Jordan Love Excels In This Phase, So Why Aren’t Packers Leaning Into It?

GREEN BAY, Wis. – The Green Bay Packers’ offense is, in a word, bad.

Or substitute any of these other words: disappointing, feeble, impotent. They all apply to a team that will enter Sunday’s rivalry showdown against the Chicago Bears ranked 28th in scoring.

One of their strengths through four games has been the Jordan Love-operated play-action passing attack. That phase of the game is excellent.

According to Pro Football Focus, 31 quarterbacks have dropped back to pass at least 50 times through the first four games of the season. Overall, Love ranks 29th in completion percentage (56.5), 20th in yards per attempt (6.8) and 19th in passer rating (86.5).

In standard dropbacks, Love is 30th with a completion rate of 53.8 percent, a decent 18th with 6.5 yards per attempt and 25th with a 74.0 passer rating.

It’s a completely different story when Love gets to use play-action. From that same group of 31 quarterbacks, Love ranks seventh in completion percentage (70.6), 15th in yards per attempt (7.7) and third in passer rating (132.8).

Doing a little math, Love’s completion percentage is plus-18.1, his yards per attempt is plus-1.2 and his passer rating is a staggering plus-58.8.

The numbers suggest Love should be using play-action early and often. The reality? Love is 27th in play-action usage at 20.7 percent of his dropbacks. He was somewhere just above or just below the league average the last three seasons with 25.4 percent in 2025, 25.7 percent in 2024 and 25.4 percent in 2023.

Which begs one question: Why don’t the Packers use more play-action passes? Considering it’s the one thing they’re doing well, the limited usage doesn’t make any sense.

But first, let’s get into something that really doesn’t make any sense. How can you have a productive play-action passing game when you have an unproductive running game?

That Doesn’t Make Sense

It is weird to believe any defense would be suckered by a fake handoff to MarShawn Lloyd, who is averaging 2.7 yards per carry. But, oddly, it works.

“It does go against your first inclination, there’s no question about that,” Aaron Schatz of FTN Fantasy told Packers On SI on Thursday. He was the founder of Football Outsiders; FO’s research brought to light the counterintuitive nature of play-action passing.

“But all the research that's been done says that's the case. You don't have to establish the run in order to make play-action work because the linebackers have been taught their whole life that when the quarterback does the handoff, that’s a run. Go get it.”

Then came the money line.

“What I like to say is that you don't have to establish the run because the run was established in Pop Warner,” Schatz said.

“These guys have been playing their whole lives with the quarterback making that move, right? Especially at a younger age, it was more often a run, not a play-action fake, so they're just conditioned to believe that the run is coming.”

Schatz pointed to last season’s top six teams in terms of the difference in efficiency between using play action and not using play action. The first four, as you might expect, were run-centric offenses: the Seahawks, Bills, Ravens and Falcons. The next two were the Titans, who finished 30th in rushing, and the Commanders, with Jacory Croskey-Merritt and Chris Rodriguez atop the depth chart.

“So, you don't need to be able to run the ball in order to make the play action work,” Schatz said. “If you look at the opposite, teams that were not as good on play action as they were otherwise, it includes Jacksonville, which was a good running team for a lot of the year, and Cincinnati, where Chase Brown had a really good year, and San Francisco, where Christian McCaffrey didn't have a good year but he's Christian McCaffrey!”

What’s Matt LaFleur Missing?

Green Bay’s rushing attack is the worst in the NFL by a considerable margin. Since the success or failure of the run game shouldn’t matter in terms of play-action effectiveness, why doesn’t Packers coach Matt LaFleur lean into the strength that has been Jordan Love’s play-action passing?

“I think you have to stay in manageable situations,” LaFleur explained. “If it’s second-and-20 and you run a play-action, it’s probably not going to be as effective as if it’s even second-and-7. I think that [not needing an effective run game to have an effective play-action game] could hold true for some of the first-down situations, but it’s more when you’re in get-back-on-track then I think it’s less effective.”

Schatz agreed with LaFleur on that one. The Packers are 30th in the league with a 3.6-yard average on first down. Of 31 quarterbacks who’ve thrown at least 20 passes on first down, Love is 28th in completion percentage. Of 53 dropbacks, 26 have produced incompletions or sacks. That means a lot of second-and-10 situations. The run game, meanwhile, is averaging 2.8 yards per carry.

That’s meant a lot of second-and-long and third-and-long plays, where even linebackers with a stop-the-run mentality will shrug their shoulders at a play-action fake.

When Love has been up for success, the play-action game has been dynamic. Why has it been so good, even when the team’s horrendous run game should limit the effectiveness?

“I think it works well when we’re running the football,” LaFleur said. “Everything plays off one another and, like I just mentioned, you’ve got to stay in some of those situational calls. And then like many teams do, a lot of times with play-action you’re looking for premier looks, and it gets a little bit harder if teams are going to play off and soft to get some of the premier looks that you’re looking for. I would say coverage dictates some of that, as well.”

Added together, this is another case where the fate of the Packers’ offense doesn’t necessarily fall on LaFleur’s play-calling or Love’s accuracy. It will be up to the new offensive line to set the offense up for success and allow LaFleur to put Love in position to use play action as a major weapon.

The Packers have tossed aside their usual roster-building philosophy by adding a bunch of veterans. So, with the running game struggling, this big, powerful veteran would be a potential fit. ⬇️https://t.co/xNBgyd9wFN
— Bill Huber (@BillHuberNFL) October 8, 2026

SIGN UP FOR OUR FREE DAILY PACKERS NEWSLETTER

Add us as a preferred source on Google