Packers 2026 Offseason

[BrewerFan]

On 3/13/2026 at 12:13 PM, JosephC said:

As incredibly unpopular as this would be, this is the one I would never consider unless it was a virtually improbable two year deal.

Snap count percentage by year - 2022 = 46.34%, 2023 = 40.69%, 2024 = 51.20%, 2025 = 39.77%.  Two significant injuries.  And what is more concerning, those injuries weren't a guy putting his helmet right on his knee or getting a shoulder blown out in a scrum when diving for a loose ball.  Those injuries are non-contact injuries.  An optimist would write off the first one as a fluke, but it's happened twice with Watson.

Watson will be good if he's healthy, but considering the history, a 4 year, 120 million dollar deal with something like 70 million guaranteed looks like a disaster waiting to happen.

By the time the NFL is done with their next wave of TV contracts, none of these deals are going to be a disaster waiting to happen. 

Doubs deal will likely have bigger cap implications the next two years than a Watson extension will have the two years after his extension... which was created with a dummy bonus during the void years and dummby base salaries specifically so they COULD extend him to a deal for ~30M a year(which they can't go much over). 


He had hamstring issues early on, he(and Stokes) when to Madison to deal with that and he hasn't since. He hasn't had the hamstring injuries taking him out. He had an ACL, but unless there is something else structural with the knee, that shouldn't be a big deal, and we know can happen to any player at any time.

He's also just been way too important to this offense. 

Two years into his extension deal, the cap is... almost certainly going to be... a LOT higher. 

I think you'll see Kraft, Wyatt, Watson, maybe Reed, all extended over the next 6 months and Watson is probably going to be 4/120 and I'd guess his SB is lower. Also, the Packers are the ones who want the 4 year deal. If they insist on a 2 year deal... it's just going to be a battle over GTD money and they probably end up paying him close to the same in GTD money. 2 year extension? Watson's camp is going to want more money, they're not going to just settle for a prorated % of that. 

[HarryDoyle]

KMN.

 

[SeaBass]

19 hours ago, BrewerFan said:

Two years into his extension deal, the cap is... almost certainly going to be... a LOT higher. 

I think I saw someone earlier in this thread (maybe it was even you) say that the cap could grow to 500M in the near future. That is just an insane figure to me. A half billion dollar per season cap per team. Crazy money even in a league that is making crazy money.

If you'd told someone back in 1985 that teams 40 years in the future would be or potentially would be spending that much per season I think their brains would break and likely just simply wouldn't believe you.

[igor67]

One should at least acknowledge that current geopolitical uncertainties are large enough that you can't 100% assume full speed ahead on these every increasing valuations.

[Joseph Zarr]

Updated Coaching designations posted today. Sure looks like we are shifting back to a 3-4 Base:

I know nothing about this hire but from afar it would pique my curiosity as 'interesting'?

[JosephC]

Gutekunst said it two years ago and it is still true today.  4-3 or 3-4, it doesn't matter because this is a 4-2-5 league.

I'm much more interested in knowing how much dime personnel Gannon is anticipating using.  As I understand it, Hafley hardly ever played dime, but Gannon has a history of using quite a bit of dime personnel.

[JosephC]

Nate Hobbs signs with San Francisco.  1 year, 1.25 million dollar signing bonus, 1.86 million dollar base salary, 50k workout bonus and up to 340k in per-game roster bonuses.  So it's a 1 year, 3.5 million dollar contract.

[LouisEly]

 

I know this will generate some "lively" discussion, but there have been questions about how the Packers have drafted relative to their draft position and picking in the back 1/3rd every year but one since 2020.

Not all picks have panned out, but neither have all the picks for all other teams.  And if the Packers are constantly drafting in the back 1/3rd of the round, most teams should draft more impactful players.  But most teams don't.

From a quantity standpoint, 2020 and 2021 weren't great years.  But getting Jordan Love at #26 at the cost of a 4th round pick to move up was an absolute coup.  (Think about how much resources the Packers would have to use at QB if they didn't have Love.)  Looking at Pro Football Reference's wAV as a proxy, the only player in the entire draft who has a higher wAV per game started is Jalen Hurts.  Not Joe Burrow, not Justin Herbert, not Justin Jefferson.

And 2020 was a stinker for a lot of teams - two of the top 12 picks are already out of the league (for different reasons), one top 3 pick has started 31 games in 6 years, and a top 10 DT pick has 13 career sacks, and another top 10 pick is on his 4th team.  People complain about A.J. Dillon at the end of round 2, but he has a higher career wAV than 13 first round picks that year (and is tied with two others).

[CheezWizHed]

2 hours ago, LouisEly said:

 

I know this will generate some "lively" discussion, but there have been questions about how the Packers have drafted relative to their draft position and picking in the back 1/3rd every year but one since 2020.

Not all picks have panned out, but neither have all the picks for all other teams.  And if the Packers are constantly drafting in the back 1/3rd of the round, most teams should draft more impactful players.  But most teams don't.

From a quantity standpoint, 2020 and 2021 weren't great years.  But getting Jordan Love at #26 at the cost of a 4th round pick to move up was an absolute coup.  (Think about how much resources the Packers would have to use at QB if they didn't have Love.)  Looking at Pro Football Reference's wAV as a proxy, the only player in the entire draft who has a higher wAV per game started is Jalen Hurts.  Not Joe Burrow, not Justin Herbert, not Justin Jefferson.

And 2020 was a stinker for a lot of teams - two of the top 12 picks are already out of the league (for different reasons), one top 3 pick has started 31 games in 6 years, and a top 10 DT pick has 13 career sacks, and another top 10 pick is on his 4th team.  People complain about A.J. Dillon at the end of round 2, but he has a higher career wAV than 13 first round picks that year (and is tied with two others).

Just think what he could do if he would "hit" on his 1st round picks... Well, I guess we don't have to worry about that for a couple of years. 

[JosephC]

9 hours ago, LouisEly said:

anned out, but neither have all the picks for all other teams.  And if the Packers are constantly drafting i

 

9 hours ago, LouisEly said:

 

I know this will generate some "lively" discussion, but there have been questions about how the Packers have drafted relative to their draft position and picking in the back 1/3rd every year but one since 2020.

Not all picks have panned out, but neither have all the picks for all other teams.  And if the Packers are constantly drafting in the back 1/3rd of the round, most teams should draft more impactful players.  But most teams don't.

From a quantity standpoint, 2020 and 2021 weren't great years.  But getting Jordan Love at #26 at the cost of a 4th round pick to move up was an absolute coup.  (Think about how much resources the Packers would have to use at QB if they didn't have Love.)  Looking at Pro Football Reference's wAV as a proxy, the only player in the entire draft who has a higher wAV per game started is Jalen Hurts.  Not Joe Burrow, not Justin Herbert, not Justin Jefferson.

And 2020 was a stinker for a lot of teams - two of the top 12 picks are already out of the league (for different reasons), one top 3 pick has started 31 games in 6 years, and a top 10 DT pick has 13 career sacks, and another top 10 pick is on his 4th team.  People complain about A.J. Dillon at the end of round 2, but he has a higher career wAV than 13 first round picks that year (and is tied with two others).

Gutekunst is definitely not a bad drafter.  Anybody who thinks that just isn't paying attention.  I'm pretty sure I've posted this in the recent past, but I would guess that looking over his entire tenure as the GM in Green Bay (not just the last five years), he would grade out as somewhere between above average to "good."  However, if you subtract out the 2022 draft, then that grade would drop significantly, because the 2022 draft was extraordinarily good.  Just a few nights I started scrolling through some of the Packers drafts going way, way back, and to say the 2022 draft class is one of the 10 best drafts ever for this franchise would not be a stretch.

So you factor that class into a five year window instead of the full tenure, and I would expect the Packers to be top 10 at minimum.  Top five....probably.  Number one?  I don't know enough about all the other teams to say that.

I do think the detractors have a legitimate point when they talk about the lack of All-Pro talent.  Personally, I'd rather land three solid starters rather than getting one All-Pro type player.  But the lack of hitting on this type of talent occasionally in the draft, is that what is keeping this team from jumping to the next level?  People might have a point when bringing this up.

[LouisEly]

On 3/20/2026 at 10:10 PM, JosephC said:

I do think the detractors have a legitimate point when they talk about the lack of All-Pro talent. 

I think there's a pretty good chance that Tucker Kraft makes All Pro if he doesn't get injured.  Maybe Zach Tom too if he stays healthy.

It also is a lot harder to land those when they're constantly drafting in the back 1/3rd of the round.  The two All Pro QBs went 1/1 and 1/3 the years they came out - never had a chance to draft them.  Yeah, they got Rodgers and Matthews late in the 1st but other teams had to pass on them first.  (And Matthews wasn't their first 1st round pick that year - they picked Raji 9th overall and he never made All Pro, only once Pro Bowl.)  Rodgers was in the discussion for 1st overall, and then 24 other teams over-thought it.

And you can't cherry pick what years to include.  Last six years also includes 2021 and 2020 - and they're still one of the top teams.  The point is that every team misses on some picks; the Packers have missed on less than most.

[JosephC]

ACME Packing Company is reporting WR-Ted Hurst/Georgia State is one of the 30 players the Packers are bringing in for a visit.  Hurst is 6-3 7/8, 206, 4.42 40, 36.5 vertical and fits the mode of a deep-threat/third-level WR.  He is currently projecting in the mid to late round three area.  In 2025, he appeared in 12 games and totaled 71-1004-6.  In 2024, he played in 12 games and totaled 56-961-9.  Prior to that he was at Valdosta State. 

[BrewerFan]

On 3/19/2026 at 11:14 AM, SeaBass said:

I think I saw someone earlier in this thread (maybe it was even you) say that the cap could grow to 500M in the near future. That is just an insane figure to me. A half billion dollar per season cap per team. Crazy money even in a league that is making crazy money.

If you'd told someone back in 1985 that teams 40 years in the future would be or potentially would be spending that much per season I think their brains would break and likely just simply wouldn't believe you.

It was. TV deals are going to go up a lot. Either in the near term when networks can renegotiate prior to the NFL's opt out(IIRC after the '28 season) or... they do it now which it sounds as though they'll start doing.

The 500M I.... just came up with on real rough numbers. It's more likely it'd be rolled out a bit more slowly with incremental jumps(though, we just went up 22M). 

The NBA somehow saw their cap projections go down... which I don't recall the last time that happened outside of Covid. 

I do think it's pretty fair to say it makes more sense to extend the players they're likely to extend now. Watson, Kraft, Wyatt(IDL are... as difficult to find as nearly any other position) and...I'm forgetting someone(not Reed, but I'd probably try and extend Reed also). 

Of course this is hardly a secret and the players know that. That's likely why Seattle extended JSN with 2 years left on his deal and gave him 4/168.4 in new money with 120M GTD. 

[CheezWizHed]

15 hours ago, JosephC said:

ACME Packing Company is reporting WR-Ted Hurst/Georgia State is one of the 30 players the Packers are bringing in for a visit.  Hurst is 6-3 7/8, 206, 4.42 40, 36.5 vertical and fits the mode of a deep-threat/third-level WR.  He is currently projecting in the mid to late round three area.  In 2025, he appeared in 12 games and totaled 71-1004-6.  In 2024, he played in 12 games and totaled 56-961-9.  Prior to that he was at Valdosta State. 

I read that this morning and thought "wow" that is a Packer draft pick. We have a type; young (21), tall and athletic. 

[BrewerFan]

9 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

I read that this morning and thought "wow" that is a Packer draft pick. We have a type; young (21), tall and athletic. 

Yeah... but he's also got the prototype of pretty much every X WR you're looking for. 

I think the way he's trending, they may not get a chance to take him and if they do, it's likely only one(though maybe 2). 

You'd also really have to look at the WRs and figure out which one you're going to move. If you draft another WR, you're probably going to have to lose one. 
-
Watson- I think he's in their long term plans as a focal point of the offense.
Golden- We're not getting a 1 for him, so you'd be selling low.
Reed- I guess a 2nd would be wise. Especially as the Brewers are likely to be in the FA market next year and thus less worried about pick comp, but without Doubs, I think Reed is a big loss. 
Wicks- Still hasn't broken through, but a really nice #4. Willing blocker. But pending FA. Maybe a 4th? 
Williams- 2nd year player. KR specialist, looked pretty good in contested catch catch situations(relative for a rookie). 
Sky Moore-Not really like the Hardman situation from last year. They gave him 1M in GTD money. 

If they like the kid... think he's a #1 or can play on the outside, even with the OL/DT/CB needs, they should do it. But in that scenario, Reed or Wicks are probably going to get traded. 

He does look like a tank though. 

[JosephC]

As of now, Watson, Reed and Wicks are all unrestricted free agents after this year, so it wouldn't be a big surprise if the Packers added one in the draft.  Moore will likely see snaps on offense, but they may view him as 95% special teams/5% offense and may already be viewing his contributions on offense as minimal.  Personally, with the way things have progressed, I'm pretty doubtful that they will have 10 53-man roster quality offensive linemen in training camp, and if that's the case, thinking they end up with 7 WR and 9 OLineman in week 1 seems like a reasonable projection.

I do think Packer fans should have a bit of worry in them that Gutekunst might be sitting back and saying-

Offense = Love, Jacobs, Watson, Reed, Golden, Kraft, Morgan, Banks, Rhyan, Belton, Tom

Defense = Perkins, Van Ness, Wyatt, Hargrave, Cooper, Franklin, Nixon, Valentine, Bullard, McKinney, Williams

"We are set, I can just use the draft for filling the holes we will have after the season."

If he goes WR and TE (Kraft, Musgrave, Whyle all unrestricted free agents) with the first couple picks, look for the Packers to have another 9 win season.  OL and CB was garbage at the end of last season, and will bad again in 2026.

 

 

[JosephC]

Packerswire is reporting Louisville LB-T.J. Quinn is another player the Packers are bringing in for a 30 visit.  A non-combine invitee, Quinn is projected to go undrafted.  Louisville had their Pro Day a few days ago, but like last year, media coverage of pro days is now garbage.  He's listed at 6-1, 235 on Lousville's website.  Third-team All-ACC in 2025.

2025 stats = 13 games played, 95 tackles, 8 tackles for loss, 3 sacks, 2 interceptions, 6 pass breakups

2024 stats = 13 games played, 82 tackles, 4 tackles for loss, 1.5 sacks, 

Also had 92 tackles in 2023.  So a guy that redshirted in 2021, backup in 2022 and then started the next three years.

[CheezWizHed]

On 3/27/2026 at 11:31 PM, BrewerFan said:

Yeah... but he's also got the prototype of pretty much every X WR you're looking for. 

I think the way he's trending, they may not get a chance to take him and if they do, it's likely only one(though maybe 2). 

You'd also really have to look at the WRs and figure out which one you're going to move. If you draft another WR, you're probably going to have to lose one. 
-
Watson- I think he's in their long term plans as a focal point of the offense.
Golden- We're not getting a 1 for him, so you'd be selling low.
Reed- I guess a 2nd would be wise. Especially as the Brewers are likely to be in the FA market next year and thus less worried about pick comp, but without Doubs, I think Reed is a big loss. 
Wicks- Still hasn't broken through, but a really nice #4. Willing blocker. But pending FA. Maybe a 4th? 
Williams- 2nd year player. KR specialist, looked pretty good in contested catch catch situations(relative for a rookie). 
Sky Moore-Not really like the Hardman situation from last year. They gave him 1M in GTD money. 

If they like the kid... think he's a #1 or can play on the outside, even with the OL/DT/CB needs, they should do it. But in that scenario, Reed or Wicks are probably going to get traded. 

He does look like a tank though. 

I can see them trading off Wicks, but they won't get much more than a 7th for him.  No one is giving us a 2nd and 4th for Reed and Wicks (both the original draft round) when they have 1 year left. 

Personally, I hope they sign Reed and Watson to second contracts.  I think Reed is a bit underrated as a WR.  

Watson, Reed, and Golden would be a great trio.  Even having Wicks for 1 year as the 4th would make a great WR room (assuming everyone can stay healthy...which is a big assumption). 

[jay87shot]

2 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

I can see them trading off Wicks, but they won't get much more than a 7th for him.  No one is giving us a 2nd and 4th for Reed and Wicks (both the original draft round) when they have 1 year left. 

Personally, I hope they sign Reed and Watson to second contracts.  I think Reed is a bit underrated as a WR.  

Watson, Reed, and Golden would be a great trio.  Even having Wicks for 1 year as the 4th would make a great WR room (assuming everyone can stay healthy...which is a big assumption). 

I agree that we wouldn't get much in value from Wicks, Reed, or Watson. However I could see a trade for a position player. Maybe Wicks for a CB or OL would work somewhere. 

[jay87shot]

If we don't get a backup QB in the draft what would thoughts be on bringing in Russell Wilson for a year as a backup? I get he has been a strange personality but I think he could fit the Malik Willis role for a couple games if need be.

We have 22 million in cap space left, after the draft I would guess that is like 12-15ish. Who left on the market would be your perferred signing? I would go with Taylor Decker or Cameron Jordan, I think as short term vets both could provide huge depth and upside to go along with proven leadership.

[SeaBass]

On 3/4/2026 at 6:53 AM, SeaBass said:

B's are not bad grades. Sorry. If there were some breakdown of criteria that showed more context then there could be some debate. So fans are just left with the things we already see every week which are already things that get talked about.

So I talked a lot about needing context and it seems some context has been provided by MLF himself.

Packers' Matt LaFleur mulls low survey grade

"According to the survey, which was not supposed to be made public this year but was obtained by ESPN and other media outlets, some players dinged LaFleur when it came to "respect for players."

"If I'm being honest about it, I think there were some guys that were upset about roles last year, and I think that took a toll on our football team," LaFleur said."

He mentioned that he needed to improve his communication and suggested that the team wasn't "connected".

[CheezWizHed]

2 hours ago, jay87shot said:

If we don't get a backup QB in the draft what would thoughts be on bringing in Russell Wilson for a year as a backup? I get he has been a strange personality but I think he could fit the Malik Willis role for a couple games if need be.

We have 22 million in cap space left, after the draft I would guess that is like 12-15ish. Who left on the market would be your perferred signing? I would go with Taylor Decker or Cameron Jordan, I think as short term vets both could provide huge depth and upside to go along with proven leadership.

I would have very little interest in Wilson at $12-15M.  He made less than $11M last year for NYG when he was brought in to start. 

Maybe in the $5 or 6M range... But I doubt Gute does that.  You'll see the two we have compete with a late round draft pick and/or UDFA.  Then late in TC, if those don't work, see who is available. 

[LouisEly]

3 hours ago, SeaBass said:

So I talked a lot about needing context and it seems some context has been provided by MLF himself.

Packers' Matt LaFleur mulls low survey grade

"According to the survey, which was not supposed to be made public this year but was obtained by ESPN and other media outlets, some players dinged LaFleur when it came to "respect for players."

"If I'm being honest about it, I think there were some guys that were upset about roles last year, and I think that took a toll on our football team," LaFleur said."

He mentioned that he needed to improve his communication and suggested that the team wasn't "connected".

So he was holding players accountable and getting in their face when they screwed up?

[jay87shot]

3 hours ago, CheezWizHed said:

I would have very little interest in Wilson at $12-15M.  He made less than $11M last year for NYG when he was brought in to start. 

Maybe in the $5 or 6M range... But I doubt Gute does that.  You'll see the two we have compete with a late round draft pick and/or UDFA.  Then late in TC, if those don't work, see who is available. 

Sorry, I would assume Russ would only cost like 2 million and then sign Jordan or Decker to like a 1/10 deal. Maybe my wording or thought process was off.

[BrewerFan]

On 3/20/2026 at 10:10 AM, JosephC said:

Gutekunst said it two years ago and it is still true today.  4-3 or 3-4, it doesn't matter because this is a 4-2-5 league.

I'm much more interested in knowing how much dime personnel Gannon is anticipating using.  As I understand it, Hafley hardly ever played dime, but Gannon has a history of using quite a bit of dime personnel.

It makes having a NT, a true NT more important. Hargroves an be that guy, but he didn't like the way he was used in Minnesota last year. 

He wants to rush the QB and be allowed to get up field. I like the idea of being able to use Parsons in different ways. Also, someone like Collin Oliver... there was a whole lot of excitement around him the year before he got drafted. That could help him quite a bit... although in some schemes the edge has more responsibility as  they have to set the edge where as DEs don't always have to in a 4-3, the Will or Sam does. 


The Dime defense... my guess would be it'd skew toward more big nickel with McKinney, Williams, Bullard MAYBE Oladapo or maybe just 3 Corners on the field with Cooper. 

I think we're going to have a good defense, but it'll come down to Parsons getting back to 100%, Wyatt... both getting back to 100% and playing like he was early last year, Hargroves being closer to how he played when Gannon was last year his DC and LVN building off last year. 

If we're not dominating with our 4 man front... there are going to be a LOT of Joe Barry references. And while I despised Joe Barry, I do think if you gave him Parsons, developed Wyatt, Hargroves and then the fliars that are Karl Brooks, LVN, Sorrell, Oliver and whoever else we sign, he'd have been fine. I'm REALLY hoping we're in on Calais Campbell. I love a front of Parsons, Wyatt, Campbell and then LVN. Until the big man stops having elite seasons, no reason to stop believing.