What Should the Packers Do with Rashan Gary: Restructure or Release?
By GilMartin
The Green Bay Packers have a decision to make this offseason regarding former first-round pick Rashan Gary. Ultimately, GM Brian Gutekunst has to decide whether the Packers should release the former Michigan star outright or restructure his contract and keep him on the roster.
The 2025 season was a disappointing one for Gary. He was expected to be one of the biggest beneficiaries of Micah Parsons’ addition to the defense. The theory went that if opposing teams double team Parsons and slide their protection to his side, Gary will see single coverage and be able to take advantage of the opportunities that would result.
In the early part of the season, it worked very well. Gary recorded 7.5 sacks in the first seven games of the year. He was getting good pressure on opposing quarterbacks and had recorded seven tackles for loss in those first seven games. Gary needed just two more sacks to tie his career high for a season and 2.5 more to reach double digit sacks for the first time in his NFL career.
But in the final 10 games, Gary’s production dropped significantly. He did not record a sack or a tackle for loss in those final 10 games. In the first seven games, Gary recorded 13 quarterback hits according to pro-football-reference.com. In the last 10 games, he recorded just seven. His snap counts started to drop after his production did.
When Parsons was lost for the season in Denver in Week 15, the Packers needed Gary to step up and provide more pass rush. He failed to come through. Overall, the defense played poorly without Parsons and gave up far too many yards and points down the stretch. The Packers did not win another game.
The options facing Gutekunst with regards to Gary are straightforward. Under his current contract, Gary’s cap hit will be a little more than $28 million. The Packers cannot afford to keep Gary under those terms. The team remains over the project 2026 salary cap and having a player with Gary’s production (or lack thereof) taking up so much cap space makes very little sense.
If the Packers release Gary outright, they will save almost $11 million in cap space for 2026. All of the dead cap money on his contract would count toward the coming season and then his contract would be completely off the books by the start of the 2027 league year.
An alternative would be to designate Gary as a post-June 1st cut. That would save the Packers roughly $19.5 million in cap space this year with the dead cap cost being spread over two seasons. However, the money saved by releasing Gary would not be available for the Packers during the important early phases of free agency.
A third alternative would be to try to restructure Gary’s deal to reduce his cap hit but to keep him in Green Bay this season. Why would they do that to keep Gary on the team? Well, Parsons may not be ready to play in Week 1 as he rehabs from knee surgery.
Kingsley Enagbare will be an unrestricted free agent in March unless the Packers extend him. Even if they do re-sign Enagbare, he has never produced at levels close to Gary’s over the course of their respective careers.
The Packers also still don’t know how good Lukas Van Ness, Barryn Sorell, and Collin Oliver can be. Van Ness has the best chance of starting out of the three. While he’s shown flashes of the raw athletic ability that made him a first-round pick in 2023, he has never established himself as a starting caliber player in the NFL. Injuries limited Van Ness to nine games this season and he recorded 1.5 sacks as a rotational player.
The challenge for Gutekunst and Gary would be to find a fair salary and cap hit that would benefit both player and team. A restructuring would not save the Packers as money as either release option, but it would push the dead cap money further down the road and allow the Packers to keep Gary on their roster in 2026 if they feel that’s worthwhile.
The decision won’t be an easy one. Ultimately, it’s more likely that Gary will be released at some point this offseason. But Gutekunst has to determine what the best option is for the Green Bay Packers.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________
You can follow Gil Martin on Twitter @GilPackers
__________________________
Comments (97)
crayzpackfan
January 31, 2026 at 10:32 am
Short and sweet - His time here has run it's course. He looked like he packed it in this year, so he should keep on packing and hit the road.
TKWorldWide
January 31, 2026 at 10:50 am
Yes.
I am very hesitant to call players “lazy”, but he sure looked like it on several occasions this past season. Maybe it was because the contrast between him and Micah was so striking.
KenEllis
January 31, 2026 at 11:32 am
Gute really gonna give up on his highest ever draft pick?
Gute may want to give the $96,000,000 man one more opportunity to reach the elusive double-digit sack total.
Then again Gute has his second-highest ever draft pick LVN waiting in the wings ready to break out in year 4.
Since'75
January 31, 2026 at 12:10 pm
Lol.
In Green Bay, Gute refers to that as the '4th year leap'
dblbogey
January 31, 2026 at 01:19 pm
Good to see Ken is still seething.
KenEllis
January 31, 2026 at 05:58 pm
Good to see Bogey still celebrating the 9-8-1 record, playoff loss to the Bears, and 5 game end of the season losing streak.
Packers’ brass appreciates and relies upon the uncritical support of such good and loyal fans.
ricky
January 31, 2026 at 10:46 am
It seemed as if Gary was tired and physically unable to be competitive in the latter part of last season. Whether his conditioning is poor, or he has a physical ailment that flares up and causes him to lose strength is something the team should know. But he has been a disappointment. Maybe a change in scenery will lead to a new coach finding the key to making him more effective. Though it seems more likely he was simply over-drafted by evaluators who liked his potential, rather than his accomplishments in college.
Since'75
January 31, 2026 at 12:18 pm
Hasn't Gary carried the distinction of being a disappointment his whole career.
He was known as the #1 edge rusher coming out of high school.
He then underperformed at Michigan, to expectations and potential.
Some excused it as he occupied defensive players, so 'others' could make plays.
Lol...which was a real head scratcher at the time (to me), considering either, you are the man making plays, or you're not.
I remember when fans critiqued him in his early years.
His Mom, yes his Mom, spoke out angrily that his job in college was to 'occupy'.
GregC
January 31, 2026 at 01:23 pm
Gary did not live up to his draft position, but I thought he was quite good for maybe a year and a half, just before his injury. Aside from that, he was mostly a pretty good player until his production fell off a cliff this past season.
Since'75
January 31, 2026 at 03:37 pm
Yea...I always said, he was slightly above average, and i still do.
So all in all, a disappointment in his draft slot, and mega compensation.
One thing to remember about his first two years playing, he was coming off the bench...fresh.
That is a pretty big advantage.
badaxed
January 31, 2026 at 11:01 am
Release. He is not worth the money he is getting and has not shown he is worth being a starter.
splitpea1
January 31, 2026 at 11:09 am
Release him ASAP and see if any of the younger rotational guys are good enough to claim a starting role. You'll never find out if you keep him. Gary has had dry spells before, but this last one makes him decidedly expendable.
Guam
January 31, 2026 at 11:09 am
I am not sure what happened, but the difference in effort level and hustle between the 2024 and 2025 seasons looked substantial to me. To my old eyes, too often this year Gary pulled up and coasted I stead of hustling to make a play. If Gannon thinks he can re-motivate Gary then a restructure might make some sense, but I would lean toward a straight cut and give the young players an opportunity.
Oppy
January 31, 2026 at 11:20 am
I just posted nearly the exact same thing about Gary's play in 2025. Zero pursuit, total deviation from his normal play.. I would assume playing through significant pain, but who knows? Something changed, drastically.
Rick5952
January 31, 2026 at 11:24 am
If we keep him I can see Gannon punching him in the gut. lol.
dobber
January 31, 2026 at 04:26 pm
Maybe that's what it will take.
stockholder
January 31, 2026 at 11:14 am
The film doesn't lie.
Fool me once shame on you,
Fool me twice shame on me.
Do you want to pay him a whole year
for 1 game, when he takes off the others?.
No Thanks - Good Bye.
Oppy
January 31, 2026 at 11:16 am
Release doesn't seem to be an option, as that would mean the Packers are still on the hook for $17 million. Sure, you 'save' $11 million, but you're getting -literally- nothing for $17 million.
I am fully prepared for Packers fans to lose their ever-loving shit on this one, because it's probably not as easy as 'release him'.
Don't know what happened with Gary this year- a guy whose play on the field has always been about hustle in his time with the Packers- but he was clearly taking his foot all the way off the gas pedal as soon as a QB got out of the pocket- there was no pursuit from Gary in 2025. Best guess was playing through something painful, but who knows.
Matt
January 31, 2026 at 02:48 pm
Empty 17 mln is bad but for 11 mln spared we could have a decent starter or very good backup and this is the point of the game. Considering Gary's second half of the season production and more worrying - eye test, most of us think that our backups would have better numbers and overall presence when taking Gary's snaps. This is not a talk about average/decent player who is overpaid - who Gary was in the moment of signing a new contract. This is a talk about underperformer who can be replaced by someone who is not a star but is present on the field with his heart and body.
dobber
January 31, 2026 at 03:13 pm
"we could have a decent starter or very good backup and this is the point of the game. "
As an example, $11M buys Emanuel Wilson's and Darian Kinnard's RFA contracts and brings back Rhyan (just as a f'rinstance...I'm not a Rhyan guy)--and likely still have room for a low-money vet.
Or, with cap gymnastics, it could buy two decent starting caliber guys depending on the position, too.
Or it also more than pays for the entire 2026 draft class.
gsd3
January 31, 2026 at 02:50 pm
Better than getting literally nothing for 28 mil and taking up a roster spot.
13TimeChamps
January 31, 2026 at 11:19 am
I'm not sure what the salary cap ramifications would be as far a release vs a trade, but why not try and get something vs nothing. Even a 6th round pick would be something. Of course, his salary would probably be a hindrance with a trade. I can't imagine a new team taking on that contract. I'm not sure if there is a way around that.
Oppy
January 31, 2026 at 11:25 am
Restructure if possible to spread cap hit across multiple years. At that point, you may be able to trade or release with less "hit'' on a single season.
I feel as though there's more to this story. If Gary had a physical issue he was playing through, the Packers may be inclined to keep him. If not.. it's hard to see why you would keep him- there was a 180 degree shift on the field of play in attitude and approach in 2025 from Gary compared to his previous play.
Since'75
January 31, 2026 at 12:36 pm
If they restructure, it is, to keep him a Packer.
dobber
January 31, 2026 at 01:18 pm
Agreed. A restructure likely increases the future cap obligation on the Packers, which probably means they're giving him another shot.
Remember that a trade or cut (with waiver claim) leaves the guarantees and dead money behind with the Packers and only the current and future compensation goes with the player. It's still a pretty big number, and gets in the way of getting good return. With no more bonuses to pay out, Gary's contract is just cash value in trade at this point, and cuttable by another team with no dead money--just like Diggs when the Packers claimed him.
dblbogey
January 31, 2026 at 01:21 pm
Do you ever consider the fact nobody wants an old, high priced player? You think someone will give up a draft pick and pay Gary's salary?
13TimeChamps
January 31, 2026 at 02:53 pm
I believe I addressed that in my post.
"Of course, his salary would probably be a hindrance with a trade. I can't imagine a new team taking on that contract."
dobber
January 31, 2026 at 03:19 pm
Cap hit to the Packers and cost to an acquiring team either as a waiver pick up or trade object are not the same thing.
GBPfaninMO
January 31, 2026 at 11:22 am
If he wants to work for peanuts fine otherwise bye Felicia
Boneman
January 31, 2026 at 11:34 am
It seems obvious to me he was dealing with some type of injury. He clearly was on a snap count in the mid part of the season and then suffered relentless criticisms afterward as he was pushing through. What is more likely, he was hurt or he suddenly got fat and lazy? Come on now. Regardless, the truth of the matter will be determined by what they do. If I'm right, they restructure. If he truly lost interest and wasn't giving full effort, they'll cut him, probably the June 1st designation option.
Since'75
January 31, 2026 at 12:01 pm
Look, lets be real....he never lived up to his contract, or expectations, he was clearly paid on potential, not unlike some other players in the past.
It happens, it just seems to happen to often to the Packers.
Blame it on injury if you'd like, or the snap count, or a stubbed toe.
In his career he has clearly underperformed to expectations.
When you see a player dog it (it's on tape) after a big contract....there is a problem, period.
dobber
January 31, 2026 at 01:27 pm
Bottom line is that if he was injured, he never was limited or a sit during practice during the week.
TarynsEyes
January 31, 2026 at 11:38 am
The only benefit Gary has given this team since his overdrafting and stupid contract is the 'hope' that the FO learned a lesson, a lesson they didn't learn fast enough to prevent the same mistake with the drafting of LVN in the 1st round. So, let's take the hit for mistakes and move on quickly. There is nothing, growth-wise, to be gained by retaining either.
Since'75
January 31, 2026 at 11:55 am
Well, well, well, what do we have here?
An article on the Rashan Gary reality.
As i've posted earlier, the Packers have two choices, either cut Gary, or restructure a new deal with down to earth compensation.
Not the bloated contract making him the 5th highest paid edge rusher in the league a couple years ago.
The question now is....what will the Packers value Gary's worth at, and, what will other teams value giving him a new deal.
I have no doubt that Gary will find a new team in the NFL if released.
But probably at a more realistic compensation number, more reflective of his actual worth.
Not the over bloated contract the Packers gave him a couple years ago.
Gary finished tied for 29th in sacks (7.5), with one forced fumble.
Gary isn't Brian Burns, picked after Gary in the same draft, who had 15.5 sacks (2nd), 22 TFL, and 3 forced fumbles.
So, what's Gary's projected worth?
To keep it 💯
Gary has turned into a part time player.
Sure, some moron might overpay for him (again). See Deshaun Watson.
But i see him as a 7-10 million/year guy.
Far less than his contract now, but pretty good money, considering.
Hard to say, but i think the chance are better that the Packers restructure Gary's deal, vs. versus an outright release.
Based on the fact they have many positional needs going into the draft already, they probably don't want to create another one.
The only potential speed bump to restructuring, is that is it takes two to tango.
Not sure what Gary wants to do.
Personally, i think they are better with him, than without him, in the big picture view.
But at a realistic number.
We will see.
dobber
January 31, 2026 at 01:33 pm
"The only potential speed bump to restructuring, is that is it takes two to tango."
Gary has had his contract restructured automatically at least once: the Packers can take his cash value and turn it into signing bonus without needing Gary to agree. I think the Packers can get about $9M back against the cap this way in 2026, but it pushes money out against the future.
golfpacker61
January 31, 2026 at 02:22 pm
Yeah Dobber, "I think the Packers can get about $9M back against the cap this way in 2026, but it pushes money out against the future."
The future might be another $20 million cap increase.
Since'75
January 31, 2026 at 03:50 pm
Yea...idk Dobs.
I'm not so sure teams can change anyone's contract structure without their approval.
That just doesn't make sense to me, maybe i guess, but......
dobber
January 31, 2026 at 04:32 pm
Look up "nfl automatic restructure". It's built into most big contracts. It allows teams to convert cash value and roster bonuses to signing bonus and push money onto future cap years. It also accelerates more of the contract money into a player's hands. This is in part how teams can pay as they go, and why they put large bonuses into contracts in year two and/or three. If it's in the contract--and Gary has it in his because the Packers have done this once already--the player does not have to agree to it.
Since'75
February 01, 2026 at 07:47 am
I wrote a response and i lost it.
But i guess the jist is, the player and the agent aren't going to object anyway, if the team wanted to restructure by giving the player more of his money in advance in the form of an additional signing bonus.
Who would object to that?
Here's the rub in Gary's case..this would be the last thing the Packers should/would do.
Gary has already received 81 million from the Packers.
He's also set to receive almost 20 million in the 2026 season.
Now, give him additional money up front in form of a signing bonus?
The consensus is he's already being overpayed, so why shuffle him more money up front.
That doesn't make any sense.
Like i said repeatedly.
The Packers have two (realistic) choices.
1) Release (trade him). Most likely release, as not many teams will want his contract.
2) If Gary wants to stay, restructure his deal to something more in line with his production, or his market value.
I'm sure as **** not shuffling more money up front to him in a signing bonus!!
That might give cap relief.
But it doesn't fix the original mistake of overpaying him, it enhances it.
At some point the Packers have to stop the bleeding on this.
That point is now.
That is why there is so much talk about this (finally).
Since'75
February 01, 2026 at 08:11 am
"The only potential speed bump to restructuring, is that is it takes two to tango."
Dobs...i'm not sure how that got translated to an 'automatic restructure'.
In my post, restructuring was one of two choices.
By 'restructuring' i meant 🤷♂️, redoing his deal 'completely', to lower his cost to the Packers.
THAT..would take two to tango.
Ferrari-Driver
January 31, 2026 at 11:58 am
It was especially bad when Gary was on the field with Parsons. Micah was like a man on a mission and nothing was going to stop him. Then I would run the play again and watch Gary. Physically Gary should be the dominant player with his size, speed, and looks, but he may just lack one of the most important ingredients that makes a player great...HEART.
Since'75
January 31, 2026 at 12:06 pm
Ferrari gets it.
And THAT...is the rest of the story.
TarynsEyes
January 31, 2026 at 12:11 pm
A player can look fast when playing with slower players. A faster player makes one realize how slow the assumed fast player actually was or becomes.
Oppy
January 31, 2026 at 12:25 pm
Gary was never a speed rusher, he's always been a effort / power rusher..?
So. there's that.
TarynsEyes
January 31, 2026 at 12:44 pm
It seems he was much of those also.
bjkdad44
January 31, 2026 at 06:26 pm
Info!
bjkdad44
January 31, 2026 at 06:27 pm
Meant… BINGO!!
MitchAnthony
January 31, 2026 at 12:12 pm
He is way too expensive for his part-time work. The other thing is that his part-time work now gets in the way of the potential development of players like Sorrel and Oliver who could show just as much production, or more, for far less salary.
After what he has demonstrated on the field of play, nobody will trade for him. To trade for him and pick up his over-inflated contract would be GM malpractice and it just ain't gonna happen. But if he gets released some GM will pick him up at a more realistic number.
If he has self awareness he has to understand he is absolutely not worth what he is being paid. But that ain't his fault. But that does open the door for a restructure. So it could possibly happen and it wouldn't totally surprise me.
I was never enamored with the pick from the start so count me in the crowd who wants him gone.
Since'75
January 31, 2026 at 12:39 pm
Funny how they all come around, albeit, years later.
Since'75
January 31, 2026 at 12:23 pm
I think the reality is, when these guys get paid, they are set for life.
Sometimes i think it saps motivation, they are no longer hungry, they are eating at the buffet every day (financially)
Their kids, grandkids and their great grandkids are set for life.
Pending, being fiscally responsible.
Oppy
January 31, 2026 at 12:33 pm
I have a sneaking suspicion that Gary was playing through something exceedingly painful in 2025, and the fact he was even on the field at all by the 3rd quarter of the season was probably proof he was still "hungry".
His play has always been about high effort in Green Bay- it's all on tape- but something happened in 2025 that had him giving up on plays after about 2 seconds from the snap of the ball. That's completely unlike him.
As to fiscally responsible- it's unfortunate, but far too many players aren't prepared to managed their fortunes and trust vultures to do it for them, leaving them in bad situations down the road- especially since many former players destroy their bodies and require expensive medical procedures as they age to maintain their mobility or live without physical pain. It's the same thing with lottery winners- it feels like an endless pot of gold, until you get to the bottom of it.
Since'75
January 31, 2026 at 12:54 pm
Well...lets say your right.
But when a players is injured, they will be put on the Injured list.
That's the way it is.
You are also right about 'effort', but effort doesn't make you a playmaker, when you are paid to be a playmaker.
All effort does, is say 'you tried hard'.
As far as vultures, the NFL and NFLPA go 'above and beyond' about providing education to players for being fiscally responsible with their money.
They provide everything short of paying their bills and managing their portfolio.
Although they may provide that also...idk
They provide that education, from the time they are drafted, to retirement, there is help provided.
Now whether they take advantage of that or not, is up to the players.
I have no time for millionaires crying they're broke after making millions, or tens of millions.
It's their own doing.
I mean, lets not pretend a lot of them don't piss away their money
i'm responsible for me, they are responsible for themselves.
Oppy
January 31, 2026 at 02:08 pm
"But when a players is injured, they will be put on the Injured list.
That's the way it is."
No, that's not the way it is. When a player has an injury that prevents them from full participation at practice, the league requires they be put on the injury list. And, in actual practice(as in, application), teams regularly try to push the limits of what and when they report injuries, because they view it as a tactical disadvantage to make player injuries / limitations public knowledge.
Remember Kenny Clark's foot injury that wasn't made public until long after the 2024 season when he had surgery to repair his chronic toe injury (which he suffered in the season opener) and to remove bone spurs?
That's actually 'the way it is."
Since'75
January 31, 2026 at 03:28 pm
I'm sorry Opie, i must have forgot who i was talking too.
Please accept my deep and sincere apology.
Have a coke and a 😊
Oppy
January 31, 2026 at 08:36 pm
It's entertaining when you think you're putting me in my place "Let's assume your right... and that's the way it is" and you have no response to my counter, so you attempt to be dismissive to play off your floundering.
Since'75
February 01, 2026 at 08:03 am
Well i am impressed.
In your responses, you show a lot of 'effort' Opie.
Be proud of that 👍💯
golfpacker61
February 01, 2026 at 09:15 am
Hey 75, why don't stop being a child by insulting him. He goes by OPPY, not Opie. Make your point and move on. Christ it's like being in a daycare.
Since'75
February 03, 2026 at 03:42 pm
Your the boss Daddy
Oppy
January 31, 2026 at 02:15 pm
Btw, great diatribe on how you're not responsible for NFL players, crying for broke ex-millionaires, and how it's up to them to take advantage of the tools at their disposal.. but I'm not sure why you decided I needed the lecture. I made a statement of fact about common outcomes for NFL players, I didn't say a word about it being anyone's responsibility to watch out for them.
They're people. I don't really care if someone is a one-time millionaire or if they had a life time being destitute, I don't judge if people should be cared about or if they deserve misery based on their finances, but thanks for letting me know you do, apparently. Sounds like jealousy to me, but what do I know.
Since'75
January 31, 2026 at 03:30 pm
Can i buy you a coke, would you like that? 😏
************
So...you're more of a pepsi guy?
Oppy
January 31, 2026 at 02:22 pm
Third post, because there's so much to unpack in your response.
"You are also right about 'effort', but effort doesn't make you a playmaker, when you are paid to be a playmaker. All effort does, is say 'you tried hard'."
You couldn't be more wrong about effort. Not much more I can say about that. Micah Parson wouldn't be Micah Parsons without the other-wordly level of effort he puts in on every play. Aaron Kampman wouldn't have been Aaron Kampman, for example, one of the many, many great Packers players lauded for his "workman-like effort", "bringing his lunch box to work everyday" effort. It's a major part of what makes the difference in players.
You can not approve of Gary's output, that's fine, but effort is a massive part of being a play maker.
Since'75
January 31, 2026 at 03:32 pm
Yawn......
Who's Aaron Kampman?
Are we done yet? 🙄
**********
Ok OPIE, he gave 'effort'
Let me go check PFF's grade for...EFFORT
Maybe we can get him an 'effort ribbon' or something.
IDK...maybe take him out for an ice cream cone?
When Gary leaves the Packers, should Gute go up to the podium and thank Rashan Gary for his 'effort'?
That would sound stupid, right Opie?
Much like, your opinions on this matter.
LambeauPlain
January 31, 2026 at 12:31 pm
"He did not record a sack or a tackle for loss in those final 10 games."
That is a glaring drop in production. Was Gary hurt, an attitude issue losing interest, have a personal problem affecting his preparation and performance?
The Packers did face better OLs in those last 10 games. PFSN ranks OLs with a data compiled letter grade. 16 of 32 teams received a grade of C or better. And of those 16 teams the Packers played in the last 10, 8 of those top were top 16 OL units. Only the Ugly Purple had a D graded OL (2 games). And 4 games were vs bares and broncos, both top 4 OLs. (The Packers OL earned a D and ranked 27th FYI.)
Those OLs might give Gannon some pause to take the time to analyze Gary and evaluate his fit within the Defense he starts. And if Gary shows up in great shape, attitude reflecting no behavioral issues, and is a high effort leader in camp, Gannon may decide he wants him and persuade Gutey to keep him.
Now Gary is on the outside looking in. It is up to him if he stays on the inside.
davekenya
January 31, 2026 at 12:57 pm
Release him - now or after June 1st - whichever is better for the team and UFA/extension deals they're working.
No injury reported 1/2 way through the season to account for his 'drop off the cliff' in performance. What the heck happened??? He went from all-pro to bottom-tier starter.
He looked "sluggish" and lacked his trademark burst off the line. This perception was reinforced by Micah Parsons' end-of-season comments about teammates needing to "strain" more and play "80 f***ing snaps" without being tired—quotes that seem directed at Gary. If anyone would know that Gary was playing through an unreported injury, it would be Parsons -- who could then cut Gary some slack. But not the case.
Use the 11M savings towards a better replacement edge UFA that would fit Gannon's new system best. I wouldn't want a restructure as that would mean paying him 14M+/year over 3+ years for what -- a rotational-quality starter rather than an impact player. How does that improve the team? It does the opposite -- tie them down to a mediocre performer. He's had years to prove himself. Bu-bye. Let another team get teased.
Oppy
January 31, 2026 at 02:34 pm
Your analysis is biased to your own pre-determined outcome that Gary was not suffering from an injury.
Let me explain. You state Micah Parsons' end of season comments about teammates needing to strain more and play 80 fucking snaps without being tired, "seems" to be directed at Gary, and therefore, since Parsons would know if Gary was playing through injury, wouldn't make those comments directed towards Gary.
But the thing is, your logic completely relies on your own perception that Parsons comments were, indeed, directed at Gary. A perception that you have based on your belief that Gary wasn't playing through injury and was just lazy or unmotivated or maybe poorly conditioned or whatever it is that prevented him from playing 80 snaps and straining- anything except injury.
This is circular logic. Hey, maybe you're right, it's entirely possible Parsons was calling out Gary. I'm just pointing out your logic is intrinsically flawed and self-affirming.
davekenya
January 31, 2026 at 03:21 pm
You say I'm biased to my pre-determined outcome that Gary was NOT suffering from an injury.
Nothing was pre-determined as you claim. Instead, I look at the facts and then reach a conclusion based on those facts. Every indicator was that Gary was indeed healthy. Analysts speculated Gary might be playing through an undisclosed injury, but Head Coach Matt LaFleur explicitly stated that was not the case. He remained off the injury report for almost the entire season, maintaining high availability even as his snap counts dropped toward the end of the year due to performance rather than health. So...based on facts and evidence, Gary was healthy; his decline in play therefore is not attributable to some underlying health issue.
Thus, something else was slowing him down. What?
Others with inside knowledge - not me - inferred that from Parsons' comments that they were Gary-directed. They reach this conclusion because the specific criticisms targeted the exact two flaws that defined Gary’s disappointing 2025 season: conditioning and finishing ability.
The most damning part of the quote was the reference to snap counts.
• The Disparity: Micah Parsons is famous for being an "Ironman" who plays 80–90% of defensive snaps when healthy. In contrast, Rashan Gary has historically been a "rotational" star, rarely exceeding 60–65% of snaps even in his prime. Throughout the Packers' late-season collapse, Gary was frequently seen "tapping his helmet" (signaling to coaches that he needed a sub) during critical defensive drives.
• The Interpretation: When Parsons mentioned "80 snaps," he was calling out healthy players who voluntarily took themselves off the field while the defense was crumbling. As the second-highest-paid player on the defense, Gary checking out of games for "breathers" while producing zero sacks infuriated the leadership core.
The Definition of "Strain" (Effort & Finish): In football coaching vernacular, "strain" refers to the extra effort required to finish a play—fighting through a block after the initial move fails or chasing down a play from the backside.
• Gary's "Almost" Season: Gary’s 2025 metrics showed a high "win rate" early in reps but a historically low "finish rate." He would beat a lineman, get near the quarterback, and then stall.
• The Accusation: By using the word "strain," Parsons was implying that Gary was content with looking like he was rushing the passer but wasn't exerting the painful, exhausting effort required to actually get the sack. It was a critique of "fake hustle" vs. "impact."
Parsons did not come right out and say ‘Gary didn’t do XYZ’. Instead he implied it based on what he (Parsons) saw. The logic and conclusion Parsons wanted us to take was, ‘if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck’.
Oppy
January 31, 2026 at 08:33 pm
Again, I'd remind you, Kenny Clark was playing through injury all through 2024, and it never made the injury report. Packers never came clean about his injury until after the season, when surgery made it impossible to deflect.
A high win rate "early in reps" but a 'historically low' (your words) finish rate in 2025... for a player who has always been know for his motor and playing through the whistle, this seems to support the idea that something drastically has changed, doesn't it? Historically low finish rate, even though he was winning reps early off the snap? That sounds like a player that has an obstacle he's trying to overcome to me. Like, perhaps, a painful injury.
murf7777
February 01, 2026 at 08:38 am
Really good debate between you two, both have good points. Of course, they both carry some assumptions, backed with some support though. Because of such a huge drop off in production, I’d lean towards an injury, but who knows for sure. The winner will be determined by what the Packers do and our new DC Gannon feels about him.
davekenya
February 01, 2026 at 02:29 pm
Oops! You're saying that b/c of Gary's performance change...it's perhaps a painful injury. And without a scintilla of supporting evidence? You are drawing this unfounded conclusion? Is that using sound logic and reasoning?
(Unless you are trying to use one - one - cherry-picked observation (Clark) and are therefore saying the same is true with Gary?
'Clark..never made the injury report'...you state. And yet Kenny Clark appeared on the Green Bay Packers' injury report several times during the 2024 season
Designations:
Week 5 (vs. Rams): He was listed with a toe injury. He missed practice early in the week (DNP) but returned to limited participation (LP) and played without a final game status designation.
Week 12 (vs. 49ers): He was listed with the toe injury again but was a full participant in practice.
Late Season (Weeks 13, 14, 15): In December, he appeared on reports primarily under "NIR - Rest" (Not Injury Related), indicating the team was managing his workload to keep him available for game days.
I get you're trolling. So I'm not going to respond to whatever spaghetti you next throw against the wall. I instead will prefer to discuss Packers stuff with those using truthful statements and those who make observations and personal reflections based on those facts and what they observe watching games. Good night.
Lare
January 31, 2026 at 01:13 pm
Simply put, someone decided to sign Gary to that big contract. It was a mistake. If it was one of the guys that just signed on to big fancy contract extensions then take the Gary contract money out of that. The same with Banks and Hobbs.
This makes people accountable for their decisions. Once you start making people accountable these mistakes don't happen. If they don't like being held accountable, let them leave.
Oppy
January 31, 2026 at 02:45 pm
"Once you start making people accountable these mistake don't happen."
The thing is, they're not making widgets on an assembly line. You're talking about projecting player performance into the future. Penalizing people financially for getting it wrong won't magically make mistakes not happen in the future. It's not the same thing as "bob forgot to stock back-up relays for the production line again, and the lost production of line 3 cost us 4 hours of mfg. profits, so we're taking that out of his pay to teach him a lesson."
There's a reason the average NFL career doesn't last a full contract. Predicting future performance of players is art, not science, and there's a million factors that can redirect a career of a player. If you're unhappy with the performance of the GM, you move on. There's nothing to be gained from punishing them financially to attempt to 'hold them accountable' or 'teach them a lesson', there's nothing to be learned. The accountability factor is you either keep your job or you don't. All these guys make mistakes. There's no crystal balls. Some are better than others, it is what it is.
but I get it, there's always a certain number of people who are wholly enamored with the idea of punishing. Gotta hold them accountable, gotta PUNISH THEM.
GreenandBold
January 31, 2026 at 06:50 pm
Do you have something against factory workers ? Your comments do not seem to hold them in high regards . It is hard work and something tells me you wouldn’t be able to handle the hard work required to earn a living and put the food on the table . The way Gary played last season he would’ve been fired from such a job . He should be fired from his job with the Packers also .
Oppy
January 31, 2026 at 08:25 pm
You're not very bright, are you?
I worked in farm fields as a kid pulling rocks and boulders out of the ground in early spring, running behind the tractor to throw them on the flatbed, and you don't seem as bright as the other kids who toiled next to me in the fields. Certainly not as bright as most of the roofers I worked with as a young man, not as bright as many of the welders, painters, machinists and laborers I worked with, either. Not nearly as witty as the bouncers, bartenders and bar backs I caroused with for many years, nor the tradesmen and engineers I currently work with.
The amount of real hard work I've done during my life is enough that my back and knees are destroyed. I did hard, dirty jobs that other people thought they were too good for, and I did them at 110%, my body paid the price over the years.
Not sure how its possible you could be so dim as to take away from my statement that I look down on workers, but here you are, spouting off on something you know nothing about. I've spent the majority of my life working harder than most people around me because I thought it was what's expected of me. I've always had the good sense, however, not to question a strangers work ethic when I haven't worked beside them.
dobber
January 31, 2026 at 01:53 pm
Once Jenkins goes--which feels like more of a given than Gary--and the Packers are in plus cap territory, they're under no pressure to move on Gary until they want to use his cap money. Even $11M in cap savings on a straight cut or trade probably buys the Packers two vets for 2026, if they wrangle out that route, or a resign of a couple valued internal FAs.
As mentioned above, they're losing two guys out of the DE room (Enagbare and Parsons (first part of the season)), and until a plan coalesces, I think they keep Gary--much like they did with JA a year ago. I wouldn't be surprised if they re-do his deal and stay with him until Parsons is 100%...they might move him at the deadline if they're liking their depth.
golfpacker61
February 01, 2026 at 09:21 am
" Even $11M in cap savings on a straight cut or trade probably buys the Packers two vets for 2026, if they wrangle out that route, or a resign of a couple valued internal FAs.
Hopefully they do a better job of spending that $11 million Dobb. Way better than the 2 big splashes last year.
Real Talk Ryan
January 31, 2026 at 02:29 pm
Let's get real about Gary and take the green and gold glasses off. The Packers need to get rid of him asap. What does he bring to the team?? A breathing body... His attitude is junk, his effort is junk, and the worst part is he thinks he's better than he is. A terrible example for younger players. Gary's another example of how far the standard in Green Bay has fallen, keeping him would solidify that.
If he's released he will not make it to the regular season on any other team, mark my words. Really not even worth a discussion.
golfpacker61
January 31, 2026 at 02:45 pm
If GB is to release Gary, the obvious choice would be a June 1 release doesn't it? That seems to save the most money. As far as a trade, if we could find a partner, what is the maximum we save by doing that? If it's close, and we had a trade partner, at least we get something back. His money is a lot for any team to want to take on, even with the inflated dollars Edge rushers make. If it was $15 million then yeah, someone would want him.
It's a lot of money to just flush down the toilet, a very comparable situation though to Alexander last year. The Pack deemed it was better to lose the big chunk of cash to move on & start fresh.
Enegbare is as good as gone because he will make what Gary should be making. $10-$12 million per year. Cox has been a better pass rusher than Gary in a lot fewer snaps. He, Van Ness and Sorrell can split his snaps and should exceed Gary's production. Collin Oliver, I just don't know, he is small compared to regular pass rusher. Situational at best.
With our limited cap resources, we don't have a lot of options. Same with the draft, and a later round Edge probably doesn't play much anyway, see the 2 we drafted last year. It is going to be very interesting to see how GB navigates a bunch of tough choices this off season. Big holes to fill at CB, DT, and OL. Add ILB when we don't resign Walker.
Serious injuries or lack thereof could make or break us again.
lou
January 31, 2026 at 04:17 pm
Another case of trying to beat the system which the GM admitted draft day by saying "we believe it will take time but his development curve is unlimited" (we heard that with Savage, Amari Rodgers, Burks and LVN also). He was given a long leash and eventually played at an NFL starter level until mid season this year and as Hafley gave him credit for he became solid on holding the edge compared to prior years. However when NFL teams are paying players at a star level clip and getting average starter level production with advancing age it is almost impossible to make a case to keep him going forward.
jannesbjornson
February 01, 2026 at 11:46 am
Yes, the guy did say as much with a straight face while Brian Burns and Sweat were beeping on the board, or power front guys like Dexter Lawrence and Jeffery Simmons. The blade in the back was the dbl down selecting
Savage over a list of superior football players. This effectively screwed the superbowl run envisioning your one picks contributing close to nothing while shoveling big bucks to P. Smith and ZaDarious. The third renewal payment to this guy was extortion.
lou
February 01, 2026 at 04:19 pm
What a great description "The third renewal payment to this guy was extortion". He's been cut twice and on the street already. At least Valentine attempts to tackle even with his small frame but Savage flat out avoided contact and even a players coach like MLF noted it at a press conference and Joe Barry blamed it on the league not allowing enough tackling in practice the lamest excuse I have ever heard.
HarryHodag
January 31, 2026 at 05:08 pm
I would offer him a restructure at a lower salary and if he refuses I would cut him.
That said, some folks here have apparently forgotten that he has amassed 46.5 sacks in seven seasons. Prior to the arrival of Micah Parsons, he was the main pass rusher. It is annoying how quickly the totality of a person's career is forgotten.
Enagbare could get a contract from another team. With Gary gone, the Packers outside pass rush would suffer until Parsons returns, likely after the fourth game.
I smiled a bit at the folks dismissing his play down the stretch. With Parsons gone, opponents could double Gary and with Wyatt gone, simply neutralize the pass rush.
But his price tag for next year is too high.
Since'61
January 31, 2026 at 05:35 pm
I had supported the selection of Gary and had hoped/expected that he was going to evolve into a dominant player for the Packers defense..
However that has not happened. IMO opinion Gary has all the tools required to be a game wrecker. The fact is that he has been a disappointment to me and he should be a huge disappointment for the Packers.
IMO 2025 has been his worst season since he came a starting player for the Packers. I think that he should be released and that the Packers should just move on.
Another example of Gute overpaying a player based on expectations rather than actual results. This is why we've arrived in cap hell again during his tenure as Packers GM. Thanks, Since '61
Packers0808
January 31, 2026 at 06:10 pm
Time to cut bait!
GreenandBold
January 31, 2026 at 06:33 pm
This whole article gave me a headache to read and it is an outstanding example on how screwed up this roster is under Gute . If you don’t hit on your picks especially the first rounders you chase your tail to fill holes . Gary is a hole .
murf7777
February 01, 2026 at 09:01 am
How do we actually define good drafting in the first round? Might the Packers actually do a good job at drafting in the first round? Let’s take a look at one metrics of success.
While many look at Pro Bowls, playing time might be the most objective metric of success. If a player is on the field, the coaches trust them.
Interestingly, over the last 10 years, the Green Bay Packers lead the NFL, with their first-rounders appearing in 68.3% of all possible games. Even more impressive? They also rank #1 in games started. This is a massive feat when you consider Love, the Packers are one of the few teams with the patience to let a first-round QB sit for three years, which naturally lowers those percentages. Despite that 'redshirt' period, their overall hit rate on durable, starting-caliber talent is the highestt in the league. Sure, there are other metrics that could be used, but this does say a lot.
Other thing to keep in mind, they normally draft later in the first round and have a winning record most every year, which means they have some pretty good players already in the lineup for the rookie to try and beat out. Of course, you can note, but they should’ve taken ___________fill in the name vs ______________. Yes, there are many examples of players who had better careers taken after the Packers pick, but so does every team. No GM bats anywhere near 1000%
golfpacker61
February 01, 2026 at 09:39 am
Yeah Green, especially those first 3 picks every year make or break every team. GB has missed more than they have hit by a wide margin. And alot of those misses have been self inflicted by passing on the obvious much higher rated players.
A bigger problem has been created by ignoring our biggest needs multiple years in a row so it becomes a huge problem instead of a manageable one.
It's possible with a tradeback for an extra 3rd or 4th rounder we might find a decent Edge that fell farther than expected. I like Derrick Moore-Michigan and Nadame Tucker-Western Michigan this year, maybe they fall into the later 3rd round.
HawkPacker
January 31, 2026 at 09:50 pm
About two months ago I said to release him and I stand by my word!
Free up cap space and let others play.
WestCoastPackerBacker
January 31, 2026 at 10:23 pm
I wonder if we’ll find out he was ill or injured or somehow limited. It makes no sense that he didn’t flourish. Going back to college days, his motor was never in question. Like we found out Wyatt and Clark were playing hurt last season. I’m curious.
davekenya
February 01, 2026 at 02:38 pm
In 2024, Wyatt missed time during the 2024 season due to an ankle injury week 4 vs. Vikings. He was a mainstay on the injury report for several weeks following the injury. For example, heading into Week 8 against the Jacksonville Jaguars, he was listed as questionable after participating in practice on a limited basis.
In 2025, he got the major injury and was on IR.
In 2024, Clark appeared on the injury report several different times.
In 2025, I don't know that Gary was documented with any injuries or was on the injury report.
So..either the Packers chose to not put Gary on the injury report (when he was injured; though they liberally listed other players on the injury report) or he simply wasn't injured.
golfpacker61
February 01, 2026 at 09:48 am
A J Epenesa would give everything Gary has been giving us for $10 million a year or less. And he would thrive across from Parsons. And he wouldn't be a "take plays off" slacker like Gary. Epenesa, unlike Gary, never had that reputation in college. Both were rated highly coming to Iowa & Michigan. Epenesa accomplished more in less snaps than Gary.I have said before that I heard from multiple Michigan sources and informed boosters that Gary was lazy and we should avoid drafting him. I wish our FO would have heard the same things, maybe they did.
sugarbair
February 01, 2026 at 10:14 am
A lot of good discussion going on here. But in my opinion, this decision should be one of the easier ones. You can't fire all 53. Release Gary, take the cap savings and find 2 or 3 guys who can contribute. There are so many areas on this roster that need improving. If Gute keeps Gary it will tell me what to expect next season.
SinceLombardi
February 01, 2026 at 11:12 am
When do the Packers just learn to cut bait?
Coaches and players here never face the consequences of their failures. Just cut him and move on. You replace his production from the waiver wire.
greengold
February 01, 2026 at 12:09 pm
RELEASE.
gsd3
February 01, 2026 at 12:13 pm
Does it matter if it's injury or effort? Yes.
If he was injured, it's on him to let the staff know. If the staff did know and nothing was done, that's on the staff.
Regardless of injury or lack of effort, performance is the bottom line.
Make every effort to trade him. Might find a sucker that will take on the contract. If there are no takers, release him.
stockholder
February 01, 2026 at 12:38 pm
I just hope Gute doesn't screw this up-
With 25 mil increase coming per cap.
My hope is he still dumps
Gary ,Banks and Jenkins.
And looks at Tyler Linderbaum, C
and the eagles Phillps as replacements.
davekenya
February 01, 2026 at 02:45 pm
A lot has been mentioned about Gary and maybe having unreported injuries that hampered him. Unrelated, but I have to share this (to me) amazingly wonderful fact:
In 2023, the Packers headed into their Week 6 bye with several injuries, but they expected to return much healthier for their Week 7 matchup against the Denver Broncos. Instead, the injury report grew:
Pre-Bye (Week 5): The Packers had a handful of key names, but Aaron Jones and Jaire Alexander were the primary concerns.
Post-Bye (Week 7): The report swelled to 10 players listed with a game status (Doubtful/Questionable).
The "Bye Week Curse": During the week of practice following the bye, star cornerback Jaire Alexander (back) and offensive tackle Yosh Nijman (knee) were added as new injuries. Additionally, Pro Bowl guard Elgton Jenkins missed practice time for precautionary reasons, and Aaron Jones remained limited, much to the frustration of fans expecting a full recovery.
I LOVE it that a team's injury list could grow DURING the bye week!!!
Lphill
February 02, 2026 at 06:55 am
he is capable of better just not with the Packers, time to move on.