IS GB A LEADING SUPERBOWL CONTENDER EVEN W/O #4?

[MOBB DEEP]

good news! pro foootball prospectus author aaron schatz states this on espn first take. WOW...

he points to the youth, improved D (front 7 will be even better), and stacked roster as reasons why they will succeed even w/o lord favre


says that as long as arod is average we have the line, running game, and wr's to have great offense

also says giants will miss playoffs and cowgirls "are not superbowl contenders, jus another good team..."

[MadtownPacker]

I dont know about SB contenders but playoff contenders for sure.

[ThunderDan]

We are definately not a "Leading" Superbowl contender. We have an outside chance but not the lead horse.

[Chevelle2]

Someone from football outsiders last summer was on ESPN first take, said GB was a darkhorse to get to the SB.

[The Leaper]

Typically, a team needs to be able to pressure the QB before you are a true Super Bowl contender. Our pass rush is pathetic right now.

[Tony Oday]

We are a contender and a great one at that...not one game has been played yet!

[LL2]

Well, I say we have just as good of a chance as any of the other contenders. To do it though we will have to win a few in the first 4 or 5 games until the team gets all of the starters healthy. They are a banged up bunch right now.

[Harlan Huckleby]

The Packers were Super Bowl contenders last year WITH Favre, and Favre looked like a worn-down old man who didn't want to play in the NFC championship game. I suspect the team had a better chance of advancing to the Super Bowl if Rodgers had played that game.

Favre is gone. Let him go.

[MOBB DEEP]

The Packers were Super Bowl contenders last year WITH Favre, and Favre looked like a worn-down old man who didn't want to play in the NFC championship game. I suspect the team had a better chance of advancing to the Super Bowl if Rodgers had played that game.

Favre is gone. Let him go.

HH,

i hope the "let him go" comment wasnt directed towards me. the question was posed that way to that aaron schatz guy; "without favre, how good do you think the packers will be?"

or did u take that opportunity to remind me, and others, to get over it??

i dont know about others but im EXCITED for brett in NY and look forward to sundays twice as much

im sure pack will be AT LEAST 11-5 and 2nd best in nfc behind cowgirls...

[Harlan Huckleby]

I am really sick of all things Brett Favre. I don't mind cheering him on with the Jets, but the old hand-wringing is just that, old.

[texaspackerbacker]

The Packers were Super Bowl contenders last year WITH Favre, and Favre looked like a worn-down old man who didn't want to play in the NFC championship game. I suspect the team had a better chance of advancing to the Super Bowl if Rodgers had played that game.

Favre is gone. Let him go.

Good analysis, Harlan.

This seems to be shaping up as a parity season.

The Giants were a fluke and will be worst with injuiries and other personnel losses; The Cowboys haven't looked good at all in preseason; Tampa isn't even as good as their record last year; Who else is there in the NFC? The Vikings? Come on!

Even in the AFC, the Pats and Colts show signs of coming back to the pack. San Diego was a fluke and is hurting too. Jacksonville just doesn't seem as good as a lot of people think. Pittsburgh might be the team, but they have weaknesses too. The Jets with Favre? A big no way there!

The Packers IMO should be as good as last season, and the rest of the league should be a little weaker.

[MOBB DEEP]

I am really sick of all things Brett Favre. I don't mind cheering him on with the Jets, but the old hand-wringing is just that, old.

well, like harv, u better get prepared for the reg season.

just imagine how it's gonna be around here at certain points...

i, for 1, will aim to post about favre in that 1 "official" thread. but u know people will be indignant and post where they want.

but u're better than that; after all #4 has meant to GB u cant xpect folk to say bye so easily (it's only been 5 months not 2 years) and like mad said it has simmered down quite a bit (the favre talk).

it'll probly increase on sundays and mondays during the season but the rest of the week will be dedicated to breakn down the pack's performance (right now there's only so much pack info to relay/discuss...)

[mraynrand]

The Packers were Super Bowl contenders last year WITH Favre, and Favre looked like a worn-down old man who didn't want to play in the NFC championship game. I suspect the team had a better chance of advancing to the Super Bowl if Rodgers had played that game.

Favre is gone. Let him go.

But Favre looked like an energized young man leading the Packers back from a 2 TD deficit in the Divisional game. He also looked like an extremely experienced veteran, in complete control of his game, having an MVP-level season for most of the season. Rodgers is almost a complete unknown. The advantages he has going for him are three years in the system, a coach with a proven record of improving the play of QBs, and what looks to be a very talented offense to work with, possibly with the exception of a couple of spots on the line. QBs typically don't learn all the nuances of the game in one season of starting, but with a very solid team around him, Rodgers could weather the initial steep part of the learning curve and be a competent starter (or more) by playoff time. More realistically, this will happen next year or the year after, but it's possible he'll be playoff ready this year and should the Packers be forced to play in the third coldest game in NFL history yet again, he could fare better than Favre and the Packers could get to the big game. Some of that depends on the competition, which doesn't figure to be any harder than last year.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I wanted the team to bring back Favre. I also saw TT & MM's point of view.

[SD GB fan]

Good analysis, Harlan.

This seems to be shaping up as a parity season.

The Giants were a fluke and will be worst with injuiries and other personnel losses; The Cowboys haven't looked good at all in preseason; Tampa isn't even as good as their record last year; Who else is there in the NFC? The Vikings? Come on!

Even in the AFC, the Pats and Colts show signs of coming back to the pack. San Diego was a fluke and is hurting too. Jacksonville just doesn't seem as good as a lot of people think. Pittsburgh might be the team, but they have weaknesses too. The Jets with Favre? A big no way there!

The Packers IMO should be as good as last season, and the rest of the league should be a little weaker.

uhhhh..no

giants weren't exactly a fluke. their pass rush is tremendous but osi is a big loss. i don't think looking bad in preseason writes cowboys off as a contender; they have roster loaded with talent. vikings have a legit reason to be a contender. they were on the border and have improved.

where'd you get the idea that colts and pats are losing a step? are you thinking this statement based on preseason games without their two legendary QBs? they have injuries but once they heal, there is no question that both are contenders. saying that the chargers are a fluke is wrong. they had 3 or 4 games last year that they could and should have won. in the AFC championship game, their defense was really solid against the pats but their offense was missing LT, river had a torn knee ligament, gates had a toe problem. all of them are now getting healthy. losing merriman will hurt, but their defense always produces pressure and even had the most interceptions last year. jacksonville has been consistently making the playoffs despite playing in the same division as the colts for many years. in fact, many say this could be the year for them to knock off the colts with better pass rushers. saying pittsburg has weaknesses doesn't say much. all teams do.

i don't think packers are the leading team for SB win. they have the talent to be a playoff contender, but we need a better pass rush and consistent play from the o-line to reach the SB.