I've never understood this kind of thinking. Why wouldn't we sign Sitton and Lang. The cap can be manipulated. We don't have that many years left with Rodgers, isn't it about time we kept him protected.

You let marginal and injury prone players like Bahktiari and Bulaga walk, not proven lunch pail guys like Sitton and Lang.

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 

Concerning not resigning Sitton, age (turns 30 in June) and mounting injuries: torn toe ligament in 2014 and back trouble in 2015. The back thing is more concerning as its nagged at him during his career but has been able to get by with just missing practice but last year was the first time I think that it was listed week to week on the injury report (from week 13 onwards). It's probably not a problem that will go away as he gets older.

Originally Posted by: Mucky Tundra 

Why we worried about Josh Sitton? The guy has played in 110 of the last 112 games and is producing at a high level. I mean, have we already forgot about the Guard failure of 2005? How about we worry about not re-signing Sitton when his injuries keep him off the field OR (and this is the important one, follow along) when he is not producing at a high level on the field.

A player that is playing a high level and is aging and has injuries, but isn't missing game time is not reason to let him go. You use that to craft an incentive based contract predicated on playing time.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

I prefer Ted to draft the guys HE thinks are the best for the team because in the end that is what he is doing. I don't want him to be swayed by public opinion. He and his scouts have done far more research on the players than anyone who is not a GM or a scout. I don't want him taking some guy from a different country just because its a good story and the guy looks cool. I want him to take a guy from a different country because he thinks he is the best player to take at the time. I don't want him to spend a high pick on a guy just because I or a bunch of other fans think we need to spend a high pick at that position.

I'm not saying he is infallible as we all know that is not the case. I do think he knows more than anyone on this or any other fan website about the details of the players in the draft. Why he picks or passes on certain players when we all think its a mistake may never be known but some people act as if he is intentionally choosing lower level talent and passing on better players when its only their opinions that make them think so. Our opinions do not matter even though in some cases our opinions may turn out to be more accurate. That doesn't necessarily mean we know more than him, it may just mean we guessed better.

How many GMs passed on Andrew Billings more than once. 32 of them. A lot of us wanted the Packers to take Billings at #27. Are we smarter than 32 GMs? I don't think so. Guys like Jack and Ragland and Reed and Robinson and several others were all passed over in favor of other players. Even some GMs who drafted higher needs early on passed on these guys a second time around so you can't simply say they had bigger needs. If they were truly the BPA on everyone's boards don't you think they would have been chosen by someone a bit earlier?

The bottom line is maybe we don't know as much as we think we do when it comes to these players. Maybe no one does.

Originally Posted by: sschind