Pack-A-Day Podcast - Episode 1795 - Better Packers' Roster: 2022 or 2023?!

On today's show, Andy reviews his grades from 2022 and ultimately asks - which Packers' roster is better - the 2022 team, or the 2023 version? Find out today!

On today's show, Andy reviews his grades from 2022 and ultimately asks - which Packers' roster is better - the 2022 team, or the 2023 version? Find out today!


Andy is a graduate of UW-Oshkosh and owns & operates the Pack-A-Day Podcast. Andy has taken multiple courses in NFL scouting and is an Editor for Packer Report. Andy grew up in Green Bay and is a lifelong season ticket holder - follow him on Twitter @AndyHermanNFL!

NFL Categories: 
0 points

Comments (2)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
PackEyedOptimist's picture

June 25, 2023 at 03:25 pm

Situational comparison:
QBs worse (but more likeable?)
RBs same
WRs better
TEs better by mid-season
OL better
DL same though different—maybe better
ED better
ILB better, or same
CB same or better
S the big unknown, but I’m guessing better
K/P I expect better—but I’m an optimist

0 points
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

June 26, 2023 at 07:19 am

Pretty fair but also relentlessly optimistic. At least there is reason to have some optimism. The notion that the offense will be better is largely predicated on a vastly improved offensive line, and that is based on the return to health of Bakhtiari and Jenkins. Probably can't afford an injury at LG, OC, or RG as the downgrade is fairly steep. There was a correlation between improved scoring and Bakh being healthy, but it also coincided with the emergence of Watson and Watson's own return to health (Watson had his first game with more than 34 receiving yards in week 10). Bakh was healthy in weeks 10-12 and 16 and 17, and the Packers scored 31, 17, 33, 41, and 16, a robust 27.6 pts/game average.

The WR room being better is based on Watson being really good and healthy for 17 games as opposed to the 9 games he seemed fine in 2022. The team probably needs Doubs to be a decent #2 WR. Will he be as good as Lazard? IDK, I like the talent, but I can't say I liked what I saw during his rookie year. Can Jayden Reed earn a neutral grade like Cobb did? I don't know much about him. Wicks, Dubose, Melton, and Toure are late round flyers. One or more might surprise, but they might be as bad as Watkins and Amari Rodgers.

I like Musgrave and Kraft, but rookie TEs have history in the NFL. GB will miss Lewis' blocking, but perhaps the OL will be good enough not to need it as much. I agree that Tonyan probably blocks better than either Musgrave or Kraft (while they are rookies, anyway), but they will be better receivers, possibly by a decent margin.

Quay Walker blossoming would make a difference. The DL getting a +5.15 grade last year is surprising. It doesn't always work out when teams take part-time players and turn them into full-time guys, while relying on day three rookies as depth. Wyatt is another wild card. Agree that the CBs could be better, barring injury to the two guys we know can play. Yeah, safety could get worse, but it is true that the bar is pretty low. Edge should indeed be better.

0 points