Finding Packers Pass Rushers: the great debate over college production vs. physical traits
Some argue the Packers need to shift their approach to drafting pass rushers after projects like Lukas Van Ness have failed to produce, but such a change holds considerable risk.
Good morning!
The NFL Scouting Combine kicks off in just a few weeks, and the Green Bay Packers' personnel needs have grown increasingly clear. Accordingly, how the team will attack the draft has become one of the topics du jour, especially when it comes to addressing the defensive front.
Today's edition of The Leap focuses entirely on the Packers' process for identifying pass-rush talent and how the incoming rookie class looks when viewed from that lens.
Thank you for reading and supporting our coverage. You can also support our work by following us on social media:
Jason B. Hirschhorn: @by_JBH on Twitter / @byjbh@bsky.social on Bluesky / @by_jbh on Threads
Peter Bukowski: @Peter_Bukowski on Twitter / @peterbukowski@bsky.social on Bluesky / @peter_bukowski on Threads
The Leap: @TheLeapGB on Twitter / @theleap.bsky.social on Bluesky / The Leap's YouTube channel
If you appreciate thoughtful, independent coverage of the Packers and NFL, please consider becoming a paid subscriber. Your support allows us to serve this community with the stories and reporting it deserves.
As always, thanks for making The Leap a part of your day.
If forced to choose, should the Packers prioritize college production or physical traits regarding rookie pass rushers?
Jason B. Hirschhorn: The debate over production versus measurables resurfaces every year as the draft process begins. Outside of the elite prospects, most of the players along the defensive front enter the NFL with either impressive sack and pressure totals despite limited physical tools or overwhelming athletic gifts that their statistical pass-rush output doesn't reflect.
No single rule exists that, without exception, determines which of the two groups will succeed. Not every bad athlete will fail in the NFL nor will those with great test results always thrive at the next level. With decades of draft data available, one can easily find an example from either category to argue a preference.
However, when considering the full range of information available, the argument for production over physical traits falls apart. Look no further than the players who finished top 10 in pressures this past season, according to Pro Football Focus' charting.
1. Myles Garrett: 62 total pressures, 9.99 Relative Athletic Score
2. Jonathan Greenard: 59, 5.47
3. Trey Hendrickson: 57, 9.53
4. Jared Verse: 55, 9.60
5. Nick Bosa: 53, 9.44
T-6. Zach Allen: 50, 5.14
T-6. Chris Jones: 50, 8.42
T-8. Chase Young: 47, no pre-draft testing
T-8. Za'Darius Smith: 47, 3.73
T-10. Kobie Turner: 46, 7.10
T-10. Jonathon Cooper: 46, 7.70
Just two of the included pass rushers didn't have at least an above-average athletic profile, and one of them (Young) would have ranked at or near the top of the list had he not opted out of pre-draft testing. Even so, seven of the players had an RAS of at least 7.10 and all but one of the top five came in over 9.40.
And 2024's leading pass rushers actually graded as less athletic collectively than most years. In 2023, no one in the top 10 had an RAS lower than 9.31. The season before that, only two tested below 8.33 (Matthew Judon and the aforementioned Smith). In 2021, all of the top 10 pass rushers had a well-above-average RAS, and only two graded worse than 8.90. That last group included Rashan Gary before his ACL tear, by the way.
All of which underscores an important lesson: If you need to find a quality pass rusher in the draft, don't expect to find him among the poor athletic testers.
It shouldn't come as a surprise that the Packers favor traits over production when it comes to pass rushers, at least when forced to choose between the two. Since Ted Thompson took over as general manager in 2005, the team has selected just one edge rusher or interior defensive lineman with a below-average RAS in the first round, and that player -- 2009's B.J. Raji -- only came in so slow because the system doesn't delineate between nose tackles and three-techniques.
Few complained about Green Bay's approach when it produced an All-Pro like Clay Matthews or a stud like Kenny Clark. However, when a project like 2023 first-rounder Lukas Van Ness fails to produce within his first two seasons, some will loudly argue that the Packers should chase college production over everything else.
Such a shift in strategy would almost certainly hurt the Packers. Draft history features far more Jarvis Joneses and Nate Orchards (highly productive collegiate pass rushers with poor physical tools) than Vernon Gholstons and Dion Jordans (the opposite).
Moreover, focusing solely on college production can lead to arguably the most massive mistakes. Take Dallas Cowboys pass rusher Micah Parsons. At Penn State, he generated just 6.5 sacks officially and, according to PFF, 28 total pressures between his two seasons of action. Parsons quite literally generated double the sack total and nearly triple the pressure total during his rookie year in Dallas.
And Parsons hardly represents an outlier. The aforementioned Jones never had more than three sacks in any season at Mississippi State. Cooper topped out at 3.5 at Ohio State. Turner had just two sacks during his lone season in FBS and 15 total over four seasons at FCS Richmond. Yet, they all had high-end athletic traits and used them to develop into top pass rushers in the NFL.
The Packers need to bolster their pass rush, and that pursuit might result in them adding a notable veteran this offseason. But whether or not they acquire one in free agency or via a trade, their approach to the draft can't deviate too far from what history says works.
So, what does all of that mean for Green Bay and the incoming class of pass rushers?
As of now, we only have limited information for the 2025 rookie class, and that doesn't include most of the tests needed for composite metrics like RAS. However, we can look at the currently available information -- confirmed measurements and collegiate productivity -- and use that gauge which pass rushers might come off the board too early for Green Bay to consider or won't fit for a different reason.
Among the top performers, Penn State's Abdul Carter will likely test extremely well (if he tests at all). Marshall's Mike Green also seems likely to test well, though the Packers have not selected an edge defender that light (251 pounds at the Senior Bowl). On the other end of the spectrum, Shemar Stewart looks like a Green Bay defensive end (6-foot-5, 281 pounds, and an insane 83-inch wingspan) but he never produced like a star at Texas A&M, though that program has a poor track record of late when it comes to deploying its best defenders (see: Cooper, Edgerrin).
Compared to the edge defenders, the incoming class of defensive tackles features fewer top-end producers. Michigan's Mason Graham, the clear leader on the chart, currently projects as a top-10 pick. However, Ole Miss' Walter Nolan could conceivably last long enough for the Packers, though opinions vary as to how well he will test in the pre-draft process. Whereas the edge class features a decent number of quality producers who might test well, Green Bay will have to focus more heavily on athletic traits to find a meaningful contributor along the interior.
Still, as history shows, measurable traits better reflect how prospects will perform in the NFL than college production does. That might scare off some teams, but the Packers have demonstrated time and time again that they will pull the trigger on players who have the requisite physical tools even if they haven't put it all together yet.