RealGM

Roster: With impact players on both sides of the ball, the high-scoring Packers might actually have more stars on defense than offense in three years. This is especially true among their front seven, led by DT B.J. Raji and OLB Clay Matthews. The Packers' WR group is aging and the run game is inconsistent, but the Packers will continue to find quality weapons for QB Aaron Rodgers. -- Gary Horton

Quarterback: Right now, Rodgers plays the position about as well as we've seen it played. He's also only 28. That said, is Green Bay comfortable with the current backup situation of Graham Harrell and B.J. Coleman? Matt Flynn's absence at least creates the question. -- Trent Dilfer

Draft: The Packers worked hard to fix the front seven in the 2012 draft. How well they are able to draft pass-rushers will define the next few years, but this is an exceptional scouting department in which finding great value is routine. -- Mel Kiper

Front office: GM Ted Thompson heads a very efficient scouting staff and believes in building a team through the draft rather than spending a lot of money in free agency. What's more, the Packers often re-sign that in-house talent, using the open market only to fill specific needs. It's a model that promotes enduring success. -- Horton

Coaching: This coaching staff has great experience and stability and combines a blue-collar work ethic with extreme attention to detail. Nobody in the NFL teaches basic fundamentals like this staff, headed by Mike McCarthy. The Packers are creative and innovative on both sides of the ball, work well together and respect one another. This is a family atmosphere that coaches embrace and do not want to leave. -- Horton

Bucksfans1and2 wrote:I think we can do better.

GrendonJennings wrote:Listening to the Vikings show with Paul Allen and some other Vikings guys on the radio on my way home from work is comical.

Most fully acknowledge a rough season, but they keep saying "if the progression is a little ahead of schedule and this draft class is a home-run...you can definitely have one of those 10-6 seasons as a young team." And they rank 31. I guess I just wondered where any of their exciting youth is.

QBR has been tracked for four years. Take the top 10 QBs in each season, and you have 40 total seasons. In 39 out of those 40, that QB's team was at or over .500. Only Aaron Rodgers on the 6-10 Packers of 2008 was under .500. (And QBR bashers, know that passer-rating numbers show the same trend.)

So as you see the NFL Future Power Rankings, you could complain that there seems to be a lot of usual suspects at the top. Well, this is lame -- all those teams have great quarterbacks! But what's the counterargument? Will Green Bay drop off appreciably over the next three years if Rodgers, at age 28, doesn't?

How is it possible to make that argument after the last 18 months?

The Packers won a Super Bowl in 2011 with 14 players on injured reserve. Last year, they went 15-1 during the regular season despite being poor in many areas. They had, by some measures, the worst pass rush in the NFL. They were even less efficient at stopping the run; same story with the pass. And Rodgers wasn't pampered, scanning the field in cool comfort -- Green Bay was safely in the bottom third in pass protection; Rodgers' step-through move has become a needed weapon.

In hindsight, this makes the case for a vulnerable Green Bay team, something that turned out to be true. But this was a team favored to win the Super Bowl, and by traditional numbers and modern metrics, they were deficient in myriad of places. Same story with the Patriots, who sit there at No. 2. But if Brady is Brady for a few more years (he's 34), is there a reason to put another team higher?

mnWI wrote:

GrendonJennings wrote:Listening to the Vikings show with Paul Allen and some other Vikings guys on the radio on my way home from work is comical.

Most fully acknowledge a rough season, but they keep saying "if the progression is a little ahead of schedule and this draft class is a home-run...you can definitely have one of those 10-6 seasons as a young team." And they rank 31. I guess I just wondered where any of their exciting youth is.

Paul Allen is the absolute worst. I gave up listening to KFAN years ago (Common Man Dan Cole is funny), but was on a long drive last year during training camp and decided to tune in. He was saying worst case for the Vikings last year was 10-6, with 12-4 being more realistic. He used to dump on Rodgers all the time too.

GrendonJennings wrote:Listening to the Vikings show with Paul Allen and some other Vikings guys on the radio on my way home from work is comical.

Most fully acknowledge a rough season, but they keep saying "if the progression is a little ahead of schedule and this draft class is a home-run...you can definitely have one of those 10-6 seasons as a young team." And they rank 31. I guess I just wondered where any of their exciting youth is.