The Athletic Football Show: A show about the NFL - Football GM: Terry McLaurin’s extension, Seahawks quarterback questions & Deshaun Watson’s disciplinary hearing continues

Episode Date: June 30, 2022

Mike Sando and former GM Randy Mueller fill in for Robert Mays by discussing all of the top NFL headlines. They begin by talking about Terry McLaurin’s contract extension and what the deal means for a guy like DK Metcalf. Then, they examine the Seahawks quarterback situation and if they should make a trade for Baker Mayfield. Finally, they discuss the latest with Deshaun Watson’s disciplinary hearing. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is the athletic football show. Welcome to this 2022 NFL offseason edition of the Football GM podcast, Mike Sando here with Randy Mueller. And typically we record this for Saturdays, but with Robert Mays occupied today. He has called upon us to fill in. We're happy to do it. Good morning, Randy. Good morning, Mike. I would thought Robert would have had guys higher on the list than us, but, you know, I guess.

duty call, so I'm happy to do it. I'm always good to be back in the saddle with you and hope everything's good in your world. I have a lot of late round picks, you know, pay off. So hopefully we do well. And for those that haven't listened to us, because we're in a little bit of a different slot here, I am Mike Sandos, senior writer for the athletic. I've been doing this a fair long time, 25 years covering the NFL. Randy Mueller, former NFL executive year, 35-year NFL evaluator, team builder,

three-time GM, spent a lot of years with Seattle, executive the year with the Saints, general manager of the Dolphins, and what, about a decade with the Chargers. So I probably left one or two out in there. But shoot, you did a stint at ESPN as well. So you've been around a little bit too. I know where a few of the bones are buried, that's for sure.

It's funny. You know, one of the things, we're going to talk about a number of things, even though it's the middle of the off season and quote-unquote, look at the quiet period. We did get a nice contract for Terry McLaren with Washington. I think that leads to some analysis and discussion lends itself to that. Certainly it relates to D.K. Metcalfe, who we want to talk about to Seattle's young receiver who's in line for a deal, which I think is going to, I think the Cocks are still an interesting topic overall.

I think Randy still can't wrap his head around what they're doing at quarterback is kind of overall. So we're going to talk about them. shoot something with the Sean Watson could pop while we're talking while we're recording we may get into that. I think Washington certainly is an interesting team overall, not just for McLaren where we're going to start, but they've had an eventful offseason with their owner, with their decoordinator, with their head coach, you name it. I think that's a team too.

But, Randy, before we get into that, I got to say, I enjoyed our round of golf together, not just because I hit the ball better than I do 99 out of 100 times. I don't know what happened. That was certainly not representative. But what do you think of our first shot in our for some? What would you think of that? Were you impressed with the group that I assembled? Yeah.

To just set this up, you know, Randy and I both live in the Northwest, and he's got a place over in Idaho there. It's not that far of a drive for me. And so we're going to play some golf. and I said, hey, I'll invite a couple of my old buddies I used to work with there, and we'll have a great group. So we get to the first tea, and everyone's trying to make a good impression. And take it from there, Randy, what did you see?

Well, I'm trying to erase it from my mind, to be honest with you. These two buddies and Mike, I was looking forward to a great round of golf. I didn't know I was going to need psychological help and to be put on the couch for the next month and a half, trying to get over what I saw on the first tea. But I'm afraid we'll offend somebody if we tell too many of the details. but the truth be known, the first swing of the day resulted in the death of a winged, you know, two-lanked bird that I've never seen in my life before. It shook us up.

We were still talking about it hours later. It was crazy. Uneventful. Heck, that was the whole day in the nutshell. So we get to the first tea. There's history on this T-Box, by the way. I used to play at this course, you know, what I lived over in that area. And so we've got some scars from this course.

I mean, one time years ago, I tee off and I pull my drive and it goes through this guy's bay window, just shatters his window down there up the left side of the fairway. It's the dog leg right. So I re-tee and I push it out over the trap on the right. So, you know, technically I didn't really have to go over where my ball went. My playing partner at the time pulls his drive into this guy's yard and gets an earful over there. So we had that history.

I actually hit my playing partner's son in a leg with a shot. out of the rough on that hole. So we've got a lot of, there's a lot of bones buried in this hole. The first hole, my buddy, Steve, we'll just leave him at Steve. He tees off. He's a good golfer. He hits a freaking robin in the head by the ladies' tea box. And I trust that this poor creature, this innocent creature, died instantly.

But there was like this spastic reaction where it cartwheeled off the course into the rough and then just lied there. And we all look at each other. like, should we just quit? Should we just not? Is this a bad omen? We ended up having a great round, but Steve doesn't know this. I actually signed him up for a membership in the Audubon Society.

That's the least he can do. Come on. We made a donation to the Audubon Society in honor of this poor creature. But, yeah. And maybe that's the start of the day. That's the start of the day. Yeah, yeah. So we won't tell you what else happened on our round of golf.

But it does lead into something that you have often said, Randy, that this time of the calendar, which is supposed to be relaxing with golf where you don't kill any creatures, is actually a little bit of a stressful time for the GM explain. Well, I think it's been documented that a lot of the things that happen now, it's 90% bad. That's for sure. I mean, I remember being on a trip in Europe one time and getting a call when I was in Miami from. one of our security people reporting that a player had been arrested down on South Beach, you know, just time, time on their hands. A lot of times these guys want to get away.

I totally understand it. But a lot of bad things can happen between now and training camp. So I know that whether it was Nick Saban or Mike Holmgren or whoever the people that I've been around as coaches, they would always, you know, the last day of school, it was like guys scattering, right? And so they always had to give the speech of, hey, this has got to be a little bit focus this next month. We can't have this kind of stuff happen. We all want you to get away.

But it just seems like it's never ending. And we'll probably hear about something in the next week or so. Somewhere, some team, they're going to lose a player for some reason or another. And it's usually off the field instances that just, hey, kids wanting to be kids. And I understand it. But it's a hard time when you've spent the whole offseason building your team. and you think you're all set, and then stuff happens. So it's a cautionary tale for sure, yeah.

Yeah, absolutely. Yeah. And I think you get 90 people on a roster and shoot, there's a good chance that something unexpected is going to happen with one of them, especially when you have free time in the schedule. And I always laugh, you know, if I had had a lot of money when I was 22 years old and had two months off, I mean, shoot, you know, lots of things could have happened. Yeah, we would have gone.

us all, no doubt. Hey, I get it, but it's, it's a hard deal now. Yeah. Now, not a hard deal for the Washington commanders to re-sign Terry McLaren, a very good, uh, young receiver, 26 years old. He gets, we, we don't have the final details and we're not going to make the mistake of saying exactly what it was worth, but we think he gets about 23 million a year, on a three-year extension that's tacked on to the 2022 season. Um, so now that's off the table. We're not going to have a him missing training camp, those sorts of things. What do you think of him? What do you think of the deal? Anything notable here? Well, I think the most notable thing probably is from 30,000 feet in that it was a positive for a franchise that has been taken on water for what seems like years in negative

sense, you know. So we all know what's happened with the owner. We know what's happened with the congressional hearings and all this stuff. It just seems like it's a franchise that's somewhat cursed. So I do think it's a positive move for them. I've always liked Terry McCall. I think he's a really good player. I think he's a complete player. I think he's the only thing lacking are really for me in his world are he's not really dynamic as a speed receiver like a tributeal or even like AJ Brown or some of those guys, Stefan Diggs. He's he's probably got slotted salary wise below those guys and I think that's probably fair. The other thing is, is it's been hard for him is he's been productive in a world of revolving quarterbacks, an

offensive system that I'm not sold on. So I think for him to come out of this with a three-year extension in the low 20s is probably a good deal for everybody involved, to be honest with you. So I like the deal. I think it's good for the Washington side. I think it's good for Terry himself. I do think it leads into some of the receivers and the money they got in this offseason, and that's a changing landscape and you know you hate to say 23 million year kind of comes back down to earth but I can understand this one some I really don't understand it's still a lot of money but I think it's a good deal for everybody involved really and it kind of like I said fits from an ability standpoint and from a business standpoint in the right spot for for all parties it is amazing I've

I'm now conditioned to they had 23 million I don't even blank and that that would have been a quarterback starting salary you know and and and it's it's really amazing but the growth of the league and what's going to come. It's going to only go up. But you're right. To the $23 million, if that's what it is, would put him, I think, you know, maybe about seventh. And we'll see what it actually comes in.

But you'd have Tyree Kill, Devante Adams, DeAndre Hopkins, Cooper Cup, A.J. Brown, Stefan Diggs, in that range. I got no problem with it. Really like him as a player. I think it's important to resign your best players. I think it's great for your locker room, all of that stuff. And so a good deal there. talk about the implications for it, just more broadly for the league, because I think

D.K. Metcalf is an interesting one now, and he has generally showed up for everything, but then didn't come to the latest camp for the CX, which I don't think is a huge deal, but just a little baby is just sending a signal that, hey, guys, you know, that we need to get this done. I think it will get done, most likely in training camp. What do you think of him? where would you slot him in? Would you want to bring him in below, McLaren above? Well, and again, everybody's going to have their own opinion on this, but as an evaluator and as a guy that's looked at him closely on film,

I would definitely say that McColl and Corrin deal is the ceiling, and I think he probably should follow suit under this. I don't think he's as complete, as the guys you mentioned, whether it's Diggs or A.J. Brown or Cooper Cup or even Devante Adams and definitely Tyree Kiel. I don't think he's in that. category. I think he's a little more flashy, so everybody has their opinion of this big play guy, and he scored his share of touchdowns. I understand that. But I don't think he's as complete a

receiver. I don't think he's the route runner that we see some of these other guys are. So I think he's still a work in progress. It's going to be interesting. I'm sure he wants to get his money for a lot of reasons, but you mentioned their quarterback issues and the things that their offense has struggled with. I'm sure he wants to get paid before the results. I'm sure he wants to get paid before the results of that come out on the field this year because I think that could be a struggle for him to keep up numbers-wise. So it's definitely going to have a reflection. I've said all along that these deals that these receivers are getting are really a philosophical decision that front offices have to make, even more so than the individuals and what they're worth and how they are valued, I think.

Because there's certain systems, there's certain offensive coaches, there's certain play callers that just aren't comfortable paying. top dollar and now top dollar is you know 23 million plus for a receiver like you said for a non-quarterback for a guy that has to be you know schemed in these these coaches that I'm referring to the Andy reads the the the guy in Green Bay the guys that got rid of these receivers they're banking on their systems and their quarterbacks and that's how they're you know that's how they've decided to spend their money so I don't know that that's going to be running rampant throughout the league, all of a sudden, every receiver now is going to get the next $25 million a year deal. I just don't see that as being the norm as much as the normal fan might,

if that makes any sense. Yeah, I think it's just different by team, too. I mean, I think that Kansas City would have an easier time doing it if they weren't paying their quarterback so much, or if they didn't feel like their coach and quarterback were so good that they can put someone else in there. I mean, look at Green Bay. Shoot, Aaron Rogers, with Aaron Rogers there, they can make Jeff Janus look like a good player. You know, you'll look like have good numbers or they can have different receivers in there. We can debate whether they should have better guys. But, uh, um, the quarterback component, what he's making is a huge part of it. I'm Seattle. Who else am I going to pay, right? I mean, it's not like they have a quarterback that they have to pay. Um, and when I, I'm, I am interested though in your evel and the

player, because I think we, we've talked about this a lot in terms of what you like and you definitely like the more well-rounded guy. We, we joke that you, um, you, um, you, um, you, you, um, you, um, You know, you don't just like all the Ohio State guys wink, wink, because you'd draft to Ted Gannon and Joey Galloway. You had Chris Lave number one. I think you had the other Ohio State receiver, maybe number two in this draft this year. And, of course, McLaren's an Ohio State guy. But why do you, like for me instinctively, I would see a D.K. Metcalfe, and maybe I would be, I just look at those two guys and say, I want this guy. You know, I remember watching Terrell Owens and warmups, and you go, oh, who's that guy?

Can we have guys that look like that on our team? And when I look at the production of Metcalf, shoot, he's never missed a game, which McLaren hasn't missed many either. But he's got more yards than McLaurin over the last three years. We can say it's the quarterback. He's caught a lot more touchdown passes. We can say it's the quarterback. He seems to be a great competitor when we've seen him not only just get upset at times, but chase down the guy in Arizona. I mean, I just don't see why.

I think I would rather lean towards a Metcalf and bet on that physical impressiveness and maybe being able to grow into that at age 24, two years younger than I would McLaren. Why would you rather have McLaren and what do you not see in Metcalf for his future? I think more than anything, the development of these guys once they get in the league will, you know, that sticks with me. I think McLaurin has developed maybe more than Metcalf has. I think Metcalf has more upside without it out. And I understand these are varying opinions.

And I'm not saying, hey, I'm right. I'm just for my money, and you mentioned something earlier that just, you know, that make me think about something. Who else are they going to pay? A team would never think about that as being a reason to pay somebody, just because who else are we going to pay? They're looking at it more in a detailed fashion. I would hope so.

And I don't know, I guess I just don't see the details in Metcalf's game compared to a McLaurin. I think he's big, yes, he can run fast, yes. But I don't see the full route tree that a McLaurin has. I don't think he could be used in the same way because of that. I just don't see the completeness. But I do see what you're saying. Big plays, you know, catches a lot of long balls, has a chance to score when he does catch it. I just see not quite the versatility that a McLaurin might have.

So again, it comes down to everybody likes a different flavor of ice cream. And I like the more complete guys, the guy that we can do all kinds of stuff with, that our coaches can scheme in any way. I just think sometimes, and again, I'm not killing Metcalf. I understand he's a good player. But he's just not as versatile and not as complete for me as McLaurin, that's all. Who do you think a defensive coordinator would rather face? Is that going to change based on who the coordinator is?

Or do you think that kind of to my point that, you know, Metcalf could be the more imposing matchup. Is he a bigger game plan consideration or no? I think any time speed, yeah, I think anytime speeds a factor, that scares defenses. So if you're saying that Metcalf is faster and more big playability, that may scare him more and they've got to be aware of where he's at. I always used to say, hey, whether it was Ted Ginn or Joey Galloway or whoever we had as a fast guy, I said he changes the way they defend us even if we never throw him the ball because they're going to know that he can take the top off the defense.

Now, if we're saying Matt Keff can do some of that, and we've seen evidence of that, I think you're probably right. And I think it's a valid point. That might put more fear into defenses. But if I'm investing for the future, it comes with, hey, would I rather invest in a flashy stock or would I weathering, invest in, you know, AT&T over the long haul. Reliable stuff. Yeah. Yeah.

So. Yeah. And what's interesting, too, is so if we look at these two players, it's amazing. They've played, they've both run 1,600 routes and change, okay? They've been targeted, one of them's been targeted 358 times the other 357. So we have a real, they've played about the same. Here's what's interesting. So Metcalf has a lot more drops, 22 to 12.

Okay. So there's a little bit of that consistent. you're talking about. They both averaged exactly the same number of yards per route run. They have almost the exact same number of explosive receptions. How about this? Receptions gaining more than 15 yards, Metcalfe 69, McLaren, 68. That wouldn't be my perception because I would perceive the upside or whatever we're talking about, and especially with Russell Wilson being a deep ball thrower. You would say that, but shoot, here's McLaren. Got the same number of big plays, a little bit of a higher, you know, a little bit of a higher yards per catch for Metcalf.

But that could be because some of those underneath and shorter things that you want a receiver to do, he's not as good at. Now, I would say this, I don't think Russell Wilson throws a lot of those either. So I think they've been a more of a downfield offense. I don't think when we're going to get into this with Seattle that they necessarily have the quarterbacks to maximize any receiver, whatever was McLaren or Metcalf. but I think at age 24 with the production that MECFEs had

with the fact that he stayed on the field and the fact that maybe he can grow in to be more that has a lot of appeal to me and I wouldn't have a problem paying him even a little bit more than McLaurin got if that's what it took. I do have in the back of my mind, Randy, you said you would never take into account

who else do we have to pay and I think that is a flippant way of putting it. I wouldn't say that. But I think it's easier to assimilate a contract for somebody like Metcalf when you don't have a bunch of other guys yet to pay. It's going to be a relatively young team. We're kind of going back in time for Seattle here. And if they are a million higher on Metcalf than they'd like to be, I don't think it really matters.

Right. I would agree with that. I think for them, for Seattle, Metcalf probably makes more sense. And they know what they have. A lot of times it's in the eyes of Beholder, right? hopefully these teams value their own guys more than making a change. So you might be willing to pay another million or two over the top just to keep your group intact.

So I think there's value to be gained as well. I think in both these cases, and let's just assume Metcalf does get done, it'll be a fascinating follow for the next two or three years, whether the quarterback and the offense can raise the production bar with either one of these and how it does change them going forward, if at all. Because I do think there is more in Metcalf's tank if they can somehow develop him just to do a little more of the little detail things that McLaurin does. So different types, different styles. As you pointed out, maybe the numbers are more, you know, parallel than we think, but they go about it totally different.

They do go about differently. Now, I think for Metcalf, like what you said, he should take a deal now and strike after three really good years before a bad quarterback situation. could. That's my point. That's my point. Yeah. And if I'm Seattle, I may be thinking that way, too, because you may buy not only a good young player that you hope you can maximize once the quarterback's situation is hopefully

more solid, but you may have an easier time managing him this coming year and the frustrations, the ups and downs of the season, if he's already been paid as opposed to he feels this whole thing slipping away now. And he's gone three games without, you know, five games without a touchdown. and people are starting to talk about how his production is down. Then he's worried about his long-term value. You may just buy a happier situation by getting it done now. And there's some value to that, Mike.

That's a valid point. I think teams realize each individual player they have are different personalities. They're different in dealing with the business side. They can handle some bad news with good news. And I'm not saying DK can't, but you're right in that I think a happier paid D-K might give them a better chance to manage the situation going forward because I think I think there's some rough waters ahead here at some point and you'd like to have at least as many good pieces going forward tied down as you can so that they can't jump off the ship if that makes

any sense. Yeah, but I do feel like the vitals on him are good. Like he's going to work hard. I think he's a good teammate. He means well. I think he means well all of that. It's just that overall frustration that you're going to, you could sense that he could have if, you know, Well, he's shown it in the past.

And he's shown it in the past. So yet I think, yeah, so you could manage that. I'm not worried about the underlying stuff. You know, I don't think it's a big problem of a reason why I wouldn't like him or anything. It just could make the situation a little bit tougher. Let's talk about that situation, Randy, because I think you still can't believe that it's Drew Locke and Jim Smith for the CX. And a lot of people can't. I mean, I think that's why a lot of this Baker-Mainfield stuff's coming up.

I don't think it's because Seattle's interested. And I really actually don't think they are that interested. And I think from the outside, Seattle's been a hard team to read because the way, because let's face it, people on the outside can't believe that they'll do some of the things that they'll do that they're really thinking that way. I think they are going into the season with these two guys. What do you think of it? What do you think of where they're at and just can you believe it?

Well, there's a couple things. One thing is that I keep reading and hearing it. I don't know if this is true. I have not talked to the people on the inside. I'm sure you're better connected there than I am. But I've read the narrative that John Schneider had liked Drew Locke coming out of Missouri. Well, here's the deal. There's three more years of film.

But since then, that would have a lot to do with my perspective on if I like the player that coming out of college or not. So there is some more information. So the fact that I like somebody coming out of college and I'm anchored on that position would scare me a little bit. The other thing is it's not like Seattle has been great pick and quarter. And let's just face it, they got Russell Wilson. I get it. They had him for a decade and even longer. But before that, they were paying the Matt Flynn's of the world and Charlie Whitehursts

of the world. And they were swinging and missing on quarterbacks. So it's not like they're the quarterback factory, right? So I just have that doubt in the back of my mind that, gosh, are they going to get this right? Obviously, Vegas doesn't see it that way. Over and under is 5.5. So there's questions there.

Not that Vegas knows everything, but Vegas knows some things. They always do. That's why they are glitter and everything else in that town. So I think there is some doubt, and there is for me, going forward. I have tried to warm up to Drew Block. Drew Locke. I've tried to understand their thinking. I've tried to drink to Kool-Aid because, as you said, we live in the Northwest.

So I just, I don't see it. I'm not seeing it. I saw some fatal flaws. I saw it cost the staff in Denver, their jobs. They signed Teddy Bridgewater. to replace him and Teddy Bridgewater is just a guy, you know, in the NFL right now. So I don't know where they're going to get it.

I don't think Gino Smith is the answer. But I've also heard the narrative, and I can't remember who exactly said, they're going to be okay if they win six or seven games because next year's quarterback crop is better. Well, that's a whole other podcast if we're going to get into next year's quarterback group. Because as you know, this time last year,

we're talking about the Spencer Rattlers and Sam Howells and all those guys that everybody, all the experts had locked into being top 10 franchise quarterbacks. And none of those guys got picked in the top five rounds, much less anything else. So that's not a given that next year's quarterback crew is going to be great and that we should wait to fill our need a year from now. Your points about Russell Wilson being the one they hit on compared to the five or six or however many others that they totally missed on is a great point.

And it's a little bit how it is that quarterback, right? I mean, you try and you try and you try. But there have been other situations over time. Shoot, their coach before Pete Carroll was Mike Holmgren. And shoot, they drafted the guys all the time in Green Bay. And they ended up being good players. They had a track record of drafting and developing quarterbacks that you could hang your hat on and say, you know what? Shoot, he could bring in a Matt Hasselbeck and go to three provols, right?

They can draft a Ty Detmer or Mark Brunel or they can have a Kurt Warner in camp because they know exactly. And cut him and be okay with it. Yeah. Yeah, they know what they're looking at that position, and they have an amazing track record. I do agree with the risk that you have. And I think that this is an unprecedented situation. I just can't think of another time that you have a quarterback who's perceived to be at least a top 10 quarterback, who's under contract, who is not especially old, is not especially broken down. And you trade them away without having something that looks better or a viable alternative.

I mean, I think when the cults. got rid of Peyton Manning, they had Andrew Luck. You could understand why they were doing it. This is a situation that I really can't find a precedent for. And to me, the variables that I look at that are key are, is Wilson in decline and are they selling high? I think it could be. I think we may have seen the best of them actually. Yeah, I don't disagree with that. I think it's an indicator of how sour that relationship was and how the shelf life had expired without a doubt. And we see that every day. And I've said from the first minute this happened, there's got to be something else coming. There's got to be something else coming. And there hasn't been. So that's where my skepticism comes

from. I just, I had already made up my mind in everything that I saw in two or three years of Drew Locke in Denver. And I thought, Gino is Gino, you know, so I don't know. It's going to be, it's going to be interesting to follow. And as you mentioned, the Baker deal isn't settled yet. that's a whole other topic of, you know, we heard leaked out information over the last couple weeks that Carolina was close to making a deal. Then a week later, we heard Seattle's close to making a deal. Well, guess what? That's all coming from Cleveland, right? They're trying to stir up interest so that they can scare somebody into making a deal and it hasn't happened yet. So he doesn't fit in Seattle, though, does he, Randy? I mean, everyone I know that even likes Baker Mayfield is like this guy needs to

being a shotgun, uptempo offense, and move fast. That's not what Seattle wants to do. Do you think it would be a good fit or just a marginal upgrade over Drew Locke? And then you're looking for a guy in a year anyway. I don't really know what Seattle's offense is. I'll be honest with you. I don't see it enough. I thought it struggled last year. I'm waiting. I'm waiting for something to really say this is our identity. This is what we do. I happen to be one of the few that think Baker on a one-year deal makes a lot of sense in Seattle. But obviously, I'm the only one that thinks that. No, a lot of people think that. I think that's what the public perception is. Hey, we just get Baker Mayfield. Yeah, and I don't think he's the answer, but I think he's on a one year deal.

He has to play well. I think he could execute what they did last year as good, if not better, than the people who were doing it last year. I think he's an upgrade as a passer and a decision maker over Jewelock or Gino. So I do think he's a better option for me. Obviously, they don't think that. Now, the other side is, are they just waiting it out to where Cleveland has to cut him? That's a whole other topic of how the exit path either has hurdles or the hurdles get pushed down and he becomes free. I don't know. But it's still Seattle.

It's still Carolina. We're four months removed from the first time we heard these guys in this conversation. I'm the one, I happen to think that Carolina is not a good fit for him. And I know Baker's agents well, and they're very competent people. They're good people. They understand it too. But I think Carolina is a hornet's nest because I think the coach is under the gun. I think everybody there is under the gun.

They've got an owner that, you know, is ready to press the button any day now on a reset, I think. And if I'm Baker, that could be messy and ugly in the same, you know, I don't think that makes any sense to me. I'd better have a year as a backup somewhere or a year off than go to Carolina. I think it's a terrible place. Well, and maybe that's why I keep coming back to Seattle as being the one spot for him, you know. Yeah. And I think if the terms were right on it, it makes sense. What's the terms?

What are the terms for? He's going to get his 19 million. Yeah, I know. Exactly. But Seattle needs him humbled in that role, not empowered in that role. Do you agree? I agree with that. But I think they would get a humbled baker.

I just think it's a matter of, I guess when you say terms, who pays what portion of the 19 million? Is that what you're saying? No, I'm just saying, no. To me, if I'm Seattle, I don't want to pay any of it. I just sign him for a few million bucks. That's fine. Then you've got to wait it out. And that may happen.

That may happen. I agree with that. Before I'd trade for them. I think the narrative of Baker, why doesn't he, why don't the Browns just welcome him back now because Watson's going to be, you know, I mean, that to me is ridiculous. It's crazy. There's no way. I think, again, I don't know if we want to get into this now, but the Browns have kind of overplayed their hand in my mind anyway. So we'll see what happens.

But I know this for sure. Baker's getting into 19 million. It's just a matter of who writes the check. That's all. So I know this, having negotiated hundreds of deals, I would rather negotiate from zero up than 19 million down. And that may be part of the parameters and the issues here. I think at some point, Cleveland has to pull the trigger on moving on. And I think from a team building standpoint, from a locker room standpoint, from a continuity standpoint, that's coming pretty soon.

At some point, the distraction is going to be real. whether it's with the Watson fallout or moving on from Baker. And I know I would want, as the GM, as Andrew Barry, I would want that distraction to be over and have some time passed so that we can come to training camp with a clear mind and clear direction as to what we're going to do. I don't want all this doubt and rumors swirling and all that. So that's fast approaching, in my opinion.

So, Randy, we're talking about Cleveland, and we're talking about Seattle. And I think in a normal offseason, the situation in Seattle would be a once in a 10 year. It would be the most spectacular thing we've seen happen at the quarterback position like I was talking about, where you have a franchise icon who is just traded and you don't have a, you don't even have a viable quarterback. You don't have a backup plan. That is unprecedented enough, but maybe five times more unprecedented than that,

like unprecedented in the history of the league is this the Sean Watson situation. where the team went all in for him, paid him. He's got all these lawsuits against him, and we don't know what the heck's going to happen. And beyond that, normally we have at least you know, okay, Roger Goodell's in charge of discipline, here's what the commissioner has done in the past, here's what I think he'll do, and why.

We don't even know that. We have an arbitrator in Susan Robinson who no one knows anything about. So when we say we can't believe what Seattle's doing at quarterback. Really, you can't believe times five what Cleveland's doing and where it might even go. You're exactly right. I think it's more than the story of the year.

I think you're on it. It's the story of the last five or six years. I think the normity of it, the decisions that have been made up to this point are borderline reckless. It's only worse. It only gets worse because we still don't know months after the fact. I think it's, I mean, I don't know. I'd like to say it's a foregone conclusion that Deshawn Watson isn't playing football this year. But we don't know that.

We don't know Susan Robinson. She's never been in a role like this. Do you think the league or Roger Goodell is regretful of giving up the gavel when it comes to discipline at this point for this one case? Because it has such an enormous effect on the league, I think that they'd have to, right? Yeah, they would have to. they know that they're going to get what they want anyway. I don't know. But how do they know that? We've never been down this road. Isn't the point of Susan Robinson being involved? She's supposed to be an independent arbitrator of all things personal conduct? I think it does take Goodell off the hook a little

bit personally, though, because they can say that they've pushed for doing what's right, okay, which I think the public perceives as Sean Watson not playing this year, maybe even not playing some of next season. Yeah. And that was leaked out for a reason. I agree. Absolutely. So the league, I think the league sort of politically here needs to appear to really want to come down hard on the John Watson. Can the league have it both ways in this thing? The league, oh, we want to do what's right. We want this guy out. And then he's playing for Cleveland Brown sooner than they want and it's not their fault. I mean, that's kind of a cynical way of looking at it. But Goodell can't really be held responsible now, right, for whatever it is. not directly but i do know this that makes it even more puts even more at stake is there are 31 owners and 31 front offices with their eyes directly beaming on this to find out what's going on all these owners punished right yes they they want their pound of flesh extracted there's no doubt about it this is this has been a deal changer for them in every way on every street corner they've heard

about it. They all think that the Browns pulled wool over their eyes in this case and they're all having to pay the price. So I do think that is part of it, whether it's part of Susan Robinson's, you know, decree, I doubt. But that's why that's so fascinating because there is so much at stake with regard to this. And I think you're right. The league leaked out this information so that everybody knew that they clearly wanted a, and you and I talked about this a couple weeks ago when we were playing golf that day in that I thought there would be a year suspension or a year come back after a year and then we'll talk about it because I think there's even more at stake than this season. I think there's some of 2003 where financially they can get into everybody's pocket even more.

We all know that his base salary for this year is $1 million and it goes up extremely higher in 23. So they're good. They want some of that money as well. So the league has made their case publicly now. And I think you're right to take the pressure off, Goodell, to take the pressure off, you know, and put it squarely on the arbitrator's, you know, plate per se. Absolutely. The best thing for the league would be to just exempt list them this year and then start the suspension after that. And you could do it under the guys, not just a guys, but the real reality of these things aren't settled. They're not settled and they, who knows what's coming.

Who knows what's coming? And you have to give that, you can't wait forever for what else might be coming. but I think you could certainly wait, you know, wait this season and then, you know, do that and we'll see how that goes with the arbitrator. Do you, we've also seen out there this idea that, hey, the league didn't come down hard on Robert Kraft and Daniel Snyder for what they did. So look, personal conduct policy, Randy, applies to everybody. Does that, do you think that is a decent basis of an argument, sort of put you, in Susan Robinson shoes for maybe not coming down as hard on Deshawn Watson, or is that fantasy land thinking by people who are just grasping for anything as Deshaun Watson, you know, basically is going to take his punishment?

Yeah, I think that's probably fodder for the Watson camp and for what they would like to introduce as part of the reason for a lesser sentencing per se. I also think that they'll use the inconsistencies in the past of the personal conduct, you know, a court of law, if that we can even use that as, because we know it's not a court of law. It's all done internally.

But they're going to use the inconsistencies in the past, whether Roger used them or any of his lieutenants used them in deciding cases. There's just nothing been to this level and been this convoluted, in my opinion. So I don't think any of that will matter. I'm not buying part of that. part of this case. I also think that Susan Robinson has to put her stamp on something. And I just, you know, I don't know. I just don't know her. What we've seen in the past, I think, is people that are on the inside of the league sometimes don't realize how big these things are on the outside, right?

And we've seen shoot Goodell with the Ray Rice situation or whatever, right? I mean, the way that things have been looked at from inside the league haven't always been in the appropriate proportion, right, to what, because I think inside the league, everything's focused on how well somebody plays and next week's game and all of that. This obviously touches on much bigger societal issues. So my hope would be that somebody who's not, doesn't come from inside the league, isn't sort of hardened by that inside the league thinking, might look at this from the outside and say, wow, you know, see it for what it is.

secret is I'm not saying that I hope that she comes down overly hard because I don't think that would be right either but I hope that an outside perspective is actually appropriate here for what's going on because this is unprecedented maybe they'll benefit from having someone looking at this from a different angle. What you said though is interesting like she has to put her stamp on this thing too because this is going to define her whatever she does here defines her in this role that could be good because maybe then she feels like I need to do what's appropriate here, whatever that is, and come out with something that's fair. Well, it's hard to find cases to compare it to or history. But if you go back just to the Ben Rothesberger deal, and that was what, eight or ten years ago when that happened, he was suspended six games for one violation of the equal to the 24 that Deshaun Watson has. And he was suspended, I believe, six games and it got reduced to four. Was that right?

Yeah, it was something like that. Yeah, six that went to four for one. So if you use that and extrapolate that out to where there's 24 of these cases, it's easy to justify, hey, this should be a year, year and a half, to be honest with you. So finding the, everybody's going to cherry pick history to help their cause. That's the world, right? That's the way the world operates now. So I'm just going to be fascinated by where she comes down on this with all the different points of view and angles and agendas.

at stake. Frankly, I'm happy there's an independent person doing it, and maybe she will be less agenda affected, you know? Absolutely. And it was four games that Rutherberg ended up being suspended back then. So it seems like it has to be way more than that. Just the gravity of this whole thing feels so different. And I think no one's going to be satisfied other than Watson's camp if it's not, if he plays this year even. I think it's got to be longer than that. So it'll be interesting to see what the Cleveland Brown's come out, you know, at the end of all this, with egg on their face or not, just saying they had to know some of this stuff was coming. They had to, these guys are smart people.

They had to know a little bit about what they were going to face. So here's a parallel that segues into, I think, how we want to wrap this up, which is circling back to the Washington commanders. I think these are two franchises, okay, that have bad owners. We'd say Cleveland and Washington have terrible owners. But in both cases, they've tried to hide. hire good people who have good reputations in the league to kind of write the ship. The owners themselves haven't changed, but certainly in the case of Cleveland,

they initially brought in John Dorsey, you know, and he upgraded some of the talent of the team. And then they brought in, you know, they have, they have Andrew Barry and they have Kevin Stefanski, who I think are well-regarded people in the league. And they're kind of seen as sort of smart, stable people, right? They're sort of seen as the opposite of that owner in terms of temperament and just terms of the way they go about things. And then the same thing here in Washington where you have Dan Snyder who has a terrible reputation that's only gotten worse. But you've brought in Ron Rivera, right? Somebody who I think is well regarded around the league and he's going to try to make this situation better.

Or they've tried to change the culture of the team, right? They brought in Jason Wright also as a team president. And that's been the messaging is that, hey, you know, we've made these changes. Can you really, I guess my question here, maybe we have our answer. Can you really do that and succeed or does the owner, does a bad owner always sort of win in the wrong ways and drag you down? Well, that's a good point. It's really a great question. I think dysfunction always starts at the top.

I think you can bring people in. But what's happened, I think, especially in the Washington case, and, you know, I've worked with Ron Rivera. I knew him well. The further he gets away from coaching the team, the more that team is going to struggle. And I feel like once he got there, they've given him all these hats, or he's wanted all these hats. GM free. Yeah, he's everything. He's still running that part of it.

So I know the Jason Wright hire was a good hire. I know he's a sharp guy and should be able to help. But I just see Ron with his hat changing every day and getting further and further away from the team. He's got friends and family that work under him now. And that theory always for me doesn't work. You know, so there's some things there that I still can have concern. I understand the culture is better. I know Ron's a good person.

But they haven't shown it on the field. Let's face it. And now they have more distractions above him than maybe ever before with. all the stuff the commanders, you know, are trying to put to bed from years past. So it's just a cesspool of swirls around and around. And we saw the Jimmy Haslam stuff in Cleveland. You mentioned the long litany of GMs.

And you've left out a couple in that group too. So they've tried. Yeah. I think, you know, all these people are good people, but they've all had to jump outside of their own lanes. And that's really when you get in trouble, when you get outside your own lane. I think team building is hard.

team building is a really hard task. Some people are better at it than others. But it definitely helps when you have an owner at the top that gets it. And I'm not sure in this case, we do. So I don't know. I wish I had a better crystal ball for these franchises, but they've been the same for years now. So I don't know. Yeah. And I do. I just, that's what I felt like with the Deshaun Watson thing happening when that happens sort of out of left field and they were involved. obviously the owner has to not only sign off on it but it just felt like an owner grabbing control of the wheel you know when the car was sort of back on the road and it was

between the lines and then all of a sudden the own that felt like and I'm not saying I'm not excusing the football people there because maybe they really wanted to get to Sean Watson too but I think a better ownership would have resulted in handling that situation better maybe not even going after I'm certainly not giving them that kind of contract once you were in. And I just, I think we're seeing it here with Washington, too, that if you don't have that ownership at the top being solid, especially if it's really dysfunctional,

I don't know that you can bring in enough good people underneath that and be able to steer it. And your point about Ron Rivera maybe, you know, having to do too many things besides coach's team is a great one. I just look at what they've had to deal with this offseason, besides the Daniel Slander, then you got Jack Del Rio, you know, being a political commentator. And then he, how about this? Their head coach and their decorting or Jack Del Rio have both been fined 100 grand this offseason.

You know, what's up with that? I thought it was interesting. Remember it initially came out that Ron Rivera was fining Del Rio 100 grand. Then they kind of reworded that to the club as finding him 100 grand. Then Ron Rivera gets fired 100 grand for violations of OTAs and too much physical contact. So wait a second. It's like, it's crazy. You're right.

I've never heard of such a thing. Maybe if Rivera could have fined Jack DeRio, he could have used that $100 grand himself to pay the league, right? To pay his own fine. Hey, thanks, Jack. At some point, yeah. At some point, hopefully you don't have those things going on. Oh, by the way, Washington has now brought in Carson Wentz at quarterback.

Yeah. Talk about stability. I mean, where. Another circus, yeah. Another circus because he can't handle it. And, you know, he may be an upgrade. He may play well, but he's certainly, if you were going to talk about leadership, Ron Rivera is going to have to help him lead the team too.

Because he's not a natural leader and doesn't really have a great self-awareness and know how to do it. Well, and that's a team that has a record of swinging and missing at quarterbacks, I think, for the last several years. So they've kind of, in my opinion, mis-evaluated their quarterback position now for two or three years. So time will tell. The other franchise you can throw in there really sometimes is Miami. And that starts with the ownership too because of the chaos they've had. And you can go back to, why do things keep coming up at Miami about Tom Brady and their pursuit of Watson last year when they didn't pursue him? Then the coach leaving under all this.

Suing him. Yeah. I mean, same thing. Stuff keeps happening there. And maybe Mr. Ross is the greatest guy in the world and maybe it's the people under him. But I know it's not the football people there because I know those guys. And they're not off the hook trying to do all these other things. So there's a distraction sometime that is created at the top that nobody in the building can do.

anything about it. So I guess I would say this, if you have the great quarterback and a good coach, I think that overcomes anything. And so like let's just look at Tom Brady going to Tampa. That's another team that hasn't had great ownership, right? You would say Tampa's ownership. It's better than those other ownerships. But we wouldn't have been holding that up as an example of great ownership. Yeah. And then you, but you bring in Brady and you have Bruce Ariens and now, you know, Todd Bowles, I think that overcomes, right? You can overcome it, no doubt, yep. That overcomes.

But maybe if you have that ownership, getting a good coach or just some stability in the front office isn't going to be enough by itself. It depends. I'll tell you, you've seen some cases. For example, look at New Orleans, what they've done. And I don't think Tom Benson, it was ever regarded as the great. owner ever, but he was always had a reputation of being a little tight and a little bit of a questionable decision maker.

But guess what? You got Drew Brees. You got Sean Payton and you win a Super Bowl. So it can be overcome. But I don't know that at some point, I think we all have to figure out what we are and what we're good at, whether it's the owner, whether it's the coach, whether it's the GM. And once we find the lane that we're comfortable and good in, we ought to just stay. there and hopefully the owner understands that as well what they are good at. Bill Pullian used to say

this for years and I used to laugh every time he'd say it. He said owner's own, coach's coach, GM's GM. He said, those are the best organizations. Players play. He said it's when the lines get blurred, that's when you have a problem when everybody wants to get in everybody else's business. So it's fascinating. It's a fair to be some merit to that. It's absolutely fascinating in how all these teams come together or not and what's going to happen. So I think we've we've used our time. I'm here, Randy. Hopefully we've used it wisely and people have enjoyed the conversation. Everybody here, you can find Randy Mueller on Twitter at Randy Mueller underscore. You can also go to MuellerFootball.com. Lots of good stuff on there. I'm Mike Sando. You can find

me at Sandow NFL, also on The Athletic. Thanks for coming along. And Randy, we'll talk to you next time. Sounds good, Mike. This was the Athletic Football Show.