Huh? They lost one player on offense. Yes it was a big player they lost but besides Rodgers how is it a unknown? Grant? I could see. They have one of if not the best WR group in the NFL. A improving line, and Donald Lee is starting to come into his own as a TE. I'm not sure I'd lavish that high of praise on them. They're one of the better WR cores, but they still are really 2nd tier. I can think of several teams off the top of my head that have better. Like who? Colts Pats Arizona Cinci After that there are a couple of teams that can be argued either way (Detriot, New Orleans, maybe one other that I can't think of right now). Indy? Probably Pats? No Arizona? haha no Cinci? No Arizona? Seriously? Yes they have Boldin and Fitz but after that? Come on now New England has Moss and Welker but Gaffney and co. would be battling it out with Ruvell Martin for the 5th WR spot on the Packers rosters. Cinci? Johnson and TJ are both elite but Chris Henry is.. well blah. He has talent but he cant stay on the field to prove that. And Chatman wouldnt make the Packers roster. The Packers 1-5 have the arguably most talent and depth in the NFL at the WR position. The Colts are probably the closest however. Gonzalez would probably start over Jones but after that... And Wayne and Harrison are obviously elite but after that it would be Nelson and Martin over Hall and whoever else they have. So I would probably give you the Colts. please take your unconscionable homerism to the packers unconditional love thread, if you want to start one. if you want to say that the packers are deep at wide receiver, go ahead. but it's a complete joke to compare a solid receiver corp filled with competent receivers to teams with 2 great receivers. geez, try to be at least a little objective here, i know that being from wisconsin makes it hard, but still.