1. Welcome to Green Bay Packers NFL Football Forum & Community!

    Packer Forum is one of the largest online communities for the Green Bay Packers. You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user.

    Sign Up or

    Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions. Furthermore, we hide most of the ads once you register as a member!
    Dismiss Notice

Last 2 Packer SB teams vs each other

Discussion in 'Packer Fan Forum' started by longtimefan, May 7, 2011.

  1. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    17,841
    Ratings:
    +3,485
    Green Bay Packers news | How do Green Bay Packers' last two Super Bowl teams match up? | Green Bay Press Gazette


    Check the rest..
     
    • Like Like x 4
  2. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,590
    Ratings:
    +4,273
    its sooo tough to compare. But ill go 2010 for 2 reasons, first I believe Rodgers is the better QB. Secondly I believe this is a passing league and the 2010 passing D was amazing where as 96 was decent. The one thing in favor of 96 that no one can argue is the special teams.
     
  3. Poppa San

    Poppa San SB I trophy First of four Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2010
    Messages:
    5,839
    Ratings:
    +1,631
    I would go with the 96 team being more of a juggernaut. With the injuries this year, I felt at times the team was held together with duct tape and baling wire. I never really felt like they were going to win when they walked on the field mainly because someone new was playing. At the time the 96ers just seemed destined to win every game with the SB victory being icing on the cake.
     
  4. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +980
    The 96' team was much better in the regular season. It was the most dominant regular season Packers team I've seen.

    The 10' team was much better in the postseason. It was the most dominant postseason Packer team I've seen.

    And it affects in specific areas.

    Favre was a much better regular season QB in 96' than Rodgers was in 10', no comparison. But Rodgers was much better in the postseason than Favre was. In fact, Rodgers had arguably the greatest postseason a QB has ever had.

    Same for the coaches. Holmgren wins in a landslide comparing the regular season. But IMHO MM was phenomenal in the postseason, maybe better than Holmgren was.

    BTW, Vandermause forgot to compare coaching staff. IMHO Holmgren was a better coach than McCarthy is, but, no offense to Fritz Shurmur, Dom Capers is in another level. Lewis and Philbin are more behind the curtains guys, with both MM and Holmgren taking active roles in offensive playcalling. I don't need to mention ST, right? We had a coach in 96, we didn't in 10. (Here's hoping Slocum has the performance of his life in 11')
     
  5. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,590
    Ratings:
    +4,273
    I never thought anyone would even debate a team that had Matt Flynn to a team that didnt.

    Case closed.
     
  6. PFanCan

    PFanCan That's MISTER Cheesehead, to you.

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Messages:
    1,880
    Ratings:
    +1,232
    I have to go with the '96 team. With that team, whenever the defense stepped on the field, I KNEW that they would shut down the other team when needed. During the last season, I held my breath before each game-saving INT that the defense delivered.

    In short, both teams got the job done, but one was a near-given and the other an awesome surprise.
     
  7. longtimefan

    longtimefan Super Moderator Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2005
    Messages:
    17,841
    Ratings:
    +3,485

    I think 96 D line was better then last years
     
  8. Powarun

    Powarun Big Bay Blues fan

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2010
    Messages:
    2,048
    Ratings:
    +420
    Well I could see Favre getting intercepted a little more and Rodger's getting sacked a little more. White may of had a field day, though I don't think CM3 wouldn't do half bad.

    Either way Packers win.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Kitten

    Kitten Feline Cheesehead Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2010
    Messages:
    5,112
    Ratings:
    +1,442
    Oh this is hard! You can break it down on so many different levels for comparison. You can compare the teams as a whole, individual players/ positions, offense and defense, special teams, coaching staff....

    I'm going to go with 1996. I tried and I tried and I simply cannot go against Reggie's team. Even thinking about that win still gets me choked up even to this day. Even after 2010.

    Now, Powerrun you got me thinking. Can you imagine a hybrid of the two? Rodgers as QB, both CM3 and White...... Oh my holy footballs!
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. Bensalama21

    Bensalama21 Ben

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2011
    Messages:
    1,575
    Ratings:
    +609
    Well I would say the 2010 Packers because Matt Flynn wasn't on the '96 team.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Helmets

    Helmets Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2011
    Messages:
    615
    Ratings:
    +222
    They would line up Reggie to face Buluga. The Iowan rookie would be schooled and clubbed all game. Should probably compare the backup QBs as Flynn would have to finish the game...
     
  12. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,590
    Ratings:
    +4,273
    Jim Mcmahon!
     
  13. Powarun

    Powarun Big Bay Blues fan

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2010
    Messages:
    2,048
    Ratings:
    +420
    Ivo you just opened up a new can of worms, McMahon would love to beat the Pack, shoot there goes me cheering for the 96 group, their offense is lead by the two QB's who have betrayed the Packers in my lifetime.

    Go Flynn/Rodgers combo, though if goes down we can switch to wild cat, which was nonexistant back then.
     
  14. GBPack2010

    GBPack2010 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2011
    Messages:
    483
    Ratings:
    +67
    Tough to go against a Hall of Fame DE. As good as our team was last year, I'd have to go with '96 team. Now had those 15 injuries not occurred, maybe I'd rethink it. Equally tough to defend a team with Jennings, Finley, Nelson, Driver and secondary featuring Woodson, Williams, Collins, and Shields.
     
  15. GaryGnu

    GaryGnu Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2011
    Messages:
    20
    Ratings:
    +5
    Has anyone set this up in Madden? I know one used to be able to unlock super bowl winning teams, though I don't know if that can still be done. And I don't own any newer game than 2008. I would be curious how a computer simulation would handle the head to head match-up.
     
  16. lambeaulambo

    lambeaulambo Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2010
    Messages:
    628
    Ratings:
    +206
    well. now this is a good subject...

    people forget that BOTH secondaries were excellent. that is a push. Woodson, Williams, Collins, and Peprah up against Evans, Newsome, Butler, and Robinson. Both of these units were great and I believe have at the least 2 HOFers in those 8.

    Defensive line - hands down 96 no question, with arguably the greatest defensive lineman in football history, and a young gilbert brown, santana dotson, and dont forget Sean Jones. Their backups wouldve started on most other teams then.

    Linebackers - I'll give the edge to 2010 due to their duct tape job, but overall its really close. Not going to disrespect Wayne Simmons, Ron Cox, Brian Williams, et al. they were great. Simmons was an animal, like Matthews, just a little bigger.

    Oline - this ones easy:

    pass blocking - '10 but close

    run blocking - '96 (not even close) remember dorsey levens running through HUGE holes, and it almost looked like they were running downhill at all times.

    running backs - '96 had more consistancy so they get the nod. The best mudder in nfl recent history has to be Edgar Bennett in the modern era.

    receivers - this is a push. Jennings, DD, Nelson, Jones up against Brooks, Beebe, Rison, Freeman. too close to call.

    quarterback - this is not even close. Rodgers is twice the championship qb that Favre ever was. Holmgren was in Favre's ear constantly, while Rodgers had more freedom and just flat out is a better decision maker. When Favre made the decisions and had more freedom, the result was just not the same. Favre was an incredible improvisor, but Aaron just has more poise.

    Special Teams - Jacke was wayyyy better than Crosby.
    the punters, I got to give it to hentrich, but its close. Return teams all 96, it was the dagger in the sb win. Desmond Howard truly sparkled.

    Overall if these two teams played, I truly believe 96 would win due to their run game, and keeping rodgers off the field. It is really close though. I'd say something like 31-28, because Jacke nails the 50 yarder in crunch time, while Crosby chokes. And Reggie White would demoralize '10's OL.

    Great idea for a post.
     
  17. AmishMafia

    AmishMafia Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    2,975
    Ratings:
    +2,226
    Woodson > Butler > Williams > Collins > Evans > Newsome > Robinson > Peprah

    I'd give the secondary nod to the 2010 team.


    But overall, 96 was a dominant team whereas the 10 team just squeaked into the playoffs. I would say if the 11 team can dominate throughout the season like I think they can and win another one, they will become the better team.
     
  18. packerstl101

    packerstl101 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2011
    Messages:
    299
    Ratings:
    +31
    who was there when Rodgers had concussions? Flynn. Therefore the 2010 team was better.
     
  19. ivo610

    ivo610 Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Messages:
    16,590
    Ratings:
    +4,273
    clearly "the belt" is a better celebration than showing your D*ck to people.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. VersusTheMoose

    VersusTheMoose Canadian Packer Fan

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2011
    Messages:
    1,353
    Ratings:
    +166
    Heart vs. talent. In the end I think the 2010 Packers would win just because I believe Rodgers is a much more steady QB.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  21. Jasonfan

    Jasonfan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 12, 2011
    Messages:
    26
    Ratings:
    +0
    I think 1996 would win pretty comfortably. Can you imagine Desmond Howard and the 96 Special Team against those of 2010? It would be a 10 Point advantage just in ST. The 1996 Team not only was maybe the best Packers team ever but statistically has a strong argument as the Greatest Team in NFL History.
     
  22. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +980
    I'm not so sure it would be that much of a blowout.

    Remember, back then rarely teams were spreaded. I'm not so sure if our 96 D would do great if we spreaded them.
     
  23. Jasonfan

    Jasonfan Cheesehead

    Joined:
    May 12, 2011
    Messages:
    26
    Ratings:
    +0
    That is true but that Defense was pretty exceptional and GB was successful vs the 49ers who while not a spread Offense were sending out 3-5 eligible players on each pass play. 1996 allowed fewer TDs than the 85 Bears did during the regular season, which is really a remarkable feat. I think that the D Line Combo of White, Jones, and Dotson would give the 2010 O Line huge problems, especially considering that 96's D Line was better than Detroit's D Line in 2010.

    The scary thing about 1996 is that their Offense never played at full strength (Brooks and Rison never got to play together). In theory, their Top 4 receivers would be Brooks, Freeman, Rison, Beebe which is a stronger core probably than even 2010 and that is not factoring in 2 Pro Bowl Caliber TE's in Jackson and Chmura.

    2010 would need Matthews and Jenkins to really play fantastic since even 2010's awesome secondary would struggle vs those 6.

    In Epstein's Book of Dominance, 96 GB grades out as the strongest Super Bowl Champion in NFL history.
     
  24. PackersRS

    PackersRS Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2008
    Messages:
    8,471
    Ratings:
    +980
    Yes, those Packers were statistic juggernauts, but saying that the 96 DL would dominate the 10' OL is meaningless if the secondary wouldn't be able to cover Jordy Nelson and James Jones, who would be a considerable mismatch with Tyronne Williams and Mike Prior. We saw that in the SB.

    It's just different eras. They didn't have to play any spread offenses (SF's offense was very good, but we're still talking about a LB covering a TE or a RB, not having to sub 2 extra dbs to take care of the extra receivers.)

    And regarding the 96' receivers, you are overrating them, quite frankly. Rison and Beebe wouldn't see the field in the 2010 team.
    Jennins > Brooks > Nelson > Jones > Freeman > Driver > Rison > Beebe

    If we're talking about healthy players, then Driver probably overlaps Nelson.

    And if we're including TEs, Finley is a much bigger weapon than Chmura or Jackson ever was. They were more productive for a much longer period of time, but we're talking about everyone healthy in here, right?

    And the Packers 2010 secondary is much, much, much better than the 96'. Woodson and Williams are in a completely different level than Newsome and Doug Evans. The safeties are better, specially Robinson to Peprah, though.
    Williams > Woodson > Butler > Collins > Shields > Newsome > Robinson > Evans > Peprah.

    All in all, the 96' team was slightly better than the 2010, but football is still about mismatches. The 2010' Defense has proven that it can take any kind of offense and shut it down, while the 96' Defense didn't face any spread team, while lacking the CB depth to do so, while the 2010 Offense thrived in it.

    Regarding Special Teams, Every single team we faced in the playoffs had a huge ST advantage, specially the Bears. It didn't affect the game that much.

    So, in conclusion, if this hypotetical game was played in 96', chances are that team would win.

    But if it was played nowadays, the 2010 team would have the matchup advantage.
     
  25. buckshotrob

    buckshotrob Cheesehead

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2011
    Messages:
    62
    Ratings:
    +8
    yea thats cause now days the 96 team is old back then the 10 team were children lol in all seriousness id say the 10 team wins i like the 96 d you cant stop reggie but the way our d plays this year is unstoppalbe everyone works together and farve is famous for chokin in important games with rodgers you never see that so i say the 10 team has the upperhand
     

Share This Page