Faceoff: Patriots, Bengals beware; Packers on prowl; Player of Decade?

CBSSports.com pro football writers Pete Prisco and Clark Judge face off weekly throughout the season.

Which wild-card host is the most vulnerable?

PRISCO: New England. If not for a Mark Clayton drop the first time the Ravens and Patriots played, the Ravens might have won at New England. That's how close they played, with the Pats winning 27-21. And that New England team had Wes Welker. He had only six catches for 48 yards that day, but his play in the middle of the field is important against a team like the Ravens. With all the blitzing the Ravens do, Tom Brady has to get the ball off. That usually means Welker. Without Welker in the lineup, Julian Edelman, a rookie, will assume that role. That can be tough. Reading the coverage is tough for a rookie receiver. One mistake and the Ravens can take a pick to the end zone. Ravens quarterback Joe Flacco threw for 264 yards and a touchdown the last time the teams played. The New England secondary is vulnerable. The Pats could be the home team that falls.

JUDGE: Cincinnati. The Bengals have been sputtering lately, and maybe, just maybe, all the tragedies and turmoil that marked this season are catching up to these guys. All I know is that I worry about a team that is down to, essentially, two playmakers outside of Carson Palmer -- with one of them, wide receiver Chad Ochocinco, coming off an injury. He says he's OK, but he's not OK when he has to beat Darrelle Revis to the football. Revis is the best cornerback in the game, and he has a history of marginalizing opponents' top receivers. That means it's down to Cedric Benson, and the Bengals better hope he can take the heat off Palmer. If he doesn't, the Bengals are looking for a pass attack that might not be there. All I know is Cincinnati lost three of its last four; the Jets won five of their last six. Plus, the playoffs are supposed to be about teams that can run and play defense. The Jets are numero uno in both categories. Cincinnati is in trouble.

Which wild-card underdog is the most dangerous?

PRISCO: I'll go with the Green Bay Packers. The Packers can score and they can also play good defense. They finished sixth in total offense and second in total defense. They scored 28.8 points per game -- third-best in the league -- and gave up 18.6 points, which was sixth best. They have a quarterback in Aaron Rodgers who can light up a defense and they can run it with Ryan Grant. The defense features a physical front seven with a back four that can cover. Corner Charles Woodson is outstanding in man coverage, but he's also a willing blitzer. Defensive coordinator Dom Capers is one of the best in football. I'm not saying they are going to the Super Bowl, but it wouldn't be a shock if they did. This is a good football team.

JUDGE: The Packers are hot. They can run. They can pass. They can play defense. And they don't turn the ball over. You can look it up: The Packers led the league in the takeaway/turnover department with a plus-24. Impressive. What I like most about these guys is that they're peaking at the right time. They won seven of their last eight, losing only when Pittsburgh produced a last-second miracle. Plus, they seem to have gotten Ryan Grant untracked the second half of the season. The last time he looked this good the Packers wound up in the NFC Championship Game. I wouldn't be shocked if that happened again -- and I would be a lot less shocked if they had Al Harris and Aaron Kampman in the lineup. That's the only thing that bothers me about these guys. With Harris and Kampman, I could see them going to the top. Without them, I can still see it happening, though I'm quick to throw in the disclaimer. Anyway, I say beware of these guys. They're a club nobody wants to face.

Who is the player of the decade?

PRISCO: That choice comes down to two players: Tom Brady or Peyton Manning. Most will go with Brady and his three rings. I'll go with Manning and his one. Manning was a better quarterback in the decade, even if his team didn't win the same numbers of rings. Manning has the most regular-season victories in the decade, didn't miss a start the entire decade and averaged 4,225 yards and 31 touchdowns per season. By comparison, Brady averaged 3,084 yards and 23 touchdowns per season. Even if you take out the 2000 season, when he played one game as a rookie, and the 2008 season when he played one game before tearing an ACL, those averages rise to only 3,845 yards and 28 touchdown passes. It's not close when it comes to the numbers, any way you look at it. Even Brady's magical 2007 season, where he broke the single-season record for touchdowns passes with 50, isn't that much better than Manning's 2004 season -- if at all. Brady threw 578 passes to get his 50 touchdowns. Manning threw 497 to get his 49. In 81 more attempts, Brady threw for 4,806 yards to 4,557 for Manning, but the yards-per-attempt is 9.2 for Manning and 8.3 for Brady. The passer ratings were 121.1 for Manning and 117.2 for Brady. It's close. But that's one of only three seasons Brady threw for more than 4,000 yards. Manning had nine of them. Brady's 50-touchdown season was his only one over 30. Manning had five of those. So you tell me, who's the player of the decade? Rings or not, it's Manning.

JUDGE: It's a close call between Peyton Manning and Tom Brady, but I'll take Brady and here's why: Super Bowls. He was in four of them, and he won three of them. Bottom line: The guy's a winner. Since stepping in as quarterback of the Patriots he's been to the playoffs all but one season, and the Pats were 9-7 that year. I know he hasn't won as many MVP awards as Manning, but he has won more Lombardi Trophies -- and isn't that how we define great teams? This great team is led by a great quarterback, and Brady proved it to me when he didn't reach a Super Bowl. That would be the 2006 team when the Patriots subtracted his best receiver, Deion Branch, and gave him guys like Reche Caldwell and Jabar Gaffney to run deep. Yet Brady came within minutes of taking the team to the Super Bowl. If you polled fans and asked for their Team of the Decade, they'd tell you New England -- and one of the reason, I suspect, is their head coach, Bill Belichick. But keep this in mind: Belichick didn't win anything before Tom Brady showed up. Then he won three Super Bowls in four years.