Parsons traded to Green Bay, given $188 million contract

[Sierra Foothills]

I understand those who object to the binary framing of the Parsons trade in terms of winning or losing the trade. I often object on these very pages to such oversimplified black and white, overly-reductionistic framing of issues, in sports or elsewhere.

 

But look, it's hard to dispute. The Packers didn't make this trade to just improve. The did it to win the Super Bowl. You don't take on a contractual obligation like they did and give up 2 first round draft picks and one of your best players simply to improve. They're gambling that Parsons is the final piece who'll put them over the top. They're taking a calculated risk that they hope pays off... knowing that there's a downside if it doesn't.

 

If they don't win a Super Bowl this year, what are the chances that they'll be able to improve minus 2 1st rounders and saddled with a huge contract on top of Jordan Love's contract? What happens when players like Elgton Jenkins, Rashan Gary, and Xavier McKinney start coming due?

 

I don't buy that the Packers traded for Parsons simply to improve the team. And I don't think that they think that they'll somehow be able to add more talent to get them over the top if Parsons doesn't get them there.

 

I admire the Packers for pulling the trigger but if they don't win a Super Bowl with Parsons, the huge gamble didn't work. There's no in-between here.

 

[3rdand12]

On 9/16/2025 at 1:25 AM, Alphadawg7 said:

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.  

 

It was going to be expensive to get any of the DE/ LBs on my list. Probably yours too

 I would have done it.  Groot so needed a complimentary and dangerous dude on the Other Side lol

Counting our blessings with Bosa though. That Beane !

 

Edited September 17 by 3rdand12

[billsfan89]

1 minute ago, 3rdand12 said:

It was going to be expensive to get any of the DE/ LBs on my list. Probably yours too

 I would have done it.  Groot so needed a complimentary and dangerous dud on the Other Side lol

Counting our blessings with Bosa though. That Beane !

 

The Bills are just not going to be able to trade for a proven guy like Parsons. The Bills don't have the cap space to do it. The picks the Bills would be willing to part with but the Bills can't pay 40 million for a pass rusher. The Bills are going to have to draft D-line players and hope to find a hit or take on older injury prone or flawed vets like Bosa. Hopefully Bosa can stay healthy this year and the Bills get that "war daddy" pass rusher for this year while they develop the 3 D-line they drafted (Walker looks like he could be a complete stud if he stays healthy and builds out his lower body). 

 

Groot and Ed are very good and you need those D-line players. But the Bills outside of that brief time with Von in 2022 never had that one guy that defenses had to account for week in and week out. The Bills path to finding that is gonna be through the draft which is hard or through lower end free agency which means taking on injury risks.

[3rdand12]

16 hours ago, Sierra Foothills said:

I understand those who object to the binary framing of the Parsons trade in terms of winning or losing the trade. I often object on these very pages to such oversimplified black and white, overly-reductionistic framing of issues, in sports or elsewhere.

 

But look, it's hard to dispute. The Packers didn't make this trade to just improve. The did it to win the Super Bowl. You don't take on a contractual obligation like they did and give up 2 first round draft picks and one of your best players simply to improve. They're gambling that Parsons is the final piece who'll put them over the top. They're taking a calculated risk that they hope pays off... knowing that there's a downside if it doesn't.

 

If they don't win a Super Bowl this year, what are the chances that they'll be able to improve minus 2 1st rounders and saddled with a huge contract on top of Jordan Love's contract? What happens when players like Elgton Jenkins, Rashan Gary, and Xavier McKinney start coming due?

 

I don't buy that the Packers traded for Parsons simply to improve the team. And I don't think that they think that they'll somehow be able to add more talent to get them over the top if Parsons doesn't get them there.

 

I admire the Packers for pulling the trigger but if they don't win a Super Bowl with Parsons, the huge gamble didn't work. There's no in-between here.

 

I agree with all the above. excepting my bolded bit at the end

 Disagree with the conclusion. They made the right effort.
really no loss here on the trade.

 Just not a win 😋

[3rdand12]

3 minutes ago, billsfan89 said:

The Bills are just not going to be able to trade for a proven guy like Parsons. The Bills don't have the cap space to do it. The picks the Bills would be willing to part with but the Bills can't pay 40 million for a pass rusher. The Bills are going to have to draft D-line players and hope to find a hit or take on older injury prone or flawed vets like Bosa. Hopefully Bosa can stay healthy this year and the Bills get that "war daddy" pass rusher for this year while they develop the 3 D-line they drafted (Walker looks like he could be a complete stud if he stays healthy and builds out his lower body). 

 

Groot and Ed are very good and you need those D-line players. But the Bills outside of that brief time with Von in 2022 never had that one guy that defenses had to account for week in and week out. The Bills path to finding that is gonna be through the draft which is hard or through lower end free agency which means taking on injury risks.

Agreed , the money thing. But it was an absolute need this year and addressing the Dline in the Draft was a good thing
Expected a focus on FA for Beane to wave the Wand and steal one of those premiere Pass rushers.

 Beanes scoring us Bosa was pretty cool , I admitted then and more so after 2 games !

 go bills

[DaVinci]

I can see Bill Pollian making that trade.

[Augie]

8 minutes ago, DaVinci said:

I can see Bill Pollian making that trade.

 

Bill Polian can see Lamar Jackson as a WR. 

 

We all have our hits and misses. 

[Alphadawg7]

On 9/15/2025 at 2:33 PM, 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 ??  😇

 

I know I already answered your question, but let me ask you this as a follow up and a way to think about it, at least the way I think about it:

 

What $47M cap expenditure makes the most impact on the win - loss record for the Bills:

1. $47M on Micah and the loss of 2 first round picks.
2. $35M on Justin Jefferson and $12M on Cook and 2 more premium first round prospects (or even trading those first round picks for other impact players).  

That is 4 players, including an elite player better at his job than Micah is at his, and an excellent RB and 2 more guys who are first round picks.  And that is if you spend the $47M on just 2 guys - and really pick any two impact guys on either side of the ball, point remains the same.  You could actually spend it on 3, maybe 4  impact players depending on the positions and still have 2 more guys from the 2 first round picks via drafting or trading those picks.  

 

That is why for me, Micah just isnt worth that much, he doesn't impact wins and losses to the same degree as a QB (the only other players making that much money) or the combo of great to elite players that can be spread around the team for that same cap space and also with the draft picks.  

 

[Buffalo Junction]

18 hours ago, Sierra Foothills said:

I understand those who object to the binary framing of the Parsons trade in terms of winning or losing the trade. I often object on these very pages to such oversimplified black and white, overly-reductionistic framing of issues, in sports or elsewhere.

 

But look, it's hard to dispute. The Packers didn't make this trade to just improve. The did it to win the Super Bowl. You don't take on a contractual obligation like they did and give up 2 first round draft picks and one of your best players simply to improve. They're gambling that Parsons is the final piece who'll put them over the top. They're taking a calculated risk that they hope pays off... knowing that there's a downside if it doesn't.

 

If they don't win a Super Bowl this year, what are the chances that they'll be able to improve minus 2 1st rounders and saddled with a huge contract on top of Jordan Love's contract? What happens when players like Elgton Jenkins, Rashan Gary, and Xavier McKinney start coming due?

 

I don't buy that the Packers traded for Parsons simply to improve the team. And I don't think that they think that they'll somehow be able to add more talent to get them over the top if Parsons doesn't get them there.

 

I admire the Packers for pulling the trigger but if they don't win a Super Bowl with Parsons, the huge gamble didn't work. There's no in-between here.

 

Gary and McKinney are locked up for three years. Jenkins is interesting as he doesn’t have much guaranteed money left on the next two years, but changed positions to center. Could be a restructure option. 
 

The Packers are also one of the youngest teams in the league, and are one of the best draft and develop teams in the NFL… especially at WR and OL. 
 

Trading for Parsons wasn’t an all in move for this season; it was a push for the next three years. We will know in February 2028 if it was a worthwhile move. 

[Alphadawg7]

Lmao - $47m per year(franchise QB money), 2 first round picks, and a pro bowl DT for a one dimensional pass rush specialist - just to go 0-1-1 against the Browns and Cowboys - who dropped a 40 piece despite not having their best offensive weapon in CeeDee Lamb.

That kind of comp you better be adding wins to the win column to the degree a QB does.  And not only is he not having that kind of impact, they aren’t even winning lol.  
 

I didn’t think he was worth anything close to what he got, and I still don’t.  I said it before when the trade happened, that I didn’t think this moved the needle much for the Packers and that the Lions and Eagles are still better.  And so far, nothings happened to change my mind.  

 

[mikemac2001]

28 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Lmao - $47m per year(franchise QB money), 2 first round picks, and a pro bowl DT for a one dimensional pass rush specialist - just to go 0-1-1 against the Browns and Cowboys - who dropped a 40 piece despite not having their best offensive weapon in CeeDee Lamb.

That kind of comp you better be adding wins to the win column to the degree a QB does.  And not only is he not having that kind of impact, they aren’t even winning lol.  
 

I didn’t think he was worth anything close to what he got, and I still don’t.  I said it before when the trade happened, that I didn’t think this moved the needle much for the Packers and that the Lions and Eagles are still better.  And so far, nothings happened to change my mind.  

 

Micah was never that dude 

 

Myles Garrett maybe that guy is always around the qb but Micah is a small one trick pony 

[Simon]

33 minutes ago, Alphadawg7 said:

Lmao - $47m per year(franchise QB money), 2 first round picks, and a pro bowl DT for a one dimensional pass rush specialist - just to go 0-1-1 against the Browns and Cowboys - who dropped a 40 piece despite not having their best offensive weapon in CeeDee Lamb.

That kind of comp you better be adding wins to the win column to the degree a QB does.  And not only is he not having that kind of impact, they aren’t even winning lol.  
 

I didn’t think he was worth anything close to what he got, and I still don’t.  I said it before when the trade happened, that I didn’t think this moved the needle much for the Packers and that the Lions and Eagles are still better.  And so far, nothings happened to change my mind.  

 

 

If I'm GB I'm less worried about Parsons and more worried about the fact that nobody on the field or sidelines could take advantage of all the doubles the guy was drawing all night. Dallas sold out to make sure the guy didn't have himself a day against them on national TV and yet still nobody else in that front7 was more effective than him.

[Alphadawg7]

1 hour ago, Simon said:

 

If I'm GB I'm less worried about Parsons and more worried about the fact that nobody on the field or sidelines could take advantage of all the doubles the guy was drawing all night. Dallas sold out to make sure the guy didn't have himself a day against them on national TV and yet still nobody else in that front7 was more effective than him.

 

Actually, that is exactly why they should be worried.  $47m in cap space gone.  Pro Bowl DT gone.  2 First Round picks gone.  For a guy so easily neutralized and now they lack cap space, premium draft picks, and created a hole on the interior making it even harder for them to put people on the filed that can take advantage of the double teams Parsons sees.