GREEN BAY − Green Bay Press-Gazette and PackersNews columnist Pete Dougherty responds to reader questions on the hot topics of the Green Bay Packers’ offseason.
What’s going wrong in the Packers’ locker room?
Gary M: Pete, It’s starting to sound like the Packers were having issues in the locker room last year. Does Matt LaFleur run a tight ship? Mike Holmgren had a players committee to keep in touch with feelings in the locker room. Does LaFluer? Who are the leaders on this team and are they vocal? You have been around a lot of teams. Do you think the Packers have locker room problems?
Pete Dougherty: Hi everybody, let’s get started with a question about the big news of the week, Matt LaFleur saying at the NFL owners meetings that one of the team’s problems last season was at least a few players not being happy with their roles.
To answer your question about the players committee first, I don’t know that LaFleur has a formal committee. Not that I recall anyway.
I will say, I always thought Holmgren’s players committee was more for show than substance. Basically, from what I could tell, if he wanted to change anything, he did it. But if the players agreed, it would make them feel like they had a say even though they really didn’t. And if the players asked for something that didn’t matter to him, he’d do it. That made them feel empowered.
It was a good psychological ploy by Holmgren.
The Packers’ leaders who first come to mind are Xavier McKinney, Josh Jacobs and Micah Parsons. The quarterback is by definition a leader, and I think Jordan Love has gradually gotten more vocal in his time as the starter, though it’s hard to say he’s a natural in the way, say, Brett Favre was.
Two emerging young leaders are Evan Williams and Javon Bullard. Williams has shown some of those qualities since his rookie season, and it looked to me like late last season Bullard really started showing up as a strong locker room voice.
It’s interesting, I’ve talked with former colleague and current ESPN Packers beat writer Rob Demovsky a lot about locker rooms. After covering the league all these years, as well as having worked in offices and more generally lived among people, we’re in agreement that all NFL locker rooms have a lot of dysfunction.
Every human endeavor does. Throw in the money and ego involved in the NFL, and the large number of players on each team, and there are always significant issues either happening or about to happen. I’m sure the public hears only a small percentage of them. This is who we are as human beings. The more people involved in something, the more problems.
Winning games helps cover up a lot of those issues. You’ve probably heard the saying attributed to John Madden, “winning is the best deodorant.” This is what he’s talking about.
Now, it’s also true that locker room issues can get bad enough to contribute to losing.
I can guarantee there’s plenty of discontent in every NFL locker room. Also, there’s more in some locker rooms than others.
LaFleur at the owners meetings made a point of saying it was an issue last season. He brought it up unprompted, so it’s something he wanted out there. Usually when speaking publicly like that, he’s talking to the team more than anyone else. He wanted the players to hear it.
There were a few small signs of some players being discontented, but it didn’t strike me as unusually bad. It probably was a bigger issue than I picked up on if LaFleur felt compelled to bring it up publicly.
Who was he talking about? I offer these as at least possibilities.
Romeo Doubs famously was suspended for a game in ‘24 for skipping practice because he was unhappy about his role in the game plan. And I’m sure he wanted a contract extension last year but didn’t get it. Maybe he was among the issues, though there were no overt signs of it. I can’t say I got the sense LaFleur was ever unhappy with him, LaFleur always praised him profusely.
Jordan Morgan said publicly he wanted to play left tackle and not move around. So it’s not speculating to say he wasn’t happy with his role. But at least in news conferences, LaFleur or OC Adam Stenavich always praised him for being a team player. Stenavich even said he thought Morgan was talented enough to be better at playing multiple positions than Zach Tom, which is saying a lot. I can only assume they said those things to make Morgan feel appreciated.
Colby Wooden told Indianapolis media after he was traded there that he was playing out of position with the Packers at nose tackle. So it’s not speculation to say he wasn’t thrilled about his role either.
I don’t doubt Matthew Golden wasn’t happy about not getting more targets (44, with 29 catches in 14 games) as a rookie. Dontayvion Wicks also had a career-low 46 targets (in 14 games). I guess this is one of the issues when you have good depth at receiver, these guys all want the ball, and there’s only one ball.
Quay Walker suggested he wasn’t happy with the way the Packers used him when he talked about Raiders linebackers coach Rob Leonard with the Las Vegas media media after he signed in free agency.
“I’m not going to go into everything, but I know he’s going to use me the right way,” Walker said.
Walker also might have been unhappy that the Packers didn’t put a fifth-year tender on him the year before.
And Elgton Jenkins refused to participate in offseason work last year because he wanted a contract extension that never came for his move to center. It’s interesting that it looks like he signed with Cleveland this offseason to play center, not guard.
That might sound like a lot of unhappy players, but I find it hard to believe many or most teams don’t have their share of these issues. I think one of the Packers’ free-agent signees this offseason, DT Javon Hargrave, has said he wasn’t happy with the way the Vikings used him last season.
You see reports about stuff like this all the time during the season. Have to say I find it a little hard to believe things were any worse with the Packers than with plenty of other franchises, but maybe they were.
Tami from De Pere: MLF’s recent statement regarding some players not liking the role they were asked to play last season means these players do not have “team mentality.” How can MLF turn that around?
Dougherty: That’s one of the biggest challenges in coaching, especially in professional sports with the money at stake based on how much and how well players perform.
There are a couple of ways to deal with it. One is for the team to get rid of players it considers malcontented. For whatever it’s worth, Doubs, Quay Walker and Jenkins are all gone. But it sounds like the Packers at least tried to re-sign Walker and maybe Doubs before the start of free agency.
Another way to deal with it is for the coaching staff to be clear, open and honest about roles with players, which LaFleur said when he talked about the issue. That’s kind of a never-ending job.
Coaches want to get the most out of players, so they often encourage them by making them feel like they have a chance to expand their roles, or that opportunities are around the corner. And opportunity often is around the corner, because of injury if nothing else.
But coaches also need to be honest with guys, brutally honest, in letting them know why they’re not a bigger part of game plans, or why someone is playing ahead of them. Some coaches are better at that than others, and some players handle it better than others.
LaFleur and his staff have to do everything they can to convince players that if they make it about the team, it will be good for their individual careers. That can be a hard sell when you’re dealing with NFL locker rooms.
Packers salary-cap question
Mike in Diamond Bar, CA: Hello Pete, always appreciate the chats. Good article by your colleague Tom Silverstein on “The Packers clearing significant salary-cap space for potential roster moves.” At the end of the article, he listed the “Cap Value” and the “Cash Value” for each player and some interesting disparities.
E.g. Jordan Love (Cap Value, $36M, Cash Value, $51M), Micah Parsons (Cap Value, $19M, Cash Value, $40M), Josh Jacobs (Cap Value, $14M, Cash Value, $11M), Zach Tom (Cap Value, $11M, Cash Value, $6M) and Aaron Banks (Cap Value, $12M, Cash Value, $18M).
In looking at some of those numbers, I guess one would think having a smaller “Cap Value” makes more sense than having a smaller “Cash Value” as it’s factored in the team’s salary cap. I assume the “Cash Value” of each player is based on their performance and reputation vs. other players in the league. I’m guessing not too many other players in the league have a higher “Cash Value” than Love and Parsons at their respective positions. Your thoughts?
Dougherty: One way for teams to stay under the cap is to keep the cap value of big contracts lower than the cash value for a given season. That’s a way, especially in the early seasons of a big contract, to pay the player a lot of cash (which is an incentive to get him to sign) but not have him kill the salary cap the first season or two.
But the money always eventually gets counted on the cap, either in the players’ final seasons or, more often, after he leaves. Then you’re having money count on your cap for a player who’s not even on the team.
For what it’s worth, Mike Sando of The Athletic added the cash-over-cap spending for each over the 2020-24 seasons, and Cleveland led the way by spending 27.4% more in cash than cap over that time. The Steelers were last and spend 1.6% LESS cash than cap. The Packers, for what it’s worth, were 15th at 8.9% cash over cap.
You’re right that Love and Parsons rank way up there in cash payment this year, which drives up the Packers’ cash-to-cap ratio.
Patrick Mahomes has the NFL’s highest cash value this season at $56.75M. Josh Allen ($55M), Jared Goff ($55M), Lamar Jackson ($52M) and Jalen Hurts ($51.5M) fill out the top five. Love is sixth at $51M.
Parsons ($40.8M) ranks 11th. The only non-quarterback ahead of him is Seattle tackle Charlie Cross ($43M), who signed a contract extension in January. The next non-quarterback is Seattle receiver Jaxon Smith-Njgba ($36.5M).
A Dontayvion Wicks for Davante Adams trade?
Rick in Pleasant Prairie: Pete, thanks for the chats! I was just reading several articles about the Packers possibly involved in trading Dontayvion Wicks to the NY Jets. Rather than send him to the Jets, what do you think of the possibility of sending Wicks to the Rams in exchange for [Davante] Adams?
If I read the article right, Adams might only cost $18 mil on our books. I think a veteran with his leadership would be extremely valuable in the locker room with our young group of receivers. I am not sure what else could be involved in a trade like this; however, one would have to think bringing Adams back could be the boost the offense needs to take the next step in playoffs.
Dougherty: Until reading your question, I hadn’t seen the report that multiple teams had called the Packers about Wicks and don’t know anything about the person who first reported it, so I can’t comment on its reliability. But it rings true because of how the Packers’ depth chart at receiver is likely to shake out.
I’ll start by saying I’m generally not in favor of trading players at deep positions, because you never know when you’re going to need that depth. The Packers had their share of injuries at receiver last season, for instance.
But in this case, depending on what they could get for Wicks, I could see it. He’s got talent – his 40-yard dash time is slow (4.62 seconds), but he’s a good route runner, consistently gets open and has decent size (6-foot-1, 206 pounds)– so I could see other teams having interest in him. And Christian Watson, Jayden Reed and Matthew Golden likely are ahead of him. Trading Wicks, though, would mean Savion Williams will have to be ready to play a lot more than last season.
The big question is what the Packers might get in return for taking another hit at that position after Romeo Doubs already left in free agency. I’m not sure they can get that great a value for a player in the last year of his contract. Maybe their best hope would be getting a decent player at a position of great need that the Jets are are willing to move on from because he’s also is in the last year of his contract, or is being paid more than they think he’s worth.
What draft pick could they get for Wicks? Not sure I even have a good guess. A D4? Seems like a lot for a guy who hasn’t done that much in the league and is in the final year of his contract. I have my doubts the Jets or anyone else would do that. A fifth-rounder? That’s what the Packers used to take him. I’d probably rather have the depth if I’m them.
I don’t see how a deal for Adams makes sense for the Packers. Adding $18M to their books is a lot, and even if he agreed to add void years on his contract for cap purposes, I still don’t think it makes sense. Adams led the league in TD catches last season (14) but missed three games, had only 60 receptions and turns 34 this season.
He’d be taking snaps and targets away from younger, improving players (Watson, Reed, Golden) at a high cost. I just don’t see that as something the Packers would or should be interested in.
Also, the Rams were talking about Adams as part of a trade for A.J. Brown from Philadelphia. I find it hard to believe the Rams would consider it a good deal to swap Adams for Wicks even if they got a decent draft pick in return (which the Packers wouldn’t and shouldn’t be willing to give up). The Rams are going all-in this year with Matthew Stafford playing in possibly his last season, so I have to think they’d want a more-proven receiver than Wicks in return.
Just way too many reasons for this to not be a possibility.
What is Christian Watson worth?
Quinoa Bean: Christian Watson has No. 1 receiver written all over him. He’s got the size and speed, he makes big plays (career 17.0 yards per catch!), and his hands have steadily improved since he’s been a Packer. My impression is that his route-running has improved as well − this past year he was catching all sorts of out routes and comebacks on the sideline, with lots of nice hands catches away from his body.
So that’s all good, and he seems like a lock for a second contract. But it’s also been injury after injury with him, especially to his right leg, and he has yet to play a full season; his career season highs are 41 catches and 620 yards. If you’re the Packers, what kind of money are you giving him this offseason, and how much of it is guaranteed against injury?
Dougherty: You’ve pretty much summed up the factors the Packers have to think about.
They definitely have to factor injuries, but the always-rising contract market also plays into it regardless of the injuries. They have to decide how far they’re willing to go considering the injury risk. If Watson stays healthy and has a big year, and they haven’t extended him, then they either have to franchise him, pay even bigger money or let a talented player walk.
Jaxon Smith-Njigba just signed an extension with Seattle that set the receiver market at $41.2M a year. Watson obviously is not in for that kind of deal. Smith-Njigba is a rising star and was first-team All-Pro last season.
There are 10 receivers in the $30M or more category, and I’m not sure Watson quite makes into that group, either.
But Indianapolis recently re-signed Alec Pierce for $28.5M a year, and I have to think Watson can get a deal like that. Pierce has been similar to Watson as a player but healthier. He’s never had more than 47 receptions in a season but led the league in yards per catch the past two years (22.3, 21.1). Watson’s career high in receptions is 41 as a rookie, and he has a healthy 17.5-yard average per catch in his career.
Watson has had his well-known injuries issues but, as you noted, he showed great improvement as an overall receiver last season, running and catching more possession-type routes along with the big plays. He’s better than Pierce that way – Pierce is mostly a deep-ball threat. But take Watson’s injury history into account, and a contract similar to Pierce’s seems right to me if I’m the Packers.
As far as guarantees against injury, they could try to include big roster bonuses as a hedge. Teams are starting to increase those. New England, for instance, just signed offensive lineman Alijah Vera-Tucker to a contract that will pay him $250,000 for each game he plays ($4.25M if he plays all 17 regular-season games). In the past, roster bonuses were $250K or $500K for the season.
Whether, or at least the degree to which, Watson would agree to something like that is another matter. He has leverage, too, if he’s willing to take on the injury risk and let the season play out.
But I’m thinking the Pierce contract is the best comp for Watson.
Eric Lindquist: In theory, no first-round pick means less chance of getting a difference-maker and more picks means more chances to strike gold. What do you think is more likely in the early rounds − that the Packers trade up to improve their chances of landing a star or trade down to get more swings?
Dougherty: I have to think the better odds are for trading down for more swings.
The Packers have so many needs (immediate and a year or two down the road), and making this class smaller by trading an extra pick to move just strikes me as highly unlikely. I’d think they’d have to just absolutely love a player to do something like that.
One question I’m wondering is what Brian Gutekunst would do in this scenario, if the possibility came up: trading down from the second round to the third, and thus having three third-round picks rather one second and one third.
Again, it takes two to tango, not sure how likely he could find someone to make such a deal. I know Jacksonville has two later third-round picks, for instance. But if Gutekunst could make that kind of deal, I wonder if he’d find that more valuable, or taking a player at No. 52 more valuable.
There’s probably not a pat answer to that. Surely depends on the quality of any given draft. Some drafts have more third-round talent than others.
Will Packers draft a return man?
John Hildago: Pete, thank you for doing the chats, I love reading your opinions and analysis in the Packers. Do you expect the Packers to make a bigger investment in special teams this year? Perhaps draft a guy with the specific intent of being a return man? Or do you expect them to put a rookie WR as a return man?
Dougherty: Strikes me as unlikely they’ll draft a return-only guy because they recently signed Skyy Moore in free agency to probably fill that role.
They paid Moore a $1M bonus. That doesn’t guarantee he’ll make the roster, but it says they think he very likely will. In the same circumstances last year, they paid Mecole Hardman only a $150,000 bonus. He was more a look-see, and it’s a lot easier to eat a $150K bonus than a $1M bonus.
Moore had only seven targets and five catches in 17 games with San Francisco last season. He’s a return guy. Assuming he makes the team, if he’s on the field as a receiver, it will be because that position has been hit by a few injuries.
Either way, the smart money says Moore will be their punt and kick returner this season.
When’s the last chat?
Eric: Pete, love the chats. In the past, was the final chat the week of the draft? If so, would it be possible to skip a week prior to the draft to get one or two chats in after the draft?
Dougherty: The final chat is always the week after the draft.
Are Packers facilities all they’re cracked up to be?
Adam: Are Packers facilities not as good as they make them seem? The player survey had mixed reactions there.
Dougherty: The Packers’ facilities are first-rate except for the training room, which, by the way, is in the process of being upgraded this offseason.
Their training room received a C grade from their players, which seems strange considering they’d given it an A-minus the year before. Not sure why a facility would drop that far in one season. What changed?
Still, that’s a bad grade in a competitive league and for a franchise that prides itself in not having to pay an owner and thus putting its money back into everything football. The Packers need to always have first-rate facilities. It’s one of their calling cards. They don’t have a big city to entice players, so they need their football facilities to help do that.
For context, that C grade for their training room tied them with three teams (Pittsburgh, Tampa Bay and Cleveland) for No. 27 in the league. The five teams below them were Kansas City (C-minus), San Francisco (C-minus), New England (C-minus) and Arizona (D-plus).
The grade will improve significantly next year because the Packers’ big offseason facilities project is redoing their training room. (They didn’t do this in response to the survey, it’s been planned for a while and work on it started before the survey even became public). They’d upgraded their locker room the year before, and its grade jumped from a B in 2025 to an A this past season. Have to think their training room will jump back into the A range in next year’s survey.
Will the Packers draft an interior offensive lineman?
Jakob B: Do you think it’s likely that the Packers will draft an interior offensive lineman? The team has been filling holes in the interior for some time, but it feels like the personnel folks prefer to draft tackle prospects that can flex into the interior. At the same time, there’s been mixed success with drafting so many tackles.
Dougherty: This isn’t exactly what you’re asking, I’ll get to that, but I get a lot of questions at this time of year about whether they’ll draft a guy at this position or that position.
The discussion this year starts with, they have only seven picks. If you divide the positions up in a reasonable way, there are 13: QB, RB, WR, TE, IOL, T, DT, DE/Edge, ILB, CB, S, P, K.
Even if you remove the specialists, several positions will have to go unaddressed. And that’s if they don’t double-up at, say, CB.
That said, I don’t see how they don’t come out of this draft with at least one OL (outside or interior), and perhaps two (one of each).
As for directly answering your question, there’s a reason teams draft tackles and move them inside – every team does it, not just the Packers. Many of the most-talented linemen in college play tackle. But there are only so many tackle jobs in the NFL, and only so many players good enough to win them.
So teams watch a prospect’s traits at tackle and determine whether he could move inside, which is much more viable than moving a guard to tackle. It often works. T.J. Lang, Josh Sitton and Mike Wahle are prime examples of college tackles who became excellent NFL guards.
But you’re right that there are college players who are guards or centers and project well to those positions in the NFL. Generally, teams want a couple of linemen who can play guard and center. The starting center can be a center-only guy, but it’s tough to have a backup center who can’t also play guard. Teams suit up only seven or eight linemen on game day. Those two or three gameday backups have to be able to play two or three positions.
The Packers in essence have an extra late-round pick at guard this year because of John Williams. He was a D7 last year but missed all camp and season because of a pre-existing back injury. He never even practiced with the Packers because of the injury.
He’s one of those who was athletic enough to play left tackle in college at Cincinnati, but the Packers projected him to guard. Assuming he’s now healthy enough to play, he’s like adding another late-round interior lineman to the pot this season. I doubt he plays center but maybe he’ll be one of the guys they start working there occasionally.
The Packers need quality OL depth both inside and outside, but I don’t know which is Gutekunst’s priority. Can’t say they have a good backup at either guard or tackle right now. Travis Glover missed all last season because of a shoulder (lat) injury. Is he their top backup tackle? Or would they have to move Anthony Belton out there if Morgan or Tom gets hurt, and then replace Belton at guard?
They have a real depth issue on the OL. That’s why you can’t rule out them taking an OL early.
Can MarShawn Lloyd help?
Dan Bramschreiber: Pete, do you think MarShawn Lloyd will be a productive RB in 2026?
Dougherty: From the (very) little we’ve seen of him, Lloyd appears to have some quickness and explosiveness. At least that’s what he’s flashed in the short stretches he’s practiced in camp and six carries he’s had in the one NFL game he’s been healthy enough to play in two seasons.
But I can’t even venture a guess on whether he’ll help them. I’m not sure he’s stayed healthy for a full week except for Week 2 of 2024, when he practiced and then had six carries (for 15 yards against Indianapolis). That’s the only game he’s been healthy enough to play.
There’s just no way the Packers can count on him.
Now, he went to a movement-evaluation clinic last season to learn why he has these habitual soft-tissue injuries. He hasn’t talked publicly yet about what he learned from them (what strength imbalances he might have, for instance, similar to what Watson discovered when he visited a similar clinic because of his hamstring issues). But Lloyd missed the rest of the season after that visit, so he must have had a lot to work on.
Your guess is as good as mine as to whether he’ll make it through OTAs and then the offseason without getting injured again, and thus be worth keeping on the 53. If he can stay healthy, there appears to be some talent there, and he’d be a quickness change-of-pace from Jacobs’ more power-oriented running. But how can we not be skeptical about Lloyd’s health?
He missed seven of 39 games in college because of injuries at USC and South Carolina, for whatever you think that’s worth.
And with that, we’ll call it a wrap on this mailbag. Thanks to all for taking the time to submit questions, know that it’s greatly appreciated. We’ll be back next week, same time and place. Until then, take care everybody!
This article originally appeared on Packers News: Pete Dougherty has answers on Packers’ locker room, Dontayvion Wicks
Reporting by Pete Dougherty, Green Bay Press-Gazette / Packers News
USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect
