Offensive Line Sans Bahk at OTAs

[thequick12]

Just read quote from oline coach saying he expects Ben Braden to compete for a starting job at guard or tackle

 

[Krabs]

As have I...my thinking though is not that he won't be ready before week 7 but that the Packers medical staff is cautious and I don't see that changing with a guy the team just committed so much money to long-term

Very fair point. I say he plays by week 3.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Just read quote from oline coach saying he expects Ben Braden to compete for a starting job at guard or tackle

Saw an article too about Braden. Talking about coming out of nowhere, I didn't even know he was on the team. While I would rather have Bahk playing, who BTW sounds like he is ahead of schedule in his recovery, but I am pretty excited about the O-Line depth and talent we appear to have.

Ben Braden Article

 

[Krabs]

Just read quote from oline coach saying he expects Ben Braden to compete for a starting job at guard or tackle

Saw an article too about Braden. Talking about coming out of nowhere, I didn't even know he was on the team. While I would rather have Bahk playing, who BTW sounds like he is ahead of schedule in his recovery, but I am pretty excited about the O-Line depth and talent we appear to have.

Ben Braden Article

I find this really odd. Barley a journeyman to a starter? Not sure I like the thought of that. I guess he does say he is "competing". Probably could say that about every player.

 

[thequick12]

Could say that about every player but he didn't...has to be at least some significance to that. Will he win the left tackle job until Bakh comes back? Maybe, maybe not but I'm not against it just because even calling him a journeyman is a stretch...I trust that the coaches are gonna put the best 5 on the field, if he's one of em go pack go

Although I do understand what you mean...this could also signal, our other options just aren't that good...

 

[Krabs]

Could say that about every player but he didn't...has to be at least some significance to that. Will he win the left tackle job until Bakh comes back? Maybe, maybe not but I'm not against it just because even calling him a journeyman is a stretch...I trust that the coaches are gonna put the best 5 on the field, if he's one of em go pack go

Although I do understand what you mean...this could also signal, our other options just aren't that good...

That's what I was kind of getting at. If Braden comes in and truly wins the job as a legit starter in the NFL than it's a great story. This just seems like chatter to me though. Either to boost Braden's confidence or to motivate those around him. Maybe both. I just have a hard time believing he will be the day 1 starter and I believe it means our oline isn't as deep as we thought.

 

[tynimiller]

Honestly, if we have just one more guy prove themselves worthy of playing time or being an immediate depth option that is dependable for an injury at guard not named Runyon or Patrick (Jenkins is not worthy of this discussion and WAY above it) that is a MASSIVE positive thing. We just need one though, could be Newman, could be Braden, Stepaniak, Johnson, Cronk, Dietzen, Capra or Van Lanen.

I like the odds of at least one of those illustrating what say Runyon did last year to deserve snaps in reserve if nothing else.

 

[tynimiller]

Quick addition...the reason why that is massive is Jenkins should be IMO the first guy to slide out to a Tackle position if an injury occurs - having a solid reserve at Guard allows us to do this. If Nijman finally clicks this could also be as massive of a thing as well but only at RT incase of injury - Jenkins is our best LT not named Bahk.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Quick addition...the reason why that is massive is Jenkins should be IMO the first guy to slide out to a Tackle position if an injury occurs - having a solid reserve at Guard allows us to do this. If Nijman finally clicks this could also be as massive of a thing as well but only at RT incase of injury - Jenkins is our best LT not named Bahk.

Because of his unbelievable flexibility of positions, Jenkins is a super valuable piece on the OL, almost more so then Bahk. I am nervous about what his next contract is going to be pegged at and there is no 5th year option ability on him. Because of that, I would rather see him moving between Guard and Center and less at tackle. Not saying he isn't the 3rd best option at Tackle, but sure would be nice to get 1-2 guys ahead of him in that role and make him a permanent fixture at G. Obviously, if he is your best option at a starting T, then so be it and we pay him big on his 2nd contract.

 

[tynimiller]

Because of his unbelievable flexibility of positions, Jenkins is a super valuable piece on the OL, almost more so then Bahk. I am nervous about what his next contract is going to be pegged at and there is no 5th year option ability on him. Because of that, I would rather see him moving between Guard and Center and less at tackle. Not saying he isn't the 3rd best option at Tackle, but sure would be nice to get 1-2 guys ahead of him in that role and make him a permanent fixture at G. Obviously, if he is your best option at a starting T, then so be it and we pay him big on his 2nd contract.

Honestly if Bahk doesn’t come back from this injury like we all hope and honestly expect - Jenkins could be the future LT

 

[gopkrs]

I just hope the coaches never again just "get by" because they want "flexibility." They have to play their best tackles when they are up against a really good D with good outside pass rushers. I hate when the coaches get fooled about someone because they happened to do well against lesser Ds. They also get "fooled" because they want to be fooled. And that is on the coaches that do it. imho

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Honestly if Bahk doesn’t come back from this injury like we all hope and honestly expect - Jenkins could be the future LT

I actually wondered if that might have been the plan before Bahk was given the huge contract. Jeeesh....imagine how unhappy THAT would have made Aaron?

 

[tynimiller]

I just hope the coaches never again just "get by" because they want "flexibility." They have to play their best tackles when they are up against a really good D with good outside pass rushers. I hate when the coaches get fooled about someone because they happened to do well against lesser Ds. They also get "fooled" because they want to be fooled. And that is on the coaches that do it. imho

What situation are you speaking to?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I just hope the coaches never again just "get by" because they want "flexibility." They have to play their best tackles when they are up against a really good D with good outside pass rushers. I hate when the coaches get fooled about someone because they happened to do well against lesser Ds. They also get "fooled" because they want to be fooled. And that is on the coaches that do it. imho

I'm pretty satisfied with the Packers OL over the years and that includes the coaching of it. I actually was really worried when former longtime OL Coach James Campen left when McCarthy left. However, Stenavich seems to be doing a great job and Campen has jumped around and coached a different team for 3 straight seasons now.

Your point about playing the wrong guys at Tackle is noted, but I also think you have to look at a number of variables, that we as fans might not be aware of. Health, previous matchups with the defense they are facing, practices leading up to game, etc. Sometimes just because the depth chart say #2, doesn't mean that player is always going to be next man up.

 

[gopkrs]

What situation are you speaking to?

I am speaking in general but the obvious is putting Turner at L tackle against tampa. It actually has happened a lot over the years where the line and head coaches wants so bad to have a guy play a position that he is not really capable of doing that they do it anyway. Then that player does well against lousy competition and they fool themselves into thinking he can be that guy. It bites them in the *** when it is a big game. Just want them to be realistic...always.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I am speaking in general but the obvious is putting Turner at L tackle against tampa. It actually has happened a lot over the years where the line and head coaches wants so bad to have a guy play a position that he is not really capable of doing that they do it anyway. Then that player does well against lousy competition and they fool themselves into thinking he can be that guy. It bites them in the *** when it is a big game. Just want them to be realistic...always.

No doubt that Pierre-Paul, along with Shaquil Barrett and the rest of the TB defense dominated the Packers front that day, sacking Rodgers five times and making his job difficult the whole time. But I think that went beyond just Jenkins, who yes, gave up 2 sacks. The Packers gave up the same number (5) of sacks in their first meeting with the Bucs and Bahk played the whole game.

 

[gopkrs]

No doubt that Pierre-Paul, along with Shaquil Barrett and the rest of the TB defense dominated the Packers front that day, sacking Rodgers five times and making his job difficult the whole time. But I think that went beyond just Jenkins, who yes, gave up 2 sacks. The Packers gave up the same number (5) of sacks in their first meeting with the Bucs and Bahk played the whole game.

I guess you meant Turner. And he did not play well on the L side. It isn't always just about sacks. It is about time. It is about comfort. It is about a lot of things. He should have been on the R side. At least then we could have been almost good on at least one side. I don't think they ever tried anything different in that game. And I think because they wanted it to be true. So they could play Jenkins inside. But it wasn't true.

 

[OldSchool101]

That's what I was kind of getting at. If Braden comes in and truly wins the job as a legit starter in the NFL than it's a great story. This just seems like chatter to me though. Either to boost Braden's confidence or to motivate those around him. Maybe both. I just have a hard time believing he will be the day 1 starter and I believe it means our oline isn't as deep as we thought.

My gut tells me GB is just doing due diligence on their options. That’s not to say he’s not in the running, but it’s very early on here. This is the time to see what you got

 

[Krabs]

My gut tells me GB is just doing due diligence on their options. That’s not to say he’s not in the running, but it’s very early on here. This is the time to see what you got

Yep, offseason chatter.

 

[thequick12]

That's what I was kind of getting at. If Braden comes in and truly wins the job as a legit starter in the NFL than it's a great story. This just seems like chatter to me though. Either to boost Braden's confidence or to motivate those around him. Maybe both. I just have a hard time believing he will be the day 1 starter and I believe it means our oline isn't as deep as we thought.

Good point I didn't think about that...could be motivation for the other guys to step up. Now I just saw Royce Newman was starting at RT with turner at left tackle. It's obviously early and I'd expect they're just trying every combination that has a chance to be the best 5 guys

 

[Krabs]

As have I...my thinking though is not that he won't be ready before week 7 but that the Packers medical staff is cautious and I don't see that changing with a guy the team just committed so much money to long-term

Just read on Packers wire that Bahk is at the halfway point in terms of recovery. I thought he was much further than that. I now agree with your assessment.