So which Green Bay Packers Super Bowl championship team is better, Mike Holmgrens heroes of 1996 or Mike McCarthys marauders of 2010?

The easy answer, based solely on statistics, would favor the 1996 team that ranked No. 1 on offense and defense in the NFL and produced a flashy 16-3 record.

But the current Packers championship team (14-6) cant be dismissed so easily. It produced more total yards and sacks than the 1996 team and committed fewer penalties and turnovers. Plus it traveled a much more difficult playoff road and still came away with the Lombardi Trophy.

Both teams possessed remarkable similarities:

They featured fifth-year head coaches with similar credentials. Holmgren (51-29) was slightly better than McCarthy (48-32) during the regular season, but McCarthy held an edge in post-season winning percentage (.714 to .700).

They both had 58-year-old general managers Ron Wolf and Ted Thompson that served as the architects of their title teams. Wolf built the Packers from the ground up in the 1990s, and one of his key hires was Thompson, who 14 years later would follow in his mentors footsteps on the way to Super Bowl glory.

They both featured elite quarterbacks Brett Favre and Aaron Rodgers who led their teams to titles in their sixth NFL seasons at age 27. Both Favre and Rodgers were acquired by the Packers with first-round draft choices.

They both signed big-name free agents Reggie White and Charles Woodson that served as dynamic playmakers on defense.

They both overcame significant injuries. The 96 team lost Robert Brooks, Ken Ruettgers and George Koonce. The 2010 team suffered even more damage with the loss of starters Jermichael Finley, Nick Barnett, Ryan Grant, Mark Tauscher, Morgan Burnett and Brad Jones.

So which team would win a head-to-head matchup?

Who better to answer that question than Edgar Bennett, the Packers starting halfback in 1996 who served as the 2010 running backs coach.

It doesnt matter, Bennett said with a smile. Its about bringing that trophy home and putting another ring on your finger.

Its hard to blame Bennett for not addressing the question. My position-by-position analysis didnt produce a more conclusive answer, with both teams deadlocked in a 4-4-1 stalemate (* indicates which team gets the edge):

Quarterbacks

* 1996: Brett Favre.

* 2010: Aaron Rodgers.

Analysis: This is a dead heat with Favre winning NFL regular-season MVP honors and Rodgers earning Super Bowl MVP accolades. Rodgers had a better passer rating (101.2 to 95.8) and completion percentage (65.7 to 59.9) but Favre threw more touchdown passes (39 to 28). Surprisingly, their interception percentage was almost identical (2.4% for Favre, 2.3% for Rodgers).

Receivers

1996: Antonio Freeman, Robert Brooks, Andre Rison, Don Beebe.

* 2010: Greg Jennings, Donald Driver, James Jones, Jordy Nelson.

Analysis: The 96 receivers were ravaged by injuries, with Brooks lost for the year in mid-season and Freeman missing a chunk of time. Freeman was the leading receiver with just 56 catches and Wolf saved the day with the late-season pickup of Rison in time for their Super Bowl run. The 2010 receivers corps was the deepest the Packers have seen in a long time.

Running backs

* 1996: Edgar Bennett, Dorsey Levens, William Henderson.

2010: Ryan Grant, James Starks, John Kuhn.

Analysis: After Grant went down for the season in Week 1 the Packers scrambled to find a go-to runner and didnt find one until the playoffs with Starks, a rookie. In 96, Bennett and Levens formed a solid, consistent 1-2 tandem at halfback and Henderson was steady at fullback.

Offensive line

1996: Bruce Wilkerson, Aaron Taylor, Frank Winters, Adam Timmerman, Earl Dotson.

* 2010: Chad Clifton, Daryn Colledge, Scott Wells, Josh Sitton, Bryan Bulaga.

Analysis: Its a wonder the Packers won the Super Bowl in 96 after playing a dangerous game of left-tackle-by-committee, alternating John Michels, Gary Brown and finally Bruce Wilkerson when Ruettgers was forced to retire. Favre amazingly stayed healthy despite the revolving door at the most crucial position. In 2010, veteran left tackle Clifton was as steady as it gets, Sitton was a rock at right guard and rookie right tackle Bulaga grew into the job.

Tight ends

*1996: Mark Chmura, Keith Jackson.

2010: Jermichael Finley, Andrew Quarless.

Analysis: This wasnt close, especially when Finley went down for the season early in the year. The Packers may never boast two better tight ends on the same team than Chmura and Jackson.

Defensive line

*1996: Reggie White, Gilbert Brown, Santana Dotson, Sean Jones.

2010: Ryan Pickett, B.J. Raji, Cullen Jenkins.

Analysis: The Packers boasted the No. 1 defense in the NFL in 96 thanks in large part to the always-dangerous White and his line mates. The 2010 line was no slouch but didnt quite rise to the 96 standard.

Linebackers

1996: Brian Williams, George Koonce, Wayne Simmons.

* 2010: Clay Matthews, A.J. Hawk, Desmond Bishop, Frank Zombo.

Analysis: Matthews sets the 2010 unit apart, but Hawk and Bishop held their own and even Zombo, a street free agent, contributed to the cause. The 96 unit was steady but there were no Pro Bowlers in the bunch.

Secondary

1996: Craig Newsome, Doug Evans, Tyrone Williams, LeRoy Butler, Eugene Robinson.

* 2010: Charles Woodson, Tramon Williams, Sam Shields, Charlie Peprah, Nick Collins.

Analysis: There was nothing wrong with Newsome and Evans, but Woodson and Tramon Williams were better. LeRoy Butler has been the Packers best safety in some time, but Collins is a three-time Pro Bowl selection.

Special teams

*1996: K Chris Jacke, P Craig Hentrich, KR/PR Desmond Howard.

2010: K Mason Crosby, P Tim Masthay, KR/PR Jordy Nelson, Tramon Williams.

Analysis: Howard changed the complexion of games with his return ability, a dimension the 2010 team simply didnt have.

GBPressGazette wrote:

The 96 Packers earned and deserved their way into the playoffs and the Super Bowl win.

"vikesrule" wrote:

Hands down, no comparison.... the 96 Packers.
They were so dominate in all aspects of the game.
Only 3 regular season losses (cough one to an unnamed Purple team).

"vikesrule" wrote:

As of now, Rodgers has a 4-1 playoff record. Favre had a 7-3 playoff record at this point. I think it will be very interesting to compare their playoff record after Rodger's has had 4 seasons with playoff runs.

Rodgers clearly has the better winning % in the playoffs, but the sample size is too small. To me, win % and td:int ratio in the playoffs are the best ways to really compare quarterbacks. You see guys like Bart Star, Joe Montana, and Tom Brady really excel in those stats, and its hard to say they aren't some of if not the best ever.

So when we compare TD:INT, at this stage Rodgers is currently 13:3. Favre was 18:7. So both Rodger's winning % and TD:INT ratio are significantly better than Favre at this point, and this is arguably Favre in his prime, as far as winning in the playoffs go.

I say there isn't enough data to make a real comparison, but Rodgers certainly looks like the more efficient QB at this point.

Now Favre's career numbers:
44:30 TD:INTs
13-11 W/L

Looking at that, I think its safe to say that Rodgers does not need to play 15 more years to be considered a better QB than Favre, he just needs to keep up with his projected playoff stats. Hell, even 5 more years of reasonably good playoff performances might do it. If Rodgers playoff statline reads more Bart Star than it does Brett Favre at the end of his career, I think it will be hard to say he wasn't the best all time. Another Superbowl win will leave no doubt.

"earthquake" wrote: