The 'One player away' mantra rarely proves to be the reason for success, as the player selected as that player rarely comes through with winning, but more often puts the team in a more difficult situation. A diva, it's about me, salary, etc.

Has Parsons, the 'One player away' crown wearer since the trade, been that guy, no. Is it possible, sure, is it more likely yes than no, no, as his inconsistency has already been witnessed as was in Dallas.. Yes, I know, the stats say he is doing great, but why then did we lose two games to designated bad teams. Has his being double-teamed truly opened the door for the others to play to their once lofty expectations, no.

The 'One player away' is nothing more than a pacifier for the optimist, until that player doesn't change a thing, which seems to be the case for the Packers. They're still suffering the same issues.

Yes a team can be one player away. We have seen it. Tampa Bay in 2020 just needed a QB because the rest of that roster was stacked, Brady knew this when he choose that team. P. Manning did the same thing when he looked at Denver. That team was stacked on D, had good WRs and OL play. Took him a little longer but they could have won it that 1st year as well.

Can a team be one player away that isn't a QB? That is usually a bit more complicated as no other player can effect the game the way a QB can. I thought adding Barkley to the that OL in Philly was a big shot in the arm but if they didn't draft well with their DBs as well I don't think they win it last year. Barkley was a big difference maker but part of the puzzle.

The Packers weren't one player away from being a team like those two mentioned IMO. Parsons put them among the top contenders but he didn't put them on a different level from the others. Picking up Parsons gave the defense a shot in the arm and hopefully it will improve as the year goes on but the team still has deficiencies that need to be addressed.

The Packers are about 3 good linemen away from being a dominant team. Watson won’t be getting the ball if Love doesn’t have time to throw. Fewer three and outs from the offense will make the defense’s job easier. More TDs will also take the pressure off special teams.

Right now we are a healthy Tom and Aaron Banks away from being good enough to win later on. If we regain health and keep it then my one fear is DT depth and pressure from the middle outside of obvious passing downs, not just versus the run. Fortunately I think the team that played Dallas (less Wyatt) should be more than enough against the Bengals.

It's the loss of a key player that can really doom a team's SB aspirations more than one addition.

However, if a team is close to being a real contender anyway, one key addition CAN put you over the top.

The Packers are pretty much the definition of a team that is (or was) close to being elite before the Parsons deal and despite some recent miscues, I think they qualify now as an elite team with a realistically good chance to win the SB.

As GregMeinholz pointed out, adding one key player has an effect that stretches beyong their position group. That applies to a WR like Watson or Golden, (teams put two players on them that opens up the short to middle distance game). High quality O linemen help RBs and they both help the QB, and so on.

One final point about adding a key player. Often they can take on multiple roles, like the reliable RB who also has a knack for picking up blitzes and catches well, the safety that can play corner, the ILB that can cover like a safety or be a great blitzer, a lineman who can play several positions, or a TE who is both a talented receiver and a plus blocker (good WR blockers are a nice plus as well).

the key word is 'overlap'. The more of it you have, the easier it is to be creative without tipping your hand to what is coming.

Can Watson play on the O-Line effectively? -lol

Of course a team can be one player away, but that's not the case with the Packers right now. I think more of baseball teams getting a stud pitcher at the deadline. Justin Verlander in Houston and John Lester for the Cubs. Hockey has those gamechangers, too. Patrick Roy, Mario Lemieux. Shaq to the Lakers was the one player they needed for championships. Yeah, maybe Brady to the Bucs works if you ignore the way the Packers shit the bed that season.

The Packers have a roster filled with talented players, guys who will get healthy, and guys who will improve. This team has yet to develop an identity and there's a lot of season left.

Great article

Yes we have been one player away in the Rogers years

And usually it’s a special team player away …

No different than the last two weeks…

Well I guess the Kevin King pick cost us two super bowls…

Vs home grown TJ. Watt.

HOW DO YOU LET THAT HAPPEN.

The only thing is they gave one to the Steelers for us beating the in the Super Bowl..

Speical team play like this does not win Super Bowls.

Yes I didn’t spell it correctly because since Nixon is removed from that it hasn’t been Special..

Oh does Owen Burks play for Cincinnati. Since he caused the so called fumble and hit to the head no calls in Eagles game.

I remember I hope the Packers remember also get a return right by him…

The packers have everything they need.

Putting players in the proper spot is the key.

Rotation will keep everyone focused.

Another question could be: can a player be one team away?
(I didn’t say it was a GOOD question.)

When AR and Adams were here, we were a #2 WR away...so yes. Now however, ML does not have a bunch of Vets...so we have a lot of mistakes in the operation and ML brings his own every week as well. This is where I am with GB as of now....ML needs someone else to call the game on Offense, Watson should help out the Offense as well. I really wanted a #1 WR to get this thing going. Reed hurt sucks and really impairs the offense and ML has not gotten Golden going nearly enough. We need more starters on ST....obviously. IF THE OFFENSE GETS HEALTHY AND STAYS HEALTHY, we may make some noise and Lloyd coming back could help with Reeds jitterbug movement skills. Reed could squeak back in the last few weeks of the season and maybe post season if we are lucky enough. Luke needs fed the ball double what he has been.

When last year we lost to Philly, our deficiencies seemed clear: no consistent pressure; and our oline was shoved around by the Philly D.
IMO, Guty concluded to reach the SB and pass Philly, he must obtain a superior pass rusher and add another piece(s) to the oline. He did so with Parsons, Banks, and Kinnard. I applauded this
strategy, but Banks looks shaky and Parsons is a stud. One player away…? Maybe!
We’ll soon know if it’s gonna work?
Go Packers!!!

One person CAN be the difference. Don't look at it as to what that person can bring to the table? Look at it as where would we be without that person? Just ask Cincy about it. What difference would it make to the O-line the last two games if we'd had Tom?

The Packers went to 2 NFCCG's in a row, falling short on both.

Were they one player away?

Maybe, but Gute didn't think so, drafting a a 3 year bench player in the first round, and a rb advertised as quadzilla, who is now a bit player for another team for the vet minimum.,

In my opinion, it's one of the most annoying things about the sports media: Invent a bunch of silly cliches and ill-defined buzzwords, and then argue about whether or not they apply.

Let's have an article about whether or not Love is "a true franchise QB." (Yes, yes... but is he also "elite?") Does Parsons "tilt the field?" Is McKinney "a true difference maker?" Do the Packers suck because they don't really have "a lock-down corner?" Or "a true WR1?" Does Rashan "make everybody better?"

Inquiring minds want to know...