"Relying on Rookies Far from a Sure Bet"

[Bretsky]

Mike Vandermause column: Thompson relying on rookies, other young players is far from sure bet

By Mike Vandermause

The knock against General Manager Ted Thompson is he's unwilling to take an occasional risk in building the Packers' roster. But maybe that criticism is all wrong. Maybe Thompson should be taken to task for being too much of a gambler. After all, Thompson is staking the fate of the 2007 Packers on a number of untested offensive players.

Last season, the Packers ranked in the bottom third of the NFL in scoring, rushing yards and red-zone efficiency.

Thompson's idea of giving the offense a boost was to stand pat during the offseason. He didn't sign a single offensive player in free agency or acquire anyone on the trade market. That could be the biggest gamble of all.

Believing that non-impact players suddenly will surface takes a giant leap of faith. Expecting skill-position rookies to step in and contribute immediately is a huge roll of the dice. While Thompson has stocked the defense with several key players, he has left himself hoping a lot of unproven talent on offense develops.

On one hand, it leaves an unsettling picture of the Packers being locked in numerous 12-10 defensive slugfests this season. Then again, Thompson has maintained a poker face and leaves the distinct impression the Packers have all the weapons they need.

"Who is going to score?" seems to be the burning question surrounding the 2007 team, but the unflappable Thompson doesn't appear worried. Maybe he should be, when you consider Thompson is staking the offensive success on these high-risk ventures:

# A tight end corps made up of pedestrian receivers and average blockers. The aging Bubba Franks, who has scored just two touchdowns in the past two years, will struggle to hold his starting job. The heir apparent, Donald Lee, is a Miami Dolphins castoff who slumped badly in 2006 with just 10 receptions. Quarterback Brett Favre never will confuse the Franks-Lee duo with Keith Jackson and Mark Chmura.

# A stable of halfbacks that has combined for two career NFL starts. Vernand Morency, the veteran with the best chance to see significant playing time, has been nothing more than a change-of-pace back in two pro seasons.

# A receiving corps with one proven performer — Pro Bowler Donald Driver — and a collection of wideouts long on potential and lean on production. Greg Jennings displayed flashes of brilliance as a rookie, but must stay healthy.

Thompson is hoping someone in the group consisting of Robert Ferguson, Carlyle Holiday, Ruvell Martin and Koren Robinson emerges from the shadows.

# A draft class that may or may not pan out. Counting on rookies is, at best, a sketchy proposition.

Nevertheless, Thompson is betting running back Brandon Jackson and receivers James Jones and David Clowney can make some noise. hompson was criticized during the offseason for not taking a chance and trading for receiver Randy Moss.

But he chose an even riskier approach in relying on a collection of rookies and holdovers. It's a boom or bust strategy that will leave Thompson either looking like a genius or searching for a new shirt.

[GrnBay007]

It's a boom or bust strategy that will leave Thompson either looking like a genius or searching for a new shirt.

....No pressure there!

No matter what your opinions are on Thompson, you have to admit this "boom or bust" strategy, the endless curiosity of what the young players can do is making the pre-season exciting.

(...like we really need another reason!)

[oregonpackfan]

When asked about the impact of freshman basketball players at the collegiate level, former Marquette coach Al McGuire said, "The best thing about freshman is that a year later they become sophmores."

The same analogy can be applied to rookie NFL players. There is so much to learn and adapt to playing at the higher level, that most rookie players don't have much of an impact on their team's performance.

[Tarlam!]

There is so much to learn and adapt to playing at the higher level, that most rookie players don't have much of an impact on their team's performance.

It's a nice quote, but applied to a guy like Nick Collins, doesn't really fly, does it. We were expecting him to really step up, but he played at a similar level to his rookie campaign.

The term "sophomore slump" was coined for a reason....

[Scott Campbell]

There is so much to learn and adapt to playing at the higher level, that most rookie players don't have much of an impact on their team's performance.

It's a nice quote, but applied to a guy like Nick Collins, doesn't really fly, does it. We were expecting him to really step up, but he played at a similar level to his rookie campaign.

The term "sophomore slump" was coined for a reason....

A lot of peoplet think Nick played hurt for much of the year.

[retailguy]

There is so much to learn and adapt to playing at the higher level, that most rookie players don't have much of an impact on their team's performance.

It's a nice quote, but applied to a guy like Nick Collins, doesn't really fly, does it. We were expecting him to really step up, but he played at a similar level to his rookie campaign.

The term "sophomore slump" was coined for a reason....

A lot of peoplet think Nick played hurt for much of the year.

I'm one of those. I have hopes for improvement from Nick. (That may surprise you and some others, but it is true)

[Partial]

Sophomore slump is far from uncommon because the players are still learning and by this point teams have all off-season to study and review tapes of teams they're going to play and get a much greater grasp of their opposition.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Who are the most likely for sophomore slumps? Personally, I think Hawk, Jennings, and Colledge will be better--but I could see Spitz, Moll, and some of the others having a sophomore slump. I'd say generally players get better in their second year. The guys you usually have to worry about those that get high on themselves and don't work hard or things came to easily for them their rookie year. Maybe that happened to Collins. Then, you have Underwood--who looked to be making big strides.

[Bretsky]

Who are the most likely for sophomore slumps? Personally, I think Hawk, Jennings, and Colledge will be better--but I could see Spitz, Moll, and some of the others having a sophomore slump. I'd say generally players get better in their second year. The guys you usually have to worry about those that get high on themselves and don't work hard or things came to easily for them their rookie year. Maybe that happened to Collins. Then, you have Underwood--who looked to be making big strides.

Completely agree

When I think of Sophomore Slumps, I think Spitz. Moll is far from starter material at this point but if I had to name a second it'd be him.

[The Leaper]

Actually, I think Moll may be more likely to step forward. He was the one guy singled out as very weak during the offseason...so he likely worked harder.

To me, a second season decline often is the result of not putting enough effort into your profession. You've reached the NFL...you may have had an OK rookie year...so suddenly you feel you've "arrived" and do not work hard enough.

From everything I've read so far, Moll seems to be one of the guys singled out for having made progress physically in the offseason. That doesn't tell me he is primed for a second year slump.

[run pMc]

I'd be surprised if the OL rookies from last year slump...they didn't exactly have a lot to brag about, and I got the impression the coaches made it very clear they needed to improve in the offseason. 'Plateau' might be a better possibilty there. Don't know if Collins was hurt, but he slumped.
As far as TT being a gambler, I agree with that...I think betting completely on this year's and last year's drafts is risky.

[wist43]

I agree about the OL... where are they going to slump to??? Even in the last game of the year they couldn't block 4 with 7. Can't get much worse than that.

Granted they improved marginally over the course of the year, but that's not saying much. I'm hoping they can be average... that would go a long way toward the offense making strides.

[CaliforniaCheez]

Counting on rookies?? Laughable.

There is Brandon Jackson and possibly Mason Crosby.

The other rookies are likely depth. It is and improved situation from last year with Jennings, Colledge, Spitz, and Hawk.

Sometimes rookies develop into good players too.

[Rastak]

Counting on rookies?? Laughable.

There is Brandon Jackson and possibly Mason Crosby.

The other rookies are likely depth. It is and improved situation from last year with Jennings, Colledge, Spitz, and Hawk.

Sometimes rookies develop into good players too.

Isn't it possible Jones at WR might be the #3 guy. They get on the field quite a bit. Harrell's listed as a starter right now also. There's probably 3 or 4 guys who may see significant playing time.

[retailguy]

Counting on rookies?? Laughable.

There is Brandon Jackson and possibly Mason Crosby.

The other rookies are likely depth. It is and improved situation from last year with Jennings, Colledge, Spitz, and Hawk.

Sometimes rookies develop into good players too.

Isn't it possible Jones at WR might be the #3 guy. They get on the field quite a bit. Harrell's listed as a starter right now also. There's probably 3 or 4 guys who may see significant playing time.

Good points Rastak. I guess what this means, is, if we can't count on the rookies, then by default, the only holes on this team were #3 Cornerback (Walker), and any position filled by a draft pick/free agent from LAST season. What happens if the player in those positions doesn't fill the need? I guess we have a hole that lasts until the draft in 2008, but those holes can only be filled by FA or a draft choice from 2007 or earlier...

That analysis does not work for me. At all.