Seemingly against all odds, Micah Parsons' contract dispute with the Dallas Cowboys ended with the superstar edge rusher being traded. On Thursday evening, Dallas did the unthinkable, dealing Parsons to the Green Bay Packers in exchange for two first-round picks and defensive tackle Kenny Clark.
The move paid off for Parsons, literally. Upon joining his new team, the Packers handed him a four-year, $188 million contract, which included $120 million fully guaranteed at signing.
Are the Packers legitimate Super Bowl contenders with Parsons? Did they give up too much for him? And where does this leave the Cowboys? Let's dive into that by grading the trade from both perspectives.
Cowboys trade Parsons to Packers for Clark, picks
Packers get: Edge Micah Parsons
Cowboys get: DT Kenny Clark, 2026 first-round pick, 2027 first-round pick
Packers grade: B+
Cowboys grade: C+
I never actually thought this was going to happen. It might be even more surreal for Packers fans -- they must be thinking, the Cowboys traded Parsons to us?
The franchise-altering trade came a week before the 2025 season kicks off, changing what we think of the Cowboys and Packers for this season and beyond. But before I break this down, I want to make one thing clear: There is a price at which it makes sense to trade every player, even Chiefs quarterback Patrick Mahomes. But that doesn't mean Dallas got that type of return for Parsons.
Let's start with the fun side of this deal: Green Bay. Parsons has had between 12 and 14.5 sacks in each of his four NFL seasons, but those numbers don't fully explain his impact. On a down-to-down basis, he wreaks absolute havoc. Last season was the first time in his career that he didn't lead the league in pass rush win rate -- he finished second.
Since 2021, Parsons has had a 30% pass rush win rate (meaning he beat his blocker within 2.5 seconds 30% of the time). That blows every other player out of the water, including Myles Garrett, who was second at 26%. Parsons' 310 pass rush wins also leads the league in that span. He ranks second in pressures with 251 (five behind Maxx Crosby). And it's important to note: Parsons is only 26 years old. He's in the prime of his career.
Green Bay will pay for all of that in draft picks and contract dollars. The question isn't how much better he makes the Packers, but whether he is worth the cost. When discussing contracts, we throw out terms like "market-setting" and "record" far too often, because that's often just a reflection of cap inflation. That is not the case here.
Since 2015, the most expensive contract in terms of APY adjusted into 2025 cap dollars for a non-quarterback was T.J. Watt's 2021 deal with the Pittsburgh Steelers, according to data from OverTheCap.com. That contract would have been $42.8 million per year in the 2025 cap environment. Parsons cleared that number by a large margin.
Green Bay surrendered two first-round picks -- they'll probably be late first-rounders, but you never know! -- and Clark for the right to pay Parsons that deal. Clark had a long, productive career in Green Bay, and while his loss is noteworthy, his impact pales in comparison to Parsons.' Clark is also 30 and coming off a season in which he recorded only one sack and a career-low pass rush win rate of 7%. His deal is a bargain for Dallas this year but will cost $21.5 million in 2026 assuming it is unchanged, per OverTheCap.com.
It is hard to justify trades like this because the acquiring team is giving up draft picks in order to pay what theoretically is a market-price contract. If we surmise that Parsons' expensive contract was "fair," it's hard to find how that can make up for the two first-round picks lost. And the impact of any non-QB fails to reach the level of the top quarterbacks. History is not particularly kind to these multi-first-round-pick deals (thinking Khalil Mack, Jamal Adams and Laremy Tunsil here).
But if there is an exception to that rule, it's this scenario because of the elite level of Parsons' play, his youth and -- most importantly -- because of the boost it provides the Packers' Super Bowl chances now and in the future.
Prior to Thursday's deal, the Packers were heading into the season as a fringe Super Bowl contender -- ESPN's Football Power Index gave them a 3% chance to win it -- but with easily visible upside. They're coming off an 11-win season in which they had the lowest snap-weighted age in the NFL, had to start backup quarterback Malik Willis for two games and almost certainly could have had a more efficient offense had they not been quite so run-heavy.
Even though the Packers ranked fourth in defensive EPA per play last season, the roster still has a clear pass-rush weakness. Now they've acquired perhaps the best player possible to fix that problem.
Sam Acho and EJ Manuel react to the Cowboys trading Micah Parsons to the Packers.
And because of Parsons' age, quarterback Jordan Love and the team in general, this isn't an "all-in for 2025" situation. The Packers have set themselves up for years of contention (albeit without first-round picks the next two years). And that's why I think this high-leverage move is worth it.
Let's flip to the Cowboys.
Before Thursday, I felt the foundation was in place for Dallas to have a good team. Yes, the Cowboys were 7-10 last season, but that was in a season in which quarterback Dak Prescott missed half of the campaign. Prior to that, the nucleus of Prescott, Parsons and wide receiver CeeDee Lamb helped Dallas win 12 games in three consecutive seasons. The team acquired George Pickens to address a major need at WR2, and while the roster was hardly perfect -- it ranked 18th in FPI before the trade -- it was one good draft away from being dangerous.
That's a much harder sell with Parsons gone.
To be fair, Dallas' pass rush still has a fair amount of potential. Veteran Dante Fowler Jr. is fresh off a 10.5-sack season with Washington. And he's surrounded by upside players. Second-rounder Donovan Ezeiruaku has been a standout in training camp, per ESPN's Todd Archer. Former backup Sam Williams flashed real potential in 2022 and 2023, when he combined for a well-above-average 22% pass rush win rate before missing last season with a torn ACL. And Dallas is still high on Marshawn Kneeland, last year's second-round pick.
But did the Cowboys get the most they could have for Parsons? The obvious comparison is the Raiders' trade of Mack in 2018 (that deal was for slightly less than two first-round picks), but Parsons is a better player now than Mack was then. And would the Cowboys have gotten more for Parsons had they made him available for a trade in March? My feeling is yes.
This might change the Cowboys' current trajectory, but they do recoup all the surplus value the Packers gave up. There will be pain here -- this certainly hurts Dallas in the short term -- but there's a world where the Cowboys can use the extra picks (especially if they trade down for even more selections) to build the foundation of their next contending team. This is usually good strategy.
So while I'll knock the Cowboys for not extending Parsons to begin with and for not trading him for (presumably) more earlier in the offseason, this move will probably not be as bad in the long term as the PR hit they are taking right now.