THe Packers from '92-'95

[lastcat3]

History often paints a picture that the Packers were just a step behind the Cowboys and 49ers during this era. But really when you look at it more closely they really didn't seem to be that much better than most other 'average' teams during that period. They went 9-7 in '92-'94 and didn't win their division any of those years and the nfc central really wasn't a division that stood out that much either (the Bears were in clear decline at that point, the Bucs were still the Yucs, the Lions were a very hit or miss franchise, and the Vikings were still recovering from that awful Walker trade they made). Even in '95 which is often considered their break out year they were still basically a .500 team halfway through the season but then they got the Bears, Browns, Bengals, Buccaneers (twice) and Saints to end the year (only one of those teams ended the year with over a .500 record)

So why is it that they often get put on a pedestal above most of the other also rans of the league at that time? Is it solely because of Brett Favre and the fact that they had Reggie White on defense? And also what changed that gave them such good teams in '96 and '97? Was it just the continuing maturity of Favre or did the defense get better?

[Rupert Patrick]

The 1992-95 Packers suffered from the fact that the NFC Norris in that era, as a whole, was a very competitive division, and the Bears, Vikings and Lions were also pretty decent teams. Playing those teams six times a year would weigh down their WL percentage, as it did the other teams. The other thing that made the Packers of those years interesting was that people who watched the game back then could tell that the Packers were methodically building a powerhouse, a couple new pieces each year, steadily improving each season until they were the strongest team in the NFL. By 1993 and 1994, I think it was clear that the Packers were going to win a Super Bowl within the next five years, you could see it coming.

The 1992-95 Packers are a textbook example of how to build a great football team over time, and what's more important about that is that they established a way of doing things that carried over for the next 20 years. Unlike most systems, who wait until their star QB decides to retire and are stuck with nobody to continue to carry the torch, the Packers were already ahead of the curve in preparing for the day Brett Favre left the team three years earlier when they drafted Aaron Rodgers, although Favre's annual retirement threats may have also played a role in drafting Rodgers. Rodgers essentially watched and learned for three years, and when Favre left, Rodgers stepped in and the team was still hugely successful, and Rodgers has turned out to be a better QB than Favre statistically.

When Sterling Sharpe was forced to retire after the 1994 season, Robert Brooks stepped up and caught 102 passes for 1500 yards and 13 TD's in 1995. By 1996, Antonio Freeman (a rookie in 1995) stepped into the role as Favre's go-to receiver when Brooks was injured. In 1997, a healthy Brooks and Freeman formed arguably the top WR duo in the NFL. Were either of them as good as Sterling Sharpe? No, but it demonstrates how the Packers were a deep team who could recover and not miss a beat after losing the best receiver in the NFL at the time who was not named Jerry Rice.

[Jay Z]

The 1992-94 Packers all finished 9-7, but there was a steady improvement each year if you look at the statistics.

[74_75_78_79_]

I started a ‘95 Packers vs 95 Steelers’ thread a while back. I was the only one who opined that Steelers were better if only due to their advantage in the run-game and LB-play. Also, in that year’s finale, the ’Burgh who had nothing to play for (stuck at 2nd-seed) were a dropped Thigpen catch from winning at Lambeau vs a Packers team who had to win to take the division over Detroit.

I’ve once said forget about Neil, Cowboys ought to thank GB for their SBXXX title. Well, even more so than the Pack, I think Yancey should be the #1 person they thank for GB would have been the wild card instead had he made that catch. I think GB beats Philly no matter where the game would have been played as Detroit very likely enough eliminates Atl. This would mean GB would have to go straight to Big D, as SF doesn’t suffer that upset (vs Detroit) in the divisionals.

In either case, from ’92 up until that very ’95 divisional round, it was Dallas, San Fran, and (after a nice gap) everyone else. GB, no pun, was just part of the pack; not even ‘3rd-best’ all that time. But, as Rupert and Jay state, improved each year while showing quite the promise with Favre and Reggie leading the way at respective sides of the ball. Once ’96 hit (though they still had a hard time matching with Dallas), different story (I do think though that they beat Dallas in a hypo-’96 NFCCG). They arrived.

[lastcat3]

An interesting conversation could also be that if say the salary cap era didn't hit until say the early '2000's and Dallas and San Fran were able to keep their teams together throughout the '90's would the '96 Packers still been good enough to beat a (still loaded) Dallas and 49ers teams?

[Rupert Patrick]

An interesting conversation could also be that if say the salary cap era didn't hit until say the early '2000's and Dallas and San Fran were able to keep their teams together throughout the '90's would the '96 Packers still been good enough to beat a (still loaded) Dallas and 49ers teams?

I think by 1996-97, Dallas was going to have problems as the existence of the White House became public, which would have led to suspensions, etc. I also think that Barry Switzer was at best a short term solution to replacing Jimmy Johnson as that head coach in Dallas, that Barry wasn't going to hold the job for 8-10 years. I think if Jimmy and Jerry could have worked out their differences, Jimmy Johnson would have had a 10-15 year run as the head coach of the Cowboys.

San Francisco would have had issues at the end of the 90's when Young was forced out due to injury and the team had to transition from Seifert and Young to Mariucci and Jeff Garcia.

In addition, you had the players who played for Dallas and San Francisco during that era, guys who were chasing a Super Bowl ring like Deion Sanders, that they might not have been able to move so freely without a salary cap.

I do think the Packers would have gotten a Super Bowl in the mid-late 90's, as they upset San Francisco in the 1995 Divisional game and went to the NFC Championship against Dallas. Great teams (even teams who were truly great for one season like the 1977 Broncos or 2002 Bucs) find a way to force their way thru a gap between the best teams and make it to the Super Bowl.

[JKelly]

An interesting conversation could also be that if say the salary cap era didn't hit until say the early '2000's and Dallas and San Fran were able to keep their teams together throughout the '90's would the '96 Packers still been good enough to beat a (still loaded) Dallas and 49ers teams?

Bingo you hit the nail on the head. In fact with out free agency the 49ers don't win in 94'. They basically purchased a defense.