The Athletic Football Show: A show about the NFL - Lingering questions, episode 2: Bryce Young's turnaround, the Chargers' talent, the Seahawks' defense's breakout

Episode Date: May 22, 2025

Bryce Young put himself on the right track in the second half of last season. The Chargers shortcomings in 2024 owed to a lack of talent. The Seahawks defense is primed for a breakout in 2025. That's all true, right? Right?!? Robert Mays and Derrik Klassen answer three more of last season's lingering questions on this episode of The Athletic Football Show.Hosts: Robert Mays and Derrik KlassenExecutive Producer: Michael BellerProducer: Michael BellerSubscribe to The Athletic Football Show...⁠Apple⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠YouTube⁠Follow Robert on Bluesky: @robertmays.bsky.socialFollow Derrik on Bluesky: @qbklass.bsky.socialFollow Robert on X: @robertmaysFollow Derrik on X: @QBKlassTheme song: HauntedWritten by Dylan Slocum, Trevor Dietrich, Ruben Duarte, Kyle McAulay, and Meredith VanWoert / Performed by Spanish Love SongsCourtesy of Pure Noise / By arrangement with Bank Robber Music, LLC Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Welcome to the athletic football show. I'm Robert Mays. Our lingering questions series rolls on today. For those of you guys who did not hear the first episode of these, each offseason, we did this last year too. I like just addressing some questions that we didn't have a chance to answer over the course of the regular season last year. You get distracted by playoff seating, what the postseason is going to look like.

There are some teams just kind of fall off your radar. You can't really do deep studies on them around Christmas as you're trying to figure out what the playoff seedings and playoff picture is going to be. So we're going to hit three more of those today. How real was Bryce Young's turnaround last year? And what can we expect from him moving forward? Is the Chargers problem really about talent on offense and defense? Derek and I both took one side of the ball unknowingly,

which I think is kind of a fun wrinkle to this. And three, what is the ceiling for the Seattle Seahawks defense after they looked like a top 10 to top five unit in the back half of last year? Like, is this going to be potentially, the next really, really good defense in the NFL. So I addressed all three of those with my co-host, Derek Klesson. Let's get to that conversation right now.

It's another day of lingering questions, Derek. I really enjoyed the first iteration of this. We're going to be doing four in total. This is the second one. And we've got some good ones today. You and are going back and forth a little bit on Slack before we started recording. And I think we're in store for some decent conversations this afternoon. I think we are.

The first one was it was a really fun show. I think we had some great questions, but I think we mostly came to the same conclusions. I think today that is not going to be the case, which I think is going to make it a pretty fun discussion. So I obviously laid in the intro, the three that we're doing today. Let's start with what I probably see is the juiciest one and something that you're alluding to here. We're going to start with Bryce Young and the Carolina Panthers and what to make of the second half of the season for Bryce Young and those Carolina Panthers.

Just for some context, in 2023, Bryce Young averaged negative point. 3 EPA per dropback. He was an anti-MVP. It's essentially a negative MVP on a per-play basis. 184 negative total EPA on dropbacks for Bryce Young in 2020. I mean, it's all-time bad stuff. It was really, really ugly. And I thought over the first few weeks of this season that we were going to see more

of the same in 2024. Obviously, he goes to the bench. He comes back. And in the second half of the year, listen, the Panthers were not the best passing offense in the league or even a very. good one by any stretch or any calculation, but they were an adult put together respectable passing game. They were 15th in EPA per dropback or right around there depending on which source you're using in the second half of last year. And that is a far, far cry from what they were the year before and what we saw

from Bryce Young in the first month of last season. So the lingering question here is, how real is the Bryce Young bounced back from the second half of last year and what should our realistic expectations be? heading into the 2025 season and moving forward. How would you respond to that? Real in that, I think he can actually play quarterback in this league in a way that I didn't think he could for the first 20 starts of his career. I think that's fair. I think what we saw towards the second half of last year is he looked a lot more comfortable.

He looked a lot more confident. And I think that there were certain throws outside of the numbers, particularly down the field that he was making in a way that he just wasn't earlier on in his career. I still think that there are a lot of limitations to his game. And I think the consistency of his game was kind of vastly overrated because the last three games of his season were insane. Like if you look at the production, obviously over the second half of the season,

in general he was better than he had ever been before. But from weeks, I think it was eight to 15. So when he first took the job again to before those last three games where he really went crazy, he was still 25th in EPA per dropback over that span, which was just behind Kirk Cousins and just ahead of Will Levis. But then over those last three games, he was seventh. Like he really did go insane those last three games. And I think those are a little bit coloring how good I think his actual second half of the season was. And the success rate is also pretty bad.

Even if you look at the entire back half of the second half of the season, the weeks 10 through 18, I believe he was in the bottom. bottom five and drop back success rate. Even saying that, though, I think I'm kind of bought in. Not about the ceiling about what Bryce Young can be, because I do think that, yes, there are obviously athletic limitations, arm strength limitations that are going to crop up with Bryce Young. But I think we saw enough from him in the back half of last year for me to get at least a

little bit excited about what this could look like with another full off season and with a slight uptick in the receiving talent on this team. You have Xavier Ligat heading into year two. You go get Tetaroa McMillan. And that was one of my biggest takeaways going back and watching several Bryce Young games from the back half of last season. When they drafted McMillan, I think we all consciously understood that they needed more receiving talent on this team.

But going back and watching those games, I was like, oh, my God, you just forget who he was throwing the ball to and what some of those plays ended up looking like. I want to, I'm curious, if you had to guess how many routes David Moore ran last year for the Panthers, what would you say? What would it be your guess? Hundreds. Because what's funny is that one of the biggest notes I have here is I rewatch, I actually watched both Saints game because I felt like that was a control of like before he got benched. It's a good idea. It's a good idea, actually. In the second one, Moore drops a fantastic over route. And I was like, dude, is this really what he had to deal with the entire season? So I will,

with some of the success rate, I'll give him that, is that those receivers not helping. So that was one of my biggest takeaways going back and watching a few games in the second half of the year. The Chiefs game, which I feel like that was kind of the first game where everyone was starting to sit up and take notice a little bit, where he's making four or five really impressive high impact throws down the field. And then that extends. He had a big game against the Eagles relatively compared to some other quarterbacks. That game he had against the Bucks, the first Bucks game of the year, where they came back and tied the game and took it into overtime. that great last drive.

You're watching those games, and there are a ton of examples, like a dozen examples, of guys letting him down on what should be really big gains. I mean, he had a go ball to Leggett in the Chiefs game that was perfectly dropped in the Leggett can't hang on to.

He rips a scene ball to Felipe Franks in the Bucks game that he can't hang on to. He rips a deep out to David Moore in that Bucks game. He drops it on the next play. Bryce Young escapes and finds Tommy tremble for like a 40-yard gain down the right side line. An in-breaker near the two-minute warning, David Moore's coming on a dig.

Bryce Young is going to get lit up by Vita Vaya. Somehow gets the ball out over him. Moore drops it. And then at the end of the game, he throws a bullet to Adam Thielen in the end zone in which should have been a touchdown. And I think probably either tie the game or put them into the lead. They have to kick a field goal there because Thelan can't hang on to it. And there are just a lot of those examples.

And I think that we probably didn't recognize how bad the supporting cast still was while Bryce Young was doing this. And I think that's really important context for trying to figure out exactly what we might expect from him moving forward. It is. I mean, I think you can make the case other than Thielen that their most reliable pass catcher relative to their role was like Jatavian Sanders, who was a fourth round rookie tight end who had like 350 yards last year. Like that shouldn't be one of your most reliable scope. Okay, I want to ask you about this. Where do you think the physical limitations show up the most and end up becoming the most important? Because I'm willing to admit that they exist.

But I think some of his strengths and some of the things that really stand out to me are enough to overshadow what I think some of the limitations are there. And I think for you, it's the inverse where the limitations maybe overshadow some of the strengths a little bit more. So why is that the ratio in your mind? What's holding you back here? I still think he has issues getting the ball over defenders if he has, if the pocket is a little bit crowded. Now, I think he got more willing to make those throws, which I think was really important. Earlier in this year, he was like very uncomfortable, always late, didn't know where to make

those throws. I still think he sometimes had an issue getting the ball up and over. I also think if he's ever late, the ball's not getting there. Like, he has to be a guy where the ball has to come out early. And you can be good playing that way. Like, that's totally fine. Like, there are ways to where if you are playing fast enough and you do see it fast enough that that can work, I just worry that he's ever going to get there in terms of this being like a top 10 passer.

And so I guess that's the, I think when we're framing this conversation, that's kind of how I'm viewing it. It's like, I think he can be like Baker Mayfield quality player. I just can't see the world where he's like a top 10 player because of some of these limitations. Okay, that's good to know. Because when we were talking earlier and I was like, I kind of think I'm a little bit bought in and you had some reservations. I wasn't sure where your stumbling block was or like where your ceiling was with him. So I think I'm okay with that being the point where you start pulling back a little bit.

Like I'm not sure he'll ever be a top 10 quarterback. I think that would be an incredible outcome considering what he looked like for the first 20 games of his career. But I think just outside of that or right on the fringe, I think that's possible. And it's for this reason. I totally agree with you. If he's late, one addendum there. If he's late, he's not making a throw late from the pocket. That is not something he's going to be able to do because of the lack of arm strength.

But I think his ability as a creator was on display much more in the back half of last season than we had ever seen before. And I think part of that is because he was breaking Glassman case of emergency faster. he was scrambling at a much higher rate and he actually was doing a lot of damage as a scrambler like he was one of the most impactful scrabbers in the league over the second half of the season and I do think when he was getting into trouble he was escaping out of the pocket

and making plays out of the pocket more often but I do think that's his only avenue when he's not playing quickly and on time but I kind of want to talk about the playing quickly on on time element of this because I actually think it's more impressive and more dangerous than I think

you do at its height, like the best version of what it can be. I think his best throws are. I just don't think he consistently does play on time. Like, especially in the quick game, I think he's late a lot. I know, but like, this was an issue with him going back to college. And I think it probably is going to be because of the way his footwork works. He's always on his toes. Like, we've talked about this with Trevor being kind of weird in terms of his footwork,

Jordan Love being kind of weird in terms of his footwork. I think Bryce has a lot of the same issues. and he's not as talented as either of those guys. And so that to me is where I think the issue. Like there's a play in the Saints game where they're, I think, motioning a guy from left to right into the trip. So they basically create quads. And he's just run into the flat.

The ball should be out like, catch the ball, throw it. But he like pitter patters his feet two or three different times and then makes the throw balls on the guy's back shoulder. It's late. He gets hit at the line of scrimmage. They don't get the first down. He does that in the quick game a lot. Now on throws where he can, it's a little bit longer developing, like he's waiting for a 12-yard

outbreaker. His timing is usually fine on those, but I think- I think it's the best thing he does. It is the best thing he does. I just, when you're so consistently making the easier stuff really, really hard, but you don't have as many of the high ceiling plays because he's a just kind of an okay athlete, I just struggle with some of it. I'm going to call you a hypocrite in this moment.

All you want is for guys to be. be aggressive and to take the big chunks when they're there. I want to read you some Bryce Young stats from the second half of last season. Where do you think Bryce Young ranked in air yards per attempt in the back half of last year? Very high because they had to. He was third. Okay, I was going to say like sixth. I wasn't going to say that.

He was third. It was behind Anthony Richardson and Lamar Jackson. That's where Bryce Young ranked. Where do you think Bryce Young ranked in the percentage of his throws to the stick? in the back half of last season. Is it even higher than that? Sixth. He was six.

The only guys ahead of him were Lamar, fifth. So the only guys ahead of him, the full-time stars in the back half last year, were Lamar, Anthony Richardson, Justin Herbert, and Sam Darnold. This is a man who wants to be aggressive. That's how he's trying to play. And I think in almost any other packaging,

you would appreciate this. But because he's small, you're holding it against him. I mean, it's the high. but he's just not that talented of a thrower. Like he, I appreciate his willingness to make a lot of these throws. I also think for as nice as some of those throws were, he got away with a lot of shit last year.

That I just, it's one of those things where like I would rather see it again. Because we've seen this before, right? Like Case Keenham had a year where he just got away with, with stuff that he probably shouldn't have gotten away with because he was being aggressive. And I just want to see it more before I can buy into it. What are we talking about getting away with stuff though?

I don't think he's getting away with anything with those receivers. The amount of throws he got away with, I absolutely think that is outshined by far with the amount of throws that were left on the field because of who he was throwing the ball to. Well, if we're just talking about production, sure, but there are just moments where he's trying to make a throw and I'm just like safety is way later there than he should be.

Just like all these other stuff where I just don't feel like he should have gotten away with that against good teams. Here's why I'm relatively bullish, I think, compared to you. This idea of he needs to, it's about anticipation and about being able to play on time and about seeing things before they necessarily come open. That's his route to be successful. I think that route is there for him

because he's already doing a decent amount of that, especially on outbreaking routes. Like before guys are even out of their break, the ball is gone. And he's doing some of that stuff in crumbling pockets, way more than a smaller player should be able to. And that skill specifically, that's something that I think it's more than reasonable

to project improvement moving forward. As he plays more and he gets more reps and he gets more experience and he sees defenses more, I think that's something where his feel for those situations, when he needs to let the ball rip all of that stuff, I think that can become even more pronounced with time. Like there are certain elements of his game

when it comes to the instincts and the feel for the position that remind me a little bit of what Joe Burrow can do. And I think that to me is the best path forward. for him. And you look at some of the things throws he's willing to make back shoulder balls. Steve throws one on one down the sideline. And you could say this about any quarterback, but of all the guys, I think I've watched recently, that I would love to just drop into an offense with T. Higgins and Jumar Chase, the way

that Bryce Young played last year, that's what I want to see for him. And I don't know if McMillan will be that, but I'm very, very excited to potentially see him with a guy who is a high-end talent and maybe somebody who can be a contested catch player because he's willing to give guys opportunities in those moments. So I just think that there's way more to him than I anticipated, even after watching some of that stuff from afar and catching a couple games on rewatching the back half of last year. I mean, that is why McMillan was the best, I mean, he was the best receiver left on the board regardless, but he's the best one for Bryce Young because the best thing that he did was he

will just throw the ball at a guy. I mean, he had a, again, in that Saints game, there was one where he was getting smoked and he just kind of throws up a fade route to Chetavian Sanders, and he goes up and gets it. And it's like, it's not necessarily an elite throw because he's kind of just throwing it up when he's going to get hit. But it's a good enough spot that Sanders can go get to it. And if we assume that McMillan is going to do more of that, then I do think it's a pretty good pairing.

I just, I struggle to see, like, what is the best outcome supposed to be? I don't think, I want to be clear. I don't think he sucks anymore. I think he can be like Baker Mayfield, but Baker's what, the 19th best quarterback in the NFL and like that I think he already plays with like better timing than Baker mayfield does oh I don't agree with that I don't agree with that may maybe on some of the outbreaking stuff but on the quick game I think I think I think that's that's the that's the barrier that's like the gap between what we're seeing right now is that I think you are fixated is painting in a bad in a bad way I think that

you're preoccupied with some of the quick game stuff and I think I'm overrating his touch and feel and timing on some of the outbreaking stuff because those are often my favorite throws the quarterbacks make. They're pretty. Him throwing some of those cornerouts on time into space,

understanding where that space is. That is something I probably overvalue when I'm watching quarterbacks. And so I'm probably over indexing that and under it indexing the quick game stuff. And I think you might be doing some of the same on the other side of this. And I think that's explaining the gap

that we have right now. I think I probably am. And I think another part of it too. And maybe this is unfair, because I think the Panthers run game is going to be good again anyway. I think his issues in the quick game would feel like such a bigger problem if they didn't have a top five run game, which like I said, they're going to have a top five run game anyway again. So it might not matter. And I also think that does inform why he threw down the field so much is like, well, they didn't need to get as many of their short gains because they were running the ball really well.

So he was allowed to throw down the field more. I just, I guess when I'm trying to paint the holistic picture of what a quarterback should be, I would like. like him to be better in the quick game. And I think last year, even for how well he played, towards the intermediate area especially, I still feel like he was one of the worst quick game passers in the league. It was hard for me to get over. Do you think some of that is the way that receiving core was constructed? It honestly still is constructed because even with adding McMillan, that's not a skill set where you think that receiving talent in the quick game is probably going to get significantly better. I think you could make that case, especially with, again, new offense

that he was learning, all that stuff. Does he want to trust receivers that were probably not that good? And in the Gets case, also a rookie himself. But Bryce Young was bad at this in college. And he wasn't good at it in his first year. And I just don't think he was good this year. So this could be something that I think like two, three years down the line when he continues to get a lot more experience. Maybe he could ramp up and be decent at it. We've seen quarterback get better at it before. Cam Newton wasn't a good quick game passer until like five years into his career. Obviously very different skill sets. But still, it's something he could develop.

But until he gets there, I think he's always, the offense is always going to feel a little bit more herky-jurkey because he struggles in that area. You kind of have to RPO or he's just not going to get it. So this is the exact question I was about to ask you. I was going to say, how do you want to try this on? What if we saw more RPO's on early downs? Because I think that is his best work as a quick passer is when he can just kind of

play point guard a little bit. I mean, when you're, he's throwing like a little glance or a little seam ball off of an early down RPO. I actually think he's pretty proficient at that kind of stuff. Because it cuts the footwork out of it. Like, it's because like you have the time that you would normally spend getting through a drop back and getting to your drop, you're kind of just wasting either like putting the ball in the in the running back's gut or whatever it is.

Like you kind of cut that out. So I think it does make him a more effective quick game passer. I still think a lot of that is. a lot of their best work was still like him just getting the ball out on time on screens and stuff on RPO's. Which they didn't run that many of, by the way. They really did actually. So I think this is going to be, I think this is a good place to kind of tie it all together.

I think them figuring out how to find easy gains in the passing game, whether that's RPO's or more screens, which the screens just really weren't part of their offense last year. I want to see that as a way to kind of raise the floor and make things feel a little bit less volatile because if he's going to be able to make some of those down the field throws and some of those outbreakers that we're talking about, if they can find smaller, quieter ways if he's still going to struggle in the quick game to make things a little bit more consistent on early downs, I think screens and RPO's are two potential pads to getting there. I'd like to see more of them baked into the construction of the

offense this year. And that's an important point because what was one of the biggest differences that we saw from the bucks going from Canales to Cohen? Cohen's screen game was really something. And with Canales, it was just never really there. And I think that we kind of to your point, we saw that again in Carolina where their run game was really good, but other than that, they didn't have very good ways to get

these short gains. And I think that is partly a Canales problem. And then again, I think it's partly a Bryce Young problem. So if they can find if they can just get to average there in the passing games in terms of getting these short gains, I think they'll be in a much better spot. But again, to be determined for me. I think us being in a place where we're kind of our

about whether or not Bryce Young can be like a top 12 quarterback is a pretty good place to be if you're the Carolina Panthers considering how things felt on like September 20th of last year. It's it's an absolute win for them. I mean, they thought they benched in for Andy Dalton who had like bounced around to what three different teams since the Bengals between then and like only really got benched. Bryce Young really only got the job again because Andy Dalton was in a car accident. And so the fact that he is actually able to play well over the last nine games or whatever it was and actually give them a little bit of hope for the future and want to build around him, it's obviously a win.

I think obviously the ceiling is, again, we'll see. But the fact that he is a playable quarterback and it, like even if you want to be as pessimistic as I was, Bryce Young was at least a top like 24 quarterback last year, which doesn't sound sexy. But that's like that guy will get a job every year. And so if he can at least be that, that's a win. I mean, firmly in the top half of the league on a rookie quarterback contract, that's a really nice thing to have. And I think that is very much on the table for the Panthers this year and next year if he continues on the path that he was on. The last thing, I talk about outbreaking rounds, I do think that his ability to get the ball up and over on some of those inbreakers like digs and things like that and crumbling pockets.

I was impressed with how often he was able to do that. It's never going to be a strength of his. But I do think that the timing he was able to play with on some of those throws. and the amount of hits he took wall throwing the ball last year and him being willing to stand in there and just get the shit kicked out of him, I thought that was really impressive for a young guy. So again, just going back and watching some of these games,

I just was more encouraged and more impressed with kind of different elements of his game than I expected him to be. And maybe it's because I felt a little bit surprised that I found myself coming out of it, maybe more optimistic and excited than I was going in. He does layer the ball really well. He can get the guy. Like if a linebacker is like sitting in the zone under that digger out, he can get the ball up and over.

I guess my issue and why I think we differ here, if he has to throw it through a car wash, ball's not getting there. It's just he just doesn't have that. And that's fair. That's always going to be a limitation to his game. But if he can be good enough at some of the stuff where he's got to just put it over a guy and layer it, then that can make up for it. You don't necessarily have to be great at both if you're good at one.

He has to put the ball in space to be successful. Yeah. And I think the ability and awareness of how. how to put the ball in space, again, is something that can improve over time as you get more reps and you understand what you're seeing in defenses a little bit more. And so I think that's something to monitor moving forward, how quickly he's able to make some of those decisions as he gets more experience. The last thing I'll say, one thing I was surprised by going back and watching this, because I think, again, just on a conventional wisdom blanket level, we've framed

the improvements of the Panthers offensive line in such a way where it's like, oh, the Panthers offensive line is good now. The Panthers Offensive Wine is a very good run blocking unit. The Panthers offensive wine in past protection, I still think leaves a decent amount to be desired. In the second half of last year, the Panthers had the fifth highest quick pressure rate

in the NFL. And so he's under siege, I think, a lot more than I anticipated him being given, I think, the outside perception of what the Panthers offensive wine was last season. Yeah, those tackles they're a lot better moving forward than moving backwards.

I'll say that. Yes. So I think that's also something to point out where we framed the supporting cast as much improved last year. And I think in some ways, that's true. But when it comes to the pass protection of the offensive line and the receiving talent, it's good to remember that this team was picking first overall the year before for a reason. And you could only do so much in a single offseason. I think they'll probably be better this year with Ligetany or two.

with McMillan coming in, but it's not as if this was a super team around him last year. It was still an objectively poor group of players surrounding him in this offense, and I still think he was able to overcome that a decent amount. Yeah, he definitely was. And the only thing I will be interested with moving forward is he was not, there weren't that many games where they asked him to throw a ton because, again, the run game was pretty good. I would be curious to see what that would look like because I think we've seen. I think sometimes quarterbacks can look worse when they get thrown into situations where they have to throw a ton.

Like I think this was an issue with Caleb Williams last year where he's just got to throw 40 times a game on a team that's bad. I do wonder what that would look like with Bryce Young. But again, if the run game is so good and we see moderate improvements in maybe the screen game or whatever it is, then maybe we just never have to get there with him to begin with. I just love that we've now realized the limitations of your sizesism and how it relates to quarterbacks. Because so many things about how he plays, he had the highest percentage of tight window. throws in the league in the second half of last year. Only two quarterbacks through a lower percentage of their passes behind the line of

scrimmage in the second half of last season. Those quarterbacks are Joe Flacco and James Winston. This is a man who is trying to play the position in an honorable way and you just refuse to acknowledge it. He's trying his hardest, but there are still certain you got to be this tall to ride meters that you got to hit. You're just never going to get over that. All right, we're going to take our first break, then come back with a couple more

lingering questions. The WMBA season tipped off last weekend, and the Athletic is your ultimate destination for all things WMBA. Three full-time writers have you covered in print, along with no off-season, the Athletics Women's Basketball podcast. The show brings you the latest news, analysis, and player interviews, providing smart, in-depth analysis that helps you fully understand the game and the league. Now, the Athletics WMBA coverage features curated video highlights, ensuring you never

miss the key action. Check out no off-season wherever you get your podcasts. Let's get to our next one here. this is a really interesting note. When we were figuring out which question we wanted to ask or which questions we wanted to address in the second show, I proposed one about the Chargers. And the only framing what this question was,

was the Charger's issues last year really a talent problem? So it's a very open-ended question. And I was conceiving of this as more about the offense. Because in my mind, the defense kind of proved to us that they could lift lesser talent for a good majority of last year. So I focused on the offense in what I was studying. But because I didn't specify, you actually focused on the defense as like your answer to this question. Why did you take that framing?

Was talent really the issue for the chargers as a way, as a reason to look at the defense and not the offense? So I think the reason I did it was on offense at play caller and quarterback, it's kind of known quantities for. for better or worse. Justin Herbert, I think he's a very good quarterback. And we've seen enough of him in a bunch of different offenses at this point that I think we know that he's good. And the reason that this offense was any type of functional last year was because he was that good. And I think for as far as Greg Roman goes, we know what Greg Roman is. Like Greg Roman is going to do what he does. They're going to be limited in the pure dropback passing game, all that stuff. So I think when I just conceived of the offense, it was like kind of some known quantities. Obviously they can get

better with talent, but known quantities in terms of that. With the defense, it's a lot of new. It was new play callers, some newer star players, a lot of young defensive backs. And I think I agree with you that they did a really good job of raising the talent level higher than what it looked like it should have been on paper. I think at the end of last year, we also had issues of like, maybe they don't have enough star talent. And maybe there are certain limitations about why this defense can be good, but maybe not great. And that was my biggest question going into this offseason, especially because they didn't really do anything on defense, right? They made a bunch of changes to the offense, but the defense is like kind of the same guys and

also they signed Deshaun Hand. All right. Like, they're kind of running it back. So what was your conclusion then? Do you feel like there are issues related to the defense and maybe why they fell off a little bit in the back half of last year that go beyond the players on that defense? Because at first glance, my thought is the defense in certain positions specifically really endured a lot of injuries in the back half of last year.

Like what was going on with the safety room specifically and them having to play like Tony Jefferson in that game against the Texans? It was just at a point where it's like, we've done what we can. Like we're losing too many guys to be functional on the back half. We already weren't talented and now we're decimated at certain key positions. So there's really no way we can hang on anymore. Do you think that is too broad and a little bit misguided or do you think that that's kind of one of the answers of why their defense kind of tailed off in the back half of the year.

So I think that was certainly part of it. And I think that plays into a little bit what I'm going to talk about now, but also I think this is an issue with them to begin with. The defense is kind of simple. They run a lot of the same stuff. Like they are not a defense that we're going to talk about the Seahawks a little bit later. And I think one of the things that they do well is they play everything. The Chargers really did not. The Chargers had the second lowest rate of man coverage in the NFL last year. And I think that's partly the way the defense is designed, but they also just don't have the corners to play a lot of man coverage. Now, what's interesting is the team below them who ran the least amount of man coverage was Minnesota. Now, what makes

them different is that Minnesota did a lot of other interesting stuff. Minnesota blitzed 42% of the time, which was the highest in the league. The charges were at 24.7%, which was 23rd. Now, And so I think what's interesting is I looked at, okay, blitzing, man coverage, those are ways to kind of be aggressive. And the Chargers didn't really do either. The only two teams that were under 25% of in both of those where it was the Chargers. And then it was the Colts and the Falcons. Not really good defenses.

Like they're just teams that felt limited and couldn't really bring the punch to the other teams. And so. How far was Seattle off from that? Seattle was actually pretty far because they played a lot of everything. and they played not super far off. They were like, if I remember correctly, they were at like 28% maybe of like cover one. Like it was something like that.

So they were a little bit over it. The reason I thought that they would be a potential candidate there because going to look at the Seahawks stats, which we're going to talk about here in a second, they didn't blitz very often. They were at that 25% blitz rate. So I was curious where the man coverage rate fell. So they were close but didn't fall into that group.

They were like in the neighborhood, but not. Yeah. And the other teams that were close were like the Rams were kind of close. and then the Packers and the Bears were like not that far off. And so those are kind of the general. So you can be a decent defense with that, right? Like the Packers had a pretty good defense. And the Bears weren't bad, but it's just.

Well, I was looking at some of the numbers for man coverage rates in the back half of last year. There's a reason the Packers and Bears weren't playing man coverage in the back half of last season. The numbers were atrocious. I can't remember why I brought myself there. I think it was, I was looking at the Seahawks man coverage numbers. But the Bears and the Packers were, I think, 31st and 32nd. paper drop back against man in the back half of last season. So there is a reason they were straying away from those sorts of approaches in the final

eight weeks. Exactly. And I have one more point about how this defense was very predictable, I would say, in terms of the stuff that they were running. On plays where they brought exactly five rushers, so you are bringing a little bit of pressure, 57.4% of the time they ran cover three, which is the fourth highest in the league tied with Tampa Bay. The only two teams ahead of those teams were, again, Indianapolis and the Chicago Bears.

The league average is about 38.7%. So they're way over in terms of like when we bring pressure, we're playing 3D 300. Like, that's it. And again, you compare this to Minnesota, who when they brought five, 26.3% of the time, they played cover three. And so less than half. Yeah, less than half. And then 32% of the time, they were playing quarters. And the only team of head of them in that was Kansas City.

So you compare the charges who are like, okay, we bring five, it's three deep, three under no matter what, versus the two teams that were running a bunch of quarters in Minnesota and the Chiefs, those are two of the most well thought out, well-designed defenses in the league. Like they just, I think there was such a clear difference in the way that the charges were able to attack teams in terms of being aggressive and funky and weird versus some of the better defenses in the league. Okay, so what does this mean moving forward? but do you think that with maybe another year in the system, you know, some improvements in free agency, obviously they didn't spend big,

but like there are spots where, you know, that second cornerback spot, maybe feel a little bit better about it this year. They have cornerback depth. If they stay a little bit healthier at corner, things like that. Again, you have a full off season. You're going into year two. You know where your strengths are.

You know where your weaknesses are. What would you like to see them do more of? And what do you think the limitations are going to be if you don't see them diversify in those sorts of ways. I think it's just when teams, if they don't diversify enough, I think now that teams are going to have

a year and a half, two years worth of film, I think it's just going to be easier to pick on them a little bit and find where the weaknesses are. In terms of the man coverage, I would be shocked if that goes that much higher just because I think the collection of players they have,

that's not necessarily what they want to do. I do think with some of the blitzing stuff, though, and how they bring their pressures, who's coming from where, what types of coverage is they want to play. I do think that I'm going to leave the door open for them getting better. Like that absolutely could be a thing where it's just, okay, first year NFL play caller, 3D3 under is like kind of, it's like the defense's version of doing the outside zone into play action.

You know what I mean? It's just like it's baby's first play calling type of deal. And there's nothing wrong with that. So that one I'm more willing to leave the door open to them potentially getting a little bit better there. How optimistic or pessimistic do you feel after going back and rewatching and studying some of this stuff? Do you find yourself more or less optimistic about like the outlook for the Chargers defense in 2025 and beyond than you were before you started the process? I would probably say pessimistic. And it's for two reasons.

I don't think there'll be a bad defense. I just, one, I struggle to see how it's going to get that much better because I know they have a little bit more depth at corner, but I don't think they are really better at the position. And so I think that's going to be part of it, unless, you know, Cam Hart and Tree. still just take huge jumps, which is possible. They played well last year, so I'll leave the door open for that. The other thing is they played a fairly easy schedule of offenses last year. They had the sixth easiest schedule according to DVOA. And if that, I don't, I didn't look up what they're projected to be this year,

but assuming it's going to be a little bit harder. It's always hard to figure it out. We always do that in the off season where it's like your strength of opponents. It's like, well, yeah, if you played Washington twice last year, you would have think they, you thought they would have been a shitty offense. They were not. Exactly. So I always think that's hard to do. I think that's probably something where we wait to see what the season actually looks like and in order to determine how good or bad your offensive slate of opponents is. I agree with that. But so if we assume it's going to

go from relatively easier to just average, because again, we have no idea. Baking that in on top of talent-wise, I don't think that this defense really got better. They're pretty much only banking on young guys getting better, which again is possible. But it's, asking for a lot, it's hard for me to see how this defense is going to be better than it was last year. And again, they were an above average solid unit for a lot of the year. It's just hard for me to see, like, can they make the jump to top five? Probably not, given the players they have on the roster. So this is, I like this a lot because what you're getting at is the core of why I wanted to have this conversation. Because I think that the tempting reaction to the 2024 Chargers season is,

oh man like this staff did an incredible job they were so much better than some people anticipated they were a playoff team you know arrows pointed up skies the limit let's roll and part of my fear is that the staff jim harbaugh included is a group that is a really really good floor setter but are we going to have some questions and some concerns when it comes to establishing the ceiling with this group i'm open to either answer but i just think it's a question worth asking you So the fact that you landed there when studying the defense, I do think is a worthwhile thing to notice if that is the question that's kind of fueling all of this. And I kind of went the same way on the offensive side of the ball. Like this offense was better than we expected them to be, I think, in a lot of ways. Herbert was 12th in a paper dropback last year, throwing to Ladd-McConkey and Quinn Johnston and Will Disley. but you look at it and I was curious like, okay, the structure of the offense itself, like how much faith should we have in the offense reaching a higher ceiling and being potentially like a top five, top seven unit if they get better players in there along with this quarterback.

And I came away with some pretty big questions about that. And I think some of it is just the way that they want to play and especially the way that they want to throw the ball. So Herbert was 12 and EPA dropback. It was 26th in success rate. among 39 quarterbacks without when not using play action last year. And so that is kind of the defining trait of the offense. They want to push the ball down the field off of play action.

The only team that used play action more last season were the Vikings. And that fuels just the types of throws that they're making, but also just how the passing game feels overall. When you watch them, the ball never comes out quickly. Like there is no quick game within the offense. Which is so funny coming off of like them having just done the Kellynne thing where it was all quick game. It's incredible. It was it was such like a vast departure from how we've come to expect that offense. So I was looking this up. 33% of their attempts last

year happened in less than two and a half seconds. So 66% lasted more than two and a half seconds. The only team ranked lower than them was the Vikings. And part of me was like, okay, is that because of play action? Obviously play action plays are going to be slower developing. That's why you're not getting rid of the ball quickly. They were 30th. They ranked 30th, even with outplay action, on non-play action throws. So this is just a slow developing push the ball down the field offense. And when you look at the guys they acquired this offseason, like, Trey Harris is not pushing you off of this approach offensively.

He's only pushing you to, he's pushing you further into it. Like this is a signal of we want to be a vertical down the field passing game. And I get that. I just wonder and I'm curious, how much is that going to play into the volatility, of your offense and really kind of potentially sabotage the down-to-down consistency of who you are throwing the ball. We saw that last year and I'm just wondering if there's going to be any changes to how this version of the offense feels based on what they went out and got this offseason. I have my doubts about that. Yeah, I don't think so because I think what's interesting is if you look at it last

off season, or last season, they started the year trying to be the run the ball 40 times team and then do all the play action stuff. And towards the back half, the year, they realized the run game was so bad. They actually didn't have to do. And rushing success right last year. 29th. I think we all remember like one or two J.K. Dobbins runs. And we were like, oh, it wasn't that bad.

Down to down. It was not good. Because the interior was still not very good. And so that's, that kind of brings me to the next part of this. If the passing game is probably going to be like big game hunting, volatile, fine. You know, you kind of live with that. Can you be a team that runs the ball well in order to give yourself a floor offensively, to give yourself some down-to-down consistency?

They couldn't do that last year. 29th and rushing success rate. The only the Giants had a lower percentage of their runs go over expectation last year. According to next-gen stats. And they were disgusting to watch. It was not good. And so you hope that Hampton can give you that, right? Like that's a stat that points to the running backs not getting even what was blocked for them,

even if the offensive line and the infrastructure and the ecosystem weren't great. So that's why you go get a running back in the first round is hopefully to at least we're going to get what's there more often than we do. did last year. That's fine. But I still have questions about just the overall structure of the offense period when it comes to the other personnel. They went out and they volume shot on the interior of the offensive line. That was their plan this offseason. It's like we're going to go out and get Andre James. We're going to sign Mackay Beckton. And now it's going to be we have three spots and like five guys. So we're going to figure out the best three guys for the, the best three guys for those spots. Where that's Zion Johnson at center with Beckton at one of the guards.

whether that's Zion still a guard with Bozeman at center, whether that's Andre James at center and Zion's still a guard. However it ends up shaking out, we want to give ourselves more optionality here. That's still not a ton of talent, though. And that's not a huge injection of talent at those spots. So I have a little bit of concern there. And the other part of this, and this is something I thought about coming into last year, and I'm curious what your thoughts on this are.

There were plays last year because they were in the gun a lot still. even as a team that was running the ball a lot and using a ton of play action. And you're watching them on like early downs. And they'll have Josh Palmer like tight to the formation trying to like dig out a defensive end on some of these plays while they're running from the gun. And if you kind of graft those ideas onto Greg Roman Ravens teams, you're not blocking that guy at all because that's somebody you're reading because Lamar Jackson is your quarterback. And so I was curious, the last couple times we'd seen Greg Roman Ravens teams. Devise running games in the NFL was with Colin Kaepernick and with Lamar Jackson. So if you remove the quarterback run game part of this, how much of an impact does that have?

And my like novice understanding of this and just going back and watching some stuff is a real impact. Like it actually does matter that your quarterback isn't that sort of threat considering what we had seen from Roman offenses over the last 10 years. You know, the last time Greg Roman was also a really good play caller was in Buffalo in 2015. 15, 2016 with Tyrod Taylor, who again, really good Russian quarterback. And dude, some of the stuff they were doing out of the pistol was phenomenal that year. And Justin Herbert, in theory, can do that, right? Like, he's a really good athlete. He's a long strider, almost in the same way that Kaepernick was, actually.

But Justin Herbert kind of gets banged up a lot. Like, that's one of the few drawbacks I think we have with him. Like, he misses time. You should not run Justin Herbert as part of your offense. I do not want to see that. Right. Yeah, like he's such a good pastor, such a good downfield pastor that, like, there's, if he wants to scramble a few times, go ahead, buddy.

We don't really need you to be part of the run game, except for maybe in the red zone every now and then. Sure, I'll give him that. But it should be like the Josh, like how the bills have treated Josh Allen a little bit more now that he's gotten really good. It's like, okay, on third downs and red zone maybe, but until like week 17, you're not doing any of this shit, man. And that's how he needs to be treated. And even that is probably generous. Yes, I honestly don't even need that. I would much rather see him I'd much rather see him just he has a scrambler.

That's his rushing production is when he has to take off and make plays with his legs. I don't need to see a lot of design Justin Herbert runs. But as kind of the baseline element of your running game, when we've seen it in the past and you don't have it here,

I think that's just something that's worth noting about, okay, this was supposed to be a team that was built on the offensive line in the running game because that's how we conceive of Greg Roman. Why hasn't that happened? I think some of it is the offensive line personnel

on the interior. but I think the quarterback not being a part of the run game is also a detail that's probably worth pointing out as we try to figure out why that gap exists between perception and reality last year. I mean, it's a really good call. It's what Roman has been used to. And Herbert is the first guy in like over a decade that he's had to really put together an offense like this where the quarterback just isn't part of it.

What's where I think I struggle with the way that the offense is designed and all that stuff is For as much as I love Justin Herbert, I think he kind of needs the run the ball play action offense to and to force him to throw the ball down the field. I agree with this. Because I think what we've seen in other offenses is that if you do a little bit more dropback, a little bit more quick game, the ball might come out a little bit too fast, might check the ball down a little bit too much. So you kind of need this structure to force him to throw it down the field,

force him to scramble a little bit more. I think then you just get into the question of like, is Greg Roman the best guy? to get the peak of that. And the answer to that is probably not. But I do still think the overall structure and idea they're going for actually probably is the right idea for a guy like Justin Herbert. I'm open to the idea that them getting better talent or just more options to find the right combination of players within this structure with Greg Roman as the

offensive coordinator. I'm open to that working. Right? If like Trey Harris is like a real vertical presence in the offense, you still have McConkey. If Hampton and year two in the system, and just better players up front. Even if we just say we're rolling the same group as last year, but Bechton is getting dropped in for Trey Pipkins,

you become much more physical on the interior of the offensive line when you're trying to push people around. So I think them leading into this version of it is fine with me. I just worry that we get to a place in, at the end of this season, or at the middle of next season, where the floor is established, there are a solid offense, and we just worry, okay, there isn't enough here for them to take the final step in the same way that we said about the Ravens when Greg Roman was there.

Like that's my concern is that that's what's waiting for us at the end of this road. That even if they can improve this year. Exactly. Like I think they might still get better, but I kind of agree with you is that I still think both with the offense and the defense to really bring this whole like discussion all the way around is like we might get to the end of the year where it's like, okay, the floor is high for all this. You're clearly competent.

Do you really have enough firepower and enough creativity on either side of the ball? I think it's, I still have my questions there. The last thing I want to mention, just because this, another just counterintuitive element of this, of this offense and just what we think about them in general, you think, okay, play action, you slide guys across the formation and all these heavy personnel groupings,

that's going to help your past protection. That's going to be an area where you're taking less off of guys' plates. And you go back, and it's anecdotal, but there's tons of examples of this last year, where them doing that shit actually led to leaky pressure, where they would have, oh, the guard is like a dash protection.

He's sealing off the back side. You know, we're sliding a tight end across. And then you're making one of your guards play in space, and they're incapable of doing that against the pass rusher. So there were just a lot of things with the offense where it's like, okay, I understand this idea in principle. And then you watch the execution of it. And there's just something left to be desired.

And so I think I'm curious to see how much more buttoned up it feels heading into year two with a few more personnel upgrades and what that ultimately means. for this group. I'm certainly not like giving up on what this can be and I'm not even that pessimistic about it. I just still have some questions about what the ceiling and the best version of this could potentially look like. I think that's the best way to frame it because like you said at the beginning of discussion, I think we all got excited that the charges were better than they probably should have been last year. And I think we're all like they can be even better next year and like they might

be a little bit better. But I think this entire discussion is trying to temper that to be like maybe they're just going to be the 11th best team in the NFL again. And that's probably where we're going to arrive. Yes. And I think that's partially why I wanted to have this conversation. All right, we're going to take one more quick break and then get back with our last lingering question about the Seattle Seahawks defense. Let's chat about the Seattle Seahawks defense and specifically the back half of their season last year. This is a group that was really good in the back half of last year. They were fourth in EPA per dropback in the back half of last season. They were eighth in defensive rushing success rate. So my lingering question from last year, as I think we were more focused on the

Seahawks placing the playoff standings and some of the other things going on in the NFC, and we didn't really talk that intensely or in a focused way about this, what is the ceiling of the Seahawks defense? Like, is this potentially like the next great defense in the NFL with Mike McDonald heading into year two with this group based on how the back half of last year went when they finished eighth in weighted defensive DVOA? So what is your answer? to that lingering question about the Seahawks? I kind of think they, I think they can be. And it's a, it's a, it's not copy and paste what they were doing in Baltimore, right?

Like, I think the personnel is a little bit different, where your best players are, are a little bit different. Like, I know they just drafted them in Warren, but he is not Kyle Hamilton. And I know that Ernest Jones is really good. He is not Roquan Smith. So like the reasons the Baltimore defense worked are a little bit different here. Whereas in Seattle, I think it's, you know, you know, you have Witherspoon, who's like a phenomenal nickel corner.

Maybe. I mean, we'll get into that discussion about what they're going to do with the secondary this year. But then your front is really good. Like Leonard Williams was like all pro last year. He was phenomenal, dude. So good. It's like just so unbelievably good. So I want to use this that what you just said about Witherspoon and what you just said about Leonard Williams is like the entry point into this conversation.

How many great players do you think the Seattle Seahawks defense has is currently? constructed. I think it's just those two, but I'm like, the door is cracked for Byron Murphy. Like his best plays are awesome, but I think it's probably just those two and then Byron Murphy. And Ernest Jones is really good. He's a great glue piece. I don't think he's good enough athletically to consider him in that, in that air. So the reason I wanted to start here is because I do think it fuels the way that I'm thinking about this unit overall. I think that, I think that they have a chance to be really good because I think that if you look at it top to bottom, there aren't that many weaknesses. They have a lot of good players on this team, but they don't

have a lot of elite players. And even Devin Witherspoon, I think there are elements of his game that he's terrified. He's a great blitzer. He's a really good run defender. He's very physical player. I actually think that in coverage this year, it was a little bit more up and down that I expected after watching the first two weeks of this season. And especially when they kick him outside, I still think that playing in that amount of space, it worries me a little bit. And so you were a little bit concerned

that they didn't add anything to the corner room. And I was thinking, is them adding Ammon Worry, maybe we're going to see Witherspoon more outside? Going back and rewatching a couple Seahawks games in the back half of last year, I am now firmly with you that I wish they had done more

at one of those other outside corner spots. They brought in Rasul Douglas last week for a visit. I want that. Like, I want them to add one more outside corner based on how things are constructed because I think Eminwari is just a third safety for them. Like he's just, we're getting Ray Sean Jenkins out of here. We're bringing Eminwari into that role. So I appreciate your, you being a little bit alarmist about the cornerback spot in a way

that I didn't a month ago. I guess that's what I would say. Yeah, like I love Devin Witherspoon. He's just not like that kind of outside cornerback. Like that's just not the stuff like the best stuff he does is, the closer he is to the ball, the closer he is to the formation, the better he is. And so that's why there has been like some talk of Emin Worry potentially playing the nickel for them. And then Withers been playing more outside, which he already did in their base defense. That's just not his best plays. It's,

it would be to me like what we saw last year with the Chiefs, where Trent McDuffie was in A plus level nickel. And then you move him to the outside and he's still good, but he's like a B player instead of like a dominant force at the nickel. And I think Witherspoon is probably a worse outside corner even than McDuffie. I think McDuffie is firmly like the movement skills are just a little bit better, whereas I think Witherspoon is a little bit less natural. So that is for as good as I think this defense is and can be, I think if they move Emin Worry to the nickel and Witherspoon is their other outside guy,

I have more questions. If Witherspoon remains in the nickel, Rassoul Douglas is playing outside and then Em and Worry is just big Rayshon Jenkins, then I can really see the vision for the defense. So the answer to how many elite players they have is like 1.5, right, based on how Leonard Williams plays last year? On the flip side of that, how many bad players if they signed Rasul Douglas? How many, like, firmly below average players are on the defense?

Like, maybe Tyrese Knight is not great. And I don't know about you. I actually was very impressed when I went back and was watching games in the back half last year. There are elements of his game where I'm like, I can totally. lock myself into this pretty easily. I still have some questions about him, but he actually got better compared to early in the season. He was not good.

Later in the year, he played it well enough that I could reasonably be like, okay, almost like the Patrick Queen thing, right? Like when Baltimore brought over Roquan Smith, you could start to see it with Patrick Queen at the end of that season. And then the following year, he plays well enough to, you know, like make a Pro Bowl and then eventually get paid by the Steelers. So I'm assuming that is, you know, they're not one. to one players, but I'm assuming that's their like developmental vision for a guy like him.

And I do think that he's a little bit more explosive than Ernest Jones is. And I think that when having Ernest Jones be kind of a stabilizing factor in the middle of the defense kind of allows Tyrese Knight to be the player that you want him to be in a very similar way that the Ravens were able to do that. Like Patrick Queen can be a different sort of player when Roe Kwan Smith is there. And I think you could say the same thing about the Seahawks linebackers. But I look at all these guys. And I think that Ernest Jones is a very good example of this.

And I honestly think the best example of this is, Julian Love. Like, Julian Love within this defense is a really, really good player because he's very smart. And, you know, in terms of positioning and being able to read things out in different tells with formations and when to drive on certain routes. And so that's kind of where I'm going with this. If you look at the production in the Seahawks back half of the year on defense, they really picked on bad teams.

And I think sometimes when we say that, we try to make it out to be like, oh, they're just bad team merchants. that's not what I'm saying here. I just think that similar to the Ravens, remember that Ravens game against the Rams two years ago and how the Ravens were just this all-world defense and they had to play against the Rams and then they struggled relatively

when they had to play against the Rams. The reason I remember that game specifically is Stafford put a seam ball right next to Roquan Smith that I don't even know if I can repeat the sound I made. That throw was phenomenal. I think why that game is telling and why the back half of last season, I think, is a similar sort of conversation. If you make things easy for Mike McDonald, when he has a defense that doesn't have any bad

players on it, he's going to dismantle you. If there are tells, if you're not switching things up when it comes to, all right, when we're in this formation with this personnel grouping, we do this X amount of the time. If you give him those answers and he's playing with enough smart guys like Julian Love and Ernest Jones, you're going to be in big fucking trouble. But if you're in a number of... offense that can dictate to them, the Packers in the back half of last year, some of the things that the Vikings were doing in that stretch, then it changes a little bit. Then I think you feel

the lack of high-end talent on those defenses in a way similar to what it was with Baltimore. Like, this is not an indictment. I think it's just a comment on the limitations of what a defense can do when it doesn't have four or five truly elite players. And even if you're a comment, confident about what the Seahawks can be. I still think that we can kind of definitively say they're not that sort of defense. They're a more than the sum of their parts defense. And I, that's a good thing until you realize what the cap on that looks like. Exactly. And they are to me like a tier above the Chargers in that realm because one, the play call is better. But also they do have some elite players. Like I think the Chargers right now. And they have good players. Exactly. The Chargers have passable

players at a lot of spots. The Seahawks have good players in a lot of spots. Exactly. And so I think like that's the distinction. But to get into, like we're saying, elite territory, instead of one and a half, like all pro-calibur players, you might need three. You might need four. And that's where I think we need to maybe see some development from some of the younger players. Like, if Murphy takes that step this year, then, okay, then we could absolutely start having the conversation that they have enough talent.

It's just I think that we would probably need to see it. The one thing I want to say about McDonald-Why, you know, I was just talking about the charge. we were just talking about the charges how they've had a defense that is better than the sum of its parts. And I think the reason they got away with it is they simplified a lot of things. And it was just like a lot of young players is like, okay, let's just go do this. To your point about Mike McDonald, he loves smart players. And he's done a very good job of drafting them and of signing them and putting them in the right spots, like moving Kobe Durant to safety, all that stuff. If you look at Kobe Bryant. Or Kobe Bryant. Yeah, sorry. If you look at the Seahawks, like their coverage rates, they are not top five.

or bottom five in anything. They are... Yeah, they are, what do we need this week? They are a what do we need this week type of defense, but you can only do that when you have Ernest Jones as smart as he is at linebacker, Julian Love at safety. Like, you need guys who can do that. And I even, that's kind of why I love bringing in to Marcus Lawrence

where I don't think we envision past rushers necessarily as like needing to be your super smart guys. But I think bringing in a veteran like him when you have all these other like younger pieces, just getting that 5% better in like getting every, everybody to be more on the same page. Like, I just, the collection of players they have just does make a lot of sense. But I think the front is a good kind of expression of this idea where the intelligence really

shines through. Watching them, like, read blocking angles. And when certain guys are leaving, I know the polar's coming, the ability to just defeat one-on-one blocks in part because of that stuff, you feel that with this team. And so I do think that if we're talking about coaches as multipliers, let's say Jesse Minter is a 1.2. Mike McDonald was like a 1.7 for the reasons that you're talking about. And when I talk about the ceiling of this defense, because this feels like the sort of thing that enterprising Seahx fan would clip out when they're number one in DVOA 12 weeks into the year, I do think that's

possible, right? I think that that's within the range of outcomes for them to be over the course of a season, the best defense in the league, similar to what the Ravens were a couple years ago. The problem is when you get into the biggest games against the best offenses, that's when I think you start to feel some of the relative limitations of a defense with this sort of talent level. And that's okay. If you're the best defense in football for 17 weeks and you can't beat, I don't know,

let's say the Rams are the best offense in the league this season, and you lose to them in the division around. Like, that's an okay life to live. But I do think that's the type of defense that we're talking about where they can just feast on bad teams. And in a good way, but maybe they'll have a few more issues when it comes to, again, offenses that can dictate to them and are a little bit harder to pin down.

There are a couple examples in the Packers game that I think are really telling. Like, they'll use motion to get a certain player in the run fit, whether it was Ray Sean Jenkins or one of the other D.Bs or, you know, some of the things they're doing construction-wise in the passing game, where it's a double move here or there and you're picking on Josh Job a little bit. Like those sorts of pointed strikes and, like, details that go. along with really, really good offenses from Matt Tree specifically. Every defense is going to give them problems or every offense is going to have problems with that.

But I think the gap between what Mike McDonald can do to the Aaron Rogers Jets and the Caleb Williams, Shane Waldron, Bears and what he's going to have to do against the Matlefleur Packers, you feel the gap there in a way that I think is a little bit more pronounced than some other teams. That makes sense. No, it does because, I mean, think about, I mean, the Eagles last year, they're also a defense that requires a lot of smart play. players to really run the defense they want to run. Their secondary is also more capable of just running with guys than I think that we've seen from the Seahawks secondary so far. And their front, their front four was also better. They were able to just generate a little bit more pressure.

The Seahawks front, there is, again, if Murphy takes that step and Lawrence comes back from injury, there's a chance they can be close to what the Eagles were. It's just we haven't seen it yet, I think is the thing. I like them, when they pass rush as a unit, again, because there aren't any objectively bad players, you feel that group. And they have so many different players. Yes. And the difference between like what Derek Hall is and what Mafay is, I think that plays

to their advantage. Like you've got some pocket pushers. You've got some speed bendy guys. You've got like an elite player the way he played last year in Leonard Williams. You've got a potentially an ascending player in Byron Murphy. Now you bring into Marcus Lawrence, I think, to kind of give you maybe an uptick about what Draymond Jones was last year where you need kind of like a big physical early down edge, which to Marcus Lawrence can be for you. I really like that group as a whole. Again, I just think

they're more than the sum of their parts. And you watch it, they're fifth in pressure rate over the back half last year. They were fifth in sacks. Like, they can get shit done. I just think that there's a slight gap at the end of the road when you do not have those two or three like super, super high-end guys and we'll see if a couple of them can emerge for them this year. I really hope they do. Because again, Mike McDonald is in terms of the way that it is constructed, the most fascinating defense. Because even for as good as Spags is or Flores or whoever it is, you kind of know the pitches you're going to get, if that makes sense. Like even though they'll scheme it up in certain ways and the way they time their blitzes is all different. With Mike McDonald, it truly is like week to week.

You could, they could be playing a completely different defense. And I think it's just such a, he's obviously such a rare teacher to be able to get away. with something like that, to be able to be that flexible on a week-to-week basis. And I think it's the teaching element, but I also think it's what he's picking up in preparation, right? Like there's a reason that the game plans become so hyper-specific. It's because, again, if you're giving him the answers, if you're easy to figure out, he's going to figure you out. And so these defenses that are just a step behind, it's going to look really ugly. The stat that just really jumped out to me, when they blitz, they don't do it often,

but they're doing it for a reason almost every single time they do. And you look at the effectiveness of it in the back half of last year, what do you think their pressure rate was on blitzes last season? From weeks 10 through 18, the Seahawks. Like when they actually threw them, like in terms of their rank, I would say like at a sixth maybe? It was number one.

Okay. And it was on 50% of dropbacks. Wow. Five zero. They got pressure on half of their blitz dropbacks in the back half. of last year. Over in the fight from weeks 10 through 18, they, they generated negative 32 passing EPA on their blitzes.

There were only three teams in the league that had 16 or more. They had 32. Some of that is bad teams. They had 10 against the Jets, which is partially because of that Leonard Williams pick six, because that's like a, that flips like, that's like three points the other team and six points for you. But they destroyed the bears in that game. They destroyed the Cardinals in that game.

again, we've talked about this with the Cardinals. They're elements of the Cardinals that are really fun. But when it comes to the passing game, it can be a little bit predictable. And so if you're predictable against this team and against this coach, he is going to devise a tailored game plan to completely just take away your will to live. And that happens over and over again. That's why one of the games I went back and watched was, I think, the first Cardinals game where the Seahawks win 16 to 6.

the worst thing the Cardinals did is their interior. One was not very good or strong. And then two, you got a young left tackle in Paris Johnson. And he's a good player when he gets hands on, but his eyes can be a little bit up and down sometimes. Mike McDonald did a very good job of abusing Paris Johnson. And then he did a very good job of like, what if we take Leonard Williams and Byron Murphy

and just have them twist all over these bad guarded interior players and just have them mashing each other. And they got a ton of pressures in sacks that way. I think there are some moments little kernels of pessimism or like skepticism as part of this. I want to be very clear as we finish up this conversation. I think this team has a very clear path to be like a top 10 defense,

like firmly a top 10 defense. I think it's just a conversation about how high they can get and how good they can be against the best offenses in the league given kind of the tiers of talent they have on that side of the ball. But nothing about going back and watching this made me feel worse about like the trajectory of this unit. It's just little things like Treek Wall had a really rough game against the Packers.

That's something you need to think about when you conceive of like the ceiling of this defense. Like he's going to be your number one outside corner and there are moments of like real brilliance from him but it's a little bit more volatile than you want it to be. They were 25th in EPA per coverage in man in the back half of last year because again, when it can't be more than the sum of its parts and you're isolating individual players on the defense,

you feel the gaps a little bit. So those are some of the elements I think are worth paying attention to when you think about what this group can be at its best against the best teams in the league this year. And the last thing I'll say to that point, for as much as bringing in Rasul Douglas will make me he feel better overall about the cornerback room, he's not solving the we can't play man coverage problem.

And so that again... Those guys aren't available in free agency on May 19th. Exactly. And in the middle of May, those guys are pretty much off the board. but I would like to see that happen because I do think that your point about the cornerback room I wish I had heard it a little bit more when you were making it during the draft

but going back and rewatching it this week I was like all right, he was right about that. I think corner is definitely a need that remains on the board for the Seahawks and if they can make the Russell Douglas thing happen you guys may, this may run after a signing like that takes place so just be on the lookout for that but I'm with you on that

but I do think that both of us are pretty bullish on what this group can be moving forward because even if there aren't that many super high-end players, there are not a lot of weak links on this team. I think they've done a very good job of addressing that. That is all we've got. We will have our next two lingering questions shows coming a little bit later in June. We're actually going to save those for when I get back from vacation.

So I'll be back the first week in June. We will hit our next two of these. I always love doing them. I've had a great time with the first two. So please be on the lookout for both of those. For now, that's all we got. Appreciate you guys listening. We'll talk to you very soon.