Musings on the Packer's Dilemma
The Packers enter the 2026 season in a… bit of a bind.
By Kalani Jones
With the 2025 season behind us, we now have the benefit of 20/20 hindsight in order to assess what went right and wrong for teams all around the league. For some, it’s a pretty simple discussion. For the Green Bay Packers, it’s a bit more nuanced.
The Packers flashed their high end talent all season long. Thinking back to the first two weeks of the season, the Packers seemed unstoppable. Victories over the Lions and Commanders were hard to ignore at the time (though neither would go on to make the playoffs, or even impress all that much).
But the baseline problem for the Packers is just that. They flashed. They were never really quite able to put it all together. Every time it seemed like they had really found their stride, something would come along to knock them back down to Earth, and Green Bay would have to pick themselves up and get going again. This happened over the course of weeks, but you could also see this cycle repeating itself through the course of individual games too.
Usually, the cause of this "stumbling" effect was a devastating injury. Take your pick, because the Packers had plenty to choose from. Micah Parsons. Tucker Kraft. Jayden Reed. Devonte Wyatt. Zach Tom. They (and other) injuries are probably the main reason why the Packers aren’t coming off the highs of a Super Bowl victory right now, but they aren’t the only ones.
Reasons 2A and 2B are right on the line of scrimmage. I saw it best summed up succinctly on twitter recently.
Football an amazing sport because we talk about a million things all year and then it really boils down to do you have men in the trenches or not
— Daniel Oyefusi (@DanielOyefusi) February 9, 2026
Unfortunately for the Packers, they just did not have the right men in the trenches. On the offensive line, the team suffered from positional rotations and poor execution. Defensively, most of their pass rush problems were solved by the presence of Micah Parsons until he was no longer there to solve them. Then on the interior, they struggled mightily against the run, for which I’d blame the lack of a true NT. Their heaviest player was Nazir Stackhouse at 327, but as an undrafted free agent, he was limited in his impact. The team waited too long to add another run stopper, and the next heaviest lineman was also a rookie, Warren Brinson.
These struggles are well documented at this point, and rehashing them isn’t the point of this article. Rather, the point is to ask: what can the Packers actually do about it? Without taking the wildcard issue of injuries into account, there are a few things.
First and foremost, the obvious answer: you pour resources into the problem. Yes, the Packers have a limited amount of those right now. Is there a possibility to add a true blue chip type of player to the roster? No, not really. The lack of a first round draft precludes the possibility of one falling into your lap via the draft, and there probably wouldn’t be one there at 20 anyway, even if the Packers had their picks intact.
Meanwhile in free agency, the team starts with a deficit in cap space, albeit a very easily surmountable one. Releasing one of Elgton Jenkins or Rashan Gary gets them into the green by themselves, and the Packers are all but guaranteed to release both. This, along with some other possible moves, could net them ~$25-30 million, depending on how aggressive the team wants to be. That’s great, but consider their own extension candidates and the rising cost of doing business in the NFL. If the Packers made every single cap cutting move or measure that they could take this offseason, they’d wind up with ~$80 million in cap space. That's still not as much as the teams with the most to spend right now, who could all also make their own cap moves. So, they likely won’t be amongst the biggest threats in the player acquisition market.
All together, what does that mean? The Packers will need to be smart in how they let free agency play out, and they need to be lucky in who falls to them in the draft.
The front office will need to be extremely smart in how they identify and value veteran free agents on the market this offseason. Count me amongst the growing voice of fans who are ready to move on from the “youngest roster in the NFL” era. Adding a few key veteran voices to that locker room could be a major, deciding factor in crunch time next year. I’m a huge fan of how the Packers have allowed their young player base to mature and grow together, but at the end of the day, they should take a lesson from the Seahawks and Eagles, who had outside veteran free agents act as key contributors to their respective championship runs.
Finding outside additions who won’t break the bank is not Mission: Impossible. In fact, that’s been one of the core strengths of the Gutekunst era. Did they out think themselves last year, with the idea to move Nate Hobbs to the outside, or to bet that the perennially injured Aaron Banks would stay healthy? Maybe. But let’s not fall victim to recency bias. De’Vondre Campbell, Rasul Douglas, and Rick Wagner were all found for pennies on the dollar. Market price free agents like the Smith brothers, Josh Jacobs, and Xavier McKinney have been franchise-altering signings.
Finding an outside contributor should be a heavy priority for the front office, likely at a position of key need. A few come to mind, such as recent Super Bowl winner Tariq Woolen, if the Packers wanted to make a splash at cornerback. There’s also Josh Jobe from the same team, or Jaylen Watson from Kansas City. Maybe a trade could be in order? There’s been rumors of Tennessee willing to move on from T’Vondre Sweat, and the 366lb nose tackle could be just what the doctor ordered for Green Bay’s defense.
Whatever direction the Packers choose to go in, will they be able to shore up all their remaining holes in the draft? The tough answer is no, probably not. And the even harder answer is that they shouldn't, and it’s here where the biggest decisions around the offseason find form.
When it comes to the draft, the reality is that teams who draft badly, draft only for need. Drafting the best player available is far superior when it comes to the long term health of a team’s roster, even though it has a tendency to drive us all crazy. Smart teams draft to fill future needs, not current ones.
Think back to last year’s draft. While wide receiver was generally considered to be a need for the Packers, I definitely would not have labeled it their “primary” need. I was begging for investment at cornerback and defensive tackle, but instead they went with their own board, taking WR, OL and another WR. It’s the third round pick of Savion Williams that confused me most at the time, and it meant that the Packers were not going to leave that draft with an impact edge rusher or cornerback. Could that decision work out in the long term for Green Bay? You bet. Was there short-term frustration associated with the lack of investment, especially at cornerback? Yup.
Without a first round pick, the reality is that the Packers are probably more likely to include a wide range of options at their selections, rather than focusing on a few needs. The roster math in the coming years makes balancing the rising costs of Jordan Love, Micah Parsons, and extension candidates like Tucker Kraft with hoarding cheap rookies contract imperative to fielding their 53 man rosters.
The Packers usually make a couple of these head scratching draft picks a year. My go-to example now is the Ty’Ron Hopper selection in the third round of 2024. At the time, Hopper was considered a massive reach. The same was true of Evan Williams. But without the Hopper pick, the Packers have a young, promising player on the verge of a breakout and can afford to move on from Quay Walker if they choose to. It’s why you draft Jacob Monk long before Josh Myers is gone (not that that selection has quite panned out, as of yet).
Over the next two seasons, the Packers will need to decide the fates of the three draft classes that saw the bulk of the benefit from the trades of Aaron Rodgers and Davante Adams. Without an excess of picks, the team now needs to deal with the reality of more cheap rookies leaving the team rather than coming in. This is what makes the estimated four comp picks that the Packers could receive in 2027 so valuable, which could be canceled out by outside additions. It also means the Packers are probably better suited (as far as the long term health of the roster) to not spend a lot of money this offseason. They could choose to sign their own guys, let the rest of the money roll over to a more cash-strapped 2027, and reap the benefits then.
The problem, of course, is that the Packers pushed their chips in on a championship window that is open now. Refusing to invest in the 2026 season would be a puzzling move, and could result in a similar, disappointing result to the season. The Packers are caught between a rock and hard place when it comes to their needs, and their ability to fill those needs. And the walls are shrinking rapidly.
The Packers have shown the ability to quickly remake certain position groups, like safety in 2024 or the pass catchers from 2022-2023. But this strategy entails pouring lots of capital into the position, capital that the Packers will have to pull away from their usual strategy. Fixing the safety room meant a near top of market contract for Xavier McKinney, along with three draft picks. For the pass catchers, it meant five receiver selections across two drafts, and two tight ends. Fixing the offensive line, defensive line, or cornerback room in this manner would leave the other needs woefully unaddressed.
I’m not saying that it’s impossible for the Packers to emerge on the other side of this offseason with a more cohesive offensive line, a dominant nose tackle, and new starter at cornerback. In fact, it might be closer than you think. The offensive line could be fixed with something as simple as a great training camp. With everyone’s position (hopefully) more set in stone than in years past, the Packers could get upgrades at right guard, center, and left tackle just by settling players in at the places they ended last season at. That’s assuming the team chooses to re-sign Sean Rhyan, which I think they will. At nose tackle, there are players out there for the Packers to find. Between a trade for T’Vondre Sweat, and signing a veteran, the Packers could address this before the draft even begins. The same goes for corner, and this is rumored to be a fairly deep draft class at the position.
The Packers front office will need to turn an “A” worthy offseason for the Packers to hoist the Lombardi. Whether they can thread all those needles and preserve the championship window will be seen, but I’ve got faith in Gutekunst & Co.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________
Co-Owner of the thirteen time world champion Green Bay Packers. Sometimes I write about them. Follow me on Twitter at https://x.com/kjones_in_co and on Substack for film breakdowns!
__________________________
Comments (70)
TKWorldWide
February 16, 2026 at 06:36 am
The Savion pick seemed like a luxury, gadget type that I think GB should avoid. It felt to me like the Deguara selection.
When it comes to need vs BPA, how far apart are these player grades? Seems to me that most teams put players in “buckets”, such as these 5 guys are all graded at 5.8 (or whatever), and includes a center, an off-ball linebacker, two receivers, and an edge rusher. So in that case, it could be need or positional scarcity that decides the pick.
Here’s another thing that sticks in my craw: let’s say two college players carry the same draft grade. But after a couple years in the league, their actual performance is often wildly divergent. Here’s a fun one: When Ryan Leaf and Peyton Manning were drafted, the “experts” were really split on which player would be the more successful pro. How did that turn out?
GB COULD shore up CB, DT, and IOL this offseason. They’ll just need to target the right players. Not easy to do. But we shall see.
Guam
February 16, 2026 at 07:27 am
Given the high level of D1 college football it is amazing to me how much of a crapshoot the NFL draft continues to be. Most GMs (Gute included) seem to hit on about half their draft choices with the other half washing out of the league by the end of their rookie contract. And that is even true of first round draft choices which you would expect should have a much lower failure rate than later round draft choices.
The teams spend a great deal of time evaluating these prospects, particularly the physical talent side of the player. The player's height, weight, speed, ability to change direction, durability and other physical aspects are examined to the nth degree. And yet draft failures happen frequently. I have to assume that the mental make-up of the player (something much harder to evaluate) is the driving force between success and failure since the physical side seems fairly well examined and understood. Apparently the interview process used to evaluate the mental side is still pretty flawed (which is not surprising since that statement is true for many fields of endeavor, not just football).
dobber
February 16, 2026 at 08:05 am
In recent years with Covid and the transfer portal, many of these college players have been on college rosters well into their mid-20s. It's not unusual to run into 25-plus-year-old rookies (who DIDN'T go to BYU). I think these guys are coming out much closer to their ceilings and more physically developed than in the past, so many guys are drafted but really don't have much "coaching up" to go.
You point to mental make-up: many of these kids can get a really nice payday staying in college (there are a lot more teams and roster spots there) and not risking that for an iffy shot at the NFL. I think this changes their mindsets, and many of these guys are jumping from team to team to get their $$. In some cases, they see multiple coaches and systems, and they grow. In some, they play a lot, but are just collecting a check. Virtually none of these guys are students anymore.
Guam
February 16, 2026 at 08:22 am
NIL has completely changed the college game (see: Indiana, National Champion) and yes, kids are playing longer in college. I am surprised this hasn't translated into better NFL drafting. You would think the NFL would have a better bead on these older kids rather than the college sophomore or junior that was prematurely jumping to the NFL. And yet my sense is the failure rate of draft choices hasn't changed much. IDK.
TKWorldWide
February 16, 2026 at 08:25 am
With the portal, I think grit and determination are on the wane. If a guy doesn’t get money or playing time immediately, he can just go in the portal to where the grass and money are greener. Character is built largely through struggle. But what if a player never struggles?
dobber
February 16, 2026 at 10:44 am
TKWorldWide with the Global perspective.
BuckyBadger
February 16, 2026 at 09:11 am
Going into the draft last year all that anyone could talk about was the lack of a #1 WR and they needed more firepower there. Now in hindsight they probably didn't need to spend a first on a WR but that wasn't the perception before the draft. Savion might seem like a luxury pick today but at the time I don't think it was so much.
golfpacker61
February 16, 2026 at 09:36 am
This is a great article but there is almost too much to disagree with so I will pick a couple. Also it's obvious you at least pay attention to what is posted on Cheesehead because we posters have debated many of your comments already.
"When it comes to the draft, the reality is that teams who draft badly, draft only for need. Drafting the best player available is far superior when it comes to the long term health of a team’s roster, even though it has a tendency to drive us all crazy. Smart teams draft to fill future needs, not current ones."
I couldn't disagree more. And you even refute this claim later when dissing the WRs taken in the 1st & 3rd rounds by us. DT was a huge need as you said, the Top 4 were gone before we picked so that option was off the table for GB. CB was the Co#1 "Biggest" need and we had a dozen solid options up to the end of the 3rd round that we could have selected. I wouldn't do this, but GB could have even moved back from #22 to #102 and still drafted a solid CB. And picked up extra premium picks.
The point is if you don't fill your BIGGEST needs first with the best players possible, you are selecting players with almost no chance to contribute, not to mention we still have those "Biggest" needs again this year and now add OL to the need category. Last year's draft was a disaster, and because of lack of money this year, the draft is now 90% of what we have to fix our problems this year.
Duneslick
February 16, 2026 at 02:47 pm
Should have taken a cb instead of Savion
stockholder
February 16, 2026 at 07:09 am
The way to improvement, is don't pay the OL.
Banks and Jenkins must go!
The injuries are only excuses.
Gute had a hole at RG.
And it took the draft to fill it.
Expecting Parsons to be the defense,
will only bring heart break.
The DL needs fixing.
Undersized players going against
giant size OL, is ignorant.
Either Van Ess is Garys replacement
in the pass rush.
Or they bring in the jolly green giant.
TKWorldWide
February 16, 2026 at 08:30 am
The path to Enightenment.
Is rife with pot Holes.
But Do Not.
Smoke the pot, as.
It could lead To a Failed.
Drug.
Test.
😉🏈
golfpacker61
February 16, 2026 at 09:46 am
"Either Van Ness is Garys replacement in the pass rush, or they bring in the jolly green giant."
2 solid low priced options that would be as good, cheaper and probably better, than Gary & Enegbare, would be to sign either A J Epenesa-long term or Jadaveon Clowney-short term. Both will be cheap and would outperform even Gary while playing across from Parsons.
dobber
February 16, 2026 at 10:43 am
I would take Epenesa in a heartbeat.
golfpacker61
February 16, 2026 at 12:47 pm
A J is projected to get $4-5 million annually Dobber. He was underused in Buffalo last year to highlight Bosa. Epenesa would be a steal.
NickPerry
February 16, 2026 at 07:21 am
I made a comment last week about this offseason being one of the most important off-season I can remember. The Packers have 6 draft picks plus a few 7th round COMP choices coming their way, but NO 1st round pick. They'd got some moves they can make to create some space with guys like Jenkins and Gary, other moves can be made by kicking the can down the road when they renegotiate current contracts. But can they do enough?
When I look at this roster I see holes EVERYWHERE. In the past we've had players drafted a year or two before ready to step right in. But with so many holes and just 6 draft picks and a few late COMP picks how do the do it? The Packers, IMO, have GLARING holes at CB, O-Line, D-Line, and the Edge.
Micah Parsons was amazing last season. I was even more impressed with what he did after he was hurt and NO ONE stepped up. He literally was all alone out there, and those still standing after Parsons was injured backed that up. They SUCKED!. What will they do to keep Josh Jacobs from getting hit behind the LOS time after time while losing possibly 2 more starters from the O-Line from last season? Do we REALLY want to trot Nixon out there as the #1 CB again?
There's so many issues with this team from really competing for a SB. Can it be done? Absolutely! Can Gutey do it? Hell yes! Do you have the faith in Gute to be able to fix it? Ummm, based on previous results, not so much.
Depending on Gutey and this Packers coaching staff, this team really CAN win the NFC North and do some damage in the playoffs. BUT, they could just as easily finish 3rd or 4th in the NFC North and miss the playoffs
Guam
February 16, 2026 at 07:44 am
More than anything else, I would wish good health for the Packers in 2026. It is hard to have guys like Parsons, Wyatt, Kraft, Watson, and Jenkins miss all or significant parts of a season and still be highly competitive. I'm not letting Gute or MLF off the hook for the last five games of last season, but having all those guys would have made a difference. Good health, good draft and good free agency, in that order, are my wishes for next season.
dobber
February 16, 2026 at 08:08 am
When you lose your difference-makers and replace them with replacement level guys, it's going to take a toll. I agree, though: it's still the job of the coaches and management to find a way to make it work.
13TimeChamps
February 16, 2026 at 11:41 am
"I'm not letting Gute or MLF off the hook for the last five games of last season, but having all those guys would have made a difference."
I may be in the minority here, but I actually DO think injuries are a valid excuse. Do the Packers lose those last 5 games with Parsons, Wyatt, Kraft, et al in the lineup? No way to know for sure, but I think it's safe to say it's highly unlikely. Do they lose that play-off game vs Chicago? Again, unlikely.
Team injuries seem to be cyclical. We had a really bad year last year. It cost us numerous games. Let's hope 2026 is our turn to stay relatively healthy, particularly with our best players. It would make a world of difference.
TKWorldWide
February 16, 2026 at 07:24 pm
Injuries matter. Players matter. If those things weren’t true, why even have a depth chart? Just throw anybody out there, and don’t you dare change your expectations. 😂
GregC
February 16, 2026 at 09:52 am
If they had holes everywhere, they would not have been 9-3-1 before the injury to Micah Parsons. They need to upgrade at a few positions and add depth, but the only glaring hole I see is at DT. Mostly they need to not lose several of their best players to injury again.
Tundraboy
February 17, 2026 at 08:43 pm
Well said NP. I'm hoping that they nail the draft, especially since there is no Number 1 to screw up. Although I love Golden. Yes I'm probably dreaming, but I'm keeping my expectations in check this year.
T7Steve
February 16, 2026 at 07:28 am
Just fix the trenches and the rest with the possible exception of special teams will take care of itself.
Guam
February 16, 2026 at 07:36 am
After watching Philly and Seattle dominate the playoffs the last two years, taking care of the trenches has certainly come back in vogue. I think Kansas City and Mahomes tilted the discussion the other way for a few years as they won without dominating the trenches. I think it can be done either way but being strong in the trenches is certainly the tried and true path to championships.
T7Steve
February 16, 2026 at 08:06 am
I probably should have said instead of "take care of itself" that it won't matter if they don't take care of the trenches.
Andy R. always had great trenches with Maholmes till injuries hurt the O-line this season which, in part, had allot to do with Maholmes injury and why they struggled this season. They had no trouble after letting one of the fastest/best receivers in the NFL walk.
Guam
February 16, 2026 at 08:16 am
KC's OL was bad this year, but I never thought they had a dominant OL or DL even during their Super Bowl years. They had decent to good trenches, but never dominant lines. Philly and Seattle had dominant DLs and Philly had a really good OL.
T7Steve
February 16, 2026 at 08:43 am
Maybe one of the GOATs at QB and TE can offset it a little but not season in and season out.
How many teams can boast a Maholmes on their roster? A good O-line can make a QB that's on his fifth team look great. Didn't Cousins even have the most turnovers for QBs in the NFL this season?
Guam
February 16, 2026 at 09:08 am
A GOAT at QB can win a championship with a decent OL, but dominant DL and OL have always been the path to championships. See: Dilfer, Trent.
golfpacker61
February 16, 2026 at 12:55 pm
KC had Chris Jones and George Karlaftis on their D-line last year, both of whom I would take over anyone we have other than Parsons. Their OL has not been as good for several years now because they lost some really good FAs and didn't find suitable replacements.
Don't forget we gifted them Pro-Bowl Center Creed Humphrey when we showed our tremendous drafting knowledge by taking the 10th best OC, Josh Myers instead of Creed. I bet they still are laughing over that incredibly move by GB. Even as good as Creed is, he can't play all 5 positions.
jannesbjornson
February 17, 2026 at 08:37 am
Trey Smith was also there for the taking. He was a guy with a 1st round grade until his heart issue which was manageable. Think about having them onboard. Thuney going to the Bears hurt their chances, but Money caught up with their lineup. Maybe move on Rutledge from Georgia Tech with the #52. The top DTs and CBs will be off the board .
golfpacker61
February 16, 2026 at 09:49 am
Sorry T7, that doesn't fill the gaping hole at CB. We blew the FA option last year and ignored the draft too. Double whammy and it's still the biggest need in 2026. We have a better O-line group than we do CB group.
T7Steve
February 16, 2026 at 10:45 am
What good does it do to have good CBs if the team can't stop anything at the line or rush the passer?
Have to perfect the line of scrimmage and work out from there.
I give you credit for the CBs can make a pass rush look much better, but as you point out, it's the lack of pass rush that exposed the CBs for what they are. For that matter, I thought Xavior had a kind of pedestrian season too, even allowing that they try to avoid him as much or if they can. He did intercept an arm punt long 4th down pass that he shouldn't have though.
Tundraboy
February 17, 2026 at 08:46 pm
Outside of CB, has to be Step number 1.
GregC
February 16, 2026 at 07:42 am
Let's face it: This is the least interesting off-season for the Packers in recent memory. If you were to put it in home-buyer's terms, you would say that it doesn't have a lot of curb appeal. Not having a first round draft pick is a buzz-kill right off the bat. There won't be much free agent money to work with, and the positions that need to be shored up (DT, OL, CB) are not the most exciting ones. CB would be interesting if they could afford a top-tier fee agent CB or maybe draft one in the first round, but that can't happen.
The good news is that this was one of the better teams in the league before all the injuries hit, and they will not be losing any of their best players, nor are any of their best players in danger of declining due to age. I'm in the minority who thinks the Packers can get by with the CBs currently on their roster, but it sure would be nice to add one who could challenge for a starting position and provide quality depth. But for me, it's mostly about DT and OL, specifically interior OL. Most of us here are big fans, so there will be plenty to talk about once the off-season transactions get going. It's hard to see anything really big happening, but there could be some unglamorous moves that really pay off.
dobber
February 16, 2026 at 07:56 am
"Let's face it: This is the least interesting off-season for the Packers in recent memory. "
I disagree...I think this off-season will be one of the more interesting ones in recent memory for exactly the reasons you say. It's started with a bang, that's for certain because there's no lack for drama around here.
"Most of us here are big fans, so there will be plenty to talk about once the off-season transactions get going. "
I think there will be several big-name adjustments to the vets on the roster. The Packers will need to generate cap space to function, and to fill holes. Frankly, I'd like to see them be more "decisive" with their vets than they have been in the past. They were exposed as not having the roster depth they thought their youth was going to provide. There's going to be plenty of movement...and plenty of people offering opinions.
WD
February 16, 2026 at 11:49 am
I see many are overly pessimistic. Granted we have no first round but you have to consider we have Micah Parsons instead! I will take that trade any day! The only problem we had was injuries to key personnel. Gute will address CB and DL in the off season. In the meantime, if it ain't broke don't fix it!
Starrbrite
February 16, 2026 at 10:56 pm
Absolutely agree concerning Parsons—he was everything we needed and had the offense played better (as Leatherhead has stated many times), we were in great shape; until the Kraft/Parsons injuries.
Starrbrite
February 16, 2026 at 10:53 pm
This is a critical and highly intriguing off-season and will set the tone for the season.
dobber
February 16, 2026 at 07:52 am
"Then on the interior, they struggled mightily against the run, for which I’d blame the lack of a true NT. "
They went from Slaton at about 340 and Clark at 320-ish as their base DTs in '24 (and finished 7th in run defense) to a hodge-podge of inside guys who run around 305 and finishing 18th. I'll point out that the law firm of Slaton and Clark finished 28th in '23 and that Clark and Jarran Reed finished 26th in '22.
You're going to have to define what a "true NT" is, because there are 340-lb tree stumps who don't move off their spot but only play about 25-30% of the snaps (and are easy enough to run away from), and then there are guys like Clark who have more juice and can play 3 downs. What do you give up? Wyatt's going to be one of their starting DT in '26. When he's healthy, he can make things happen as an interior rusher, but he's not stout. Who do you put next to him that will cover him up and how many snaps do you play that guy?
The Packers have Wooden, Brooks, Brinson, and Stackhouse under contract, and can bring back Riley (who probably misses most of '26) and Ford. Ideally you find someone who is good at the point AND can push the pocket on a regular basis...those guys cost big $$ and don't often get to FA. The Packers would really be rolling the dice to expect Brinson (315) and/or Stackhouse (330) become base-down starters.
Maybe it was Hafley that led to the spike in '24 (I think Campanile had a lot to do with it)...maybe it was player bulk. Maybe it was both: after all, the Packers didn't drop all the way back into the mid-to-late 20's in rush D with the lightweight guys they put out there this season. Bottom line is that teams that go far in the playoffs usually don't have a glaring chink in their armor. They have weaknesses, but not holes that you can drive a Derrick-Henry-sized truck through. By the time you get to the playoffs, an "average" run D is a problem.
Guam
February 16, 2026 at 08:10 am
I'd might refine the focus of the run defense a bit. The Packers did a pretty good job against Detroit and their wide zone rushing attack this year. They even did okay against Chicago who had a better OL than Detroit but who also seemed to prefer trying to run wide rather than inside.
The teams that gashed the Packer run defense had big backs that ran straight at them (Ravens with Henry and Philly with Barkley come first to mind). I think a tree stump fixes a lot of that rather than a more expensive three down player. I think the Packer run D can be fixed fairly quickly with a big tree stump next to Wyatt. And I think that will have to be a veteran tree stump rather than a college draftee. They need someone who can be effective right away rather than have a lengthy learning curve (Slaton took two years before he was a good run stuffer).
golfpacker61
February 16, 2026 at 10:09 am
Stackhouse still has a lot of "potential", there's that ugly word again, to become what we seem to need on the DL so badly. But he is a big unknown at this point. I would feel much better buying Calais Campbell if we could talk him into coming to GB. And who knows, he could stay for 2 years if he wants to because he would be our best IDL last year and this year.
The other option that makes sense if it's true, trading for D"Vondre Sweat. He would be more of a longer term fix. Acquiring 1 of these 2 would open up the draft to take a Top 10 OL on Day 2. It would take some of the pressure off and even allow us to trade back from #52 because just like last year when we ignored it, really solid CBs will be available until the end of the 2nd round.
Since'61
February 16, 2026 at 08:14 am
The issue is can Gute fix the problem that he has created of his own making? This is the second time ( in four years) he has put the Packers in a difficult position cap wise only this time he doesn't have first round draft capital to help him fill the holes in an obviously depleted roster.
Last season Gute spoke about the need for a sense of urgency. If anyone in Green Bay needs that sense of urgency it's Gute and he needs it as of yesterday.
Beyond Gute the other major issue for the Packers is MLF. He's been the HC for seven seasons and he is still making the same questionable decisions, at best, as he has from his early seasons as HC. In game decisions, time management, challenges, pre-snap penalties, lack of accountability, pre-game preparation, all need to be improved if the Packers are to make strides to reach the playoffs and beyond.
The Packers dilemmas are not just player related they are primarily management related and I am less and less confident that the management team which has created the current situation can get the Packers out of it. As an organization, lack of accountability at all levels may be the Packers biggest dilemma. Thanks, Since '61
Green Bay Shareholder
February 16, 2026 at 12:43 pm
No truer statements have been made on the state of this organization and I have been preaching from the same pulpit for years, as all this has been evident for a while. Greatly illustrated post Parsons injury, zero coaching or player adjustments only a severe degradation of seemingly not only the defense but the offense as well, taking off immense stretches of time during the game with seemingly no sense of urgency - that is coaching. Saw it years ago when Rogers would get hurt, literally the team looked like it should be in the CFL on both sides of the ball. Just seems like a Commitment to Complacency permeates the management and coaching staff, way too long of a leash on everyone.
Since'61
February 16, 2026 at 09:24 pm
I appreciate your feedback Green Bay Shareholder. Remember that the Packers are a non-profit organization. Unfortunately that type of organization can be an enabler of complacency and a lack of accountability which is what we have seen in Green Bay for the last 20 years or so.
Non-profits are driven first by securing their revenue streams which the Packers have achieved thanks to NFL Revenue sharing and thanks to a sold out stadium for the next 20+ seasons. Secondly they are driven by remaining scandal free. Regreatbly the Packers board seems Ok with the current status of the team.
Even with their secure revenue streams the Packers could still hold their GM and HC accountable for their results and in turn the coaching staff could hold their players accountable. However when a player like Nixon steps out of the way of an opposing RB on his way to the end zone and he is still on the team rather than released after the game that is a very troubling sign and a microcosm of the lack of accountability and complacency in the Packers organization. That is one example but there are many others including extending the GM and HC after a completely embarrassing 5 game losing streak to end the season.
Injuries are there excuse but what if the same injuries occurred in week 5 or 6. Would it still be OK to go winless for the remainder of the season? What would it take to make the required moves to hire accountable management for the Packers? We may never find out. Thanks, since '61
Tundraboy
February 17, 2026 at 08:59 pm
You are not wrong. Competant coaching carries a team through adversity and injuries. We have seen far too many examples of the opposite. Sadly much has been self inflicted and glossed over. Nonetheless we have to believe that our luck will eventually change for the better. GPG
Vachio
February 16, 2026 at 09:00 am
The dilemma with the Packers is mental. Even with all the injuries...even with the subpar (I'm being generous) offensive line play...the Packers were in control with a high probability of winning the game into the 4th quarter every week (except for the Baltimore game). Finding new and inventive ways to completely collapse and steal defeat from the jaws of victory became the team's identity. You could see it towards the end of the season and into the playoffs. The other team was never worried if they were down in the 4th. In fact, the demeanor always looked confident. They knew the Packers were going to find a way to gift wrap them the victory. And they delivered...consistently.
The Packers beat the Packers far more than anyone else beat the Packers. That's the dilemma they need to figure out. How do we make other teams beat us instead of beating ourselves for them?
Guam
February 16, 2026 at 09:10 am
Many thumbs up if I could Vachio!
Starrbrite
February 16, 2026 at 11:38 pm
Yes—right! We found inexcusable ways to lose.
Tundraboy
February 17, 2026 at 09:15 pm
Coaching?
Handsback
February 16, 2026 at 09:14 am
Here's my take on the musing....Green Bay sucked on both sides on the LOS last year. Their success, yes success, was that they won 9 games. The Oline should be fine, not great but fine, when the left tackle and center positions become stable. I think that will happen. The other tackle position will be locked down by Tom and probably solid support at the two guard positions. My concerns are the reserves. They have to play a lot better and be healthily if Green Bay's offense can get cranking.
The Dline minus Micah was lacking, however there is a silver lining....injuries made Stackhouse and Brinson play a lot of snaps and that isn't usually the case. Rookies usually get a handful until they physically develop after a year of professional weight training. I think, don't know for sure, but think the large number of snaps they got last season and the improved 2nd year leap happens, then Green Bay could find themselves with two solid DTs. So again next year may be OK on the Dline.
My musing is if the front office can find a returner, some cover CBs and is there a another LB that will step up this year.
JMHO
golfpacker61
February 16, 2026 at 10:59 am
Stackhouse is already the right size Hands, I hope you are right and he takes a jump. Also GB has a really fast, underweight, potential inside sack machine in LVN if he gains 20 lbs. He could be a game wrecker inside because he sure isn't one outside.
The Packers should be able to figure out after 3 years that LVN is not going to be the dominant Edge rusher that we wasted the 12th pick on. But he could be our answer to rush the passer from the IDL position. Somebody in GB needs to wake up and smell the coffee on how to make the most out of LVN, and it won't come at the Edge position all the time.
Starrbrite
February 16, 2026 at 11:41 pm
I agree with you—we must move LVN inside. The limitations of a bull-rush only skill is better served inside.
PackerBackerAZ
February 16, 2026 at 11:51 am
Who was the last Packer player to take a second or third year jump? Jumping doesn't seem to be the Packers long suit.
The Packers have a returner in Nixon, need cornerbacks desperately, need a NT desperately, need another dependable edge rusher opposite Parsons and linebackers that can cover. Cooper regressed and Walker stayed undependable. Too much to fix on defense for the Packers to be considered a contending team.
The o-line needs to have a solid LT, a better LG, a solid center and Tom to stay healthy. Until Morgan shows he can even play LT I'm reserving judgement. Until Banks proves he can play LG at an acceptable level, I'll not believe in him. Until there is a proven center, that can play at an acceptable level in the run and pass game, I will continue to wait on one. Until Tom remains healthy for an entire season, I won't be holding my breath that he will. Too many undesirable possibilities on the o-line for me to have faith in them being a contender.
Hopefully, I will be pleasantly surprised and my faith restored this season. If not, I can always blame the Packers Policy(ies).
gsd3
February 16, 2026 at 09:16 am
I would like to see them trade for T'Vondre Sweat and draft Jacob Rodriguez. Cooper and J Rod would absolutely cook. J Rod is an instinctive turnover machine.
GreenandBold
February 16, 2026 at 09:25 am
The problem is the “ future “ needs have been the “ current “ needs for years . Defensive Tackle or Nose Tackle . Cornerback . Both of these positions have been ignored by Gute in the top rounds despite being the cornerstones of building Super Bowl caliber teams . Offensive Line Gute has screwed that up for other reasons .
golfpacker61
February 16, 2026 at 11:04 am
Yeah Green, and the author even admits it wasn't the right choice to draft WRs in the 1st & 3rd rounds when we had an overfilled WR room already. And now we have to add OL to the "Biggest Needs" because position group will be weakened this year.
Gsd3 commented on a possible trade scenario with the Titans D'Vondre Sweat. If the Packers could pull that off, they could concentrate more on CB & OL, which would give us a fighting chance of strengthening 2 weaker groups in a draft that we have no first-round pick.
gsd3
February 16, 2026 at 12:55 pm
As you have as well golf. If he could be had for either of the cut candidates or possibly Brooks or Wicks, it should not even be a question.
Then they could go NT later in the draft or go with Stackhouse / Wooden backing him up.
golfpacker61
February 16, 2026 at 01:06 pm
Yeah Gsd3, I also think Musgrave has more trade value than some posters on here think. Musgrave had his best season as a Packer last year statistic wise, and teams always need decent TEs. Yeah, he isn't a great blocker, but that's not a gamechanger for most teams. He caught 90% of his targets this year and he played every game too. Availability is so important.
gsd3
February 16, 2026 at 01:30 pm
To move him without having a viable alternative would be a little risky. I like Kolar but there is no guarantee he is even on Gutey's radar.
To go a step further, I would consider re-signing Doubs if they could get a discount and trading Reed.
Opens up the slot spot for Golden and gets a player and / or draft capital that can be used now.
Reed would probably command higher $ in free agency than they are willing to spend.
dobber
February 16, 2026 at 10:31 am
"That's still not as much as the teams with the most to spend right now, who could all also make their own cap moves. So, they likely won’t be amongst the biggest threats in the player acquisition market."
Most of the projections I've seen have the Packers landing in the black by about $35M. Keep in mind that if the Packers are smart, and they usually are, they won't make those moves all at once: they'll have to release Jenkins/Gary right off the bat to become solvent, but each of those restructures or releases kicks cap obligations further down the line or creates a hole that you need to fill. After the first move, they'll make moves on rostered players as they need $$.
Still, many of the guys the Packers will likely be targeting in FA will probably have contracts structured to give them very low '26 cap numbers--$3-5M--and not much in guaranteed money if they don't move the needle in camp (See: Simmons, Isaiah).
"All together, what does that mean? The Packers will need to be smart in how they let free agency play out, and they need to be lucky in who falls to them in the draft. "
It's always been a matter of luck in both cases. Still, you make your own luck with good scouting and by finding good fits for your needs. I don't think anyone expected that Zack Baun would be the key piece he was in Philly given how he couldn't get on the field (he was a core ST guy) in NO, but it's hard to see them winning a SB without him. You also need to look back and see that they likely didn't sign him to start...but he was right guy at the right time when he did.
"The front office will need to be extremely smart in how they identify and value veteran free agents on the market this offseason. Count me amongst the growing voice of fans who are ready to move on from the “youngest roster in the NFL” era. "
They'll need to look back into how they evaluated guys at draft time and also lean into their pro scouting to locate guys who can help right now (many are likely 30-ish), and find others who--like Baun--could be right guy, right time (many are probably coming off rookie contracts). It could be there was a guy they really liked, but was a poor fit for whatever Joe Barry was doing on defense at the time...or didn't want to draft that spot because they had two first rounders (e.g. Stokes and Jaire) and no clear path to playing time at that draft.
The youngest roster thing really kinda went out the window with the Parsons trade and contract, and the Packers are on the path to the next rebuild, already.
"It’s the third round pick of Savion Williams that confused me most at the time"
I see it as the more recent iteration of the Josiah Deguara thing: Deguara was supposed to be that flexible FB/HB piece like what the Packers saw with Jusczyk in SF. I think LaF was enamored and convinced Gute to go get that guy. It didn't pan out. Williams, to me, was the attempt to go get a gadget piece like Deebo Samuel to diversify the offense. Deebo was way better developed coming out of South Carolina than Williams, and Williams came into camp hurt (and seemed to stay hurt). If Williams carves out a role this year and is productive, I think we'll all be fine with him. If not?
golfpacker61
February 16, 2026 at 11:36 am
"Still, many of the guys the Packers will likely be targeting in FA will probably have contracts structured to give them very low '26 cap numbers--$3-5M--and not much in guaranteed money if they don't move the needle in camp (See: Simmons, Isaiah)."
I agree completely Dobber, but I was a big fan of trying to see if Hafley could unlock something in Isaiah Simmons. Plus every team has cheap special teams wizards who affect ganes in positive ways. It was worth a try and was cheap.
"Cheap FA Moves" are all we can do this year. Anyone wanting us to sign another $12 million CB are going to be sad because it won't happen. Especially another SLOT CB.
We also don't want to mess up our chance to gain 4 comp picks in 2027. Easy small moves could include signing TE Charlie Kolar since TE is actually a solid need, he is projected to get $1.7 mill per year.
We need a KR and Skyy Moore has been floated because he is a very good KR and has great hands @ WR. He flamed out @ KC but is still young and healthy. Projected $1.5 million per year.
I was a fan of signing Nakobe Dean-LB, to replace Quay, but a better, cheaper, option is Leo Chenel-LB-Chiefs. Projected $4 million annually.
Other cheap options to replace & upgrade the loss of Gary & Enegbare could be A J Epenesa or Jadaveon Clowney, both projected in $4/5 million range.
Small signings that could go a long way to filling holes and even upgrading the players we are losing.
Turophile
February 16, 2026 at 10:39 am
Here we go again with the need vs BPA argument. It always rears its head at this time of year.
In a previous comment I argued that need vs BPA should be seen on a sliding scale. You do need to improve weak areas of your team just as much as you want to get the best guy on the board.
You ignore a need and take BPA pick elsewhere at one draft slot - and the pressure to draft to fill that need with the next pick is higher. You have to fill your whole roster somehow and all teams rightly chase the myth of strength and depth at every position. This sliding scale between BPA and need, also holds true over multiple drafts, the more you ignore a position group, the more urgent the need to improve that group becomes.
If you ignore a need to the point where you have an unusually poor position group, that weakness (which is already bad) becomes exaggerated even more as other teams look to schemes that exploit your weakness in the worst way.
With BPA vs need, it really comes down to how much better the BPA is than the best player at one of your need positions (though of course sometimes the BPA IS a position of need, which makes your choice easier). If the difference in the grade between the BPA and BPoN (Best Position of Need) is tiny, would you really (for example) draft a Safety over a Cornerback this year, given the strength of the Safety room and the weakness at corner ?
Bottom line is never push for just one philosophy. Kalani Jones (author of this article) likes to push for BPA, but I think he should add weight the other part of the equation more than he seems to, in his piece. BPA and need can each be the best answer, it all comes down to the details and what you have done before. The more you walk up the 'BPA regardless' line, the deeper the hole your worst unit sinks into......and equally, with too much drafting for need, where you keep reaching for picks at need positions, the weaker your overall team becomes over time.
Let us hope the BPA/Need argument is put to bed now (for another year at least).
golfpacker61
February 16, 2026 at 11:48 am
"If you ignore a need to the point where you have an unusually poor position group, that weakness (which is already bad) becomes exaggerated even more as other teams look to schemes that exploit your weakness in the worst way."
1000% right Turo and a great post to boot. Boundary CB was the Co #1 need last year and because we ignored it in the draft and blew our wad on a Slot CB, it is still a "Biggest Need" this year.
I would argue that we didn't use either draft formula last year because Golden wasn't close to the BPA and he didn't fill our "Biggest Need" either. I will also say that Golden wasn't a first-round caliber WR, Egbuka was the last one on the board in the first round. Higgins would have been a better WR choice even after trading back.
Teams were available that wanted to move up for our #22 pick and that's exactly what we should have done to gain premium picks where we could have fill multiple "Needs."
The 2025 draft was a disaster for GB as we overdrafted our first 3 picks. I really liked Belton but no one had him being drafted before the late 3rd round, where we could have got him if we had traded back from #22. Someone needs to be a lot better in our draft room for us in the 2026 draft or we are going backwards again.
HarryHodag
February 16, 2026 at 10:45 am
With a couple of exceptions, the problem last year was the defense not the offense. The team scored enough points to win most games. I kept quiet during the season but with Hafley gone I say good riddance. The numbers nerds kept telling us about all the great things the defense did, but the 'collapses' were due in no small part to the defense being shredded.. The Seahawks victory in the Stupid Bowl should serve as a testament to the old NLF belief: defense wins championships. The Packers aren't champions because the defense wasn't that good, excepting Micah Parsons. Parsons is Reggie White reincarnated, but without Parsons the defense couldn't stop the nuns from St. Norbert College.
The defense has the potential to be outstanding but after Parsons left you saw the real defense. I can't forget the Ravens game where Harbaugh just bullied the Packers into submission. They need some real meat eaters to come on board. How about some turnovers? How about getting McKinney back to the top? How about some interceptions? How about a run defense and tackles for loss?
Gannon will be tasked to turn it around. If they do, and the offense responds, they should be back where the Packers belong, at the top.
golfpacker61
February 16, 2026 at 12:17 pm
Who would have thought Harry that we would add Micah Parson, a Top 3 sack artist, and we would have less sacks than the year before?
Our offense seemed to be hit or miss last year, too many times the offense seemed to go to sleep for entire quarters or half's. Injuries were a big story last year, no matter who tries to poo poo that fact. I attribute GBs CB play as being a big factor in the defense going backwards last year. As much as adding a player like Parsons, or Garrett, or any Top Tier game-changer D-lineman, improves all 3 levels of the defense, our sub standard CB play brought the entire defense down. Our safeties, that are a real strength for us were affected by the below NFL average CBs we put on the field. Just look at how Interceptions were down last year, over 10 that hit CBs in both hands and they dropped. Turnovers get the other teams offense off the field and we couldn't make those plays last year.
I don't know what we will do to come up with extra cash this year. There are no-brainer options like releasing Jenkins, and trading/releasing Gary are happening for sure. Some restructures will have to happen and that hinders us in the future. Things will have to go our way by acquiring some cheap free agents that can actually upgrade weaker position groups. LB, TE, OL, and KR position groups could be strengthened by getting lucky with some cheaper players.
Trades are another way to grab players at positions of need. The most talked about trade possibility has been D'Vondre Sweat-Titans NT. It's not a for sure they will trade him, but Gutey should be calling daily to see if we can steal him and fill 1 of our biggest holes before the draft. The possibility of signing Calais Campbell or trading for Sweat would be the biggest, potential game changer, cheaper, move that we could reasonably make before the draft this year.
Lastly the draft has to be more hit than miss this year. With less cash resources this year and no first-round pick, this has to be our best draft in the last 5 years. We need CB help more than anything and from #52 all the way to #90, there will be solid CBs available. Trading back 10-20 spots should be a strong possibility for GB that they work the phones to death on. In fact before the draft Gutey should be calling to say #52 is in play to be traded. Gaining potential premium picks, 2nd thru 5th rounders would really give us a chance for a solid draft that fills a lot of needs.
Starrbrite
February 16, 2026 at 11:57 pm
I love the Calias idea; Sweat too, but Calias more.
We could pull off what Pickett did for a us years ago.
Zekerg
February 16, 2026 at 03:11 pm
Look at the bright side. Most of the top ten on Gutey's draft board will still be there at 52.
GreenandBold
February 16, 2026 at 08:13 pm
Half will be there in the third and fourth . But it’s all about potential right ?
LeotisHarris
February 16, 2026 at 08:30 pm
I enjoy musings on a dilemma as much as anyone, and you mofos did not disappoint in the comments. I'm off to my sitting room to do my best pondering and mulling.
Bitternotsour
February 16, 2026 at 10:33 pm
I'm willing to wager that there will be a full complement of rostered players, including a back-up quarterback when the games roll around. I'd also be willing to wager that the cap will be managed, and that optimism will arrive like spring around the first week of training camp.
So it shall be, there will be draft picks debated, 40 times analyzed, and a progression of posters dead certain they know more than the front office. As it ever was, as it shall be again. The players change, the numbers stay the same...
Starrbrite
February 17, 2026 at 12:00 am
Exactly Bitter, and I enjoy the heck out of talking about it.