Packers must rejuvenate play-action passing game this offseason

Paul Bretl | 2/12/2025

GREEN BAY, Wis. — The Packers’ usage of play-action during the 2024 season wasn’t an issue. However, the offense’s effectiveness when utilizing play-action does have to improve in 2025.

If you look at PFF’s numbers, Jordan Love ranked 24th out of 44 eligible quarterbacks in play-action dropback rate last season. By Pro Football Reference’s numbers, the Packers ranked 16th in pass attempts off play-action in 2024.

However, by the Packers’ own metrics, they utilized play-action at one of the highest-rates in the NFL last season. The difference, as Matt LaFleur described after the season, is what is defined as play-action. A ball fake to the running back is what is often associated with a play-action play, but in how the Packers define it, the movement of the offensive line–either pass setting or run blocking–is a determining factor.

Hit like and subscribe to my YouTube Channel ‘The Paul Bretl Show’ for more Packers coverage.

“I see something on we’re not doing play-action enough, and then I go to our analytics people and they’re like, ‘No, you’re one of the highest-ranked in terms of percentage in the league.” I think we’re like third or something like that. So I never know where these stats are coming from, to be honest with you.”

LaFleur would go on to add:

“When we’re in what we call our jet protection, which is our 6-man protection and our line is pass setting, I don’t really consider that play action. But because we slapped a ball fake on it, I think it gets marked as play-action. So, that’s why it’s so intriguing to me, quite frankly, is what is truly considered play-action? I think if you ask a defensive guy, and they see a lineman pass setting, they don’t really view that as play-action.”

However, regardless of how a play-action pass is defined, the numbers–or at least those that are available–showcase what was an inefficient Packers’ offense.

There are a lot of benefits to running play-action successfully, but two of them are that it can help open up downfield opportunities and it can also help increase a quarterback’s efficiency with the defense playing the run. But that wasn’t the case for Love.

According to PFF’s metrics, Love’s completion rate on play-action passes versus regular pass attempts was 3.1% lower. That ranked 38th out of the 44 eligible quarterbacks. His difference in yards per pass attempt was only 1.2 yards greater from play-action, and that ranked 29th in the NFL.

Not surprisingly, many of the quarterbacks who were the most efficient and effective off play-action–Baker Mayfield, Jared Goff, Sam Darnold, Lamar Jackson, and Jalen Hurts–all led top-scoring offenses last season. Josh Allen and Patrick Mahomes were also just outside of the top-10.

While by the Packers’ metrics, their play-action usage was among the best, one big difference was how they utilized play-action this season.

With Josh Jacobs at running back, LaFleur mentioned that the Packers were much more efficient running out of shotgun than they were under center. We also saw more gap-scheme run blocking, with Jacobs often running between the tackles rather than the traditional outside zone blocking scheme we’ve grown accustomed to seeing under LaFleur.

“I think coaching is, you have a philosophy of what you want to do and a foundation of what you want to do, but you’d better not be so stubborn that you just – this is what we’re going to do – if you’re pieces don’t necessarily match,” said LaFleur. “I think that’s good coaching – putting your players in the best position possible.”

Behind every decision, there are pros and cons. One element that may have resulted in the Packers being a much more efficient running team out of shotgun is that this naturally can spread a defense out, creating more natural running lanes for Jacobs to take advantage of.

But on the flip side, perhaps a negative to that is the impact on play-action when running it out of shotgun. The defense is more prepared for passing plays in that situation. Whereas under center, in what can be a more condensed alignment, there is more spacing that can naturally appear on the back end to be exploited by the passing game.

“Anytime you get under center, you give those run-type formations and then throw the ball out of it, I think that’s very useful,” said offensive coordinator Adam Stenavich late in the season. “You can really create some good sell with the offensive line and mess with the second and third level of the defense to really create the space with the play-action game.

“I think anytime you can get under center and be successful, it’s a very useful tool. Even if you’re in gun, any formations where you can make the run and the pass look the same, I think that’s what you’re always striving for.”

That, of course, is just one example of what may have contributed to an inefficient play-action passing game. But along with the shift to more running from shotgun, there are fewer play-action concepts when utilizing a gap blocking scheme over an outside zone scheme, which as mentioned above, was the case for the Packers in 2024.

“Outside zone, things kind of marry when you’re doing the outside-zone game as far as there’s certain types of play-actions and boots you can do,” added Stenavich. “Inside, there’s not as many that you really have but you can use a lot of pulling guards where you can get second-level pull and stuff like that. It just changes the types of protections you have and things like that. So, that’s just one world or the other, which one you’re living in. We like to try to live in both.”

We also know that the lack of attention to details at times by the receivers resulted in a disjointed passing game. That factor certainly could have impacted the play-action game as well.

When up against the NFC’s best teams–Philadelphia, Minnesota, and Detroit–the Packers were often trailing in those games and playing from behind is going to limit both play-action opportunities and the effectiveness of it with the defense not overly concerned about the running game and instead protecting against the big play in the second half of games.

In addition to all of that, Love’s lack of mobility for roughly half of the season may have been a contributor as well. This could limit the opportunities to operate from under center as well as any boot-action to get out of the pocket and on the move off of the play-action.

As I’m sure you can glean, there is no one answer as to why the Packers didn’t find as much success off play-action as they did year ago or as many of the other top offenses in football did.

But one of the important items on LaFleur’s offseason to-do list is to figure out how that element within the offense can regain its spark in 2025, leading to more efficient play and more big plays. What I believe is an important factor in accomplishing that will be determining what kind of running team this Packers’ offense is going to be. Is the pendulum going to swing back to more outside zone and under-center runs or is this more of a gap-scheme offense that’s going to stay in shotgun? The answer to that question will then directly impact the Packers’ play-action game.

“Do I think there’s some things that we absolutely could probably do a little bit more under center?” said LaFleur. “No doubt about it, and that’s the fun part of this. And like that is what I would say from the moment our season ends ‘til we’re going through and into training camp, that’s what you’re trying to find, is just what is the right recipe for success in this league.”

Powered By SoCast