Cory's Corner: Can The Packers Survive Without Parsons?
The Packers were a completely different defense without Micah Parsons last year. If that unit can come together early on, it will allow Parsons to make sure that he will not be rushed back to the field.
The Green Bay Packers can absolutely remain a competitive playoff contender without Micah Parsons for about the first five games of the 2026 season, but their ultimate championship ceiling will remain firmly on hold until their defensive anchor returns. Following a blockbuster trade from Dallas, Parsons transformed Green Bay's defense before a devastating Week 15 ACL and meniscus tear against the Denver Broncos cut his dominant 2025 campaign short. Now, as training camp approaches, his recovery timeline points toward a stint on the Physically Unable to Perform (PUP) list. This opens up a fascinating tactical dilemma for Packers head coach Matt LaFleur and defensive coordinator Jonathan Gannon.
Without Parsons flying off the edge, Green Bay’s pass rush faces an immediate litmus test. The Packers still boast a roster deeply insulated with young talent, and Jordan Love’s high-powered offense is capable of winning shootouts. However, surviving an opening stretch that includes critical conference matchups requires the remaining front seven to manufacture pressure by committee. If the interior line steps up and the secondary locks down opponents, the Packers can realistically aim for a 3-2 or 4-1 start. They do not need to be world-beaters in September; they just need to stay afloat.
This reality feeds directly into the second, more compelling question: If Gannon's defense gels into a cohesive, highly functional unit over the first month, should the front office hold Parsons out even longer? The answer is a resounding yes.
Football history is littered with cautionary tales of rushed injury returns. For a hyper-athletic edge rusher whose game relies entirely on lateral agility, explosive cutting, and violent knee flexion, coming back at 90% is a recipe for disaster. Former Packers offensive tackle Bryan Bulaga recently emphasized on ESPN Milwaukee that an elite player needs zero mental hesitation regarding their knee before stepping back onto a football field. General manager Brian Gutekunst did not trade for Parsons simply to win a random Week 6 game; he acquired him to hoist a Lombardi Trophy.
If the defense proves it can stop the run and pressure the quarterback as a collective unit, Green Bay earns the luxury of patience. A self-sufficient defense allows the medical staff to enforce a strict, conservative rehabilitation protocol without external pressure. Instead of rushing Parsons back for a highly anticipated Week 5 game against the Chicago Bears or a Week 6 revenge match against the Dallas Cowboys, the team can comfortably push his 2026 debut into late October or even November.
Ultimately, holding a healthy Parsons back until he is completely 100% creates a terrifying midseason “cheat code” for Green Bay. While rival teams begin to suffer from late-season attrition, a fresh, fully healed top-tier defender will be injected into a defense that has already found its identity. It will be like adding an elite free agent at the perfect time.
However, the Packers’ defense completely collapsed after Parsons went down. Before his injury, the defense operated as a top-tier, championship-level unit. Afterward, it crumbled entirely, leading to a five-game losing streak that tanked their regular-season finish and ended their playoff run early.
With Parsons, the Packers went 10-4, allowed 18.2 points a game, tallied 3.6 sacks and notched an opponent passer rating of 82.4. Without Parsons, the Packers went 0-5, allowed 29.8 points, tallied 1.2 sacks and allowed an opponent passer rating of 104.8.
If Green Bay’s defense is going to play well in Parsons’ absence, Lukas Van Ness and Devonte Wyatt must take a giant step forward. Van Ness only has 8.5 sacks in three seasons, while Wyatt has 16 sacks in four seasons. If those two can keep that unit afloat, it will not only help Parson’s long-term health but it will also build confidence for a defense that really leaned on the dynamic play of No. 1.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________
Cory Jennerjohn is a graduate from UW-Oshkosh and has been in sports media for over 15 years. He was a co-host on "Clubhouse Live" and has also done various radio and TV work as well. He has written for newspapers, magazines and websites. He currently is a columnist for CHTV and also does various podcasts. He recently earned his Masters degree from the University of Iowa. He can be found on Twitter: @Coryjennerjohn
__________________________
Comments (38)
Guam
June 27, 2026 at 07:26 am
As good as Parsons is, his absence was not the only reason for the Packer's year end collapse last season. Missing Zach Tom, Tucker Kraft, Devonte Wyatt, etc. etc. also contributed to that very unpleasant end of year tumble. It appears that Parsons will be the only player that is not back for the start of the season so the Packers will have reinforcements on both sides of the ball to help with his absence. Additionally Hargrave and St Juste have been brought in to help bolster the defensive unit.
If the Packers can't hold their own without Parsons, they certainly won't be a championship team with him. Parsons needs to take the Packers from very good to great, not be their savior.
TKWorldWide
June 27, 2026 at 07:45 am
His impact is astounding. Not only his superhuman talent, but his ferocious, relentless pursuit. He raises the bar for everyone on the defense. I wonder if those traits have the same effect when he’s on the sidelines.
Guam
June 27, 2026 at 08:08 am
Football is the ultimate team game. Parsons is an elite player but you need more than a Hall of Fame player to win a championship. Just ask Dan Marino.....
golfpacker61
June 27, 2026 at 08:39 am
Really Guam, you don't think Parsons injury was the biggest factor in GB wilting down the stretch last year? How many games did theyu lose with him out? And what was their record with him playing?
Losing those other players hurt us, especially Kraft, but Parsons injury was the nail in the coffin as it exposed our weakness in the CBs. Parsons lifts the whole defense like few players do in the NFL, but I think we will be a 500 team if we don't sign an insurance FA like Clowney.
Guam
June 27, 2026 at 08:50 am
Biggest factor - yes. Only factor - far from it. If the Packers are only a 500 team without Parsons, they are not a championship team with him.
I know you have been beating the drum for Clowney or another veteran OLB, but it is it is becoming increasingly obvious Gute is not going to sign another OLB until he has had a chance to evaluate his current roster with the pads on. We will see what TC brings.
TarynsEyes
June 27, 2026 at 09:37 am
IMO, the biggest factor was losing Kraft, which made the offense mediocre, thus placing a bigger burden on a defense that was suspect even while having Parsons. I know, I know; the stats will say otherwise, but they don't actually say. It depends on who and how that person interprets them. Like I say often, stats don't tell the truth; they cover up the lies.
Guam
June 27, 2026 at 11:05 am
I would still rate Parson the biggest loss, but Kraft was a solid #2 loss for me. He was having a breakout year and was a prime chain mover in the offense until his loss. Add in Tom and Wyatt and the Packers had lost many of their best players by year's end.
dobber
June 27, 2026 at 10:40 am
It was a 1-2 punch. Losing Wyatt on the inside was a killer. The step down from Brooks-Wyatt to Wooden-Brooks was a big one.
Guam
June 27, 2026 at 11:05 am
Cookie for Dobber!
Coldworld
June 27, 2026 at 12:01 pm
After Parsons went out, but not because of that, teams figured they could just run on us consistently. That would have greatly diluted Parsond impact. It wasn’t his loss that allowed that, but our inherent flaws on the DL. Allied with an OL that couldn’t give the run game an adequate chance or protect well, I think Parsons going out is overrated as a cause for us coming unstuck. It made things worse, but it wasn’t the cause of our meltdown.
Coldworld
June 27, 2026 at 07:46 am
So don’t play a player coming off major injury before he’s fully fit? The short answer to that in the regular season “is of course.”
However, for clarity, this assumes we talking about not fully fit in the sense of recurrence of injury. If he’s just not fully back in terms of explosion, which can happen post ACL, then he’s fit, and it’s not a problem. He’s still going to be better than the depth. So the key here is has the risk of reinjury reverted to the norm? If it has, then holding him back doesn’t achieve anything.
If we are drowning without him we are unlikely to thrive with him to any meaningful extent. One rusher can make us look better, but it won’t save a team if he’s the sole significant threat to the point where we will contend for anything worthwhile in the scheme of things. Should that be the case, it should be an indication of off field failure that demands change.
dobber
June 27, 2026 at 08:27 am
"...it won’t save a team if he’s the sole significant threat ..."
There's no denying that Parsons' injury was a significant dropoff point for the Packers' defense...it didn't help that their best inside player (Wyatt) went on the shelf a few weeks prior and that somewhere around week 7, Hafley dropped off into more of a "rush 4 and cover" mode (my interpretation of how they played).
Since then, they've ditched Gary and allowed Enagbare to move on, and are riding with an edge room that features LVN as its most seasoned guy and has added two pieces: DDS and Gannon. If they're likely to play 6+ weeks without Parsons and have to lean on that group of edge defenders, they're taking a terrible chance. Yes, they get Wyatt back and added Hargarve, but they're not a replacement for Parsons--and inside pressure coupled to outside rush is a great combo.
They're not going to trade for Maxx Crosby or the like, but there are a small number of players they could add who might help raise the floor of the edge group...and be that much stronger when #1 starts playing.
Coldworld
June 27, 2026 at 08:54 am
The problem with that is that they created a log jam when sticking with Van Ness. He’s going to start now. Sure, we can displace Sorrell, but then we are diminishing the chance that he takes a step and the same for those behind him. We essentially piled a great deal of our eggs into one basket of hoping Van Ness is transformed.
Even if we got a Clowney type and he could deliver at the rate he did last year, that’s not enough if Van Ness is the other starter till November and performs at the rate he did last year or near to it. Even if Parsons comes back and is at his peak, we’d still need 8 or so sacks from someone if Van Ness is unchanged and, if he’s still getting significant snaps, that’s asking a a great deal from players getting the limited opportunities that 4th or 5th rushers typically get.
We bet a great deal on Van Ness transforming and it goes beyond his sack rate alone as it affects cap and opportunity for others as well. If he is largely unchanged, Parsons is unlikely to redeem us no matter how superbly he plays.
dobber
June 27, 2026 at 10:31 am
"The problem with that is that they created a log jam when sticking with Van Ness. He’s going to start now."
Whether the Packers picked up his option or not, Van Ness wasn't going anywhere in 2026...and he was going to start. Moving on from Gary seems to pretty broadly viewed as a necessary move. It seems like people were divided on Enagbare, but for the money most don't feel that the Packers couldn't improve on him. Do the Packers pick up LVN's option if Parsons doesn't get hurt? The Packers moved on from Gary and Enagbare knowing Parsons likely misses at least a quarter of '26, so I'm guessing they planned to exercise LVN's option all along.
Here's the odd part of the whole situation. IF you put much stock in PFF, here's what they have to say on LVN in 2025:
"Lukas Van Ness is an edge defender for the Green Bay Packers who earned a 75.5 overall PFF defensive grade in the 2025 season, 27th among 115 qualified edge defenders. His PFF pass-rush grade of 68.5 ranked 46th among 115 qualified edge defenders. His run-defense grade of 72.1 ranked 20th at the position"
In general, recognizing the loss of time due to injury and keeping in mind that I'm pretty cynical about the broad use of analytics in football, LVN improved significantly pretty much across the board in 2025. If scouts and personnel evaluators see it that way, too, it could be that looking for a significant step up in '26 isn't too unreasonable--but is he going to make that leap as the lead DE and mostly not playing across from Gary or Parsons?
Especially with Parsons' injury, I don't see a logjam...I see a lack of logs.
Coldworld
June 27, 2026 at 12:10 pm
I disagree in the sense of what should be, if not necessarily what I expected from the Packers. If the Packers do not believe that Van Ness can be reasonably expected to get 10 to 12 sacks in the regular season, they should have either traded him if they could or demoted him in the rotation and let him play out his contract. In either case, better potential for sacks from depth and or a FA.
Extending him almost ensures he’s going to get starting role. If he indeed delivers, then that was a great decision. If not, we are sticking with the option hit and dead wood at least as a starter who would likely slow the development of others and potentially keep a bigger threat off the field.
It’s a big win if he does break out but a triple loss (sack deficit, keeping other players from opportunities and cap burden) if he does not. Gute made a very significant conscious bet when he exercised that option. If it doesn’t pay off, we likely don’t do well and are very likely a worse team than had we traded/bypassed him.
Was Gute right? Let’s see. If not it’s up there with the Hobbs contract and the belief Wooden could credibly hold up as a starting DT. Time has a habit of stacking bad decisions and gradually foreclosing the scope for excuses. The Van Ness one could be critical for Gute in hindsight.
Guam
June 27, 2026 at 09:07 am
I dunno Dobber, I am not as down on the Edge group as you might be ("terrible chance"). Cox missed most of last season (injury) and certainly has flashed potential previously. Sorrell came on late last season and could easily have a second year jump. DDS was a great value find in the draft. There is uncertainty in this group, but I am more worried about reserve OT and CB depth than I am about the Edge group.
It will be interesting to see what Gute does during TC. He has the cap space to make a few lower cost moves and OT, CB and Edge would be likely spots where he invests.
dobber
June 27, 2026 at 09:35 am
I actually feel pretty good (relatively speaking) about the CB situation at this point, especially if there's some semblance of a pass rush in front of them. With Bullard playing the slot, it takes some pressure off the group, and they've got 3 experienced guys and a high draft pick who showed well at minicamp. If the pass rush is wimpy, it likely won't matter much who is playing CB, though.
"I am not as down on the Edge group as you might be ("terrible chance")"
If they do nothing and the young players and scheme pay off with a fast start, Gute looks like a riverboat gambler. If they do nothing and the pass rush is anemic and the defense gets exposed, Gute looks like a fool. You don't win a playoff berth in September, but you can damn near lose one.
On one hand, none of these guys have played under Gannon, so he might be able to work some magic, but there's not much to hang their hats on in terms of established production in that group absent Parsons. LVN looks more and more like a run-down DE, Cox has flashed but struggled to stay active/healthy, Sorrell played limited snaps last year but hasn't been a dynamic sack artist in his college career, DDS hasn't played an NFL snap, and Oliver is a pass-down speed rush specialist who lacks size. I think a fast start is a key for '26, and I'd rather not gamble at that key position.
Coldworld
June 27, 2026 at 10:03 am
We win If Van Ness is healthy and breaks out to the significant extent we keep being told he’s Been hinting at. If he can’t stay healthy and can’t get 5 sacks or so by November we are probably in trouble unless Cox and one of the others break out in limited opportunities AND the coaches react quickly to increase their playing time over non producers.
Guam
June 27, 2026 at 11:15 am
Gute may choose to make a move at OLB after a couple of weeks of TC. I think it really depends on what the young guns show when the pads are on. There is considerable potential in the OLB group but at this point it is just potential. I am okay with Gute waiting until he gets a better look at them.
Bullard certainly helps in the slot, but I just don't see a CB1 in the group unless Cisse has a breakout rookie season. Nixon, Valentine and St Juste all feel like CB2 or CB3 material and that may not be good enough against some teams.
I still believe reserve swing OT is the biggest hole on the team. Unless Glover or B. Banks surprises (and both are long shots), I just don't see a reserve LT on the current roster.
dobber
June 27, 2026 at 07:52 am
"an elite player needs zero mental hesitation regarding their knee before stepping back onto a football field."
Those players will also tell you that you need to play on it to get to that stage, too. What does it mean to be 100%? Conditioning shouldn't be a problem for Parsons, as his reputation is as a workout warrior and he'll be able to work on that well ahead of practicing, but that's different from playing to and through contact and straining against an opponent. If you're not in game shape, you're likely not 100%...and how do you get in game shape?
When the medical staff clears Parsons and he's got a couple weeks of practice under his belt without issue, he should play. A key part of that is how the player feels: people pan medical staffs and coaches for "rushing players back" but these guys aren't going to play if they don't feel they can hold up. He shouldn't play 85% of the snaps right out of the gate, like he did last season, but he'll need a ramp-up and reintegration period. If that defense is playing well he's an added feather in their cap, not something to keep on ice.
TarynsEyes
June 27, 2026 at 08:40 am
Basket, here are all my eggs.
Seriously, stop.
golfpacker61
June 27, 2026 at 08:56 am
"Cory's Corner: Can The Packers Survive Without Parsons?"
The bigger question/answer should be WHY would we even try to? It is suicidal for GB to throw all of its eggs into the one basket of HOPING the other Edge rushers will make up the difference of Parsons absence. That means LVN and Cox doing something they haven't done yet in their careers by reaching their potentials. And the rookies & 1st year players having actual meaningful production against NFL competition. Those are 2 really big pipe dreams GB is hoping come true by doing nothing.
If Parsons was healthy, I would feel alot better about who was behind him and across from him, but I would not be worried at all if we just signed Clowney right now and have him lead the group until Parsons returns. And then he could rotate with whoever rises to the top of the others, which I predict will be Cox & DDS.
The available options are almost gone, but the most potentially impactful is still available in Clowney. Bosa might be retired, Epenesa signed for vet minimum, and Jordan is gone too. The only other options are Clowney or a trade. I am shocked we haven't just spent the piddly $5 million projected cost for Clowney and just give our team a great chance to go 6-2 in the first 8 games instead of 4-4. Then Parsons comes back and gives the defense a huge lift.
In an ideal scenario GB would trade for Sweat and be done with the uncertainty, and then just trade him after the season for better picks. But signing Clowney for $5-6 million for 1 year is almost better because then we still get plenty of opportunities for the young guys to progress. Just get it done before Chicago, SF, Minnesota, Detroit, or 5 other teams wake up and steal the last viable option for the Packers.
dobber
June 27, 2026 at 09:09 am
"...just give our team a great chance to go 6-2 in the first 8 games instead of 4-4. "
I think this is a key statement. The schedule always looks different on paper in June than it looks later, but those first four weeks in particular seem to be lining up as the softest part of the Packers' schedule for all of 2026. They can't afford a slow start.
Lare
June 27, 2026 at 09:00 am
Regardless of Parsons being back or not, they need to get some pass rush from their other players if they’re going to be successful.
If not, they need a different GM.
Oppy
June 27, 2026 at 09:40 am
Wyatt was amongst the top 3 in QB pressures/hits/hurries per snap last year before his early season injury. That was across all players, not just DTs.
If Wyatt's healthy, that's a massive boon to get that level of pressure from the interior of the line- it's generally quick pressure and it forces the QB off the spot faster.
Coldworld
June 27, 2026 at 10:07 am
Wyatt, Hargrave and McClellan help, but they won’t make up for a misfiring group of rushers unless they are all far beyond reasonable expectations. The starting OLBs will need to at least match them collectively even if all produce.
I want to see whoever at OLB is getting to the QB in the preseason given the most snaps from the outset and without hesitation, whomever they are and however much they are paid. That’s our best chance of success before and even after Parsons returns. If that means demoting Van Ness, Sorrell or both, so be it. We need results not hope.
dobber
June 27, 2026 at 10:36 am
"I want to see whoever at OLB is getting to the QB in the preseason given the most snaps from the outset and without hesitation"
My guess is that whichever edge players are projected to be starters won't play a lot of preseason snaps. I think we see an awful lot of Mosby, DDS, Oliver, and Kelly, and just enough Sorrell, Cox, and LVN for them to get used to what Gannon wants them to do.
Coldworld
June 27, 2026 at 12:18 pm
We should know from camp (once practice is in pads and full contact), but it’s possible we are going to play starters more this year given the way preseason has been scheduled.
Oppy
June 27, 2026 at 10:43 am
Consistent, quick pressure from the interior of the DL flushes QB's to the edges. That should lead to increased numbers for our pass rushers from the OLB/DE groups. If a QB attempts to flee the interior pass rush by working through it instead of around it, I feel pretty confident in our interior LBs playmaking ability to clamp that down, too.
Interior pass rush is a game changer.
Since'61
June 27, 2026 at 09:34 am
If the Packers do not add another Edge player like Clowney then the best approach to help the defense is with the Packers offense. That means the Packers OL needs to play effectively from the opening snap of the season until Parsons returns. MLF is the alleged offensive genius. Assuming the offense is healthy on the OL and with all their skill players the Packers offense should score points regularly in 2026. If they can play with a lead and stay on the field that will help the defense stay fresh and hopefully enable them to make stops.
IMO the offense needs to carry the team until Parsons returns. If MLF continues with his predictable, conservative offense the Packers are doomed and Parsons return will likely not matter whenever it is. The bottom line is that the offense will be the stronger unit until Parsons returns and they have no excuses for not putting points on the board assuming they remain healthy. Score points early and often and force the opponent into mistakes that the defense can capitalize upon. The offense is on you MLF.
The early part of the season will tell us what exactly Gannon brings to the defense as the Packers DC. Can he get the front 7 to stop the run and can he get improved play from our CBs? We won't know until the games begin. Unless the Packers add a veteran Edge we are in a wait and see mode. Thanks, Since '61
Oppy
June 27, 2026 at 09:34 am
I tend to think the Packers' pass rush from the edges will not be the cornerstone of the defense until Parsons is back on the field. I also think a healthy Devonte Wyatt provides plenty of pass rush to make the need for top tier edges less of a necessity.
Other stuff I think:
-The level of angst over not having Parsons on the field somewhat baffles me. Yes, he is a field-tilting player the likes of which the Packers haven't had since Reggie White. I fully believe that to be the case. However, before we ever even thought about Parsons being in green and gold, the Packers spent roughly 26 years without a pass rusher remotely close to his caliber- not since White. We've had numerous debates about if we've needed to improve the pass rush over the years, but suddenly, if we don't have one of the top 3 pass rushers of the last 20 years we're doomed? It seems so overblown to me.
-While I'm not entirely sold on LVN or the stable of younger, unproven OLB/DE/Edge types at our disposal, my take is generally that the Packers see these young men performing day in and day out in camp and know more about their ability than we'll ever know until they get their opportunity. My general belief is that if the Packers believe they can weather the storm, they will probably be able to weather the storm. If they have high concerns, they will most likely make some moves to try to plug the hole. No, it doesn't always work out that what the team thinks about their roster and the actions they take (or don't) to address it, and what actually plays out are congruent, but generally speaking, they know what they've got and what they need.
-The complexion of the defense will be entirely different when a healthy Parsons is lined up on the field, that is certain, and there is much unknown about what the defense is going to look like in 2026 in general.. but I'm not remotely worried about who's coming off the edge at this point. Frankly, I'm still more concerned about our CB room. I don't expect the rookie CB to press for starting play time this year, but I sure hope Cisse does just that. The Packers need true CB#1 talent on this roster.
Guam
June 27, 2026 at 11:21 am
Sorry Oppy, I didn't read your comment until after I responded to Dobber about the CB room. You and I both see the same concern - no CB1 and a bunch of CB2/CB3 cornerbacks. I hope Cisse has a breakout year, but I am not counting on it. I think CB could be a weakness on the team unless Gute can find a vet to plug the hole.
Coldworld
June 27, 2026 at 12:23 pm
All I can say on the CB room is that we can’t have got worse. Our starters from last year remain and we have added much better depth in St. Juste and Cisse at least, perhaps more than depth if we are lucky.
LeotisHarris
June 27, 2026 at 10:52 am
I don't think the Packers can survive without Parsons. Uncle Ed should just fold the damn tent, have a giant thrift sale at 1265 and call it a day. The sledding hill is there, stadium tours could continue to sell the past, along with the Hall of Fame, but survival without Micha? No way.
stockholder
June 27, 2026 at 11:21 am
The packers had Rodgers.
He put the team on his back.
Love will have to be like Rodgers.
The slow starts and the poor execution.
Must end.
If the offense puts it on the defense.
It will give up like in the past.
The Dallas Cowboys posted an overall record of 41-22
while Parsons was there.
I Look for this offense to carry it's weight, until he's back.
NickPerry
June 27, 2026 at 11:24 am
Good Question. Before that Denver game last season I'd have said, hell yes! Now, I'm not so sure. I know they had so many injuries to VERY key players last season. Not many teams could function losing players of that caliber, but I really thought they'd have done better.
For the first time in years I'm really uncertain about this team. I honestly could see this team winning the division. I could also see them coming in 4th... UGH!
Coldworld
June 27, 2026 at 12:27 pm
This is the year where the offense has to be fearsome. The skill
Players are there, they are all returning players. If they can’t get that group to produce consistently then LaFleur needs to be done, regardless whether it’s his design, calling or another abject failure by his OL coaching undermining his design, tactical acumen and game management. There simply aren’t going to be a lot of better opportunities for to LaFleur to prove he’s a good offensive coach.
Ferrari-Driver
June 27, 2026 at 11:34 am
There are a few players in the NFL like Parsons, Myles Garrett, Patrict Mchomes, etc that are given the "Game Changer" tags, but it's important to remember that football is the consummate team sport and we have at lest 22 players out on the field every game day. It's sweet to watch when the players are performing as a well oiled "team" and we get to watch a unit which performs better than the individual parts.