It is official -- Bulaga and Sitton are on the left side

[gbgary]

Yes, but to be fair, they drafted a 3rd round center in the first.

lol...yes they did. jerra got torched for it too. long live jerra.

[Carolina_Packer]

Holy Smokes Carolina_Packer ...come on ...out with it!

You work for PFF:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/

It's awesome to have you aboard Packerrats.

Impressive posting Packer fan.

GO PACK GO !

Thanks, Wood. It was fun to do. The Guards and Tackles will definitely take more time. I'm guessing there will be a lot more 1st rounders on the edges.

[Carolina_Packer]

It is - and amusing is that no team with a 1st round center and only one team with a 2nd round center made the playoffs! That settles it, I'm damn happy the Pack didn't take that Alabama center in the 2nd, they'd be doomed (lies, damn lies and statistics, right?)

Some nice creative work there Carolina_Packer!

Thanks, Guiness!

[Pugger]

Yes, but to be fair, they drafted a 3rd round center in the first.

[rbaloha1]

Yes, but to be fair, they drafted a 3rd round center in the first.

You do not know that. Lets wait to see what happens on the field.

[Fritz]

True, but it's so much fun to make fun of Jerrah.

[Pugger]

True, but it's so much fun to make fun of Jerrah.

And I hope he continues to run that team into the ground for many years to come!!

[bobblehead]

Ya afraid to hang out with the uncool kids??

Some teams value the trenches, the Packers do not - they value T's, but not interior linemen... I should think that obvious.

They value T's on the offensive line, and are perpetually trying to make college tackles into pro guards and center. They've never drafted a center, and even though many of the tackles they've drafted were projected to guard, and I don't mind that per se, the fact is the Packers will not outright draft a guard or center. The Packers would never consider drafting a Chance Warmack or Jonathon Cooper in the 1st round.

We don't have any drive blockers, and rarely call power running plays. Our guards have size, but their strength is zone blocking and pass protection (which really isn't very good either) - as a result, our team is viewed as being soft.

It's not as if I'm the only one making this argument - it's obvious enough to many, that the question gets posed to TT and MM from time to time. They of course always dismiss it, but when you pass on size, for the smallest OT in the draft - what are we supposed to make of that??

We were pushed around by stronger, more physical teams last year - it was hard to watch.

You are very smart, but wrong. Size isn't important in drive blocking, its important for pass blocking. Smallish guys have made careers out of driving bigger guys off the ball. We are a passing team first, so big guys with good feet is TT's main objective. Most of those guys play tackle in college. IF they actually drafted the "smallest OT in the draft" it was for the intent purpose of drive blocking more than likely (so they can say they are physical).

Again, the 9ers didn't beat us by being more physical no matter what mcginn or anyone else says. They didn't push our D around, and we ran just fine on them when we tried. We didn't defend a read option, we allowed a running QB to get the edge over and over again. We can, and I believe will beat SF on opening day. I could be wrong....or I could be right and rbaloha won't post til week 16....don't you REALLY hope I'm right?

[rbaloha1]

You are very smart, but wrong. Size isn't important in drive blocking, its important for pass blocking. Smallish guys have made careers out of driving bigger guys off the ball. We are a passing team first, so big guys with good feet is TT's main objective. Most of those guys play tackle in college. IF they actually drafted the "smallest OT in the draft" it was for the intent purpose of drive blocking more than likely (so they can say they are physical).

Again, the 9ers didn't beat us by being more physical no matter what mcginn or anyone else says. They didn't push our D around, and we ran just fine on them when we tried. We didn't defend a read option, we allowed a running QB to get the edge over and over again. We can, and I believe will beat SF on opening day. I could be wrong....or I could be right and rbaloha won't post til week 16....don't you REALLY hope I'm right?

Why were there large gaps for the niners to run in?

579.

Love your persistence but the spin is dizzying.

[bobblehead]

If I could be guaranteed to get an actionable answer to two questions about the Packers instead of any draft picks (or say contribution from draft picks) I would take:

1. Are the Packers doing anything to contribute/prolong to injuries?

2. Why does the defense play disciplined in one game then undisciplined in 2 others?

Solve those two riddles, I like the odds. Unfortunately, odds are long that they get any answers at all.

I have argued that MM is too easy on the players regarding contact in the early going. I know that bodies can only take so much, but I also believe you play the way you practice. If you don't hit and get hit in practice, you are not as good at doing it without taking the brunt of the impact. Just like practicing indoors when you know you are playing outdoors. Practicing catching a ball in the cold is important. Practicing contact without getting hurt is also important. I would like to see more contact in practices.

[bobblehead]

Nerd Alert! OK, so the overall discussion is whether the Pack are doing enough to shore up the offensive line. Someone even suggesting that TT won't draft a center in a higher round. That got me to wondering what the other 31 teams have done about bringing in a starting center. I'm not saying what's right or wrong, just what is.

Now, do the same thing for LT and see why TT drafts so many college LT's. The most talented guys play LT (as far as OL)

[bobblehead]

Why were there large gaps for the niners to run in?

579.

Love your persistence but the spin is dizzying.

Because guys blew assignments. Gore did not run between the tackles for swathes of yardage....Love your ignorance, it is....well, why do I bother responding to you? I guess I'm the fool for engaging a bigger fool.

PS, of the 579, how many were through the air, or QB scrambles (which do not come because you blew guys off the ball).

[pbmax]

You are very smart, but wrong. Size isn't important in drive blocking, its important for pass blocking. Smallish guys have made careers out of driving bigger guys off the ball. We are a passing team first, so big guys with good feet is TT's main objective. Most of those guys play tackle in college. IF they actually drafted the "smallest OT in the draft" it was for the intent purpose of drive blocking more than likely (so they can say they are physical).

Again, the 9ers didn't beat us by being more physical no matter what mcginn or anyone else says. They didn't push our D around, and we ran just fine on them when we tried. We didn't defend a read option, we allowed a running QB to get the edge over and over again. We can, and I believe will beat SF on opening day. I could be wrong....or I could be right and rbaloha won't post til week 16....don't you REALLY hope I'm right?

There you go talking sense and specifics when its clear what we really want to talk about is softness and measuring tape

Bahktari's coach, who also coached Clifton apparently, said the zone blocking run game was this kid's wheelhouse. Packer's Report has an interview with the coach.

[wist43]

You are very smart, but wrong. Size isn't important in drive blocking, its important for pass blocking. Smallish guys have made careers out of driving bigger guys off the ball. We are a passing team first, so big guys with good feet is TT's main objective. Most of those guys play tackle in college. IF they actually drafted the "smallest OT in the draft" it was for the intent purpose of drive blocking more than likely (so they can say they are physical).

Allow me to phrase it this way then... 'when we pass on power for the smallest OT in the draft'.

I would have loved to land a guard like Chance Warmack... he's only 6'2", but at 317 lbs he packs a lot of power. Much more powerful than TJ Lang at 6'4", 318 lbs. It's body type more than anything... and some guys just have natural, functional strength - you hear the term 'country strong', implying the guy is pretty damn strong before he ever sets foot in a weight room.

Brian Winters is a guy who is listed at 6'4", 320 lbs, same as Lang. Yet Winters is best known for being a nasty, tough, strong SOB. Lang on the other hand, in terms of physicality, is very average. It's the type of player the Packers go after that is problematic when going up against power teams.

The Persian guy and Tretter are not big players, but what worries me about them is - given the Packers perverse preference for finesse players, are these guys softies like our current OL - only smaller?? That would be disasterous... if these guys prove to be so underpowered that they can't compete against NFL caliber power players, then they're both wasted draft picks.

Again, the 9ers didn't beat us by being more physical no matter what mcginn or anyone else says. They didn't push our D around, and we ran just fine on them when we tried. We didn't defend a read option, we allowed a running QB to get the edge over and over again. We can, and I believe will beat SF on opening day. I could be wrong....or I could be right and rbaloha won't post til week 16....don't you REALLY hope I'm right?

Well, I would be one of those "anybody else says" guys... cause I watched those games, and we were completely dominated in the trenches in both games. Most of the running we manufactured were out of spread formations, Cobb, Rodgers, or b/c the Niners only committed six to the LOS, and even then they stuffed us pretty regularly.

The stats don't lie bobble.

Game 1 in September - SF rushed for 32-186 yds (5.8 yd avg); we ran 14-45 (and Rodgers ran for 27)

Game 2 in January - SF rushed for 43-323 (take out K's 16-181, and you still have 27-142, which is a 5.25 yd avg); we rushed 16-104 (Rodgers 28 yds; Cobb 23 yds; and Harris got the rest running out of spread formations mostly)

No bobble - the 49er's righteously kicked the living hell out of us in the trenches, and I did not enjoy watching it.

[smuggler]

In the first game, the 49ers dominated the LoS. In the 2nd game, our D-line played like shit, and they didn't need to. Their d-line put a decent amt of pressure on Rodgers, but not really until we had abandoned the run. The 2nd game was a lot better than the first at the line. The trouble was the team lost contain on some scrambles by Kaep and also ignored him on the read-option plays when he was the keeper. I always say hammer the QB on the read-option. It's a free hit on the other teams QB. Even if Gore gets a 20 yard run, their QB gets rattled and they have to think twice about running that play again too soon.