Purple Insider - a Minnesota Vikings and NFL podcast - What the numbers told us about the Vikings all along, crazy trade ideas and cap questions (A Fan's Only pod)

Episode Date: January 26, 2023

Matthew Coller answers Minnesota Vikings fan questions, from whether stats like DVOA and point differential were warning fans all along to a wild idea about trading a Vikings star to why contracts are structured the way they are and much much more... Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Purple Insider is presented by Liquid Death, delicious water that's bringing death to plastic. Learn more at liquiddeath.com slash insider. Hello, welcome to another episode of Purple Insider. Matthew Collar here, and this is another fans-only podcast. And trust me, there are a number of these that will be coming on the way because I have received so many off-season questions from you guys. A couple of episodes on the way. Just a real quick update on the situation when it comes to the defensive coordinator. The Vikings interviewed Mike Pettin, their assistant coach, former Packers defensive coordinator, today.

And they have already interviewed, I believe, Sean Desai, who comes from Seattle. Ryan Nielsen from the New Orleans Saints. And Brian Flores is reportedly on the list that he is going to have his interview soon. If not, as you've listened to this, maybe they've already done it. And I could attempt to rank the candidates, but I don't really know how. I mean, Mike Patton maybe is a discussion there of, look, if it was the same system that mike pettin used in green bay that they were trying to emulate with ed donatel is that something you want again uh do you stick with the same system because that's what you've taught to guys already like lewis seen andrew booth jr brian asamoah and i

do believe that if there was a little better on the play calling side, a little better on the adjustment side, and a lot better on the talent side, that this system can be effective. And you don't have to look all that far to find examples of it working in the NFL. But I do know that, you know, when Mike Pettin was the defensive coordinator in Green Bay, there, you know, weren't the happiest Green Bay fans, I think, with the way that their defenses went over a couple of years. And I guess I'm starting to think that when it comes to this type of defense, that you just, you can't just have like good players and fill spots. Maybe you need to have really, really good players. Even when you go back and look at Vic Fangio, it was very successful when

what? The roster was excellent. And I think the Vikings are a ways from an excellent roster, unless there are huge sweeping changes. That doesn't mean they shouldn't give the job to Petten. He deserves an interview based on his past. But I think when you have a season like last year, you'd rather look maybe to something else than going back to a different version of the same thing. I don't know. I mean, maybe they will feel that way. I think if they do go with Mike Pettin, I'd be very surprised.

And I would also wonder why that change wasn't mid-season if they thought that Mike Pettin was a better option to run their defense than Ed Donatel. So I think that they're going to continue to look at some of these other candidates, other systems, maybe a more aggressive version of what they have, and we'll go from there. So that's kind of your mini updates. And let's get to your questions. All right, this one comes from Aaron. I wanted to get your thoughts on the fact that after Saturday night,

the top six teams in the playoffs were the top six in DVOA with four of the top five teams playing championship weekend. DVOA is the football outsiders kind of catch-all team strength stat. Let's see, those top six teams were also the top six in point differential. It's almost like these stats can be indicators of the type of team you truly are. I heard a lot of Vikings fans throughout the season saying these stats didn't matter because we had a good record. So the way that I look at it is there's no one statistic,

whether it's point differential or DVOA or expected points added or anything that's supposed to be a catch-all that will always tell you who the best teams are going to be and who's going to win and go deep in the playoffs. The way I look at it is you have to meet certain statistical markers to get an invite to the party, to be a real Super Bowl contender. And those are usually a top five offense offense most of the teams that have been to the super bowl in the last whatever number of years five seven years are all top five offenses top passing games those things will get you a ticket to potentially get to the super bowl and there are outliers to

all of these things of course you know there's the team here or there that didn't have a very high point differential or that wasn't a number one seed or two seed. It used to be historically that it was one and two seeds. And then last year it was two number four seeds. And so these things can have exceptions to the rule. And there have been teams in the past that didn't have the strongest DVOA, didn't have unbelievable point differentials. The thing with the Vikings that was so unique is they were not just not getting a ticket statistically, they were getting

thrown out by the bouncers statistically. DVOA thought they weren't good at all, which I thought maybe was too aggressive, right? They were clearly a good football team. Uh, but you know, when you fall down to the Colts like that, uh, statistic like DVO way that takes opponent strength into account is going to hammer you for giving up that many points and falling down to, uh, the Indianapolis Colts. And that's maybe part of it too, that when we look at the end of the year, they didn't face a whole lot of other teams that had dynamic offenses, right? So if you gave up a lot of points to the New York Jets and the New England Patriots, you are going to get slammed by a statistic like DVOA. Point differential, I mean,

there's long been this kind of thing, right, where if you don't think of them as individual games, but you think of it rather as plays, sort of like a basketball game where you think of it as per possession. So per play, we look at that a lot yards per play, uh, adjusted yards per pass attempt per rush, those types of things. And if we looked at it kind of on a per play over the full season, then you get where that point differential kind of comes in, where you assume that there's going to be a distribution of opponents and how well did you do against them over the long haul, not just over this week, you found a way to win that week, you found a way to win. And those things are better indicators. I mean, a team that

outscores its opponents over a whole season by 150 points versus a team that doesn't outscore their opponents. I mean, which one would you say was going to be the stronger team? Of course, it's going to be the one that outscores their opponent. But where I would defend Vikings fans is it's just not something you really want to talk about when your team continues to find a way to win. When you're enjoying the team, when the team has endeared itself to you the way that the 2022 Vikings did over the season, when a lot of things were going their way, when they were healthy, when there was elements of Kirk Cousins game that were better. I mean, you didn't imagine these

things that Kirk Cousins had those comebacks and I mean, you didn't imagine these things that Kirk Cousins had those comebacks and made those big plays at the end of games like that really happened. And I think for some people it's like, oh, okay. Thanks so much for the wet blanket here after we just won a game. And I, and I, and look, I am the most guilty person of this, of course, because I really enjoy using the numbers to give me a guiding light toward what the truth is about the team. And it's always been very, very helpful for me to know what those statistical indicators are and to be able to look at them and say, are you really a contender?

Is the arrow pointing this way or that way? What should they be doing? Like all those things are really tremendous tools for me, but they're also really obnoxious when they are saying something about your team, like the point differential or like the DVOA for this year. So I don't blame anybody who heard those arguments and discussions and was like, whatever, man, other teams have won like this. Let's see what happens.

I totally get that opinion. But I think that what this year showed us was that's why those numbers are used. And when we look at what they need to do in the future, these numbers also become relevant as well, because if you didn't know that the Vikings had 13 wins, but I gave you access to every other data point that you could look at. What would you say about this team? You would guess that it was probably a nine or 10 win team. You would guess that some of the same issues cropped up as they did before and that things weren't wildly different from the past. That's only if I give it to you on paper, I don't tell you about the locker room or Kevin O'Connell's connection with players or the last minute drives and all those different types

of things. But you know, I mean, history has kind of not been kind to teams like this in the future because a lot of times you win a lot of those close games and then it comes back the other way, just like they didn't win those close games in 2021. So you should use these tools, but they don't mean you have to like hate your team or not believe that your team can win on a weekly basis. I thought they would win against the New York Giants. I even underestimated how poorly they would do the second time through on defense. I thought that there would be some adjustments. I thought they would play better. And I never had a whole lot of respect for the giants because I thought they were a worse version, uh, with a lot of the same things that happened where they didn't beat

great opponents. And they had, uh, an easy schedule early on the season where they kind of got ahead and then just sort of survived to the end of the year. So I really thought that the Vikings would win despite some of these things. So I think that you use them and they do give you a lot of information about how truly strong a team is. And it eliminates a lot of those random elements that we're always trying to kind of parse through when it comes to a season and how good a team is. But it's the fundamental question,

how good is your team? Can they really win the Superbowl that we ask all season long? And the Vikings, the answer to those questions, if you're using the numbers was always probably not. Now, could they have just as easily broken a tackle with TJ Hawkinson, gotten a first down, won the game, gone to the divisional round. Yeah. But eventually those numbers were going to kind of show themselves against some of the stronger teams. And you really saw that with the way that San Francisco and Philadelphia played. Those teams were even on another level than a team like the Dallas Cowboys. And those are the two strongest teams. A lot of times that's how it works out.

And so what you should do is you should look at the teams that dominate DVO way, dominate expected points, added have elite offenses. How did they build it? How did they get there? So you don't have to be the team or the fan base. Who's talking about, Hey, who cares about those statistics? You're the team that's bragging about those statistics. And again, nothing is perfect. I mean, I think DVO actually liked last year's Vikings and I don't know, you know, because they had a little bit of a tougher quarterback schedule and because they played some good teams like Baltimore, very close the Rams. I think they played within one score like they, you know, so I think even a statistic like that might've argued that the Vikings were a little stronger last year than they

actually were. So you always have to use what you know, your common sense, your context and everything else, but where you want to be truly is the team that's saying our offense and defense are really strong. I've, I've always, I feel like I've always said this in the off season, like, man, how do those teams get to the Superbowl by having a good offense? Yes. By having a good defense. Yes. Right. It's like by being the best complete team. So how do they build a complete team that can beat opponents by 150 points? Uh, that's, that's the way you have to look at it. And so you don't have to justify it to yourself

that your team hasn't done that. And that's the fundamental question really for this off season, isn't it? How do you get to San Francisco or Philadelphia levels as a complete team? Do you do it through signing a couple more free agents, patching holes and hoping to get to the 15th best defense? I don't know. I don't know if that's really the answer. So thanks for the question, Aaron. Next question comes from Alan from Delaware. Radical thought with the value of a quarterback on a rookie deal. If you were a GM, would you consider trading Justin Jefferson and our first round pick for one of these 2023 quarterbacks? If yes, which one? Wow, that is a really hard question because Justin Jefferson is as great as it gets, truly as great as it gets for his position.

And I tend to think that you would rather draft the fifth best quarterback in a draft class and give him Justin Jefferson than get the first best prospect in a draft class and not have justin jefferson but if your only trade for me is let's just say it's bryce young bryce young at number one overall for justin jefferson but you also have to give up your first i think that might be too much for giving it also having to give up the first I might rather just wait and let it play out for next year and see the natural tank possibly, or just don't do enough and make sure you're drafting kind of in the top 15. So you can get one of the top three or four quarterbacks, or at least be in range of trading up because giving up Jefferson and a first round pick means that your cupboard is completely

bare with your roster. And one thing that does have to be considered is look at Justin Fields and now going into his third year with nothing. And we all assume that they're going to sign some people, draft some people, and that the Bears will take a step up like the Jaguars did this year. But that is not a guarantee that all signings just work out or that high draft picks just work out. If you miss on some of those things, they can really blow you up for a long time.

And if you set up a young quarterback in a very bad situation, sometimes, and who knows whether it's the player or whether it's the situation, and that's always going to be a debate, but sometimes there are guys that just never have a chance in the world at succeeding. And there are other quarterbacks who are dropped into great positions. And look, you know, I've seen here or there like,

oh, well, you know, Patrick Mahomes got to come onto a very good team with Andy Reed. And that is true. I'm sure he would have been a great quarterback wherever he went. Just look at the guy play, but would he have been five straight championship weekends? Like probably not, uh, to be able to join Andy Reid and a very good franchise and a very good team that had a solid roster and some star players like Tyreek Hill and Travis Kelsey that helped them be as quickly successful as they are. And the same thing goes for, you know, Jalen Hurts, where he comes on to a team that had a good amount of talent and they were really a couple of players away and they were

able to get to that point by his third year, but second year starting, that's where you want to be. And it's hard to get there. If you move on from Jefferson and then look at the roster and go, what do we got? Um, you might as well just tank for the next year, trade away cousins, play whoever at quarterback, Jake Browning, uh, or Kyle Slaughter or something and lose every game. And then draft number one, that probably makes more sense to give the number one draft pick in the future, Justin Jefferson, rather than trading him for him. But if you said this is the only trade that you can ever have to have a young quarterback, you might do it. You might do it because it is so valuable because you can trade for another wide receiver. I mean, there's a lot of evidence to suggest that Devante Adams, Stefan Diggs, Tyreek Hill, AJ Brown. These are all elite wide receivers who have been traded

just within the last couple of years. You can draft or trade for a great wide receiver. Maybe not as great as Jefferson, maybe not as great, but really good. And then afford another one. I mean, yeah, it's hard. Like, cause I, any way that I answer, I don't want it to sound like at all. I'm degrading Justin Jefferson's value. And it really says something because there's only about five receivers in the league where I would even hesitate for a second to talk about trading up. He is one of them. But if you said this is the only deal for the way the Vikings could get a top quarterback prospect within the next three years, I would say, yes, let's do it. No matter how much pain that would be for everybody who loves Justin Jefferson, the only way to the top from where they are right now seems to be to get that quarterback in the

draft. It doesn't have to be that way, but that's how it looks. And it's the most likely way to get yourself there. So I guess I would, it's an interesting hypothetical. I don't even know if, and I guess this might be another way to look at it is if it was the Texans and that offer came in, do the Texans take it? Do they take a receiver, an elite receiver and a first round pick? I don't even know if they would, or Bryce young to have the first overall pick because that's a Texans franchise. Look at them. They were a middling team with Matt Schaub, a middling quarterback with a great receiver in Andre Johnson. They were never truly a contender,

even though they were good. And then they get Deshaun Watson and suddenly they are, and they did not take full advantage of his rookie deal, but they were still a legit team that had a chance every year with Deshaun Watson. And of course, you know, the off field stuff is what it is, but I mean, that's a franchise that understands how much Deshaun Watson changed everything for them. And you can find a lot of examples, no guarantees, no guarantees at all. And Cleveland is that way.

And maybe Bryce Young would be a bust, but you take that chance to get a shot, to get the, you know, to get a ticket to the party, to have a chance to build a complete team to try to really go after the Superbowl. It's a fun hypothetical. I don't know. I'm sure there'd be a ton of different answers because a lot of people look at it that way is the only ways to get that young quarterback. And other people might say, use Jefferson to build around and give the quarterback

a good situation. And there's a little bit of chicken and egg. And I would listen to both arguments. I'm not saying definitively one way or the other here. I think it's a really fun hypothetical because I don't know exactly what I would do if I were them and that offer was on the table. The one thing I would say is if you gave me other options like trading up to get the third best quarterback prospect, I would probably do that and keep Jefferson. But if that's the only option, I don't know. Great question. Folks, it is time once again for us to have a discussion about liquid death. Now, here's the thing.

My wife has been one of those people for a really long time that has carried around a water bottle. And it's metal and it's gross and she drops it on the ground all the time. And so I said, look, why don't we try some liquid death? You're a big water drinker. Give it a shot. And she has fallen in love with not only me, but liquid death as well. And it looks like sometimes when she's driving around that she is drinking a tall boy beer while she's driving.

But it is indeed liquid death water. And one of the reasons that she likes it is that it comes in aluminum cans. The name liquid death comes from bringing death to plastic and liquid death gives 10% of their profits to end plastic bottles, which are not easily recyclable. And that's another part that my wife is enjoying about liquid death. And I am also drinking it as well, especially the lime flavored sparkling water, which is very good. So make sure you give that a try. Go to Hy-Vee, Target, wherever you get your groceries, go to the water aisle,

look for the can that looks actually like a tall boy beer. And if you want to learn more about where to find it, go to liquiddeath.com slash insider. That's liquiddeath.com slash insider. All right, this next one comes from Thomas. and i just want to say before i read all of this that thomas wrote long emails in the off season totally welcome so bear with us here thomas says long-suffering california vikings fan herschel walker trade is my first debacle boy if i could go back and tell that innocent young man a thing or two it sure as heck would be more important and profound than warning him about the years

of football misery that lay ahead. Anyhow, competitive rebuild. Maybe I've cracked the code on this term. Trade Cousins for whatever you can get. Trade Daniil Hunter. Trade Cook and Thielen. If you can't get trades, then cut them both. Cut everyone else over 28.

Bring back Brandl and tonga i guess uh that creates 50 ish million dollars in cap space extend jj and tj uh i assume you mean hockinson re-sign bradbury and duke shelly sign jimmy garoppolo for a reasonable contract and should still have 20 million dollars to fill the roster pay Pay a number two wide receiver in Jacoby Myers or Darius Slayton or an older guy like Alan Lazard. Use the balance of the cap to bring in the draft and some youth on defense. Hope that between those ads and second-year rookies, we uncover some gems or even some solid players.

Worst case, you still have the worst defense in the league, but your offense is similar and albeit cheaper. And at least in 2024, likely miss the playoffs. But you enter next season with a boatload of cap space offense again intact. And you begin to fill around with defensive players that you can start your rebuild on defense and theoretically have a fair amount of draft capital. Plenty of holes in that theory and that approach, but simply trying to find a way to justify a competitive rebuild. Jimmy Garoppolo seems to be the only candidate that perhaps fits that definition that we should be able to afford. Love to hear you tear this apart sincerely. So you really want to get rid of pretty much everybody

that is old, bring in a quarterback who is solid and proven that's going to keep you in the race, but is going to be cheaper. That's the idea. So you could potentially go out and sign some players to multi-year deals who can be here for a long time. And then when the next wave comes in, because you've stacked some more draft capital and have some cap space, then you're able to quickly jump back into the game. Uh, yeah. Okay. I mean like the individual moves, some of them are a little on the aggressive side, uh, you know, as far as like cutting every single player, I don't know that they'll do that. But if your theory is those broad strokes of, and I guess it can include cousins or not. I mean, Jimmy Garoppolo would be cheaper probably because of his injury issues.

We might be able to look at a, uh, an Andy Dalton type second half of his career. Maybe, um, I guess I've always liked Jimmy Garoppolo, but he could just never really stay healthy and I'm not convinced he'll be great somewhere else. So there might be kind of a Jim Everett or Andy Dalton. It worked for a while in one spot and then did not work when he went anywhere else. But even if it doesn't and you go six and 11, the whole point is that you only have the, I guess it doesn't even have to be Jimmy G. What you're describing is the Atlanta Falcons and the Seattle Seahawks last year.

They got rid of Matt Ryan and in Seattle, they got rid of Russell Wilson, but they also moved on from Bobby Wagner and they included Noah Fant in the trade. So there's another kind of future piece. Uh, and if the Vikings take that approach and they were to have a nine and eight season, I think that everyone would be pretty excited about it and then plan to draft a quarterback in the next year. I think that that would be a very reasonable way to go about it. I mean, of course, like you're kind of going a little far as far as what they'd be willing to do, but even as it pertains to cousins, if they just say this is the last year, or if they did decide to trade him, which I think is extremely unlikely, but not totally impossible.

Those things would make for an actual competitive rebuild. And I think that that would put a lot of Vikings fans in position to feel like they were going in the direction of the Super Bowl. So this year they got a lot of wins in the regular season and they met the win threshold to be a legitimate Super Bowl contender, but not really any other threshold. And it bared out that they weren't a Super Bowl contender when they were eliminated in the first round. So you didn't make any progress toward the future. The draft so far, we'll see. But so far did not put them in a position where you're super confident They didn't develop any specific players that are going to be huge for the future for them like all this guy emerged

He's gonna be the next great thing Christian Darasau was a first-round pick and he took a jump forward But I think we all assumed After last year, when he showed what he could do, that he was going to be a good player for them in the future. So we really didn't see this year, somebody go from a third round pick to all of a sudden, wow, they've got a foundational piece or anything like that. Like we did when they took their big step from 2015 and then forward to 16 and 17. That's what you were kind of looking for. There

wasn't really a lot of evidence of that. It's not like Cam Bynum became a star or it's not like Ezra Cleveland became a, this guy's going to be, you know, your left guard for life or the next Steve Hutchinson or something like that. Um, it, it leaves a lot to be desired. And I think that a season like that, a season where young players get opportunities, some will emerge, some will prove that they can be future pieces, but you're not talking about just losing 100 games. Yeah, I mean, I think that that is a reasonable place to be. And I don't think that even to get

your future quarterback and I've alluded to this before, but like when you look at who became the best quarterbacks out of a draft class, if it was only ever the guy who was drafted number one, I'd be like, guys, we got to go all the way to the bottom, blow this thing up. But it's not, it's, it's been all over the map really i mean lamar jackson josh allen these are not the first overall picks and the same goes for patrick mahomes i mean it can be anybody in fact you know it's mac jones one year and he looks like he's the best and then it's trevor lawrence but justin field shows signs and we still don't really know who's going to be the best and most successful quarterback out of a draft from just two years ago. Uh, so I've always subscribed to the idea that if someone's a first round

caliber prospect, they have a chance, a very good chance to at least be good enough to take you somewhere. And you can get that by going seven and 10, eight and nine, nine and eight, and having a season that's fun because a lot of players emerge. And the other thing too, is when you move those players and you listed some potential draft capital, but I think you were playing it very safe. Like I think Daniil Hunter should get you a second round pick a first round pick. I mean, I think that it's hard to say exactly with cousins, but at least, at least something. And you start to get that draft capital. And then all you need is a couple of players to hit and you have these foundational pieces moving forward.

And it just, that's the whole thing is that I feel like I'm going to say it a thousand times that you can see a path if you go in that direction. And I think that's the way a lot of people want to go. And it doesn't even have to mean get rid of cousins necessarily. But that probably comes with it. It doesn't mean get him rid of him right now. I mean, you could still have that exact same season next year and do all the same things that you mentioned, but getting as much draft capital as you can is a big deal toward this. I mean, isn't it, isn't Seattle picking like top five or something?

I mean, like you make these trades and sometimes those draft picks turn out to be better than you would have expected. Maybe you trade Daniil Hunter and you're very sad about it, but then the team you trade them to is horrendous next year. Their quarterback gets hurt and suddenly, uh, you know, you've got a high draft pick. So I don't know, like if you were trading him for a future first, that is as opposed to a first this year. And, and who knows if that could happen? Um, so, you know, I guess the point is that what you're laying out there is not the craziest thing I've ever heard. Is it the likeliest thing I've ever heard? Of course not, but it's very reasonable from a team building perspective. And I, I'm, I'm actually like really, I guess I would say impressed is the wrong word.

I don't mean to sound like, Oh, you guys know ball. I know you guys know ball, but I am sort of amazed at the number of people that want this, like after this year that a lot of times during the season, it was like, Oh, good thing we didn't rebuild and so forth. And as soon as they lost to the giants and kind of showed who they were, okay. yep. Now it's really time. And if they're looking at doing these things and wondering, well, are the fans going to put up with it after you just won 13 games? I think the answer is decidedly yes. Decidedly that this fan base understands the deal. They know that there's been one playoff win in the last five years. And even if you go back since Favre, how many times have they been a real,

true Superbowl contender? You could really argue just one time. And I think fans are ready for this type of thing. And if you say competitive rebuild, you should do it. You shouldn't just competitive and hope you should, you should do it. And, um, you know, Kweisi Adafo Mensah did not really sign on to, well, this is what we're going to do, move on. But there were hints that some players production and their price don't match up anymore. And, uh, I mean, I don't know how to put a confidence meter that they'll do this, but I think that if they're wondering, if the owners are wondering, well, are our fans going to be okay with this? The answer should for them be yes. It's whether the fans who own the team are the ones that are going to be

happy with it or not. Like, can they be okay with what Seattle or what Atlanta did this year? That I don't know. Great question. All right. This one comes from Chris H. He says, I'm a Vikings fan from Liverpool in the UK. Welcome. Welcome. It says, I enjoy the podcast. It increased my understanding of football. So thank you for that. I'm glad that makes me very happy. Uh, let's see. I have a fan's only question, all the talk of Kirk's no trade clause, making it difficult for the Vikings to move on from him. But is there a scenario where Kirk has got a taste for winning this season and instigates a move away? Could he feel like the Vikings have let him down by fielding a poor defense with a limited scope to improve?

Surely winning a Super Bowl is important for him. And with his career nearer to its end than its start, could he want to try a team in which has a more balanced roster cap space and draft picks if the vikings don't extend him maybe kirk's hand will be forced and he'll seek a new contract elsewhere this offseason instead of next this scenario is something that i have wondered about really since the moment the season ended because you make a good point that cousins had all these comebacks. He won all these games and still at the end, he is getting blamed and look, he shouldn't have thrown it three yards. We all know that, but there's so much focus on that last play. Like, oh, well, typical Kirk,

he played great in that game. He played great. They put up a ton of points and they did not have enough because of the defense. Could he look at it and say, this team is not getting better immediately? I mean, he knows who's on the team. He knows what their draft capital are or is. I mean, Cousins is, he's a very aware player when it comes to his circumstances, right? And what's around him and everything else. He's also got to know that, you know, Adam Thielen might want his way out to try to championship chase or try to be somebody's number one receiver late in his career. Um, you know, there's, or that they might just cut him for the cap space. Like he knows that as well. And then are you talking about drafting another receiver? What about the offensive line? Still allowing a lot of sacks, all those things.

And you can look at the crazy thing about it is you can look at some other teams in the NFL that are in need of quarterbacks and say, they are a quarterback away. They are the 2018 Vikings. Now that doesn't mean, you know, Kirk will have a better results than last time, but I think if you're him, you'd love another swing at that joining a team that is really good. The jets are the one that come to mind first. You know, they're probably going to have their choice because they have so much to work with. Um, as far as, um, you know, players on their roster, the defense they have Garrett Wilson is there. So that's not quite having Justin

Jefferson, but it is having a young star receiver. If you're him and you look around at some of these teams that are in need of quarterbacks and have good rosters, you've got to be thinking, why not? Right? Why not ask for a trade there? Get them to extend me for four years or three years or whatever long-term extension. And we're going to try to go after a championship because this team is a team in transition. And Kirk has been through this before, by the way, 2017, Washington, they let everybody walk Pierre Garcon to Sean Jackson.

And he had the worst season of his career in 2017 with a team in transition that had kind of run its course with a lot of its veteran players through 2015 and 2016. So this is not completely new. And he worked his way out of there after 2017. Now he might look at it and say, it's possible. I'm not, this is not like sources or anything, but I'm saying that if I were on his side, if he called me right now and said, what do you think I should do? I mean, I think I would say like exactly what you're saying. Like, how are they going to be

better than they were this year by next year, two years from now? Yeah. So if you're planning on signing a really long-term extension, maybe there have been other teams. I looked this up. There have been other teams that went through transitions and came out the other side with the same quarterback so the chargers would be an example where they had three seasons that were pretty rough with rivers and then came out the other side as a team that went to i think the afc championship at maybe 12 and 4 so it does happen uh kurt warner's arizona cardinals were pretty bad when he first got there and then they came out the other side as a good team. It does happen. The Saints thing has been brought up with Drew Brees,

where he went seven wins, three seasons in a row. It's not totally impossible that you could stick with Kirk for a long period of time. But if you're him, you've got to know the history with older quarterbacks. You have to know that any given season, you might just show up and have your body not work anymore. And nobody ever knows when that's going to be. That's how we see Tom Brady or Peyton Manning have a sad final season. I think maybe Brady's final season is because they think that they can still do it and they can't.

So he's got to be aware of that, that it might not go much longer. And maybe he looks at this as a little Matt Stafford ish where Stafford kind of had his run with Detroit, had some seasons where they were competitive team, but it wasn't quite enough. And maybe, maybe championship chase, like an NBA player. I would not blame him at all. If he decided to do that, uh, is Carolina that team? I don't know. Carolina won seven games after having Matt rule. I mean, isn't Carolina kind of like Tampa Bay a couple of years ago. There's a lot of talent, but they had like bad coaching, bad quarterback play. They had PJ Walker, Sam Darnold, Baker Mayfield, and they got

to seven and 10. I don't know. I mean, maybe you don't want to trade them in the NFC, but the jets make a lot of sense. I don't, what I'm saying is I I'm not dismissing your idea that if you're him, that is on the table, unless they can tell him, Hey, you know, here's how we're going to get right back to where we were with a division title and 13 more wins. And this time our defense isn't going to let you down. I don't know at this moment how they can make that argument, but of course they've got it planned out more than I do. But I don't know how you can make that argument. I don't know who you're acquiring, who you're drafting that makes you a top offense to be, or I'm sorry, top defense to truly be competitive. Cause I look at

those games that they just played divisional weekend. So a lot of good defensive play, it's going to take, you probably have to win one game with your defense. And if you rank 28th, you're not doing that. Um, so I think it's a, it's a big hole to dig out of. And yeah, I mean, I think that your scenario is on the table. Next question is from Joey. I was watching a breakdown of the Fangio defense and the person describing it said something that caught my attention. While I'm sure that it's a derivative of the scheme as a whole, they said that it was partially

created in response to Mahomes and that style of play. It made sense to me that maybe applying that scheme in Minnesota, regardless of how successful it was implemented, might have been an awful fit for the myriad of backup and middling quarterbacks that they played this season. Considering that many of those QBs played safer in a tempered style of play, I feel like this defense is designed to play a Mahomes type is the opposite of what we needed.

Could this have been part of the issue with all of our close games against backup quarterbacks and why they had baffling career games against the Vikings hoping the next DC hire will build a scheme to play NFC teams or Kevin O'Connell will find someone that's a better fit within the division. Yeah. So what I think they mean with the Mahomes thing is when Mahomes came into the league, it was just bombs, but it wasn't just Mahomes throwing deep down the field and scrambling and stuff like that.

And I think that defenses tried to challenge Mahomes to pick them apart underneath. And then guess what he did? Cause no one is better at playing football than Patrick Mahomes, but it's not just my homes. Uh, even if you go back to 2020 and this tells you how quick the league adapts and morphs and things like that, uh, Kirk cousins was hitting all sorts of deep passes because teams were playing to shut down Delvin cook and they were running bootlegs and play actions that got one-on-one deep shots to Stefan digs and then to Justin Jefferson. And that was their offense. It was run the ball, run bootlegs and fire it deep down the field.

And I think it was, was it 2020 where the league went crazy with its explosive deep passes that year. And then the very next year, all of a sudden it didn't. And, you know, I think that like that sort of says something about like how teams switch to playing two deep safeties more because they didn't want those deep crossing passes. I did an article about deep crossing passes and how they were dominating the league. That might've been in 2019. And now I don't think we saw as much of that we still see some but it seemed to me the other day like we saw a lot of quick passes underneath even by joe burrow whose average

depth of target went way down this year and yet was just as successful and mahomes average depth of target from a couple years ago down but just as successful because those guys are multifaceted and even we saw this with Kirk Cousins this year where he threw way more short passes than he had in the past and way fewer that went more than 20 yards down the field and I think that's a response to people using these two high defenses to keep everything in front of them and try to avoid giving up these explosive plays. And there was some stat that was making the rounds about how if you give up whatever number of explosive plays in a game, you usually lose, which, you know, obviously that makes sense, right? You give up huge touchdowns. You probably don't win. But that's the ebbs and flows of the NFL. And, you know, I think with as far as like the Fangio

defense, it is a lot of a few things. I mean, one, it's the talent at linebacker seems to be a pretty big deal and how much space and what kind of linebacker you have is your linebacker seems to be a pretty big deal and how much space and what kind of linebacker you have is your linebacker good enough. Your linebackers, are they good enough to cover a lot of space in zones? And I don't think that that really fit the skills of either one of the Vikings linebackers. Do you have a star nickel corner? Do you notice that these great Fangio defenses, they always have great nickel corners. That was the Vikings' biggest weakness. And do you have deep safeties who are instinctual at making plays deep on the ball and reading

routes and things like that? And not that Harrison Smith isn't good at those things, but that's not his best thing. His best thing is playing up in the box, going after quarterbacks, shutting down routes, messing with quarterbacks pre-snap. And that's not what this defense allowed him to do. So I don't think it was a good fit really for their personnel more than anything that had been built for Zimmer's more like man to man type defense. And then, you know, I think we also saw this year and I don't remember the stat exactly,

but quarterbacks performed worse against the Blitz this year than they had in previous seasons. And the Vikings were not being very aggressive at all. And maybe there's a little bit of a change here where it's like, you know, teams becoming all of a sudden more aggressive with the Blitz as offenses start to go to a little more underneath stuff. Like, I don't know, because rather than, you know, letting them dink and dunk you down the field, now you might be saying, let's try to get after them quick and force a mistake and turn it into

a turnover. There's a lot of different ways to play defense. And the strategy sort of made sense at the time that, Hey, you're going to go out and you're going to get the trendy defense, right? That kind of makes sense. But maybe it just comes down to what players you have and how you best fit them to your system. It seemed like Ed Donatel had no interest in fitting players to his system and rather just wanted to run, here's how we do it. This is what we're doing. That's the story. And I don't think that's a good way to coach. That seemed like the way that he wanted to coach was it's not, it's not me. It's, you know, it's the kids who are wrong to quote principal Skinner, but it's

always adapting and it's always changing. And sometimes you see this where a bunch of teams go after the Fangio system, but that means a bunch of offenses have been busy figuring it out. So you need to be the one ahead of it, not chasing behind it. And their next defensive hire, they've got to be ahead of it, but they've also got to get them players because it's always both. It's always scheme and players when you're as bad as the Vikings were. Next question comes from Dustin. Do you think that Kwesi and Kevin O'Connell feel a

sense of urgency to mold the team into how they see fit with them only having three years left on their deals? To me, it feels as if winning 13 games this year made it harder for them to move off players that they may have wanted to if they had only won eight games. Am I overthinking the contract length for both of them? But it is hard for me to see them wanting to tie their futures to Kirk Cousins, who will be 35 next season. That's a really interesting factor. And I know that I'm sure if you ask them, they would tell you, oh, no, no, no, no, no.

That has nothing to do with anything. And contract status, we're going to do the best for the longterm because we heard that from Rick Spielman for many years, but there's no question that it does matter. And when you're talking about a four-year deal, it's really three because nobody wants to be a lame duck head coach or lame duck GM. So the first three years are going to be judged. And then going into the final year, generally that's when you would give somebody a contract extension. So they have to be in a good place at the end of three years, whether they're arguing that the future is coming or

whether they can look back at their record and say, Hey, we won 10 plus games three times. And, you know, of course we're amazing and you can't get rid of us. Uh, and you know, so if you built a timeline around that idea, that it's really three years, if they were to take a reset year and then show promise for the next season and look like they were on a great path by the end of the third year, uh, they would be in good shape. So I don't think that it means for sure winning 13 games that you have to try to run it back and do a lot of the same things, but you know, where it would possibly set that expectation is them kind of believing that they were just X away or Y away. Is it, you know, the belief in the front office that it was just Ed Donatello and he wasn't

good enough. And if they had only had somebody else, then while they would have been much better and they would have possibly won the super bowl, right? Like, is that their belief, uh, or not? And it's really hard to tell with the press conferences and, you know, it's going to be just a challenge throughout the years here, always with picking apart what they're saying when it is a lot of platitudes and they don't like to show a lot of their cards. Last year, they say competitive rebuild, but they don't really do it. And, you know, this year it was conflicting messages.

It was, well, we're going to look into everything that it was on the defensive side and then the next day they fire ed donatel and now you know are they going to let go those defensive guys like harrison smith and eric kendrickson completely rebuild it and also zedaria smith he's worth mentioning in this conversation as well because he wasn't the same down the second half of the stretch uh and they could argue that, you know, he's not going to project well in the future. So why, you know, keep him around at a pretty high cap it. I think it's fairly reasonable, but it's not, it's not nothing. I mean, it's a good chunk of cash. So they could argue like to keep all these players or to move off of all these players on the defensive side

and rebuild an entire new defense. But I think as far as the timeline goes, they do have enough wiggle room there to work within the time constraints. But normally this is why those deals are longer. Those deals are six years because I mean, first, unless it's a total disaster, that usually gives you a chance to at least draft and develop fully a quarterback of your choosing. And that was the second part of your question. But normally you don't want that pressure to be like, Oh yeah, within three years, you better really show it. But they, they have, I think still a chance to drop back a little, reset the roster, play competitive football, and then take a big step forward the next season.

After that, that's also not maybe what the owners want to hear and that's that's what i would be curious about is what that conversation is like are the owners understanding or are the owners demanding and we won't know that at some point we'll talk with mark wilf but it might not be until the beginning of next season uh it's always hard to know. Usually one time before the season at training camp, we'll have a conversation with him sometimes during an OTA or mini camp. And at that point, you know, we'll see what they have to say about it, but it's really hard to put a finger on how they view this 13 win season and whether it did hurt them long-term by setting the bar too high where eight

games and the same result or nine games in the same result, the first round out would have set them up to say, okay, same team, same result. We got to make a lot of changes. Uh, that's a very possible that that did set the bar too high. But I think the reason you hire Kweisi Adafo-Mensa is so it doesn't. But then is there conflicts between how the coach and the general manager see things, right? Like if you're the coach of the team, then you probably believe that you can win double digits again. How would you let anyone tell you, sorry, pal, you know, you just won 13 games, but now you have to take worse players and try to take a step back.

Well, that's a hard argument to make for a coach. That's his win loss record for his career, right? But for a general manager, that's why you want the more data-driven approach, the more big picture timeline related approach, because everything in the NFL is timelines for team building. And we're seeing that with the 49ers. We're seeing that with the Eagles, that if you hit that roster peak at the right time with the right situation, then you've got yourself a Superbowl contender. And the Vikings had that from pretty much 2015 through 2017, 18, 19. I mean, they had a window there that they let get away from them, but they had rosters that were good enough to compete year in and year out and just never quite got over that

hump. That's what they're trying to create again, but they can't do it overnight. It takes like, think about when that happened, when they peaked in 2017, that was years in the making. That was a bad 2013 season that resulted in a high draft pick and a really good 2015 draft. I mean, things had to come together over a couple of years and they should understand that. And I think Kweisi Adafomensa should understand that.

It's just, is he going to be given the leeway to do all the things necessary? And I don't know if contract plays into it as much as how much do those other decision makers that they are collaborating with believe in 13 wins now being the standard in the bar. You'd think that history would tell them that you can't do that every year because the Vikings have done that a few times and then drop back. But, you know, I mean, winning, winning is winning is fun. Winning is hard to say, oh, now we're going to not win. But if you try desperately to win and it doesn't happen and you've set yourself back, then what? And that's what they should be afraid of going forward. So I think there is time within that constraint, but it's a lot tighter than what you would normally have for a brand new general manager.

This question comes from John. I believe you mentioned this in an episode a while ago, but I thought it would be an interesting case study to look at the different approaches of the Eagles and Vikings since they met in the NFC championship in 2017. Philosophically, what they did seems different. And I know myself along with other Vikings fans have been clamoring for a rookie QB approach instead of getting ourselves stuck in mediocre purgatory. Once again, the bears with their new GM seem to be on track, on the track that the Eagles took. What are some of the key moves outside the quarterback position that led the Eagles to reach contender status again so quickly after tearing it down? Yeah, the Eagles are a very interesting case because they win the Super Bowl in 2017.

And then they go nine and seven in back-to-back years and are very mediocre with Carson Wentz. They are, I mean, just very Vikings-ish where they were 12th in points, 14th in yards. And if I remember correctly, some of these seasons are a little beat up. And at one point, Wentz, was this 2019, they were about to beat the saints and Wentz had gone down. Nick Foles was playing. And I think Elshon Jeffrey dropped the pass, but after that 2019 season, that's where they just kind of let it go. It looks to me that they didn't do a whole lot. And I haven't studied every single move like I would the Vikings with this team, but they didn't do a whole lot and and i haven't studied every single move like i would the vikings with this team but they didn't do a whole lot from 2019 to 2020 to sort of change their

fates around carson wentz that's not to say exactly a tank but listen to these top receivers i haven't even heard of some of these guys greg ward travis Fulgram, and then Jalen Rager was their third leading receiver. And then of course, Dallas Goddard, their tight end was mixed in. So they didn't really make much of an effort in 2019 to go out and sign a bunch of people. And that was right after they had drafted Jalen Hurts and he got in a couple of games there in that season. But I think it was clear after 2019 where they had had, I'm sorry, I was looking at the 2020 season after 2019, where they had had the back-to-back nine and seven seasons. That's where they didn't do a heck of a lot to make them a better team. And they just went out there and essentially set up

Carson Wentz to fail. Didn't give them a whole lot of wide receivers, let the team come apart a little bit. And then that's when they, you know, had drafted, um, Jalen hurts to give themselves a potential future quarterback. If by the end of 2020, they didn't like where they were with Carson Wentz. So they saw the writing on the wall that maybe Wentz was more of a mid pack quarterback than the MVP quarterback. Like he looked in 2017. And after that, that's when they started really stacking up the draft picks as well. So they drafted the quarterback.

They start moving people. They start getting draft capital. And I'm going to take a look at some of their draft picks here, but that, that is the turning tide as well. And they also drafted some players at some really key positions. So 2020 was when they drafted a ragger and hurts. I mean, that's the funniest, right? Like ragger is the worst draft pick and hurts is the best draft pick and if you just need to understand how the draft works just look at that uh but then 2021 that's when they got davante smith at the top of the draft and they took landon dickerson who's turned

out to be a good offensive lineman for them and this year they take jordan davis at the top of the draft too and he's been a good player for them as well, but they got their cap right after that. And yeah, I mean, I think that if the Vikings had done nothing this last off season, that's what it would have looked like instead of getting Zedaria Smith, instead of getting Patrick Peterson, let's say that they hadn't gotten Patrick Peterson. I mean, what would that have looked like if they had moved on from Adam Thielen? What would that have looked like if, let's just say, Jalen Naylor was wide receiver three or Albert Wilson was wide receiver three all season long? If Alexander Madison had been the running back all season long, which maybe actually

I might not have gone that badly in comparison, but you get what I'm saying. If they had set it up intentionally to where they kind of did nothing and let it go to it, probably not a four win season like it was with Philadelphia, but let's even say that it was a, you know, six win season because they did nothing. I mean, then you're in a position to totally draft a quarterback and start moving forward. Philadelphia also had that trade down when they picked Devante Smith, right? And somebody desperately traded up. I'm trying to remember how it all went, but that's when they were able to stack some of

the draft capital. And once you got your salary cap right with Carson Wentz off the books, that's when they can go out and make a trade for AJ Brown. So restocking the offensive line through the draft, getting an elite wide receiver, drafting a top wide receiver, drafting a quarterback in the rookie contract, all these things kind of came together for Philadelphia where the Vikings, I mean, look, they won 13 games. So it's not like they have to argue that they did everything wrong and were the absolute worst, but it's a, it is a different approach that the

Vikings never had that one year where they did nothing, uh, in 2020, even that should have even been the year where they did nothing and where they moved all the players at the deadline and heck traded Kirk cousins or sat Kirk cousins the rest of the season and just got a top draft pick in 2021. But instead, you know, they kept mostly everybody except Yanni Kingakwe after trading a second round pick for him, just not really understanding where they were. They thought they could just cobble together a defense and that they would still be good and competitive.

And that's probably where the two teams diverge is in 2020, where the Vikings tried to desperately hang on as they were sliding down the greasy wall where the Eagles just said, we were going to fall and we're going to let Carson Wentz fall apart and then we're going to trade him. And I think that you've sort of seen the fruits of that a little bit with the overall roster and team strength of those decisions that were made in that year. So the Vikings do have a chance next year to do this if they want to, which would be to do nothing and let it fall apart a little bit and draft a quarterback next year.

Will they do that? I have no idea, but at some point, most of the contending teams have reset years. And let's not forget, by the way, the 49ers who should be lauded for their team building because what a roster they have. They also had some years where Jimmy Garoppolo got hurt and they drafted high. That Nick Bosa guy didn't come from nowhere. Like usually these teams look at them. They all had to draft some great players at the top of the draft. San Francisco did, uh, Cincinnati, my gosh, their quarterback Jamar chase. Uh, usually it's going to take that. Uh, and the Vikings have been drafting in the middle and late of the first

round and amazingly landed Christian Derrissaw and Justin Jefferson, but it's just not enough. I mean, those two are two tremendous players, but it's just not enough. I mean, those two are two tremendous players, but it's just not enough. Usually you need to hit on multiple players through the draft and not just two guys and nobody on defense at all. So yeah, that's, I mean, that's all part of it. It's all part of it. And I think Kweisi Adafomenta's idea for last year's draft, I understood to trade back. That's the rebuildy part and get more draft picks and pick a safety and pick two corners and start rebuilding the secondary, but safety linebacker guard, like these are not key positions. Uh, and I think that,

you know, that Devante Smith pick ends up being huge for Philadelphia and the Vikings just not wanting to draft a receiver high year in and year out unless they were forced to with Justin Jefferson, but they never did it otherwise. And that's been one of the confusing things. And you think about the tight end position and look, TJ Hawkinson's tremendous. He's basically a wide receiver. It was a great trade a plus for the trade. I mean, he was great for them down the stretch, a huge factor, and nearly won them the playoff game. So no criticism of TJ Hawkinson. But think about where the draft capital for this current roster, before it goes one way or the other, is put. Second round pick to a tight end in Irv Smith. Second round pick traded for a tight

end. That's a lot for a tight ends. Second round pick to a guard, another second round pick to a guard, first round pick to a center. Like this, this is not a way to build a team. And of course those aren't Kwesi Adafo-Mentz's picks, but that's just mostly, but that's just not a way to build a team. It's gotta be through getting superstars at these key positions. So that's another thing that, you know, the Eagles didn't completely do, but they drafted Rager and then they bailed on that as soon as possible and drafted another one. They said, well, that didn't work. Let's try again. And then they landed their star. So it's not too wildly, wildly different approaches, but you can go back and circle that one point where in the 2020 draft, they take hurts and

they lived in reality at that point. Whereas the Vikings did not. All right. We've got a question here from Paul fans, only salary cap question. I'm always hearing about longer contracts being more flexible because teams can kick some of the players pay into future years, thus lowering their current cap number. Maybe I'm missing something, but I never hear the opposite. For example, if a team like the Vikings realized that they were not going to contend one year, could they pay a large portion of Jefferson's new contract that year with the thought of contending in future years and have him at lower cap numbers than in the future? Is there a rule that I'm unaware of?

Is this done and just not talked about much? Or is the win now philosophy so strong that it rarely happens? Yeah. So there's one example that I could think of, which is 2018 Jimmy Garoppolo. He was carrying a 40, I looked this up, $42 million cap hit in 2018. And the next year it dropped, or I'm sorry, that was a $37 million and $42 million cash paid. And it dropped from 37 down to 20 in the year that they went to the Superbowl in 2019. And then after that 26, 26, and then they restructured this year to 13. So reasonable, but still fairly highly paid,

but reasonable taking up less than 14% of the cap in every year after that first season. So it can be done, but it's hard to make sense of exactly how they're able to do this. When it comes to the bonuses, the roster bonus, I think a roster bonus was a huge part of that and the guaranteed salary and front-loading the guaranteed salary. I do not have Rob Brzezinski's ability when it comes to designing contracts exactly,

but I think that what you're talking about with the win now mentality is the reason that it's done. I mean, you can always deal with it later. So why not kick it down the road, right? Like, yeah, you could do it that way to, to have a really cap, a high cap hit one year, if you knew for sure that you were going to be bad. But if you know for sure, you're going to be bad, you might be on the cusp of losing your job most of the time. And that's just the NFL. That's how it works. And you could say that that wouldn't be the case for the Vikings now.

Of course it wouldn't. But you're not planning on being horrendous and you want to be as good as you can, presumably, presuming that they're not tanking, right? So you would want to set up the salary cap hit to be pretty reasonable and then pretty reasonable a year from now to make sure that then if you need to spend extra money, if you are back on the upswing, then you can do that. And then when you get to the big, big cap year, usually the way they try to work it out is that there's money that can be moved even further down the road. And eventually, as we all know, and as we've said a million times, the bill on that stuff comes due and you end up with dead cap being paid to play

players who aren't here, of course, but it does allow for those salary cap hits to be a little more manageable and for teams to shuffle around later in the future to squeeze out a little bit more cap for teams to shuffle around later in the future to squeeze out a little bit more cap space from what they have. But most general managers, most coaches are almost working on a year to year basis for the most part, unless you just got hired. So Kweisi Adafo-Mensa, yeah, is not working on year to year, but if they were to go five and 12 after trying to win next year, tell me that everyone's not on the hot seat. You could say right now that they're not, but tell me at the end of next year

that they're not. It is a very much year to year league. So everyone is doing everything when you're in contention to get the smallest cap hits you can possibly get and you'll deal with it later. And then when it blows up, it blows up. And what you hope is that you have created enough goodwill when it eventually blows up that you're able to keep your job. And that's just the vicious cycle that happens for everybody, except for whoever has Patrick Mahomes or Joe Burrow or whatever, but even the Buffalo bills, like they're in for it. Uh, they're in for a very, very tough off season is if you listen to the show the other day, Paul Hoda, Wannick really

laid out that they are just in for a very tough off season with a lot of those salary cap hits that they made smaller to compete right now. And basically they said the same thing. We'll deal with all that later and they'll move money and they'll get cap compliant, but they're not going to be able to fix all the shortcomings. And at some point they'll have to have a reset year more likely than not. And even with Kansas city, remember this was supposed to be Kansas city's reset year. They just have the MVP of the universe, the best athlete in the world, right? And a great, great coach and some star players that are still there, but this was supposed to be their reset year. It just didn't work out that way because they were so darn good still. Uh, and they had a lot of players step up for them, like Juju Smith

Schuster, some draft picks step into the limelight. Like that's what it usually takes. But for every team that has a human quarterback, that's just how it goes that you try to have some big years so when you do have to reset and competitive rebuild that it doesn't cost you your job and uh so that's why they do it it's not that you couldn't it's just that you'd have to be in a almost a complete tank situation to do it that way so if you knew you were going to win five games next year, and that was the total plan from day one, then yes, you could do something like that. But otherwise that's probably not the thought process is okay. We're going to go from 13 to five wins that, that I, that I cannot see. So great, great question though. Great question

though. I think, uh, I will net, if I see Rob Brzezinski at some point, I will ask him that question and I'll circle back. If I get an answer on it, if I can use the answer, um, sometimes we bump into each other in a press box or combine or something, but that's a really interesting point. And I would, I'd love to know if teams ever consider doing that because Garoppolo is really the only example I can think of. Maybe there are some others that some of you extreme salary cap fans, uh, you know, have for me, but you don't see it that often. I think just because everyone's afraid to get fired.