This game was there for the taking

Chris from New Richmond, IN

If I’m only this disappointed in the Packers like this once every eight games, then I can be content. They really could and should have won this one, but it is a week-to-week league, right?

This game was there for the taking. There’s no denying that, and it’s a shame to waste such a tremendous defensive effort. But you can’t win when only one of three phases shows up. That’s a losing formula every Sunday.

Hi II, ML tried to deflect the lack of a winning game plan against the blitzes away from JL, but everyone knew what the Chiefs would do: Try to contain the running game and force JL to make bad decisions under pressure. It worked perfectly. Even some of JL’s completions should not have been thrown. No one can say what kind of QB that JL will become, but it was a bad start.

It was, and Jordan Love wasn’t good enough. Not even close. But I didn’t take LaFleur’s comments as just another typical falling on the sword, which is why I focused on them in my editorial. He really and truly believes he let his young QB down. He talked about not protecting well enough (which I understood to refer to both the protection calls and execution) and about having too many longer-developing routes that didn’t give Love enough options to deliver the ball quickly. LaFleur knew exactly what the Chiefs were going to do and his QB didn’t have the answers for it. That is on the plan and therefore on the coach.

With Aaron Jones and AJ Dillon averaging about 5 yards per carry on just 20 attempts, why do you think they asked Jordan Love to throw the ball 34 times?

I think LaFleur is asking himself that same question today. From my seat, he seemed hell-bent on making the Chiefs pay for being aggressive at the line of scrimmage and playing only one safety deep. He wanted that one play to loosen things up. Probably wanted it too much.

Tom from Highland Village, TX

Hi Mike. First, I don’t think one start is fair to judge a QB’s future. However, I have a question I hope you will answer. How much can accuracy and arm strength be improved in a second-year pro? I attended a practice on Aug. 10, and had those two concerns about Jordan Love. Today he threw many inaccurate passes, but I only noticed a couple throws where arm strength was an issue. Are we just spoiled or can these shortcomings be significantly improved over time by a young QB?

Love’s accuracy on several throws was subpar. I don’t expect him in his first NFL start with blitzers in his face to throw spot-on go-balls on the one-on-ones down the sideline. That’s not realistic. But there were other, simpler and easier throws that just have to be more on target. Those are the plays, and gains, that can keep you out of difficult third-down situations, when a Spagnuolo-coordinated defense is going to send the house. That said, when Love had protection, he produced. I do think accuracy can be improved, and when the game settles down and slows down for him, the muscle memory should kick in. As for arm strength, I don’t believe this is an issue with Love. I’ve seen him let it rip on the practice field and the arm is there. When his throws don’t have the proper zip, in my opinion it’s because he’s not stepping into them and/or just not throwing confidently.

Obviously, Kansas City is one of the hardest places for a visiting team to play, let alone for a young QB to make his first NFL start. If this game had been played in Lambeau, would that have made a big enough difference for Love to get a win? Or were his problems not the type of thing that a home-field advantage could fix?

Not all of them. I suspect home field would have helped with the pass protection more than anything, because the guys up front could have communicated better against all those third-down blitzes, and without free runners in his face Love should have been able to convert a few more third downs.