Hands down, no comparison.... the 96 Packers.
They were so dominate in all aspects of the game.
Only 3 regular season losses (cough one to an unnamed Purple team).

"vikesrule" wrote:

Low percentage offense? Isn't Rodgers completion percentage higher than Favres? Wouldn't that make it a higher percentage offense than Holmgrens?

"Dexter_Sinister" wrote:

Hands down, no comparison.... the 96 Packers.
They were so dominate in all aspects of the game.
Only 3 regular season losses (cough one to an unnamed Purple team).

And with the likes of:
Edgar Bennett
Dorsey Levens
Antonio Freeman
Keith Jackson
Desmond Howard
Frank Winters

Reggie White
Gilbert Brown
Santana Dotson
LeRoy Butler
George Koonce

and ya....Brett Favre.

The 96 Packers earned and deserved their way into the playoffs and the Super Bowl win.

"vikesrule" wrote:

I don't know about that last part, but I agree that the 96 Packers are the superior team. The only areas where I think the 2010 Packers easily win is in the line backing core, secondary and the receiving core. However, unlike the 96 Packers, the 2010 Packers have the ability to get much better. I think that 96 team was the peak of the Holmgren and Favre era. Obviously it was, but this 2010 team should not be the peak of the McCarthy and Rodgers era. In fact, if it were, the McCarthy and Rodgers era would have underachieved.

"porky88" wrote:

I think the question posed by this article suffers from ambiguity.

If we compare how these two teams ranked with respect to their peers, I think the '96 team wins hands down. They had the No. 1 offense, the No. 1 defense, and a pretty nice special teams. The '10 team lead the league in none of these categories.

If we compare the teams against each other -- that is, if we were to put the teams on the same field and play 10 games -- I think the situation becomes less clear.

Brett Favre was a touchdown machine in '96, but we all know how easily rattled he could become toward the end of games. Aaron Rodgers, by contrast, remains cool in the clutch. If the '10 Packers could get up on the '96 Packers early, I have to think they would sneak out a couple of victories on the basis of Favre's tendency to take games on his own shoulders.

Put Reggie White on the opposite side of the line from Brett Favre, and we have Brett Favre vomiting blood on the sidelines. Put Reggie White on the opposite side of the line from Aaron Rodgers, and we might end up with a concussion, but more than likely we end up with a few rushes for first downs.

On the other hand, it is likely that Reggie White would eat this offensive line alive, so I am not sure I'd actually want to make that test.

It is an interesting question. I don't think the answer is as clear cut as some might like to imagine.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote: