But Van Ness never started a game during his time at Iowa.
This is just out and out misrepresentation at best and a lie by omission at worst. Everyone has heard how the coach at Iowa started the seniors as a reward for staying in the program through their senior year. He played more reps than the starters in 2021 and 2022.
I can see Gutekunst making the mistake of picking up his 5th year option. He retains and overpays many players that are undeserving.

4 sacks as a rookie, 3 sacks in year 2, 2.5 (including the playoff game) sacks in year 3, and two starts (after Micah went down) in his 3 years in Green Bay.

Does the above not scream absolutely give LVN $15,000,000?

How else can Gutey prove how wise he was to draft LVN at #13 overall instead of All-Pros Jaxon Smith-Njigba and Christian Gonzalez other than to shower #90 with a huge raise and give him two additional years to prove his worth?

And remember, Gutey gave another one of his 1st round gems Darnell Savage a 5th year option, so why not pay an edge who has demonstrated so much during his 3 seasons in Green Bay.

If he gets the 5th, it will a costly move if he backslides.

I don't see him doing that. He seems to be a hard worker and the $15 M, should he quickly produce during the 2026 season, could just be the short term cost of a longer in season multiyear extension.

I don't know that the Packers have a lot of choice.

Instead, they could go the "here's two years with a modest guarantee" like they did with Watson, to push off his 2027 cap number and give them one more year. (IN EDIT) I now see this proposed in the article, and I wouldn't be surprised if this is the route they choose.

yes- the cost for des keep going up.
Besides that 5th year is the " show me."

The 13th pick and after three seasons he still can only be a starter by default. I would offer him a backups deal for 4 years with the ability to cut him loose with no severe cap hit. He hasn't earned the 5th year option money, and we cannot allow a Nick Perry contract year to make fools of us again, as like Gary. Repeat this, the 13th pick, and he still seems a foundation-less building block. The sampler you get in the store, never quite tastes the same after you buy it. There really is no great evidence that he'll be better, stop buying a product based on what you want it to be, but rather what you have been shown to be. He might raise the backup floor closer to the starter ceiling, but he'll never be the deserving starter.

Regardless of what the Packers do, I'm pretty sure that Van Ness is going to be playing in this league for a while yet.

No, he hasn't done enough by a long shot, but watch the Packers pick up the option anyway. Sometimes Gute believes so much in his players that it morphs into wishful thinking. With the almost certain release of Gary, that will create an opportunity for LVN to start, now that he's "starting to understand the position, etc." after three years (LOL). It's just a question of whether his development will continue to inch along or materialize into real results and real numbers. This is a difficult decision, but only due to the lack of financial leeway and draft capital; but Gute got himself into this by drafting an extremely raw player.

Even though many projected LVN to be a back half first round pick, isn't our GM supposed to be smarter than the online scouting reports?

Looked at dispassionately, to date he’s a slightly greater pass rushing threat than Enagbare and as good against the run. That’s an excellent number 3 DE. Those players don’t get 15 million a year.

Let him play it out and prove otherwise. If Enagbare and Gary are gone he will be a valuable piece but we will still need to replace Gary with a player with some rush threat if we want to improve. If either of those stays, he’s less valuable as a primary run player.

If he continues as he is, he will probably get a little more than Enagbare does this year as a rotational piece after next year.

The philosophy should be with these types of guys is to negotiate a contract extention - The average will be less than the 5th year and if he exceeds expectations in his 5th year it is a win win - if he doesnt he can be released without a big dead cap hit and if he does well you dont have to pay big time for his second contract. Guys like this get the second pay and guaranteed - which might make sense especially if injuries have hurt his performances.

What I find amazing is some team will pay Rasheed Walker, a below average LT, a bunch of money. Lots of teams do dumb things.

He's pretty, like LaFleur, so obviously you have to keep him around and pay him.

Results be damned.
*********
RESULT'S BE DAMNED
**********
"That ain't funny man!!!" - Thumbs down crowd....lol

Brenton Cox career games: 15 Sacks: 5. O.33 sacks per game

Van Ness career games: 43 Sacks: 8.5. 0.19 sacks per game.

That probably drastically over favors Van Ness, since he’s played far more snaps per game. The decision on Cox is whether we tender him at probably 3.45 million this year or gamble and try to get him cheaper. Contrast that with the level of Van Ness’ option for 2027. Cox has also played the run pretty well.

P.S. Just as a frame of reference,
Parsons career games: 77 Sacks: 65. 0.84 sacks per game.
Gary career games: 106 Sacks: 46.5. 0.43 sacks per game.

Van Ness is not close to producing at a starter level and plays at a position where production tends to start early and be front end heavy.

I would not give him the 5th year option. He has yet to earn it. Let him play out his 4th season and if he is having a very impressive season then work on extending him.

Granting him the 5th year option at this point is just throwing money away and the Packers have done that with enough undeserving players over the years.

Thanks, Since '61

It's a fairly straightforward analysis. Gary has to go at the money he's earning so, not an option. You're left with paying Enagbare or Van Ness. Cox and the others are still here regardless. You could plan to draft another edge rusher and hope for the best but, we took 2 last year lower in the draft and that's what would happen this year as well so, not really an option. Free agency is always there but, no money so, not an option. Trade for a guy is possible but, trade who and at what price, so not an option. And we're back to Enagbare and Van Ness. Biggest upside? Far and away it's Van Ness if for no other reason than Parson's sees the talent Van Ness has. Parsons hasn't talked any other guys up like he's talked up Van Ness. Van Ness is only 25 and this season was basically a wash due to injury. Van Ness is the guy whether by default, circumstances, money, potential, or whatever metric you want to use.

Let’s see drafted in the first round and was a back up his first 3 seasons . By passed by a 5th rounder for a starting role . Nicknamed “ Hercules “ at Iowa ( Gute was all over that ) . Hurt a good majority of the time so far in his short career . Yeah Gute wants to so bad . But NO don’t do it Gute . Save the money .

Another note STEELERS HIRES MCCARTHY AS HEAD COACH!

I'm just a fan so hope often displaces strategic thinking, but at least I know I don't know. One fellow how does know is Micah Parsons, and in September he was praising LVN and went out of his way to say he has a very high ceiling. Perhaps Gute sees it too. We'll find out soon enough.

Gutekunst gets graded as a GM and 'talent-evaluator' by 5th year deals and 2nd contracts-justifies his initial decision; though we know many have fizzled out-

By the time he learns how to play the position it will be time for him to retire. Another awful 1st round reach by front office. Do not extend him its a waste of cap room.

I am a diehard Hawkeye fan too, but Van Ness never should have been a 1st round pick. The underwear olympics was the deciding factor. He is a great athlete who ran a super 40 yard dash. He might have been a solid late 2nd rounder, definitely a 3rd rounder, but he was a project with physical talent with not as much playing time as he should have got at Iowa.

This is exactly why I said GB had no business drafting Shermar Stewart last year. The Bengals selected Stewart solely based on his physical talent and projection of what he could be. He had no stats whatsoever in college to deserve being a first round pick, and it turns out he is a head case as well.

Van Ness will never be a "Diva" for the Packers, and he could still have a solid NFL career. I said last year that his real best position might be to move inside because he is big enough to do so. He was successful doing that at Iowa. His real advantage there would be his speed at that size 6'5 280+. Bottom line is no to the 5th year, he has done nothing so far to remotely deserve that kind of money. See how this year goes and sign him to a 3 year contract @ $5 million per year.

Long story short: No to resigning LVN.
Stats rarely lie, and he just doesn't have them.
Plus he's always hurt.
Sadly, a wasted 1st round pick. Got to draft better this year.
The Szotman

So far he has played more like a 7th round draft pick than a 1st rounder. Is he now just finally coming into his own? Only the coaches know that. Based on past performance though he sure doesn't appear to be a $15 million per year guy.

typical Gutey first rounder: a bust

Van Ness is another example of drafting a superior athlete, rather than drafting a superior football player. The idea of "draft and develop" only works if the player already has strong fundamentals, and needs coaches to develop his natural football abilities and instincts for the pro game. But when the drafted player lacks basic football instincts, or doesn't get the coaching he needs (LVN's previous Packer DL coach didn't even teach him to do a spin move to elude blockers), there is a problem.
He should be extended on a team friendly contract, and hopefully he can develop into a player who can at least be part of a regular rotation of defenders.

Gute was looking for another Aaron Kampman and got another Jamal Reynolds . Move on and learn from your mistakes for all of our sakes .

I would resign Enagbare to a modest, prove it-type deal instead of picking up LVN's 5th year option. To me, #55 made more impact plays AND has a better health history. Hard to be effective when you're not on the field.

If Van Ness had been relatively healthy all of last season, and played well all year, then this article would be appropriate. As it wasn't the case, and Van Ness merely gave flashes of getting better, there is no way any team would give him the 5th year option.

It's too bad Van Ness, Cox, and Oliver missed so much time with injuries because I was excited to see if the new coach Covington could unlock something that isn't clicking, especially for Lucas. Covington's specialty was D-line coming in, but Wyatt was the only player on the D-line who took a jump this year. And honestly that could also be attributed to the trade for Parsons.

Adding a talent like Parsons made the whole defense better, but it also exposed our weaknesses to the GB management. Gary and the rest of the D-line should have had a breakout year with all the attention on Parsons. Think how much better our D would have been if we even had league average talented CBs. That weakness was compounded by the failed acquisition of Hobbs, and the mind boggling not drafting any early CBs to address the biggest need we had.

LVN is a swing and a miss, Its too bad, I really wanted him to be great, but he just isnt. Give #99 his snaps, now that guy has some pop.

If they enjoy someone getting stonewalled or being pushed by the pocket then go ahead and pick up his option. Why not prolong the mistake?

He was never a first round caliber pick. He would've been there in the second round.

He doesn't seem to have any moves to break thru. I thought they said he used a swim move in practice. I can only assume that was in a pool somewhere in the facility.

I'll expect them to make the wrong decision.

1) He never was a 'star' at Iowa. He was behind two other players.
2) The Packers have little choice, especially with Gary likely gone and probably Enagbare. Workable ends don't grow on trees.
3) The new defensive coordinator will have much to say about it.
4) They could not pick up the option then try to sign him.(risky)

I fall back to my basic belief that unless you have someone in the wings capable of filling a role you need to stick with him. The Packers have a huge need in the interior d-line, cornerback and likely linebacker. Now is not the time to voluntarily add another issue.

This has a Nick Perry and Rashan Gary feeling to it in my bones....or maybe that's the polar vortex we are currently under.

Sort of comes down to what they do with Gary. The probably aren't keeping both but they have to keep one. I think LVN will be the one they keep as his contract won't be as heavy and he is younger.

I disliked the pick and #90 hasn’t done anything to change my mind. He’s definitely a bust, but they need backups. So maybe, if he’s cheap enough.

NO.

I don’t do film study, but I do think I’m slightly more than just a casual fan. LVN seems to hustle, but I do not find his production nor his availability to be encouraging.

If he DOES blow up in year 4, then what? Has he “figured it out”? Or was it a one off?

The fact that Gute picked this guy at # 13 (!) overall instead of JSN still pisses me off . Pick up his option ? Yeah then tear it up .

The question is not really whether he's done enough (the answer to that is no), but whether he is worth the investment based on potential. Van Ness at least made it interesting by playing better this season. He had a strip sack in the playoff game, but unfortunately it was recovered by the Bears. I lean slightly toward no on the fifth-year option, but if they decide to pick it up, they will have a viable starter opposite Micah Parsons for two more years instead of just one. With all their other needs, I don't think they can afford to invest any real draft capital on that position in the next couple years. So I can see both sides here.

Let’s say a guy is completely AVERAGE as an edge rusher. He plays the majority of the snaps for his team and stays healthy all season. How many sacks does he get? 5? 6?

How does a first-round selection go thru four years of HS football, four years college, and three years pro and not learn something other than a bull-rush?

I'm not sure he's done enough to warrant anything, however, the Packers knew he was a project when they drafted him...at 13th overall (I don't encourage anyone to go back and see who Gutey passed up). That's too huge of an investment to call it quits. Plus, he's now had 3 different DC's since he's been on the team, along with different DL coaches, lots of turnover for a developing player. Which is why I think they will re-sign him to a 5th year option.
As a fan and observer, he seems to be making some improvements to his game, however, we need to see him take his game to another level because he will be a starter for the first time next season. His critics will say that he needs better technique and he MUST add more to his game than just a bull rush. I can't disagree with that. But I recall the great Aaron Kampman, who started 30 more games than LVN over his first three years, took off his 4th year in the league. We're all hopeful that LVN follows his fellow Hawkeye's footsteps...but only time will tell. One thing working in his favor is that he seems to have the attention of Parsons who praised him throughout camp and into the season....I'll trust whatever #1 sees, now it's time for LVN to show everyone else what he can do....

No. At $15M, it isn't a close call.

GB should not exercise LVN's option just because they cut Gary and let Enagbare walk (assuming they do). Exercising 5th year options just because the team lacks talent at a position leads to trouble.

LVN is due $3.1M in cash for 2026 and his option is projected at $14.97M, a total of $18M. The $3M in 2026 is fully guaranteed and the $14.97M would be fully guaranteed.

That seems to leave plenty of room for both sides to reach a compromise that works for both. Maybe 2 years for $12M to $13M. Or 2 years, $5M signing bonus, $2M in 2026 base salary and workout bonus, and $6M base in 2027 with escalators for achievements reached in 2026, like sacks, snaps, etc. If he gets 8 sacks in 2026, his 2027 base escalates to $9M. They did something like this with Preston Smith with a reasonable result.