Parsons traded to Green Bay, given $188 million contract

[FireChans]

2 minutes ago, GoBills808 said:

Ok so Packers win the trade simply by virtue of acquiring Parsons? How do the Cowboys win then?

That’s a tough question.

 

There’s two ways.

 

If Micah continues to be an All Pro, they could “win” if they hit on 2 ProBowler caliber with those picks that contributed to winning their division+ or going further than the Packers in the next 2-3 years.

 

If Micah flames out as a player and becomes a disaster under his current contract, the Cowboys would only need to avoid having both of their draft picks from being busts.

 

You are right though, it’s hard to “win” a trade when you are giving up all pro level talent. The Vikings had to draft arguably the greatest WR of all time to do it. 

[Sierra Foothills]

6 hours ago, Sierra Foothills said:

Here's a related question... to all those who are wowed by Parsons' performance in his first two games:

 

Can Green Bay "win" this trade if they end up not winning a Super Bowl with Parsons?

 

6 hours ago, FireChans said:

Yes. Of course they can.

 

If your only measure of success is winning a Super Bowl, then drafting Bruce Smith wasn’t a success. The Bills should’ve traded that pick for more picks. They could’ve gotten a haul. After all, they didn’t win a Super Bowl, right? 
 

For a more recent example, was the Bills trading a first for Diggs a failure? I mean sure, he helped take our offense and our QB into elite status, and he posted the best 4 year stretch by a WR in team history, but we didn’t win the Super Bowl. 
 

It’s a failure for Green Bay only if they don’t contend for a championship during Micah’s prime, or if Micah somehow just becomes a terrible player. Otherwise, it’s the exact move that good teams should always make to try to maximize their chance of winning a ring.

 

Maybe this is over simplistic but you don't make the Parsons Trade unless you think he's the piece that puts you over the top... that greatly enhances the chances that you'll win the Super Bowl.

 

So IMO, if Parsons doesn't win a Super Bowl with the Packers, then the Packers lose the trade because it opens the door to people saying that they would have had a better chance of winning a Super Bowl had they not made the trade.

 

Put differently, by making the trade the organization is saying "we believe by making this trade that we can win the Super Bowl." If they don't win the Super Bowl, then they lost the trade because the reason for the trade did not come to fruition.

 

6 hours ago, Sierra Foothills said:

This is a reasonable response but:

• Many (most?) Bills fans here seem to believe that anything short of a Super Bowl win with Josh will be a franchise failure.
• The acquisition cost of a player like Parsons makes this an "all-in move" which implies all-in for what? We know the answer of course.

So modifying the question, if the Bills acquired Parsons and he maintained his excellent level of play but we didn't win a Super Bowl, would the Bills have won the trade?

 

6 hours ago, FireChans said:

Correct. But that’s a conflation.

 

drafting/acquiring Josh Allen wasn’t the failure. It was obviously a great success.
 

It would be a failure of the other folks involved. 
 

“All-in move” is just a term for media and fans to throw around. How many fans or media members can name the 3 last first round picks by the Packers?

 

Its meaningless. Their franchise isn’t going to fold if they don’t win a Super Bowl. The one certainty in the NFL is that you always get more picks. 
 

It’s just like how folks predicted the Rams were going to usher in 10

years of darkness when they were trading first rounders for talent. Meanwhile, here they are making the playoffs all the time again.

 

Yes. Trading for an elite pass rusher in his prime to pair with an elite QB in his prime is objectively ALWAYS a good move.

 

If the Bills traded for Parsons, would it have been a good trade? Yes. 
 

If the Bills managed to not win a Super Bowl with such a move, would that be a failure of the BILLS? Yes. Would it be a failure of a trade? No.

 

Again, JMO but if the Bills had traded for Parsons and it didn't result in a Bills Super Bowl Championship, then they would have lost the trade because (as above) the second guessers would be able to say that they should have stood pat and by keeping (for example) Rousseau and the 2 1st Round picks that they would have had a better chance to win a Super Bowl. You would only give up as much as you did for Parsons because you believe he's the missing piece.

 

4 hours ago, mannc said:

No.  It’s a Super Bowl or bust trade.  They don’t have to win it this year, but I’d say it’s a three-year window.  

 

Yes, I didn't say this year... just during the time that Parsons is with the Packers. Agree that it's Super Bowl (win) or bust.

 

3 hours ago, HomeskillitMoorman said:

Just trying to understand the first part…do you think it’s not a failure if the Bills don’t come away with a SB in Josh’s career? Or were you talking about just this season? 

 

I believe that it's an organizational failure to have Josh Allen as your quarterback and not win a Super Bowl. It doesn't have to be this year but it has to happen while he's the Bills QB.

 

[3rdand12]

If I may ?

 Agree that Parsons might well be the Piece of a puzzle. And Green Bay might have picked the One.
But if they don't do SB it won't be reason they couldn't

 Compare the Von Miller effort.

  Noble in intention.

Winning the trade will remain subjective of course

I wish Bills got Parsons. His youth and skill set look promising in GB

[Alphadawg7]

5 hours ago, FireChans said:

Yeah just flat out disagree with almost all of this.

 

For whatever reason, trading for a player is looked at like some completely different entity than drafting a player or signing a player. 
 

It’s all just player acquisition. If you acquire a great player, it’s great. If you acquire a great player for cheaper than you really should, it’s incredible.

 

Now, are there increased expectations associated with the move Green Bay made? Of course there are. But that’s BECAUSE of the caliber of the player they acquired. Because Micah is one of the best EDGE rushers in the league.

 

There’s a league-wide and fan-wide view on first round picks that they are these priceless assets. Which is really bizarro, when even the FIRST ROUND has like barely above a 50% hit rate.

 

The Packers last 4 first rounders were Eric Morgan, Lukas Van Ness, Quay Walker, and Eric Stokes.

 

You couldn’t trade all 4 of those players for a player on the caliber of Parsons, let alone just 2 of them.

 

Furthermore, I completely disagree that a team with an elite defensive talent is at some inherent disadvantage because they have to pay that player a ton of money. Wouldn’t like 29 teams kill to have a defensive player worth $40M+? Isn’t that the point? 

 

The point of having cap space and picks is to be able to get and retain great players. I don’t know how this became so backwards to folks. We aren’t at an inherent disadvantage because we are paying Josh. Because Josh is worth every single cent and then some. 
 

The argument against making a Micah Parsons move is “let’s hang onto our late first round picks and cap space so we can hope we can get lucky to get a player as good as Micah Parsons.” It’s ass backwards, respectfully.

All good either way - but GB spent what they spend on Parsons to be a final piece to win a SB.  They said this much.  That by default without question makes the win or lose barometer a SB or not during Parsons tenure there.  
 

This was made to win a SB literally right now.  This wasn’t a future roster building move, it was we want to win it now move.  If this move doesn’t get them there it will be seen as a swing and a miss.  

[Virgil]

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/46254910/cowboys-offered-micah-parsons-jets-jerry-jones-says
 

That would have been interesting.  I wouldn’t have done that as the Jets either.   Plus; I’d be curious the cap hit on the Jets 

[Draconator]

2 minutes ago, Virgil said:

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/46254910/cowboys-offered-micah-parsons-jets-jerry-jones-says
 

That would have been interesting.  I wouldn’t have done that as the Jets either.   Plus; I’d be curious the cap hit on the Jets 

Was just coming over here to post this

[Ya Digg?]

14 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

All good either way - but GB spent what they spend on Parsons to be a final piece to win a SB.  They said this much.  That by default without question makes the win or lose barometer a SB or not during Parsons tenure there.  
 

This was made to win a SB literally right now.  This wasn’t a future roster building move, it was we want to win it now move.  If this move doesn’t get them there it will be seen as a swing and a miss.  

So to me here’s the issue with the entire social media climate we are in. There MUST be a winner/loser to every scenario and people MUST go to extremes. There’s no room for breathing. I’m not calling you out personally, there’s a ton of posts in this thread saying the exact same thing, but the thought that there is only one of 2 outcomes that can happen is quite honestly very unsettling 

[FireChans]

49 minutes ago, Ya Digg? said:

So to me here’s the issue with the entire social media climate we are in. There MUST be a winner/loser to every scenario and people MUST go to extremes. There’s no room for breathing. I’m not calling you out personally, there’s a ton of posts in this thread saying the exact same thing, but the thought that there is only one of 2 outcomes that can happen is quite honestly very unsettling 

Yeah, the idea that Micah could have a 4 sack performance in the NFCCG to propel the Packers to their first SB appearance in 13+ years and the trade be a failure because they didn’t win the SB is honestly laughable.

Edited September 14 by FireChans

[Alphadawg7]

56 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Yeah, the idea that Micah could have a 4 sack performance in the NFCCG to propel the Packers to their first SB appearance in 13+ years and the trade be a failure because they didn’t win the SB is honestly laughable.

He’s never had more that 2.5 sacks in a single game - now he’s gonna get 4 in the NFCCG?  
 

But let’s say he did something he’s never done once, or even got close to — and had that game.  So what happens if the Packers give up 250 yards rushing in the SB because a team ran right at Parsons and neutralized him and the Packers lost.  Still a win for Packers?

 

 

Edited September 14 by Alphadawg7

[FireChans]

5 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

He’s never had more that 2.5 sacks in a single game - now he’s gonna get 4 in the NFCCG?  
 

But let’s say he did something he’s never done once, or even got close to — and had that game.  So what happens if the Packers give up 250 yards rushing in the SB because a team ran right at Parsons and neutralized him and the Packers lost.  Still a win for Packers?

 

 

Yes lol

[Alphadawg7]

1 hour ago, Ya Digg? said:

So to me here’s the issue with the entire social media climate we are in. There MUST be a winner/loser to every scenario and people MUST go to extremes. There’s no room for breathing. I’m not calling you out personally, there’s a ton of posts in this thread saying the exact same thing, but the thought that there is only one of 2 outcomes that can happen is quite honestly very unsettling 

I actually don’t disagree with you, but it’s not opinion here, the Packers factually (and said as much) traded a bounty for Micah and paid him a cap killing contract to go all in on winning a SB.  That is the why - it’s not my why - it’s the Packers why. 
 

So if they did this to win a SB right now in this season or the next couple seasons and then fail to accomplish that, how do you think the decision should be graded or evaluated?  I don’t blame GB at all for doing it if they think it puts them over the top, and quite honestly they were never winning the SB this year before the trade.  But IMHO it better work because the roster implications of his contract and loss of draft picks will be felt in the coming years if this roster isn’t good enough to win now.
 

This isn’t like a team using a draft pick to try and find a certain player.  They know 100% who and what Micah is, spent $7m more a year on him over a guy he is not better than (Myles Garret) and essentially now is paying two franchise QB contracts and the first time in the NFL a team has done that.  And they gave up future draft picks that become more valuable when you have cap choking contracts.  
 

All of this was done for the purpose of winning a SB.  If it fails to deliver a SB, how does one then grade the decision?  It’s not that everything has to have a winner or loser, but this move was specifically made for a specific goal - if it doesn’t achieve the goal, hard to not look at it and question or debate if it was a good or bad decision.  

[Tanoros]

1 hour ago, Ya Digg? said:

So to me here’s the issue with the entire social media climate we are in. There MUST be a winner/loser to every scenario and people MUST go to extremes. There’s no room for breathing. I’m not calling you out personally, there’s a ton of posts in this thread saying the exact same thing, but the thought that there is only one of 2 outcomes that can happen is quite honestly very unsettling 

Exactly, this is how I see it too. As a fan, of course the ultimate hope is always to win the Super Bowl. But I also love when the Bills are among the elite, when they are clearly one of the top teams in the league. That is where the Packers sit right now until proven otherwise, and I am sure their fans are happier with that than they would be sitting just outside of that elite tier.

 

If the Bills made a move like this and did not end up winning it all, but it elevated the team into the class of the NFL for several years, I would look back thinking we could have and should have won a Super Bowl. At the same time, I would also have incredible memories of watching my team compete at the very highest level, and that would mean far more than framing it simply as a failed trade.

[Alphadawg7]

6 minutes ago, FireChans said:

Yes lol

Ok now they’ve lost the SB - it’s next year and lose multiple key players/starters for cap reasons due to Micah’s contract and replace them with mid round rookies and bargain FAs and they win 3 less games, limp in playoffs as a wildcard and lose first round? 
 

Still a win?  
 

You know it’s not - you won’t admit it though because you refuse to acknowledge this could ever not be a good ending for them.  There are plenty of scenarios with this proves to be a mistake, just like there are plenty where it proves to be a great move.  
 

Bottom line is this can payoff big time or it can also blow up big time (like Mack to Chicago did).  More times than not in history, teams breaking the bank going all in to win right now has not worked and blows up in their face.  Sometimes it has worked (like Rams recent SB win), but most often it doesn’t and dominoes to set the team back for years after.  
 

All good either way, but it’s going to be interesting to see how this goes both this year and the ensuing years for both Packers and Cowboys.  Could be a good or bad move for either of them, time will tell.

[Alphadawg7]

2 minutes ago, Tanoros said:

Exactly, this is how I see it too. As a fan, of course the ultimate hope is always to win the Super Bowl. But I also love when the Bills are among the elite, when they are clearly one of the top teams in the league. That is where the Packers sit right now until proven otherwise, and I am sure their fans are happier with that than they would be sitting just outside of that elite tier.

 

If the Bills made a move like this and did not end up winning it all, but it elevated the team into the class of the NFL for several years, I would look back thinking we could have and should have won a Super Bowl. At the same time, I would also have incredible memories of watching my team compete at the very highest level, and that would mean far more than framing it simply as a failed trade.

Bills are already in the elite class, Packers were already one the contenders for the SB in the NFC too.  
 

What happens when the loss of those draft picks and cap killing contract start to erode the elite status of this he Bills and the franchise goes backwards after not winning the Super Bowl?  This board would be calling for Beanes head as they always do anytime this team loses a game.  
 

I don’t think the majority are going to feel the way you do.  Sure at time of trade people will get excited - but the second we give up 250+ yards rushing to a team in the playoffs and lose because teams ran right us, literally almost everyone would be slamming Beane and calling for his head and calling him an idiot for spending all that money on a guy who struggles against the run.  
 

That’s just how it works.  It’s always a great idea until it’s not — then it’s well he should have known it wouldn’t work and needs to be fired.  
 

There would be endless threads on this board about the pro bowler some other team drafted with our draft pick playing on a rookie contract while we twist in cap hell and having an empty trophy case.  Look at Diggs - that helped develop Josh but people still here slamming that move because “we could have had Jefferson” with the pick we sent Vikings for Diggs.

[Brand J]

1 minute ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Bills are already in the elite class, Packers were already one the contenders for the SB in the NFC too.  
 

What happens when the loss of those draft picks and cap killing contract start to erode the elite status of this he Bills and the franchise goes backwards after not winning the Super Bowl?  This board would be calling for Beanes head as they always do anytime this team loses a game.  
 

I don’t think the majority are going to feel the way you do.  Sure at time of trade people will get excited - but the second we give up 250+ yards rushing to a team in the playoffs and lose because teams ran right us, literally almost everyone would be slamming Beane and calling for his head and calling him an idiot for spending all that money on a guy who struggles against the run.  
 

That’s just how it works.  It’s always a great idea until it’s not — then it’s well he should have known it wouldn’t work and needs to be fired.  
 

There would be endless threads on this board about the pro bowler some other team drafted with our draft pick playing on a rookie contract while we twist in cap hell and having an empty trophy case.  Look at Diggs - that helped develop Josh but people still here slamming that move because “we could have had Jefferson” with the pick we sent Vikings for Diggs.

If a team is giving up 250 rushing yards, the blame far exceeds ONE player.

[Alphadawg7]

9 minutes ago, Brand J said:

If a team is giving up 250 rushing yards, the blame far exceeds ONE player.

You missed the point 

[Brand J]

1 minute ago, Alphadawg7 said:

You missed the point 

No, I got it pretty well. And wouldn’t have been bashing Beane for acquiring Parsons because we got gashed in the run game (like we do against the Ravens every time we play them). Parsons is elite at getting to the QB, that’s what he does. Is that worth $47M/yr? That part of the argument is debatable.

[Tanoros]

14 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Bills are already in the elite class, Packers were already one the contenders for the SB in the NFC too.  
 

What happens when the loss of those draft picks and cap killing contract start to erode the elite status of this he Bills and the franchise goes backwards after not winning the Super Bowl?  This board would be calling for Beanes head as they always do anytime this team loses a game.  
 

I don’t think the majority are going to feel the way you do.  Sure at time of trade people will get excited - but the second we give up 250+ yards rushing to a team in the playoffs and lose because teams ran right us, literally almost everyone would be slamming Beane and calling for his head and calling him an idiot for spending all that money on a guy who struggles against the run.  
 

That’s just how it works.  It’s always a great idea until it’s not — then it’s well he should have known it wouldn’t work and needs to be fired.  
 

There would be endless threads on this board about the pro bowler some other team drafted with our draft pick playing on a rookie contract while we twist in cap hell and having an empty trophy case.  Look at Diggs - that helped develop Josh but people still here slamming that move because “we could have had Jefferson” with the pick we sent Vikings for Diggs.

I understand the Bills are already elite and have been for a while. My point was more about how I would feel if I were on the Packers side of things. Yes, Green Bay was a contender before the trade, but they were not widely viewed in the same tier as the very top teams. This move, at least for now, puts them there, and time will tell if it holds.

 

I get your point about the cap and roster implications that come with making a big move like this. Those things do create pressure, and if the ultimate goal is not reached, it is easy for fans to look back and say it was not worth it. Sports often get reduced to win or lose in that way. But as a fan, I do not think it has to be that black and white. I love seeing the Bills as one of the class teams in the NFL and will always value that, even while recognizing that nothing lasts forever.

 

Right now, the Packers feel like a team that can take on anybody, and that is a great place to be. Not winning a Super Bowl does not erase that. Sure, many fans would complain about a move like this if it does not end in a championship, but just as many would remember and enjoy the ride of watching their team compete at the very highest level.

 

We love our Bills and enjoy the seasons especially now that we have 17. There are so many memories we have that we think fondly of. No matter what happens, I will always look back at this time fondly and with good memories and I will not consider it a loss. 

[3rdand12]

On 9/14/2025 at 12:18 PM, Alphadawg7 said:

Bills are already in the elite class, Packers were already one the contenders for the SB in the NFC too.  
 

What happens when the loss of those draft picks and cap killing contract start to erode the elite status of this he Bills and the franchise goes backwards after not winning the Super Bowl?  This board would be calling for Beanes head as they always do anytime this team loses a game.  
 

I don’t think the majority are going to feel the way you do.  Sure at time of trade people will get excited - but the second we give up 250+ yards rushing to a team in the playoffs and lose because teams ran right us, literally almost everyone would be slamming Beane and calling for his head and calling him an idiot for spending all that money on a guy who struggles against the run.  
 

That’s just how it works.  It’s always a great idea until it’s not — then it’s well he should have known it wouldn’t work and needs to be fired.  
 

There would be endless threads on this board about the pro bowler some other team drafted with our draft pick playing on a rookie contract while we twist in cap hell and having an empty trophy case.  Look at Diggs - that helped develop Josh but people still here slamming that move because “we could have had Jefferson” with the pick we sent Vikings for Diggs.

So would you have done it ?

For the Bills , I would have and actually hoped for it. After Garrett , then Crosby or Hendrickson dream fever  lol.

If he has as much of a disruptive season as he has so far ? It's a Win

Unless he pulls a Von Miller ( no harm meant Von ) and gets injured early onto the contract with a serious injury.

 

Would you have made the deal Alpha ??  😇

[Alphadawg7]

7 hours ago, 3rdand12 said:

So would you have done it ?

For the Bills , I would have and actually hoped for it. After Garrett , then Crosby or Hendrickson dream fever  lol.

If he has as much of a disruptive season as he has so far ? It's a Win

Unless he pulls a Von Miller ( no harm meant Von ) and gets injured early onto the contract with a serious injury.

 

Would you have made the deal Alpha ??  😇

Honestly - Not a chance I do it for 2 firsts and a $47M contract.  Bosa has had a better first 2 games for 1/4 the cost and no draft pick loss.  
 

I wanted to look into Parsons, but $47M is a franchise QB contract.  We can’t pay him and Allen and expect the roster around them to stay strong.  It’s an insane amount of money for a guy who isn’t even the best at his own position.  Myles Garrett is better and makes $7M less despite getting his contract in the same season.  And Myles isn’t a liability in half the snaps either.  
 

If GB doesn’t win the SB this season they are going to regret this trade in a couple years.  If they do win it, then worth the risk, but I don’t think Micah makes them all that much better personally and I don’t see think they are even the best team in the NFC.

 

2023 Cowboys had the number 1 offense and number 5 defense in the NFL.  Dallas led league in passing.  Cowboys had not only Micah but the league leader in interceptions too.  All teams had to do was run on them to neutralize them and they lost embarrassingly to the Packers in the postseason.

 

I just don’t think Micah will ever make a $47m impact to the wins and loss column like a QB does.  

 

Edited September 16 by Alphadawg7