So you aren't as convinced as before that the Packers won't make the playoffs.

Also, you are bad at maths. As a Cowboys fan you need the Packers to beat the Panthers because that raises the chance for a wild card spot, and then you hope that the Packers drop a less important game afterwards.

That's a stupid article because it forgets about the Vikings outside of mentioning them on the schedule of the Packers. Let me go over this:

1. Cowboys have to win out. Dallas at 10-6, holding the tie-breaker over the Seahawks who will be at best 10-6.

2. Lions win against Bears and Bengals, so they have to lose to the Packers. Detroit at 9-7.

3. Packers win against Panthers and Lions, lose against Vikings. Green Bay at 9-7.

4a. Panthers will be 10-5 after week 16 if they beat the Bucs after losing to the Packers.
4b. Falcons will be 9-6 after week 16 if they beat the Bucs and lose to the Saints.

5a. Week 17, Panthers vs. Falcons. Panthers win (11-5), Cowboys ahead of 9-7 Falcons.
5b. Week 17, Panthers vs. Falcons. Falcons win (10-6), Panthers and Cowboys are also 10-6. If the tie-breaking procedure hasn't a crazy caveat, then the Falcons should be the 5th seed (they beat Dallas, better divisional record than Panthers) and the Cowboys the 6th seed because of more wins in the NFC than the Panthers.

Essentially, a Packers win against the Panthers opens up a more favorable scenario for the Cowboys as long as you trust the Vikings enough to win in Green Bay. I don't know why the article doesn't consider the Vikings at all.

EDIT: Packers losing to Panthers would mean that the Cowboys don't have to worry about the Packers anymore, but at the same time this would push the Panthers towards a playoff spot so much that they might phone it in against the Falcons in week 17 and lose. Panthers 11-5, Falcons 10-6 and Cowboys 10-6 means that Dallas stays at home.