2007-08 Packers depth breakdown

This is a depth analisis for the 2007-08 Green Bay Packers offense. Using the key located below here is a position by position breakdown.Status:Excellent - Alot of players capable of starting with alot of depth at the positionGood - A good amount of players cabable of starting or to provide good depth at the positionAverage - A few players capable of starting with descent depth at the positionBelow Average - Some players capable of starting but position needs depthPoor - Lack of starting quality players with little to no depth at the positionPlayers in <span style="color:#FF0000">RED</span> are players who likely won't make the 53 man roster.*************************************************************************
****<span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%">QBs</span>Status: GoodDepth Chart:1) Brett Favre2) Aaron Rodgers3) Ingle Martin4) <span style="color:#FF0000">Paul Thompson</span>5) <span style="color:#FF0000">Jerry Babb</span>The Packers go into the season with some questions on offense but not at QB. Brett Favre returns for his 16th season in Green Bay, 17th season overall. There is some concern with Aaron Rodgers ability to remain healthy but so far he looks stronger and an improved passer from over a year ago. Ingle Martin started this offseason a bit shaky but calmed down and looked more in control of the offense. Overall you simply just can't discount Favre's ironman streak of starting games along with Rodgers 1st round draft status. Martin is still raw but a good option to have as our 3rd string QB.<span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%">RBs</span>Status: AverageDepth Chart:1) Vernand Morency2) Brandon Jackson3) Noah Herron4) DeShawn Wynn5) <span style="color:#FF0000">Arliss Beach</span>6) <span style="color:#FF0000">P.J. Pope</span>The Ahman Green era is over in Green Bay which is likely a good thing because of the nice sized contract he received from the Texans. It was no secret that the Packers wanted RB Marshawn Lynch in April's draft but the Buffalo Bills picked him 4 spots before the Packers. The Packers then settled with RB Brandon Jackson whom they selected in the 2nd round. Jackson doesn't have much starting experience - in fact no RB on the Packers has started more than 2 games in the NFL. That being Vernand Morecy. GM Ted Thompson isn't afraid to play young players but I still think that Morency will get the nod as the starting RB but this season might be more of a RB by committee. The Packers were high on Arliss Beach last year but he hasn't stood out as much this year. Though there is a chance he makes the roster. Herron and Wynn are the same type of RB though Wynn has more agility and cutting skills. Wynn needs to stay healthy though. The only locks are Morency and Jackson so the rest is wide open and I wouldn't be suprised if we carry 4 RBs this year.<span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%">FBs</span>Status: AverageDepth Chart:1) Brandon Miree2) Corey White3) <span style="color:#FF0000">Korey Hall</span>4) <span style="color:#FF0000">Ryan Powdrell</span>The starting FB is wide open this year. Long time starter William Henderson was let go as the Packers look to find that zone blocking RB who can also fill that receiving role that Henderson was so good at during his years in Green Bay. Miree has the experience in the system but isn't much of a receiver. White has shown some explosiveness and agility plus he has the better hands. At this point it looks to be a battle between those 2 players but the Packers might opt to keep both because of their skill sets. Hall has a slim chance because of his special teams abilities and ability to be a backup LB.<span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%">WRs</span>Status: GoodDepth Chart:1) Donald Driver2) Greg Jennings3) James Jones4) Robert Ferguson5) David Clowney6) <span style="color:#FF0000">Ruvell Martin</span>7) <span style="color:#FF0000">Carlyle Holiday</span>8) <span style="color:#FF0000">Shaun Bodiford</span>9) <span style="color:#FF0000">Chris Francies</span>10) Koren RobinsonI know what your thinking, you think the Packers status at WR is good? Well, yes, yes I do. When you look at the WRs on the roster they all fit a role for this team. Driver is obviously our go-to-guy while Jennings looks poised for a 1000+ yard season if he can stay healthy. Jones is a good slot option because of his size and his soft hands. Ferguson has the experience but I wouldn't be suprised if he finally gets the axe this year. Clowney is a hard worker who has excellent deep speed but is raw as a WR. Robinson, when he returns from suspension, might challenge for the slot role but his main contribution will be on special teams. Martin, Holiday, Bodiford, and Francies are good #4 options but with 2 rookies thrown into the mix they will likely get beat out.<span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%">TEs</span>Status: PoorDepth Chart:1) Donald Lee2) Bubba Franks3) Tory Humphrey4) <span style="color:#FF0000">Clark Harris</span>5) <span style="color:#FF0000">Zac Alcorn</span>Now back in 2006 I was a huge proponent of drafting Vernon Davis 5th overall. Don't get me wrong though, I like Hawk and I'm big Hawk fan its just that our division doesn't have a dominating TE like Davis has the potential to be. LBs are around every year while TEs like Davis don't come around very often. Well aside from that, I'm also a big fan of Donald Lee, but as our starter? I didn't like the re-signing of Franks a few years ago either and now this is all starting to catch up with us. Right now Lee is the starter but the coaches might be just trying to light a fire under Franks. Humphrey has an inside track mostly because of his ability on special teams. I like how we took a flyer on Harris but I just don't see him making the team this year. <span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%">OTs</span>Status: AverageDepth Chart:1) Chad Clifton2) Mark Tauscher3) Tony Moll4) <span style="color:#FF0000">Orrin Thompson</span>Probably 2 of the most underrated takles in the NFL are Clifton and Tauscher. Both players battled injuries last season but the suprisingly good play of rookie Tony Moll gave the Packers a well balanced offensive line. Moll is being groomed as our RT of the future so he'll likely stay there this season barring injury elsewhere on the line. Though the rest is wide open, the Packers drafted Allen Barbre who played LT but is being looked at as a LG. Current LG Daryn Colledge would likely slide over if Clifton goes down.<span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%">OGs</span>Status: GoodDepth Chart:1) Daryn Colledge2) Jason Spitz3) Junius Coston4) Allen Barbre5) <span style="color:#FF0000">Tony Palmer</span>6) <span style="color:#FF0000">Tyson Walter</span>The interior of the Packers has been completely rebuilt since the loss of standout guards Marco Rivera and Mark Wahle a few years back. Colledge and Spitz are entrenched as starters with Coston backing up RG and Barbre backup up LG. The entire offensive line is very versitle but with the good depth each position has a good backup option who is capable of filling in that role. Though I'd prefer Barbre to work at LT the Packers seem intent with keeping him at LG.<span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%">Cs</span>Status: AverageDepth Chart:1) Scott WellsWells faces no competition at center and with his contract extention last year he's obviously the starter. RG Jason Spitz will back him up. Wells did struggle a bit with the exchanges last year but with a full season under his belt we're hoping he can fix the problem.<span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%">Offense Status:</span> Above AverageOverall the Packers really have alot of depth on offense and alot of players who could contribute. Wether or not they can execute on Sundays is another question but they have some key pieces in place. The biggest questions in my opinion are at RB and FB. There isn't alot of experience with those groups but there is the potential for someone to step up and be the guy.

 

I think you're very generous in a few of your ratings. How can a Running Game of Vernand Morency and Brandon Jackson be considered 'Average'? Average implies that it is better then that of quite a few of other NFL Teams in order for it to be in the middle of the pack. And I hate to say it, but Morency is nothing more then a backup. I liked Brandon Jackson as a prospect, but his number 1 knock coming out of College was his durability and you have to wonder if he is going to be able to carry the load for the Packers, considering he never carried the load in College. At the best I would rank them as Below-Average right now until Brandon Jackson proves he can be the guy. Same with Fullback, You lost William Henderson to retirement, did little to nothing to replace him, and you're 'Average' there? Seems very generous. Overall Above Average? Even if I concede that QB, WR, and Guard are 'Above Average' (Which are certaintly debateable), that still leaves OT, C which you yourself labeled as 'Average' and Runningback, Fullback, and Tight End which should be 'Below Average'. Overall that averages out to a very Average Offense....and that's being generous IMO.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (AdropOFvenom @ Jun 14 2007, 03:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I think you're very generous in a few of your ratings. How can a Running Game of Vernand Morency and Brandon Jackson be considered 'Average'? Average implies that it is better then that of quite a few of other NFL Teams in order for it to be in the middle of the pack. And I hate to say it, but Morency is nothing more then a backup. I liked Brandon Jackson as a prospect, but his number 1 knock coming out of College was his durability and you have to wonder if he is going to be able to carry the load for the Packers, considering he never carried the load in College. At the best I would rank them as Below-Average right now until Brandon Jackson proves he can be the guy. Same with Fullback, You lost William Henderson to retirement, did little to nothing to replace him, and you're 'Average' there? Seems very generous. Overall Above Average? Even if I concede that QB, WR, and Guard are 'Above Average' (Which are certaintly debateable), that still leaves OT, C which you yourself labeled as 'Average' and Runningback, Fullback, and Tight End which should be 'Below Average'. Overall that averages out to a very Average Offense....and that's being generous IMO.</div>This is mearly in terms of DEPTH, hence the title 2007-08 Packers DEPTH breakdown. These are players that fit into our system and have their roles for OUR team. Also actually read the key, thats how I determined these rankings.Next time I suggest reading the entire post before rushing to judgement.

 

It doesn't matter how good your depth is if you have crap starters. The RB's are definitely a poor in depth along with the fullbacks..

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PurplePeopleEaters @ Jun 14 2007, 11:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>It doesn't matter how good your depth is if you have crap starters. The RB's are definitely a poor in depth along with the fullbacks..</div>Crap starters? I'd take 7 out of 11 players on the Packers offense over the Vikings offense. We run the zone blocking scheme, any of those players are capable of 1000+ yards in the system. FBs? Are you joking? FBs come and go around the NFL. Not too mention that Miree started 3 games last season. When he came to the Packers our zone blocking system took off. Henderson didn't fit the scheme. Plus Miree spent a year on the Broncos practice squad so he know the system.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (nBarnett56 @ Jun 15 2007, 08:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PurplePeopleEaters @ Jun 14 2007, 11:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>It doesn't matter how good your depth is if you have crap starters. The RB's are definitely a poor in depth along with the fullbacks..</div>Crap starters? I'd take 7 out of 11 players on the Packers offense over the Vikings offense. We run the zone blocking scheme, any of those players are capable of 1000+ yards in the system. FBs? Are you joking? FBs come and go around the NFL. Not too mention that Miree started 3 games last season. When he came to the Packers our zone blocking system took off. Henderson didn't fit the scheme. Plus Miree spent a year on the Broncos practice squad so he know the system.</div>I said nothing about the vikings. You brought them into this argument. Blah blah. I'll believe that Vernand Morency can run for 1000 yards when I see it. I would take our 3rd stringer over Morency. Good fullbacks can be extremely important.. A good lead blocker can make or break a running back. 3 games? That's not that much experience last time I checked. I've heard the "he knows the system" game before. I could know every system like the back of my hand but if i'm not as good as the guy across from me, im gonna get beat. I was just pointing out that the Packers offense isnt quite as good as you make it out to be in this. I would say they are about average. you may be being a bit generous in my opinion. Sorry for pointing that out. I dont know where you're getting 7 out of 11 starter either.

 

I think we are going to struggle this year finding running backs that can can positive yards on a regular basis. And we are going to pay for TT's lack of attention to the positon. That being said i think it all depends on whether or not Brandon Jackson can emerge as a good running back for us because i think he can suprise alot of people. Tight Ends are horrible and that is all really there is to be said. Bubba is just bad and we really have no one on the team right now that could step up and be a solid starter for us at the position. Fullbakcs are going to be bad too

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PurplePeopleEaters @ Jun 15 2007, 11:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (nBarnett56 @ Jun 15 2007, 08:45 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (PurplePeopleEaters @ Jun 14 2007, 11:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>It doesn't matter how good your depth is if you have crap starters. The RB's are definitely a poor in depth along with the fullbacks..</div>Crap starters? I'd take 7 out of 11 players on the Packers offense over the Vikings offense. We run the zone blocking scheme, any of those players are capable of 1000+ yards in the system. FBs? Are you joking? FBs come and go around the NFL. Not too mention that Miree started 3 games last season. When he came to the Packers our zone blocking system took off. Henderson didn't fit the scheme. Plus Miree spent a year on the Broncos practice squad so he know the system.</div>I said nothing about the vikings. You brought them into this argument. Blah blah. I'll believe that Vernand Morency can run for 1000 yards when I see it. I would take our 3rd stringer over Morency. Good fullbacks can be extremely important.. A good lead blocker can make or break a running back. 3 games? That's not that much experience last time I checked. I've heard the "he knows the system" game before. I could know every system like the back of my hand but if i'm not as good as the guy across from me, im gonna get beat. I was just pointing out that the Packers offense isnt quite as good as you make it out to be in this. I would say they are about average. you may be being a bit generous in my opinion. Sorry for pointing that out. I dont know where you're getting 7 out of 11 starter either.</div>I was stating that I would take 7 out of 11 starters from the Packers offense over the starters from the Vikings offense. Or is that too hard of a concept for you to understand?As for Morency, he put up 434 yards as a backup on only 96 attempts. I don't expect him to be the full time starter because we will work Jackson in with him if Jackson is not the starter. Look at the 1000 yard RBs that the Broncos put up in the zone blocking scheme. Its not unrealistic for him to do so IMO and 1000 yards really isn't even a benchmark for RBs in the NFL anymore. You aren't an "elite" RB if you aren't putting up 1300+ IMO.Look around the NFL, FBs come and go. You obviously don't even know how the zone blocking scheme works if you think that the lead blocker makes or breaks the running game. Your over-valuing the position.Again, I'm not saying the offense is above average. If you could actually read, its a DEPTH break down. It has nothing to do with how the offense will perform. You're more retarted than I originally thought.....

 

[quote name='nBarnett56' post='94601' date='Jun 21 2007, 09:37 AM'][quote name='PurplePeopleEaters' post='94394' date='Jun 15 2007, 11:57 PM'][quote name='nBarnett56' post='94369' date='Jun 15 2007, 08:45 AM'][quote name='PurplePeopleEaters' post='94362' date='Jun 14 2007, 11:46 PM']It doesn't matter how good your depth is if you have crap starters. The RB's are definitely a poor in depth along with the fullbacks..[/quote]Crap starters? I'd take 7 out of 11 players on the Packers offense over the Vikings offense. We run the zone blocking scheme, any of those players are capable of 1000+ yards in the system. FBs? Are you joking? FBs come and go around the NFL. Not too mention that Miree started 3 games last season. When he came to the Packers our zone blocking system took off. Henderson didn't fit the scheme. Plus Miree spent a year on the Broncos practice squad so he know the system.[/quote]I said nothing about the vikings. You brought them into this argument. Blah blah. I'll believe that Vernand Morency can run for 1000 yards when I see it. I would take our 3rd stringer over Morency. Good fullbacks can be extremely important.. A good lead blocker can make or break a running back. 3 games? That's not that much experience last time I checked. I've heard the "he knows the system" game before. I could know every system like the back of my hand but if i'm not as good as the guy across from me, im gonna get beat. I was just pointing out that the Packers offense isnt quite as good as you make it out to be in this. I would say they are about average. you may be being a bit generous in my opinion. Sorry for pointing that out. I dont know where you're getting 7 out of 11 starter either.[/quote]I was stating that I would take 7 out of 11 starters from the Packers offense over the starters from the Vikings offense. Or is that too hard of a concept for you to understand?As for Morency, he put up 434 yards as a backup on only 96 attempts. I don't expect him to be the full time starter because we will work Jackson in with him if Jackson is not the starter. Look at the 1000 yard RBs that the Broncos put up in the zone blocking scheme. Its not unrealistic for him to do so IMO and 1000 yards really isn't even a benchmark for RBs in the NFL anymore. You aren't an "elite" RB if you aren't putting up 1300+ IMO.Look around the NFL, FBs come and go. You obviously don't even know how the zone blocking scheme works if you think that the lead blocker makes or breaks the running game. Your over-valuing the position.Again, I'm not saying the offense is above average. If you could actually read, its a DEPTH break down. It has nothing to do with how the offense will perform. You're more retarted than I originally thought..... [/quote]Real mature, pulling out petty insults. I completely understood what you said about the packers and vikings. I'm just saying that I have no idea where you got the idea that you would take 7 packer starters over viking starters. Is that too hard for YOU to understand.I understand that 1000 yards isn't the benchmark any more with a 16 game schedule in the modern day NFL. Don't talk down to me like you're the god of football knowledge. As you mentioned morency will be sharing the load next season. With no Ahman Green to rely on Favre will probably be throwing more often next season. Again, I know what the zone blocking scheme is. Most teams use it at some point in the season. It's not unrealistic for a BRONCOS RB to put up 1000 in the zone blocking scheme. They're the team that has basically popularized the method after pumping out 1000 yard backs year in and year out and trading them for other help on the team. The packers are NOT the broncos last time I checked. I might agree with you if this was Ahman Green we were talking about but this is freakin Vernand Morency we're talking about. He's proven nothing in the zone blocking scheme in houston and in green bay. And yes, the fullback can be important to spring the downfield runner after the initial contact of the 2nd double teaming lineman moving to the linebacker. If we're talking 1000 yard back here that can be a huge part of the blocking game. If your fullback can't block you're going to get hit by the middle linebacker moving across the field. Plus if one of your lineman isn't pulling on a counter you're going to get screwed without a lead blocker. And you thinking that i'm overvaluing the fullback doesn't make up for the fact that you have overvalued the fullbacks on the packers. You can't say "I give this position an A+ because it doesn't matter that much in the scheme" when the players aren't that good. It doesn't work that way. You have to value the players as a whole rather than put the player up against the scheme. At least in my mind that's how you should set up a value scale. And your labeling of a "depth" breakdown is a total cop out for your below average rating scale and us calling you out on it. Not to mention the fact that YOU are overvaluing most of your depth players. :thumbsup: People here want to have friendly discussion without petty namecalling. If you can't do that then I personally don't want you back. It's very easy to have a good discussion about this topic without you calling me a retard. Not to mention its stooping low.

 

[quote name='PurplePeopleEaters' post='94665' date='Jun 21 2007, 09:51 PM']Real mature, pulling out petty insults.[/quote]Coming from the guy who jumps into another teams topic and starts trash talking that means a whole lot. [quote name='PurplePeopleEaters' post='94665' date='Jun 21 2007, 09:51 PM']I completely understood what you said about the packers and vikings. I'm just saying that I have no idea where you got the idea that you would take 7 packer starters over viking starters. Is that too hard for YOU to understand.[/quote]Obviously you don't, and you still can't seem to grasp the concept. Hence, you must be a retard because I explained it twice now.[quote name='PurplePeopleEaters' post='94665' date='Jun 21 2007, 09:51 PM']I understand that 1000 yards isn't the benchmark any more with a 16 game schedule in the modern day NFL. Don't talk down to me like you're the god of football knowledge. As you mentioned morency will be sharing the load next season. With no Ahman Green to rely on Favre will probably be throwing more often next season. Again, I know what the zone blocking scheme is. Most teams use it at some point in the season. It's not unrealistic for a BRONCOS RB to put up 1000 in the zone blocking scheme. They're the team that has basically popularized the method after pumping out 1000 yard backs year in and year out and trading them for other help on the team. The packers are NOT the broncos last time I checked. I might agree with you if this was Ahman Green we were talking about but this is freakin Vernand Morency we're talking about. He's proven nothing in the zone blocking scheme in houston and in green bay.[/quote]Don't talk to me like you know my team. Your making assumptions about a team you don't follow while I'm a fan year round. Its the same system. We have the personal to run in it. Green put up 1000 in 14 games. Morency put up 400+ as the backup. Your making it sound like only a season'd veteran can run in the system which simply isn't true. There is a reason why the Bronco's can put up 1000+ each season and its because they have the personel. Just like the Packers.Just showing more how little you know about the Packers, Morency ran in the zone blocking scheme in college as well. Plus this was the 1st year that Houston ran the zone blocking scheme. Morency wasn't even there! [quote name='PurplePeopleEaters' post='94665' date='Jun 21 2007, 09:51 PM']And yes, the fullback can be important to spring the downfield runner after the initial contact of the 2nd double teaming lineman moving to the linebacker. If we're talking 1000 yard back here that can be a huge part of the blocking game. If your fullback can't block you're going to get hit by the middle linebacker moving across the field. Plus if one of your lineman isn't pulling on a counter you're going to get screwed without a lead blocker. And you thinking that i'm overvaluing the fullback doesn't make up for the fact that you have overvalued the fullbacks on the packers. You can't say "I give this position an A+ because it doesn't matter that much in the scheme" when the players aren't that good. It doesn't work that way. You have to value the players as a whole rather than put the player up against the scheme. At least in my mind that's how you should set up a value scale.[/quote]In a pound it between the tackles scheme yes, but not in the zone blocking scheme. The FBs job in the zone blocking scheme is just to get a body on the nearest guy. Its a one cut system in which the RB doesn't need to neccessarly follow the FB. Obviously the FB can block if he's going to start let alone be on the roster. Thats just common sense. Again, your making it sound like you need a veteran FB which simply is not true. Miree also ran in the zone blocking scheme in college and spent a year on the Bronco's practice squad.[quote name='PurplePeopleEaters' post='94665' date='Jun 21 2007, 09:51 PM']And you thinking that i'm overvaluing the fullback doesn't make up for the fact that you have overvalued the fullbacks on the packers. You can't say "I give this position an A+ because it doesn't matter that much in the scheme" when the players aren't that good. It doesn't work that way. You have to value the players as a whole rather than put the player up against the scheme. At least in my mind that's how you should set up a value scale.[/quote]Uh, I didn't say that at all. If you actually read the key, let alone the title, you'd see what I meant by these grades. Again, showing your a retard who can't read. Its a compilation of players who fit the system and are capable of starting in it. Its not your post, its mine, I can set it up anyway I want to. If you don't like it, then simply don't read it and quit whining about it.[quote name='PurplePeopleEaters' post='94665' date='Jun 21 2007, 09:51 PM']And your labeling of a "depth" breakdown is a total cop out for your below average rating scale and us calling you out on it. Not to mention the fact that YOU are overvaluing most of your depth players. :thumbsup: People here want to have friendly discussion without petty namecalling. If you can't do that then I personally don't want you back. It's very easy to have a good discussion about this topic without you calling me a retard. Not to mention its stooping low.[/quote]Us, or you? Funny how your a Vikings fan trying to trash the Packers. Yeah, that doesn't relate in anyway to this at all... Overvaluing? I'm not putting a value on anything. Its simply a depth analisis. You still don't get that do you? LMAO1) Do I care if you want me back? From what I've seen is that there is only maybe 7-10 people that post here. Other people can't have opinions. Its probably why the attendance is so low. Its your additudes towards "new" posters. Everyone has their opinion so why jump in a topic just to trash it?2) You jumped in here and started to trash talk when you don't even comprehend the subject at hand. That to me is someone who is retarded.Anyways, I'm done with this site so feel free to get the last jab in and show how classy you think you are.

 

Bye.

 

lol, what a fucking douchebag that guy is. He's telling you who you follow and when you follow them. He thinks because you disagree with him it means you're trash talking. Thank god he left. Just another worthless Packer fan.