Type to search

Lane Taylor

Lane Taylor will Start at Left Guard

The answer to the question, who will replace Josh Sitton in the starting lineup at left guard? Lane Taylor.

Taylor, who thus far, only has two starts in his NFL career, will be tasked with replacing one of the best offensive linemen the Green Bay Packers have ever had. Plus, he’ll be asked to do that coming off a preseason performance that was so bad, we wondered if he’d still be on the roster come Sunday.

Good luck to you, Lane Taylor.

While the Sitton move came totally out of left field, Taylor’s ascension doesn’t. The Packers gave him a two-year contract during the offseason when he was a restricted free agent. Typically, the Packers will tender their restricted free agents and let them play the season out on that one-year deal. So clearly, there were signs the Packers valued Taylor.

At the time, we felt Taylor’s value was as insurance. Knowing the Packers couldn’t afford to re-sign Sitton, T.J. Lang, David Bakhtiari and J.C. Tretter when they were scheduled to become free agents after the season, that deal signaled Taylor as a potential replacement for Sitton or Lang.

Only in 2017.

Now Taylor will replace Sitton in 2016.

Of course, coach Mike McCarthy didn’t offer any insight into why the team parted ways with Sitton when he addressed the media today.

“There’s a lot of things that go into this decision,” McCarthy said. “This wasn’t just one thing.”

McCarthy didn’t elaborate, but predictably got defensive when asked how the Packers were a better team without Sitton.

“I believe there are positions in football that are primary positions and some positions not to that level,” McCarthy said. “It’s just like any profession, when you outline job responsibility and what you’re asking each position to do, there are some positions you put in front of the others. I think we all understand that the quarterback position is the most important position in football, that goes without being said.

“To sit there and say, are you a better team or not a better team because of one player, we haven’t even played a game yet. So this is about growth for our football program. Every decision we make is in the best interest of improving all aspects of our program. This is not about one player. This about our football team.”

We absolutely know that guard is not one of the most important positions on a football team. In fact, it’s probably one of the least important. However, that doesn’t take away from the fact that this move reeks of buffoonery, regardless of how you spin it.

Tags:
Monty McMahon

Monty McMahon is one of the founders of Total Packers. He is probably the most famous graduate of UW-Oshkosh next to Jim Gantner.

    1

20 Comments

  1. PF4L September 5, 2016

    What could go wrong?

    1. ferris September 5, 2016

      They just signed James Jones to play Guard. Hoodie Power.

  2. PF4L September 5, 2016

    This move isn’t about whether guard is the most important position. But it’s also not the least important position, especially if the left side of the line leaks like a sieve and Rodgers ends up hurt.

    Whats the most vulnerable position for a QB? The left side of the line, a right handers blind spot. Not just left tackle.

    He basically said the guard position isn’t all that important. Like it has nothing at all to do with left tackle? He said this move was about growth. Growth for when? 2017, 2018?

    If Rodgers gets instant pressure or gets hurt because of this, i will lose my fucking mind. Yes, even more than i already have.

    I’m a Packer fan, and i have passion and desire to try and have the strongest team, each year for making a run at the Super Bowl. Excuse me….. if i’m not fucking stupid or naive enough to think that getting rid of Sitton doesn’t weaken our team. No matter how much McCarthy try’s to SPIN it.

    Reporter: “Was he not one of your 2 best guards on the roster?”
    McCarthy: Non answer.

    Reporter: “Are you a better team without Josh Sitton?”
    McCarthy: Non answer…………….and so on, and so on, and so on.

    My guess is this was done because of something personal. when you disrespect, and terminate Sitton, and put Lane Taylor in his place, that has nothing to do with talent or growth.

  3. Vijay Swearingen September 5, 2016

    What about Dandy Don Barclay? He’s seems to dominate when asked to step into the interior Guard postions. This does not bode well for Rodgers & Co. If they were going to release Sitton anyways, they should have done it earlier so that a new cohesive line sould play together. Folks, guarantee this decision bites them in their arse the first month of the season. Let’s hope that’s not the case but you are taking a known strength and turning it into an unknown, just as the regular season kicks off. Not wise.

  4. Kato September 5, 2016

    Like LeRoy Butler said, the fastest way to Rodgers is up the middle. I will not be happy if Rodgers ends up hurt as a result of this idiocy.

    1. PF4L September 5, 2016

      I wish i could’ve heard Bulters thoughts on this.

  5. Howard September 5, 2016

    I told a co worker last year when the Bears moved Kyle long to tackle that they were making a huge error. Long was more valuable to the Bears as a guard. A tackle is on a island. It is difficult for a tackle to help the guard next to him in pass pro. The co worker told me I was wrong, by the end of the first month he agreed with me, and so must the Bears because Long is back at guard. A guard like Long and Sitton not only protect their gap, but can assist the center and tackle. That is pretty damn valuable, so I do not agree with McCarthy implying that guard is not a all that important of a position. With Sitton gone I do not see that ability from Taylor.

    You can guarantee the Packers are going to see multiple defensive line stunts, Double A gap blitzes, and delayed blitzes all aimed at Taylor and Tretter. I trust Tretter a lot more than Taylor but let’s face it neither have a lot of regular season game experience at their positions. I know the O-line have started rookies in Bahk and Linsley and have done fine, but guess who was at their sides to protect them when needed, Sitton. There is no Sitton anymore to help in pass pro. The positive is Lacy and Starks are very good in pass protection. My guess is McCarthy will probably go 5 wides with empty backfield to start out just to show everyone how great of a move it was to cut Sitton. I hope to hell Rodgers stats after the first month will show a 140+ QBR when Rodgers is blitzed because it is coming.

    1. PF4L September 5, 2016

      You are right, and i respect that you understand the correlation with the LT and LG. What your not understanding, as Mike put it…….”So this is about growth for our football program. Every decision we make is in the best interest of improving all aspects of our program.”

      It’s about growth and the best interest of the team my friend. You buyin it? Me either, and i’ll be sure to remember that all season.

      If this move, bites Ted and Mike in the ass, on account of bad play and/or maybe injury, the shit will hit the fan this year. And i’m willing to bet, a lot of the reporters that McCarthy jumped on their shit in the past, will say fuck him, and come out guns loaded.

  6. Empacador September 5, 2016

    Well, there is a built in excuse if the running game sucks ass this season. Those interior runs McCarthy likes to use are probably going to take a hit. But I’m sure the run game will suffer because Lacy regressed, not because of the change at guard and center. Continuity be damned. Lacy was simply too fat and his pad level was off. But really, who needs guards anyway? McCarthy wants Rodgers to roam around buying time to pick up those shock plays of 20+ yards that are an integral part of the Packer offense. If Rodgers doesn’t get killed first that is.

    Anyone want to wager this is a 6 game try out for Lane Taylor to see if he can hold his own? Or will they reboot the offensive line once Linsley is able to return? I still think Linsley doesn’t sit, and neither does Tretter.

    1. PF4L September 5, 2016

      I was thinking the same exact thing. That Taylor is a stopgap until Linsley comes back, plays center, and they shift Tretter to LG.

    2. Howard September 5, 2016

      I think the three of us are close to the same opinion on this Sitton and Taylor situation. I have no confidence in Taylor in pass protection. I do believe Taylor has ability in the run game. The biggest concern to me is the health of QB#1 so until proven otherwise this is a fucked up move. Have either of you seen Lang’s locker room interview. If not you should watch. Lang is not happy and also believe this is a fucked up move. He is having to work hard to hold back from saying what is on his mind.

      Just to make sure I am not in the early stages of Alzheimer’s, I could swear I have made a couple of comments to killer and I thought I saw some comments from PF4L to Killer. I don’t see any of them, including killers. Please tell me they did exist. :-}.

      1. Empacador September 5, 2016

        You know, I haven’t seen the interview. But if he is that pissed, he might not want to re-sign with the Packers. They sure as hell aren’t going to use the franchise tag on a guard. This could backfire in ways they never imagined.

        1. PF4L September 5, 2016

          Howard, i don’t know if they deleted any of our comments, if so, oh well.

          I think the day Sitton was released, Lang tweeted, and i’m paraphrasing…that he lost his best friend today.

          I don’t have the inclination to list all the negatives of this move, but a few are, the message it sends the team. the chemistry of the team/O line. I’m willing to bet that Rodgers isn’t real happy about it also. Rodgers needs to worry about reading his progressions and finding receivers open, not worrying about a unproven LG and getting taken out..

          1. Phatgzus September 6, 2016

            Rodgers referred to the cut as “shocking”. Likely thinking his best o-lineman would not be cut out of the blue, so I would assume he is none to pleased with the circumstances, though he didn’t seem pissy in his interview.

      2. Killer September 6, 2016

        They did Howard, but Monty or his people engaged in censorship out of cowardice. They were targeting me, not you, but took yours out as well as they would appear weird responding to nothing there.

        I’m always up for some good discussion and debate and constructive agreement or disagreement. It makes us all think harder and mentally stronger. Poor arguments fall to the wayside and good ones rise like cream.

        1. Phatgzus September 6, 2016

          They’ve done that to pretty much every poster here at some point or another, and often times they do leave others’ responses. Trust me, K-Pax, you ain’t the special snowflake you think you are; I know I know, your entire world view is shattered, it’ll be okay li’l guy, you just keep fighting the good fight, one day you’ll overcome this abominable injustice.

      3. Phatgzus September 6, 2016

        Based on his word choice, terseness, and vocal tone, Lang was not remotely happen. and was doing everything he could to restrain himself from flipping out. The fact that the Packers are not prioritizing his contract talks likely isn’t helping either. If they’re not careful we may be down our two best o-linemen all in the same season cycle..

        1. PF4L September 6, 2016

          Lets be honest….Ted and Mike, aren’t exactly the most personable people. At least in public perception.

          But one think Ted and Mike have going for them, is Aaron Rodgers, otherwise known as job security.

  7. PF4L September 5, 2016

    Maybe your not getting the “hint”.

  8. Killer September 6, 2016

    I read an article — I think it was CBS Sports — that TT likely knew all along he would cut Sitton but intentionally waited in order to narrow Sitton’s options and interest from other teams. This sends a signal to everyone in the organization that TT is the boss and all should bow and quake in fear. It also meant Sitton might get much less money than he otherwise would have. So Ted can say, “See, others did not think he was worth so much. I told you he overvalued himself.” It was also likely to cause Sitton to sign a one year contract so Ted could say when Sitton signed again then with yet another team, “See, that next team did not like him so much either. It clearly did not work out.” Then, on the third team’s contract Sitton would be another year older and yet again be signed for less than what he would have made in a multi-year deal if he had been waived in the off season. Also, by now all other teams have made provisions for starting guards so signing Sitton is only just so much of an upgrade thus lowering the money due to reducing the possible performance differential.
    Ted’s big secret plan backfired though. Sitton signed with Chicago for 21.75 million with 10 of that guaranteed.
    1) Some of you Ted Sheep are getting a little itchy in all that wool?
    2) Against all odds Sitton DID get a fair contract, paying more than what the Packers were paying. Sitton actually makes more money than he would have had the Packers not cut him.
    3) He did go the rival Bears. So Ted downgraded his own team and upgraded a rival. All while alienating the team and making his weaselly machinations fairly obvious. Smooth Ted.
    All that he hoped to accomplish by timing the cut as he did was not, in fact, accomplished. He tried bad to hurt Sitton to help himself look good. Both failed to the detriment of the Packers. In fact, it failed worse than most appreciate. He could have had a new guard working with the 1st team all through training camp, developing chemistry/experience. But he could not have that AND hurt Sitton as badly as possible, could he?