Packers SHOULD be a better team in 2008

[Patler]

While it does not necessarily mean they will have a better record, after all 13-3 is difficult to top, overall the team should be better in 2008.

1. The Packers have the ability to control every player on the current roster, if they want to, including Cory Williams. Their cap space is large enough to allow them to keep everyone for at least another year.

2. No one seems to be retiring.

3. No one, other than perhaps Jolly, seems to have a current injury that might be a factor at the start of the 2008 season.

4. With #1-#3 being the case, any new players added to the final roster next year should be there because they are better than the players they replace.

5. Any of the players entering their 2nd or 3rd seasons could make big strides in performance. There are many players in this group, and if just a few of them step up it could make a lot of difference. This is when it happens for a lot of players.

6. No one, other than maybe Grant, really came from no where and had an outstanding year. There really isn't anyone who had a breakout season. Accordingly, most players should be expected to perform about as they did in 2007, give or take normal season to season variations.

7. The number of players that might fall back due to age is small. Favre, Harris and Woodson fall into the category of players who are at ages for the positions they play in which they might not return next season as good as they have been. Driver, Clifton and Tauscher potentially are in this group too. I don't look at this category as a big risk for the Packers. The biggest concern is that maybe one of the CBs will start to lose it.

Of course, even though the roster should be better overall in 2008 compared to 2007, another team could leapfrog the Packers, injuries could make things completely different, etc. But overall, the Packers look to be a team on the rise.

[Kiwon]

The biggest intangible I think from year to year is health.

The Packers were fortunate last year. They avoided many serious injuries, plus enjoyed an extra bye week and home field advantage in the playoffs. It doesn't get any better than that.

In 2002, they had a good club that won 12 games, but had injuries late in the season and got knocked out in the first round.

In 2005, they got killed with injuries and struggle to win 4 games (although NO was a blowout win).

If they can stay healthy and Farve plays consistent then they should be almost favorites to make it to the NFC Championship game in 2008. The schedule may be harder but who knows for sure.

The 2007 season was special for a lot of reasons. A Super Bowl win would have make it a storybook season. But didn't happen.

Super Bowl champs in '08? The Packers have as good a chance as any team in the league. But they have to stay healthy.

[twoseven]

Agreed, but DAL and the NYG aren't going anywhere either.

[Patler]

I agree with both replies above, which is why I was not making any comparisons of one team to another team, or predicting how successful the team will be. I was simply looking at where the Packers are now and what that should mean for their roster in 2008. As I said, another team can easily leap frog the Packers, or injuries could decimate the Packers 2008 roster.

However, unlike the early 2000s, there are many reasons to think the team should bet better next year. It may not win as many games, may not get as far in the playoffs for other reasons, but those are different questions to ponder.

[Patler]

Another reason to be hopeful is this:

A few years ago, they were looking for improvement to come from fundamentally poor players with questionable attitudes, like Carroll, Thomas, Hunt, etc.

Now they are looking for improvement from basically sound football players, most with extremely good attitudes and work ethics. Most seem to be passionate about the game.

[Joemailman]

Agreed, but DAL and the NYG aren't going anywhere either.

I have a feeling Dallas will have a disappointing year. They finished poorly in 2007, and Wade Phillips hasn't had a lot of staying power in his previous head coaching stints. It was no fluke that the Packers and Giants met in the NFC Title Game, and it will probably happen again.

[Kiwon]

Wow, if the Giants proved anything with their Super Bowl run was that momentum (confidence?) is a huge factor for success.

Ten straight wins on the road?

By all rights, Green Bay should have played the game of their lives against the Giants to get into the Super Bowl after their magical game against the Seahawks. But it was the Giants that played with confidence and plainly beat the Pack in so many phases after they came out emotionally flat.

Talent-wise are the Giants equal to the Pats, the Pack, or even the Cowboys? I don't know if they are on paper, but they beat each team. They were better when they had to be and a 10-6 team became World Champs.

Kudos to them.

[Scott Campbell]

Where's the Superbowl next year?

[b bulldog]

In Florida

[KYPack]

The Giants HAVE to come down. You only get a rocket ride like they had once in your life.

Pats, down by momentum. they've got a ton of golden oldies who can't keep it going.

Dal, Wade runs a loose ship. It can't stay on course long.

Our challenges will come from the up and comers, The Vikes, Tampa, SD, JAX, (I used to think AZ, but they got trouble), and some other teams will rise up and be surprise pains in the butt.

[b bulldog]

I think the Boys have the most proven talent in the NFC and they have 2 first roundes to boot. The Giants are very young and have solid players at key positions. The Saints could be trouble if they stay healthy and the Hawks will load up for a run this year. The Bears have one great D when healthy and the Vikes are talented but have huge questions at QB. The Packers have huge questions at QB, we also can't grind out a ball controlling running attack and our corners are old and our passrush against good teams is less than adequate. IMO, the NFC is wiiiiide open. We had a great chance this year, that is what really hurts.

[oregonpackfan]

I think a huge factor in the Packers' success next year is Favre's retirement question. If he returns, I agree that overall the Packers should be as strong, if not, stronger than this year's team.

If Favre retires, it may take the Packers considerably long to transition to Rodgers being the starter. Fundamentally, I have confidence in his ability to start. On the other hand, it may require a long time for the team to adjust to Rodgers as the starter.

Endurance wise, Rodgers is a big question mark. He had that broken foot and the pulled hamstring injuries.

As Packer fans, we have been terribly spoiled by Favre's incredible durability. We have to remember there are many starting quarterbacks who have to sit out due to injury. If Rodgers went down, the Packers would be in a terrible bind at the QB position(if Favre had retired prior to the start of the 2008 season.)

[Charles Woodson]

In Florida

tampa to be precise, then in 2010 its back in miami

[Partial]

Raymond James is by far the nicest stadium I have ever been in. That will be a treat for the spectators. I saw two outback bowls there. Hilarious when the crowd was chanting "Game" "Cock!" for SC.

[MJZiggy]

In Florida

tampa to be precise, then in 2010 its back in miami

**Starts digging through address book to see who she can visit next year...

[Jimx29]

..... plus enjoyed an extra bye week and home field advantage in the playoffs. It doesn't get any better than that.

...umm....erm......... :?