7 hours ago, Mongo3451 said:

He'll be easy to afford.  Being effective and young are both plusses.  The good teams keep guys like him and replace them when the new guy pushes them out.  Once true depth is achieved, the OL will never be a problem.

I agree with why we'd want to keep him as depth, but he will get offered a chance to start somewhere else. And we are not going to get into a bidding war for him, so I expect him not to be here next year.

I love your description of having a talent pipeline with depth thats actually growing to be impact starters in a few years, that is for sure a great plan if you can prime the pump and get the cycle started. The Bears have never looked that far ahead before, it's nice to see an actual plan developing.

Time will tell what happens, but we do agree that when he's healthy Jenkins is a pretty good player. I think we just disagree on what to do with him, or what the Bears plan will be, and that's all just future guesses for all of us, so cool. We mostly agree.

11 hours ago, BearFan PHX said:

I think we just disagree on what to do with him, or what the Bears plan will be, and that's all just future guesses for all of us, so cool. We mostly agree.

That's how delicate the job of GM is.  Agree, disagree, hope intuition and capital all plays a part.  In this forum, all I care is that I'm heard and understood.  Getting a consensus agreement here is damn near impossible.  I wish summertime would pay for my opinion...😱

1 hour ago, Mongo3451 said:

That's how delicate the job of GM is.  Agree, disagree, hope intuition and capital all plays a part.  In this forum, all I care is that I'm heard and understood.  Getting a consensus agreement here is damn near impossible.  I wish summertime would pay for my opinion...😱

LOL so true, and i think we agree on our evaluation of jenkins, both in terms of his talent, and his penchant for injuries, so the rest is, as you say, GM stuff, and it aint easy.

I agree that neither of our conclusions on this are obvious or clear, its murky, and you went one way and i went another, but we still do pretty much see it the same way. How to balance it is the question.

9 hours ago, Mongo3451 said:

That's how delicate the job of GM is.  Agree, disagree, hope intuition and capital all plays a part.  In this forum, all I care is that I'm heard and understood.  Getting a consensus agreement here is damn near impossible.  I wish summertime would pay for my opinion...😱

I've reached the age where I know if everyone agrees with me then I know I'm likely the one who is wrong, and they're just going to enjoy watching me step in it.  

8 hours ago, BearFan PHX said:

LOL so true, and i think we agree on our evaluation of jenkins, both in terms of his talent, and his penchant for injuries, so the rest is, as you say, GM stuff, and it aint easy.

I agree that neither of our conclusions on this are obvious or clear, its murky, and you went one way and i went another, but we still do pretty much see it the same way. How to balance it is the question.

The balance here IMO is really the money.  How much financial and roster commitment is reasonable for the downside risk vs. the upside risk?   I don't think anybody would argue against giving Tev $3mil/yr.  I think everyone would argue against giving him $15mil/yr.  What I usually do not grasp well enough is market value.  

2 hours ago, AZ54 said:

The balance here IMO is really the money.  How much financial and roster commitment is reasonable for the downside risk vs. the upside risk?   I don't think anybody would argue against giving Tev $3mil/yr.  I think everyone would argue against giving him $15mil/yr.  What I usually do not grasp well enough is market value.  

I hear ya, but i think that having a decent player who is oft injured makes it hard to put together an OL. It makes you think the backup for when hes injured doesnt have to be a starter, and if they are starter caliber, then it deprives them of reps.

I hear you on the money, and he probably could be had for a decent price, but Im not sure youre ahead of the game if you fill a roster spot with a guy you cant count on just because you got him cheaper?

If you want to sign him as depth, that fixes my concern, but Ill bet someone else will offer him a chance to start then.

I bet he will be gone next year. I think Poles has to look at revamping the OL in the offseason with draft picks, and maybe even free agents. Hes got almost everything else covered.

That's just how I see it - my guess - but I obviously don't KNOW anything.

12 hours ago, BearFan PHX said:

I hear ya, but i think that having a decent player who is oft injured makes it hard to put together an OL. It makes you think the backup for when hes injured doesnt have to be a starter, and if they are starter caliber, then it deprives them of reps.

I hear you on the money, and he probably could be had for a decent price, but Im not sure youre ahead of the game if you fill a roster spot with a guy you cant count on just because you got him cheaper?

If you want to sign him as depth, that fixes my concern, but Ill bet someone else will offer him a chance to start then.

I bet he will be gone next year. I think Poles has to look at revamping the OL in the offseason with draft picks, and maybe even free agents. Hes got almost everything else covered.

That's just how I see it - my guess - but I obviously don't KNOW anything.

Okay I understand your opinion, what do we do to fix not only RG and C but now LG. 2 spots wont be easy but 3 make it a rough job. Bates may very well save the Center spot but we dont know that yet. There is limited options in free agency next year for young and ascending, plenty of old guys. I doubt very much he drafts 3 starting OL in the first 3 rounds. If he brings back Jenkins even if he only plays 12 games at least it gives time for a rookie to develop or someone like Bill Murray to get vaiuable starts. 

We have only 4 OLmen signed for next year and 3 are OTs. How do we fix it?

1 hour ago, Stinger226 said:

Okay I understand your opinion, what do we do to fix not only RG and C but now LG. 2 spots wont be easy but 3 make it a rough job. Bates may very well save the Center spot but we dont know that yet. There is limited options in free agency next year for young and ascending, plenty of old guys. I doubt very much he drafts 3 starting OL in the first 3 rounds. If he brings back Jenkins even if he only plays 12 games at least it gives time for a rookie to develop or someone like Bill Murray to get vaiuable starts. 

We have only 4 OLmen signed for next year and 3 are OTs. How do we fix it?

I see it more this way. We want Caleb to have a great line to protect him, but putting 2 or 3 rookies in front of him will only put him in harms way.  I see it more as they draft a good G and maybe a Center, stick with Jenkins if he survives this season.  The you have Kiran and Braxton pushing for LT, a rookie G, Bates and rookie C, Jenkins and Wright. Integrate small pieces so the players don't all have to gel amd they can start 2025 closer to were they left off.

I remember a few years back we were having a similar discussion about the WR group. It may have been more than a few years back LOL weve all been here a long time!

Anyway I was saying that we would completely revamp the WRs, and others were saying we would tinker, and keep some. In the end we completely revamped the WR position.

This does NOT mean that I think this is evidence we would do it again. It was a different GM, and as I recall the revamped WRs werent so good either LOL

It's just that it's hard to predict who will be available in trade (like Montez Sweat) or who we might find in the draft that isnt a highly scouted player.

I think Bates will likely be on the OL next year. Maybe at Center, or maybe at Guard. I think pryor sticks around as depth. I think Wright will ascend.

So I think we see 3 new faces on the OL. Also, Poles and Eberflus have shown no problem starting rookies at various positions.

So i think the OL is gonna undergo massive change, and Jenkins will be gone. That's my guess.