I understand each situation is different, but based upon the only evidence that is available on Steven Jackson this year, it's a fairly safe assumption. The Falcons also have (or had) a very good passing game similar to the Packers, so he should have had room to run. Jacquizz Rodgers has looked much more effective than Jackson, but now that Jackson is back, Rodgers isn't seeing the field as much, which is disappointing imo because he is the better player.

Add Jackson ineffectiveness this season to all the other running backs that lose a step around the same age and/or mileage, and it's enough to convince me it was a good thing he didn't land with the Packers. The only way one could know for sure is if it actually happened, but since it didn't, we have to work with what's available when evaluating the decision in hind sight.

Yeah, I wanted Lynch, and still think it would have been a good idea. But his new contract would have meant someone else would have to go eventually, and now the Packers have Lacy, so I'm not that worried about it. Can't win them all. Ultimately, it worked out. Lacy has a ways to go to be as good as Lynch, though.