You're right that a lot of teams are QB driven. Yet, the depth of their supporting talent appears to be a lot stronger than that which the Packers have. They will stumble, but I believe their fall won't be as great as it is with the Packers, in most cases. Of course there are exceptions to that rule. I'd say that both Atlanta and New Orleans could - I say could - have an even bigger problem.I get your point but its such a QB driven league that 95% of teams losing their QB spells doom. NE, Pitt, NO, LA, ATL. Philly is an somewhat of an anomly with Foles. And it speaks to how bad Hundley is and Kizer is really not a major upgrade. But then again the QB pool is so bad whats the alternative?
I believe a head coach who realizes that he can use a moderately decent QB if he insures his defense is top 5 has a much better chance of winning the whole show than a team with a lights out QB and a weaker surrounding cast of players. Maybe we've spent too much time cultivating Rodgers as the answer, and the Packers have totally failed to address their primary needs which is the surrounding cast?