I thought they outplayed every team they lost to. So I don't understand why you continue to use "underperformed." It was more like they were under resulted.

It plays into my assertion that luck took more away than it gave. They out played opponents and lost on fluky plays. I am not saying what if. I am saying they played well. Whether you could recognize it or not.

That is the difference between a fortunate year like '09 for the Vikings where they needed lucky fluky plays to beat mediocre teams, had extreemly fortunate draws on the schedule to happen to fall during struggling periods for opponents and got outplayed by the only good team they played but still made it to the NFCCG. If it were not for INTs that were dropped by opponents Ds, they would have been 8-8.

The Packers had luck and injuries against them and lost by 4 or less. They had every team out played, even with the injuries they had. Yet they still won the Super Bowl.

Courage, heart and team unity held the season together. Many guys stepping up to get the job done when they needed it. They deserve all the credit you don't want to give them.

---

Yeah, I'm trying to decide which is the norm, getting eliminated in Arizona or winning it all. Because, as we saw this past week, we tend to let teams hang around unnecessarily. This past week, we didn't have the ugly fluke play that cost us the win. Nearly so, but not quite.

---

In 2009 we lost with different roster of players than we won with in 2010.. that right there pretty much defeats much of the possible debate of what is the norm. Not to mention that each passing year will adjust some for the players capabilities up and down.. some players will be advanced.. some players will be in decline in level of play.

IMO.. it is way to subjective to try and compare the two different years and project into this season. Way to many variables in play.


That said.. one thing the Packers didn't face last season vs 2009 is a QB and passing offense that was extremely dynamic. Atlanta was the closest thing to it.. and they really only had one primary threat upon the offense in White. Gonzo is just a shadow of his former self.. capable at times but hardly a consistent threat.

2009 we faced an offense lead by a future HOF QB with a balanced receiving corp that the QB utilized. Ryan is still developing in that arena.. even still this season and he didn't utilize the weapons around him.. still locking in on one receiver until forced away from it.

Cutler.. please, physically gifted.. mentally and emotionally challenged because of a fragile ego and self esteem.

Vick.. sorry.. he is an exceptional talent.. but far from a highly polished passer and offensive mind, more of an instinctive players.

Big Ben.. great leader, physically gifted talent, but hardly a great passing QB and mind.

I am looking forward to the Packers getting into the playoffs and having to play a Brees or a Brady.. a truly dynamic passing talent with an exceptional offensive mind and a balanced arsenal around them. Ryan has all the talent to be in the conversation.. he just IMO has to learn to nonspecific in his read selection.. that will come with time in an offense where he has more than one choice that can be consistent. Rivers is more advanced at this point than Ryan.. I just don't think he has the team around him to make it to the SB.

---

What about the Pats? I thought the defense handled them pretty well, kept the game competitive at least so QB2 had a chance to win.

---