The Athletic Football Show: A show about the NFL - Mailbag: Counting current Hall of Famers, buying the best possible team, worst QB who can win a Super Bowl & more with Sheil Kapadia

Episode Date: June 7, 2022

It's our own Sheil Kapadia as the special guest to answer your Mailbag e-mails and voicemails - from the affect Urban Meyer had on the Jags, to which BAD QB is most likely to win a Super Bowl, counting up all the active Hall-of-Fame caliber players, Raiders and Vikings talk and more! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is the Athletic Football Show. Welcome to the Athletic Football Show. Today's Tuesday, June 7th. I'm Robert Mays. Joining me today, it's my good buddy Shiakapati. How are you doing? I'm doing well. I'm doing all of my sort of season preview team by team, look ahead things.

And so this is a nice reset to see what kind of takes I actually have with some of these questions we're going to get to. This is the time in the calendar where I have to actively push that stuff. stuff away from me. Anytime there's a look ahead or a prediction, who's going to be good when the questions come in and just in my day to day. When I'm thinking about the league, it's like, no. That is for

July and onward. June is this weird middle ground where you want to look back, you want to look forward, and I think we kind of try to play with that element on the show. You'll see that over the next few show ideas that we're going to roll out here over the next couple weeks. But we are back with our weekly mailbag.

I sincerely appreciate it. As always, guys, you sending in the questions. You make it easy to do this every single week. It's fun to kind of wake up on a Monday morning as we get ready to do the show and always have enough in there to get us through a really interesting Tuesday podcast. And that would not be possible if you guys did not send these in every single week in the way that you do. So thank you very much for doing that.

Let's get right into it. First one here. Some of these questions had a lot of work that the asker put in, including this first one here from Phil Goad. There have been a lot of questions lately about the whole. of Fame. It got me thinking about how stacked with known talent the league currently is. My question is, how many teams have at least one player who could retire before this season

started and walk into the Hall of Fame? No questions asked. No guesswork, no predictions. By my count, it's 20 of the 32. They may not go in for the team they're on now, for example. JJ Watt is not going to be a Cardinal, but he's on their roster. And he gave us his list of all the guys. And I want to kind of interrogate this list a little bit.

First of all, it is way less than 20. Phil, you are a generous man going through and saying 20 of these guys are Hall of Famers. Some examples of players that Phil had in there that I definitely don't think are no guesswork and no projection players. Devin McCordy was his past player. He's second team all pro three times. I do not think Devin McCordy is probably a Hall of Famer. Dolphins Jets don't have any. Von Miller on the Bills I think absolutely is.

The Browns, I think correctly don't have any. The Ravens, he had Calais, Camer. I don't think Callais Campbell was a no doubt about it, Hall of Famer. When you hear Callais Campbell's name, do you think Hall of Famer? I do because I've had this bit for a while that every game I've covered or watched, like closely that Callais Campbell has played in. He has just absolutely dominated or made a game-changing play. And the week leading up to it, every player and coach is talking about how underrated

Callias Campbell is. And after the game, every player and coach is talking about, man, we did not have an answer for Callias Campbell. but I hear what you're saying with all this sort of defensive linemen we've had over the past era. I wouldn't say a no-brainer. I would have to look at the numbers and stuff a little bit more closely. But he's someone who kind of has a special place in my, you know, football viewing mind. I love Clayas Campbell.

I've loved Clayas Campbell for a very long time. I had a long conference. This is a story that never ran. I tried to write it like three times. And for various different reasons, it just never worked out. But I visited with Clay's Campbell at Jaguars Camp kind of near the tail end of of his career there. And we had a long kind of frank conversation about the Hall of Fame and about what it takes

to make the Hall of Fame. And he was very aware of what he would probably need to do. This is probably 2019. He was very aware of what he would probably need to do to make the Hall of Fame. And he knew he'd probably need to win a Super Bowl at some point. He'd probably need 100 sacks. I mean, there's certain benchmarks you need to get. He has 93 career sacks.

He is a four-time first or second team all pro. and he is on the all-decade team. So I think he's right, if the Ravens win the Super Bowl this year and he gets like six and a half sacks, I think we could probably start having that conversation, but it's not a no doubt abouter sort of thing with him, even if I do remember him fondly.

I also think the sack number for him isn't really fair because of where he played for so much of his career. I think he should be judged more like a Richard Seymour than a true edge rusher, which makes that 93 number more impressive than it might seem at first glance. We could have a long conversation about whether Clayas Campbell blogs in the Hall of Fame, but I don't think he's a just write-ed-in-pen sort of guy right now.

I kind of feel like as you were speaking, this thought just popped in my head. I do feel like he's had sort of an underrated impact on the game and the way coaches and GMs think. I mean, I can remember so many coaches, like everybody is always looking for that guy. You know, okay, long, interior pass rusher, disruptive, three-down player. Like every team is always like, you know, you just see them. And this is, and Callais Campbell is the player they're often thinking of. And just, it's hard to replicate. I mean, there's kind of a small number of people who can actually do that.

So that's, and then great teammate off the field stuff. So he's, yeah, he's got a lot of those things working in his favor for sure. The other thing he told me, he was very honest about it. Part of the reason he wanted to go to Jacksonville is he wanted a chance to play on the edge so he could get more sex because it really mattered to him to ultimately get into this. conversation with it's the most honest and open admittance a player has ever given me of i want to be in the hall of fame and these are the things that i knew i have to do to get there no i've never heard a player talk about it in those terms before it was actually really interesting but we can

have a much longer clias campbell conversation at a different time all right some other guys here he had cam hayward on his list i think that's closer to a conversation than some people might Cam Hayward is a four-time all-pro kind of in that same range as Callais Campbell. Do you think Cam Hayward is a Hall of Famer? Probably in a similar spot. I mean, yeah, he's another guy.

Like you just remember every year, if you were a casual football fan and wanted to impress someone or sound cool, Cam Hayward, most underrated player in the league, I mean, you could have said that for probably six, seven years that it might have been true. So, yeah, I wouldn't be probably going nuts either way on him. I don't have a strong opinion, but I think he's probably right there.

Cam Hayward, in my opinion, has been helped a lot by the kind of the dawn of the PFF era. You have some of these players that their accolades have gone up as more people that are voters to become fluent in some of the advanced numbers and things like that. Cam Hayward didn't make his first Pro Bowl until he was 28 years old. It was the seventh season of his career. But he's made for AP All Pro First or Second Team since then, from ages 28 to 32, which is a very strange kind of career. But if I had to guess as to why, I'd say that's probably why. The numbers have just given him a little bit of a boost that they might not give other people.

So let's just say Cam Hayward is on there. I don't think if his career at it today, he'd be a Hallfamer, but I think he's absolutely on that track. I think T.J. Watt is also probably going to end up being a Hallfam. He has 72 sacks in five years. He already has a defensive player of the year, all of that stuff. Bengals, nobody yet. He had Stefan Gilmore. I definitely don't think he's a Hall of Fame.

Two-time All-Pro. I mean, he's just not enough of a track record of high-level production. Really good player, not a Hall of Fame player. He had Derek Henry on the Titans. I don't think Derek Henry is a Hall of Famer. He has two seasons with more than 1,200 yards. He has two all-pro seasons. He's 71st right now, all-time in career rushing yards.

Derek Henry absolutely would not be a Hall-famer, especially if he retired today. Jags, shockingly, don't. think has anybody. The Texans also, shockingly, don't think have any current Hall of Famers. Broncos, Russell Wilson, I think no question. Super Bowl, a ton of just career accolades and efficiency stats. He's only been an alt pro once. He was a second team in 2019. That's it. The same reason he's never gotten to Hall of Fame or MVP vote. He's never been the first or second best quarterback in the league for an entire season, but I think his track record overall will get him in. Travis Kelsey.

no question. Chandler Jones is an interesting one for the Raiders. He has 100 career sacks all-decade team, but only two-time all-pro. If you're being generous, you could put him in. I think Devante Adams is probably on his way yet. So, the

Raiders probably have one. The Chargers, Khalil Mack, is another interesting one. Cleo-Mack only has 76 sacks in his career. Wow. But he's on the all-decade team and he's a four-time all-pro. So I think if we're being generous, put Khalil Mack in.

Giants don't have anyone. Zach Martin, absolutely in for the, for the Cowboys. Washington doesn't have anybody. The Eagles, Jason Kelsey, I think is a Hall of Famer. Would you agree with that? Yes. And Fletcher Cox is probably on the edge.

If you're being generous, you could read into some Fletcher Cox, but I think you'd have to give a little bit there. Yes, I would agree with that. Yeah, I think Kelsey I feel good about. I would sort of, as they say, bang the table for Jason Kelsey. Cox, yeah, Fletcher Cox, I don't know if it was a long enough period where he was a dominant player compared to some of his peers like Aaron Donald.

But I'm generally the person who's saying like, no, come on, that person can't go in there. I was actually surprised your, going back to your Chandler Jones one. I was surprised by that. To me, I had him down as a no-brainer. I mean, I thought, I feel like if he were playing and maybe, you know, what he did in Arizona year in and year out, I feel like he's got the body of work consistently productive. It was just some of the sort of narrative stuff maybe worked against him. But the numbers, I think we did like a decade team for the athletic.

And I can't remember if I had Chandler Jones or had the edge rushers or whatever. But I remember going through the exercises of looking him at him compared to everyone else. And like if you just stack up all the numbers during the time he played, you would say, yeah, absolutely he's got the resume. So I feel good about that one. That resume, I think it says exactly what you're trying to say because he's on the all decade team. He has over 100 sacks. but he was only an all pro twice. Okay.

So he has the body of work over time, but relative to his peers at the position, he's like one step down from the best guys in the league consistently. I would have no trouble. I would have no problem if he ended up making the Hall of Fame based on what he's done. The Bears definitely don't have anyone. Phil had Robert Quinn on his list. Robert Quinn's been an all pro twice.

I mean, Robert Quinn's a good player, but I don't think he's anywhere near a Hall of Famer. Packers had Aaron Rogers, obviously. The Vikings had Patrick Peterson. I think he's pretty much a no doubt about it. Hall of Famer. He's like eight Pro Bowls, three-time All-Pro All-Decate team. Nobody on the Lions, nobody on the Falcons.

The Saints, I think Cam Jordan's probably a Hall-Famer. I don't know how you feel about that. We've had this discussion on the show a couple different times. He's in that conversation. Tyra Matthew probably is too. So between those two guys, the Saints probably do. Nobody on the Panthers, the Bucks of Tom Brady, obviously. Nobody on the Seahawks.

He had Trent Williams. I don't think Trent Williams is a Hall of Famer. Really? Two-time All-Pro. Okay, most Hall of Fame tackles have at least twice that, first or second team. For example, Willie Anderson was a first or second team all pro four times. Willie Anderson's not in the Hall of Fame. You look at guys like even his peers, like Tyrone Smith has a much better Hall of Fame resume for

all pros. Tyron Smith is on the all-decade team. So Trent Williams, I mean, he's been really, really good. His peak is obviously super dominant. But I don't think if you look at his career. compared to most Hall of Fame tackles. He's a no doubt about it, Hall of Fame type player.

That's interesting. Yeah, I hadn't dug into the numbers with him. I just saw that and said, yeah, you know, that may, in my head, here's how I do it. I know I am an analytically minded writer and podcaster. My Hall of Fame stuff is nonsense. I go in my head and I go, and I go, was this person one of the three to five best players at their position

were at least like, and then I pick a number, depending on how I'm feeling that day, usually like five years. And then to me, like, they're in the conversation. If they're not, if you can't even say that about them, then I'm like, no, I don't care about other numbers or counting stats or whatever. And so in my head, I had Trent Williams as a yes there. But I guess if we're, you know, if he puts together, what, two more years maybe, two more all pros, then you would feel a lot better about it. I think so.

I mean, you look at it. He was a second team all pro. Well, he wasn't even a real team second team all pro in 2013. The problem is he played in an era where Joe Thomas, The majority of his career was played during Trent Williams' career, and especially during his prime. Jason Peters and Trent Williams overlapped for a huge portion of their careers. I think Jason Peters is going to be a hallfamer before Trent Williams were. And then other guy, you know, Joe Staley was in there for a long time when Trent Williams was playing.

So there's a lot of guys that were fighting with him for those spots, Tyrone Smith, who we mentioned. So I think it's more, I think it's murkier that it might seem at first glance with him. The Rams, obviously, they have two no doubt about it. They're the only team, I think, with two, like, no questions asked walk into the Hall of Fame players on their team right now with Aaron Donald and Bobby Wactor. Like, zero question in my mind. And then the Cardinals have JJ Watt. So even if we're being generous here, like very generous, that's one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, fourteen, fifteen, fifteen. That's less than half the league has a Hall of Fame player on their team.

And I just, what I wanted to, I wanted to do this because I think it's interesting because I've never thought about it in these terms before. But also, it's just to remind her of how hard it is to be a Hall of Fame level player. In the current league, maybe there are 15 to 16. Maybe. There are a couple of guys that aren't on rosters currently that recently were. Like I think Julio's a Hall of Famer, Richard Sherman's a Hall of Famer, Drew Breeze. But those guys aren't currently on rosters. So on current rosters, it's less than half the league, really.

Yeah, who would walk in? right now. And then there's the fun exercise of looking at the young guys and being, you know, we could probably do a show where we had to name, you know, whatever, 10 each under whatever, 25, 27, we're going to make it. And then 10 years from now, we'd look stupid on a lot of those. Because to what you just said, it's hard to sustain. It's hard to maintain. You have a great, you know, start to your contract, but to your career, but to kind of do, you know, when we're saying Trent Williams now, who's what, 33, 34, is not a lock. I mean, that's, Matt really does put it into perspective, I think.

It's very, very difficult, and it's good to remember that. All right. Matt from New Jersey. Says, I love the show. It's the first feed I check every day at my pod drive-in. I appreciate that. He said, I understand the Chargers and Broncos both got better in the AFC West, which is a gauntlet.

But the Chief's taking a step back, though, is everyone sleeping on the Raiders. They've obviously upgraded at receiver the biggest way possible with the addition of Vante Adams. Between him, Renfer, and Waller, one of them has to be single covered every play. The additions of Chandler Jones and Rocky Sin mean the Dief. defense will have a little bit more talent.

And lastly, the upgrade and play calling on defense with Patrick Graham's imaginative scheme over Gus Bradley's uninspired cover three means the unit probably takes a step forward. This is a playoff team last year and they seemingly got better on each side of the ball, but everyone is penciling them for fourth in the AFC West. Am I crazy or is their demise a little premature? What do you think about this? We have not had this conversation about the Raiders on this show. Like the What are the Raiders after all of these moves kind of reset?

So I want you to kick us off here. Yeah, so I think that the Raiders are going to be a fun, entertaining team. And if you're a Raiders fan who's really excited and feel the same way that Matt, it was, right? Yeah, if you feel the same way Matt does, I'm not going to tell you you're crazy. Now, having said that, I have some questions about this team. I mean, I think they're a solid team. I think they're going to have a chance to make the playoffs. If we're talking about making the leap, you know, there are a few things to look at here.

One is there were 10 and 7 last year, some flukiness to that. I mean, they were seven and two in one score games. They were a minus 65 point differential. Those teams generally are not finishing three games over 500. So I don't think it's as simple as saying they were 10 and 7 last year. They got better. They're going to win 11 or 12 games because there was a flukiness to that last year for sure. Josh McDaniels, terrific image rehab by him, I would say not as good as Mike McCarthy a few years ago.

I mean, that to me is the gold standard when he was out there, you know, job hunting. and got the Cowboys job. I think that's sort of the standard. But listen, I'm open to the idea that Josh McDaniels learned a lot during the first stint he had as a head coach and is ready for this and didn't rush into it and is going to do a good job. I'm not sold that that's definitely going to happen.

I mean, you look at just kind of the circumstances he's coached under. In the past, he's had one, two, three, six seasons where he hasn't had Tom Brady and he's produced two good offenses in those six seasons. Now, sometimes he had terrible quarterback, so that absolutely matters. But then you look at Bill Belichick. I mean, Bill Belichick is right, I don't want to say, be mean about it and say holding your hand during these Patriot seasons. But come on, it's Bill Belichick that is right there with you making a lot of these decisions. So I kind of need to see that he's this offensive guru that a lot of smart people think he is.

But to me, in terms of that relationship with players, all the other stuff that a head coach has to do, leadership, accountability, setting the culture. like my mind, the jury is out on all that stuff. So those are some of the questions I have with the Raiders. And defensively, I wonder what you think about this. I don't see a defense that's ready to make a monster leap. I mean, they were 17th in DVOA last year. I feel like they're probably going to be in a similar range of kind of mediocrity.

I mean, I love the edge rushers. I love Crosby and Chandler Jones. To me, they have questions really across the rest of that defense. So Patrick Graham can be a good defensive coordinator. and maybe they bump up the 13th or 14th, but I don't see them as like a top seven or eight defense this year. What did I get wrong there? I think that's totally fair.

When it comes to this team went 10 and 7 last year, I kind of throw that in the garbage as building off that kind of stuff. That doesn't really matter to me because I think a lot of times those records are a little bit fluky. I'm kind of starting over, especially because it's a new staff. They're not really building on anything. They're kind of starting with the players that they have. And if you look at the skill position talent, it's obviously very good.

This is one of those teams where it's easy to get excited about the skill position talent and then forget about all the questions along the offensive line. Colton Miller is going to be the left tackle for the Raiders. Outside of that, Parham will be in the mix at center, but there are a lot of other questions otherwise. Denzo Good is involved here. Leatherwood was taking snaps at right tackle during OTAs, according to DeShon's reporting that he did earlier this week. I mean, there are a lot of concerns with what that team is going to look like up front. And I think the expectations on defense are about right.

Where, you know, middle of the pack, they have some good players there, but not a ton of good ones. Rocky Sin is fine. It's not this huge upgrade at corner. And I think their secondary is filled with a lot of those guys, especially at corner. And on offense, when you have first year play callers or new offensive staffs, and we see those teams take huge leaps. We usually see them take huge leaps because they went from garbage, bottom of the barrel offensive coaching to pretty good or very good. Those turnarounds, that's what it typically looks like.

The Raiders offensive coaching under the previous regime was not bad. I actually think it was pretty good. So I would assume that there's going to be some growing pains and just some transition time built in with learning a new system, one that's heavily built on, you know, details and it's very dense. So it's easy to get excited about the players on this team, but I don't think they're going to take some monster leap. And even if you're looking at the defensive play calling and the personnel in an optimistic way, they still probably have, depending on how you want to look at 2022 Russell Wilson, the third or fourth best quarterback in their own division. So I'm not pessimistic or bearish about the Raiders. I just think that there are really, really good teams that they're going to be playing twice a year. Yeah, in the schedule strength stuff.

If you go by projected win totals, bear that out. They have the third tough of the schedule in the NFL. A lot of that obviously has to do with playing in the AFC West. I will say this. If you want to, you know, if you're a Raiders fan, it's like, oh, my gosh, you know, get out of here. We're so excited about this team. You know, they do have the ceiling to produce a really good offense.

I'm not talking to the top three or four. But to me, like, if you can talk yourself into like a top eight offense, then you're going to have a chance. And they've been top 10 in DVOA twice. the past six years with Derek Carr. Now you're adding Devonte Adams. And so you have a chance to do that. It's not a guarantee.

But I do think that type of ceiling probably exists with them. And even if people are projecting them to finish fourth in the AFC West, they're over under wind total is still eight and a half. Yeah. They're still expected to be a just above 500 team, which I think feels right to me. You know, maybe you could go a little bit better than that as a number that's fair to them. but I don't think that we're being overly negative about where the Raiders sit at this point

if we're projecting them to finish last than the division. I think that's more about the division than it is about the Raiders. All right. Next one here. Michael Angel says, why does the NFL value centers so little as reflected by their contracts? Centers make roughly half what a comparable tackle makes. The center is usually responsible for line calls.

They're involved in every play, whereas a tackle is less critical on place to the other side. There isn't some huge surplus of players the position. Quarterbacks absolutely hate pressure up the middle compared to edge pressure. And if your starting center goes down or you don't have a competent one to begin with, you're completely hosed. Ask any Bears fan how much they enjoyed the Sam Mustifer experience. Am I missing something or is this a market inefficiency? What do you think about this? Well, what I first thought was that this is the only podcast that would do like a mailbag and this

question would make the cut. And that's a credit to you and to the listeners that on June, what's today, June 6th, a question about center positional value. Oh, we got to make sure we get that one in there and address it. So that speaks to the hardcore nature of this pot. This is a compliment. I hope you're not, yeah, you're not taking effect to this year. The listeners know how to get to the core of me. They know how to bait me.

That's right. You know, I thought it was a fair question, although, you know, I think tackle can be a different animal. I mean, you need certain, you know, athletic traits, measurables to play tackle. in terms of guard versus tackle. You know, the top guards are making 16.5 million. Kelsey is the highest paid center at 14 million. So there is a difference there.

It's not a huge difference. I mean, I was looking at this, and I just thought great centers absolutely matter. There's no doubt about it for everything he spoke about. You know, it's the setting protections, helping the quarterback, the athleticism, someone like Kelsey with the pinpole schemes in the screen game. I mean, we all like looking at those highlights. So I think the top, top end centers, absolutely. matter. I think when you have a center that is not very good, that absolutely matters as well and can

wreck a lot of things. It just feels to me like there might be this big like middle tier where, all right, these are all, you know, solid, good players that you don't need to pay crazy amounts for that are going to help you. You know, someone like Bradley Bozeman, I was shot, that was one of the most shocking contracts of free agency where he only is making 2.8 million from the Panthers. I mean, I thought he was going to be an $8, 9, 10 million a year guy, the former Raven Center who has been a good player for them. and he doesn't get paid a lot. So it is a tricky market to kind of assess, but you could probably speak to his question more than me. I think there is a surplus of guys who can play the position

just because success at the position isn't based on outlandish physical traits. That to me is important. I think safety is kind of like this, where having good safety is a really important, but you don't need to go out and get a guy who's 6.3, 220, and runs a 4th, 3,40 to be a useful safety in the NFL, even if the value of the position is still really, really high. If you go out and get somebody, like, Ben Jones is a good example.

Ben Jones is always there, but finding that guy is really important to the success of your offense. And I think that's it. I think there's a have and have not with center. The gradations of how it affects your offense, I think there are limits on it. And I think that's why the value of them can only go so high. It's because there's only so much math you can flip with the center. If you have a guard that can lock down a three technique pass rusher, every single play one-on-one, you don't have to worry about him, things like that. There isn't a lot of that at center.

There's not a lot of one-on-one blocks in the passing game. I just think that having one is really important, but the impact of an elite one, what the Eagles do with Kelsey is so unique. But no one else does that. No one else weaponizes their center really in that way. What Travis Frederick could do for the Cowboys at some points, you know, there are examples of it, but I just think they're fewer and further between than they are at other people. positions even along the offensive line. Yeah, I think that makes sense.

It feels like one where, you know, durability. I mean, durability should always be prioritized, but it almost feels more so with the, when you had that drop off, a guy gets injured and you go to your backup, I feel like that's probably when you really feel it at center. Yeah, absolutely. Again, kind of that have, have not feeling. All right.

This is a fun one. Jonah Kula says you get to drop a retired player onto a team of your choosing where they reenter their prime for the 2020. 22 season. Who is it and why? His personal choice is Randy Moss on the Chargers. I did not send this question in. That would be the one that if people are making your caricature of me, that's what I would

say is dropping Randy Moss onto the Chargers. So I did not fake send this question in. I want to be clear about that. This was a great job by Joe. I mean, I looked at this question and I looked at Randy Moss to the Chargers and I'm like, I'll be able to beat that. And then I'm coming up with him, go, I don't know that I can beat that. My gosh, that would be amazing for this year to have Justin Herber throwing to

Randy Moss. And then I was just like, Randy Moss with any big, big armed QB. I mean, put him on the Chiefs right now. Oh, yeah, that would be fun. On the bills right now, that'd be fun. So I think he nailed it with his question and his prompt. I don't know that that can be beat. I tried to, you know, I was trying to find somewhere for Ed Reed or like Reggie White. I just couldn't totally get there. One of the ones I landed on, what about Pete Gronk on the Bengals this year? You have Jamar Chase on the out. No, do you pick this? I'm seeing your face. I also. I had that and then I changed it. Lay out your reasoning for it.

Well, I thought one, you know, he has some O-line issues. I mean, Gronka has been known to, like, just one-on-one block these defensive ends. If he's helping your tackle, you're in great shape there. You're protecting Burrow at all costs. He's a beast in the run game. You can work the middle of the field. It's almost like, you know, upgrade Tyler Boyd a little bit. You got these outside receivers and then in between the hashes, this guy is just going to be creating all kinds of chaos.

Red Zone. He's an absolute monster. And so I think that. in like February, when I was doing my mock free agency thing, I had this version of Gronk on the Bengals. I thought even that would be fun by Pete Grank on the Bengals team, that to me

would be amazing. I had that. That's the first name that I had for Gronk. I was thinking about fun offenses that had a hole and Pete Gronk over Hayden Hurst is a good one. I mean, that's a nice little upgrade. I was like, how the Bengals already have so many good players. So I put him on

the Jags just to give Trevor Lawrence something. Just to give him something. And I was thinking about certain receivers, but I have a couple of the receivers I put on other teams. And the scene ball that Lawrence throws, just imagine Gronk, like barreling down the seam in 2012 and the way that Trevor Lawrence throws the ball. So that's where I landed. But Bengals were another thought that I had. This is funny because they both played for the Ravens, but neither of them played for the Ravens in their primes. So putting early career, Ann Kwan Bolden or Steve Smith on the current version of the Ravens. Not really.

Revens versions of either guy, but their peak versions of both guys, I think would be very fun. I had Calvin Johnson on the Bears. Again, just to give Justin Fields something. I want to just give him the 6-5-230-pound-4-3 guy and let them go to work down the field every single play. That's another one I had. And this one, again, we're sticking to the brands being strong. Give me Marshall Yonda on the Bills or the Colts. Stick him with Quentin Nelson and Ryan Kelly in Indy.

just let those guys go to town. But also just the, I mean, Ryan Bates is a fine player. I would love to see what Marshall Yonda would look like on a really good offense with a bunch of other really good players. I like that. I wasn't going to go running back, but I was like, is there a running back I could pair with Lamar? Like, I don't know that, you know, like Barry Sanders with Lamont.

Like, I don't know if he's going to, if he's a fit or whatever. But, I mean, that would be pretty fun to, I mean, they would never have to really pass the ball with those. I mean, they would be a threat. They would have more explosive running plays than teams would have. have a passing place. So listen, the running backs don't matter. People, calm down.

You know, Barry Sanders was an amazing player to watch. Lamar Jackson is an amazing player to watch. So that would be fun also. He's not retired, but I also had, if you dropped like 2015 or 16, Julio onto the current Packers, and what that would ultimately look like would be really, really enjoyable. Yeah. All right. Kelly from Cincinnati says, I love the most valuable non-quarterback draft show and it got me thinking.

If the cap didn't exist and ownership wrote you a blank check, how would you go about constructing your team. Would the best roster you can come up with be the same as the most expensive roster possible or their positions where you still wouldn't take the most expensive guy at his spot? She has said a related question that I think would be great for trivia. If you did have a team with the most expensive player at every position, how far over this year's cap would it be?

So I did figure that out, sort of. We could talk about that in a second. But looking at the roster that you would construct, how close is yours or a version of yours to having the most expensive player at pretty much every position. Yeah, I mean, I think if I were approaching it, my priority number one with the GM, the owner, whatever would be, how are we building one of the most efficient offenses in the NFL, you know, top eight, whatever consistently. I wouldn't even, I don't hate defense.

I like defense, but if I'm talking team building, that would be my pitch. I would say this is how we sustain it, whether it's quarterback, play call, or whatever. We need to be finishing in the top six, top eight of offensive efficiency year in and year out. that's going to give us the opportunity to win Super Bowl. So then you look at the positions. I don't think that it would necessarily be the most expensive players at each position. I mean, you have great quarterbacks on rookie contracts right now with Justin Herbert, Joe Burrow. I mean, you could certainly go that route, wide receiver.

You know, I would want to build quarterback, wide receiver, O line. And maybe not specifically in that order. If you can build the O line with the pass catchers at the same time, that's a win. But, I mean, someone like Jamar Chase, absolutely. he would be in the mix if you're building your ideal roster, Justin Jefferson. He'd absolutely be on the short list of wide receivers you would want right now. Even someone like for Sean Slater as your left tackle and all those guys are on rookie contracts. So yeah, I think, you know, if you're talking about guys on their second contracts,

it probably would get a little bit closer. But man, you have so many talented elite players who are on their first deals that I don't think it would align with the most expensive roster. There are several guys. And I think the positions you mentioned are right. in line with what I had. Justin Jefferson was on my list. He's on a rookie deal. If I were to contract aside, if I were just putting together a trio of receivers right now, Justin Jefferson might be in there. That's how good I think Justin Jefferson is. Cooper Cup is the 19th highest paid wide receiver in the league. And he'd probably be in there. Tristan works may be the best right

tackle in football. He's on a rookie deal. Quentin Nelson is still on a rookie deal. Nick Bosa is probably on the edge, but he's a guy that I could throw him into a starting lineup. Him, his brother, T.J. Watt, Miles Garrett. I think they're all kind of in that same boat. So those guys have already gotten paid. He hasn't. Maybe he would be an exception. And I think AJ Terrell is another guy that even if you were building a starting three corners, you could probably make an argument that he could be in there with Jair Alexander or Jalen Ramsey and a lot of those guys. That's really it. Other than that, I had most guys that are at the top. You know, Mahomes and Allen, I think I'd still rather have Mahomes than anybody else right now. And he's at the top of the market.

Running back is another one. Jonathan Taylor is still on a rookie deal. I would take Jonathan Taylor. And even if we talk about guys that got paid, I'd rather have Nick Chubb than the $16 million running back's price not even in consideration. Receiver, it's gotten to the point now where the other guys are probably the highest paid guys. Devante, Tyree Kill, if you're putting together, receiving core would probably be in there. The tight ends have all gotten paid.

The really, really good ones. Kelsey and Kittle are at the top of the market. They've already gotten theirs. tackle we already talked about, and then the edges. And then the corners for the most part outside of Terrell have already gotten paid. I think the safeties are kind of the same way. So the few exceptions, but there still are a lot of expensive players in there. Answering the question about how much it would cost to have the most expensive players at every single position.

These are just the starters. Just the 22 starters would be $465 million, which is twice the 2022 cap. So when we spend time on contracts and how it's important to have guys that are values, that's why. It's a capped league. I mean, there is a salary cap. That's why it matters with the context when we talk about stuff like this. Because if you just had all the most expensive players, you'd be twice the cap. And that's without filling out the other 31 spots on your roster.

So I've never done that before. It's information I did not know. So I appreciate Kelly for the question because it was fun to look into that. All right. This next one I absolutely love. Dmitri and Acacus says, one potential question for the mailbag. In the other football, soccer, a good manager can make a team 10% better. A bad manager can make that same team 30% worse.

Giovanni Trappitone, I don't know who that is, but that was the example that he gave. I've often thought that an American football, these numbers are even higher. I get the impression that the vintage coaching staffs with Belichick and Dantes Scarnacia improve their teams more than 10%. And on the negative end, someone like Urban Meyer probably made his team more than 30% worse. What are the right percentages? This is a great question because I've never thought about it in these terms before, but it's really a question about how much does coaching ultimately matter in the NFL

compared to the talent on your roster? So where did you land? It was a great question. I was trying to think about it. I was trying to think of teams where I said, man, that coach really got more out of that roster than he should have. And then vice versa, I mean, one team that just stood out to me, the 2019 Steelers, where they're playing Mason Rudolph and Duck Hodges

and Mike Tomlin still goes eight and eight. Like, I was, you know, again, this is not a fancy math. This is me in my head going, what would an average coach have done with that team? I mean, five or six wins? I mean, what would Urban Meyer have done with that team? It would have gotten really ugly, really fast. So that was one that stood out. He mentioned Belichick and the Patriots.

I mean, even the 2020 Patriots, I remember looking at that roster before the season going, they're not going to be very good. Look at this. They've got nobody on this roster. And they go seven and nine. I mean, there are teams in the NFL that would like, you know, you tell some fan bases right now, you're going to go seven and nine next year, and they'll be throwing a parade in the preseason. And so, like, it's nothing to go seven and nine.

They had no juice at the skill positions. They've got Cam Newton in there. The defense wasn't very good. I mean, they were 26th in DVOA. Of course, they were first in special teams. Yes, coaching matters there for sure. And so I was looking at that going easily could have been a four-win team. Again, you know, not to pick on Urban Meyer with all of this, but, yeah, it could have gotten even uglier there.

So I kind of landed on a great coach over average. This could be totally wrong. Maybe there will be some analytics people who will tell us what the actual answer is. In my head, I feel like they could get you two to three wins. It might be crazy. That's what I feel over an average coach and over a terrible coach, I feel like it's even higher than that. So I kind of agree with Dimitri there.

So what is the percentage? Well, yeah, so the percentage would be, well, yeah. So I was using the Steelers example that an average coach would win six games and so if you win eight games there that would be what 33% more is am i doing the math there 25% more i'm doing it on the fly here i i landed on a very similar number i had you could make a a team a third better or third about 30% better and the examples i was thinking about was and it's hard to figure all of this out because you can't control for every single variable but i look at teams like the 2017 Rams, for example, where the 2016 Rams had the worst offense in football, like the

worst offense in the league. And then in 2017, Sean McVay comes in and they finish sixth in offensive BVOA. There are other elements to that. They went out and signed Robert Woods. They signed Andrew Whitworth and Free Agency. Jared Goff goes from year one to year two. So if we're trying to control for the coaching variable of that, I think it's like a third better.

That would be my guess. And I think the same is true on the bad side. I think you can make about a third worse on the bad side. It could be more or less than that, but that was kind of where I settled. It was about 30 to 33%. Yeah, I think it might be, yeah, because, I mean, that Steelers example I said. So if they win six games and then I'm saying Tom, you know, or they won eight games, and I'm saying an average coach maybe wins them six.

So that would be a 33% bump from Tomlin to an average coach, a bad coach. It would be more. I mean, could that team have gone four and 12? I don't know. I haven't done a deep dive on the 29. Steelers, I hadn't thought about them much until... I think their defense was too good. I think their defense just based on talent alone was too good for them to be that bad.

Okay. Now, this is a good exercise, though, when you're looking at it, I know we're not jumping ahead to this season, but I do think about teams in that way when I'm trying to identify teams that could make the leap, like a team like the Jaguars, you know, with Urban Meyer just going from him to a, if you believe, Doug Peterson's average or above average or whatever you think of him, that should technically make a pretty serious difference.

So we'll get some test cases this year with some of this. And that's the problem, though, is that it's not just the coats that's going to change. They signed a bunch of players in free agency. And I don't even know, it's so hard to know whether it's Doug Peterson or not Urban Meyer is the most important factor in that equation. There's teams that are really bad, like really, really bad are going to get better, just by sheer luck they're probably going to get better. It's hard to be that bad over and over again in a league with so many factors pushing

team toward the middle. So even like that example I used the 2017 Rams, they were not going to have the worst offense in the league again. They were probably going to finish around 25th even if they were bad. So it's more about 25 to about 6 to 8. And that's where that 30%, even though I'm sure that math is wrong, starts to come into play. So it's really, really difficult. to isolate this stuff.

And I think that's the difficulty in answering a question like this. Let's say before last season, the Jaguars and the Patriots trade coaching staffs. How many wins do you think the Jaguars have last year? There were three and 14.

You've got Trevor Lawrence. Everything else, the roster is exactly the same. How many wins do you think they have? They probably could have gone seven and ten. Yeah, I was going, I was at seven. My head said seven and I go, is that too high? maybe not too high. So, I mean, in that case, it's higher than we're even talking about.

So, yeah, it's fun. Those are fun conversations. I think they probably could have won seven games. Yeah. I really do. That's how little faith I have in, urban Meyer, and how much faith I have. And the version of last year's Patriots coaching staff with Josh from Daniels on it. This year's version with Matt Patricia calling plays and Belichick drafting,

Cole Strange in the first round, everything else. I feel like we should have a reset about how much respect we're giving the Patriots, but that's a conversation for another day. All right. Kent, let's get to our first voicemail here. Hey, Robert. This is Noah from Toronto. First off, does anybody ever compare

Sky Moore to Golden Tate? It's just an independent thought that I had. Anyways, here's my question. Do you think there's more Austin Ecclors and Adam Thielen that get found by the NFL or lost? To say, like, guys that clearly have stuff, or productive level talent that have like a walk-on sort of NFL journey.

Let me know. First note, fuck off, Noah. I appreciate that. It's great. It's a great way to start that question. So I figured you were a really good person to ask this because I always love talking to people who cover teams day to day because they have such an intimate knowledge of even the pre-cut 90

where you're thinking about every single player and how they got there and what their backstory is. And you've covered multiple teams in that capacity where you've had to think about all of the guys filtering on and off the roster. So I'm wondering, how do you feel about this? Do you think more of those guys get lost or found

relative to the general pool of NFL players? Yeah, I struggled with this question a little bit. I mean, my initial reaction is that sort of those, you know, star level players, the, you know, Austin Eckler, Adam Thielen, if you just, you know, are looking at salary or whatever, those are high level. NFL players. I think those are mostly found. I mean, just because if you look at it from lower levels, high school, college, you know, those are the types of players that are probably going to get

a lot of benefit of the doubt. They're just supremely talented. They have a high ceiling. They can have other issues, but programs will be willing to take a chance on those types of players. And so I would say, you know, I could be totally wrong about this. I mean, I would be curious to hear what like former players think about, you know, it feels like they have more stories about, hey, this guy was in camp and man, if he just got an opportunity type thing. But I sort of feel like the star level players get found. Now, I would agree or believe that the productive players, like who could be maybe backups, maybe average starters, those guys, maybe you could make a case for getting lost because there

are other factors at work aside from talent. There are coaching preferences. There are GM preferences. There's where did a guy get drafted? I mean, we see it every year. You get drafted in the first round. You're going to get a lot more opportunities than if you were in undrafted free agent, politics plays a role in injuries.

I mean, all these different things. So I agree with that premise that, you know, you do have to have a little bit of luck on your side. But I think once you hit a certain threshold of talent, most of those guys are probably going to be given the opportunity and found at some point. Yeah, I think that's a good way to draw the lines with stars and then just players that end up making the roster. The one I come back to last year was Deerunis Johnson, where Deeris Johnson was

an AAAF player and he was struggling to kind of find a footing in the NFL and then you see him in good circumstances with that Browns offense, that Browns offense line. It's like, holy shit, that guy can just play. He's making $2 million this year. The Browns did a lot of work to keep him on the roster. And I'm sure there are so many of those guys that just with the right breaks, it could have been players that were worth a one year, $2.5 million contract in the NFL that never got one. But those are guys that just are functional NFL players.

When it comes to those star level guys, I probably say that ultimately more of those guys get found than get lost. Yeah, I agree. All right, Julia Gunther asks, I've been thinking about this a lot lately, and you alluded to it a bit on the GM show. Are NFL teams too quick to make leadership changes at GM and head coach, and do they overvalue results compared to process?

It's been percolating for me the last few months as a Jets fan, watching the job Joe Douglas and maybe to a lesser degree, Salah and LaFleur have done. For the first time and a long time, they're behaving like a competent organization with a plan and a philosophy. Patch up holes at non-premium positions with free agents who are not top of the market and swing for stars at premium positions in the draft. You talk on the show about how these are dice rolls. I have no idea of Zach or anyone else will pan out. But for up to me, I'd let JD potentially take another swinging quarterback if Zach doesn't work out.

I'm sure that's on how the billionaire owners that these teams think. Am I just a star of Jeff's fan clinging out to any more sort of competence or are owners rash with some of these decisions? What do you think about this? The framing of this question was very interesting because I started reading it. And my initial reaction was, more patience is something that coaches, GMs, people in the league, they seem to always push. And in my head, I'm kind of like, if you have three years and I'm not, you know, seeing signs of a turnaround or, you know, significant progress, in most cases, not every case, then I don't think it's wild to be like, this might not be the person. Let's move on.

And so sometimes I think we go overboard, you know, it seems. sort of, you know, trendy to say, oh, you need more patience. These owners don't give them time to work. Like, I feel like three years is a fair window. You should let the people know going in, hey, by the end of year three, I want to see some real progress with this. Now, having said that, I love the Joe Douglas example, because to me, this is like an exception. And it goes back to the quarterback discussion we, you guys have had on the show, we've had on the show for so long. Finding the quarterback is really freaking hard. And I would not be firing a coach or a GM because they screwed up because they made a mistake on quarterback. Now, that's easy for me to say,

I'm not an owner. I don't have the pressure, you know, the other pressure. So this might be, this probably is totally unrealistic. But if an owner asked me, I would say if you have a GM who you feel like is doing a lot of things right and it's a good culture and the scouting and everything, you know, they're open-minded and you like what they've done with the rest of their roster, some of that certainly would apply to Joe Douglas when you look at how the roster has improved and they miss on the quarterback. That to me is not reason enough to fire that. Like if Zach Wilson stinks this year and Joe Douglas goes to ownership and says, you know what, we took a swing on Wilson, we're going to learn from that. We don't think he's the guy.

We didn't have a great year. But we really feel like we're building something here. The roster's good. Let me take a swing on another quarterback. And I liked everything else I saw. That's reasonable to me. Like, that's not crazy to me to go ahead and give the person more time. So it sort of shifted to me into a like don't just judge the GM or whatever, the decision maker on the quarter.

because there's so much uncertainty there. It's so hard to find one that you have to take more things into account and let them take a couple swings there even if they get one wrong. I am more inclined to give patience with the GM than I am with the coaching staff. I think that you see the results with the coaching staff. You see immediately the impact that a coaching staff can have on a group of players. with a personnel side and a team building process, I think it's much harder to see results immediately. And I think that process is more important than anything else.

So you look at all, and part of the reason I'm talking about it this way is you look at all of the teams that have shifted between coaching staffs but kept their personnel folks and had some success. I mean, Jason Light, if he had been fired after three years, he easily could have been. You think about that 2016 draft. that was the one where they traded up for the kicker. That was his third year. He could have been gone. And now we're talking about him as one of the better GMs in the league. Les Sneed went through multiple coaches with the Rams.

And they had some really rough years before they got Sean McVeigh in there. Tom Telesco was on another coaching staff now. Duke Tobin, who is the de facto GM for the Bengals, is on another coaching staff now. So I think with personnel guys, there is some justification. for holding on to those guys because we've seen people rebound because I do think that it's a numbers game over time. We've seen it gone the other way too, right? John Schneider was not on our list of top 10 GMs. John Schneider was the king of NFL personnel guys at one point.

So I think with that, it's so up and down because there's a lot of luck involved with draft things of that nature that I think with personnel guys, I'm okay with that with coaches. I do think you're going to see the results in two, three years probably. I think holding on to those guys, there probably isn't as much justification. Yeah, coaches, you can just do the exercise we just did, you know? Yes. At the end of the year, look at the team, the record, how they performed. Hey, if we had Belichick or McVeigh, how would we have performed? Hey, if we had Urban Meyer, Matt Patricia, how would we have performed?

And where did our guy actually perform? It's very simplistic, but that's the kind of thing when you're trying to decide, do we have a chance to upgrade or not, you know, that's kind of a simple way to look at it. I also think that the GM is such an important figure in how the building runs, that having someone with that organizational fluency and this is what the vision of the team has been for this long. If you're okay with what that vision is, but the results haven't necessarily been up to your standards, then I think riding with that vision for a little bit longer, I do think there's some merit to that. The Eagles are another really good example.

I mean, Howie Roseman has lived multiple lives as part as a member of that organization. And I think that part of the reason he probably got that job again is that Jeffrey Lurie was very comfortable with the vision that how he would have for what the organization should look like. He brings him back into that role. They win a Super Bowl two years later. So because Doug Peterson was a better fit for what that team needed in the moment than Chip Kelly ended up being. So I just think that that is why I would be more prone to give a little bit longer leash to some of the guys on the personnel side. And what you mentioned with all those GMs with turnarounds, I mean, I mean, how many of them is it just find the right play caller, find the right quarterback,

and man, that will erase many. That will solve a lot of your problems. Just focus on getting one of those two, McVeigh, you know, the Tom Brady. If you can hit on just one of those, we love talking about all the nuances, but sometimes it does, you know, sometimes it is kind of simple. It's not easy, but it is simple. I think you get two coaches. After coach number two, if you haven't managed to turn it around, I think that's probably you should be on your way out there. the door, but that's a lot of these guys, that's when it was.

I'm pretty sure the Lesney just had Jeff Fisher, and then they went from Jeff Fisher to McVeigh, to McVeigh, success. Jason Light had Lovey, and he went from Lovey to Dirk Cutter and then to Bruce Ariens. I understand how that happened, though. That happened because Dirk Cutter was the offensive coordinator when James had that little whisper of competency and those flashes, like we have to stick to this, so we're going to hire Dirk Cutter and then Fire Lovie is what they ultimately ended up doing, even though that didn't really work out.

But a lot of these guys, they have a bad coach and then they have a good one. And if that's when the success happens, I think that's totally fine as a plan. All right. Matt Lane asks, this is a great question. Who is the worst quarterback who can win a Super Bowl this year? That's it. He sent us several questions. I may go back to some of them because they're all really good.

But this is the one that I landed on for today. It's such a good question. I had such a hard time with it. I was going through the standings and, you know, a lot of the no-brainers are there. Well, you know, this is a great quarterback. Yeah, this team can win the Super Bowl. I landed on three. I'm just going to name one because then I want to hear.

I also have three. You have three, too. Okay. Yep. I don't know. Am I being a homer here by saying Jalen Hertz? When you look at the, here's why. J.

J. Hurtz is one of my three. Okay. So I was looking at the state of the roster. I mean, man, they've really put him in position to succeed with that offensive line, with the addition of A.J. Brown, Devante Smith, Dallas Goddard, like just going through the roster. the rosters. He is really in position to succeed one. Two, one of the easiest schedules in the

entire NFL. So you've got that working for you in terms of does this team have a chance to get a high seed in the NFC? And then three, the division is not great. So you get some gimmies in there. It's not like you're battling in the AFC West. And so so much of this is if you can get a buy, if you can get a two seat and play a home game in the second round, that gets you there. So I think Hertz is, you know, somewhere in that middle tier of quarterbacks, we'll see if he makes the leap or not. But I didn't want to pick the team that I am, you know, the city I'm in. But that's one, that was the one that really stood out to me.

Jalen Hertz is a very good answer. He's one of the three that I had on my list. So I guess the answer, the final answer, is more about who do you think is the worst quarterback among these three guys if we're going to admit that these three teams win the Super Bowl? Here are the three I had. James Winston. Wow.

22, Matt Ryan and Jalen Hertz. So the three that I had. Interesting. So let's just look at the Super Bowl odds, okay? And just run through them. All right, the bills have the best Super Bowl odds. Josh Allen's a very good quarterback. Tom Brady.

Patrick Mahomes. Matthew Stafford. Aaron Rogers. Justin Herbert. The Niners are next. The Niners are a good one. So I guess it would be Trey Lance would be the answer here or if Jimmy was going to be their quarterback.

So that should be another one of these answers. But I feel like if. they are in the Super Bowl mix, Trey Lance is going to be really good. Like, we don't know a lot, all these guys, we have opinions on. It's a good point.

Trey Lance, you know, you might have an opinion on, but you don't really know for sure. So I feel like, yeah, no, I would scratch Trey Lance. So Trey Lance would be the wild card in there.

After that, Russell Wilson, Dak Prescott, Deshawn Watson, Lamar Jackson, Joe Burrow. And then we get to this little tier here with Matt Ryan,

J-1 Hertz, and then a little bit behind that is James Winston. So those are my three answers. I think the correct answer is J-1-Hertz. Because I think, who's better right now, J-1-Hertz or James Winston? Man, when you factor in what Hertz does in the run game, it's really what kind of offense, you know, how do you want to play sort of thing? Hurtz is going to make fewer mistakes. Winston is going to make a lot more big-time throws. I mean, I think they're very, I bet if you look, I would say Winston probably has an, if you just looked at it statistically,

Winston has probably, you know, had enough seasons where he's been a little bit above average and Hertz was probably around, what, 16 or 17th last year? I think it's close, but I mean, there are teams that would definitely say they would rather have Hertz than Winston for this year. I think it would probably be pretty split. I would probably say Winston. Do you think the Saints with Winston can win the Super Bowl? No, I don't think the Saints can win. I think people are going nuts on the Saints team. I love New Orleans. I love you Saints fans, but I do not. I think this team is in for a rude awakening. I think people are underrating how good of a coach Sean Payton was,

some of the veterans that they lost. I do not see that team. I mean, I would be shocked, stunned if James Winston were sniffing a Super Bowl. Other smart people would very much disagree with me. I'll throw you, you ready for this wild one?

I'll throw one at you. I might say Kirk Cousins. Is Kurt Cousins, is he not bad enough? Or is he too bad? I mean, I don't even know where we are now with this. But I just don't think the rest of that team is good enough. I just don't think the rest of that team is good enough.

Really? See, the Vikings were one team where I went through the roster and I thought they had a puzzling offseason. And as we talked about, where the new regime operated by like the last regime, but at the same time, what they did, which I didn't agree with, was adding these veterans. Don't do this to yourself.

Don't do this to yourself. I mean, Justin Jefferson, Dalvin, Cook, and Adam Thielen on offense, we don't even talk about the offensive line. They add Jordan. I mean, their front seven, They've got players in that front seven. If Kevin O'Connell, like, who, how good of an offensive coach would he have to be for them to win that division?

Where does he fall along our percentages? It would have Kevin O'Connell is a 30% coach and we just don't even know it yet. Yeah. And specifically the type, I mean, going from a defensive coach who doesn't really care about scoring points to now an offensive coach who's going to have a system. Kirk Cousins was one of the ones I threw in there now. I don't know where we are on Derek Carr. I don't know how I feel about Derek Carr. I don't have a specific ranking,

but he was another name that I did write down. I think he's a good quarterback, but he's not in the same category as those guys you mentioned. If we concede that the Eagles can win the Super Bowl, then Jalen Hertz is the answer, I think, over both Derek Carr and Kurt Cousins. If Price is not involved here at all, just how good of a quarterback are you,

then I think Jalen Hertz is the correct answer. I'm with you on the Saints. All of this rationalization with this, I'll be happily wrong. If the Saints ended up being great and Chris Oliva and Trevor Penning are great players from day one and all of these bets that they made or were a great understanding of their window and what they needed in this moment. Great. That sounds like it's fun. The defense stays healthy even though they're getting a little bit older. All of that.

Cool. I will love watching the Saints. Let's let James throw it around. I'm totally with you about the Sean Payton's side of this. going from an objectively top five coach that's been there for a decade to even if we're excited about Dennis Allen, I still think there's so many uncertainties associated with that team that I'm not nearly as quick to pencil them in as potential contenders in the NFC as everyone else is. I just thought that if we're trying to go down the list here, that's about the range I was going to be hunting in. But I do think ultimately Jalen Hertz is the correct answer to the question. That a great question. Matt Lane, send me like sometimes I don't have column ideas, just like email me. I mean, I wish I would have if I'm asked to write about something in the next two weeks, I might just steal this question. I'll just transcribe what we wrote, do some additional work on it. But that's an awesome question. All right, last one here. We're talking about the Vikings. Let's do more Vikings talk. You always push forward to Vikings talk on this show. All right, Matthew Warren says, as a follower of the Minnesota Vikings, I was really interested in Mike Sandow's observation about nice guy.

head coaches during the excellent rebuilding episode on June 2nd. A lot of the rhetoric on the end of the Zimmer Spilman era revolved around cultural problems and it's been a big part of the message of the new Kevin O'Connell, Quiseido Fulmesa regime. The build during Simmer's time, especially at his hire, has a lot in common with your current

successful rebuild examples. Obviously, Minnesota missed on the quarterback, Bridgewater, Bradford Cousins, and clock management was always a knock against Zimmer, but I do have the sense teams hated to face playing him, even if they didn't fear him. I'm tired of the attitude narrative coming from Minnesota in its press, but Sandos comments have me thinking that there's more to it than I've given credit. How big of a deal is it

really? Are there other examples of team that got it all right except the coach wasn't nice enough? I thought nice guys always finished last. I wanted to ask you this because, again, as someone who's been around and gotten a good sense of how buildings feel and what the vibe is in certain places, that you cover Pete Carroll, how much do you think it really does matter that there is a healthy atmosphere in the building that ends up potentially driving a team success? I think it does matter. I think it's, you know, you want the atmosphere where the players don't hate coming to work every day, where they don't have a relationship with the coach.

I mean, I think all those things matter where there's an energy. It doesn't always have to be positive, but there's a respect where, I mean, to me, like, simply players want coaches who can help them get better. And so, you know, I don't want to say that Zimmer, I don't think that Zimmer got everything right except for that. I bet there are players under Zimmer who say, yeah, absolutely, he made me a lot better. He made a lot of money for me, for my family. He helped me have the career that I wanted, you know, specifically, I bet you could find a lot of defensive players who would say that. So I don't think that's everything with him. You know, I think coaches, I mean, I think owners, uh, tend to

overcorrect with a lot of this stuff. You know, how often do we see someone like Zimmer who's a little gruff, uh, curmudgeonly? And then you kind of go in the opposite direction where it's, you know, Kevin O'Connell just seems, you know, he's going to be good with the media. He's somebody who it seems like players are going to like. And then, you know, once that type of guy fails, then you hear the opposite where the story, oh, you know, this team needed more discipline. The last guy wasn't doing that. So we may overrate it a little bit.

And I don't know that it specifically applies to Zimmer. I think their issues were probably bigger than just, you know, kind of how, you know, his mood or the culture he created those things. But I definitely do think it matters, especially with athletes now. I think the smartest coaches realize that and they're like, we're not going to run this, you know, like a like a 1970s high school program where we're a drill sergeant where it's more, we're going to have relationships with these players. We're going to create a culture.

We're going to make sure everyone knows that we're creating an environment where we're trying to help them get better and also win at the same time. This isn't about niceness to me. It's about openness. And I think that's a huge difference. I don't, I've had this conversation with. which is a lot recently, and I think it's a really useful one. And the phrase I landed on when I was talking to a head coach about it recently was,

how much do you think this kumbaya bullshit really matters? The answer was it doesn't matter to that extent. It's not about the kumbaya bullshit. It's about having a culture of openness and reciprocation between your players. I think in Minnesota, everything got really condensed and insulated. And it led to people, not a lot of sharing of information. I don't think, and I think it led to people walking on eggshells all of the time. I don't know how much it ultimately matters.

I can tell you right now that that building feels very, very different right now than it did for the last few years on several different levels. I think the impact of it is already tangible in how people feel in the hallway every single day at work. How much that ultimately ends up factoring into wins on the field? I don't know. But I don't think it's about having a young coach who's going to, to be nice to people like me or not be curt at press conferences. I think it's about a place where the communication goes two ways instead of one way. Because I think for a long time in that place specifically, the communication went one way.

I think the players are going to be involved more in decision making. I think the players are going to feel more comfortable speaking up about little tiny things. This is how we feel this week. We're tired. I don't think we should do full pads on Thursday. I just don't think it's the right approach. Just having that environment, that to me is real. And that was the biggest change when the Packers hired Matt LaFleurre.

There was just that level of communication started traveling both ways. And there was just an open dialogue about some of that smaller stuff that I do think has a real impact. So I think that's what's going to happen in Minnesota. And I do think that stuff ultimately ends up being real. And just soliciting ideas from your players. This is what I feel comfortable doing. What if we did this? What if we do that?

Not every guy is going to be Cooper Cup and what he was for the Rams. But I think fostering that type of environment where you're really pushing forward the idea of ownership among the people playing in the building, I do think that ultimately ends up being an important thing. And I do think the Vikings are going to be more prone to having that now than they were before. Absolutely. Yeah, that's smart leadership. That's smart management. I mean, it's just common sense to think that everyone's going to be pulling in the

same direction or invested if they feel like their voice is heard. So, yeah, I would agree with you. All right. That's all we got. Great set of questions. A lot of really, really good conversation starters. So thank you very much for sending all of those in.

Thank you for spending the time, buddy. I know that you're very busy. So it's the off season. We're all trying to take it easy a little bit, but I appreciate you hopping on with us for an hour. Lindsay's ramping up toward vacation. So we're going to kind of let her do her thing this week. Me and Nate are going to be back on Wednesday.

we're going to do a show about Lamar Jackson and Kyler Murray. I think that they are just two really, really good guys to chew on as we currently sit in the NFL calendar. Both are on the verge of potential huge contract extensions. Their offenses have kind of petered out. Nate wrote about Lamar last year. I think the status of both of those guys could potentially impact with the veteran quarterback market looks like next offseason, which could potentially impact how many teams need quarterbacks in the draft. There are just a lot of potential fallout elements from those two players specifically that I really wanted to dig into.

So that's what we're going to do on Wednesday. Encourage you guys to come back and check that out if that sounds interesting to you. In the meantime, please rate and review the podcast on your podcast platform for choice. I mean a lot to me if you did that. Please subscribe to the athletics show. What are you working on? I long-term stuff. Just go, yeah, nothing in the works.

Okay. Well, there are plenty of other writers that you can read, including that piece I just discussed. of that Nate wrote last week about Lamar Jackson would be a great primer to what we're going to end up talking about on Wednesday's show. So if you do not have a subscription, please go get one. Theathletic.com slash football show. You will not regret it, I promise. We'll be back on Wednesday. Until that, appreciate you guys listening.

Appreciate the questions. We'll talk to you soon. This was the Athletic Football Show.