This is basically a chance to compare the "First Set" of characters to the "Second Set", or their replacements.

Trapper vs. B.J.
Blake vs. Potter
Frank vs. Charles
and (sort of) Radar vs. Klinger

I liked B.J. much better than Trapper, although this is mostly due to the writing, as Trapper never really got much development. I do like Mike Farrell's performance better than Wayne Rogers.

I also enjoyed Potter better than Blake, but the two are incredibly different in style. Yet, Harry Morgan impressed me more as a legitimate colonel, and he was a necessary move into the more serious later episodes.

I do prefer Frank to Charles, but they are also impossible to compare. Frank (at least how the writers were writing him) could not be a part of the later seasons like Charles could...yet I can't help thinking that better writing for Frank could have made Charles unecessary.

And Radar beats Klinger, which is obvious and unfair to the character of Klinger, who was never really a total replacement anyway.

I mostly agree, except that I don't care much for BJ, and I really like Trapper.

Okay, I've waited long enough to say what I think:

B.J. was better than Trapper

Potter was pretty cool

Charles beats Frank, whom I never really liked

Radar beats Klinger for the sole reason that when Klinger became clerk, he quit wearing dresses, which was one of the best parts of the show.

And just why did he stop wearing dresses? Sometimes when he did something goofy, someone would say, "I thought you gave up doing that sort of thing", but they never said why. Did Potter give Klinger an ultimatum--dresses or company clerk? Was he so busy company clerking that he didn't have time anymore? That seems like a plausible answer, until you remember that he seemed to have plenty of time for his money-making schemes. Actually, you could say that the money-making replaced the dress trick. Maybe Jamie Farr just got tired of it. Or perhaps it was like the character of Frank Burns--they had taken both as far as they could go, and there just wasn't anything new they could do.

I always felt sorry for Wayne Rogers. He left the show because his character, which was supposed to be equal to Hawkeye, was becoming more and more secondary. His character could have really filled out if the writers have given it the same kind of attention they gave the character of B.J. Why didn't they just give him what he wanted? I think Mike Farrell has cause to be grateful to Wayne Rogers, because he got all the things that Rogers fought for.
I think that B.J.'s character was a better foil for Hawkeye. They had a good deal in common, but the (mostly) faithful husband B.J. was in stark contrast to the casual philanderer Trapper. On the other hand, as I've pointed out elsewhere, B.J. also had a really nasty streak that I didn't care for.

I liked Charles better than Frank, simply because he had more depth. As Larry Linville was aware, Frank's character was very one-dimensional. My favorite episodes with Frank are the ones where he rises above (however slightly) his flat, basic jerkiness. Charles could be as bigoted and narrow-minded as Frank, but he could also be deeply moved by the simple gift of an autumn birch leaf. He was also capable of learning from his mistakes, something Frank almost never did.

Potter was better than Henry, for the same reason. Henry was almost never allowed to rise above his status as the befuddled commander who never quite knew what was going on, and was terrified of making decisions. Potter was stern, compassionate, regimented, mischievous, by-the-book, and laid back. He kept everyone on their toes, but he also knew how to have fun.

As for Radar and Klinger--you really can't compare them. Klinger didn't replace Radar, he succeeded him. I always wondered why Radar didn't get promoted to Sergeant, like Klinger did.

Here's another point of comparison--Old Margaret vs. New Margaret. They had a lot of fun with the stiff-necked, hypocritical Margaret, but I enjoyed her more when she acquired more depth.

That really is the difference with the early shows vs. the later shows--more depth. Much more.

And, arguably, less funny. Much less.

>As for Radar and Klinger--you really can't compare them. Klinger didn't replace Radar, he succeeded him. I always wondered why Radar didn't get promoted to Sergeant, like Klinger did.>

I guess it was because Klinger had been in the army longer. Radar had been in for about 7 seasons when he was discharged. Klinger had been in for about 8 seasons by "Promotion Comotion"

I'd have to say the new Margaret. I'd liked how she got into the jokes...in the later seasons, we found out more about her than in the early ones.

B.J. was a much better-developed character than Trapper, but Trapper was much better as a "partner in crime" for Hawkeye. Wayne Rogers demonstrated a great droll comic talent which matched and complemented Alda's perfectly. The two made a great comedy team.

I am also a big fan of the new Margaret. There were moments, however, when I liked the Margaret prior to character development. Take, for example, Images. I agreed with her 100% about getting rid of that whining, useless crybaby nurse. She had no business in a unit like that. She was putting lives in danger by running out of the OR, not helping to preserve them. I was upset in the extreme when Margaret's character "developed" in that episode, and she changed her stance. I agreed with her first stance of shipping her out--I was ticked when she backed down. But, for the most part, I like the newer Margaret best.

I prefer B. J., Potter, Charles, and the newer Margaret much more than their counterparts. Between Klinger and Radar it's a tie.

Call me shallow, but I always preferred the show when it was going for laughs rather than Big Issues - i.e. seasons one thru (roughly) six. So - while I like Potter and BJ o.k. - I can never quite forgive them for not being the original cast.
(And who's to say that Trapper and Henry - especially Trapper - wouldn't have become just as multifaceted as their replacements, given a few more seasons? Look how Margaret turned out.)
I especially never could stand Charles...i'm not sure why, because i really like David Ogden Stiers. Something about the character was just too stagey.

Trapper way over Beej. Beej is way to much of a whiner & crier.

Charles over Ferret Face if only for the moments that Charles' good side comes out. Frank had none.

Klinger/Radar - a draw. Both were true to thier commander and thier unit. Even with Klinger's AWOL attempts.

Margaret - the Margaret after her divorce from Donnie

Potter/Blake - another draw - if not for Blake Potter would not have had the great command he did.

BJ wins for me.

I've always liked Frank much more.

Radar was better.

I like the original, stuffy, bossy Margaret.

I can't decide between Potter and Blake.