DePack said:
OK guys the answer is obvious. net will never give a Brett Favre led team it's due so just ignore his post.
The more dominating team was the team of the 60's. They had more titles more HOF's etc. Zero is right though. It is a helluva alot easier to win a title when less teams are involved. If this concept escapes you then the help you need is beyond my ability to provide.
However if you lined the teams up against each other there would be no competition. The '96 team would have dominated. The size, speed and sophistication of the NFL is far and away greater now. The 60's teams would be overwhelmed. Now if you don't believe me just ask Jerry Kramer. In his book titled "Distant Replay" he said that when he came back for a "homecoming game" the size of the players scared him. He said that there is no way he could 've played in the NFL today at the size that he was. I am paraphrasing because I refuse to look it up for you trolls. That book was probably written 15-20 years ago.
To sum it up the Packers of the 60's were more dominating in their era but the 96 Packers would have have kicked their ****, in my opinion. And as everybody knows my opinion is the only one that matters on this board.
So do we ignore your posts because you diss Vince Lombardi and Bart Starr? We've had this discussion ad nauseum. I had the audacity to suggest that maybe, just maybe, Brett Favre has peaked and his attitude has changed, not for the better. I'm sorry if that offends you, but I think I'm closer to the truth than you are. Also, I make my judgements of great players by how many championships they win, not how many T.D.s they throw. John Brodie threw touchdowns like rocks on a lakeshore, but he's not considered the greatest of the era...why?...he never won a championship. Favre won one...lost one. Starr...won five...lost one(1960)
I truly resent your definitive statements that you know my position and to dismiss my argument simply because you and a some of your buds here happen to agree with you. You are beginning to make a mockery out of your increasingly inane argument.
You are absolutely wrong about the 96 team. It was a good team, but proved it's lack of distinction when it layed a huge fart against Denver the next year. To compare that team to the team of the 60's with a straight face reveals your true lack of knowledge.