Cory's Corner: Now Is Not The Time To Trade Willis
Coming off an injury-riddled season from Jordan Love, the Packers cannot ignore their best insurance policy.
I’ve heard plenty of people say it during last season.
And now I”m hearing people talk about it as we enter 2025.
People seem to think that Packers quarterback Malik Willis would be a great trade piece. They are thinking that if they can trade away Willis, maybe they can add more depth elsewhere.
However, there is one problem: Jordan Love had injury issues last year. On the season opener’s final drive, he sprained his MCL. Then in Week 8, he had a groin injury.
Willis stepped in and not only went 2-0 to keep the Packers’ season from going sideways. But he also completed 76 percent of his passes in both games against Indianapolis and Tennessee. Against the Colts, he only had two incompletions. He tallied passer ratings of 126.8 and 120.9 and really made the eyebrows go up on a lot of people with some very impressive tight-window throws.
To some, that is enough to leverage a trade for a potential edge rusher — something this defense has been in desperate need of. The last time a Packers defensive player tallied double-digit sacks was when Za’Darius Smith got 12.5 in 2020.
But now is not the time to get rid of Willis. He just opened a lot of people’s eyes. The 2022 third round pick just had one of the best stretches of his career. He proved to plenty of people that he can still play.
The Packers just beefed up their offensive line, but with 17 games, you have to always be prepared at the most important position in all of sports. And with two straight games to open the season against 2024 playoff teams in Detroit and Washington, the Packers need all the insurance they can get.
“I don’t think you guys can appreciate or even comprehend the task that Mailik Willis (had),” said Packers coach Matt LaFleur last season. “I mean, this guy got here three weeks ago. For him to be able to go out there and command our offense — we still had a lot of long calls.”
The 25-year-old is under contract through the 2025 season and has a minuscule cap hit of $1.4 million. Willis has a ton of value on this team by being the guy that can keep this team on track to win its first division title since 2021.
If the Packers were to trade Willis, who is going to get them a couple wins if Love goes down? Sean Clifford? Really? I don’t want Clifford to attempt two passes let alone start a couple times.
Insurance is a necessary evil. If you don’t ever use it, does that mean that it was a waste? Of course not. I still think the best way to keep Love healthy is to mix in Willis with some run-pass-option wrinkles.
So don’t just think of Willis as the classic backup quarterback. Think of him as a weapon that can be used in various types of situations.
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________
Cory Jennerjohn is a graduate from UW-Oshkosh and has been in sports media for over 15 years. He was a co-host on "Clubhouse Live" and has also done various radio and TV work as well. He has written for newspapers, magazines and websites. He currently is a columnist for CHTV and also does various podcasts. He recently earned his Masters degree from the University of Iowa. He can be found on Twitter: @Coryjennerjohn
__________________________
Comments (60)
PackEyedOptimist
May 31, 2025 at 06:36 am
The best reason for not trading Willis is that we currently have good depth at EVERY position on the team--except QB if we trade Willis.
Anyone who wants another edge rusher when we have Gary, LVN, Cox, Enagbare, and just drafted Sorrell and Oliver, PLUS now have Cooper and Simmons as pass rushers....
well, wanting to trade our only quality backup QB for another body there, is just nuts.
LLCHESTY
May 31, 2025 at 08:01 am
Walker is a better blitzer than Simmons.
Packers0808
May 31, 2025 at 06:55 am
Not only not trade him, but probably not possible, tie him down for see able future!
NickPerry
May 31, 2025 at 07:05 am
This isn't a knock on Willis who I thought he was amazing last season. But with two really great performances against the Titans and Colts just this past season and not much before that, what exactly do people think the Packers would get for him?
I doubt there would be a huge market for Willis this next offseason even with a couple more save performances from him like last season. He might get paid a little more to be a backup, but I don't thing he'll be sought after as a starter.
Personally I hope it's the Packers who pursue Willis and sign him to an extension. He's the best backup we've seen here since Matt Flynn. Why exactly would you let him go? Why would you want Clifford as your backup or even this new kid they signed.
Oh shit, I'm having flashbacks to Brett Hundley and being unprepared at the backup QB position! No, lets just KEEP Willis as long as we can.
stockholder
May 31, 2025 at 07:15 am
I'd trade him.
A top 100 pick seems perfect.
Who would back up Love?
Well, when Aaron Rodgers is just sitting there.
Thats a No Brainer.
Rodgers still can play.
And MLF would welcome him back.
I'm still concerned about leadership.
And if I could get in Gute's mind.
We just might win a super-Bowl.
Packers0808
May 31, 2025 at 07:22 am
Holy Christ, now I heard everything!
stockholder
May 31, 2025 at 07:26 am
Wolf signed Jim McMahon primarily due to his extensive experience, particularly in "big games".
TarynsEyes
May 31, 2025 at 08:46 am
Unless you're talking about the SB of 2011, Rodgers' record in 'big games' isn't great, or they'd have a couple more SBs.
stockholder
May 31, 2025 at 09:55 am
No -
Taryn - The OL is fixed.
We have a defense now.
There is No need for a Mobile QB now.
You need a true pocket passer that leads.
TarynsEyes
May 31, 2025 at 10:36 am
If the OL is fixed, then why are there always so many different questions about it.
Having enough OL men to man the positions doesn't mean it's fixed.
When the musical chair game stops, then, there might be stability.
There's a reason why it's played every season, in season, and I'm not talking injury cover, it's always more performance failure cover.
stockholder
May 31, 2025 at 11:42 am
Injuries! (Bahk) and free Agency. Bulaga etc.
Wrong choices at center. After Linsley.
You must remember Rodgers chewing out
Myers?
RG has been a problem since
they moved Turner around.
But the puzzle is about over.
Walker and Tom are the Ots.
Gute spent money on the OL again.
Let's see if it bites him in the ass.
LLCHESTY
May 31, 2025 at 08:03 am
"And if I could get in Gute's mind."
Well that wouldn't end well for Gutey or the Packers.
stockholder
May 31, 2025 at 08:14 am
Re-train your brain.
I'm saying winning is more important,
then just your twisting words.
dobber
May 31, 2025 at 09:39 am
Usually twisting words comes after the winning, yes.
jannesbjornson
May 31, 2025 at 09:40 am
Andy Reid brought in Minshaw. He always has a veteran to cover for Mahomes. Willis would maybe garner a three pick, but not likely?
Packers0808
May 31, 2025 at 09:47 am
Willis a veteran been in NFL three years.
jannesbjornson
May 31, 2025 at 02:06 pm
Willis is not a true passing QB. He can manage a couple games as a RPO guy, but the defenses will counter his tendencies.
Packers0808
May 31, 2025 at 04:17 pm
Not expert like some seem to think are.
LLCHESTY
May 31, 2025 at 10:29 pm
The word salad king accusing me of twisting my words? 🤣🤣🤣
mnbadger
May 31, 2025 at 02:21 pm
I t would definitely end well for my favorite liquor store!
Stock must have been thinking about being in MURPHY's head.
He won't be anywhere near a big decision ever again, which is where all of us and especially stock belong.
GPG!
JimDelGaizoGuy
May 31, 2025 at 08:53 am
This is hilarious! Way to lighten the mood S-holder!
harleycops
May 31, 2025 at 09:16 am
I hope you're not really a stockholder, cuz that would be the dumbest move GB could make. Get off the juice, Stock, lay off the Rodgers' weed,, Holder. Your head is screwed up, you're not thinking straight - there's help for that. Go find some!
LLCHESTY
May 31, 2025 at 10:33 pm
It's those Orange Tree Frogs. One lick and he's hanging onto reality by a thread, two licks and over the cliff he goes.
ricky
May 31, 2025 at 10:57 am
This may be the single worst idea I've heard, since the signing of Jeff Saturday to be the Packers center. Rodgers doesn't want to be a backup, he wants to start. And notice the lack of interest in the rest of the league. When he hit the market, only the Giants and Steelers showed any interest. He quickly told the Giants to go away, and has continued contact with the Steelers. He would have been the starter for both teams, not the backup. The idea of him effectively admitting the Packers were right, and he was wrong would be totally unacceptable for him to admit. Maybe the Packers should get in contact with Favre. He's had plenty of time to rest, and could use the paycheck to pay off his legal bills for all his shenanigans since retiring.
stockholder
May 31, 2025 at 11:58 am
Rodgers needs a OL.
He's got 1 year left to go out on Top.
I'm sure he realizes that.
The steelers are closer to going to the SB.
Example - Peyton Manning.
Were talking back-up.
And the Packers have a choice.
Either you pay Rodgers to Retire a packer.
Which is what I would wait for.
(Especially after offering Favre millions.)
Or you turn the check and let him retire
the legend he had become in GB.
The smart thing is to push Love.
Backing him up with leadership.
And making him mentally tough
to play through injuries.
Oppy
May 31, 2025 at 01:09 pm
Rodgers is a cancer that eats the healthy cells that are the connective tissue of a team.
I can't believe you still refuse to see it.
jannesbjornson
May 31, 2025 at 02:04 pm
He's finished. Get used to the idea...
PackerBackerAZ
June 01, 2025 at 12:48 pm
Good lord man!! Organizations don't pay players to retire from their team. They get a one day no compensation contract to do so. If there is money in the contract it is voided when the player officially retires that day. Your ignorance is appallingly irrefutable.
Ball has seen to it that Love cannot be pushed by giving him that ridiculous contract. I wanted to see a legitimate competition between Willis and Love, but that's now out of the question.
You can't make a player mentally tough. The player, in this case Love, either is or isn't mentally tough. I believe Love is mentally tough, but does he have the mental acuity to be elite? To date that answer is 1/4 of his play yes and 3/4 of his play no.
mnbadger
June 01, 2025 at 06:40 pm
Sorry stock, but no, no, no, no and hell no!
GPG!
WestCoastPackerBacker
May 31, 2025 at 01:01 pm
One big problem. Rodgers is not going to agree to be a backup QB. Ever.
Guam
May 31, 2025 at 07:34 am
It is all about value. Yes, Willis is a very valuable backup and I seriously doubt the Packers are seeking to trade him. However if a QB hungry team (why does Pittsburgh keep coming to mind???) offers a second round draft choice for Willis, do you think the Packers would refuse? Almost every player has a price, but it would be a steep one to pry Willis away from the Packers.
dobber
May 31, 2025 at 09:27 am
"Hot like wasabi when I bust rhymes
Big like LeAnn Rimes
Because I'm all about value"
I think your perspective is right on. If someone offers the Packers what they feel is too good an offer to pass up, then take it and sign a vet to fill the #2 role. There are a few left--Tyler Huntley, Carson Wentz, Desmond Ridder--who could fit the bill, and some teams that drafted QBs will likely be jettisoning a QB at some point.
People who are asking the Packers to sign Willis to an extension need to realize that while he might not be a marquee player, Willis will be looking for a chance to be "the man" and get that kind of financial security. He'll command more on the open market with a QB-needy team looking to take a flier on a possible starter than the Packers are likely willing to commit to a backup while 10 is in the fold, and the Packers are married to Love's deal for at least two more seasons.
In the end, we need to be cognizant of the point that the same thing that limits Willis' trade value (small sample size against poor teams w/ the Packers) should keep us grounded in terms of who he is. Maybe Willis might command a FA contract next off-season that might-could equate to a 3rd round comp pick in '27 (yes, in two years!), but those comp picks can be negated if the Packers sign FAs off the open market to higher end deals. A concrete draft return in 2026 is way more valuable than an iffy comp pick in '27.
nagawicka
May 31, 2025 at 09:39 am
We've got a vet. His name's Malik Willis.
NFLfan
May 31, 2025 at 08:17 am
He's the one player I would not trade.
LeotisHarris
May 31, 2025 at 08:33 am
No trade. Get him on the field in addition to and sometimes in place of Love. The U2 package is just begging to be implemented.
HawkPacker
May 31, 2025 at 11:54 am
I was preaching that last year but it has fallen on deaf ears with the coaches.
Oppy
May 31, 2025 at 01:22 pm
Leotis, with all due respect (and I mean that);
Teams that put their backup QB on the field at the same time as their starting QB- or teams that run wildcat, etc- are teams that will have an injured starting QB sooner than later.
When your starting QB is on the field of play and doesn't have the ball in his hands, he's just another player on the field and loses all the protections inherent with QB play. Defenses actively look to punish these looks to dissuade offenses from using them. It's why that wildcat trend a few years ago is no longer really a thing. The second Love doesn't have a ball snapped into his hands or he hands/pitches it off to another passing threat, he's a blocker, a receiver, or a runner. All three of those provide ample opportunity for defenders to obliterate him.. and they absolutely will.
LeotisHarris
May 31, 2025 at 03:44 pm
Solid point, Oppy.
dobber
May 31, 2025 at 07:03 pm
Isn't a backup QB lining up in the wildcat really just a QB?
Alberta_Packer
May 31, 2025 at 01:50 pm
I'd like to see Willis on the field with Savion Williams - to broaden the run-pass options.
Oppy
May 31, 2025 at 02:02 pm
It would broaden the run options, I'll give you that.
I'm not sold that what the NFL needs is a high-school caliber and a college caliber QB on the field at the same time.
Since'61
May 31, 2025 at 09:06 am
This is not the time to trade Willis. At his current salary he is a bargain and provides solid depth at QB where it could be needed the most. Keep him and possibly offer him an extension to remain in Green Bay. Thanks, Since '61
TarynsEyes
May 31, 2025 at 09:25 am
“I mean, this guy got here three weeks ago. For him to be able to go out there and command our offense — we still had a lot of long calls.”
Does this statement really invoke confidence in the MLF Offensive scheme, something that has been of questionable substance. I wonder, can an opposing Defense learn and command it quickly also. We had suffered before with this possible issue of predictability.
Perhaps it would be better to say, Willis grasped quickly enough of the Offense to succeed against the lesser, which offers no detriment to Love, since the lesser is all they seem to be able to defeat.
If Willis can command the Offense in three weeks, what the heck was the reason to rush to pay Love that contract, especially being in the same Offense for 4 years prior.
I know it isn't that simple, but there should be a lot of food for thought, especially if Love gets off to another slow start against the better teams, which many here seem to think there aren't many, since they're (ahem, cough) favored in 13 games. What if it's another struggle to get 9 wins with Love playing the whole season? A backup QB needs to be had, but he shouldn't be able to do what the starter can, especially when the paying of money is loudly heard.
If the ability of Love to play well, or remain injury free is in doubt, keep Willis, if not, then trade him for what you need, before he hits FA, as he will get more money elsewhere, or even a chance to win the starting job.
Oppy
May 31, 2025 at 01:31 pm
Willis was NEVER in command of the offense. He was handed a custom-built gameplan that limited his need to fully grasp the offense, period.
Look at the run/pass ratio. Look at the use of RPO. Watch Willis actually execute the plays when he did pass..
Bitternotsour will have a fit about it, but Willis wasn't asked to execute an NFL offense as any other backup QB in the league would be asked to do. He was given a completely different gameplan specifically to shield him from his limitations as a QB, and take advantage of his strengths. His success is a testament to MLF's ability to manage the situation and put Willis in a position to succeed despite his deficiencies.
Similarly, no team is offering a 2nd round pick for Willis to be a starting QB, so stop it. (not directed at you, Taryn, but other posters' sentiments today and in the past.) When he hits free agency, I have no doubt he will be picked up by a team hoping to make him into a franchise QB.. barring a miracle, they will fail.
Willis is in the best possible situation for Willis right now in Green Bay, but it is unlikely he'll be satisfied with remaining in a situation where he'll never have an opportunity to be a starter, and it's unlikely Green Bay will be satisfied with Willis as a long-term solution as "the" QB#2, because Willis lacks fundamental traits you want your #2 QB to possess.
Bitternotsour
May 31, 2025 at 05:57 pm
Same fit, correct. Aside from that, it's likely with the changes in the o-line that the Willis crafted offense will BE the offense in 2025. The idea is that you score more points than your opponents
Leatherhead
May 31, 2025 at 06:38 pm
Touchdown, BNS. The "Willis Crafted Offense" is going to look a lot like what we're going to do this year, based on what we've done with our Oline. After 30 years of HOF quarterbacking driving our offense, this is going to be a departure. We can put 5 legit weapons on the field at a time and all the QB has to do is get them the ball. He doesn't have "Make plays' or "create on the run' . Just protect the ball and get it to somebody else.
Oppy
June 01, 2025 at 02:19 am
Malik Willis had 217 snaps on offense in 2024.
Malik Willis had 54 passing attempts in 2024.
54/217=~24.9
Put it down for the record that Bitternotsour and Leatherhead are predicting the 2025 Green Bay Packers offense will be over 75% run, less than 25% pass.
That's apparently what the 2025 offense is going to look like..
<<insert eye-roll emoji here>>
Leatherhead
June 01, 2025 at 01:31 pm
Oppy....seriously?
We're going to see more runs. I have no doubt. 75%? That's pretty extreme. But even at 60%, that's a huge reduction from the decades of high-volume passing attacks.
We threw 479 passes last year in 17 games last year, one of the lowest totals in the league (Eagles were 32nd, we were 30th) (IOW, you can have a very good offense without throwing very much).
In Rodgers last MVP year, 2021, he threw over 600 passes, and by 2024, we're down to 480? That's not an accident, it's a trend, and the offseason changes we've made in offense incline me to believe that we're going to take the ball out of the QBs hands and have other people be the playmakers.
Handoffs, pitches, jet sweeps, reverses, WR screens, and the occasional play action throw. We're done throwing 40 passes a game. We'd like to throw less than 30 times a game. I think we could be seeing something like 25 passes/game AVERAGE (meaning some games would only be about 20 passes).
And of that number.....several will be WR screens or some other "long handoff". We are NOT going to say "Jordan Love...make a play" and force a ball downfield under pressure. I think it'll be a lot more like "Protect the ball and get it to somebody else".
These guys we added...Banks and Belton.....these guys are road graders. Maulers. We have one of the best group of RBs I've ever seen the Packers have.
The 49ers beat us in the 2019 Championship game. They threw 8 passes, completed 6 for 77 yards. Scored 37. They were up 20-0 by the end of the half even without a HOF QB.
I think this is part of the new Green Bay model. We'll see what happens. But do I think we'll throw FEWER than the 479 passes we threw last year? Yes, I do. Do I believe we'll be one of the better rushing teams in the league? Yes I do .
In fact, I'd bet a six pack of Pabst on that.
Bitternotsour
June 01, 2025 at 03:47 pm
And while a Willis run/pass option includes him taking off with the ball, the Love equivalent will be a pass in the flat rather than exposing the franchise to excessive hits.
I'd blocked that 2019 championship game from memory, Raheem Mostert ran rough shod over the defense. Jimmy G just handed off the rock and that was that. While I think we want to emulate the Shanahan offense, that particular iteration was extreme. Still - Mostert, a nice running back is no Josh Jacobs, and he gashed the Pack for over 220 yards...
Oppy
June 01, 2025 at 11:18 pm
"But even at 60%, that's a huge reduction from the decades of high-volume passing attacks."
Cows will fly out of my butthole before we see a season where the run/pass ratio is 60% run, 40% pass.
Barring injury to Love that keeps him sidelined multiple games again, I will bet the house the Packers throw more that 479 passes in 2025. That's easy money.
TarynsEyes
May 31, 2025 at 10:31 pm
I was stating what MLF said, and I was saying in a round about way how much full of it MLF was in saying it.
Oppy
June 01, 2025 at 02:24 am
There's no question about that, Taryn.
I don't expect HCs to put their players on blast in front of the media, but MLF took things a little far on the flip side with those presser statements that day.
There's no question Malik Willis has done everything asked of him, and MLF has cooked up perfect game plans that Willis has executed perfectly.. but he didn't have "full command of the offense", he had a game plan and play selection that was comprised of what he had command of.
nagawicka
May 31, 2025 at 09:37 am
No. Trading Malik Willis is wildly negligent advice, and poor GM franchise management at best. Sure, if Willis *wants* to go, and there's a *substantially* above-value offer on the table. Ok, then. But last year provides proof trading Willis is bad and dumb. One mistake on the OLine, one ding to Jordan Love, and the season tanks for no real reason. Unless you like having a backup QB who gets that operating in world-class quarterback development system provides tremendous advantages. Unless you like having a world-class backup QB b/c you realize it massively improves your chances of making it through the season in great shape for running the postseason gauntlet. You DID see Malik Willis play last season? You saw him play, right?
Just uncritically repeating what you've been told, that this is 'What Happens', isn't really analysis. It's only what happens if Gut & 1265 decide it's in our best interest. It's only what happens when bad teams use bad math and worse logic to parrot what we've been told, that 'this is what you do'. 'It must be what we're supposed to do', merely because it's what we've seen other people do. Because they'd *also* been told 'it's what other people have been told it's what we've seen other people do'. It's the sort of asinine line of reasoning that led Charlotte to *give away* $1 billion to a multibillionaire for a new stadium, 'because he's going to give us a super bowl' and 'this is what we've seen other cities do' [sic]. Imagine trying to explain this to your accountant.
'Line of reasoning' doesn't offer insight into what's best for the Packers, or Willis, or us. Doesn't align with what's made GB a winning franchise. Trade Javon Walker, sure. Preston Smith; jah, both trades work for team & player both. Here both are satisfied and have a mutual interest in sticking with the current arrangement.
Chumming for uninitiated hype-driven fanatics can't be great for the online cred whether or not it drives engagement. 'It's always been this way' 'This is the way it is now' 'T'was ever thus' -- ONLY when you make it this way. Analysis and reactions doesn't change just b/c folks like throwing up those kinds of failed excuses.
fireball
May 31, 2025 at 11:13 am
Seems like a really bad idea to trade Malik. So far, at least, he seems to be a terrific backup quarterback. And the Packers get him for almost nothing. And then there's the impression that Malik could be, is actually, a better quarterback than Love. Remember, all the Packers have on Love is the last half of Love's first year as the fulltime starting quarterback. His so-so inconsistent quarterbacking his second year has been excused to injuries suffered that year.
Lest we forget, the rap on Love when he entered the draft, was " high-risk, high-reward, " " could be a winning hand that leads a team into the future or a siren's song of erratic play and unfulfilled potential, " so on and so on. A huge problem for the Packers is the huge contract they signed him to less than a year ago pretty much based on that last half of his first year as the starting quarterback. He was definitely not worth 55 million dollars a year last year. I suspect Love's huge contract makes it difficult for the Packers to appreciate Malik's potential as a starting quarterback.
It might be real smart to sign Malik to an extension, quick.
nagawicka
June 01, 2025 at 08:54 am
Fantastic points not often mentioned:
* We got Malik Willis for next to nothing. We captured our amazing value already.
* Willis performed at an elite level, stepping in on the fly. That's Majik-Favre territory. Can't buy that.
* Teams move heaven & earth to find even an adequate backup quarterback, e.g. Da Bears; desperately & ineffectively--so there's no value in throwing away the elite backup QB we've *only just now finally* acquired.
* The potential for inconsistency or injury to befall Jordan Love exists and (though small (per plus performance)) has to be accounted for. It's the NFL and where you don't have a functional backup qb you end up playing Love hurt or worse: losing games b/c you play Favre hurt when you actually have Brunell in the house.
* IF you DON'T believe in Love, you've got an elite NFL QB in the house. Not seeing a problem either way.
13TimeChamps
June 01, 2025 at 02:15 pm
"* IF you DON'T believe in Love, you've got an elite NFL QB in the house."
Are you seriously calling Willis an "elite NFL QB"? Based on what exactly? Two games against two crappy teams? MLF designed a great game plan for him and, to be fair, he executed it well. But it was a very limited game plan.
I'm not going to go full-on Oppy here and suggest Willis isn't a legitimate NFL QB, but elite? That's quite a stretch based on his limited playing time.
Let's enjoy having him on the team while he's still here, because I doubt he will agree to a back-up role in 2026. You can't blame him for wanting an opportunity to become a starter somewhere. But it won't be in Green Bay.
nagawicka
June 13, 2025 at 03:31 pm
Nah, everybody saw Willis operate, with near-zero time in the system. LaFleur didn't 'have to' simplify for Willis due to skill-level; Malik had no time to learn, grow, or get comfortable so GB had no choice. Saying he 'had to' to cater to a substandard backup qb has not basis and is wildly contradicted by Malik Willis' on-field work. Poor opponents? c'mON, it's the NFL. Willis showed he could manage the field ini-game, operate within the system, execute the game plan, *run* for real yards opening up a whole new dimension, and hit controlled short passes to move the chains which worked better than hail mary's, it was more starr than favre. It's okay to open your eyes and see Lambeau Field for real when reallly Malik Willis provided no opportunities for folks to imagine a list of shortcomings. Gotta let em play prior to cutting players down to what?? Jerry Tagge level non-all star play?
WD
May 31, 2025 at 12:11 pm
Before we talk about trading Malik we need to fully assess the QB's we have now. Love is our starter. Number two and three is yet to be determined. I am interested in seeing the guy they just added.
Alberta_Packer
May 31, 2025 at 02:33 pm
Of the 32 teams in the NFL (in 2024) - 14 teams did not require their backup QB to play during the regular season. However 18 teams did require their backup to play - whether it be during a game and/ as a starter (including the GBP). Thus producing a 56% probability that a team will need their backup QB to play sometime during the regular season. So the Packers will likely not be trading Willis. Especially as Clifford has basically established himself as just a practice squad QB. Plus Taylor Elgersma being at least one year away from showing what could be his floor or ceiling.
HarryHodag
June 01, 2025 at 06:54 am
Isn't the goal to win? Didn't Jordan Love get hurt last year? Didn't Willis win two games for the Packers?
So if Willis is gone you have Sean Clifford and/or Canadian rookie Taylor Elgersma to lead the team against the Lions, Vikings, Bears, Eagles, Cowboys, etc.
Has someone gone to Peru for mind-expanding intervention or possibly four days in darkness?