Sitton signed for 3 years!

[Deleted]

Sept 5, 2016 8:03:18 GMT -6 dachuckster said:

Sept 5, 2016 7:54:17 GMT -6 @belliot said:

Regarding Whitehair: right on the money. The kid COULD come in and play day 1 but why force the issue now that you have the luxury to develop him more. Whitehair played every (almost every?!?!?) OL spot in college. If he's not being forced into LG day one you can get him exp. up and down the line (not just the interior) which will give us a ton of flexibility WHEN one of our OL is injured during the reg season.

This Sitton move will help us immensely in weathering the wear and tear of the season.

Not trying to chug the Kool-Aid but I suddenly have a much better feeling about our OL after signing Sitton.

If Edison keeps on developing, we have quality backup with Edison and Whitehair.

I'm assuming you mean Grasu. Edison was waived yesterday.

[JABF]

Sept 5, 2016 7:54:17 GMT -6 @belliot said:

Sept 5, 2016 5:17:02 GMT -6 @soulman said:

I'm thinking Sitton will start at LG as well with Larsen at OC for now until Whitehair has proven he's the better option and that may happen later in the season.  In the meantime he can take reps all over the interior of the OL and even at LT so he'll get a lot of work in practice with less pressure to have to be the starter anywhere right now.

So Whitehair could move to OC eventually or to LG with Sitton to RG if Long does need a game off to heal and so far we still have Silatolu also coming off injury status who might also be able to contribute as the season progresses.  All I know is this looks much better now than it did a week ago no matter how they suss it out.

Regarding Whitehair: right on the money. The kid COULD come in and play day 1 but why force the issue now that you have the luxury to develop him more. Whitehair played every (almost every?!?!?) OL spot in college. If he's not being forced into LG day one you can get him exp. up and down the line (not just the interior) which will give us a ton of flexibility WHEN one of our OL is injured during the reg season.

This Sitton move will help us immensely in weathering the wear and tear of the season.

That's a good way to look at it.  However we look at the new situation for our OL, we just got better.  And I think it should have a significant positive impact on this season for the team.  I'm sure feeling better going into the season now.  I was really worried about the OL situation.  Adding a piece like Sitton to the unit is huge.

[dachuckster]

Sept 5, 2016 8:05:50 GMT -6 @belliot said:

Sept 5, 2016 8:03:18 GMT -6 dachuckster said:

Not trying to chug the Kool-Aid but I suddenly have a much better feeling about our OL after signing Sitton.

If Edison keeps on developing, we have quality backup with Edison and Whitehair.

I'm assuming you mean Grasu. Edison was waived yesterday.

No I meant Edison.  Didn't keep up.

[mpbears68]

Sept 5, 2016 3:18:05 GMT -6 @soulman said:

Sept 5, 2016 2:31:50 GMT -6 mpbears68 said:

Thanks for the corrections, Soul.  I only saw a fraction of PS and thought i read he missed 2 and 2, my bad if wrong.  It was also reported that some of his MADE kicks didn't look very good.  Regardless, I stand by my position as it is the same one I took way long before on the old board--the Gould trend was slipping noticeably downward and he was way overpaid (elite kicker money for very non-elite results).  I called for him be either replaced, competed against, or at least be restructured to take less money.  The team saw it otherwise...at least initially.  Obviously, Pace changed his mind based on what he saw this preseason or he wouldn't have made this move this late.  Whether they approached him about a pay cut, I do not know (but I certainly would have-playing GM here).

I'm not saying his replacement is all that and a bag of chips but I do think SOMETHING needed to be done.   Its better to walk away a little too early than a little too late as they say.  I'm glad to see the Chicago Bears behave a little more like the Patriots do--move on when a player isn't getting the job done anymore.  Speaking of games, Gould was a big part of us losing 2 last season that could/should have been won with make-able kicks.  We aren't talking about 57 yarders here.  I wish Gould well and loved watching him but the time had come.

Nor do I but as it stands it makes no difference.

It's just that on the basis of Robbie's preseason (5 for 6 on FGs) and especially his game against against Cleveland where he was 3 for 3 on FGs but missed an XP and had one blocked (don't know if that was on him or not because I didn't see it) releasing him seemed like an abrupt move and even sketchier when it comes right after Pace lays out $40 mil in guaranteed money for two Pro Bowl OGs.

That alone is pretty suspect and leads me to my conclusion that Robbie was a cap casualty. Now whether the Bears will admit that or not the facts and the timing sure seem to lead in that direction don't they?  He's gone now but what bothers me even more is if this had been on their minds at all this summer just how poorly they planned to replace him.

For a team and a coaching staff that loves a lot of competition for roster spots there was not a single whisper or even an attempt to bring in another PK or two for competition.  How different is that?  Nah, I think his recent performance was not bad enough to scream replace him.  Only his salary and cap hit were enough to induce that.  We'll know more for certain when we see the stricture of Long's and Sitton's deals. But I'm guessing they're front loaded and ate up a lot of the remaining 2016 cap. 

If not then I can't see Pace's rationale for replacing Robbie with a PK whose quite possibly not even as good or as dependable as Robbie had been until last year.  The prior year he was dealing with an injury so to me that can't be counted against him.  And I still related this decline in his accuracy to the loss of Pat Mannelly two years ago and the revolving door of LS we've had since.

Yeah, I'm sorry to see him go as I was with Matt Slauson and Matt Forte but I would feel much better about it had we replaced him as well as it appears we have the two Matt's.  I just don't think we have is all.

When I first saw the tweet that Gould had been released, the first thing that popped into my head was that it had something to do with Sitton (who hadn't officially signed yet to public knowledge).  But then I thought that couldn't be right since we had a ton of cap space and the savings from RG would be only a couple million.  I'd like to get the full story on that.  

Again, I only saw a small fraction of the PS like you but "concerns about Gould" were written about before his unexpected release.  Maybe he didn't look good in TC either, I dunno.  I would hope the team would have approached him about taking a pay cut (out of respect) but I do think it was time to make some kind of change in the status quo.

[bears40]

Here's another twist, could Da Bears still be thinking of eventually having Long move to tackle? $$$ wise, it's a win. He has the talent to do so.

[mikegolf]

Sept 5, 2016 9:55:58 GMT -6 bears40 said:

Here's another twist, could Da Bears still be thinking of eventually having Long move to tackle? $$$ wise, it's a win. He has the talent to do so.

If Long was going to be a Tackle he would have stayed there and not moved back to guard.

[mpbears68]

Bears just swapped LS---Scales back in, Brewer cut. Gotta believe that was Gould related.

[Deleted]

My grandson is telling me that Sitton has injury issues but that's all I have so far.  I'll try to get more info later but my so far my daughter says to tell you all "the Bears still suck". LOLOL

[dachuckster]

Sept 5, 2016 11:14:17 GMT -6 @soulman said:

My grandson is telling me that Sitton has injury issues but that's all I have so far.  I'll try to get more info later but my so far my daughter says to tell you all "the Bears still suck". LOLOL

He's had several injuries: sprained ankles, dislocated big toe (or similar big toe injury), etc.  He has missed little or not playing time due to injury. He played 99.3% of the Pack's offensive snaps last year (link).  He played 94.7% of the offensive snaps in 2014 (link), this as the season with the big toe injury where it would tape it up with a steel brace and play the game and spend the entire week treating the pain and swelling and then tape it back up and play again (link).  He played in 100% if the Pack's offensive snaps in 2013 (link).

Pretty impressive.

[Deleted]

Sept 5, 2016 11:40:46 GMT -6 dachuckster said:

Sept 5, 2016 11:14:17 GMT -6 @soulman said:

My grandson is telling me that Sitton has injury issues but that's all I have so far.  I'll try to get more info later but my so far my daughter says to tell you all "the Bears still suck". LOLOL

He's had several injuries: sprained ankles, dislocated big toe (or similar big toe injury), etc.  He has missed little or not playing time due to injury. He played 99.3% of the Pack's offensive snaps last year (link).  He played 94.7% of the offensive snaps in 2014 (link), this as the season with the big toe injury where it would tape it up with a steel brace and play the game and spend the entire week treating the pain and swelling and then tape it back up and play again (link).  He played in 100% if the Pack's offensive snaps in 2013 (link).

Pretty impressive.

The word from my grandson the football nut is a foot issue (no back problems) which may be the same toe injury Sitton has been dealing with since 2014 so you're spot on chuck.  He's played though all of it as I posted before.  Since becoming a starter he hasn't missed any starts.  Like Kyle Long he's a warrior so it would appear that we're all good here.

The Porker faithful and the GB press are puzzled he was let go and they are not happy campers at all.  It seems like his release was probably cap related.  With nearly a $7 mil cap hit, at age 30, and looking for an extension paying more than his 2016 salary (which he got from us) it seems he was looked at as being expendable.

Looking at the Porkers cap numbers on Spotrac they have just $11.459 mil available after releasing Sitton with his $7 mil hit meaning they would have had just $4.459 mil available to take them through the season.  That's a pretty slim margin if they have a significant number of injuries and have to sign players to replace key starters.

So call this a very nice and very timely pay back for us losing Pep to them two years ago due to our own cap issues.