Josh Jacobs could be on thin ice in Green Bay

Published October 31, 2026 10:41 AM Throughout his off-field incident that resulted in a no-contest plea to misdemeanor battery, the Packers have remained steadfast in their support of running back Josh Jacobs.That could now be changing.The persistent presence of the Packers as one of the teams that have expressed some degree of interest in trading for Colts running back Jonathan Taylor suggests that they’ve at least pondered the possibility of swapping out Jacobs for Taylor.Recent developments don’t help Jacobs’s cause.Beyond the handcuff celebration that Jacobs tried to say wasn’t a handcuff celebration (but that video of the full celebration suggests was a handcuff celebration), Friday’s release of police records indicating that at least three other women have accused Jacobs of domestic violence could shake the team’s apparent resolve to keep him. Throw in the fact that Jacobs is averaging 2.3 yards per carry in his two games back from a six-game stint on paid leave — including 1.9 yards per carry against the worst run defense in the league entering Thursday night’s game — and it’s possible that the Packers will realize that Jacobs is no longer good enough to justify a stubborn circling of the wagons.Cutting Jacobs would raise the issue of termination pay as to the balance of his $10.2 million salary, and it would short-circuit the team’s ability to seek partial repayment of signing-bonus money if/when (when) he’s eventually suspended under the Personal Conduct Policy. For now, we won’t delve into the full extent of the niceties of Article 30 of the CBA; at a minimum, the Packers would have some potential arguments aimed at cutting off his right to any termination pay.Even if the Packers ultimately are on the hook for termination pay, it’s a sunk cost. The question is whether they want to keep him on the team, in light of recent developments.Again, they’ve been linked in multiple reports from ESPNFL to a trade for Jonathan Taylor. That alone is substantial evidence that they’re considering a future without Jacobs that could begin sooner rather than later.