Packers one player away, and this time it isn't Rodgers

With two offensive linemen sidelined with injuries, leading rusher James Starks out and the team’s best receiver, Greg Jennings, likely to sit the remainder of the regular season, I still expected Green Bay to defeat the Kansas City Chiefs—who were throttled 37-10 by the New York Jets last week—by something like 41-14. After all, Aaron Rodgers is a passing God who can make the most mind-boggling throws with such deadly accuracy that any defender with the misfortune to encounter one is likely to pass-out with cognizance exhaustion. The Chiefs, however, didn’t cooperate and put a relative arse-whooping on the Packers, 19-14, ending their undefeated pretensions. Well, alright, we can allow Rodgers a bad day, like the one he had at Detroit last year. But it may be more than that. Since Jennings was knocked out of the game last week against Oakland, Rodgers’ stat line looks like this:

21-47 316 Yards 1 TD 1 INT 7 Sacks QBRTG 65.6

Now, either the Packers have a deep receiving corps that can sustain an injury to their best receiver—or not? Last year we were told the Packers missed TE Jermichael Finley; could have fooled me. Against the Chiefs, he failed to be that safety blanket Rodgers needed as he was being chased around the pocket; targeted 10 times, he caught just 3 passes. Great White Hope Jordy Nelson was also exposed as over-rated, and Donald Driver is clearly past his prime. The Chiefs rarely blitzed Rodgers, but employing five DBs on most plays was sufficient to nullify the passing game and force Rodgers to take four sacks. It was eye-opening how the absence of one player (Jennings) could make the Packers look so pedestrian on offense.

The Packers defense cannot be blamed for this loss; yes, their pass defense was exposed once again, and it failed to compensate by intercepting a pass or two. But in five trips in the red zone, the defense allowed only one touchdown. On two early drives of a combined 161 yards, the Chiefs came away with just 3 points. Overall, it was a “typical” defensive performance; this loss was squarely on offensive inefficiency. The question now is if the Packers will go into the Chicago game trying to prove that they are the “deep” team they were last year, or a fraud; theoretically they have the advantage, as the Bears will be missing their starting quarterback, running back and best playmaking receiver. The Seattle Seahawks handled them fairly easily in Chicago this weekend; but my doubts about Rodgers ability to perform under pressure, especially without all his main weapons, have returned, dating back from the second quarter of the Raider game which the score run-up managed to conceal.

On ESPN recently I listened to Bart Starr talk about how he didn’t want to compare his 1962 team, with 11 Hall of Famers and the NFL’s greatest coach, with this team. He needn’t have been so modest. This team hasn't proved anything thus far except that good fortune comes in many guises.