Well, the Packers are no longer undefeated, but are still a lock to beat my predicted 12 - 4 season record. Still, there were some troubling signs on Sunday other than the mere fact of a loss.
1. The press focused on the absence of Greg Jennings as the reason for the Packer's offensive malaise yesterday, but I do not. Aaron Rodgers is no longer playing "lights out" football. I am NOT saying he is the reason for the loss, but his play yesterday was not good enough to overcome the problems leading to the loss (as it has sometimes been in the past). In fact, based on my view of recent games, Rodgers is on a 3 game slump from the unbelievable standard he set for himself early in the year. Many of his passes yesterday were off the mark. Not off the mark like Donavon McNabb, but not where his receivers are used to them being either. He looked nervous in the pocket even before Bulaga and Sherrod were injured and his performance suffered because of it.
2. Although Rodgers WAS off, the Packer offense MIGHT have been able to avoid the defeat if Jermichael Finley had not ALSO picked yesterday to have a terrible game. Early in the game, it became apparent the Packer offensive game plan with Jennings missing emphasized two factors. First, to increase the run opportunities, and second, to increase the involvement of Jermichael Finley. Ryan Grant's carries were more frequent, particularly early in the game. The run game was not an overwhelming success, but it was not a disaster either. Finley was targeted on 10 pass plays during the game, most of them in the first half. Problem was, Finley's early performance was a disaster. He had 4 passes that will probably be classified as "drops' (passes off the hands of a receiver that subjectively should have been caught) and another that while not officially a "drop" could have been caught. If Finley had been catching the ball as his oversized ego and reputation would suggest he should, the Packer offense might not have been misfiring as bad as it was. Jordy Nelson had a bad day, James Jones was almost invisible, and Donald Driver just doesn't seem athletic enough to get good separation regularly anymore. The only bright spot - but not bright enough - was the play of Randall Cobb.
3. But, the entire blame cannot rest with the Packer offense. The offense is just an easier target because its mishaps have been so uncommon otherwise this year. Unfortunately, the Packer defense is incapable of bailing out the offense. While I don't have the stats, I suspect the Chiefs had a remarkably high conversion rate on 3rd down. I can't count the number of times the defense played pretty well on 1st and 2nd down, only to allow Chief drives to continue with lapses on 3rd down. [Actually, the Chiefs were only 4 of 14 on 3rd down conversions while the Pack was 6 of 14, but it didn't seem that way to me.] To emphasize how poorly the Packer defense played overall, consider the Chiefs have only gained 400+ yards on offense one other time this season - against the (until Sunday) winless Indianapolis Colts.
It has frequently been the case this year, and again on Sunday, that the Packer defense appears disinterested or to not care about playing hard consistently until the other team is within the "red zone." Against the Chiefs, you could narrow it down further to being lackadaisical until the Chiefs got within the 10 yard line. The defense has to start playing with the same intensity and urgency as soon as the opponent gets the ball. Perhaps the most obvious difference with the defense on Sunday was the 0 in the line describing total turnovers by the Chiefs. On numerous occasions this year the Pack has been able to shrug off poor defensive play by focusing in on game changing turnovers (usually interceptions) by the defense. The problem is it is unrealistic to be able to expect to generate turnovers consistently. Sooner or later, you will come up dry. That later became sooner yesterday. I think it is naive to believe it is a coincidence the Packers experienced their first loss of the season on the same day the defense was unable to get even one turnover.
While the Pack started out looking strong against the run, as the game wore on, it was clear the Pack had a REAL problem with runs to the right side of its defense. Time after time, Chief running backs would bounce out to their left (against the Packer defensive right) and take a run out wide for big yardage. Several big screen pass plays were also successful to the same side. Defensive end Erik Walden was the patsy for this problem most of the game. However, after Walden got pulled from the game late in the 2nd half due to continued poor performance, Frank Zombo was playing the same end with the same results on the Chief's final drive when the Pack was trying to get the ball back late in the game after the onside kick.
Random Thoughts
Offensive line - Might Thompson give a call to Mark Tauscher to add depth to a depleted tackle corps? He is rested and certainly knows the system and blocking assignments. Who else is available who could fill in as seamlessly if necessary? Will Bulaga be ready to play Sunday night? Given how he looked on the sidelines, maybe. How far away from returning is Chad Clifton? If neither of them is able to play, I fear for Aaron Rodgers. In that event, look for the Pack to go to quicker pass plays with less deep drops and less deep routes from the receivers. If they get a significant lead over the now toothless Bears, look for Matt Flynn to play earlier than would otherwise be the case to minimize the chances of an injury to Rodgers.
Defensive line - Jarius Wynn played many more snaps on Sunday than did Mike Neal. I found that to be curious and somewhat ominous. I expected Neal to provide a pick up to the defensive line play when he finally got healthy. If the coaching staff thinks Wynn is better, that does not bode well. I certainly hope Ryan Pickett will be back in the line up from his concussion next Sunday. The Pack had absolutely NO pass rush on Sunday (no sacks and precious few hits or hurries) since the Chiefs were so free to double team the outside linebackers because the Packers interior linemen were toothless.
Idle speculation - Any day now we are supposed to get a report on whether Nick Collins will be medically cleared to return to play next season, or whether his injury is such he will be forced to retire. If he can return, great. But, let's suppose for a moment he can't (which I fear is more likely). If that happens, look for the long rumored move of Charles Woodson from cornerback to safety to be implemented next season. I think Woodson does not have the same recover speed and "shut down" cover skills he had before. Nevertheless, he remains one of the better tacklers and his ball instincts would make him a formidable threat to ball hawk from the safety position. As a safety, he could still blitz off the corner to good effect.
Finally, while I haven't checked out what the odds makers say, I would not be surprised if the odds of the New Orleans Saints getting to the Super Bowl were slightly better than the odds of the Packers returning at this point. When pondering that heresy, consider the Packers have only beat 4 teams this year that currently have a winning record (New Orleans, Detroit, Atlanta & Denver), that the Pack is ranked 31st (that is second to last) in defense, and that Drew Brees is on a pace to beat Dan Marino's record for passing yards in a season.
