Heavy blitz rates were supposed to make Jordan Love uncomfortable when Chicago visited Lambeau Field in Week 5. Instead, the Packers quarterback turned the Bears’ pressure into another reason their afternoon went sideways. Chicago sent extra rushers, but Love kept finding answers. According to SumerSports data analyzed by Acme Packing Company
, Love completed eight of 10 passes for 130 yards against the blitz, generating an exceptional +0.60 EPA per play. His average release time across all passes was just 2.54 seconds. Green Bay won 31-7, with Love throwing for 367 yards and two touchdowns. The performance marked a sharp rebound because through five weeks, Love still carried a negative season-long EPA against the blitz, reflecting earlier struggles with pressure and protection.
Against Chicago, though, he looked like a different quarterback. Better offensive line play gave him room to attack. Quick decisions kept defenders from disrupting his rhythm, while deeper throws punished coverage mistakes. That leaves defensive coordinators in a bind. Why keep sending extra rushers when prepared quarterbacks can identify the pressure, adjust their protection, and attack the coverage before anyone reaches them?
Heavy Blitz Rates Are Rising, but Quarterbacks Are Responding Differently
NFL defenses haven’t abandoned aggressive pressure packages, as coordinators remain increasingly willing to bring additional rushers from certain personnel groupings. According to Pro Football Focus research
published in June 2026, defenses blitzed on 29.63% of nickel-package snaps during 2025, up from 27.37% in 2024. Base-package blitzing increased from 25.76% to 30.24% over the same period. Those figures hardly suggest that heavy blitz rates have stopped working entirely. PFF also found improved efficiency for certain pressure packages, with defenses allowing fewer yards per pass play.
But the league-wide picture hides an important distinction. A blitz that overwhelms an inexperienced quarterback can produce an entirely different result against a veteran who recognizes the coverage before the snap. The first five weeks of 2026 offer a useful comparison.
Which NFL Quarterbacks Are Beating the Blitz in 2026?
play-level charting from FTN Data
, compiled through nflverse, highlights how differently quarterbacks have performed when defenses send five or more pass rushers.
| Quarterback | EPA vs. blitz | EPA without blitz |
| Brock Purdy | +0.69 | +0.26 |
| Patrick Mahomes | +0.48 | +0.09 |
| Jared Goff | +0.41 | +0.24 |
| Josh Allen | +0.33 | +0.20 |
| Jordan Love | -0.11 | +0.25 |
| Jalen Hurts | -0.26 | +0.04 |
The split is revealing across the board. Brock Purdy, Patrick Mahomes, and Jared Goff have generated more EPA per dropback against blitzes than against standard rushes. Their offenses have frequently turned extra pressure into profitable passing situations. Love presents the opposite season-long trend, despite his excellent Week 5 performance.
His -0.11 EPA per dropback against heavy blitz rates covers the entire five-game sample, meaning Chicago’s outing represents one particularly successful game within that larger record. The two figures also come from different datasets and use different play-level measures, so they shouldn’t be treated as directly interchangeable.
Jalen Hurts has experienced similar season-long difficulties against additional rushers. These results don’t establish that blitzing universally fails. They show how strongly its effectiveness depends on quarterback processing, protection, and the defense behind the rush. The real problem begins when coordinators keep attacking quarterbacks who already know where the football should go.
Jordan Love Showed How Protection Can Change the Equation
Green Bay’s victory over Chicago deserves a closer look because Love’s improvement wasn’t simply about throwing faster. The Packers spent the opening weeks of 2026 fighting protection problems. According to an October analysis published by SB Nation, opponents pressured Love on 44.4% of his dropbacks during the first three weeks.
That figure fell to 20% across Weeks 4 and 5 after Green Bay strengthened its offensive line. The Packers brought in veterans Laken Tomlinson, Mekhi Becton, and Kevin Zeitler. Their presence helped stabilize a protection unit that had repeatedly forced Love to rush his decisions. Suddenly, Green Bay could run more of its offense without worrying about an immediate breakdown.
Quick Decisions Created Opportunities Downfield
Against Chicago, Love completed 25 of 31 attempts. Christian Watson caught six passes for 143 yards and two touchdowns. Matthew Golden added 123 receiving yards, while Tucker Kraft contributed 64. Those numbers expose a common misconception about quick-release passing games. Throwing early doesn’t always mean throwing short.
Love could identify pressure quickly while trusting his protection long enough to attack deeper coverage windows. Green Bay also leaned into play-action. Love completed 12 of 14 play-action attempts against the Bears, keeping linebackers occupied and creating favorable passing angles. The Packers combined efficient decisions with explosive throws rather than committing exclusively to underneath routes. Love’s 2.54-second average release time shows how quickly he operated overall.
His 130 yards against heavy blitz rates reveal how effectively he punished Chicago when it brought extra defenders. The two figures describe different aspects of the performance, but together they illustrate why the Bears struggled. Chicago couldn’t consistently hurry Love into poor choices, and its coverage failed to contain Green Bay’s receivers. Meanwhile, the Packers’ stronger protection prevented the rush from dictating the entire offense.
Matthew Stafford Provided the Blueprint in January 2025
Love’s performance follows an earlier postseason warning that aggressive defensive coordinators would recognize. During the January 2025 NFC wild-card round, Matthew Stafford confronted one of football’s most aggressive defensive minds. Brian Flores brought his Minnesota Vikings defense into the matchup with an appetite for pressure. His scheme regularly challenged protections with crowded fronts and late coverage rotations. Los Angeles had other plans. According to the Rams’ official breakdown using NFL Next Gen Stats
, Minnesota blitzed Stafford on all six passing plays during the opening touchdown drive. He completed every attempt. The first snap offered an immediate warning. Minnesota sent six rushers, but Stafford found Puka Nacua for 27 yards between defensive zones. On another play, Stafford recognized a man-blitz look with a single-high safety. He attacked the resulting coverage with a 23-yard completion to Tyler Higbee.
The defense kept threatening pressure, and Stafford kept taking what it surrendered. Across the game, Minnesota blitzed on 69% of Stafford’s dropbacks, the highest rate any quarterback faced that season, according to Next Gen Stats. Stafford completed 14 of 18 passes for 178 yards and two touchdowns against the blitz, recording a 144.9 passer rating in those situations. Los Angeles won 27-9.
Stafford Made Minnesota Defend Every Inch
The Rams didn’t limit their answers to slants or short checkdowns. Late in the first half, Stafford recognized a six-man rush and delivered a quick screen to Nacua for 12 yards. Minnesota subsequently sent seven defenders near the red zone. Stafford absorbed a hit from Harrison Smith but completed a 13-yard touchdown to Davis Allen.
The sequence demonstrated the value of combining quarterback recognition with routes designed for specific coverage vulnerabilities. Stafford could attack underneath when defenders abandoned space, and he also trusted his protection enough to exploit intermediate passing lanes.
Minnesota generated pressure on only 34.5% of his dropbacks despite its extraordinary blitz frequency. That gap between sending extra rushers and actually affecting the quarterback proved costly. Beating heavy blitz rates isn’t just about throwing fast. It’s about recognizing the coverage and attacking the space the defense leaves behind.
Quick-Release Passing Games Are Exploiting Vacated Coverage
The tactical weakness of sending extra rushers becomes clear when an offense identifies which defender intends to rush. Watch a nickel corner creep toward the line before the snap. The quarterback must decide whether that movement signals an actual blitz or another layer of disguise. A reliable pre-snap read can change the entire play.
The offense might shift its slide protection toward the boundary. A receiver could shorten his route, while a running back prepares to release into the flat. All three adjustments address different parts of the same pressure.
Hot Routes Turn Defensive Aggression Into Open Grass
Consider a defense that sends its weak-side linebacker through an interior gap. If the quarterback recognizes the pressure, the slot receiver can replace the departing linebacker with a quick slant. The throw might travel only five yards, but once the receiver secures the football, the missing underneath defender gives him space to accelerate. A modest completion can become a 20-yard gain if the remaining coverage takes a poor angle.
Teams can create similar problems through several familiar passing concepts. Tunnel screens invite aggressive defenders upfield before sending the football behind them. Arrow routes allow running backs to attack the flat, while stick concepts give quarterbacks immediate leverage reads against linebackers. The offense doesn’t need every option to work. One reliable answer can force a defensive coordinator to reconsider an entire pressure package.
Motion Can Reveal the Defense’s Intentions
Pre-snap motion adds another layer. A receiver crossing the formation might draw a cornerback across the field, suggesting man coverage. Alternatively, defenders can exchange responsibilities and signal a zone structure. Neither reaction guarantees the final coverage, because good defenses disguise their rotations.
Still, motion forces defenders to communicate while the quarterback gathers information. Offensive coordinators can then pair that movement with quick routes, play-action, or a protection adjustment. When an offense identifies the blitz before the snap, the defense loses some of its surprise before the football moves. The quarterback still has to execute, yet the pass rush now operates against a prepared answer rather than a confused offense.
Green Bay Proved Four Rushers Can Create Enough Pressure
The Packers offered another lesson during their Week 5 demolition of Chicago. While their offense handled aggressive pressure, Green Bay’s defense took a less adventurous approach. SumerSports figures published by Acme Packing Company show the Packers blitzed on just 14.9% of Chicago’s dropbacks. Despite that relatively low frequency, they generated pressure on 40.4% of dropbacks. That difference matters.
Green Bay didn’t need to send five or six defenders repeatedly to disrupt the Bears’ quarterbacks. The defense maintained coverage behind its rush and forced Chicago to hold the football. Tyson Bagent averaged 2.67 seconds to throw, while Case Keenum, who later entered the game, averaged 2.92 seconds. Neither quarterback consistently found quick answers.
Coverage Can Help the Pass Rush Win
The Packers’ pressure wasn’t exclusively the product of instant penetration. Their quick-pressure rate reached 17%, below the NFL average cited in the same analysis. Instead, coverage frequently extended the play long enough for rushers to reach the quarterback. Defensive lineman Dani Dennis-Sutton contributed a 25% pressure rate, including notable success on stunts. Green Bay’s strategy created a different kind of timing problem. Rather than racing extra defenders toward the pocket, the defense made Chicago’s passing options harder to access. That gave its front more opportunities to finish the rush. NFL Next Gen Stats defines quick pressure as disruption within 2.5 seconds of the snap. Its broader pressure-probability research places average time to pressure at 2.9 seconds. Those benchmarks show why timing matters. If a quarterback releases the football before pressure arrives, an impressive rush can accomplish very little. Remove his first read, though, and the defensive line gains another valuable fraction of a second.
Heavy Blitz Rates Still Work When Defenses Pick the Right Moment
The New York Giants offer a compelling counterargument to anyone suggesting that blitzing has become obsolete. Defensive coordinator Dennard Wilson began the 2026 season with a comparatively restrained approach. According to TruMedia statistics cited by NFL.com
, New York blitzed on 22.1% of opponent dropbacks through its first three games. After struggling to produce pressure with four rushers, Wilson changed tactics. The Giants blitzed Jacoby Brissett on 51.3% of his dropbacks against Arizona in Week 4. Their pressure rate increased from 19.8% across the opening three games to 28.2% in that matchup. With Brian Burns sidelined by a season-ending knee injury, Wilson needed new ways to create disruption.
Abdul Carter Benefited From the Extra Attention
The Giants’ aggressive fronts helped Abdul Carter find favorable individual matchups. As NFL.com documented, Carter recorded six pressures and three quarterback hits against Arizona without registering a sack. Rookie linebacker Arvell Reese also contributed. On one pressure, Reese struck Brissett’s throwing hand and forced an underthrown pass, which cornerback Greg Newsome II intercepted.
Wilson continued his aggressive approach against Washington. A subsequent New York Post report documented a 62.2% blitz rate in the Giants’ overtime tie with the Commanders. Across those two games, New York produced seven sacks and 14 quarterback hits. Those results make the distinction clear. Aggressive blitzing can still rescue an ineffective pass rush, particularly when additional defenders create favorable matchups and disrupt protection assignments.
But the Giants’ success doesn’t mean every offense will respond like Arizona or Washington. A quarterback with reliable hot routes and disciplined protection can punish the same calls that overwhelm a less prepared opponent. Blitz volume remains a weapon, but it cannot replace matchup-specific planning.
The Next Defensive Answer Is Better Disguise
Defensive coordinators don’t have to choose between rushing four and sending everyone. Simulated pressures offer another option. A defense can align six potential rushers near the line, forcing the quarterback and offensive line to prepare for an overloaded front. Then the ball moves.
Two apparent rushers retreat into coverage, while four defenders attack from different angles. The quarterback expects an opening behind an incoming linebacker, but instead, a defensive lineman might occupy that passing lane. His first read disappears. Even a brief hesitation gives the pass rush a better opportunity.
Creeper Pressures Create Confusion Without Emptying Coverage
Creeper pressures follow a similar principle. A second-level defender attacks the pocket while a traditional defensive lineman drops into coverage, preserving a four-man rush structure. The offense must identify the replacement rusher without automatically gaining an advantage in coverage numbers. These designs can force protection mistakes while maintaining enough defenders to contest short passes.
They also carry risks. A defensive end dropping into space might struggle against an athletic tight end, and poor coverage communication can create the same openings the scheme intended to eliminate. The best coordinators therefore vary their approach. Sometimes the defense brings six. On another snap, it threatens six and rushes four. The real flaw isn’t calling heavy blitz rates too often; it’s becoming predictable.
The Next NFL Pressure Battle Will Be Won Before the Snap
Heavy blitz rates will remain part of the NFL through the rest of the 2026 season. Nothing in the early numbers suggests defensive coordinators should abandon aggressive pressure altogether. What the league increasingly exposes is the cost of using that pressure without a convincing coverage plan.
Purdy, Mahomes, and Goff have shown how dangerous an offense becomes when its quarterback recognizes pressure and trusts his receiving options. Love’s Week 5 performance offered another version of that lesson. Against Chicago, improved protection allowed him to operate quickly without surrendering the threat of deep passes. Defenders couldn’t simply crowd the line and expect the offense to collapse.
For defensive coordinators, the adjustment starts with uncertainty. A convincing pressure disguise can force a quarterback to double-check his protection. A late safety rotation can erase the anticipated hot route, while a well-timed four-man rush can exploit that hesitation. The goal shouldn’t always involve sending more defenders; it should involve making the quarterback hesitate long enough for the rushers already coming to reach him.
Offenses will continue developing countermeasures. More motion, refined sight adjustments, and running backs with expanded receiving responsibilities will help quarterbacks handle complicated fronts. Defenses must respond with sharper coverage exchanges and better disguise. The most revealing matchup won’t necessarily feature the coordinator who calls the most blitzes against the quarterback with the fastest release.
It will feature the defense that convinces a quarterback his first read is open, only to close that window after the snap. Heavy blitz rates are failing against quick-release passing games when they trade coverage for pressure that arrives too late. The next defensive advantage belongs to coordinators who can disrupt the read before disrupting the pocket.
READ MORE: Throwing short of the sticks can beat zone-heavy NFL defenses
FAQ’s
Why are heavy blitz rates failing in the NFL?
Quarterbacks are throwing the ball faster. Quick reads and hot routes allow offenses to attack the space that blitzing defenders leave open behind them.
What is a quick-release passing game?
A quick-release passing game relies on fast decisions. The quarterback throws the ball in under 2.5 seconds to neutralize incoming pass rushers before they reach the pocket.
How do quarterbacks identify a blitz before the snap?
Quarterbacks use pre-snap motion and defensive alignment cues. Watching how corners and linebackers shift reveals whether extra rushers are coming or dropping into coverage.
Do heavy blitzes still work in the NFL?
Yes, heavy blitzes still work against inexperienced quarterbacks. They also succeed when defenses disguise their pressure rather than bringing obvious extra rushers every play.
