2004 Packers Draft

[Sparkey]

Special Teams is most often reflected in its play by the quality depth on your team. Depth is replenished via the draft. Out of seven picks in 2004, only two are left. Any questions why the Packers fell from the top tier of teams?


RND PCK
1 25(25) AHMAD CARROLL CB ---- waived
3 7(70) JOEY THOMAS CB ---- cut
3 9(72) DONNELL WASHINGTON DB ---- cut
3 24(87) B.J. SANDER P ---- cut
6 14(179) COREY WILLIAMS DT
7 50(251) SCOTT WELLS C


Four picks in the top 90 overall selections of the 2004 draft and nothing too show for it........

[Guiness]

Of course, just as telling is that none of those guys have caught on anywhere else.

I wouldn't be surprised to see BJ pop up somewhere. And someone else will at least give Caroll a look-see. Not too many 1st round busts don't get at least one more chance.

[justanotherpackfan]

Special Teams is most often reflected in its play by the quality depth on your team. Depth is replenished via the draft. Out of seven picks in 2004, only two are left. Any questions why the Packers fell from the top tier of teams?


RND PCK
1 25(25) AHMAD CARROLL CB ---- waived
3 7(70) JOEY THOMAS CB ---- cut
3 9(72) DONNELL WASHINGTON DB ---- cut
3 24(87) B.J. SANDER P ---- cut
6 14(179) COREY WILLIAMS DT
7 50(251) SCOTT WELLS C


Four picks in the top 90 overall selections of the 2004 draft and nothing too show for it........
Looking good.

[wist43]

And you guys wonder why I want Dorsey's head on a platter???

People talk about how franchises will inevitably fall from grace due to the inverse draft and the salary cap, but I don't think that has to be.

If you've got solid people running your draft (which the Packers haven't had for years), you should be landing solid, starting calibur players in the 1st 3 rounds, regardless of where you're picking; and, developmental guys with the potential to start in rds 4-7.

Granted you're going to miss out on the studs at the top of draft, but if you're a consistent winning team, you can sign the occasional stud off the FA market... The base line of your franchise, and your roster, however, has to come from the draft.

I've been hyper-critical of the Packers drafts for years... If I can see it, how is that guys who are being paid big $$$ can't??? It boggles the mind.

[MacCool606]

Is it possible that the problem wasn't the pick - but the coaching? Last year when Sherman brought in the Dallas kicking specialist coach (Hoffman? I think?) BJ was noticeably better. He then fell off after TC when the coaches contract wasn't renewed.
During the Holmgren years, I think the coaching staff he assembled helped to make Wolf's drafts better. They improved the players. I never thought Sheman's staff made anyone better. In some instances it was just the reverse (The only position coach that seemed, at the time, to be real good was the OL coach (Beightol).

[gbpackfan]

STOP BLAMING THE COACHES FOR EVERYTHING! That excuse is so old! Good players make GOOD PLAYS! It is that simple. Our 2004 draft, overall, sucked!

Washington, Thomas, Sanders, Carroll won't be players no matter who their coach is. PERIOD!

[MacCool606]

Good plaayers make good plays and bad players make good plays - the difference is that good players make good plays more frequently. (Conversely, both make bad plays - but the bad players make bad plays more frequently.)
The difference can be (and usually is) a function of coaching, or the system they are in, and the players around them.

[RashanGary]

Mike Sherman...*shudder*

[Guiness]

I know what you're getting at Mac, but you have something in the tank before you can be coached up to play in this league at all.

I'm not saying those guys definitely don't, but the fact that the ones that are gone haven't caught on (and been coached up...) sure seems to indicate that.

[Badgerinmaine]

Of course, just as telling is that none of those guys have caught on anywhere else.

I wouldn't be surprised to see BJ pop up somewhere. And someone else will at least give Caroll a look-see. Not too many 1st round busts don't get at least one more chance.

I think you're three for three here. Too bad those picks have now gone 0 for 4. :sad:

[run pMc]

And you guys wonder why I want Dorsey's head on a platter???

I wouldn't put this all on Dorsey. I don't think it's something that is a black-and-white issue...you have to factor in drafting good players, having good coaching, and a lot of luck.

(1) From what I've read, Sherman had final say on draft picks. I believe there were people who actually storemed out of the war room in disgust when BJSander was picked.
(2) Two scouts can have very different opinions about the same player. It happens all the time. You see that all the time in stories that have comments about players or teams by GM's.
(3) Drafting players with talent that fit the team's "system" well makes all the difference. Sometimes a player can be "coached up", but that requires good coaching. I don't think GB has had consistently good coaching since Holmgren. You think Rhodes or Sherman could have gotten as much out of Harry Sydney as Holmgren did? It's a problem that goes hand in hand -- you need good players AND good coaches.

[run pMc]

And yes, the 2004 draft did suck.