Building a Roster - 2007 to 2009

[Patler]

The Packers had a nice team in 2007, went to the playoffs, and looked to have a bright future. 2008 was a setback, but again in 2009 they look to have a future.

So how do the two squads compare?
Is the roster improving?
Who was on the roster at one time in 2007 that isn't here now?
Who is here now that was not here in 2007?
Comparing the changes should show if the roster is improving or not, but of course it does not account for declining performance due to age.

The following lists by position the player differences, players who were here at one time during 2007 but are not here now, and those on the current roster or IR who were not here at all in 2007 (except QB where I show starter/backup):

Receivers
2007 - Holiday, Martin, Francies, Bodiford, Robinson
2009 – Nelson, Swain, Williams

Tight ends
2007 – Franks, Krause
2009 – Finley, Havner, Frischnecht

O-line
2007 – Moll, Coston, Palmer
2009 – Sitton, Lang, Dietrich-Smith, Giacomini

Backs
2007 – Morency
2009 – Green, Johnson

QBs
2007 - Favre/Rodgers/ Nall
2009 - Rodgers/Flynn

D-line & Linebackers
2007 – Muir, Bolston, Cole, KGB, Williams, Hunter, White
2009 – Chiller, Jones, Mathews, Obiozor, Raji, Thompson, Wynn, Toribio

Corners & Safeties
2007 – Rouse, Walker, Peprah
2009 – Bell, Ford, Giordano, Martin, Underwood, Lee,

Punter
2007 – Ryan
2009 – Kapinos

Long snapper
2007 – Davis
2009 - Goode

Receiver, tight end, O-line, and the combination D-line/linebackers appear to have replaced those who are gone with clearly better players now.

Backs, DBs and long snapper appear to be positions neither better nor worse, although you might argue the DBs are marginally better. QB is a wash at starter, but perhaps not for depth.

About the only position that has gotten worse by replacing the 2007 player is punter.

[Lurker64]

Backs, DBs and long snapper appear to be positions neither better nor worse, although you might argue the DBs are marginally better.

I don't know about long snapper. Rob Davis is one of the all-time greats (though he was clearly near the end in 2007), and Goode appears to be merely adequate at this point.

[pbmax]

Maybe an argument can be made for Peprah being steady as a backup safety, but I think there is more talent at DB (esp. corner) now than in 2007. The Packers probably still need another safety in either year.

[Patler]

Backs, DBs and long snapper appear to be positions neither better nor worse, although you might argue the DBs are marginally better.

I don't know about long snapper. Rob Davis is one of the all-time greats (though he was clearly near the end in 2007), and Goode appears to be merely adequate at this point.

Davis WAS one of the best, but was clearly in decline in 2007. He had several bad snaps, both on punts and kicks in 2007. His "fastball" was gone, which showed on bad snaps in windy conditions. If not, the Packers would never have suggested he retire. He played for minimum wage, and as a vested veteran, half of that was paid from league funds. Money was no issue.

Why do you say Goode is merely adequate? I don't know about this year, but for 2008 the Packers said Goode was perfect in snaps. Not a single poor snap. I think that is better than merely adequate. The Packers were happy enough with Goode that without any competition between them, in the offseason they got rid of Jansen, who they had really liked and who had the job won in 2008 before getting injured.

I almost called 2009 Goode better than the 2007 version of Davis, but Davis brought leadership and good downfield coverage on punts, an area the Packers said Goode needed to work on. He did have a nice tackle against Seattle.

[Patler]

Maybe an argument can be made for Peprah being steady as a backup safety, but I think there is more talent at DB (esp. corner) now than in 2007. The Packers probably still need another safety in either year.

I agree with that, but none of the new ones have shown much on the field yet. Probably better potential in guys like Lee and Underwood than anyone now gone from 2007, and for backup DBs that's what you need.

[Bretsky]

Maybe an argument can be made for Peprah being steady as a backup safety, but I think there is more talent at DB (esp. corner) now than in 2007. The Packers probably still need another safety in either year.


In looking at their play so far to me they are about the same

They all stink

[Patler]

Maybe an argument can be made for Peprah being steady as a backup safety, but I think there is more talent at DB (esp. corner) now than in 2007. The Packers probably still need another safety in either year.


In looking at their play so far to me they are about the same

They all stink

Who are you comparing them to, Harris, Woodson, Collins, Williams and Bigby; or to other teams' reserve DBs?

The Packers are fortunate to have 3 exceptional players, and two very good ones. The others might pale by comparison to those 5, but probably don't look so bad when comparing to what other teams have even as a starter here and there, let alone for backups. After all, guys like Frank Walker, Mark Roman and others still find a lot of playing time around the league. Roman got a lot of starts after leaving.

Injuries are always part of it, but I'm not sure we know too much about what they might have in Underwood, Lee or Bell yet. The safeties are even less known.

[Bretsky]

Maybe an argument can be made for Peprah being steady as a backup safety, but I think there is more talent at DB (esp. corner) now than in 2007. The Packers probably still need another safety in either year.


In looking at their play so far to me they are about the same

They all stink

Who are you comparing them to, Harris, Woodson, Collins, Williams and Bigby; or to other teams' reserve DBs?

The Packers are fortunate to have 3 exceptional players, and two very good ones. The others might pale by comparison to those 5, but probably don't look so bad when comparing to what other teams have even as a starter here and there, let alone for backups. After all, guys like Frank Walker, Mark Roman and others still find a lot of playing time around the league. Roman got a lot of starts after leaving.

Injuries are always part of it, but I'm not sure we know too much about what they might have in Underwood, Lee or Bell yet. The safeties are even less known.


I was looking at these guys solely\

Corners & Safeties
2007 – Rouse, Walker, Peprah
2009 – Bell, Ford, Giordano, Martin, Underwood, Lee,

[Patler]

I was looking at these guys solely\

Corners & Safeties
2007 – Rouse, Walker, Peprah
2009 – Bell, Ford, Giordano, Martin, Underwood, Lee,

Ya, I know. But saying "They all stink." means you have made a judgment or evaluation based on some standard, and I was wondering what it was. Do you think they stink because half the DBs in the league stink, or because they are at the bottom of the DB barrel? I haven't given up on Lee, Underwood, Bell or Ford yet. Maybe next year! :lol:

[MJZiggy]

I was looking at these guys solely\

Corners & Safeties
2007 – Rouse, Walker, Peprah
2009 – Bell, Ford, Giordano, Martin, Underwood, Lee,

Ya, I know. But saying "They all stink." means you have made a judgment or evaluation based on some standard, and I was wondering what it was. Do you think they stink because half the DBs in the league stink, or because they are at the bottom of the DB barrel? I haven't given up on Lee, Underwood, Bell or Ford yet. Maybe next year! :lol:

Good to have goals...

[bobblehead]

imo the big differences are Finley, Sitton and Mathews. They are clearly much better than the guys before them. I see very little loss of talent overall, with the jury out about improvement in most areas. OK, maybe punter. Early in '07 KGB was still good, but by week 10? he was a shell.

Overall the big 3 make this team a bit better from a talent standpoint I think, with overall depth possibly slipping (basing this on ST play). Injuries to Harris and Kampman (and every DB to set foot on the field not named Woodson or Williams) brings it back to a push.

[Bretsky]

I was looking at these guys solely\

Corners & Safeties
2007 – Rouse, Walker, Peprah
2009 – Bell, Ford, Giordano, Martin, Underwood, Lee,

Ya, I know. But saying "They all stink." means you have made a judgment or evaluation based on some standard, and I was wondering what it was. Do you think they stink because half the DBs in the league stink, or because they are at the bottom of the DB barrel? I haven't given up on Lee, Underwood, Bell or Ford yet. Maybe next year! :lol:


That's a very valid point

I guess my stink judgement would have to indicate that I'm not comfortable with any of them receiving significant playing time right now.

I lack the knowledge to compare them on the norm with the other backup DB's from other teams in football.

I haven't given up on any of those either; right now though they seem to all be last DB's on a team....marginal NFL players. Hopefully they all improve and develop into guys we are fine seeing in the game.

[Smidgeon]

I was looking at these guys solely\

Corners & Safeties
2007 – Rouse, Walker, Peprah
2009 – Bell, Ford, Giordano, Martin, Underwood, Lee,

Ya, I know. But saying "They all stink." means you have made a judgment or evaluation based on some standard, and I was wondering what it was. Do you think they stink because half the DBs in the league stink, or because they are at the bottom of the DB barrel? I haven't given up on Lee, Underwood, Bell or Ford yet. Maybe next year! :lol:


That's a very valid point

I guess my stink judgement would have to indicate that I'm not comfortable with any of them receiving significant playing time right now.

I lack the knowledge to compare them on the norm with the other backup DB's from other teams in football.

I haven't given up on any of those either; right now though they seem to all be last DB's on a team....marginal NFL players. Hopefully they all improve and develop into guys we are fine seeing in the game.

I agree with this. But I'm hoping they stink simply because they're inexperienced instead of stinking because they've already reached their potential.

[Fritz]

I think it's a better roster now than it was in '07. And we'll see if they can overcome their defincies and win a game or two in the playoffs.\

Should be fun.

[Patler]

imo the big differences are Finley, Sitton and Mathews. They are clearly much better than the guys before them. I see very little loss of talent overall, with the jury out about improvement in most areas. OK, maybe punter. Early in '07 KGB was still good, but by week 10? he was a shell.


I agree with those three as very clear upgrades, but I also think several others are noticeable improvements as well. I would put Raji in that category, as noticeably better than any d-lineman now gone, and Chiller as better than an LB'er. I also like Nelson a lot better than any of the departed WR's. Lang looks like an improvement over Coston, Palmer or Moll as well.

[ND72]

It is hard to compare our teams because we are a different team now. when we switched to a 3-4, we stack ourselves with more athletes, because you don't have as many hogs up front to carry on your team. Without the switch to the 3-4, we likely don't draft Clay Matthews for instance.

[Lurker64]

because you don't have as many hogs up front to carry on your team.

This is an arguable point. The 3-4 defense tends to put up three 300+ lb guys who are clearly in the "hogs" category, whereas the 4-3 defense tends to put up 2 300+ lb guys and a couple of 270+ lb guys, at least one of which probably plays with more speed and technique than power. So I guess it depends on your criterion for establishing hoggishness.

[Patler]

It is hard to compare our teams because we are a different team now. when we switched to a 3-4, we stack ourselves with more athletes, because you don't have as many hogs up front to carry on your team. Without the switch to the 3-4, we likely don't draft Clay Matthews for instance.

That's why I grouped the d-line and linebackers together, so we can sort of look at the front seven collectively.

[Fritz]

because you don't have as many hogs up front to carry on your team.

This is an arguable point. The 3-4 defense tends to put up three 300+ lb guys who are clearly in the "hogs" category, whereas the 4-3 defense tends to put up 2 300+ lb guys and a couple of 270+ lb guys, at least one of which probably plays with more speed and technique than power. So I guess it depends on your criterion for establishing hoggishness.

Hogesoscity? Hogesqueness? Hogishness?

[Smidgeon]

because you don't have as many hogs up front to carry on your team.

This is an arguable point. The 3-4 defense tends to put up three 300+ lb guys who are clearly in the "hogs" category, whereas the 4-3 defense tends to put up 2 300+ lb guys and a couple of 270+ lb guys, at least one of which probably plays with more speed and technique than power. So I guess it depends on your criterion for establishing hoggishness.

Hogesoscity? Hogesqueness? Hogishness?

Pigotry?

[ND72]

because you don't have as many hogs up front to carry on your team.

This is an arguable point. The 3-4 defense tends to put up three 300+ lb guys who are clearly in the "hogs" category, whereas the 4-3 defense tends to put up 2 300+ lb guys and a couple of 270+ lb guys, at least one of which probably plays with more speed and technique than power. So I guess it depends on your criterion for establishing hoggishness.

Hogesoscity? Hogesqueness? Hogishness?

Pigotry?


In High School we were the Hogs....College we were just the fat guys. Now as a coach, I always refer to my OL & DL guys as "athletes" :lol: everyone seems to get a kick out of it...."Running backs over here"..."Athletes with me"....