Exactly.

[bobblehead]

For once, I agree with you, 3irty1. I never liked that "shortening the game" concept when you have a guy like Aaron Rodgers. Shortening the game is what a weaker team wants to do to increase its chance of an upset. I also never liked the idea of a run-first offense. I saw that from the Packers for literally decades, some with success back to Lombardi, some not in the decades after. Even in the good years, it was frustrating, though. I like Eddie Lacy - as a change of pace threat and maybe to run clock late in the game with a lead, but I hate the idea of getting away from riding Aaron Rodgers' arm in a pass first offense. Right now, our star runner is a power guy, and our change of pace - Starks is more of a breakaway threat. What I would really like is if that was reversed - we had some big bruiser to use for short yardage, running clock late, etc., and our star would be somebody like Chris Johnson in his prime or A.P. in his prime - a home run threat. Lacy is like having Rod Carew or Ty Cobb - a singles hitter - batting cleanup.

A weaker team, or a team with a great D that wants to limit the time you have to wear down that great D?

[texaspackerbacker]

A weaker team, or a team with a great D that wants to limit the time you have to wear down that great D?

Either way, it's the other guys, not us.

[pbmax]

A weaker team, or a team with a great D that wants to limit the time you have to wear down that great D?

Its more likely the team you describe would have a weak O rather than a substantial O protecting its dominant D. Think the Jets.