The '96 offense relied on consistent, high percentage plays and thus was successful consistently. They didn't go up early, showing how easy it could be, then produce nothing for the next 3.5 quarters only to win on a last minute interception.
The problem with the '96 team was that the defense was constructed based on power, not speed. So it was great at Lambeau, but we couldn't win consistently in domes. Remember the "dome curse?"
Well, today the offense is less consistent due to MM's low percentage "run and shoot" philosophy, but the defense is built for speed. So we are basically a dome team, who is based out of the frozen tundra. Overall, I think it's an advantage over the '96 team.
Power teams were more advantageous in the Lombardi era, when there were fewer domes, but the rules also favored the run game. Defenders could knock a WR down if they wanted to. In '70 the rules changed to favor the passing game. This if for the benefit of TV ratings. The WCO offense was designed to take advantage of this set or rules, just as Lombardi's "Power Sweep" offense was designed based on the old set of rules.
Between the rules favoring the passing game and the advent of domed stadiums with artificial turf, designing your team around the idea of speed is a distinct advantage over designing it based around the idea of power. Even when you run a stupid, low percentage offense that goes into a shell for 3.5 quarters of every game.

Actually, I was thinking:

Reggie White - Greg Jennings

I'm hoping its the Broncos, that way I won't have to go out of my way to get the Super Bowl stuff! Oh snap thats right I have to hit Walmart, they have the Journal Sentinel there!!

in both games GB has a double digit lead at half time.
27-14 in 96
21-10n 11

both games had a 2 point conversion in the 2nd half.