Official 2026 Free Agency/Offseason/Non-Draft Thread

[Joemailman]

Tom Silverstein
@TomSilverstein

Add the #Jets to those interested in #Packers run game coordinator Demarcus Covington for DC. Dallas also interested.

[pbmax]

Every contract is the same unless you're Kirk Cousins. 3 year deal disguised as a 5 year deal where the last 2 years are huge numbers that will virtually never get played. Thats why Elgton is on the chopping block. Same for why Kenny Clark wouldn't have played past this year. Same for why Gary would have only played out the deal if he turned into a genuine game wrecker. NFL execs are structuring deals to have lower bases in years 1-3 with a signing bonus to bring them up to snuff. Example: 5 years $150 million. Bonus 40 Million. Years 1 (10) 2 (10) 3 (20) then 4 and 5 (35). Agent crows that the deal averages 30 million, but it really is a 3 year deal for 80M and team options for 4/5. They aren't technically "void years" more like team option. Its the way the bulk of the deals are structured now except QB deals.

You are generally correct about most second deals being 3 years then we will see. Other veteran deals are often 1 year then we will see (Hobbs).

But void years means something specific; or you are the Saints, its the Saint to which you direct your prayers. And they have a high impact on accelerating cap costs, most so that just an extra 2 years on a 3 year deal to lower the signing bonus amortization. They are a larger fiction because they aren't a true paid year; even if the team wanted to the team could not have the player for the void years as they automatically disappear at a certain point. A 2 year fiction on a 5 year deal could, if the team chooses, be a true five year deal. I think the Packers have had this happen before because the cap went up more than expected and the player was still performing.

If I remember correctly, its essentially a way to get a second re-amortization of the contract bonuses in the middle of the deal which avoids the 5 year limit initially. It basically means you are going to get hit harder.

[bobblehead]

Normally I'd say Wyatt will get extended but not with void years, however, they are so tight, they have to do something to create enough space and then something else to have flexibility. Hobbs is a guy with a deal that they can restructure to get some immediate savings without breaking the bank if they keep him. They almost have to unless they are now convinced hes slot only.

Every contract is the same unless you're Kirk Cousins. 3 year deal disguised as a 5 year deal where the last 2 years are huge numbers that will virtually never get played. Thats why Elgton is on the chopping block. Same for why Kenny Clark wouldn't have played past this year. Same for why Gary would have only played out the deal if he turned into a genuine game wrecker. NFL execs are structuring deals to have lower bases in years 1-3 with a signing bonus to bring them up to snuff. Example: 5 years $150 million. Bonus 40 Million. Years 1 (10) 2 (10) 3 (20) then 4 and 5 (35). Agent crows that the deal averages 30 million, but it really is a 3 year deal for 80M and team options for 4/5. They aren't technically "void years" more like team option. Its the way the bulk of the deals are structured now except QB deals.

[pbmax]

Wyatt gets the 3 year (disguised as a 5 year) deal that brings him to age 32 which is normal for big men to still be effective. I said that when we drafted him "old". Looking at the life of a first round pick you generally get the 5 years and then a 3 year. After that you are paying too much to extend them. The difference is basically you let him walk at 31 without giving him another 3 or you let him walk at 32 without giving him another 3. In both cases you got the value from the player.

Normally I'd say Wyatt will get extended but not with void years, however, they are so tight, they have to do something to create enough space and then something else to have flexibility. Hobbs is a guy with a deal that they can restructure to get some immediate savings without breaking the bank if they keep him. They almost have to unless they are now convinced hes slot only.

[bobblehead]

Wyatt gets the 3 year (disguised as a 5 year) deal that brings him to age 32 which is normal for big men to still be effective. I said that when we drafted him "old". Looking at the life of a first round pick you generally get the 5 years and then a 3 year. After that you are paying too much to extend them. The difference is basically you let him walk at 31 without giving him another 3 or you let him walk at 32 without giving him another 3. In both cases you got the value from the player.

[Joemailman]

I wonder what they'll do with Devonte Wyatt. The dude has developed into a player, but he's hurt so, so much that it doesn't make sense to sign him to a long-term deal. My guess is they let him walk after next season. It's another hole to fill, for sure, but there's been a hole there a lot anyway because he's been hurt so much. Too bad. He was developing into a player.

I wonder if they'll part ways with Nixon. He's good, but he's not a shut down. Do they have him for a reasonable price next year?

I don't even know if they'll try to re-sign Sean Ryan. I know the center position is not strong in the draft, though. And Jacob Monk might not be the answer, either. I don't know.

I do think Jenkins, Gary, McAnus, and Quay Walker are all gone. Not sure about Doubs. I like the guy, but with a team in the tight cap position this one is, can you afford to keep him and watch Jayden Reed walk after next year and possibly stunt Golden's development? I don't know.

Wyatt will be interesting because he's unusually old for a 4th year player. He'll be 28 in March. I think they take a chance and sign him to an extension. Packers would save 5 million by cutting Nixon. I've read he wants a raise. Think Packers would balk at that. I think Doubs is gone. Even without him, Watson, Reed, Golden and Wicks is decent depth. Gotta spend money elsewhere. Center is a mystery. What is Rhyan's market value? Monk had a bad summer, but played pretty well last game against Vikings. Maybe he improved in practice as season went on.

[Fritz]

I wonder what they'll do with Devonte Wyatt. The dude has developed into a player, but he's hurt so, so much that it doesn't make sense to sign him to a long-term deal. My guess is they let him walk after next season. It's another hole to fill, for sure, but there's been a hole there a lot anyway because he's been hurt so much. Too bad. He was developing into a player.

I wonder if they'll part ways with Nixon. He's good, but he's not a shut down. Do they have him for a reasonable price next year?

I don't even know if they'll try to re-sign Sean Ryan. I know the center position is not strong in the draft, though. And Jacob Monk might not be the answer, either. I don't know.

I do think Jenkins, Gary, McAnus, and Quay Walker are all gone. Not sure about Doubs. I like the guy, but with a team in the tight cap position this one is, can you afford to keep him and watch Jayden Reed walk after next year and possibly stunt Golden's development? I don't know.

[Joemailman]

Tom Silverstein
@TomSilverstein

#Packers RT Zach Tom had a partially torn patellar tendon and tried to come back with a PRP injection but didn’t feel he could pass block with it. He’ll have surgery soon and it will be a 6-month recovery.

[pbmax]

Summary: Don’t expect dips into free agency this offseason beyond sign their own. They will need to restructure or cut more than moves listed below just to resign any of their non-restricted non-exclusive free agents.

The Bottom Line

So, what does all this mean and what will they do?

In summary, the Packers are on track to be $33.1 million over the cap with only bringing back their minimum-contract exclusive-rights free agents and practice-squad players. They are likely to release Elgton Jenkins and Rashan Gary, and either release or get a massive pay cut from Trevon Diggs to get slightly positive in the cap. Extending Devonte Wyatt is a safe bet to add a little bit more.

From there, the Packers will need to choose which veterans to move on from, restructure or approach with pay cuts to give them extra space to bring back some of their pending free agents and extend some of their young stars.

Even with all this potential contract movement, I do not expect a large dip into free agency and, therefore, I do not expect the Packers to go overboard with additional veteran cuts or restructurings to create a giant pile of cap space.

I believe the Packers will aim to gain the maximum-allowed four compensatory picks for 2027 based on unrestricted free agents leaving this coming offseason.

The Packers desperately will need these picks after giving up two first-rounders for Parsons. The players likely to return compensatory picks if they sign elsewhere are Rasheed Walker, Malik Willis, Romeo Doubs, Quay Walker, Sean Rhyan and Kingsley Enagbare.

The Packers might bring back one or two from that group and let the others walk. Every eligible free agent the Packers sign cancels out a potential compensatory pick so, again, I believe the Packers will be frugal spenders and maybe instead seek recently cut castoffs who would not upset the compensatory formula.

[pbmax]

Was just playing around at OverTheCap.com

If we cut Jenkins and Diggs we save $34,000,000 in cap space. Diggs will be cut, I am sure they try to sign him to new prove it deal for 2026. Diggs cost us $15,000,000 against the cap in 2026 and nothing to cut him. Acquiring Diggs puts us $10,000,000 over the cap for 2026.

If we cut Gary, Nixon and McManus, all players I can easily say aren't worth the cost right now, we save another $18,000,000.

That would get us to $42,000,000 in cap room which is probably enough to sign the guys we want back and maybe 1 other above average FA signing.

Ken Ingalls has weighted in long form. He is not as optimistic about the cap picture as you are here.

https://www.si.com/nfl/packers/onsi/everything-you-need-to-know-about-packers-salary-cap-challenges-solutions

[Joemailman]

Diggs played 1 snap against the Bears. Some think it was because he retreated on a bubble screen rather than take on blockers. He may have played his last play for Packers.

[texaspackerbacker]

What happened to Cooper blitzing, etc.? For better or worse, Hafley happened.

Regarding ThunderDan's post and the cap, some good points there. I didn't know Diggs was due to cost that much. I'd hope they do cut him and then re-sign him for less. His market value at this point shouldn't be too high,

Cutting Gary, Nixon, and McManus is music to my ears.

I'm not backing off from what I say about the cap being fairly easily defeatable, just that being smart in who you keep and who you don't makes the cap much less of a problem - something that can easily be handled with contract structure, etc. We can and should be able to retain anybody worth retaining and picking up some key free agency pieces as well.

[call_me_ishmael]

I recall in the off-season folks talking about how 56 was going to be the best blitzer in the NFL. What happened to that?

I think it's safe to the say the Packers have a lot of holes and maybe we over-estimated the roster in the off-season.

I tend to agree that every spot on the OL is up for grabs except for wherever Zach Tom wants to play. I do think they'll give Morgan every chance at LT - maybe he will develop into a good player there.

I think it goes without saying that the player acquisition in the off-season will be heavy on the OL, DL, and CB positions. I think they're in decent shape everywhere else.

[ThunderDan]

Was just playing around at OverTheCap.com

If we cut Jenkins and Diggs we save $34,000,000 in cap space. Diggs will be cut, I am sure they try to sign him to new prove it deal for 2026. Diggs cost us $15,000,000 against the cap in 2026 and nothing to cut him. Acquiring Diggs puts us $10,000,000 over the cap for 2026.

If we cut Gary, Nixon and McManus, all players I can easily say aren't worth the cost right now, we save another $18,000,000.

That would get us to $42,000,000 in cap room which is probably enough to sign the guys we want back and maybe 1 other above average FA signing.

[texaspackerbacker]

If Alexander was good enough to stay, he'd be contributing for some other team. I have to ask, why didn't they play Trevon Diggs against the Bears after he seemed to play real well the previous week?

Regarding the Nutz and pbmax posts above, there are some good points and some I don't agree with. I definitely do not think Quay Walker had all that great a season. He just doesn't seem to be instinctive - a must at the position he plays. He is a liability in coverage, and many of the tackles he does make are way downfield. He seems out of position way more often than not.

Cooper did kinda regress. I tend to blame Hafley's style of D for that. I'm not saying Hafley was worse as a DC than what came before, just that his style didn't seem to make maximum use of Cooper. When Parsons went down, I woulda like to have seen Cooper or Quay change position completely to be the nearest facsimile we had to Parsons - hyper-athletic. Quay in particular would be good that way, maybe even when Parsons comes back, as he can just use that athleticism rather than read and react - which he hasn't been very good at. Cooper, paired with McDuffie or Hopper or some new guy would be a lot better at ILB/playing instinctively. As much as I'd like to see this radical position change, I don't expect it to happen.

I have to reluctantly and sadly agree about pulling the plug on Gary. He's "warning track power" - almost getting there but not quite personified.

Belton is the only O Lineman other than Tom that I have a high opinion of. I have always said, O Line strength is way less of a factor in winning than the skilled positions - where the Packers are strong. I also agree with the obvious - Banks has been a colossal waste of money. Thus, I'd like to see some upgrade, but I don't consider that as important as some other things - Corner for sure, strength in the D Line also, given the difference when Wyatt got hurt. For the first half against the Bears, our D Line somehow showed a little bit of strength, but in the second half, they reverted to near pathetically weak. Hafley shoulda been able to better compensate for the apparently weak personnel there.