Before the 2025 NFL season, the Green Bay Packers decided to move Elgton Jenkins back to center, a position he played in college. This came after Josh Myers was not re-signed following the expiration of his rookie contract. To fill the left guard spot Jenkins left, the Packers signed Aaron Banks to a lucrative four-year, $77 million deal. However, Jenkins had earned two Pro Bowls as a left guard and was unhappy being forced into a new role, seeking a contract restructure for more guaranteed money, which the Packers declined.
Banks struggled throughout the first half of the season due to injuries, hindering his performance, while Jenkins broke his leg midseason, ending his campaign. Sean Rhyan stepped in at center after Jenkins’ injury, but questions now arise about the Packers’ decision to move Jenkins and sign Banks to such a costly deal. With Jenkins expected to be released due to salary cap constraints, the move could be seen as a major error by Green Bay.
Analysis: Jenkins’ Strength Was at Left Guard, Not Center
ESPN’s Bill Barnwell recently categorized Jenkins as a Tier Three free agent or likely cut. Barnwell highlighted Jenkins’ success at the guard position and pointed out how the Packers’ offense faltered after Jenkins went down in the 2024 wild-card loss to the Eagles. Jenkins struggled after being switched to center before suffering a season-ending ankle injury in a subsequent game against the same team.
“Jenkins excelled at guard for years, and the Packers’ offense collapsed in the 2024 wild-card loss to the Eagles after Jenkins got hurt in the first quarter. The Packers moved the veteran to center this offseason, and Jenkins struggled in the new role before suffering a season-ending ankle injury in another loss to the Eagles.” – Bill Barnwell, NFL Analyst
“Jenkins is due $19.5 million in 2026, none of which is guaranteed. He’s now on the wrong side of 30, and Green Bay GM Brian Gutekunst is more aggressive about moving on from veterans as they approach or pass 30 than anybody else in the NFL. Jenkins’ days in Green Bay are probably numbered, and I would expect another team to move the veteran back to guard and reap the benefits.” – Bill Barnwell, NFL Analyst
Barnwell’s insights suggest a strong likelihood that any team acquiring Jenkins will return him to guard, his more natural and productive position. This raises questions about whether the Packers mishandled Jenkins’ transition and contract situation, especially considering his proven value in his traditional role.
Financial Decisions and Their Impact on the Packers’ Future
Regardless of position changes, the Packers were widely expected to release Jenkins this offseason for salary cap reasons. The team stands to gain nearly $20 million in cap space by moving on from Jenkins, effectively making his release almost inevitable once they signed Banks. However, this means Green Bay will also need a new center in 2026, as Sean Rhyan is also set to become a free agent with an uncertain future in the team.
Had Jenkins stayed at left guard in 2025, the Packers could have maintained Rhyan at center, a role he covered multiple times last year. The offensive line’s overall underperformance during the season prompts reflection on whether retaining Jenkins at his best position might have helped avoid some of these struggles.
Future Implications for the Green Bay Packers’ Offensive Line
The Packers’ decision to alter Jenkins’ role and invest heavily in Banks has created challenges that could ripple into future seasons. With Jenkins facing release and Rhyan possibly departing, the team will have significant gaps to fill along the interior offensive line. This situation exposes a broader mistake in personnel management and strategic planning that may hamper the offensive line’s stability going forward.
For Green Bay fans and analysts, the Jenkins scenario underscores the risks inherent in shifting star players’ positions and offering oversized contracts without guaranteed returns. The Packers’ front office now faces pressure to correct course and rebuild the line while managing salary cap constraints and veteran departures.
