The Athletic Football Show: A show about the NFL - League-altering moves, GMing an expansion team, the end of bad quarterbacks, and more from the TAFS mailbag

Episode Date: June 11, 2025

The mailbag shifts to Wednesday this week, but it's still chock full of great questions from all of you out there. Robert Mays and Derrik Klassen consider each of the following: What are the most consequential league-altering moves of the last 10 years? Which failed head coach was hurt most by his quarterback situation? Could we soon be in a world without bad quarterbacks? Find out the guys answers to those questions, and many more, on this episode of The Athletic Football Show.Hosts: Robert Mays and Derrik KlassenWith: Michael BellerExecutive Producer: Michael BellerProducer: Michael BellerSubscribe to The Athletic Football Show...⁠Apple⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠YouTube⁠Follow Robert on Bluesky: @robertmays.bsky.socialFollow Derrik on Bluesky: @qbklass.bsky.socialFollow Beller on Bluesky: @mbeller.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. It is a mailbag day, even though it's not Monday. We're rolling out the mailbag on Wednesday because we had tweak some things this week. Another set of great questions. Really appreciate everybody who sent them in. Beller is going to be reading them for me and Derek. Very excited to get back to these. Let's get to it right now.

It's another mailbag Wednesday here on the Athletic Football Show. Pushing this back a couple days. Obviously, I got back at this weekend. and we usually record the mailbags on the previous Friday, just a little bit of a peek behind the curtain. I'm sure the mystery is now really ruined for everybody. But because we couldn't do that, we wanted to push everything back one day,

and we really wanted to hit all the news from OTAs yesterday. So we're doing the mailbag a little bit later, but we're getting back in the swing of things. We'll have another one next Monday, so we'll be back on our regularly scheduled programming. Very excited to be back doing these. Very excited for all three of us to be on here. Beller, you've got a lot of run on the feed over the last couple of weeks,

but this is it's nice to have you back in this spot and it's nice to be here with you because I've really appreciated what you've added to these mailback shows since we started rolling within this off season well thank you very much and it's great to have you back and it's great to be back in this I was it was fun to get back on the mic it was fun to stretch the vocal wings a little bit but I'm very happy to be doing the voiceover thing once again for you guys and letting you guys take the ball and run with it Derek did you miss the mailbags we didn't record any of them because we were banking them for like several weeks so even though you guys still got a mailbag every week. It's been about three weeks since we've recorded one. Yeah, like, I've been listening to them back,

obviously, but so I guess in some ways I've gotten my fix, but it's a little bit different knowing that, like, okay, I said all that stuff three weeks ago as opposed to being able to record it now. But even now, we're recording it on a Tuesday, which we've never done. So we're still all jumbled up until I think we get to the end of this week. We've got a ton of questions still in the hopper. So I'm not even sure if I'm going to solicit new questions for next week's mailbag. I think I'm just going to go through all of the ones that we have and then start. starting the week of the 16th, I guess it is. That's when I'll start requesting new questions because we've got so many good ones as we always do.

So thank you to everyone who took the time to send them in. We've got a lot of fun ones to get to. Bellar, let's just kick it off. No further ado. Okay. Will Saliano comes to us with the first question. And he says that it is based around advanced stance and their usage in media and at organizational levels. Guys, after our heart referencing some of our pals here.

Robert Mays references EPA a good amount, as does Derek Mee to Kime, seems partial. to DVOA, Nate Tice, like success rate. All of these stats are helpful in understanding strengths and weaknesses for different teams and players, but not the be all end all. I'm wondering a few things. Which of these stats do you think teams and organizations leverage most frequently? And additionally, why are your favorite stats?

Your favorite stats? What about them makes you confident that they are the best way to tell the story about why a team or a player is good at X? Robert, why do you take this one? The organizations thing, I think we can take first. I remember the first time a coach quoted DVA, back to me.

Like this is where we ranked in DVOA and this stat. And it was kind of a jarring moment. It was probably five, six years ago. And obviously they've been aware of them for longer ago than that. I think that Pete Carroll very famously, we talked about how the Seahawks were number one in DVOA pretty much every single year at a press conference several years ago. Yeah, he was, and obviously the Seahawks were the DVOA champs for like four or five years in a row.

So that was something to be proud of you for Seattle. I'm not sure how much they're indexing for this stuff. I think that they just know higher equals good, right? So if we want to be really high in some of these efficiency stats, what does that ultimately mean and how do we get there? And I think the best recent example of that, Derek, is probably what we've gotten from like Ben Johnson this offseason, where he's been talking about just the various levers you can pull

to try to increase what your EPA per dropback looks like. That process is a little bit muddled. Like, if you're good, those numbers will be good. So I don't think there's a ton of value in gaming them. But I think it's mostly just how can we make sure we rank very high in these offensive efficiency stats? Because as these newer, younger coaches have come in, I think they're attuned to the idea that if you don't rank very high in these stats, you're probably not going to be very good. I'm not sure, though, that teams are necessarily optimizing for them at a very deep level. I think that we're still probably a little ways off from that.

Yeah, I think the descriptive stats are better for us. The DVOAs, the EPAs, where it just kind of paints a picture of like this. is how effective a thing was. I think in the building, they're looking at more like whatever they can do for predictive models, whether that's like how and when we go for fourth down and how that affects us or how effective we are in first down and how do we get to more effective first down plays that then unlock what we can do for the rest of the series. I think that is more the stuff that they're using. But yeah, the DVOA is the EPA is all that stuff. That's more for us to be able to paint the picture. And I think the reason that both EPA and DVOA work is like they kind of touch the entire picture.

Like they grasp everything that's in theory happening, whether it's down in distance, all that stuff, exactly how many yards were gained? Like, are these yards that we gained completely useless on, you know, seven yards on third and 12, something like that. I think they do a good job of that. So even if the stats are never really, to me, like, painting the whole picture for the purposes of our job, it's a good way to like make a reference point and like say X team is in like this general tier of productivity.

I think that's a good point. I think the descriptive elements of it are why it's valuable for us. The reason, and we've talked a lot about this, how much of these we should use, when we should pull back on them a little bit. I think the reason that so many of us are drawn to these numbers in this sort of space is that they provide really clear context. If you're trying to explain how good or bad someone is it something, it's helpful if you can provide a number attached to that and not just the number.

Like if I tell you that so-and-so had a blank amount of EPA in a given season, there's no context for that. You have to know where that ranks. But if I tell you where they ranked according to that stat, it is a good, it's a helpful tool to be able to help describe what you are watching and why it feels the way that it does. And so I think that's why so many of us are drawn to using them. The last thing I'll say about the in the building stuff before getting to the ways that we've talked about and kind of applied all of these is that I do think that some of these numbers are helpful at

figuring out how bad or how good certain elements of your offense or defense are. If you take a sack, now there is a number you can put on it for how harmful that sack was and how harmful collective sacks are over time. That's good context for coaches even. It's like, okay, we knew sacks were bad. Now we know exactly how bad sacks are compared to other outcomes on that play. And I think the other side of it is, where are there hidden things that are more valuable than we think they are?

And yards after catch opportunities, things like that that are some of these through lines with teams that are very efficient offensively according to these metrics. I think that's another way that these can be actionable where you look at, all right, how can we do things that in a broad level

we knew we're efficient, now they're actually even more valuable than we thought. How can we start incorporating more of that stuff? And I wouldn't be surprised if that's happening behind closed doors more than we think it is. The Sacks one is honestly the perfect example

because I think, I mean, obviously Sacks have always been bad, right? But up until about like 10 years ago, I think it was very obvious, or it felt very obvious that like interceptions and turnovers of any kind were significantly worse than taking a sack. And they still are because it's an automatic

you give the other team the ball. But the gap is a lot closer than I think we thought it might have been like 10 years ago before we really started having more access to like SaaS and stuff like that. Absolutely. And I think when it comes to my favorite one of these, I don't really have a favorite one of these

because they all provide different context. So in all actuality, and this is true, and maybe I shouldn't admit this, a lot of the ones that I use are based on what the user interface is for those specific stats. So if I want to figure out where a team ranks in some sort of efficiency metric, overall as a unit, the way that FTN and previously Football Outsiders had DVOA set up, it makes it very easy to do that. Like you can click on one page.

You have all 32 teams sitting there in front of you, and they have the weighted element to it. So you know, all right, recently they've been a little bit better or worse than that. So it's just a very quick way to access that sort of context for how teams stack up against each other. Last year, and I hope this continues, I had access to next gen stats for the first time because I was working with NFL network. That's really helpful for player specific stats because the filters they have on all of that stuff go very deep. And if you actually sit there in the database, EPA per play, total EPA and success rate are lined up next to each other for quarterbacks. So if I'm looking for a quarterback specific stat now, that's typically where I'm going. So it's not even that I have a favorite because I think it's a true representation of the quality

of play. I just think that there are easier and quicker ways to get to some of these numbers and cleaner ways when it comes to team-based stuff and player-based stuff. And that's driving it more than how much I necessarily believe in any one of these numbers more than the other. Yeah, I think at a certain point, it just has become clear that like using EPA, Generally, EPA, DVOA and success rate, like just any bucket of those three, you can start, you can get to the whatever starting point you want from there and then kind of work off of it from there.

It's usually fun. Yes. And I think that the difference between EPA and success rate, we know this is success rate is down-to-down consistency. EPA, there's a lot of explosives and negatives involved in that. So if you have a team that's very good in EPA per play, but very, a little bit worse in success rate, that's a team that's probably more explosive than they are consistent. And obviously that you have to have those two things in equal tandem. But for the most part, my belief is all of these things are necessary to get a full picture of what's happening.

And that's why I think we use them somewhat interchangeably because they all provide slightly different, if always important context. All right, guys. Let's get to the next one. User experience always important across the board. Aaron Pultman, who writes our next question. And as a Jets fan knows that user experience as it relates to quarterbacks, not equally distributed across the league. But he wonders if the era of bad quarterback players. is almost over.

He's been thinking that maybe soon no team might have a bad quarterback, defining bad as worse than Derek Carr, i.e. a quarterback you're not actively trying to move and would give a second contract. Derek Carr, the idea that if you're worse than Derek Carr, you're a bad quarterback is just tough. The idea that there will be no quarterbacks in the NFL

worse than Derek Carr is the meanest thing ever said about Derek Carr. He was an MVP candidate at one point. He was consistently like the 12th best quarterback in the league. They're 32. quarterbacks. Speaking of DVOA, we're going to have Aaron shots knocking down the door for Aaron Poltman here is famously a Derek Carr defender based on DVOA. But anyways, Aaron says the basic theory is we seem to be adding more good quarterbacks through the draft and reclamation projects like Gino Smith, Sam Darnold, and Baker Mayfield, then we lose every year. Last season,

for example, we added Drake May, Jaden, Daniels, Bo Nix, and Sam Darnold with potential for Caleb Williams, Michael Panics, and J.J. McCarthy. This year, we've got two first round quarterbacks as well as potential for maybe Bryce Young, Anthony Richardson, or Justin Fields to make the turn. And while it's early, there does seem to be a number of quarterbacks who will be picked in the first round of next year's draft. On the other side, there aren't that many older quarterbacks who are likely to retire soon, Aaron Rogers, Matthew Stafford, Gino Smith's getting close. They seem to be the only ones really that close to retirement. So do you think we are nearing a point where the 32nd quarterback will be what we used to consider the 20th-ish best quarterback from a few

years ago. What do you got here, Derek? 12 spots is a little bit too, too big of a canyon for me. I think that's kind of where I come down. Like if quarterback 32 now is what like quarterback 27 used to be, maybe, I can start to get there. And I think part of that where I'll start with that is I do think that because the rules for the offense are easier now than they were two decades ago, I think that's part of why some quarterbacks are able to look, even if they're not actually better, they're able to play less offensively and like not, maybe have as many turnovers and stuff like that. And you can look like a functional quarterback.

I also just think we have an absurd amount of like a really good offensive play callers in the league right now. And we're probably hitting like we're almost hitting a saturation point. But like to bring up Sam Darnold, it's like nobody thought Sam Darnold was going to be good. But you get to go play with Kevin O'Connell and one of the best receivers in football. And it's like, yeah, you can look pretty competent. The other part of this that I would say is the part of the question where it's like we're getting a bunch of new quarterbacks that are good now. that feels like an extremely 2024 based recency bias thing

where we had one good draft class in which we don't even really know if Bo Nix is going to be an above average quarterback. We've never seen... His numbers last year are objectively bad. Yeah, Caleb Williams was not good. Drake May like, I love him, but his numbers weren't that insane last year.

He was playing on a bad team. J.J. McCarthy, we've never seen play and he's coming off of an injury. Michael Pennix played like five okay games. So I like, I think we're just projecting a lot there, and we want them all to be good, and there's reason to believe it, but I think there's more wait and see there. And then even Sam Donald, like, we got one year where he got to throw to Justin Jefferson. I don't know if we have any idea that he's a long-term

good quarterback. So I think the idea that there's more good ones pumping into the league now is, like, we had one insane year of like five good quarterbacks that we didn't think we were going to get, but maybe next year there's none. Like maybe Cam Ward sucks and none of the other rookies are good. Yeah, I think if you look at it, I get why it's tempting. to say this because at least most teams have a plan for what they're trying to do at quarterback. But I actually think the distribution across the position is probably more similar to recent history than it might seem at first glance because we got that little bit of a bump last year. So if you look at just general quarterback efficiency in a given season, typically it lands

somewhere around like 0.03 to 0.06 EPA per dropback. Last year was like 0.05. And then if you go back to 2016, it was 0.06. And then you have like seven or eight guys who are just in the negatives. And then you have two or three guys who are way behind the pack. And the real bottom of the barrel quarterback play typically falls into a few different buckets and categories here. One is this guy is starting by default because we have just stumbled into this situation and we don't have a better option. Recent examples of this, Will Levis, Desmond Ritter, Davis Mills, Sam Howell. These are guys that are typically drafted in like rounds two or three. and you trot them out there because it's like,

we don't really have anything else that we can do here. This is our option. That's what Tyler Shuck is this year. So it's very possible that we get Sam Howe or Will Levis sort of play from Tyler Shuck independent of how good or bad he is as a prospect. A young guy who falls way short of expectations because he's dropped into a terrible situation, that's almost a given every single year. Last year it was Caleb Williams.

The year before that it was Bryce Young. There's a chance that it's Cam Ward Dish. year, even if I think both of us are quietly or mildly optimistic about what the Titan situation looks like. And then you have some scenarios where there's something just kind of runs its course and there's a level of like quarterback desperation involved. Last year that was Daniel Jones. Like Carson Wentz in 2020 is something like this. And that truly one of the ugliest seasons of all time. But going into that year, I don't think anybody would have expected the bottom to fall out of that. And then kind of a corollary of that is there.

there's a older guy, the bottom falls out of that situation, either because of the circumstances or because he falls off a cliff. Matt Ryan with the Colts is like a good example of this. And so I don't think this crop of quarterbacks looks all that different than that. Like we mentioned Cam Ward already. Okay. The Giants still might be very bad with Russell Wilson and Jackson Darley. That's very much on the table. Tyler Shuck is this year started by default with Dylan Gabriel or Chador Sanders also potentially falling in to that bucket. I think the floor for Justin Fields and the passing game for the Jets is very low. The Colts are a big question if Daniel Jones has to be their quarterback for the entire season.

So I think, again, you've got like five or six teams with pretty low floors for their passing game overall. And that is actually pretty similar to what you would get in any given season. I think that's a really good point that like we still have guys who are mostly checking into all those buckets. And honestly, the last thing I would say, and I think Fields plays in. into this, and even Daniel Jones to a degree, the bad quarterbacks, the bottom quartile quarterbacks two decades ago were just stuck in the pocket and it was like, oh, if he can't

throw, then he's completely useless. At least the bad quarterbacks now can run so it feels like they're doing something, even if like by comparison, they're still the 28th best quarterback in the league or whatever it is. I will say that 2024 was a vast improvement on 23, but that's just because 2023 was a particularly bad season. Right. So you had a couple of these rookie contract guys running their course in awful circumstances. That was Zach Wilson, Mac Jones falls into that category, Kenny Pickett falls into that category. And then you had multiple of these. We have to start him because we don't have any other options guys with Sam Howell and

Desmond Ritter in the same season. So I do think it's trending slightly up after last year. But I honestly think 2023 was the outlier compared to recent seasons. And 2024 and 2025 are actually more in line. line with what we get at the position than we typically would think. All right, guys. The next question is from Henry Paulian. Henry says it is widely accepted that quarterbacks are the key to success for any franchise

and it is very hard to win without a good one. Despite this, coaches often get sacked just on the basis of their record and some never make it back to being a head coach. This presumably means that there are a number of head coaches who would have been good if they had been granted a franchise quarterback. If you agree with this premise, are there any such coaches that you can think of? Robert, what do you got here? the first thing I'll say, just super homerism here, is that if Lovie Smith had ever had a good quarterback,

we would think and talk about Lovie Smith very differently than we do. Like, Lovie Smith was a very good head football coach for the era in which he was a coach, and those Bears teams were good. They just couldn't figure out the play caller or quarterback situation ever. Like Kyle Orton is the best one that they had until J. Culler. The ones, I think, recently that fall into this, what if Zach Wilson is Jaden Daniels? Like, how do we talk about Robert Sala? Bo Nix.

Like, you didn't even have to beat Jay and Daniels, dude. All right, that's a fair point. That is a very fair point. But Sal is the first place my mind goes. Because even if they get average quarterback play and then don't have to do the Rogers desperation side of this, what does that Jets tenure look like? I have some sneaking suspicions that those guys might not have been wired correctly for the job anyway and that it might not have been as good as we're framing it to be here.

But I do think that Jets run goes very differently. if they get average quarterback play from the guy they drafted second overall. Vance Joseph, if the Paxton Lynch thing goes differently, right? So another organization tied to an abomination of a quarterback pick. What happens with Spags if Sam Bradford stays healthy? That's a really good one. That's a really, really good one. Because I think we just kind of write off.

We read off his tenure as just an utter disaster. And like it's so bad that he hasn't even gotten looks as another, as a head coach again, but it was only three years. And the first year was the year before they drafted Bradford. The second year was Bradford's rookie year, where he stayed healthy and they were fine on offense with Josh McDaniels. And then in 2011, Bradford gets hurt. And so they have absolutely no shot.

So Spags, I think, would be a little bit different. And then the other one I'd throw in there is Rex Ryan. Like if Rex Ryan has not Mark Sanchez, what do those Jets teams look like? I think you had to have like a slight modicum of success, especially on your side of the ball for me to include you here. But those are the four or five that immediately came to mind for me. Like, let's just say that the Broncos stumble into DAC instead of the Cowboys in that Paxton Lynch year.

What happens with Vance Joseph? There's no way to know. I think it would probably be okay. They probably would have been pretty dang good because Vance Joseph in not quite the same tier as obviously Spags, but he's been one of the better defensive coordinators in the league pretty much since that time. So, I mean, it's absolutely fair to assume like, okay, good defensive coordinator plus quarterback.

it is funny that all of these guys have been defensive guys. Like we pretty much assume that like the offensive guy would have figured out something if they had like even a not good quarter. Like if Kevin O'Connell can do it with Sam Darnold, I think we can all assume that like if the offensive guy had the goods, he would have figured it out with whoever. So you at least gotten like above average play out of that unit no matter who the quarterback was. You would a cycle between two to three options. And if you were a real dude as an offensive play caller, you would have had a functional if or average offense no matter how you were. what you were served at that position. That's kind of where I land, even if that's unfair.

Which it kind of leads to my only other addition that I had to this. Obviously, my first one was Sala. I think he's the best and most recent example. And this is probably going to be inflammatory and maybe a little bit unfair. But if Brian Flores had a good quarterback he liked in Miami, I really think that that could have gone well because he's been awesome for Minnesota. And obviously there's a bunch of other things that kind of complicate the Miami and Brian Flores thing.

but like I really think that if he had gotten a proper shot at head coach, it could have gotten really, really well. Let's say the Dolphins draft Justin Herbert instead of Tua. Now you're talking about. What does the Brian Fores tenure look like? And again, this isn't a Justin Herbert or Tua thing. I think we've learned that Tua can be successful in very specific circumstances. And when you have a defensive minded head coach,

there are times where you're just not able to create those specific circumstances. Like, you're trying to get an above average offensive play call if you're a defensive-minded head coach. That's what you're shooting for. And that tier of play caller isn't able to lift every single quarterback. So stumbling into the right quarterback, like Sean McDermott with Josh Allen is this? Like if Sean McDermott doesn't have Josh Allen,

I think Sean McDermott is a good coach, but his tenure in Buffalo looks very, very different if that pick doesn't happen in 2018. So I think are there a lot of guys that potentially fall into these categories that either are lifted by the guy that they stumble into or draft, or pulled down by the guy they didn't stumble into or draft.

All right, guys, time for a break number one for us here. We're going to take that. We'll be back with a bunch more questions. Okay, the next question is from Dylan Mulvaney and Dylan says, searching back through the last 10 to 15 years, what are one or two offseason moves that you think were truly league altering and future changing for the landscape of the NFL or the franchise is involved? Robert, take this one away for us first.

There are two out throwout that immediately come to mind that I think I've probably them mentioned in some way, shape, or form a bunch over the last 10 years or so. What happened in the 2017 offseason when Kyle Shanahan and Sean McVeigh were hired within like two weeks of each other is still shaping what the NFL feels like? And now it's been eight years since that happened. So I think that single winter, you know, that stretch of January has been incredibly important for how we've come to understand the league over the last 10 years. And I think the other one, the example I'll use.

use here when Aaron Rogers signed with the Steelers and I was looking at clips on Twitter or wherever and Ian Rapport was talking about an NFL network. The first thing he mentioned when talking about the best case scenario for Rogers with the Steelers was Tom Brady with the bucks. That was five years ago. Right. And no matter the veracity of that, I think Tom Brady landing in Tampa and having it go the way that it did still is influencing the way that teams are conceiving of their quarterback pursuits in a given off season. If the Brady-Stafford thing doesn't happen in back-to-back years, do you think the Broncos give up what they did for Russell Wilson?

No way. And I think that we conceive of the Jets' hopes with Rogers differently if they don't happen in the shadow of what took place with Brady and Stafford. So I think the Brady thing followed by the Stafford thing and this peddling of hope that can go with that where it's like, all right, if our team is good enough and we see. stumble into the right quarterback as the final piece, what can we accomplish? Misguided or not, I think that single move and what it led to for the Bucks is still shaping the way that teams are approaching their offseason five years later.

And I think probably the reason the Brady one would trick people a little bit is that Brady didn't really look that good at the end. Physically, he didn't look as good towards the end of his New England tenure. And then he got to Tampa Bay and he looked, dude, he was thrilled. growing heaters in Tampa. And that was something obviously when he was, even when he was like, you know, 35 or whatever in New England, he had a really good arm. But like that last year or so in New England, he didn't really have it.

And then you got the Tampa Bay and it was like all the way back. And so with Rogers, it would have to be more like mobility, right? Like if you were trying to make the comparison, you know, I don't know if he's ever going to run like that again. But I do think we've gotten to a point where teams are like, all right, 38 year old NFL quarterback. Do you have anything? I mean, teams like you said, not only did the Broncos try it with Russell Wilson, but

We're on team number four now that is going to go try it with Russell Wilson, even though we've had enough evidence that that is not going to be the case. At this point, it's probably shine. Yeah, the shine's gone. I think that's probably the Steelers was probably the last time you could sell yourself at any idea that he might have had some of that left. I think at this point, we know the game is up. I think. So I actually also had McVeigh and Shanahan. I mean, that was, like you said, we're still hiring guys who worked for those guys, like eight, almost a death.

Almost a decade later. Because it's still working. Exactly. You can, even if you're not as good as those guys, if you are the C-minus version of those guys, you can still have functional NFL offense. Even if only for a year or two, maybe it'll break down eventually. But you can get to like baseline level functional. And there's value in that.

It's a job security league. And if you have a play caller like that, it helps everybody in the building stay around for a little bit. The other one I had was in a similar-ish vein. And it was hard for me to pick the actual point I wanted to use for this. but when the Niners hired Jim Harbaugh and Greg Roman in 2011, and in that same year, you got Cam Newton being drafted by the Panthers and obviously Kaepernick being drafted by the 49ers.

That was when we really started to get a lot of the option stuff. Obviously, two years later, you have the insane Kaepernick moment where he's doing whatever he wants to against Green Bay. You have Roman really bringing in the pistol for a guy like Kaepernick, and then you have even other teams using the pistol kind of because of that. You saw Peyton Manning using it in Denver and stuff. I just feel like RG3. That's the one that comes to mind for me.

RG3 with Washington in 2012. Yes, you get 2011 with Cam and then immediately after that you get RG3. And those two guys doing the option with Cap, Kaepernick in 2012, also becoming a starting quarterback. Like it was like this two year period of everything coming together for a lot of spread and different formations and using the option. And then after all of those two things in 2013,

the Eagles go and hire Chip Kelly, who like leans into a lot more of that stuff. So there was just like this. right at the turn of the decade, just a lot of stuff that really kind of changed football that we're still using and all of those things today. Like the league really truly shifted from that moment.

It's funny that we had a little bit of a blip away from that from like, let's say, 2016 through 2018 or so. I think that there was like a collective misremembering of how valuable that stuff could be. Like if Lamar Jackson comes out in the draft in 2015, instead of 2018 on the heels of all of this happening. Do you think he lasts till the 30 second pick in the draft?

No, absolutely not. And I think a lot of those guys fizzling out a little bit, right? And even Russ, when we got to, by the time 2018 rolls around, Russ is a very different quarterback than he was early out in his career with the way that the Seahawks were using him. So I think in some ways, like, again,

the heat coming off of things like the Kaepernick ascension, things like the RG3 season, there being a little bit of a gap between that and Lamar Jackson coming into the league, I think is part of the reason that Lamar Jackson's even available when he is for the Ravens to draft him that year. That's a good point. There actually was a little bit of like a, ah, maybe this stuff isn't as good as we thought. And then you get Josh Allen and Lamar Jackson in the same class and it's like,

oh, shit, never mind. Yeah, it was all very useful. It just, now it's being populated by quarterbacks for even better than those guys were. And it's also, that was also like Chip Kelly, like completely fizzled out of the league. so I think nobody wanted anything to do with any of the stuff that he was doing. You're right. There was like a, it was hot for a second and then it sucked. And now everyone's like, wait a minute.

Let's go back to some of that. And the reality, as it always is, probably lies somewhere in the middle. Exactly. And now Chip Kelly's back too. So this is all cyclical, right? It all comes back for us. Just like Aaron Rogers. And David Zimmerman, a Steelers fan, has our next question for us.

Count him as one of these Steelers fans who is not buying into Aaron Rogers being any sort of savior. He lays out some of the counter arguments that he's heard. This is the counter argument around which his question is based. It is the Steelers are going to trade up for a quarterback with all of our assets next year. So it doesn't matter if we go all in this season. His question, if the Steelers are so obviously going to trade up for a quarterback next year, then why should I care about this season at all? There's no guarantees in the draft when it comes to trading up.

And if the Steelers don't really stand a chance of being truly competitive for a Super Bowl this year anyway, why should I not be rooting for Aaron Rogers bringing forth every distraction he can, leading to a season from hell ending in a top 10 pick. I'd rather that than watch them get slaughtered in the wildcard game again and give up two future first to get the consensus QB3-4. Derek, what do you say on this one? So purely from the perspective of quarterback play, I totally get that.

But here's the thing. In the scenario where the Steelers win, I don't know, six games, Rogers looks bad, the locker room has a mutiny, all that stuff. I would guess the offensive line did not take the step that you wanted. and the run game looks really bad. If you make the wild card somehow, that to me says the offensive line is exactly what you wanted it to be. The run game looks really good.

And you have at least some sort of structure for a young quarterback. And in both of these scenarios, to the point of the question, they're drafting a quarterback next year no matter what. It doesn't matter if they win five games or if they win 11 and go to the wild card. And so if you're going to end up there anyway, I'd rather at least get bludgeoned in the wild card and have my young offensive line look good for the rest of the season and have like a decent infrastructure for Arch Manning or whoever the

hell it is that it's going to be next year. This is a very good way of framing it. I think you're trying to find the correct point on the X, Y, axis with the highest possible returns from your young players and the worst possible outcome as a team. So I guess that's my question. How bad can your final record be

if all of the young players progress at the rate that you want them to? If Rogers gets hurt in like week four, and we get 12 games of Mason Rudolph. There's probably a world where Fattanoe, McCormick, Frazier, Broderick Jones, all those guys look good. Derek Harmon looks like a beast. You get all of that and you still win six games.

Like, I do think that's possible because my answer is going to be almost the exact same thing. The process of falling in love with and watching your young players grow over the team that you root for is a very cool process. It's not just a wasted year, even if you don't have championship aspirations or even if you're not a Super Bowl contender. So that is always going to be a worthwhile thing on a multi-year level. The question is, how good can that be with how bad the rest of the team can be? That's exactly what I would be rooting for.

All of those guys are who we want them to be and we're still picking in the top 10. If that's a possible outcome, that's the one that I want. Yeah, if we can get there, and obviously you don't, it would have to probably require Aaron Rogers not play. playing some amount of games. But that is like the, in terms of trying to get the best capital, like, that's the best outcome is you somehow get a top 10 pick for some reason, but all the young guys look good. I also think, too, to your point about like watching young players grow and all that stuff, I think in the particular case of the Steelers, because a lot of them are on your offensive line,

it's cool that you kind of see them get to grow as like a unit together, playing side by side. Like there's something, I don't know, there's something cool about that. The example I would use recently that a team I actually think kind of aligns with this where they have all these highly drafted guys, young pieces, and those guys were as good as you wanted them to be, but the team was very bad, or at least below average. Like if you had the seasons that the 2022 and 2023 Jets had, where you have all these young guys who are ascending into stardom, but one side of the ball is still absolutely terrible and you go seven and ten. like that's probably the best case scenario for what can happen with the Steelers right now. That's a really good point. Like if Derek Harmon is the. Quinn Williams.

In terms of talent. Yeah, if he's your Quinn and Williams, like Joey Porter, maybe a sense to where he's something closer to him, uh, sauce gardener. Like that's a really good comparison. I like that. And it's, of course, funny that that is also the other Aaron Rogers team. It's those Jets teams if like AVT stays healthy and becomes what, you know, Zach Frazier is hopefully going to be for the Steelers.

So I do think that there are some kernels in that, where if you can have elements of what the Jets were for those couple years, knowing you're going to draft a quarterback next year and be in a position to do that, I think that's probably okay. Next up, Justin Wick Strand says, first off, thanks for making the Monday mailbags, my favorite part of my morning commute. Justin, thank you for listening. As a Seahawks fan, my question for you revolves around the Nick Em and Warre trade up and how roster construction informs trade value. Giving up 52 and 82 to get to 35 was a bit too rich for my taste, especially for an athletic, but. raw quasi positionless player like Emin Wari. Looking at who ended up being available at 52 and 82, it's a bit tough to swallow the fact that John Schneider could have chosen

Xavier Watts or Kevin Winston Jr. at 82 and had an extra second. So now we have a few weeks of reports, footage, and stellar articles from Michael Sean Duggar. My question is this. What kind of value will Nickyman Worry have to provide to the Seahawks defense to get ROI on the trade-up? Of course, we don't know if the players from 52 and 82 will be any good, but let's just say they took Tate Ratledge and Kevin Winston Jr. instead of making the move. in what team building context does the sheer upside versatility and dynamism one player could bring to a defense outweigh having two day two potential starters to Seattle having a number of solid to above average defenders mitigate the risk of a swing and a miss on this trade and therefore informed the decision to potentially lose value on a trade up for a high upside player Robert take this one for us first this is a really good question I think that it's a good way of thinking about it if you look at modern trade value charts like the fitzgerald spielberger charon over the cap

the combination in draft value from the 52nd and 80 second pick is like a top 15 pick. And so that's what you need for the ROI to be there for Emin Wari. He needs to play like a top 15 pick. And it's safety, that's hard to do. Like there aren't many guys at that position who are making good on that sort of draft investment. So I think that's something to keep in mind. What he said about a lot of average or solid players on defense, I do think that's something I would consider in a situation like this.

But I'm thinking about it slightly differently than Justin is. For me, this is about, okay, we have so many Bs, right? We have 22 starters. We got 18 B-minuses. Do we use some of this capital to take a swing for an A or A-plus sort of player? And who knows if Eminwar is going to be that, but he has the physical talent to potentially be a really, really good player. So I think that's something that consciously or unconsciously,

might have been informing the way that John Schneider was going about this, is that like, all right, we need to take a swing here with all of these picks that we have in the middle rounds. I'm not sure that's a good way of thinking about it, but I think based on where Seattle's roster is specifically, I can get inching yourself that direction. And we've already talked about that with Seattle's roster, right? Like, we love a lot of the decent pieces they have, the Julian loves, the Ernest Joneses and all those players.

But it's like, how many stars do they have? Leonard Williams played like one last year. How many bad players do they have and how many stars do they have? The answer is not a lot for either one. It's not a lot for either one. And like your two best guys are a defensive tackle who, you know, played really well last year. He had a career year. And then a nickel. And it's like you would still rather that guy be a good like elite outside corner or you'd at least rather have another elite player. So I understand why given the players that they have, they did feel the need to go make the swing. But kind of to your point with the draft capital. and all that stuff, he would have to play like a top 15, 20 pick. And one, we don't get a lot of those at safety. And then two, safety is such a, and we've talked about this, I think from a different question before, it's not like pass rusher where you can just like, oh, take the athletic freak and we'll see if we can figure it out.

Like safety is a mental position, man. And it's not to say that like Emin Wari has no capacity to do that. Like he could be brilliant for all we know. But like, it's just basing that potential purely off the athleticism at that position, I think can get a little bit tricky. That's how you do the Taylor Mays. thing. And you end up with a player who was like not functional. So I had a lot of questions about the Eminem Wari pick to begin with. So I'm not sure that they can get there. But I do think when

you reframe it in the way of like they have so many quality players already and they felt like this was the guy, the defender with the most potential left on the board, let's go and get him. I can at least understand the thought process, even if I have some questions about actually getting to the end game there. I think I'm in the same boat. Here's a question I'll ask you. I'm putting you on the spot a little bit, but I think that what you said about safety is actually, it's somewhat related to this. Who is the best safety in the league that is driven by what his physical gifts look like?

Or over the last like five years, five to tennis years. Who is a guy who has been one of the best players in the league at that position? And his success has been rooted in what his physical gifts are. There's one guy who comes to mind for me. I mean, like Kyle Hamilton, the length, but then he ran like a 4-7. So like even that one is like, I don't know if that really fits.

I mean, it's probably Derwin James. Derwin is the answer. I think Derwin is absolutely the answer. Yeah. Derwin's, that was a physical freak of nature. Like you, we forget this a little bit now

because he's been banged up. Go look at Derwin's like pre-draft physical profile. It's out of this world. And like, and not to bash on Eminwari, but like the difference too between James and Eminwari is like Eminemois is a little bit stiff on tape. James is like has no business being as fluid as he was.

And he, you saw it at Florida State. He played he played a little bit of corner. He played in the nickel. He played in the slot. They would literally roll him down and just have him fire off the edge. He was such a clearly special player where I do think with Eminwar, you're having to fill in the gaps a little bit more there. If you look at it, like the guys who are the highest paid safeties in the league. Kirby Joseph was a third round pick. Antoine Winfield is an underrated tweener, Derwin. Minko was a first round pick.

You know, Buddha is a very specific, strange kind of player. Jesse Bates was a mid-round pick. A lot of these guys are not... I think Javon Holland. Javon Holland was a second round pick. And, you know, Javan, I'm curious what Javon Holland's testing was. I don't think it was that good. And Javad Holland's not like overwhelming size-wise.

Javon Holland is a mediocre athlete. Like if you look at, he's 82nd percentile broad jump, 49th percentile vertical, 79 percentile 40-yard dash, 61st percentile 20-yard split, 63rd percentile, 20-yard shuttle. Like, not crazy. And so that position specifically, the history just tells you.

that that's not the driver of how guys succeed. Like two that stick out to the contrary to that would probably be Derwin, and then Eric Berry was a crazy athlete. But Eric Barry was a top five pick. And so there just aren't many of those guys playing safety, and there aren't that many guys who succeed at safety because of those physical skills. Maybe Nick Eminawarie is going to be an exception to that

because he's such an overwhelming athlete. But for that position specifically, I actually think the way that we talk about and conceive of upside is an important consideration here. Okay. Our next question is from Dave Hindden. Dave says, I wanted to get your guy's thoughts on quarterback improvement timelines. I noticed myself almost being too binary where it's like, okay, this is still a young QB. And then the next year it's, okay, I know what this guy is.

I started thinking about this because as an Eagles fan, I still feel like Jalen Hertz can take a sizable leap. But when I think about the other quarterbacks around his age or his draft class, I feel like I have a pretty good idea of who those quarterbacks are, not including Jordan Love. I feel like the best way to describe what's lacking in Hertz's game is that I never feel good going into a game against a defensive coordinator like Todd Bowles or Brian Flores. Everything that comes with that. The unconventional formations and pressures and coverages that baffle rookies can still baffle Hertz. Am I being a biased fan feeling like Hertz could improve in this area and take another leap while not feeling that way about other quarterbacks beyond their rookie deals? Derek, you take this one first.

Yeah, kind of. And I think it's completely reasonable to expect that Hertz. can get better because one, it's something that he's done for his entire career, right? Like, we talked about this when he really started to emerge. Like his development in college going from what he was as a freshman at Bama all the way to what he was at the end of Oklahoma. And then even through his first three, four years in the league where he constantly developed.

Like, it's a skill and it's a skill that he clearly has. And I also think quarterbacks in general don't really hit their mental peak for the position until they're about like 30. And Jalen Hertz is still obviously a few years away from that. So I think it's entirely possible that two years from now, three years from now, the Flores-esque defenses don't give him as many issues as they do now. The counter, I would say, to other quarterbacks in his range, maybe not having that same capacity to grow and stuff,

is two guys from his same draft class last year. Justin Herbert, part of his whole thing was that he was a little bit too robotic for a lot of his career. And then you get Jim Harbaugh last year, and he actually starts to be a little bit more aggressive. He starts to be a little bit more creative outside of the pocket, running a little bit more. And then Joe Burrow has always been good at avoiding sacks by virtue of his athletic ability. But I do think last year his in-pocket management was better than it had ever, ever been. And so those are two guys in the same draft class who are also still showing that they can continue to improve.

And if they do it again next year, I wouldn't be surprised. So I would say that maybe the part of not believing other guys can get better is a little bit of bias. or maybe just, you know, you're not watching as much of them, so you have to paint them in broad strokes. But I do not think it's at all unreasonable to expect hurts to get better over the next couple of years. I think there is a binary when you're not watching that closely. I think that you're right about looking at it that way.

I think the binary is by the end of a rookie contract, you probably know whether a guy can play or not, right? You probably know whether he is a functional or sustainable NFL quarterback. So looking at it in those terms, I think is totally fine. When we get down to the details of it, that's what I think things become a little bit more, complicated. Guys at this age are absolutely still adding new layers to their game. It's almost like an NBA player, like working on certain specific elements to his game in the

off season and adding that to the toolbox. That's kind of the way I think about quarterbacks as they get a little bit older. So the mental part of it, I think is the biggest part of it. If we say that quarterbacks fully mentally mature at like 29 or 30, Jalen Hertz is 26. Think about what Josh Allen and Lamar Jackson have looked like over the last two years compared to what they looked like previously, even if they were already good players. Like, that's very real maturation on development that can happen. And I think that we've already seen kernels of Jalen Hertz getting there. But beyond that, I do think it's just adding new layers to your game and being able to

hurt teams in slightly different ways in any given season. The Herbert and Burrow examples are perfect. Like, Burrough's pocket movement this year is the best that it ever was. And it made him a more dangerous player than he's ever been. hurts this year was the best scrambler that he ever was and it made him a more dangerous player than it's ever been. So I think the overall mental trajectory, what I think is a little bit more consistent and just reliable, like that's just a line that's going to kind of keep going up and up and up. The things that are a little bit harder to pin down when it comes to the timeline are what

individual aspects you can accentuate in a given year that makes you a better player. That's harder to predict, but that's obviously a part of overall quarterback development and improvement. And I think, again, when you're maybe not watching some of these other players as closely, if they have a year where they stagnate, maybe then it's easier for you to just be like, oh, well, that's, that just is what he is like. But in 2023, Hertz didn't get better than he was the year before. Like that year, he stagnated. And then he did get better again in 2024. But like, I think Jordan Love is probably a good example of like, I think to a lot of people, Jordan Love might have stagnated next year or last year. But that doesn't mean he can't continue to get better. He's like 25 years old. Like he's, like, he's, banged up for a huge portion of last season. Exactly. Like I think it's just one of those things that I know we want to just try to say like, okay, this is what this guy is. But I really think with quarterback specifically,

until they get to like 28, you probably don't have like a truly fully fleshed out picture of what that guy can really truly be. And even like Josh Allen this year, compared to Josh Allen last year when it came to putting the ball in harm's way, like this stuff can happen pretty deep into a quarterback's career. Jalen Hertz was drafted in 2020. And so Jalen Hertz was drafted in 2020.

Josh Allen was drafted in 2018 and so was Lamar Jackson. So just potentially build in that sort of development and improvement over the next two years for Jalen Hertz. Even if it's not to that level, it's still possible at that age. So I don't think it's homerific at all to say that Jalen Hertz can still get better. I do think you're probably selling those other guys short saying that they can't. Or even the all-time guy of like who just got a little bit better every year. Kirk Cousins. Like, Kirk Cousins got like 4% better every single year

until that final year in Minnesota. And in general, he still looks in place like the same guy, right? Like, nothing really feels that different. But if you watch like how effective he actually is on a play-by-play basis in 2023 when he was obviously well over 30 by that point, as opposed to, you know, 2013, 14 or whatever in Washington, it's night and day, even if like generally it looks like the same picture. Okay, guys, Nick Andrews has a fun one for us here. He says, now that we are square into the silly season of the NFL calendar, I figured I'd ask an appropriately silly question.

Let's say through some form of magic or scientific breakthrough, you get the opportunity to time travel in order to watch exactly one NFL game of your choice that you did not get to see in person when it occurred. So you saw this game. You just weren't there for it. What would your game be? As a Seahawks fan, my first thought would be the 2014 Seahawks Packers NFC championship game. but some other contenders I consider to be the 28 to 3 Super Bowl, the tuck rule game, or maybe the 1982 Chargers, Dolphins,

a FC championship to experience an era of the game I wasn't alive for. Be curious to hear your lists. Robert, what do you got here? I stuck to things that I remembered and watched, not things that I wasn't alive for. So a little bit more recent. My easy answer is the 2006 NFC championship game where the Bears beat the Saints.

Like, that was such a special season for me as a fan. It was my freshman year of college. And so obviously you go away to college for the first time. you feel a little bit further away from home. And so that Bears season being my first stretch away from home, I think was really nice. Like I was talking to my dad all the time. It was just something very exciting to have every week. And school was going on.

And I obviously didn't have the money to buy like playoff Bears tickets. And so I didn't get to go to that game. I remember watching it in my dorm. And so the chance to be there for them to go to the Super Bowl for the only time in my lifetime. That would have been incredibly cool. one that is not Bears specific, I would have loved being at the tipped interception NFC championship game

between the Seahawks and the Niners after the 2013 season. I was at the AFC championship game that year. So I was there when the Broncos beat the Patriots in Denver to go to that Super Bowl. It was just every once in a while, you picked the wrong game. And so watching that game in the press box

and just being like, God, f*** damn it. It would have been so cool to be at that game. I've gotten some lucky ones. Like I've been at some incredible playoff games. that weren't Super Bowls, but that's one where I wish I would have picked a different door that day. I mean, that that championship game, that can't possibly have felt like the wrong choice in the

moment, right? Like those two quarterbacks in an AFC championship. Yeah, Peyton Manning Tom Brady in an AFC championship game. It's like, that's a decent place to be. But that one was, that would have been very cool to be there. And I'd seen a Seahawks game in person that year. And so I just like that, the vibe of that Seahawks team was just you could feel it. I think it was maybe week two.

or three. I'm pulling it up right now, but the Seahawks played the Niners on Sunday night football. It was week two of that season. And I went to that game in Seattle. And from that moment on, I remember I wrote a story. It was like how the Seahawks became the coolest team in football. And it was in week two of that year before they won the Super Bowl. And so I knew what that building was like with those Legion of Boom teams. And so to potentially be around that team for that sort of big moment, It would have been very cool. And I didn't go to the Super Bowl that year. That was the last Super Bowl I didn't go to.

So I didn't get to see them win the Super Bowl. So it would have been fun to be at that NFC championship game. Yeah, to be at an NFC championship game that Chippy would have been insanely good. I had two that were like I was alive for and one that I was not alive for. One that just in terms of the moment would have been incredible. I mean, the 13 seconds game. Like that's an easy answer. But like, holy shit, man.

I was there. I know. That's why I had to bring it like to a bit. been there in that moment. I can't imagine everything that you were feeling in that one. So I would have liked, I would like to have been there for that one. That would have been cool.

My selfish, like niche, not really niche because he was the first overall pick, but Cam Newton's debut against the Cardinals, like where you immediately feel like, oh, that guy is going to be different. He almost has like the game winning drive at the end. He gets stopped on like the one,

like to have been there for that and feel that for a player that I ended up, like he's like my favorite player ever, I think would have been awesome. Remember how bad he was in that preseason? Yes. He was so bad in that preseason. And then he comes out in week one and does that and we're like, we don't know anything. Nobody knows anything about anything.

I love horrible preseason into like awesome rookie debut. Like the whole thing with Jamar Chase was like, oh my God, he can't catch the football in his preseason. And then he comes out in like two weeks in. You're like, oh, he's the best receiver in football. Who cares? So those are always fun. And then the last one I had was obviously I wasn't.

I wasn't alive for this, but I do have a Bears one. 1985, Damarino against the Bears, like him playing that game. It's my favorite game that you can find on YouTube. And to have been there for that would have been pretty sick. Yeah, in the 85 in general. Like, I've just, it's so ingrained in you, like the history of it and like the legendary element of it. Like my parents had a VHS tape in their house growing up, like chronically in the entire

season. And when I would go over to their house, I would just watch the tape in the basement. And so it was a game, team I never watched, but I knew every game. I know all the beats of that season. And so very aware of the Dan Marino game and what that was for that 1985 Bears team in a bad way. Before we get to break, I'm going to throw one out here too. And sorry to now triple down on the Bears stuff, but it was already in my head. The Bears are who we thought they were game against the Cardinals.

That's another very good one. Again, that's one where I remember watching that in my dorm. It was a Monday night game. And I would have absolutely loved to be there. just incredible the way that that team was winning games really that entire stretch going back to lovey smith but really that season as well we got one more break we're going to hit it here then we're going to get to a few more of your questions bow and callison brings us our next question he says as i am sure you are all too aware broncos fans are very protective of bo necks there is a lot of talk about how he has a low ceiling and projects as a future game manager while the people saying this are

often smarter than me and i trust their processes to get there i would like to use this discourse around him to have a conversation on what makes a quarterback elite. The top three quarterbacks right now all have elite physical traits. But for my limited football knowledge, this is not always the case. Throughout history, there have been plenty of MVPs, all pros, other Hall of Fame caliber quarterbacks who succeeded without overwhelming physical gifts. My question is this. In the modern NFL game, are these traits prerequisites to be an elite quarterback

based on the evolution of offenses and defenses? Is it that some traits like being a great scrambler are necessary while you can get by with an average to above average NFL arm like Joe Burrow. To tie it back to Bo Nix, is he limited by a very good but not elite tool set or is it his penchant for avoiding negatives and other mental aspects that leads to many considering him a future game manager?

Derek, you take this one first. It's, the framing is a little bit tricky because I do think to be an elite elite quarterback. Yes, you do have to have some sort, something special physically about you. Mahomes, it's the arm and the flexibility. Allen, it's literally everything. Jackson is one of the most insane runners.

that we've ever seen. Burrow is obviously the exception, but Burrow is also probably the most accurate passer in the league to all three levels, and he also came into the league in a way that we all knew, like this guy is one of the sharpest guys that we've ever seen, especially in the particular way that he plays as like the shotgun, spread it out, point guard type of pastor. Like we, that's his superpower. And that's not to say that Bo Nix can't necessarily get there, but like with Joe Burrow, that was the game coming in that he was going to be that smart. Knicks, it would probably take years and years of development to get anywhere close to that. So Knicks could very well be like a bottom half of the top 10 type of quarterback, but to elite

elite, I don't think he has any of those elite tools because to me, his arm is good. It's not special in any way. And I think athletically, he's like pretty good, but he's, again, not special in any way. And then I think with him, I think a lot of the game manager stuff does come down to like just the way that he was asked to play to Oregon. and I think some of the way that he's been asked to play so far in Denver, what I would also say is that I think guys who feel a little bit more like they are gunslingers are a little bit more naturally aggressive and a little bit more willing to take hits in the pocket

in a way that Bo Nix isn't right now. Like every now and then you see him just fire that backside dig to Kampson or to Cortland Sutton. Like he would just do that like twice a game. But other than that, he's not that aggressive of a passer. And then in the pocket, I just think that his management against pressure, it leaves a lot to be desired. And maybe two years from now, it won't be a problem. But until then, it's very hard to see an elite quarterback playing the way that he plays in the pocket under pressure.

It's an interesting question because I actually think that Bo Nix, some of the best things Bo Nix did last year were attached to his physical gifts as a mover and an athlete. He's a good mover. No quarterback in the league last year per next gen had more passing yards outside of the pocket than Bo Nix. Like, Bo Nix made plenty of plays on the move. Bo Nex had the sixth highest total EPA generated on scramble last year of all quarterbacks. Like Bo Nix's athleticism, I think, was one of the selling points of Bo Nix's rookie year.

So I don't think that's what's preventing him for being an elite quarterback or being a game manager. I think that no matter what you are physically, in order to be an elite quarterback, you have to bring an elite trait to the table. That's what you have to do. And he's never going to be as elite physically as some of the guys that you talked about.

And I think the mental aspects of his game are not there yet either. So I think if you elite, elite when you remove them from the circumstances. Like, they're the ones driving the success of their team. And I don't think even if Bo Nix had a pretty good rookie year, he's driving the success of those teams. Like that, the pass protection he got in Denver was the best pass protection in the league. Like only Tua had a lower overall pressure rate last year than Bo Nix. Tua's average time to throw is under two and a half second. Bo Nix is nearly at three.

Bo Nix had the sixth highest average time to throw in the league on non-play action passes last year, and he finished second to last in overall pressure rate. So I think that's part of this discussion is how much are you driving your team success and how much are you kind of along for the ride? And right now, I think he's probably one of those guys who's a little bit along for the ride. And that's not a negative. That's not like trying to tear him down at all. Most quarterbacks fall into that category.

And so if he's never going to have high, high-end elite traits, I think the mental stuff is what comes in. And I'm with you in that his, how clean and how sharp things are on that side of it isn't where it needs to be if he's going to be an elite quarterback. And the pressure is the first thing that I'd mentioned. The only guys last year who had a lower success rate when pressured than Bo Nix were Russell Wilson and Will Levis. That had at least 350 dropbacks last year.

So there are just things about his game that he needs to sharpen and clean up. if he's going to be an elite quarterback because I don't think his physical talent is ever going to bring him to that place. It is what elite trade are you bringing to the table and how does that drive your team's success? I think that's the only like prerequisite I have for what makes an elite quarterback. And I still think those questions are valid when it comes to what Bo Nix's future looks like. Exactly. Like it's just for what he is now, mentally it's hard to see what the elite thing is.

And then again, physically he's probably never going to get there. But you could absolutely see a world where he plays like some level of equivalent to like what Jalen Hertz was and you can get to and win a Super Bowl that way. Like where you're just like hovering around 10th because you're gifted enough and you like you have enough mental pillars that you can lean on and like certain things within the offense. Obviously, Sean Payton has found things that work for Bo Nix. They sprint him out a lot. A lot of the RPO work they do is really well. And then they find ways to just force him to throw that dig to Cortland Sutton. And so, like, he can do all of that to be the 11th best quarterback in the league.

And that is more than enough than he needs to be like. It's just you're not going to stumble into the elite guys. They just don't come around very often. Yeah, I think that you mentioning what you did with Joe Burrow and how special those non-physical traits are that he's bringing to the table, I think that's really important. Because for a lot of guys, like we mentioned with J-1 Hertz and some of these other players, it takes until 28 or 29 to get to that level. Joe Burrow was doing it at 22, 23 in a way that guys typically are not.

And so I think we're trying to figure out what's the elite trait that separates him. That's what it's been and has always been. Last question for this mailbag is from Josh Anderson. And as we typically do here, Josh ends it with a fun one. Josh says the NFL has not expanded since 2002. This is the longest the league has ever gone without adding at least one new team. Let's say that the time is now and the NFL is adding a new club. You are the GM and have just completed the expansion draft.

because expansion draft rules allow other teams to protect 48 players, you're currently working with more of a practice squad all-star team and less of a functional NFL roster. However, as an expansion team, you have a competitive advantage over every other club, limitless flexibility. Expansion rules stipulate that a new club can draft up to 38% of the current salary cap, so the 35 or so players you selected in the expansion draft cost you $106 million. In other words, you have $173 million in available cap space entering free agency. as an expansion team, you also have the first pick of the draft as well as the first pick in each round of the draft.

Let's use this offseason as the team's establishment date, which means that you're participating in the 2025 free agency cycle and the 2025 draft draft. My question is with the weakest roster in the league, but the most ammo in this situation, what is your approach to building a modern expansion team? Robert, take this one first. I think some of this would depend on how the expansion draft went, right? if I felt like certain positions were playable based on who I got in the expansion draft, it would probably shift my strategy. But if we're conceding that all of the guys I got in the expansion draft are essentially backups, I probably would have approached it similarly to what the Titans did.

Like, signing Dan Moore to that contract, if I knew I was drafting a quarterback first overall, that's something I could get on board with. I think I'd probably be willing to overextend myself. And we can talk about whether you would take Cam Ward or not. I think that's another fun part of this. But in a world where you do, I think I'd probably be willing to overextend myself a little bit to provide him with enough pieces as a rookie to make sure I wasn't putting him in just disastrous circumstances. So I would have offered Devante Adams more than Devonte Adams probably wanted.

I would have given Dan more of that contract. I would have tried to find high value players at high value positions early on in order to give him a shot because you're probably not getting a star receiver or a starting left tackle with a 33rd overall pick in the draft or wherever the Titans were picking in the second round. So that's probably where I would start with things. Other than that, I think the other team I would kind of use as a model, what Washington did in free agency in 2024, I think there's a lot to be taken from that on two fronts. One, connective tissue players, your Dorrance Armstrongs, your guys who are your second edge

rusher on second contracts. those are probably the types of guys I would seek out. And then on one year deals or short-term deals, can you find culture-setting older players? You're Bobby Wagner's, your Zach Ertz's, guys that aren't eating into the money you're going to need when you're trying to be competitive, but can be guys who immediately set the vision

for whatever your building wants to feel like. So those are probably like the two teams and examples I would try to piece and mold together if I was starting over with all that money. But I wouldn't be throwing out like, I wouldn't sign Milton Williams to that contract. Like those aren't the types of deals I would be trying to hand out. I wouldn't be trying to win free agency to that extent.

No, you don't need to take the swing in free agency. I think that is probably a little bit reckless. Because yeah, we already even talked about it with teams like the Panthers and the Patriots being up for Milton Williams. It's like, okay, you sign him and then what? Like, you know what I mean? It's like, what are you going to accomplish necessarily? I would have taken Cam Ward because I obviously thought he was already good enough

to be taken first over. overall. And then I think what is kind of interesting with an expansion team is like, I almost wonder if with because everyone kind of concedes that you're going to suck, that you actually get a little bit more of a runway to like not have to play him. The complication with Cam Ward specifically is I think he's very geared to be like, dude, I don't care if we're the worst team in the league let me play anyway. So that would probably come into play a little bit. But for me, I probably my three most expensive free agent players would all be in the trenches and my first three or four draft picks would literally all be in the trenches.

Like, we are going to figure out the offensive line immediately and the defensive line because I actually, I honestly do think schematically you can figure it out with lesser players at DB and at receiver or even tight end or even running back and stuff like that. Whereas like, it's really hard to figure it out with less in the trenches. Like, you're going to get bullied or you're not. And so that to me is like, I'm throwing everything there. and if we have the worst secondary in the league for a year, so be it. But I really think you want to figure out as much as you can around Cam Ward in this

scenario. And then obviously defensively hope that whatever you're doing up front has some sort of cascade effect. And then kind of to your point that you were making, I wouldn't want to do the Milton Williams second contract player. But I would want to find like one guy where it feels like we're making a bet on his second contract, whether it's like a Dio O'Diangbo or like Trevin Merig, someone in that range where it's like maybe he can be a pro bowler and we're not breaking the bank in the way that we

would for Milton Williams. Talking about trying to piece together corners with like just random guys. That's, I think, what I would try to do at that position specifically where it's like, all right, we're going to roll the ball out. We're going to have three or four guys we drafted in the middle rounds. Hopefully one of them hits. Hopefully we get a Cam Hart or Jarvis Brownlee or a Legerious Sneed like one of those guys. I think that's the position where you can probably skimp a little bit. The last thing I would say, I would trade out of the 33rd pick in the draft. Like I just know that like from the start.

Because you can't trade out of the first pick if you want the quarterback. And I tend to be with you. I think you shouldn't be allowed to, honestly. That's actually a good, that could be a good wrinkle. But I think that if you, I'm with you on that where it's like, all right, even if you don't have the infrastructure yet, if you stumble in to six wins that year and you don't have the capacity to draft a quarterback the next year, you're putting yourself in a pretty dicey situation.

And I do think that you could probably sit him for longer than you would in other circumstances because there isn't a lot of expectations built in. So if you can play him for eight games, you can only do so much damage in those eight games. So I still think that I would draft him. And I think I would try to start picking up draft picks as much as I could after that. Like if you can somehow get like an extra three in a trade back from 33, because what I would do is I would want to make sure for the 2026 off-season. I could do whatever I wanted.

Is there a Stefan Diggs trade available in this offseason? Is there an AJ Brown trade available in this off season? So I would want as many draft picks as possible heading into that year two. And I would want as much cat flexibility as possible heading into that year too because then you have at least somewhat of an understanding of who you are and what you still need in a way that you just can't going into that first off season. Exactly. And the reason I would take word too is like I don't want to be thinking

about that in the second offseason, because you might not even stumble into six games. What if you stumble into only four, but the Browns win one game? And then, like, it's a one quarterback class and they jump you. And it's just like, the margin could be that small of just not ending up with a quarterback for however many years. So, like, if you were gifted the first overall pick, you almost have to take the quarterback. You can choose your destiny. Yeah, in a way, and heading into the second year, there's absolutely no way for you to know

what other factors are going to be at play. And I think that's why there are times where I'm. I think I've been a little bit more vocal about teams potentially punting on the position and revisiting it later because I've seen so many quarterbacks ruined by being dropped into shitty situations. I think now being able to control your destiny in the short term and say, we know we'll be able to get them now. Let's just do it. I think I tend to believe that's the right path more often than not these days. All right. That is all we've got today.

Like I mentioned at the beginning of the show, we're going to be doing another mailbag into Monday, the same way we would. in almost any other week. So we're going to be using a lot of the questions you guys have sent in that we couldn't get to. So be on the lookout for that next mailbag heading into next Monday. For the rest of this week, we got two more shows for you guys. We're doing our third lingering questions show tomorrow.

Got some fun ones to hit if you haven't listened to the other two versions of that. Essentially just questions from last year, we didn't really have time to address in earnest during the regular season or playoffs. So we're circling back to them now. We've got a Chiefs one. We got a Niners one.

we're hitting this week, so very excited about that. And then on Thursday, we're going to be doing something we did last off season that I really enjoyed. We're going to be ranking the supporting casts for both conferences in the NFL for quarterbacks. So essentially, where does the Patriots supporting cast rank in the AFC heading into the 2025 season just as a way to provide a little bit of context for some expectations around guys at that position? I love doing that last year.

So we're going to run that back. this year. Like I mentioned earlier in the week, we were back to four days a week. We are starting Monday through Thursday next week. So that is going to be your guys as offseason athletic football show schedule unless I say otherwise. Monday through Thursday, four shows a week. So please be on the lookout for those. For now, that's all we got. Appreciate you listening. We'll talk to you soon.