Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="rmontro" data-source="post: 743313" data-attributes="member: 12340">That is such an interesting question.  The Rodgers vs. Manning question isn't really a fair comparison because Eli's first Super Bowl came in the Favre era.  And Manning is such an odd example, the guy is horrible, except every few years when he wins a Super Bowl.  Strange case.  But it's true the championships are what stand the test of time.  Would you trade some of Green Bay's 13 championships for getting to watch Dan Marino for 17 years?  Would you trade places with the Lions just so you could watch Barry Sanders play?  I'm going to say most likely not.I think the question isn't really so much about watching Rodgers play, as it is about the sustained level of the team's success.  Would you rather win two Super Bowls but be out of contention for eight other years, or would you rather be in the playoffs every year, even if you never win?  But we do have one Super Bowl in there, so that sweetens the pot.  The Giants have four Super Bowl wins since '86, the Packers have two in that span.  Yet (I would think) the perception is GB has been more successful because they've been in it almost every year.Don't know what the answer is, but it's a good question.</blockquote>

No members online now.

Total: 99 (members: 0, guests: 99)