The Broncos players keep talking a lot of junk and making a lot of excuses about what happened to them in '96. They say they were better than the Packers, even then. Look at the "NFL's Greatest Games" episodes about the Jacksonville playoff loss and Super Bowl XXXII if you want to hear it.
Their opinion of this is highly questionable.
The Packers beat the Broncos in the 1996 regular season, 41-6. The Broncos said they had stopped playing everyone and were "getting healthy for the playoffs" as explanations for that blowout loss. Excuses.
Secondly, neither the Broncos or the Packers were the same team in '97 as they were in '96. As is discussed in this "America's Game" episode, the Broncos added key pieces in Howard Griffith and Neil Smith. Meanwhile, the Packers were still very good, but had lost Keith Jackson(5 Pro Bowls), Andre Rison(5 Pro Bowls), Sean Jones(1 Pro Bowl), and Super Bowl XXXI MVP Desmond Howard.
The '97 Packers were an excellent team, but the '96 Packers were stacked like few teams in history.
It was really not the same Packers team that the Broncos beat in Super Bowl XXXII. All respect to the Broncos for winning that game, but it does NOT follow that they were actually better than the Packers in '96 also.
The best team is the one that wins the Super Bowl. In '97 that team was the Broncos, but in '96 that team was the Packers.