The Athletic Football Show: A show about the NFL - Draft fallout and James Cook's future lead the return of the TAFS mailbag

Episode Date: May 5, 2025

The draft is over, which means Mailbag Mondays are back! Robert Mays and Derrik Klassen tackle questions about quarterbacks improving their accuracy, the most electric recent draft moments, James Cook's future in Buffalo and more on this episode of The Athletic Football Show.Rundown Which teams bet in the draft on their ability to develop players? Are the Steelers the most unlikely team to win a SB in the next five years How easy is it for a QB to improve accuracy? Which past draft moments would you have wanted to cover live? What will Titans do with Will Levis? Is pass rush success with smaller pass rushers sustainable? Was the Falcons draft really that bad? Is Cam Ward the most valuable pick of the draft? Are we seeing new positions being prioritized in the draft? Making sense of late-round trades What to make of Washington pivoting to win-now Should the Bills work to retain James Cook right now? How many quarterabcks would be elite with the Eagles? How many teams can Patrick Mahomes make elite?Host: Robert MaysCo-Host: Derrik KlassenExecutive Producer: Michael BellerProducer: Michael BellerSubscribe to The Athletic Football Show...⁠Apple⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠YouTube⁠Follow Robert on Bluesky: @robertmays.bsky.socialFollow Derrik on Bluesky: @qbklass.bsky.socialFollow Robert on X: @robertmaysFollow Derrik on X: @QBKlassTheme song: HauntedWritten by Dylan Slocum, Trevor Dietrich, Ruben Duarte, Kyle McAulay, and Meredith VanWoert / Performed by Spanish Love SongsCourtesy of Pure Noise / By arrangement with Bank Robber Music, LLC Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Welcome to the athletic football show. I'm Robert Mays. Mailbag Mondays are back. We are post-draft, so we are back to our regularly scheduled mailbags every single Monday. Another batch of great questions. Just tons of fun stuff to chew on. A lot of Falcons fans feeling real anxious about the way that their draft went. So we hit some of that.

A couple of teams, a couple of readers, listeners, had some questions about defensive lines size and how that plays into the league right now. Had a fun question at the end about whether more teams could be competitors or contenders with more quarterbacks would be contenders with the Eagles roster or more teams would be contenders with Patrick Mahomes, which I think is a fun way to think about a strong roster versus a strong quarterback, had some questions about draft trade value, a ton of really good ones today. So let's get to that conversation with Derek Classen right now. It's another mailbag Monday here on the athletic football show.

We are in our post-draft part of the offseason. And we're back to our regularly scheduled programming. I said it in the intro, but we're going to have shows Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, or Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday for the next few weeks. That is going to be our typical offseason cadence when none of us are on vacation, which we will be intermittently here over the next couple months. But you guys can be looking forward to four shows a week from us over the next several weeks, and that includes a week we mailbag every Monday.

Here to help me with that, it is my co-host at the athletic football show, Derek Lawson. Derek, how you doing, man? I am in like an all-time war against my allergies right now. But other than that, I'm doing good. It's one of those things where you would think your body gets used to being in the Central Valley, but then you leave the Central Valley for a week and you come back and there's still like a, you know, recalibration period. So other than that, I'm doing fantastic.

I did. When I went to Mexico City a couple weeks ago, the humidity was like 20%, which is just, it's not good for me. Like, on my eyes, I looked like I had just been chained smoking joints for like six hours. And when we were trying to do the show, I had not been just letting everybody know. I was just at extremely dry eyes. So I can sympathize with the changing climates and how it can really mess with you at this time of year. It'll really get you, man.

It really will. Beller's not here today. Beller is taking a well-deserved vacation. So I am going to be the one handling the questions. I've done this before. I think we're going to be okay. It's better when he does it, but I still think that we can hold it down without him.

Let's get right to it. You know what, before we get right to it, I said this yesterday. I'm going to say it again. I said it on Twitter. When I was digging through these yesterday, there are so many we could just never get to. And there are so many good ones we just never get to.

I had conversations recently with a couple people who do other podcasts and they were like, you know, how many mailbag questions do you typically get? And I was like, I don't know, around 50. And they're like 50. Yeah, it's like 50 a show. And so if you sent in a question and we did not get to it, I apologize. There's just, there are so many good ones every week. We could truly never get to them all.

We'd be here for like 20 hours. We're going to be doing some double mailbags to bank some shows while I'm on vacation. So hopefully we'll get to more of those questions over the next couple weeks because we're going to be doubling up. but just another round of applause for the job that you guys did because every single time it's worth doing because of how thoughtful and smart all of these questions are. So let's get to it. Robert Hillis or Heis says, gentlemen, there's something that bothers me about the draft conversation. Much of the discourse portrays the world as if you draft player X, they're absolutely going to be your left tackle the future, wide receiver one or a lockdown corner. The reality is none of these players have ever been in the NFL and everything is a projection.

The player is part of a projection, but they are far from the only part. The teams are also making large bets on their ability to make projections into reality. Some of this is used as in scheme, but much of it is adding to a player's skill set. Examples include adding to a receiver's ratry, developing player maturity, strength, nutrition improvements, the list goes on. So here's the question. Which teams are making massive bets on their own ability to develop, and which of these have been proven out historically, and which are large and possibly risky projections in their own right?

What do you got for me? Which teams come to mind for you here? I mean, in terms of teams that are, specifically this year took swings where it feels like they're trying to bet on something, Michael Williams with the 49ers. The guy is in general, I think. I think Alfred Collins will fall in there too. And they kind of, I think, to a lot of people, reached on Nick Martin at linebacker.

Like they, with a lot of their front players, are just like, all right, we're betting that either we know something that you don't or we're going to be able to get something out of this player that, you know, maybe other people didn't think they could. And so I still liked the Michael Williams pick to be clear, but I felt like that was one. Kenneth Grant, I think with Miami, he's a guy. where it's like, okay, the size and athletic ability looks really cool, but this is a guy you expect to take on double teams very well, and he still doesn't really do that right now. So I think in terms of their process, it wasn't them betting.

It was just like, we need defensive tackle more than anything on the roster, so we have to take him. But you're still betting that you can make him work out. And then I think there are a number of other ones, but the last one I'll throw out here is just Walter Nolan in Arizona. Like, you're just betting that you can make him a consistent player. Like the flashes are unbelievable. They look like they could be top five defensive tackle in the league.

It's just are you getting that for 10 snaps or are you getting that for 35 snaps again? I didn't put the Cardinals out here because I thought Will Johnson was kind of like a safe floor type pick when it comes to play style and his ability to play the game. So I was looking at more classes as a whole. The Niners are absolutely in there. I think with McKell Williams, what they did in later rounds. We talked about it in real time when they made the McCle Williams pick. This is a Chris Kisorwick bet and those bets have historically worked out for the Niners. Like their issues for the most part have been injury at that position.

Like Drake Jackson was a second round pick, for example, or they just haven't invested enough in it. They haven't had the resources to keep investing in it. For the most part, they've gotten the best versions of the guys who have come through that defensive line. So giving that defensive line coach in this ecosystem some really high-level picks, I'm going to bet on the fact that it's probably going to work out okay for them. I feel better about Michael Williams in San Francisco than I would in a lot of other landing spots, I guess is what I would say. there are four other teams to me that first came to mind the bengals are number one right

shimar steward is the ultimate we need to get more out of him than he showed us in college type of player so he's on there demetrius knight the linebacker they drafted in the second round is kind of a traits over overall production sort of player and even i think dylan fairchild in the third round is that sort of guy where you see him at his best that guard and you think all right that guy's really got something but it can be a little inconsistent you know the comparison that dane made in the pre-draft process was always Wyatt Teller to Dylan Fairchild. Well, what did Wyatt Teller need?

He needed to go to Bill Callahan in order to fully develop into the player we ultimately saw and a guy worth paying. So the Bengals are one of the first teams that comes to mind for me. The New York Giants, like Jackson Dart is the ultimate example of this.

Jackson Dart and Darius Alexander, I feel like are examples of this where you are betting on the upside with both of those players to kind of bring together both units. We've talked about this a lot. Defense to tackle outside of Dexter Lawrence, to me, was the other like linchpin position on this roster outside of quarterback that needed to be addressed.

And now you're making developmental bets at each of those positions. And then two more, the Seahawks, right? Eminowari is a bundle of traits. How are you going to use him? J. Wood Milrow is the perfect example of this. And Gray's Abel has never played the position that you're going to ask him to play, even though he's super athletic. And then the bears are one of them.

level and the idea of him as a high upside player. I totally understand it. And Luther Burden is another perfect example of this where you're saying, all right, you know, these guys are really talented. Now we have an offensive-minded head coach and an infrastructure over here that we think can get the most out of those guys.

So those are the teams that came to mind for me. I think if we're taking it the way that you kind of approach it more where it's like holistic draft classes, to me it's actually Seattle. That is the one where like I had actually written down Emin Worry here as like my singular player and I just didn't want to throw out eight of them, so I didn't get to it. But Emin Worry, to me, signals like, okay, we think we can get something out of this player that, you know, he's got a lot of upside, but he's a little bit stiff and we're going to see if we can use him.

And then again, Zabel hasn't played the position. Milrow is the ultimate dice role at the quarterback position. And then even Tori Horton, they're not asking to get more out of him, but he's a guy coming off of injury. Like this is just their entire draft class was like, we think we know something about these players that maybe other people don't. And I like this question because I do think that of this. time of year, it's very easy to get a little bit out in front of yourself when it comes to the impact these players will make. To me, a very good example of this and how I think about draft classes is I always am giving the benefit of the doubt to not the best possible outcome, right?

You're not penciling in first round picks as all pros, but let's say you hit somewhere in the median outcome. And a guy like Max Hirsten for the Bills is somebody who is a average player at that position and fills a need or a hole that previously existed. For the most part, that's how I think about draft classes. I don't think these guys are going to come in and be superstar players right away, even if they're first round picks. But I do think with certain position groups, if you're kind of filling out the roster with them, it's more about the downside ofverted than the upside that will be realized in year one. Yeah, I think that that's absolutely true. And which again, I was actually doing Seahawks radio yesterday, part of what I loved about

their draft class is like, okay, if we're going to jump into a new area of Seahawks football, let's just have 11 picks and just see if we can fill any. of these spots. Yeah, and I think that's a really good way to go about it when you're a team in transition. Next one here from Adam Gessk. He says, as a Steelers fan, I'm very interested. This is a dark question. This is existential.

I really appreciate the place that Adam is in right now. You guys will see the journey that he takes as we go through this question. Is this a Steelers fan, I'm very interested in hearing your opinion, who would be in the bottom tier or two if you were to assess each team's odds of winning a Super Bowl over the next five years. I'd argue there are around 26 teams that. can make a reasonable claim, they have a franchise guy, a win-with guy, or a real developmental option.

My arbitrary line being Pennix, Bryce, yes, fields, dart, no. Fair. Of the remaining teams, the Steelers, Jets, Browns, Saints, Colts and Giants. You could argue the Colts and Giants have a guy that could become a guy, and the Saints and Browns both have very believable pads to a top one to three pick. It seems the Steelers and the Jets stand alone is teams that don't have a realistic shot of winning the Super Bowl or getting a top five pick. The Jets, on the other hand, have new blood and generally seem more willing to make

a big move next year to get a guy, either via the draft or a big trade for an established vet. So his final question here is, are the Steelers the least likely team in all of football to win a Super Bowl in the next five years? There's a lot of stuff to chew on here before I get to your answer. Five years is a long time. We might have such a long time. We might have 20 new coaches by then.

Yes. So five years is a long time. I think three is probably like a more realistic way to answer this question. But even if we did five, I think there are a couple. teams that come to mind maybe along with the Steelers. Where did you land on this? Depends how you want to approach it, right? So part of the way I approach it is that so long as Tomlin is there, they're probably

not going to be sub-500. And if they're going to hang around 500 just over, they're probably going to make the playoffs a number of times. And so by definition, you're at least giving yourself a chance to make the Super Bowl. Probably not going to happen with the way that they've put these teams in there. But that's at least part of the argument. To me, where I would feel the worst about. the Steelers right now is not that you don't have a quarterback because I think

some of the you know quarterback in development teams that we've thrown in here are pretty generous like teams like the Vikings like I think that that's super generous compared to what the Steelers have like I don't it's not a different tier of of quarterback and stuff and quarterback situation to me it's an unrealized road though right it's something where at least the possibility is there but technically possibility is still there with the Steelers like in the fact that you have nothing it's not a guy in your building though right yeah unrealized potential as somebody that's in the Vikings building. So you can at least kind of game out development for Jason McCarthy over the next couple of years. The Steelers don't even have a guy to incite that sort of

hope. Yeah. So I, but I guess I'm like less hung up on that part of it. And I'm not even as hung up on like the aging vets on defense. Where I get hung up is and the person who asked the question kind of talked about this, they just don't seem that willing to do stuff that's going to move the needle. And this offseason, maybe they kind of were with the DK Metcalf trade, right? Like it seems like they a little bit realize they need to do stuff that is a little bit more aggressive. But to me, the issue for a long time has just been, oh, well, we're the Steelers. And if we just do what we do, then it'll work out. And that was true for a decade with Ben Rothersberger.

But since then, it's been a lot of, you know, kind of winning in spite of a lot of things. And so that to me would honestly be the biggest hang up over the next five years. But maybe the DK Metcalf thing is at least showing us that they're more willing. willing to do stuff that is aggressive. I think it's a great thing to point out because the answer for a team that kind of has run into the middle and needs to do something extreme in order to get themselves over the top. The best possible example of this recently. I mean, there are a couple, right?

The Bucks with Tom Brady, that's not a situation that's probably going to be able to replicate at any point over the next few years. Like there's no Tom Brady that's hitting free agency where it's this strange, I mean, Aaron Rogers would probably be the closest possible comparison and he just hit his ceiling and Cliff faster than Tom Brady did. But the other example would be the Rams with Matthew Stafford, right? And in order to do that, in order to pull off a Matthew Stafford-esque trade where you're threading the needle, you by definition, have to do something extremely aggressive in order

to do that. And then the other thing would be, what if there's like a Bow Nix-esque quarterback for the Steelers in the 2026 draft, a guy that you can get outside of the top 10 that clears the bar on a rookie contract that allows you to build out the rest of the roster in a way where you can pretty quickly be competitive. I think they have too many good players and that path is not totally closed off from them for me to do this here. I just don't think they can be the answer because how hard is that to imagine? It's like, let's say they're picking 18th this year and they have a ton of draft capital next year with a couple comp picks that they're going to get from free agency and they decide

we're going to be aggressive. We're going to do what the Vikings did last year. We're going to go from the 20s up to near the top 10. We're going to go up there. We're going to put ourselves in range. There are four to five quarterbacks worth drafting in the top half of the first round. We feel good about enough of them that if we come away with one, we think that this can all come together. That's a lot of stuff to happen, but it's not hard to imagine that. It's actually very easy to imagine that. Right. And that's, again, why I don't, in terms of purely the quarterback aspect of it, don't really put them in a different bucket from like where Carolina is at or where the falcons are at or where the Vikings are.

Because again, okay, those guys have them in the building. but those to me are not surefire bets. They're still like, eh, we kind of need some things to go right. And so I would still put the Steelers in that same bucket where it's like next year, if they want to go up and get their quarterback at 13, they're living in the same world. There's one year behind, which on a five-year timeline isn't that a bunch of an issue, I don't think.

So if it's not the Steelers for you, who is the team that comes to mind is the answer to this question? The team least likely to win a Super Bowl in the next five years based on how they are currently operated and constructed. It's such a tough question. Um, you can't escape this answer unscath. Like someone's going to be pissed off. I know. It's got to be somebody.

It feels, it feels bad to say the Browns because obviously if we're talking about quarterback, like they're going to have all the ammo in the world to go up and get it next year. But I just don't love a lot of the way that things have been put together for them. So it's probably not them though. They're a good answer though. Because let's just game this out.

Yeah. Like let's just say next year. You're Cleveland. You have those two first round picks. You have a top 10 pick. You maneuver to get the best quarterback you possibly can. In year one, you're not winning the Super Bowl. So now we're already in year three, right?

This is the third season of this exercise. And you need the quarterback to be great to even probably be a playoff team. Then we're in year four by the time you're a contender. Like, they're so far away, even if the quarterback is coming next year, that I think that's a totally reasonable answer to this. I actually think it's the Giants, though. I still think the Brown. are good, but I think for me it's the Giants.

I'm not nearly as high on the defense as I think as some people seem to be already. And then, like, if this year doesn't go well, you're going to have to restart a head coach and stuff. And so you have no idea how that's going to go. You're going to have a quarterback that if that happens, you're going to have a quarterback that you already spent the first round pick on. Who knows what the next regime is going to. Like, it just feels like there's so much in flux for them. And the offensive line is still bad.

Like, that's kind of the biggest issue, too, is like, I think if you're going to try to jumpstart and get this thing close in the next few years, the offensive line should be close, and they're one of the furthest organizations away. I don't think they're bad. I think the offensive line is not good, right? I think the offensive line is like decidedly average or just below average. And that's when you don't have other real strengths of your offense other than Malik neighbors, it's hard to do a lot of damage with that sort of offensive line.

Like you need truly elite play elsewhere if you're going to be a great offense with that. sort of offensive line. You need like the weapons that the Bengals have or the quarterback that the Bengals have. And they just don't have that. And so I think that the pathways to them being a really good offense, even if Jackson Dart somewhat works out, are still probably narrower than Giants fans would like them to be. I think the Giants are a good answer for this reason because similar to what you said, like to me, the worst case scenario for the Giants is if you were looking at something like the Will Levis era, right? And Will Levis played right away for the Titans. So let's say Jacksonard plays the second half of this year. This group,

gets fired, right? You have another group coming next year. You still probably have to stick with Jackson Dart based on what you gave up to go get him. That's now two years. Let's say you're bad enough to even get a good quarterback the same way that the Titans were this year. That's year three. Then you get to year four by the time that quarterback is even going to be ready to make you a competitor and we're almost five years in. So that's why I think that one is tough. And I think the Colts are in a somewhat similar situation. Right. So if Anthony Richardson doesn't work out and then this group gets fired, now you're in year one. of a new regime next year. Do you have a pathway to a quarterback?

There's just a lot of potential change there. I think the Raiders are a decent answer to this. Because I think the Gino thing, even if it's going to make them competitive, by the time the rest of the roster is ready to have you be a real contender, I'm not sure Gino's still going to be clicking at the level you need to be to get you to a Super Bowl place, right? Their best case scenario was the Alex Smith path of this, where they probably need to upgrade over Gino by the time the roster is ready for

them to get over the top like three years from now. That's a fine path to take, but I don't think it's going to bring them to a Super Bowl in the next five years. And the other one that I'd mention, because I just don't think they're willing to do what it takes is the Cowboys. I just, I think the Cowboys are in this conversation to me. Like, it's, I just don't understand why they're that much different than a team like the Steelers in the sense.

They have the quarterback, which is obviously a huge part of this, but they're another team that has just really shown us over and over again. that they're not willing to do what is necessary in order to get them of themselves over the top. So in terms of how they approach it, I totally agree. I think they just draft too well for them to like be in this conversation. The quarterback is too good and they draft too well. It was a totally reasonable answer.

The bar is just too high for the bottom to fall out. But like in terms of if we were to reframe it in terms of like teams that are good, but least likely to actually get over the hump, it probably is the Cowboys because of everything that you just said. but I feel like they're too close to consistently being good to mark them here. The Panthers are probably another team you could throw out, but like, I don't know. I believe enough in the flashes that Bryce showed last year that, like, there's a potential path if things go really right for them in the draft and free agency over the next couple years

as they work on a rookie quarterback contract. It's still narrow, but I still think it is at least conceivable as you have like a two to three year outlook. I think I'm more in like the Panthers are fun to talk about relative. to what they were a year ago, but I don't know if I think they're like good. You're probably right about that. You're probably right about that. And they're much more watchable than we expected them to be. Oh, they're way more watchable at this time last year.

Let's get to our next one here. I'm going to let you answer this because I've talked about this in some way, shape, or form a ton over the last few years, whether it was with Nate, whether it was when Anthony Richardson was coming into the draft. But you've watched this position and studied it from prospects to the league for so long that I think you'd have an interesting perspective on it. Kate Freiman says, with the draft over, my mind has shifted to training camp offseason program and teams preparing for actual games.

I'm finding it difficult to get terribly excited as a Colts fan because while drafting Tower Warren is exciting, our season really all depends on what Anthony Richardson can do. That leads into my question. I made the mistake of posting on Twitter that while I think it's unlikely, Richardson is able to drastically improve his accuracy, I really hope he's able to take the next step and become our franchise quarterback. What I wasn't expecting was the amount of individuals who were absolutely convinced he would easily be able to improve that part of his game and I was insane for thinking that it was a

difficult task. So how easy is it really for a quarterback to improve their accuracy? Am I the crazy one for thinking the odds are not in the Colts favor at this point in Richardson's career? Are there any examples of quarterbacks drastically approving their accuracy? I can only think of one prominent one, Joshua Patrick Allen, and he seems to be more of the exception to the rule. Thanks for considering. Love the show. What is your answer to this? There are examples. It is still very hard. Josh Allen is obviously the one that everyone is going to go to. I think some of the other examples that you can make a case for are Lamar Jackson specifically outside of the numbers. That was an issue that he struggled with early on in his career.

And then he's gotten better at it. And a lot of that to me was just timing and footwork. Like he used to, his feet used to be very narrow and they still kind of are. But he's gotten better about unlocking himself in that way. Jordan Love, I think is another one. He coming out of Utah State was just like kind of all over the place footwork wise. And he really settled down and became, I think, a little bit more accurate. He still has, you know, some of the Matt's staff.

or just like misses three a game. But it used to be like six when he was younger early in his career. So he's gotten better there. And then I think the other one that you could kind of make the case is like Cam Newton got a little bit more accurate, but not like into where Josh Allen got. He just got like from a little bit scattershot to where he could be functional in the short area, which he wasn't early in his career.

But it is still there. There aren't as many examples as you want. And I would say accuracy gets tricky because I think you can miss by purely just not throwing the ball well. And I think you can also miss by just not. playing the game fast. And the player I would bring up for this, and you're very familiar with him, is Justin Fields. Justin Fields, like, if he knows where the ball is going and everything is clean, he's a very accurate passer. The problem is things just don't happen fast enough for him,

so the ball is a little bit late. You know, window kind of closes on him. Even though he has the arm strength to fit it, he's just like mentally allowing things to close. And that's how you can be inaccurate. I think that's actually more of what we've seen from Richardson. Like, he will just spray a ball. Don't get me wrong. But I think what we've seen with Richardson is things are just, It's not getting the ball out quite as quickly as he needs to and he's not as confident in it. And so the ball can spread himself up, get a little bit more confident, settle down his footwork a little bit. Maybe he has a chance, but I do think he kind of is struggling with both where he's a little bit of a hundred mile an hour thrower where he's just going to miss. And then he's also just hasn't had the game reps to speed himself up in the way that you want.

We'll talk about this a lot this offseason. It's May 2nd. How are you feeling about Anthony Richardson? Do you think this is possible? I think it's possible. I think the problem, and we've run into this, we ran into this with Trey Lance, which this was a player we knew was very young,

didn't have a lot of reps coming out of college, and was going to need a lot of reps. He just hasn't gotten them because he can't stay on the field. He spent 15 games. He's thrown 348 passes in the NFL in two years. That's not a lot. And it's like, that's one of those things where, okay, if I could tell myself for a fact,

he's going to get the next two years fully healthy and he's going to be able to develop on the right plan, all that stuff. You could get me there with him in terms of him developing, but I just feel like the way that he gets banged up, the way that he plays, the way that he'll hold on to the ball, I just worry that we're ever going to get there with him.

And so I think, again, for a guy that needed a very carefully put together development plan, he's just not, he hasn't gotten it to this point. I don't know if he's ever going to get it with the way that he continues to get banged up. here's my like copium maybe i'm rationalizing this take if i were trying to like find the silver lining if i were colts fan he needs so much work and last year he was coming into the offseason hurt and so you'd hope that this off season he's doing the work i mean he's working like with will hewitt

and all those guys who work with brock purdy it's not like he's not trying to work on this stuff he absolutely is it's the same stuff that josh allen did i mean all of the biomechanical stuff that josh allen was doing early in his career anthony richison's working with the same guys And so having a full off season where he's not rehabbing the shoulder at all and can really dig into this, maybe there's enough work to be done where he can get there. People are going to look at Josh Allen and they're just going to misremember what the last, with the first couple years of Josh Allen's career looked like. Josh Allen's first year was all over the place. It was all over the place. It was one of the more bizarre NFL offenses I could ever remember watching with him and Robert Foster.

And it was all just huge chunks down the field are absolutely nothing. and then in year two, it was the opposite. They could not throw the ball down the field in 2019 in Buffalo. Like his numbers on 20 plus air yard throws were very bad. It was a very methodical process for him to get from point A to point B to point C. There's a very good chance that that is a unicorn story that no longer applies to anyone else who plays the position. But it took him a while to get there. And Anthony Richardson has played far fewer games, like far fewer games than Josh Allen.

So I still think the path is there. I think it's just starting to close pretty darn quickly. That is the best way to put it. The path is still there. It's just you're having to tell yourself more and more of a story the further we get into this. And there are still stuff I want to bet on with Anthony Richardson. I do think he is very calm in the pocket, which is admirable. I think his ability to get around pressure when he's really feeling it and playing well is incredibly impressive.

The arm is obviously fantastic. It's just he needs like three. years worth of game reps and now we're already entering year three and he has one year of game reps. It's just, it's hard. And there's a chance it gets ripped from him again this year because this is a group that needs to win some games and needs some stability at quarterback. And they may see Daniel Jones as that even if obviously Anthony Richardson has the higher upside, even this deep into his career. So it'll be one of the more fascinating things that we pay attention to in training camp into the early parts of the season. But what happens with Daniel Jones and Anthony Richardson? We haven't talked a lot

about it recently, but it'll obviously be something that takes up a lot of oxygen here over the next six months or so. Next one, Philip Goads says, another great year of draft coverage, guys, my question is with all the strange picks and trades that have happened all time, what moment do you think would have been the most fun to be doing a draft show with Dane Live? Too instantly that popped to my mind are the Ricky Williams trade or the Laramie Tunsel drop. What do you have for this? I have a couple. I tried to limit it to like drafts that have happened since I started covering the league or like was in sports media, it's like the last 15 years.

I didn't want to go all the way back just because it'd be hard to track. But I had a couple moments that came to mind. Were there any for you? I mean, the Tuntil one is obvious. So like that one really is, I think far in a way,

the funniest one that we could have gotten. I had two other ones. One, a little bit more recent and one yet you do have to go back a while. The first one is like Tim Tebow getting drafted where he did. I was going to say that too. Like, I think that would have been for it, for as tapped in as Dane is in terms of just understanding, like,

how to scout these players and stuff. Teba was a very questionable quarterback prospect. So I would have loved to see Dane's reaction to that. And then the other one to me was you have to go way back to it. I think it was 2003. The Vikings just not turning in their cards. Like, imagine us having to do the show there. And the Vikings just don't pick.

Like that would have been that. Something like that would have been phenomenal. Yeah, we don't bring that up a lot on this show because obviously someone involved had for most of this show's existence had some pretty rough memories of that moment. But I do think that would have been a very good one. I was at the draft for the Tunsel thing. So I'm sitting there in the auditorium theater

at Roosevelt University where they held the draft in Chicago for a couple of years. And I was working at the ringer at the time and we were trying to figure out what was happening because all you could do is just look at social media. Being alive for that sort of moment would have been absolutely insane. So that one's up there.

The Julio trade. Like imagine in that, moment if you're watching that and like the falcons just show up there and they draft Julio Jones. Like that that's one of the biggest swings we've seen in. I can't even remember how long. And another one that this is just a whole draft that I actually thought would have been fun. The 2014 draft. So you have Clownie go number one overall.

And then there's there's no consensus on the quarterbacks. So Bortles went three, but there's so many quarterbacks in that draft. And so you have Teddy Ridgewater go later. You have Derek Carr go later. Johnny Mansell was a first round pick in that draft. that was the Aaron Donald draft. And Aaron Donald was like, that's the best player in the draft. Like from the moment I watched him.

And so him going 13 and like what that slide looked like, there was a lot of interesting players in that draft. So for whatever reason, that one really came to mind. But the Tunsel move and then the Julio trade are probably the singular moments that I think would have been really enjoyable. I think the Julio one is a really good one. The Julio one is perfect, though, because I feel like a lot of the ones we just said are just like kind of oh no bad moments,

where the Julio one is like, that's the coolest thing I've ever seen. They just went up and got the receiver that looks and plays like a robot. Like that one would have been a really fun one, I think. All right. Before we move on and get some more of these questions, we're going to take a quick break. Next one here, Keb True Blood says, Hey guys, with the Titans taking ward and hoping him to be the new franchise guy, my mind keeps going to Will Levis, wondering where he's going to end up.

Well, the Titans try to flip him for pennies on the dollar like the Bears did with Fields. Do they have him holding a clipboard as a backup until he walks in free agency? surely there are concerns about locker room vibes and mentorship if somebody in that position sticks around. We love to hear your thoughts about where Levis ends up. If you have any other faces of the franchise you think might find themselves in a similar situation soon, or a personal favorite story of a Woody going out to do great things after the team brought in a new shiny Buzz Light Year. What do you got? So the locker room dynamic thing is an interesting one.

I don't know Cam Ward. I haven't talked to Cam Ward. He seems like the type of guy that does not give a shit if there was another guy. on the roster. I was going to go in. Willis's locker room dynamics. I guess that's true. I guess that's true, but like, you were a second round pick.

Like, yeah, you guys were bad. Like, he, I would think, like, he would be okay being a backup at this point. Like, he, they gave him every chance that he wanted to, or every chance that you could hope for to be the starting quarterback. And he just wasn't good enough. And so I would, I would imagine that he would be okay with that. Where I think trading him gets hard is like, we're actually in the worst spot of the offseason, I think, to trade a quarterback like this.

where if it was before the draft, it would be like, okay, a team doesn't know how things are going to go, all that jazz. But now I feel like the only way you would trade him is if somebody gets hurt in camp. Like then you would be like, okay, fine, you know, X starter gets hurt. We're going to go try this.

Like say, you know, God forbid Gino Smith goes down for the Raiders. Like, do they want to throw whatever they can get at the Titans to go get a starting quarterback, fine? The only team I could see right now trading for him because they would obviously view it as a developmental thing would be like the Rams. I think that would be kind of a fun one.

But other than that, I kind of find it a little bit hard to find a home for him right now. I think that's fair. And the Trey Lance trade comes to mind for me as something that a team did. And that was in, I think late August is when they did that. So it was deep into training camp right on the eve of the season. So when you have a better understanding of your roster, maybe you flip the Titans a fifth round pick for Will Levis to be your backup quarterback, something like that.

I took this a little bit broader because I was curious about, how often do quarterbacks who are drafted as high as Will Levis was drafted that flame out as starters stick in the league as backups for a really long time? And it's actually a shorter list than you think it is. So I looked at the number since 2000, quarterbacks who started fewer than 50 games drafted in the first two rounds that played in the NFL for at least eight years. Okay. Here are the quarterbacks for whom that applies.

Kellyn Clemens is the best possible example. Kellyn Clemens was a backup in the league for a really long time. Blaine Gabbert, who was the first person that came to mind when I was starting this exercise. Rex Grossman, Tavaris Jackson, who was the 64th pick in the draft. So that's a little bit later. You're kind of drafted as a backup at that range of the draft. And then the two others are Byron Lefwich and Kyle Bowler. Somebody who I actually think is a potential good example of this, who was drafted

as a second round pick. He started 54 games, so it was just over the. the mark, but stuck as a backup for a really long time, was Chad Henney. Right? So Chad Henney also falls into this category. And then two guys recently who, they haven't been in the league eight years, or one guy recently has been in the league eight years, but I think this is a, to me, probably the best possible path for him where you keep getting shots to be a backup,

you keep sticking on rosters, Drew Locke. Like Will Levin says Drew Locke is kind of the perfect example to me. So the answer to this for me is, how good of a dude are you? Yeah, and that's kind of the thing with Drew Locke. It seems like everybody loves being around Drew Locke. And so I can't speak to as Will Lewis, who knows, but yeah, like, just be a good hang. And like, that's the thing, if you have the arm that Will Levis has or Drew Locke for that matter, and you are a good hang, you will get shots for a decade.

Like, somebody will keep trying to roll the dice. I think a lot of these guys, and I'm not going to play like pop psychologist every quarterback who's been drafted in the first round. But if you were a first round pick and you flame out, the idea of holding a clipboard and being a backup, a lot of guys just don't want to do it. Like, they're just out of the league in four or five years. But if you can swallow the ego a little bit and understand that making two million bucks a year to like be a good hang is actually a really nice life, it's not a bad way to go about it. And so we'll see what that ends up being for Will Levis.

But I think my final definitive answer to this is how nice of a hang are you? How much do people want you around? And that may ultimately determine what your career looks like from this point forward. That's, I mean, that's half the job for backup. Next one here, William Friday says, I recently watched the Falcons press conference with their defensive coaches, and it gave more insight into why they made the move to trade back up for Pierce. Particularly the interview with Nate Ali, their defensive line coach,

who's coming off coaching the Dexon's defensive line. He emphasized Jalen Walker rushing over guards, throwing haymakers as a pass rush and having waves of pass rushers. This has cat-dept us long-suffering Falcons fans, but my question is, has there ever been a team that has sustained success focusing so heavily on lighter pass rushers on their line. We got multiple questions about size along the defensive line as part of these. John Ma asked a similar one about, I think, the Niners when it came to Michael Williams and

what they had done with this group. So when you think about the makeup of the Falcons Pass Rush Group with a couple undersized guys, are there any examples to you recently of teams that have been built that way that have been able to sustain success on defense? I think so. And I don't love it. it's not the way that I would build a defense. I subscribe a little bit more to the Dennis Allen school of, you know,

just get long arms, 270 founders, all that jazz. But I think if you look at the way the Broncos are built right now, they are certainly like this. Like Jonah Ellis and Nick Benito are both sub 250. I think Jonathan Cooper is listed like 257. And they just drafted Q Robinson from Alabama, who is listed at 243. So they are a team that is willing to have all the light bodies. The Vikings.

They have really complimentary interior pieces. stuff. That's, that was going to be what I was going to say, yes. I think that's the concern is when you look at the interior pieces, like, you need a Dron Franklin Myers and a DJ Jones as part of the equation to make good on those sorts of players. You need big somewhere. So if you're going to be small on the edge, you need big somewhere else. And the Patriots actually kind of did this in a different way where like they would have some of these, like, you know, especially recently some of these weirders undersized edge rushers. But it was when they had Donta High Tower. Juan Bentley, like linebackers who were going to hit. And then they obviously had big defensive tackles. But another team for me was the Vikings are built this way. Andrew Van Ginkle and Dallas Turner are small. Jonathan Granard is like right at 260, which isn't small, but it's not, you know, 280.

And then I went back a little bit and tried to find some other teams that were like this. The 21, the 2021 Panthers had Brian Burns and Hassan Reddick. They combined for 20 sacks. So that was pretty good. And then 2015, you had Von Miller, who was like kind of an outlier in terms of being that good at that size. But then they also had Shaq Barrett, who was like 6-2-250, not very big. They also had DeMarcus Ware, who was bigger, but still in terms of like pass-rush size

probably on the smaller end, and that was one of the best defenses we'd ever seen. So, again, I don't know if this is the way that I would build a pass-rushing room, but like there are examples of if you want to build it this way it can work. Even with those Broncos teams, though, the first thing, my first response would be they had Derek Wolf and Lake Jackson. They had interior guys who were doing such a huge part of the lifting. And I this is, we've talked about this a lot. I've kind of come around on this where I think the speed guys, there's just fewer ways

they can win. And that's what concerns me about it. And even if you look at the guys who are undersized. So I just looked last 20 years under 250 most sacks in a season. What does that list look like individually for players? And the guys who are on that list, almost all of them are more sought off dudes who are just absolute leverage monsters. Robert Mathis.

Elvis Dumerville, Alex Highsmith, James Harrison, Joey Porter, Will Anderson is even kind of like this to me, where he's a little bit shorter. He plays with a ton of power. So you can be lighter if you are a little bit shorter. Your body composition is a little bit more sturdy and you can play with that sort of power. Guys like Brian Burns and Benito, they almost feel like exceptions to the rule. And again, Benito is really good this year on a sack level basis. He's a fun player, but there's a lot of cleanup sacks in there.

his pressure numbers aren't overwhelming. He's kind of a piece of a hole rather than an ace pass rusher. So to go give up what they did for James Pierce with his body type, I just think you're asking a lot of those kinds of guys. And even a guy like Micah Parsons, right? Like Michael Parsons, right? Like, Michael Parsons and Von Miller are like all time, all time movement freaks of nature. When you watch Michael Parsons play, the balance and flexibility with both of those players,

they're in a completely different conversation. Like, you could count on one hand the players who move like Micah Parsons and Von Miller that have come into the league over the last 10 years. And I just don't think James Pierce and even Jalen Walker are those guys most likely. And pound for pound, Michael Parsons is one of the strongest players in the league. Like, he's a smaller guy, but pound for pound. That's why I've said this before him and Miles Garrett are fascinating because Miles Garrett moves way better than 280 should move. and then Micah Parsons is way stronger than 245 pounds should ever be.

So that's why they're fun mix there. But that was also my contention with Pierce is like a lot of these other smaller guys are just way stronger for their size. Or in the case of Burns, obviously incredible speed rusher. But he came out of college with like a full bag of past rushing moves. You need to be able to make inside moves. And for the most part that inside counter for guys is straight speed to power where they're working through somebody's chest. Like that's the easiest way to do it. But if you have an inside counter where if somebody's going to overset you, you can make them pay, that's possible.

Like there are guys who can do that, but there just aren't that many of them. I think Burns is a potentially good example there. Like the spin move that he has, like he has enough counters to make good on having fewer threats beyond the speed. And I think that's just harder to do. Yeah, that's such a great point. Whereas the guy with like Pierce, it might be until year two or year three where we see some of that. I think overall the way that I've started to think about just the way that you build a pass rush room and why I want more of these pocket pushers than these speed guys.

I'm trying to figure out exactly why I've landed here, but I think part of it is how mobile quarterbacks have become, right? So if you are playing 15 years ago and you're one of these speedy, bendy rushers and you know where the quarterback is going to be, it's a little bit easier because if you get pushed by the quarterback, he's not going to be able to move, et cetera. Now the quarterbacks that can move so well in the pocket, I would rather condense the space rather than have,

a lot of speed off the edge where I'm bending to a specific point because you're not really bending to a specific point anymore with half of the quarterbacks who are currently in the league. They're not going to be at that spot. And so I think that's why I like these guys more than modern NFL than I would have previously because I just want to cut off the space and the pathway and make that quarterback feel uncomfortable because he can get himself out of trouble potentially in a way that quarterbacks 10 to 15 years ago probably couldn't. Right.

And there's a predictability. in being a bend in speed rusher. Like the point that you get around the tackle and get to the quarterback is going to be around the same spot. If you're more of a power rusher can do some of the inside stuff, the exact point where the pressure is hitting and like where the guy's getting pushed into the quarterback's lap changes all the time.

And that again is going to make the quarterback a little bit, a little bit antsy, a little bit uneasy back there. Yeah, exactly. And I think that's, and tackles makes tackles on antsy on uneasy because they don't know what you're going to do. And so I think after hearing tackles talk about this,

that's why I think have been so enthusiastic about coming to this conclusion is that I think if you talk to offensive tackles about the differences between playing against the guy like Jaredverse and playing against the guy like Brian Burns. If you are playing against a guy like Brian Burns, you know that if you get to your spot and set up, you're probably going to be okay. If you're playing against Jaredverse, it doesn't matter if you're at your spot and set up because he could just put his left arm through your throat and get himself to the quarterback.

And so those guys, unless you can play straight down the middle through somebody's chest, I just think that you're going to have a hard time against tackles in the NFL. And I think there have been a lot of recent examples of that. Even a guy like Daniel Hunter, right? Like I went back last night and watched all of Daniel Hunter's sacks. Daniel Hunter is 265. Like he's still a powerful player, even if we mostly conceive of him as like a weird Gumby type pass rusher.

Cam Wake. Remember like Cam Wake was a speed guy, but he was one of the most powerful players that you've ever seen. So it just even guys with speed, the speed to power component. It almost feels like a necessary element of this if you're ever going to be one of the difference making guys. Yeah. I think you saying to get them off their spot is the perfect way to do it. Because a lot of these tackles, these guys are really good athletes.

They can get to the edge. And again, if they know the quarterback is able to move, okay, they'll just run you around the arc and my quarterback's going to get out. And we're going to be fine here. He's going to outrun you. But, yeah, if you can just get the tackle to set up on his spot and just move him off the spot, okay, everyone's upset now. And what kind of player James Pierce ends up becoming? His ceiling is relevant based on what the Falcons gave up to get him.

And that brings us to the next question here. Perry Hamlin says, with the draft over, everyone on the internet is giving their draft grades and declaring the winners and losers. One team that is at the bottom of almost any list you look at is my Atlanta Falcons. Everyone online has been bashing their draft, mainly the trade back into the first round for James Pierce.

My question is, was the Falcons draft actually that bad? With their first pick, they take Jay-Wan Walker, who most people had going in the top 10. no one seemed to have a problem if he went eight to the Panthers. So getting him in 15 feels like it should be a steal. Now, I know every pick value chart will probably disagree with this, but I feel like the James Pierce trade wasn't as bad as people are making it out to be. The Falcons basically moved from the second to the third round

in order to move a first round pick from 2026 to 2025. I personally don't think moving back around on day two is a bad price to pay to use your first round pick a year early. Also, if the Falcons hadn't made this trade but had drafted Xavier Watts in the second round, I don't think anyone would have had a problem with it. So it feels like the Falcons basically just moved up their first rounder a year. I personally think a better discussion point is whether James is worth a first rounder rather than the value of the trade itself.

But the Falcons believe him to be a top 15 players, reports have suggested, that I think it's a totally defensible move. And so the final question here is kind of, is this valid reasoning? Am I just trying to cope with the fact that this team is just objectively bad? What do you think about this? So I kind of sympathize with it, right? Because I actually agree that a lot of the draft wasn't bad. Like I wasn't the biggest fan of Jalen Walker.

I think I have more questions about how you're going to use him. But getting him at 15 instead of, you know, there were talks about him going like fourth to the Patriots. Like I think that this is actually a pretty good range for a player like that. And then I didn't mind the double dip at safety. I even like Watts a pretty good amount and them double dipping in one of the worst positions on their roster, especially when the offense is already like pretty much set. I actually liked a lot of that approach. The thing to me is just you traded a lot.

You traded a first round pick to go get a player that. to me is, again, it's one of these DPR types. It's like to me, the best version of what you're getting is Nick Benito. And I think trading all of that for a guy like Nick, you know, in that category is just way, way too much. And so I know again, you know, we can make the point of like, you know, the draft chart. And this is going to sound really dumb. When one team is giving up a future first like this, I almost don't care about what the draft

chart says. It's like, that's already you are giving up a ton there. And so I just don't love it, especially with the position that they're in. What it also is worth pointing out, the draft chart in the way that it currently charts out is that they gave up like a third round pick to do this. This is important to remind people of because we miss this oftentimes when we're figuring out the price for these trades in real time. They got a third round pick back, right?

So they got a third round pick back and gave up a first round pick. If you look at the aggregate, according to modern charts where the difference between a first round pick and the third round pick is not as big as conventional wisdom would tell you that it is, the average here, if they end up with like the 16th pick in next year's draft is that they gave up a third round pick to move up for James Pierce. That's probably okay. Teams do that stuff all the time if James Pierce ends up becoming a good player. Here's the issue.

You have no idea where that pick is going to end up. You have absolutely no idea. If we want to play it out where it's the 16th pick of the draft, it's probably going to be fine if James Pierce is a reasonably good player. But you don't know that it's going to be the 16th pick in the draft. Teams do this all the time and they're often wrong about being able to project their own level of success the following year. Two perfect examples of this.

The Broncos trade for Russell Wilson. They gave up multiple first round picks in doing so. The Broncos are thinking, we have Russell Wilson now. How bad could we possibly be? And then the next year, they give the fifth overall pick in the draft to the Seahawks where they take Devin Witherspoon. The Seahawks are not without fault here. They make a similar trade for Jamal Adams.

They think, we have Russell Wilson. How bad could we possibly be? And then the next year, they give away the 10th, 10th overall pick to the Jets in the Jamal Adams trade. This happens all the time. The Texans did this when they traded away future first round picks. They gave the fourth overall pick away to the Browns for Denzel Ward. And then they gave the third overall pick away after they traded for Laramie Tunsell.

So there's just no way to know this. And you could probably say if you're the Falcons, we think that we're going to be a competitive team this year. We think that we're going to win 10, 11 games. We're going to compete for the AFC South. This is going to be the 23rd pick in the draft. okay what happens if you trade away Kirk cousins here in a month and Mike and Michael Pennings gets hurt and you win six games and now you're handing the sixth overall pick in next year's draft to the Rams

when they need a quarterback so you're not only making yourself worse you're making a team in your conference very good I talked to a head coach this week who was just annoyed about the trade it was just like they really gave a first round pick to the Rams like it's it's one of those things we're like why did you give that to them why did you let them have that a team that we know is going to be competitive and really good as long as the people in charge there are still in charge there. So I think that's the problem to me is that the uncertainty with these future first, it can just look so, so bad depending on where this thing ends up and where this pick

eventually false. I think it's also too, at the end of the question, they said something along the lines of, oh, well, if the Falcons felt really convinced that he was a top 15 player, then it's defensible. They are no more likely to get the quality of James Pierce right. than I am. And if I just don't think it was a very good player at all, then I have a hard time justify how that is a like a justifiable move for them to make. And so I ultimately think that's all this comes down to. It's like it's almost not even about what did they give up to do it.

What were the other picks they made? It's this draft class really is just like, did you think James Pierce was good or not? And I don't. And that's why I kind of struggle with this draft class a lot. He was off boards. Yes. He was just all he was just off boards. And they traded away a future round pick. And again, the equivalent is a third, but it might be more than that. If this ends up being a top 10 pick, then it goes to like a high second or late first that you're in that you give up. And that completely changes the dynamic. So giving yourself that door, if you're the Rams, is always worth it. Like, it's always worth it to give yourself that door. We had the same conversation with the Brown's Jacks trade. That could be the sixth

pick in the draft. It absolutely could be. What happened with the RG3 trade. The Washington franchise gave the Rams the number two pick. the 2014 draft because of the RG3 trade. Like it just, when you're dealing with future first, there's just so many different things that can happen that it's just a very dangerous way to live. And so I think that's worth mentioning. Same with the bears and the Panthers.

It's just there's, the downside is just monumental. And if you're not meeting that with the correct amount of upside, I think that's where things get really dicey. That's the thing. It's hard to justify throwing the extra first round picks around unless it's for a quarterback. And there are some examples where this works out, right?

Like you can trade a first round pick for some elite receiver, elite corner, whatever it is. But by and large, if you're not trading for a quarterback with those extra first round picks, it's, you're asking for a lot. You need a lot to go right. With that in mind, I actually want to skip to a different question because I think it flows well into this from that one in that point. Micah Thornberg says, really enjoyed day-two draft coverage learning about a lot of new guys in the league.

Over the course of the day, there was a lot of emphasis on value. Since the draft, there is always a. question who get the most value with their pick this year. My question is, is Cam Ward eligible to be the best value? What excess value is a team getting by having the number one overall pick this year when a great quarterback is available? What is your answer to this? That's a great question. I mean, if Cam Ward is to be the quarterback that I believe he is going to be, then yeah, he is the most valuable pick, right? Because if he's the player, I think he's going to be, he's going to be a top like 14 quarterback at least

with maybe a handful of Pro Bowls. And then like, yeah, that is the most valuable. After that, it just becomes about like, how do you define it? Are you saying value is like the guy who fell the most on the consensus board? Are you valuing position more? And it also depends like why they fell, right? Because I think we all want to say, oh, Will Johnson was a huge value. Okay, well, we know why he fell.

It was some of the injury stuff and stuff like that. Mike Green, same thing. Him falling for some of the off-field stuff. Shadir Sanders is obviously a tricky one, because by consensus obviously fell a ton, but I think the NFL was telling us something about the way that we viewed him versus how the NFL viewed him. Past that, it becomes like I had the beholder.

Like, if we're going to try to capture both consensus board fall and positional stuff, is like Jalen Milrow with the best value? Like, it just gets into a weird, like, how are you trying to make sense of it? I think I'm taking this very literally. I'm just looking at the numbers and the money associated with the position. And that's why I think,

Cam Ward absolutely could be the most valuable pick. Dak Prescott is making $60 million a year. Cam Ward is making $10 million a year. And let's not even say he's Dak Prescott. Let's take Dak Prescott off of the table here. There are quarterbacks in that range that you just said, eight to 14, eight to 15 who are making $53 million a year, right? Let's say he's as good as Tua, who's making $53 million a year.

That is a gap between what he's making and what he's worth according to the market of $43 million. There is no non-quarterback in the NFL making more than $43 million. So the gap between the quarterbacks and Cam Ward salary is bigger than it can be at literally any other position. That's the nature of premium positions. Like that's why you draft them high in the draft, and that's why you're willing to give away picks for quarterbacks in ways you're not for other positions. Let's do it for another spot. Let's say Abdul Carter becomes Miles Garrett.

Okay, Abdul Carter is making about $10 million a year on his deal, same as Cam Ward is. Miles Garrett is making 40. That's a delta of 30 million versus the delta of 43 million for Cam Ward. This is why you can draft quarterbacks number one overall and never even think about it or give away more picks to go get them. Because the potential surplus that you are getting at the position is dramatically higher than at any other position, and it extends down into the middle class of your peers at that position. It's not just having to be Miles Garrett.

If you're Jordan Love, you are getting a massive amount of savings. And so, yes, absolutely, Cam Ward can be the most valuable player drafted in this draft class without question. That's a really good point. I wasn't viewing it as much through the money, which obviously I probably should be. But for me, it was more just like what is the pick that we spent versus the quality of the player. But then, yeah, either way, I think it can still be Cam Ward. Technically could be, I mean, it could be any of the quarterbacks really. like if any of those guys hit that is the answer but even like what was the fourth pick will campbell that's

another one where tackles are obviously getting paid a lot of money if he's even fine i mean we just paid dan more like 20 million dollars basically like if will campbell can be a cheaper version of that right out of the gate that that already is a pretty big surplus let's get to right next one here sam rapson says does the 2025 draft signal see change in which positions are considered premium by the NFL or is it one year of teams updating on the eagle's success interior offensive line and defensive line players were almost universally over-drafted relative to their rankings on big boards. Meanwhile, cornerback, historically a tier two position slid down the draft. Is it possible the modern meta, with an emphasis on forcing teams that didn't conduct down the

field, is making the unicorn athlete a cornerback less of a commodity? Mike Zimmer's quote saying he could find a cover two corner at the local 7-11 comes to mind. And on the flip side of that coin, are lighter box counts and more nickel and dime looks increasing the value of those interior trench guys who have more opportunity to make a difference individually. I think there is some of that. The interior offensive line, I think, was trickier in this class because I actually don't think there were that many of them in like the upper tiers.

So I think there was just a quick run on them because it was just like, all right, if we need one, we're just going to get ahead of it and we're not going to let this fall a little bit. I do think some of the way that the defensive linemen came off the board was pretty indicative of like where we're going with the league. And obviously some teams were probably going to want to do that anyway. like Detroit was a team that like they're just always going to build through the trenches. But I think the way that we saw the Giants make sure they got a guy.

The chiefs wouldn't make sure that they got a guy early in the draft, you know, kind of reaching on these players to make sure that they can get them. I do think that probably if anything is the signal of where we're going is making sure that you have enough defensive interior players to me because for such a long time we were obsessed on the edge where it was like, okay, you always need to replenish. You always need to have who's the next guy, who's our third and fourth guy. We have enough guys off the bench. I think we're seeing now, you absolutely need that with defensive tackle.

And like, you can find some role players in free agency, right? Like specifically the nose tackle who's going to give you 20 snaps. That is something you can find in free agency. Bobby Brown. Yeah, right. The Bobby Browns. Puna Ford. The Puna Ford's, the Tires, the Tire Tarts.

You can find those guys. It's a little bit harder to find the guys who can be like juice and to have some juice and have some actual building blocks. So I think we saw in this draft teams were very willing to go up and get them. The last thing I'll say with. the corners, I don't think it's that having a unicorn cornerback is less of a commodity. I just don't think that there are very many of them. And so I think teams are just like, okay, if we don't think he's that caliber of guy,

we're a little bit more willing to wait and just get guys that are like good with our scheme and let the front kind of handle a lot of things. I think unicorn corner means something different now because of the way that offenses are deploying their players. There was a time where if you lined up to Roe Revis on one side of the field as an outside corner because that's where Randy Moss was going to be. He was giving you immense value. Good luck trying to man somebody up on Justin Jefferson for an entire football game based on the ways they hide him, motion, stacks, bunches, lining him up in the slot. I think offenses are just making

it so much easier on their receivers that saying the receiver to corner is like a one-to-one comparison, it's just not how it works anymore. It's less man coverage and there are just less one-on-one opportunities like that outside of guys like, let's say Patrick Sartan. Like it just, he's one the only guys that can do that inside, outside. The demands on the position are just greater than they've ever been, if or even a team that plays that level of man coverage, which there aren't a lot of them. The light box thing, that's a, I like that as like a galaxy brain type thought.

I don't think teams are thinking that way. I think that you're reading too much into it. And sometimes that's the case. Like you'll have, that happened this week when I was like going over drafts with certain teams. And I'd be like, oh, why'd you guys do this? And they're like, I love that you think we were thinking that way. It's not that complicated.

So that point specifically, I think that's probably one step further than teams are actually conceiving of it. The last thing I'll say is, I think that the way that offenses are deployed and the way that corners are deployed, there has been a flip with how we think about corners and defensive tackles. I think the corners now are a floor position, not a ceiling position. It's a weakling system. It's about how bad is your worst corner, not how. good is your best corner. At defensive line, the opposite has happened. Now, defensive tackle was a ceiling position because the defensive tackle can be the best

player, the most impactful player on your entire defense because of what we talked about before. Like, bendy edge rushers is a slightly different thing. Like, your ability to affect the quarterback can happen from Chris Jones or Von Miller in a way that we didn't think it could 10 years ago. And so that's, to me, is the other one where defensive tackles can see. singularly affect the game by themselves in a way that corners no longer can. And that's why I think that it's flipped a little bit in how we value those positions.

I think that's a really good point, especially too, because with the corners, with having your worst guy, it's like, okay, well, let's say you do have one of the three guys that can just race somebody. Let's say you have a Christian Gonzalez who can just man to man on anybody. Okay, well, if you're playing the Vikings and he can take away Justin Jefferson, Jordan Addison is a very capable number one receiver by himself. And so that's a good point where it's like, you kind of need guys across the board who can win, whereas having the one unicorn probably doesn't do as much for you in terms of schematic value,

whereas like you have one of those truly special defensive interior players, they can create a lot of havoc for you kind of off the bat and allow you to do a lot of stuff schematically that maybe you wouldn't have gotten away with otherwise. All right, we're going to take one more quick break and then get back with a couple more questions. We're running a little bit long, but there are enough good ones and I do want to get to a couple more of these.

This next one's from Austin Anderson. I'm just going to answer this one very quickly because I do think it really is indicative of a trend in the NFL recently. Austin sent along a trade where the Titans moved up five picks in the fourth round and the Ravens in turn moved down five picks in the sixth round. That was the entire trade, right? So it's up five picks down six picks. And he says, can you guys explain the logic of trading back five spots only to move up five spots later on? Do you really have five guys here with the exact same grade and zero preference on which one you take? that one seems harder to believe.

So this is, I think, really a good example of the way that teams are thinking about draft trades now as more organizations have become analytically minded. I joked about it in real time, but there was a crazy Broncos Panthers trade. You guys can go look at it if you want to from day three where it was day two where the Bronco, the Panthers moved up for Scorton. And then as part of that, there were pickswops in the third round, the fourth round, and the sixth round, I think it was. So there was a swap in every single round.

And the reason that you're seeing that is that I think the way that teams are thinking about draft trades now is it's about the number of picks we're making, right? We can move around in these rounds. We don't want to give away singular draft picks. If I can maneuver and still come away from that trade with the amount of picks I started with, that is a better process than giving away single picks to move up in the draft. So I think we're going to see more of this where you're going to look at a trade and it's a team moving up 10 spots in the second round and moving down 18 spots in the third round.

And that's a pretty even trade on the charts. But teams want to make sure that they're maintaining the amount of picks they had coming into the draft. That's happening a lot more now. Especially at that range. Like that is the range where you want to have as many dart throws as possible. Because after the top 70, that's kind of all that you're really doing anyway. And that's why I actually do think teams probably do have guys who are graded very, very close

to each other within five picks. and they could take any of them. Because after like the top 100, it's a lot of guys that they're mostly grading as like priority free agents or we had a third round grade on this guy, but we knew he fell because of X, Y, and Z injury and stuff. And so you're kind of grading him that way. So like I actually do believe once you get into these fifth round picks and stuff

where the difference of 10 slots, it's like, yeah, they probably do have another guy lined up that they would feel perfectly comfortable taking there. You're getting into like coach pet projects and stuff at that point of the draft. It's good turn next to here. I loved this question. This is from Stu Ruiz. Stu said a lot of very nice stuff in his email,

but I just love this question that he landed on. I think it's actually a really good way to think as a fan. He said, now on to my real question, what do I make of this Washington football team pivot? He didn't say Washington football team, from a long-term rebuild to a win-now mindset. I understand the strategy. Ignore the pitfalls of expensive free agents

and instead load up on veterans at key positions while preserving premium draft picks. But our meager hall of players this draft drove home to me just how risky this play can be. The roster is sneaky, mediocre, with nearly every position group needing an upgrade and not nearly enough picks over this year and next to fill out the connective tissue you refer to.

Add on to that, our first two vet acquisitions are almost certainly past their prime, underwhelmed last year, and are injury prone. It seems that going all in with a few options available, we've instead limited our growth potential going into the back half of Jane Daniels's rookie contract. After the overperformance last season, and Jane Daniels already playing like a clear-cut fifth-best quarterback

in the league. I understand the urgency as a process, but are the results where they should be? Are there historic parallels with other teams that have attempted to go all in with trades instead of free agent signings? Is it worth going all in when you can't even acquire an above-average pass-ruster to get hot in the playoffs? How can we rate this mid-season pivot from long-term rebuild to win now and restart in three years? To be clear, I'm absolutely thrilled with the progress and I'm having fun watching this team for the first time in a decade, but part of the fun is obsessing over our prospects. This is great, because I've had a very similar thought about Washington's off season a lot. And I think that this is well articulated on both sides from someone

who actually has skin in the game. I think it's absolutely fantastic. Because again, I, there is a lot to be excited about. Right. When you have a quarterback playing at that caliber as a rookie who has that many tools, it's hard not to feel like the line is going to keep going up. But I've expressed a number of times before, like a lot of these same sentiments where it's like, okay, Tunsell's probably an upgrade at left tackle, but it's expensive and he's coming off his worst year. Debo Samuel is only getting older. and probably going to be more hurt. The trade for Latimore last year

didn't really do a whole lot for them, I didn't think. And the other thing that is questionable to me about the way that they built their roster, their defense might suck. Like, it might be bad. They were 21st and success rate last year and 18th in EPA per play, which isn't that bad.

But if you look at the way that they were able to add to this roster over the offseason, it's probably a worse roster now than it was last year. And I love some of what they did. Like I like the Trey Amos pick. Oh, come on. Come on. What?

How? How? How is it a worse roster now than it was last year? It's worse. They don't have Jonathan Allen. They don't have Jeremy Chin. They have no pass rushers. They didn't have Jonathan Allen for all of last season.

Okay? For all of last season, they didn't have Jonathan Allen. It didn't, this doesn't matter. They were, this is a playoff team, a surefire player team without Jonathan Allen last year. Jeremy Chin signed for like four. They were not a sure fire playoff team. They were very comfortably made the playoffs last year. Jonathan Allen was not part of this.

Jeremy Chin. had a really nice season. He signed for 20 cents on the dollar in free agency. The roster from top to bottom is not worse than it was on May 2nd of last year. That's crazy talk. The defensive roster is. The offensive roster is obviously better. But the defensive roster, I don't, maybe it's not worse, but you cannot sell me in any way that it's better.

There's no part of it that I can convince myself that it's better. You don't think that if Latimore's day is healthy and your boy, your guide, Trey Amos turns into the player that you think. You don't think this can be a good secondary. I would be shocked. I think the safety room is not good enough, and I think you're asking for a lot of things to go right for that corner room to work out the way that it's going to.

I want to be clear about this. I'm not bullish on Washington's defense. I just think saying that the roster is worse now than it was last year, when you can make a serious argument that they had the worst defensive roster talent-wise in the league is a lot to say. I just don't think the first. front has enough talent.

Like that's really all it comes down to. I just don't think they're talented enough. I don't disagree with that. So here is my, I think you would look at this two ways. I'm going to start with the pot, like the optimistic way of looking at it. This comment from Stu that the roster is sneaky, mediocre. I think there are elements of it that absolutely need more reinforcements, the defensive front being the best possible example.

What they've done this offseason is I think show you what their intentions are. They're trying to make this offense. a truly elite, flexible unit without weaknesses. And so if you look at the offensive line in particular, your offensive line, if this comes together, to me, the best possible outcome here, if one of these guys can play guard, is that from left to right,

you have Laramie Tunsell, Brandon Coleman is your left guard, at Biotr-Shit's center, Cosmi at right guard, and Connerly at right tackle. If those guys all hit and Coleman, like, makes good and, like, can play guard for you a little bit, based on how powerful he is, that has a chance to be like an excellent offensive line,

like an offensive line that can dictate the way the games and your season go. So that to me is the bet that they're making. We're going to be really, really, really good here and then manufacture on defense because we had to do that last year. We're going to do funky stuff. We're going to use a lot of simulated pressures. We're going to throw a lot of bodies at the problem pass rush-wise. We think that our secondary can actually be pretty good.

Again, I think you have to tell yourself a little bit of a story to get there, but that seems to be the strategy. So I think even if there are areas of the roster that are questionable, there are others area of the roster, other areas of the roster that have gone from mediocre to a defined strength if things work out the way that they want to. That being said, there are very, very real downsides here, okay? They only have a first, a third, and a fifth round pick next year.

They traded essentially a third and a fourth for Latimore last year. Okay. If you look at this, the Debo and Latimore moves come with real, real downside. The draft capital you're spending there isn't overwhelming, but Latimore counts 18 million against the cap this year, along with the two picks that you gave up. That's the fifth highest cap hit among any corner in the league. They played with Debo's contract, but if they move on from him next year, it's a $12 million hit next year. So people are going to look at the picks they gave up and say, oh, that wasn't that much. Well, look at the overall investment. Those are big

investments in two players in their age 29 seasons who have had a hard time staying healthy. So I get it on some levels, but I think it's really worth acknowledging the downside of players that you've acquired with some of these picks and the fact that you are not going to have a lot of bites at the Apple draft wise, not only this year, but over the next two years. It's a risky way to approach this if you're Washington. This, what it reminds me the most of, and this would actually be a version where you get the best of it and the worst of it. The 2018 Rams where they trade for Marcus Peters, keep to leave. They signed in Dominic and sue. They go and trade for Brandon Cook. It's like, okay, we are going all in.

And it worked for a little bit. They obviously went to the Super Bowl and we're almost able to win it. It's worked twice for them. Right, exactly. And then, but for the nooks like, what was it? Two years, they were just completely in the wilderness, couldn't do what they wanted to do. And then they had to go do another extreme thing, which was, I go trade for Matthew Stafford. But so I do want to say like, this obviously could work.

The fact that they are making the offense much more sustainable. and if the defense just isn't worse than it's going to be, like maybe I'm just overplaying this a little bit. But if the offense is, again, a top seven unit and the defense is again just the 19th best defense in the league, then that is a playoff team again, and that will be completely fine. It's just again, I think there is a little bit more,

like they need a lot of things to go right to be a better football team. For this set of bets, for you to make good on it, you can't be the seventh best offense in the league. You have to be the second best offense in the league. You have to be truly elite if this vision is, going to be seen all the way through. And I agree with you. It could work out. I also want to make it clear that we're trying to win Super Bowls here. Like a team doing something like this, I appreciate it, even if there's a lot of potential downside in operating this way. Like, they're not going to putter

along and just say like, we're good. And like, we're going to win 11 games a year. It's going to be fine. And even if that may hurt them in the end, I don't mind a team looking at it and saying we're going to try to push it and actually do this. And that's the other thing. I might. I'm, might on some of these individual moves be like, man, I don't know if I would have done that. Don't know if I would have done that, you know, or I can be iffy on some of this stuff. But the general approach of like, we need to win as many games as we can, whether it works as poorly as it does with the Saints or works as well as it does with the Rams. I kind of love it either way. And the Washington is at least trying to do that.

Two more here. Again, I want to hit both of these. We haven't talked about this at all. And that's why I wanted to hit it. Lucas Buccio, who's an Overwatch guy, he gives props to you about your e-sports love, Derek. So this off season, I feel like I've been going insane regarding the conversations surrounding James Cook. I personally think it's not at all a coincidence. The Josh Allen's MVP season came the year James Cook had his best year.

And the bills have been talking since Josh Allen was drafted about how they don't want him to have to do everything. Keeping James Cook seems to make a lot of sense to me. However, so many people are up in arms over his $15 million asking price, claiming he isn't worth it. Am I naive about the business side of things? And that price tag is too much? Or should the bills be working to figure out a way to get this done and keep it? keep James Cook a Buffalo Bill. What do you think about this?

We haven't talked about this at all. Like his little tiff happening there. I think they would be stupid not to pay him. Like I truly do. This was already a team like I just, they were clearly trying to work towards this formula for three years of like, what if we got tougher? What if we got bigger?

What if we ran the ball better? And they finally get there with an explosive back. And then they're going to say they want it back out of it. It doesn't make sense. This is the question, though. It's not about giving up. that style of play. It's how much is James Cook contributing to our success with that style of play? That is the foundational question of this. And where you come down is what matters.

And I think that's fair. They have a great infrastructure there, right? Like, I do think a lot of backs could be successful there. But I think why I would want to bet on James Cook is, one, he's a very explosive player. And I think those are, that's tough to find at the running back tradition. But two, he also has clearly shown growth. He was not a runner who would run through your face, or be a consistent, you know, if it's blocked for five, I'm getting six here, like type of runner early in his career. That was something he had to develop. And so maybe you could make the case that because maybe he's not the biggest guy

that that play style is going to hurt him down the line in terms of staying healthy. But let's just say they pay him for the next three years. You're paying for 26, 27, and 28, like that age seasons. That is theoretically the end of his prime. And so, like, I'm totally fine paying for those years. It's when you start to want to pay for 30 that I think that you can get into an issue with running back. if you're paying for 26, 27, 28, when he is clearly shown that he is, I mean, is he the second

best player on the offense? It's him or Dionne Dawkins, right? Spencer Brown's probably in that conversation to me, too. Spencer Brown is pretty good. I would still, to me, say Cook is a slightly better player than Spencer Brown. And that's not the takeaway from Brown. He's been incredible for them, obviously. But to me, at minimum, James Cook is the third best player on your team.

Kind of just want to keep those. Kind of just want to keep those guys. I tend to agree. And I think the point about him really improving each year is important to point out here. I think that's a necessary part of this conversation. $15 million a year for running back. How many running backs in the league make $15 million a year?

Do you know? I mean, it's probably a very small handful. Two. Who is it? Sequant and Christian McCaffrey. Okay. What was Henry making? Eight.

I mean, I guess he was coming off this stupid year with Tennessee. Yeah. So he had two years, 16 million was Henry. deal. He's also older, so I guess that was a tricky one. Jonathan Taylor, so to me, the best comp, if I were James Cook's agent, and I was walking into this,

the first player I would probably mention as I was trying to find like a market for myself would probably be Jonathan Taylor. Right? So Jonathan Taylor, three years, $42 million, $14 million a year. And this actually, to me, it's another really good example. The Jonathan Taylor contract was just an

uptick on the Nick Chubb contract, which is to me, again, similar. a back with very good infrastructure in front of him, but was clearly adding to what that run game was. And so if you think that James Cook is in that tier, you can justify paying him like that. But there just aren't that many backs making that amount of money. And so I get the bills like kind of balking at this a little bit,

even if James Cook's people are like, are we losing our minds? Look at what he did last year. Like, why wouldn't you want this? So I think by my argument for paying him, it would be like, I think we are getting to a place a little bit with the NFL where instead of doling out money for like, this is our receiver budget,

this is our tight end budget, this is our running back budget, there's a little bit more of like, this is our skill player budget, James Cook at 15 million would be less money than the Browns are paying Jerry Judy. It's less than Christian Kirk was making. It's what Cooper Cup at his age just signed for.

I mean, I'm signing a player of James Cook's quality to that any day of the week. And this is already a Bill's roster that it seems like they are not very intense. on spending a lot of money at receiver anyway. So if you're not going to spend a lot of money at receiver, then just go spend it at running back to begin with. Unless their plan is maybe in the future,

they want to go change it up at receiver again. But I think if you have the skill player budget to pay a guy like James Cook, I just don't see why you wouldn't. I mean, he's what, the fifth best running back in the league? Very good player. Here's my only, here's my response to this. Nick Chubb, when he signed that three or $36 million extension, was coming off.

Actually, he was coming off a year where he was hurt, which is interesting. But Nick Chubb got in his best season, like the season where he had the most volume, 298 carries, 302 carries. Jonathan Taylor coming off of his best, Jonathan Taylor and his best season had 332 carries. He had 303 last year.

How many carries do you think James Cook had last season? I mean, again, he's a little bit of a smaller guy, so it's probably closer to like 240? 200. Like 207. So you're getting 100 fewer carries. You're getting two thirds of the amount of carries. as these backs who can kind of be the engine of your running game typically get because he's smaller.

So that probably has to be something that you're weighing if you're the bills. Again, I think he's probably worth paying, but I do think that there are some nuances to the argument that are probably worth acknowledging. I think that's probably fair because I guess when I usually conceive of guys that I want to pay, it's like, are you a three down player? But three down player doesn't necessarily mean like workhorse player, which I guess is the difference. His skill set is three downs, but he's not on the field that much. Right, he can't actually play that. But he's a three-down player who still can only play like 70% of the snaps instead of 90. So I guess that does change it a little bit.

But again, the fact that for me, when he's on the field, we can do literally anything we want with him. And he's our most explosive playmaker. And he's gotten better every single year. I just, again, even if it's not a position we're paying, it's a guy I want on a football team. Last one here. This was a question about whether it's harder to build an elite roster like the Eagles or find an elite quarter. like Mahomes. And this is the final part of that question.

Eric Hannick says, how many quarterbacks could play for the Eagles and still be Super Bowl contenders? And how many teams could you drop Mahomes onto and have them be a legit contender? I think we often undervalue just how important elite quarterback play is. The Bills and Chiefs without their quarterbacks have tons of flaws. Look what happened to the Colts. The second manning got hurt. What is your answer to this? More quarterbacks that could be contenders with the Eagles or more teams that could be contenders

with Mahomes? I'm trying to like, because the way I'm trying to like decodes, because the way I did it was I counted quarterbacks that could win with the Eagles, but then I just for the Mahomes one counted teams that wouldn't be contenders with Mahomes. So I think still numerically, I still think I got to just over 20 teams that if you put Mahomes on them, I could like reasonably convince myself that they could have a shot. Which teams aren't there? Okay, so the Titans, they're just not ready. I don't think. Giants are definitely not ready. Jaguars, I like the direction they're heading as an idea. I just don't think. I just don't think they're ready. I just don't think they're ready. Patriots, I don't think they're ready. Panthers defense, way too many questions,

even though they just threw a bunch of bodies at it, right? Still, just way too many questions for me. And then I got into a handful of teams that I had like question marks on. Saints, I don't think so because I don't love the defense, but. Saints is in now. If the skill players are healthy, you could convince me that that could work. Browns were another, if you won,

just because I don't know what the defense is going to look like again. But you could tell me that a team that has the two best players in football, in Patrick Mahomes and Miles Garrett are just going to win a Super Bowl. And then the other one I threw in there was... And the Browns this year with that offensive line and with Judy and like... There is a chance this year,

even if the Browns outlook over the next few years isn't great, that you could thread the needle. But again, I think that's tough. Right. And then the other one kind of in a similar vein is the Jets. It's like, with the defense, you know, get back to the place they need to play.

You have a number one receiver and Garrett Wilson. I could like... That's a tough one for me. I leaned closer to know but there was, I put a question mark because there was at least a little part of me that was like, maybe. What about the Cardinals?

The Cardinals are the one I had a question mark next. Do you think the Cardinals could be a contender with Patrick Mahomes? I think the offense could be nuclear. So I would have them in there. Like obviously it's going to be one of those teams where you're having to score 35 every game, but I do think with a quarterback like Mahomes, you could kind of get there.

I got to like 17-ish teams that I felt like pretty darn good about. Like, yeah, I think they could be like Broncos, Rams, Eagles, Niners, Seahawks, Bears, Vikings, Packer the whole NFC North, Steelers, Ravens, Bills, Bengals, there are a lot of teams. Dolphins from the last couple years, maybe not this year, but dolphins from the last couple years, you drop homes out of that. Absolutely they could. Cowboys. Washington, I think, is in there. Cardinals were on the line for me. A couple other teams were on the line for me. I had fewer quarterbacks. How many guys were on your quarterback list?

Quarterbacks who could play for the Eagles and still have them be contenders? I think I had 18 I was certain on. 18 and then a handful of others it was a good team 18 that was a really good football team okay so we have mohomes alan jackson that's the obvious tier yes jalen hurts obviously because they literally did it oh i didn't count jalen hurts i have quarterbacks other than jelan hurts uh joe burrow justin herbert cj stroud trevorrence Stack Prescott, Matthew Stafford. Jayden Daniels, I would throw in there. Kyler Murray, I think was good enough to win a Super Bowl on that team.

Jordan Love, Jared Goff, Gino Smith. I think we're good enough to do it. Then you get to guys who are right on the line. Trevor. Trevor's like one where it's like that's, you could talk yourself into it either way. I think outside of Jalen, I have 14 guys based on the success their teams have had recently that I would feel really good about. Mahomes, Alan, Lamar, Burrow, Herbert, Dack, C.J.

Stroud, Jaden, Daniels, Gino. I think Gino is absolutely That's gonna be one people Who take issue with Gino's skill set is kind of similar to GEO and Hertz Except he's better

One of the best things He does is throw the goal ball And that's all they want to do Kyler I think Kyler's in there Purdy Goff Love Stafford

Those are the 14 guys I had And then I think Lawrence is probably on the line So it's probably fewer quarterbacks than it is teams If you were to stack on the line I think you could convince me That's actually kind of a fun one

It's actually kind of a fun one It's that's actually kind of a fun one. They would be a worse team than obviously with Jalen Hertz, but that he, he has enough there that I'm like, ah, you could, you could maybe get me there. And then obviously the other one that I don't expect you to jump in this far with me is like, throw Jake May on there. They could win a Super Bowl.

Yeah, I'm not doing that. I'm absolutely not doing that. I'm not even sure I'm doing with Trevor Lawrence. It is close. And I do think it is a testament to like how ridiculous the team is that the Eagles built. This isn't to diminish Jalen Hertz. He played so well in the Super Bowl And I thought he had some really good moments

In the playoffs He was in the postseason He was in gross. He really did But I think that I do feel pretty good About most of the names on that list. The offense would have to look a little bit different For guys who can't run like J.1 Hertz can

But Jalen Hertz running again That was more of a postseason thing That it was. His scrambling was huge for this team this year But the design runs in the regular season Were not nearly as impactful Or as important to the offense As they had been in years

passed. So I think there are certain skill set differences with a lot of the guys on this list, but I think in the aggregate, I do feel good about those 14 guys. So I think it's pretty close. It was pretty close. Yeah, it's always tricky, though, because the Mahomes one is just like,

you could always convince yourself that you're just like one little thing away. Like, just give them one thing because this last Chief Roster was not that good and they made it. So. And I honestly think you just dismiss the Giants out of hand. I think the Giants with Mahomes would actually be like a really competitive team. I don't know. I can't get there with the offensive line yet. I just can't do it.

I need to see a little bit more from them. What is your problem with this? They have one good player. They were hurt last year. They have one guy I am sure is good. It's almost like the Raiders thing where it's like, okay, they have a lot. They have a decent amount of guys who maybe aren't catastrophic that they have to be playing there. But it's just not a lot of guys who are moving the needle for me outside of obviously Andrew Thomas, who when he's healthy is phenomenal. I think that the

23 season and the post-Andrew Thomas injury are looming larger in your brain about what that group looks like than they actually are if they're fully healthy. I'm not excited about Greg Van Roten or Jermaine Illuminaur,

but I do think they clear a certain bar of competency where they're like together, altogether when healthy they could be like the 20th best offensive line in the league. But that's the thing. If we're saying if everything goes right they can be the 20th best,

that means they're probably bad because a lot of things aren't going to go well. To me, it's more health. When I say everything going right, it's more about health. I don't know. I still align where best case scenario is 20th. I just can't get excited about it. But you keep saying and like treating it as just like a given that it's a bad offensive line. And I just, I want to push back a little bit on that.

I don't think it's a good offensive line, but I don't think it's like so demonstrably bad that it's going to hold them back in like the best case outcomes this year. That's what I'll say. That's fair. I think for me, and this is maybe just a completely separate show in the question, if I had to really run through the team's worst offensive lines, I think it would definitely be in the single digits of teams before I got to the Giants. And so that to me is just not a good offensive line. All right.

Well, we'll have plenty of time to argue about this over the course of the rest of the off season. So long mailbag, we had a lot of good questions. I wanted to get to those ones at the end. So sometimes we'll just chop them off. But I knew we had some good ones waiting for us. So hopefully you guys stuck around. As always, sincerely appreciate the questions. We'll be doing this over the next few weeks.

Again, we're banking a couple of mailbacks for when I'm on vacation. So they will be a consistent part of your feed here for the entirety of the offseason, even when I am in some far-flung place. We will be back on our regular off-season cadence this week. Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday. We'll be doing that for the next several weeks. So just be on lookout for that. So have plenty of stuff coming your way.

We're going to recap every NFL offseason at some point over the next month or so. We did that last year. It's a very fun exercise. and got a couple other offseason staples, hopefully coming your guys' way over the next few weeks. For now, that is all we got. Sincerely appreciate you guys listening. We'll talk to you soon.