Ask Maggie: How many defensive tackles is too many defensive tackles?
By MaggieLoney
Insert Mean Girls gif, “the limit does not exist.” Thankfully, the draft is less than a week away so pretty soon I’ll be able to stop running scenarios in my head for the Packers. One minute I think the Packers are taking an edge rusher on day two. The next day, I’m all-in on the idea that the Packers trade up into the late 30s or early 40s to snag one of the premier defensive tackles in this class. But there’s a reason I’m not in the war room with Brian Gutekunst. I’m better suited here, at Cheesehead TV, writing a weekly mailbag. Let’s get into it.
“What's more likely: the Packers draft a wide receiver on Day 2 or they go DT/CB in some order on Day 2?” - Tony
I know there’s some buzz about the Packers looking at wide receivers early, but I would still be surprised to see it. They’ve brought in three receivers so far on top-30 visits. Ted Hurst from Georgia State and Chris Brazzell II from Tennessee are both probably Day 2 players, but they also talked to Anthony Smith from East Carolina, and he’s not ranked on the consensus big board, so he’d probably be a priority free agent for Green Bay.
As much as I hope the Packers take a defensive tackle, it wouldn’t shock me if they waited until Day 3 and found a run stuffer there. Maybe that’s just me trying not to get my hopes up since the players I fall in love with never end up in Green and Gold. That said, the closer we get to draft night, the more I start to think the Packers go CB/EDGE on Day 2.
Still, though, I’ll say it’s more likely they go DT/CB in some order, and I’ll lean corner first. The rumor mill is working overtime, and Green Bay is being linked to a ton of corners. Perhaps the most notable is Chris Johnson out of San Diego State. I try not to be a “he’s not going to be there!” kind of person because the draft is unpredictable and anyone can fall, but Johnson is 39th on the consensus big board, so it’s possible the Packers are looking to trade up a little bit and grab one of the top corners in this draft.
“Hey Maggie! Looking forward to your final mock draft! Any “sleepers” that you’ve come across in your studies that may have missed the eyes of others? Thanks!” - Jim
I don’t know if they qualify as sleepers since the Packers brought them in on top-30 visits, but two players that fascinate me on late Day 3 are DT Jordan van den Berg from Georgia Tech and EDGE Michael Heldman from Central Michigan. They’re ranked 235 and 269 on the consensus big board, respectively, so they’ll be good candidates for Green Bay in rounds six and seven.
The Packers won’t be looking for starters that late in the draft, so we know that’s when Gutekunst is looking for freaky athletes with desirable traits. Both van den Berg and Heldman fit the bill there.
Van den Berg is a former rugby player who earned a 10.00 relative athletic score (RAS). He’s 6-3, 310lbs and did 35 reps on the bench press. While his functional strength is impressive, he boasts elite speed, posting a 1.61-second 10-yard split. He comes from a rugby background and those skills translate to his game. In 2025, van den Berg posted 11 tackles for loss with 29 total pressures and three sacks. He’s also a much better run defender than pass rusher, with a Pro Football Focus grade of 81.2 in run defense. If the Packers are going to double-dip along the defensive line, a player like van den Berg makes a ton of sense in the later rounds, and it’s easy to see why the team brought him in for a visit.
Heldman is another freak athlete who stood out to me long before I found out that the Packers brought him in for a visit, too. He’s 6-3, 268lbs and has a 9.90 RAS. He was a First-Team All-MAC player in 2025 posting 10.5 sacks, 16.5 tackles for loss, and 53 total pressures. He earned a 93.2 grade from PFF last season which ranked second out of 872 qualifying edge rushers. He also boasts a 26.4% pass rush win rate using PFF metrics, which is unreal. If Green Bay doesn’t take an edge rusher on day two, I think he’s the perfect candidate to round out the room and could push for a roster spot over Brenton Cox Jr. and Arron Mosby.
Because those are two players who had top-30 visits in Green Bay, I’ll give you one more player I like on Day 3 who wasn’t brought in for a visit. Max Bredeson is a tight end/fullback out of Michigan and I think he’d make a ton of sense for the Packers in the seventh round. Nobody is going to be excited about a glorified fullback (okay, I lied, maybe there is a subset of us who really would be excited about selecting a fullback), but his blocking skills are incredible. While he’s not going to be a receiving threat in Matt LaFleur’s offense, that’s okay. He doesn’t need to be. That’s what Tucker Kraft is for. Bredeson, instead, is going to feast as a run blocker and help create rushing lanes for Josh Jacobs. Kraft is going to get his mega contract, and rightfully so. Beyond him, Luke Musgrave hasn’t exactly shown enough to warrant a new contract, and he’ll hit free agency in 2027. The Packers will need additional bodies in the room, and Bredeson makes sense as a blocker first, even if Green Bay wants to give him some receiving opportunities, too.
There won’t be a mailbag next week since we’ll be right in the middle of draft coverage here at Cheesehead TV, but we’ll jump back into things on May 1st. As always, feel free to send any draft questions to [email protected] and I’ll see you then. Enjoy the draft!
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO OUR CHEESEHEAD NATION WEEKLY NEWSLETTER HERE.
__________________________
Maggie Loney is a writer for Cheesehead TV and podcaster for Pack's What She Said. Find her on Bluesky at @MaggieJLoney.
__________________________
Comments (19)
Ferrari-Driver
April 17, 2026 at 10:09 am
I liked the title of your article: "How many defensive tackles is too many defensive tackles."
Many of us have seen comments which read "you can't have too many defensive backs" and similar comments regarding other positions on the team. All of us understand what the person means when he makes such a comment, but a stickler for grammar may say "I think 20 is too many defensive backs and of course he would be correct and in a sense he would just be a "smart ass" for saying that.
On a more serious note Maggie, I think this forum is a good one for you and I think thus far you are doing an excellent job. Best of luck to you.
splitpea1
April 17, 2026 at 11:08 am
I'm with you as far as not getting your hopes up for your favorite prospects as Gute often bucks logic in the early rounds (passing on Cooper Dejean, for instance when there was a need, and of course the infamous Myers over Humphrey selection). There's a lot of love for Chris Johnson, but that far of a trade-up in the second round would probably be too costly without our usual abundance of picks. So if one of the BPAs at that point is a solid NT, then we should jump at the chance; adding another large body on Day 3 and hoping for the best (with a longer developmental time) really doesn't seem to be too helpful--we already have a couple of these types. Cornerback can't wait either, though, so just pray we take the right one(s) that can contribute this season.
stockholder
April 17, 2026 at 11:15 am
Scenarious-
1. The Ras guys at edge should be gone.-
2. What DT can do what Kenny Clarke did? -None!
Likely-??
1. Ted Hurst- Saves on picks next year
2. Reed will be leaving for the money.
Hope-
CB- There is No shutdown Corner. Project only!
Their band-Aids. No CB will unseat a starter.
Still there is one with Make-up speed.
@84 - His name is Tacario Davis.
Edge- Trade up for a RAS guy?
Can we just forget the underwear this year.
We're after depth. The eyeball test; as TT called it.
No exception-
BPA regardless of RAS
Regardless of Need.
Regardless of Hope.
Bitternotsour
April 18, 2026 at 09:07 am
you can't be scenarious
dobber
April 18, 2026 at 09:49 am
I think he's totally sauropod.
golfpacker61
April 17, 2026 at 02:55 pm
Wow, Doctor Doom. There is a great chance Gabe Jacas or Dani Dennis-Sutton are still available @ #52. Either would be starters.
If not trade back 10 spots & take Julian Neal or Davison Igbinosun. Either could start over Valentine Day 1. Both are shutdown corners.
No to Hurst or any WR before Day 3. Then Stribling, Jeff Caldwell, Eric McCalister, J Michael Sturdivan, and other will be available.
CB, Edge, NT, OL are much bigger needs than WR. We have 11 picks already in 2027.
stockholder
April 17, 2026 at 03:57 pm
Wrong gp61-
There are only 3 cbs with make up speed
this year. 2 are going in the first round.
You're judging them on their 40 time.
And that is why so many have failed in GB.
Truthfully trading back for two 3s
is what you want in rebuilding.
It could give you better Trench guys.
Especially needs over BPA.
If you don't take a WR early..
The drop off from Reed, will hurt Love.
And that would be felt next year.
Do you have that much faith in the coaching?
.
It's make or brake this year and we will be
Losing Free Agents again.
golfpacker61
April 19, 2026 at 07:13 am
"You're judging them on their 40 time. And that is why so many have failed in GB."
No Stock, 40 time is a factor, and Igbinosun and Neal are plenty fast. And they are bigger than most, and physical, so they can compete with the taller WRs they will face every week. But a huge factor for me is where they played and were successful at. Both played in the top 2 conferences so they played against the best every game. Ohio State is a DB factory, selecting one of theirs give you a better than average chance of having a good to great player.
"If you don't take a WR early. The drop off from Reed, will hurt Love."
Our WR room is still a positional strength even losing Doubs & Wicks. We could still lose Reed in which case I would draft a WR earlier, just not at #52. And teams lose free agents every year.
gsd3
April 17, 2026 at 03:59 pm
Would love Jacas and Neal.
stockholder
April 17, 2026 at 04:29 pm
Jacas - Has won with power.
The next step won't be college.
His tool kit is empty and will be a project.
Neal is a Zone/boundary CB who has played NB.
He does have tight hips.
Stukes would be a better alternative.
Swisch
April 17, 2026 at 02:58 pm
At age 63, I'm still learning about the game at the NFL level.
As an example, I've never really understood fully that there are different kinds of interior defensive linemen (IDL), just as there are different kinds of wide receivers (WR).
At WR, there's a difference between a speedster who can spread the field with deep routes, and a slot guy who operates for shorter completions and moves the chains. I kind of knew it in the past, but haven't fully appreciated that some guys are better at one role than another. It's important to have complementarity types of WRs for different roles within that position.
Apparently on IDL, they are all big men, but then again some are actually bigger and better in clogging the middle against the run. It seems Wyatt and Hargrave are really good as IDL in general, as big men playing at a traditional, outside tackle -- but that we don't really have any of the bigger guys at IDL who can play nose tackle across from the center.
These bigger IDL are so huge as to almost be freaks -- of such a massive size but with some mobility.
I'm wondering if we should really try to get such a player.
What if, instead, we focused on the somewhat smaller but still quite big outside tackles who are highly athletic? We could combine these guys -- like Wyatt and Hargrave -- in different stunts along with various movements of linebackers to clog the middle, keeping the defense guessing as to what combination we'd use on any given play.
***
I realize that in this comment I'm opening myself to ridicule by exposing my lack of knowledge, possibly to the point of ignorance.
However, I'm willing to take that risk to learn more from other fans and to look for innovative solutions to the interior of our defensive line.
Since these nose tackles are so hard to find, why not at least consider other ways to stop the opposition from running up the middle behind the center?
What if the outside tackles took turns attacking the center from the side, with a linebacker filling in the area left open from behind, and possibly defensive backs at times coming up to help in different places?
If my ideas are inadequate or absurd, maybe some other fan can come up with something better.
Perhaps I'm on solid ground in saying that aren't likely to be any excellent nose tackles, ready to go in 2026, who are going to be walking in the door at Lombardi Avenue from either free agency or the draft.
SicSemperTyrannis
April 17, 2026 at 11:21 pm
Basically you're saying we have the personnel for a 3 / 4 defense, let's stick with that. Everybody assuming they know what our new DC will do may be in for a surprise. (They may also be right)
We'll find out a lot by 10 days from now 🍿
Coldworld
April 17, 2026 at 04:05 pm
It’s not the number it’s the capability. We need a NT who can play the run well and disrupt on passing downs. Late I wouldn’t object to a smaller rush threat. Brooks is in his last year and Hargrave isn’t a long term option.
The key though is a disruptive NT. That’s probably got to be in the 2nd round to be certain. Fix the middle first. If teams can just run over us as they realized that they could later last year, then we waste parsons and any shiny new CB talent we may acquire.
SicSemperTyrannis
April 17, 2026 at 11:22 pm
I'm all in favor of taking BPA at 52 as long as its a NT. And assuming Gutey doesn't screw it up ...
IshpemingPackAttack
April 17, 2026 at 08:36 pm
Amazing job once again Maggie!! I love your weekly mailbag!
dobber
April 18, 2026 at 09:40 am
Sign a NT (for the now), draft a 3T-5T (for long term), keep an eye out for a NT to grow (might already be on the 90).
"While he’s not going to be a receiving threat in Matt LaFleur’s offense, that’s okay. He doesn’t need to be. That’s what Tucker Kraft is for."
Packers need a Y TE in this draft because--if they're going to invest in Kraft--they need to get him away from the scrum around the LOS and cut down his exposure to doofuses falling on his legs. Which means they need an effective blocker whose primary position isn't OL.
They were only just changing how they use Kraft in the passing game when he got hurt, moving from a dumpoff guy with short ADOTs to getting him the ball in intermediate routes in the seam and on the sideline. His play style catching the ball it to seek out and run through contact as it is. He's going to take hits. He's going to get hurt. Packers need to be prepared for that when they give him a big contract.
Coldworld
April 18, 2026 at 01:19 pm
I don’t see a NT that can penetrate that is practically obtainable cap wise and good enough to help now or in the longer term. That does t surprise me because the few who can do both don’t come free often or cheaply. The cost of such a player would dramatically limit our ability to retain key players in the near future. For that reason, I think it’s one position we have to try to draft for, even if one facet is going to take time to develop.
As to TE, I completely agree with your statement of need and the reasons for it. If we have a plus player, we need to maximize him. What Kraft can do for an offense most can’t. Others can block and be a more balanced TE. In this draft there are several from
The mid rounds that can lead and in line block better than we’ve had (excluding Lewis) and still out perform the TE “blockers” we’ve had as pass outlets.
NorthernFinn
April 18, 2026 at 04:56 pm
Maggie the only person that would more excited tan me that we draft a fullback would be Josh Jacobs. The running game needs a lead blocker and Whylie isn’t it.
dobber
April 19, 2026 at 01:27 pm
...so we can watch a fullback getting blown up in the backfield instead of 8!