How are we feeling about the Green Bay Packers\u2019 edge-rusher group entering the summer? That\u2019s an old topic that is still looming after Green Bay failed to address it in free agency and waited until the fourth round of the draft to make an investment.<\/p>\n
The Carolina Panthers released Jadeveon Clowney<\/a> last week, and people instantly floated him<\/a> as an option for the Packers. If they sign Clowney, it would create quite the domino effect.<\/p>\n Let\u2019s start with the obvious.<\/p>\n Clowney is 32, and general manager Brian Gutekunst has been reluctant to retain players on Green Bay\u2019s roster once they hit 30 or to bring older players in from the outside. Gutekunst would be stepping outside the box of how he and the Packers typically operate if he signs Clowney.<\/p>\n Now that that\u2019s out of the way\u2026<\/p>\n Clowney had 5.5 sacks in 14 games for the Panthers a year ago. The year before that, he had 9.5 sacks for the Baltimore Ravens. He\u2019s been aging like a fine wine, contributing 44 quarterback pressures for Carolina in 2024.<\/p>\n Playing 64% of the snaps last year \u2014 not to mention being productive about it \u2014 showed there\u2019s gas left in the tank. It also suggests a player who still wants a higher-volume role rather than be a tertiary option.<\/p>\n The first domino to fall after a Clowney signing would be deciding how to divvy up the snaps. That doesn\u2019t sound like a bad thing, but Green Bay has shown in situations like this that it tends to lean on younger talent drafted in-house to get the job done.<\/p>\n Rashan Gary<\/a>\u2018s totals aren\u2019t going to be radically reduced in the event of a Clowney signing, so the focus naturally shifts towards Lukas Van Ness<\/a>. Van Ness has largely underwhelmed in two years after being the No. 13-overall pick in 2023, but Gutekunst has raved<\/a> about the former Iowa product all offseason.<\/p>\n \u201cWe need to affect the quarterback more in the front four, with just four players,\u201d he said at the combine in February, \u201cand Lukas is a big part of that.\u201d<\/p>\n It wasn\u2019t the first time Gutekunst had been asked about Van Ness in the offseason, and it wasn\u2019t the only time he mentioned Van Ness being a key part of the puzzle in 2025.<\/p>\n He does everything he can. He is everything you want in a professional as far as his work ethic and what he puts into it, and I expect him to take a big jump this year.<\/p>\n In theory, bringing in Clowney could take away some snaps from Van Ness. Still, if Gutekunst and defensive coordinator Jeff Hafley didn\u2019t want to go that route, the domino effect would definitely be felt a little further down the depth chart.<\/p>\n Kingsley Enagbare<\/a> is entering a contract year, which could be his last year in Green Bay. If Gary and Van Ness are on solid footing entering 2025, Clowney would certainly chip into the totals for Enagbare, Brenton Cox<\/a> Jr., and rookies Barryn Sorrell<\/a> and Collin Oliver<\/a>.<\/p>\n Would Clowney even be receptive to playing second fiddle? That\u2019s yet to be seen.<\/p>\n Bringing him in would also create a numbers discussion in the edge-rusher room. Would the Packers be fine with carrying six into the season and shortening the depth elsewhere? Could it be seven if we wanted to include Arron Mosby<\/a>?<\/p>\n They may use Oliver as a hybrid edge rusher and inside linebacker, and his role as a rookie may not be substantial. But you only get to keep 53 on the roster. Using six or seven on the edge alone would create a numbers disadvantage in another position group, which keeps those dominos tumbling.<\/p>\n If Green Bay believes Clowney can still be productive and can help contribute to what they hope is a wildly successful 2025, they must explore the idea. You can\u2019t pass on someone that potentially impactful because you\u2019re concerned with who could get snipped on the back end of the 53-man roster.<\/p>\n The real question is how Clowney fits into the picture, who\u2019s role would get reduced, and whether he\u2019d be okay if the Packers still wanted Gary and Van Ness to take a larger chunk of the snaps than him.<\/p>\n Getting a veteran presence with a lot of name recognition in an edge-rusher room with many unknowns sounds great on paper. When you consider the Packers typically don\u2019t pursue players Clowney\u2019s age and how often Gutekunst has sung the praises of Van Ness throughout the offseason, the whole situation seems even less likely.<\/p>\n