I don’t know why I always look at attacking the Vikings differently then do most people, on the ground. The Williams wall is solid but Pat is aging and can be moved around a little bit but real weakness on the line is running at Allen. If Clifton cannot go I think getting Lang used to pushing Allen around on runs right at him would give him confindence while wearing down Allen to help with pass protection latter on in the game.

Winfield is a solid runstopping corner and his presence will be missed more than is realized. Success in the running game will force the linebackers to spend more time looking at play action and not chasing Lee up the seam or dropping in the intermediate zones where Driver and Jennings like to work. By pounding the ball the deep passing game should open up more against the mediocre safeties and back up corners of the Vikings. I think this is a game that Grant should have another 25+ carries with moderate success if they just stick to it.

Running the 2 minute, no huddle offense against the Vikings at the end of the first half gave them yardage in large chunks. Not advocating doing that every drive, but once you get to, say, midfield, going no huddle might be a nice change of pace.

My geek fantasy-baseball friends rely on all kinds of statistics in constructing their fantasy baseball teams, and that is entirely appropriate for a FANTASY LEAGUE because that is NOT real baseball. A real baseball player, for example, hits a ground ball to the right side of the infield with a runner on second and nobody out because in real baseball, this advances the runner, which is a positive. In fantasy baseball, however, you want the player to try to get the RBI because it’s a different game with different rules.

QB ratings are similar. They do not reflect the “real” game of football. A QB who engineers his team into a significant lead frequently will stop throwing, because the game strategy at that point generally is to milk the clock while the lead holds up. Conversely, the QB whose team is losing must take more risk and throw the ball more, and he generally gets the advantage of throwing against a soft zone that is designed to give up yardage, but slowly, again to milk the clock. The additional yardage and (presumably) completions enhances a QB rating under the formula, while the QB who simply hands off gets nothing to add.

Throw in sacks: They do not count as a negative toward the QB rating. QBs on teams other than the Packers and Vikings have been accused in the past of preferring to take sacks rather than throw incompletions because of this. Certainly, 8 more incomplete passes would have hurt Rodgers’ passer rating in the Vikings game, but that would have been preferable to the sacks (including one for a safety).

My point (admittedly rather long winded) is that you can’t look at QB ratings as an “ah HA!” statistic. Frequently they mean very little. After all, Johnny Unitas and Fran Tarkenton had more yards and touchdowns, but would you rather have had one of them, or Bart Starr?

Good breakdown.

I say use Grant to keep them honest and slow the pass rush.

But have to give Aaron his shots in the air to win the game.