It's time for the Matt LaFleur conversation
No, the Packers' head coach isn't on the hot seat. But his win percentage and play designs can't paper over game-management mistakes like the ones he made against the Panthers.
Good morning!
On Sunday, the Green Bay Packers suffered their most disappointing defeat of the season to date, falling to the Carolina Panthers at Lambeau Field. The loss saw Green Bay’s most dangerous offensive weapon suffer a potentially devastating injury, the defense manage just two quarterback hits against a backup-laden offensive line, and the team lose the turnover battle.
While all important topics worthy of lengthy discussion, today’s edition of The Leap will focus on another factor that led to the Packers’ demise in Week 9: the myriad mistakes committed by their head coach.
Thank you for reading and supporting our coverage. You can also support our work by following us on social media:
Jason B. Hirschhorn: @by_JBH on Twitter / @byjbh@bsky.social on Bluesky / @by_jbh on Threads
Peter Bukowski: @Peter_Bukowski on Twitter / @peterbukowski@bsky.social on Bluesky / @peter_bukowski on Threads
The Leap: @TheLeapGB on Twitter / @theleap.bsky.social on Bluesky / The Leap's YouTube channel
If you appreciate thoughtful, independent coverage of the Packers and NFL, please consider becoming a paid subscriber. Your support allows us to serve this community with the stories and reporting it deserves.
As always, thanks for making The Leap a part of your day.
It’s time for the Matt LaFleur conversation
Jason B. Hirschhorn: Complaints about sitting coaches litter the football landscape. Even new hires will sometimes attract criticism for remarks taken out of context or misunderstood by the audience. It just comes with the territory, and those working in the profession understand that.
During Matt LaFleur’s time in Green Bay, much of the criticism aimed at him contained little substance relative to the amount of vitriol. For all the valid concerns about the Packers running too frequently on early downs and conservative kick-go decisions, many of the complaints stem from factors partially or entirely out of his control. A receiver slipping out of his break can affect the outcome of a play or not matter at all. But if that ultimately leads to a punt or turnover, many will hold the coach responsible for the drive not resulting in points.
And in many ways, LaFleur has earned the benefit of the doubt. He owns one of the highest win percentages by an NFL head coach in history, has reached the playoffs in all but one of his six complete seasons, and has stacked victories with multiple preferred starters under center. That doesn’t make him above reproach, but it does provide important context for the discourse surrounding him.
So, when a coach with LaFleur’s track record and 2025 results -- No. 6 in DVOA with top 10 rankings on both sides of the ball, a quarterback leading the league in EPA per play, and the best record in the NFC entering Week 9 -- most of the negative critiques fall into the nitpick category, if even that.
However, Sunday’s game armed LaFleur’s critics with genuine arguments against him.
Play calls and game management rank among the top of LaFleur’s responsibilities on an NFL Sunday. Against the Panthers, his choices in those areas hurt the Packers to a significant degree, erring in ways both conservative and overly aggressive.
At the Packers’ final possession of the first half, he leaned on the ground game, presumably to help extinguish the clock and leave the Panthers with no time for a response drive. That came at the expense of Jordan Love, who had played stellar football to that point in the game, averaging over 8.4 yards per attempt with only one true incompletion. Meanwhile, the interior of the offensive line had already lost Aaron Banks, forcing struggling backup Sean Rhyan into duty.
Despite those facts, LaFleur called several runs up the A and B gaps. Two of them resulted in penalties by interior offensive linemen. That forced Love to dig the Packers out of trouble, which he did via a 30-yard strike to Romeo Doubs. But even after that explosive gain, LaFleur kept his foot off the gas, calling conservative plays that didn’t force the Panthers to deviate from their Cover 3 and quarters coverages. That limited Green Bay to just a field goal before halftime.
In the second half, LaFleur went on to overcorrect that mistake. With the offense facing third-and-3 inside the Carolina 10-yard line, LaFleur dialed up a tailback screen to the left. While not an unreasonable play call in a vacuum, the Packers had just run a virtually identical design on the previous play, only Love decided to throw to Romeo Doubs on a backside slant instead.
Having just seen the concept unfold moments earlier, the Panthers easily handled the play, resulting in a 5-yard loss and forcing a fourth-and-8.
This alone would have represented a disaster given the 13-6 deficit, but LaFleur had more in store. Instead of sending in the kicking unit, he left the offense on the field, an ill-advised choice according to both conventional wisdom and the advanced analytics. The decision looks even worse when considering the offense’s depleted personnel -- the team had already lost Tucker Kraft and Matthew Golden to injury -- and the timeout LaFleur burned because the backups couldn’t line up correctly.
“Hindsight’s 20-20,” LaFleur said of the decision to go for it on fourth-and-8. “I wish we would have taken the points. Didn’t do that there. Bad decision.”
And those gaffes came on top of Savion Williams’ fumble in the red zone to kill the opening drive, Jordan Love underthrowing Christian Watson deep against Cover 6 for a pick, and Brandon McManus missing his third field goal in two games. Those players own their execution mistakes, but the Packers probably survive them if not for their head coach putting them in disadvantageous situations too often on Sunday.
“We had errors in every phase of the game,” LaFleur said. “I don’t care who you’re playing in this league. If you do that, you’re going to lose games.”
Sunday’s defeat represents a missed opportunity in other ways. With the Detroit Lions losing, the Packers could have extended their lead in the NFC North while maintaining the top spot in the conference. Instead, Green Bay fell to fourth place in the NFC with a matchup with the Philadelphia Eagles, now in the driver’s seat for the No. 1 seed and coming off a bye, in a week.
LaFleur remains a quality coach. Those arguing that the Packers should replace him or, more damningly, that the team will replace him or offer only a Band-Aid contract lack perspective. A different coach will likely have many of the same imperfections, as well as many more. The job is much harder than the average fan on his coach will ever understand.
Still, LaFleur showed Sunday that he can keep the Packers from reaching their potential if he continues to manage games so haphazardly. And with matchups against teams with winning records in five of their next seven games, he has to make those corrections quick, fast, and in a hurry.
I don't think this article exhausts the significant deficiencies of the coach. Besides the tactical play calling issues, there seems to be a culture problem. Players too often lack focus and mental toughness to execute well, which turns into a tailspin.
The conservative play calling is very frustrating, but I also can't tell is that because of the injuries? The games where he completely seems to get conservative is when the Oline is getting injured. Last week vs the Steelers, RIPPING in the 2nd half. The idea of giving up playcalling to me is still insane. We did the same thing with MM, and then immediately people wanted him to call plays again. Its a lot of bad execution. Wilson screen, just catch the ball and go.