The Athletic Football Show: A show about the NFL - Mailbag with Bill Barnwell and a Tampa Bay Buccaneers Team Visit with Greg Auman

Episode Date: November 11, 2020

First up, Robert reunites with former podcast partner, ESPN’s Bill Barnwell, to open up the mailbag and answer listener questions about fixing the Chicago Bears, rebuilding the Jets in five moves, how analytics effect the game, if they’d take Patrick Mahomes or seven non-QB starters, and many more.Then, in this week’s Tampa Bay Buccaneers Team Visit, The Athletic’s Greg Auman joins the show to discuss the Bucs’ blowout loss to the Saints, the tone around the team now as opposed to what it was like when they were rolling a few weeks ago, Tom Brady, Antonio Brown, and more.Subscribe to The Athletic now for just $1 a week when you visit http://theathletic.com/footballshow Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This is the Athletic Football Show. Welcome to the Athletic Football Show. Fun show for you guys today. Greg Almond from The Athletic is going to be joining us a little bit later for our team visit to discuss the Tampa Bay Buccaneers. But before that, joining me today, my good buddy, Bill Barnwell. Bill, how are you? Oh, just the tenor of your voice and how you built out to my name is very disconcerting. I don't know.

I don't know if I can live up to that tone. try my best. So for people who don't know, we used to do a podcast together. Literally, like I would be sad if nobody knew. Someone to listen to this did not know, but I'm sure it's possible. There might be people. I'm sure there are people out there. Well, I'm not sure. But there might be people out there who are listening to this show and did not listen to our old show. But we had a show on Grantland back in the day. And as part of that show, we used to do a lot of mailbags. We thought they were fun. We used to get really good reader questions. So we decided this week, in part because we didn't have any other better ideas that we were going to do a mailbag.

So that's what we have done. That's true. Yes. I concur with all of that. I solicited questions from everybody on Twitter through email. First things first, thank you to everyone who sent a question in. They were very good. I got a bunch of them.

I'm going to try to get to some of them in my email and respond to ones we couldn't get to one here because they were so good. I actually got like a little bit emotional reading some of them because they were so nice. Like I sincerely appreciate just like people being very nice and you know they wrote notes along with their questions. I wasn't getting emotional just at the questions. But I really did appreciate everyone engaging and sending them in. We'll get to as many as we can here. The first one I want to get to though is from Carl Peterson. And I'm very glad he sent this along on Twitter because I would not have remembered this otherwise and have not thought about it in a long time.

He sent a question about Charlie Whitehurst, which again, for those people who did not list our podcast, Charlie Whitehurst was a familiar character. We eventually, I don't know how we found this out or how we realized it that he did an interview in Nashville magazine saying that he could drive any vehicle to its limit, which we had so many questions about. And then we had Charlie Whitehurst on the podcast to answer that question. So I want to ask you right now, who is today's version of Charlie Whitehurst? Do we have one? Because it doesn't feel like there are any fun backup quarterbacks right now that fit that description. You know what this is like, Mayas?

This is like when you go see a band that had a one hit, like a one hit wonder that had a hit like six years ago. And you kind of go to the show and you're like, okay, I want to hear this song. But I don't know if they're going to play it at the end and make us sit through 40 minutes of like new stuff that nobody cares about. This is the band. They just, they got on stage. They were like, hey, this is our song. And they played that hit the first moment that they got on stage. So I'm hoping that people don't turn off the podcast after we get to the Charlie Whitehurst.

Discussion. To your point, is there a fun backup quarterback out there like Charlie Whiteer? So we're assuming good hair, maybe just a good disposition. Yes. I mean, does Fitz count? I think Fitz is probably the answer. But I would say that Fitz and the other guy I was thinking about, which is Gardner Minchu, they weren't backups. So it feels like those career backup type guys, at least at the beginning of this season, had ascended to starting roles. But now the universe is correcting itself and they're heading back to the bench.

So I think that it's going to figure itself out eventually. But those are the two guys that I would say, even if they weren't real backups at the beginning of the season. I would throw out Blaine Gabbard as well, although I don't know much about Blaine Gabbard's personality. I think I would leave that up to you. He's got the hair, but definitely does not have the rest of the disposition that you're looking for. I would also say maybe not hair, but just in terms of just like, I don't understand anything about this person and how they exist. Ben Danucci.

Ben Danucci just seems like he's really happy to be here, which I would feel the exact same way if I were playing quarterback in the NFL right now and I were Ben Danucci. I would say that I don't know many people around the Cowboys right now who feel like they're just happy to be there, but sure. It's a good point. It's a good point. All right.

Let's get to the actual questions here. And I want to, there are a few of them at the top that I'm kind of lumping together because I got so many of them on the same top. And not surprisingly, the one I got the most questions about was the Chicago Bears and how I would fix those Chicago Bears. I talk about this a decent amount on this show in snippets, whether it's what they're doing offensively, the overall plan, the quarterback, everything else. So I wanted to ask you this question. If you were thinking about just the next year of Chicago Bears football, what would you do to try to get this team back to contention as quick as you could make it happen?

Oh, I was hoping you were going to answer this one. That's why I don't have any notes for it. They're, they're sort of locked in, right? Like, I go and look at their 20-21 cap situation. They're $3.6 million under the projected cap, and that's without Alan Robinson, who is going to cost more than $3.6 million.

And you look at the top of their roster, they have a bunch of expensive players, and, well, Colomac isn't going anywhere. Kyle Fuller probably isn't going anywhere. Robert Quinn's cap situation makes him impossible to cut. Keem Hicks shouldn't be going anywhere. Eddie Jackson shouldn't be going anywhere. Charles Leno, Jimmy Graham could maybe cut those guys. But I mean, I guess you could cut Graham. Graham's actually been kind of, you know, he's been a red zone target at least this year.

Yeah, he's not been good, though. Let's not. You've not been good, but. Let's not get that twisted here. Like, if you were the Bears and you signed Jimmy Graham and this is the production you got through half season, like, I'm not sure what else Ryan Pace could have asked for besides this. So I don't think he is sitting there saying, okay, we're definitely going to cut Jimmy Graham at the end. of the year. But like, you have to cut one of these guys or make some significant moves to create cap space. And that's without adding another quarterback. That's without adding, you know, a receiver to replace Robinson or to resign Robinson. That's without addressing the offensive line. So,

I mean, you don't have a lot of financial flexibility. So I don't really know what your big first step is. So what do you think? I mean, if you were going to try and, and maintain this roster, what do you do? I don't know. I don't. know, it's not a quick fix and it's not an easy answer because part of me just thinks you have to start over. I mean, this regime as constructed, whether it's the front office, the coaching staff, whatever, I just don't know how you can expect different results. We've seen the same thing too many times here over the last couple years. But they've signed so many bad contracts and have so many deals that you can't move on from quickly that even if you brought in a new regime in

the front office, it would take a while to blow this up. It's what you think about teams like the 49ers, for example. And they give out all of these deals where you see the actual numbers, like the totals, it's like, man, those are pretty sizable contracts. They're being pretty aggressive. And then you look at the structure of those deals, and for most of them, they don't include any guaranteed money

beyond the first year. They maintain flexibility while signing these contracts. The bears have done the opposite of that. There are so many deals where you're looking at. It's like, wait a second, Buster's screen still has $3.5 million in dead money if you cut him after next year. Same thing goes with, I mean, so many of these contracts,

Charles Leno's contract is pretty much half of it guaranteed still. I mean, all of these deals are like kind of miserable. So there's no quick fix here. Even if you wanted to just say, all right, we're starting over, new front office, totally blowing it up. We're just going to have a monstrous dead money bill next year. That would even be hard to do with this team. So I don't know what the answer to that question is.

But it does feel like there's no more tweaking that can be done. It's going to be, it's going to have to be something drastic for you to expect any sort of different results. Okay. So what's your drastic move then? Oh, it's completely start over. I would clean house. So you're trading Mac, you're trading Hicks, you're trading Jackson.

I mean, who are you, is there anyone you're keeping around? So I was just talking about the personnel. In terms of the actual roster, I, trading back, I don't know. I mean, that's a hard pill to swallow. I mean, the money I don't think would even make sense if you traded Mac. I just feel like you have to bring in somebody else to run the show and then figure it out from there. when it comes, who's in charge of this entire operation? Do you then, if that's not an option, which I don't know.

I mean, I don't know Ryan Pace. My assumption is that he's not sitting here thinking, man, I can't wait to, you know, totally rebuild this team next year. Is it then a situation where you just say, okay, we're going to have to go forward with this core, let's change our coaching staff and try and get the most out of the pieces we have? I assume that's what they're going to do, but that's not what I would do. I just feel like there's, that's not an answer. because we've seen that.

We've seen the tweaks. We've seen them try to change. They changed the entire offensive coaching staff this offseason, and the results are the exact same. So there's no easy answer, and that's the frustrating part about this. I wrote about it coming into the season. They really put themselves in a terrible spot

with the way they try to do this. By going and just tweaking the quarterback spot, citing reasonably big money, reasonable big money-free agents like Robert Quinn, they tried to go halfway, and it wasn't going to work, and it didn't work, and now they're left in no man's land with no easy out.

They were always going to lack an exit plan from this version of the roster. And that's where we are right now. They're mired in it. I don't know where you go. Let me ask you. You've seen this offense all year. What do you think it would look like without Alan Robinson in the fold? More unwatchable than it is now, which is kind of hard to even picture.

I mean, it's miserable. I knew that this was going to happen and it happened. None of this surprises me, but that doesn't mean I'm any more capable. That doesn't mean I'm in a better person. position to solve it than anybody else would just because I've seen it up close. I'm almost too mired in it to have that sort of perspective. I think I would say you make a coaching change. I think you have to go forward and say, okay, we can't fundamentally change our roster because they can't. I mean, even if you wanted to trade Mac, you're eating 37 million dollars in dead cap. Like, it's just not going to

work. That's what I'm saying. That's exactly what I would do. I would clean house top to bottom and bring in somebody to say, we understand you're not going to be able to make a bunch of significant moves this offseason when in terms of the GM and just say, deal with this for this year and in 2022 when some of the stuff starts to sort itself out and you can move on from some of these guys. We'll let you build the roster that you want to. We understand that you can't do that right now. That's totally fine with me and I think that's actually the right answer. But I don't know if it's going to happen. I'm not saying that. I'm saying, you keep the roster you have. You bring back Robinson. You retool a bit. You restructure

max deal. And you just say, okay, we're hoping that. We're hoping that. with a different coaching staff, we're a 10-win football team. Like, I don't think, I think that's, I think they're so deeply invested that that is the more plausible move. I think that's the only way you can possibly end up in a better situation. I think that's probably true. All right, in a similar vein here, I got a lot of these as well. Let's say that the Jets draft Trevor Lawrence. They get the number one pick. That's what they decide to do. I'm sorry. I feel bad for Trevor Lawrence, but this is where we are. How would you rebuild the Jets in five moves? What are the things that you would do to

build around Trevor Lawrence? Okay. This is a lot easier. A lot more space to work with here. It's like, I'm just imagining leaving Chicago, walking to sunny, warm, wide boulevarded, you know, northern New Jersey. Things are going to be great. We got Trevor Lawrence. Here are the five moves we're going to make. So the Jets have $84.5 million. in cap space next year. They get the $90 million if they cut George Fant. They're losing basically six pieces on defense from what I counted, maybe more, maybe less, in terms of starters or starter adjacent players.

And some of those guys, and you're not going to miss all that much, but like Brian Poole, for example, Brian Poole is a good slot corner. You want to have guys like that on the roster. However, I think there's a way to make this work. So number one, you're trading Sam Darnold. I think he has some trade value, probably not what Jets fans would hope for. But I think the Colts are a team I linked him to in my trade deadline piece, and back when I thought trades were going to happen,

I think he still makes sense for them after this season. If you can get a two, maybe a three, more realistically, I think that's great. You know, I think that's fine. I think you just, he's a sunk cost at this point. Like, he might be great, but it doesn't matter. You have Trevor Lawrence. You're moving forward with Trevor Lawrence as your starting quarterback. I would hire Kellyn Moore and Wade Phillips.

That is my head coach, offensive-minded head coach. and defensive coach who turns things around quickly, combination. I, you know, Kellyn Moore might not be the guy, but I got to take a shot on somebody. And unless you're getting Jim Harrowball or you're getting, you know, one of the best possible options, I think Kellyn Moore is the person I would give a shot to. That offense has not looked great without Dak Prescott, but I think they were at a different level with Dak Prescott and the fold. And I think they can do, I think that's the guy I'd want with Trevor Lawrence.

Are you on board with any of these moves? Two for two so far? So I think that makes sense. The thing to me is the head coach is the most important part of this. And I would bring into play calling offensive head coach because even if we've seen different versions of that succeed where you have either a CEO type like a John Harbaal or a defensive-minded guy, I just think with Trevor Lawrence, you can't screw around. We've seen so clearly how important play callers are to a quarterback success.

I mean, I think it's more obvious than ever. So if I'm sitting down, that's the first place that I start. You're saying Dowell Loggins should stay honest. I'm Joe Brady, Arthur Smith, whoever's in this group. And I want whoever I'm interviewing, they're coming in. I'm sitting them down. I'm saying, all right, I want you to show me with a quarterback X because they won't have drafted him yet, the players that we have.

I don't want to hear buzzwords like multiple and explosive or any of that bullshit. I want you to tangibly show me. me how you're going to create space for the players on offense and how you're going to make the jobs easier for players on offense, whether that's the line, receivers, everything. Show me how you're going to do it. And I would pick the guy who gives me the best answer. That's essentially how I would do it. Because I think that is the most beyond players, beyond any help they would give Trevor Lawrence,

I think that hire is the most important part of this. Sure. I agree. I think Kellyn Moore can be that guy. So, you know, if you want to have Arthur Smith, if you want to have Joe Brady, that's fine, my me, too. but I think that's the goal. You want talented offensive coach, XYZ, and Wade Phillips.

That is a, I'm hiring Wade Phillips if I'm running a football team. I'm just, you know, if that doesn't work out, that's great. But like, I've seen it happen too many times where it's worked out. So I'm going to keep going. Especially with the young head coach. The same thing happened with McFay. You have a guy who's never done it before who's a really young guy. Let's say it is Joe Brady or even Arthur Smith, who's still relatively young,

and has only been a coordinator for two years after being a position coach. He's especially young for a guy named Arthur. We can, no one. side. The Wade Phillips is the, I mean, that's exactly what he was from McVeigh, and I think that makes total sense. All right. What else do you have? Number three, I'm signing one of the top free agents at wide receiver. That's a group that can include in relative order of my interest in them, I guess. I would say Alan Robinson, Juju Spence Schuster, Chris Godwin, Kenny Galladay, maybe a step down and then Wolf Fuller just because of injuries. But I mean, there's going to be, I'm assuming a couple

of those guys will get franchised or signed, but this could be a class where you have access to a legitimate number one caliber wide receiver. So I think that's your priority and you're paying if it's $20 million a year. You're not thrilled about it, but you're going over the top to add that guy. I think that a downfield speed guy in your mind is Jameson Crowder still on the roster next year? I'm not opposed to having him on the roster. I don't think there's any reason. I think he's obviously a valuable player when he's healthy.

So if you need the cap space, you can move on, but I don't see a reason to cut. Don't. Yeah. So I think if you have Crowder and you have Denzo Mims, who has shown some flashes in the little time that we've seen him, a guy like Robinson, a guy like Gawaday, a guy like Fuller, outside, down the field, vertical threat. I think he pairs well with those other two. I mean, you have Gawaday, Mims, Crowder, Bechtin, and a little bit of money to kind of play with the other pieces. I think that's actually a really interesting jumping off point. Mm-hmm.

Yeah. next thing is you're using your financial flexibility to take advantage of the market. I mean, we're going to see how many veterans get cut, take pay cuts, are in vulnerable situations. We're going to see teams for the first time, really, in maybe 15 years, really be desperate when it comes to the cap. Because nobody was planning for this cap to be $175 million plus rollover. So I think the jets are in a great spot. The Patriots obviously will also be in good position. but I think you're sort of letting the market come to you when it comes to adding key pass rushers,

and I think key front seven pieces around C.J. Mosley and a couple of your young players, Quentin Williams being, I guess, the most obvious one. I think you want to add veterans. I think you want to add guys who, you know, know what they're doing, and I think you want to have a competent defense. Because step five for me is trusting that Wade Phillips, a guy who has been incredible at developing defensive backs, especially unheralded guys over the last 15 years or so, is going to do that with the Jets. I think you want to, you know, you don't want to necessarily spend all that much in the secondary

for what Wade might offer you. I think you want to add some promising pieces. If there's a value that pops up, great. Like, you know, like I don't think the Giants really needed Logan Ryan, but at the price tag they paid for Logan Ryan, I think that's totally fine. And I think he's a perfect sort of stopgap piece. Smart guys, been around.

I mean, I remember talking to Blake Martinez for a story, and he was just really, relaying to me the conversations he'd have with Logan Ryan, like at lunch, just about how they were trying to figure out certain things, communications. That's the exact type of guy you want to bring in just as a quick fix on that side of the ball. I totally agree. Right. So I think you're adding, you're hoping that Wade Phillips DeVos has a couple players for you for relatively cheap. So to me, I think that's it. I think you have, if you pull this off, you have a great quarter, a very promising quarterback. You have the pieces around him on offense. And you have

enough on defense that it's not out of the question. You could kind of be like the dolphins and turn things around pretty quickly. So piggybacking off this a little bit, Caden Ignacek sent what I thought was a really good question because when I was watching the Jets last night and we're having all these conversations about tanking and they want to lose all of that, that makes sense to a certain degree.

But his question was, does the reputation for sloppy management and chaos offset the apparent upsides of getting the number one pick and being this bad this year? Would a hot head coach candidate like Joe Brady look at the opening and get discouraged by the narrative is about how much of a dumpster fire this place is. And I think this speaks to a larger question about tanking in general. So do you think that this version of the Jets being as bad as it is,

even if it's going to get them Trevor Lawrence, could have them miss out on the type of coach that would help turn this around? I don't know. I mean, Matt Ruhle's a pretty hot coaching can't sit. And I think if they had just let Matt Ruhl pick his own offensive coordinator, he'd be their coach right now. I think that it's, you know, you can overcome that based on how you, act once you're actually interviewing coaches for their job. And they look at the opportunities they have. The job is not very exciting right now. But if they do get Trevor Lawrence and you have ownership staying out of the way.

Joe Douglas is a real general manager, too. I mean, it seems like he's the type of guy that, like, he's been around. He's an adult. That's my next question for you, or my next statement, which is there is an assumption in this question that Joe Douglas is a great GM because he's drafted in Kai Bechtin, which looks like a great pick. He made the Jamal Adams trade, which seems like it's going to be a significant return. that's true. That's totally true. We don't know anything about Joe Douglas yet when it comes to his aptitude or his ability. I think some of the moves he made this offseason were great. I think signing George Vann for $10 million a year, not the choice I would have made. I think other moves. Do you think it's that bad, though? I mean, you can move on from him instantly. That's kind of what I was saying about the Bears moves. You're only committing one year worth of money to him. And you're trying to see, you're trying to do everything you can to see if Sam Donald is your guy. I think having a functional tackle.

and making sure you have a functional tackle at that spot is part of that equation. I know it doesn't look good in terms of actual returns on the money. You're not getting it, but I can still understand how you'd get there. I would rather have actual good football players. That's just me. Just my instinct. You know, I'd rather guarantee Brian Belagga two years than George Van one year. Just my opinion.

I don't know. I mean, I'm not saying that he's a bad year. I don't think anyone can say that all. I just don't think we have enough information on Joe Douglas yet to say, okay, he is definitely an asset. to this cause. He might be great. He might not be very good at drafting outside of Becton. And who knows Bechted might not even pan out. I mean, he looks great so far, but he's already had injury issues. We just don't know. We just don't have any information on him yet. So I would sort of, you know, hesitate to say that Joe Douglas is part of the solution, as opposed to the problem.

But I would say that I think it comes down to how they act once they start meeting these people and what they have to offer. I mean, having a lot of cap space is great. But there are ownership groups who will come in and talk to a coach, say, okay, well, we have $80 million in cap space. Our budget next year is going to be to spend a third of that. And if that's the case, that's totally different from saying, okay, we've $80 million in cap space and you're going to get to spend the way Mike McCagnan did when they went out and signed Drew Al-Rivas and those guys. So it's totally up in the air. And part of the issue with the COVID and the cap going down, even if you have that money, I think there are a lot of teams that are probably going to want to cut costs in terms of cash. just not, we're not going to be willing to spend the money even if we have it.

So that's a question that a lot of teams are going to have to answer. But I think all that makes sense. All right, let's move on to our next one here. Eric Briniak on Twitter asks what, so the Twitter ones I'm kind of paraphrasing here because I'm not going all to the links. But Eric Brinian asks, so I think this is kind of a, would you rather fight a duck size horse or a bunch of horse size ducks? So you can have Patrick Mahomes or seven non-quarterbacks to start your team.

seven non-quarterback players. You have to pick between them. I thought this was a really interesting one. I actually think that seven is a very good number. I agree. What do you think? What's your answer to this question? So I think it's...

First of all, the players you pick are say a lot about you. And second of all, you have to pick the right players. So I want to hear who your seven players are. My seven players are. Aaron Donald. Yep. Devante Adams. Okay.

George Kittle. Sure. Trent Williams, Mitchell Schwartz. Okay. That's surprising. Jalen Ramsey, Marlon Humphrey, which I think this speaks to my overall value system when it comes to football. But I think if I could have those seven guys, as good as Mahomes is, I'd probably roll with those seven guys. Can I tell you that we chose three of the same players?

And I chose a guard and you did not choose a guard somehow? It's the biggest surprise that's going to happen on this show. I'm going against type. I'm evolving, Barnwell. I'm becoming a better person. Well, let me ask you that question. you'd rather have a left tackle in his mid-30s than Quentin Nelson? I didn't really consider how long we were doing this for.

I was just doing it right now for this season for like one year. Okay. If I was building for the future, then maybe I'd probably rather have Quentin Nelson. You'd rather have a 32-year-old left tackle who missed all of last season than Quentin Nelson? I mean, I'm, that's what you want. That's fine. So the only reason I didn't pick Boktiari as my left tackle is because he's hurt right now. Okay.

I would let's just put Boktiari in there for Trent Williams. You pick Kittle though, and Kiddell has a broken foot. I know he said he's going to come back in two weeks, but. Yeah, I'm a little disjointed here, but that's the whole, let's just say those are my seven players so the next three years. Okay, here's my seven. My seven, Donald, Kittle, Ramsey. I'm with you on those three. I also went with Michael Thomas, as opposed to Devante Adams.

I went with Nick Bosa. I went with T.J. Watt. And I chose Quinton Nelson. So you went more past rush than past coverage like I did. That's interesting. I don't trust analytics. I want those two pass rushers. I'll figure out the rest later.

But the question is, given those seven-man rosters, would you rather have those seven guys than Patrick Mahomes? I think those seven guys in a replacement level. Who's my quarterback in this situation? Can it be Ryan Tannahill? No, your quarterback is Mitchell Tribisky. Then I'm taking Mahoms. Okay. That's fine.

I would take the seven guys in Trubisky. Wow. I will take Mahomes and I will beat you and I'll be really happy about it. If it's one step off from Trubisky, I'd probably take the seven guys. But if I'm talking like a bottom five quarterback, I would be tempted to take my homes and just figure it out with the rest of those guys. Nobody's ever gone wrong picking Mitchell Chubisky over Patrick. What about this? What if it's Tony Romo? Right now?

Right now. He gets six months to prepare. But otherwise it's Romo and those seven guys are my homes. I'll take Romo and the seven guys. Me too. It says so much about the state of bears football. All right. Chris Iyer asks,

how many of the current last place teams that are not in the NFC East could win the NFC East this season? This is a fantastic question. Oh, boy. So there are seven options. How many of the seven did you put down? I said three, four? I said three and then two have a half chance.

So I'll go four. All right, so who are your three that are just for sure? The Niners. I think we can both agree, right? I said the lions. I did as well. I said the Panthers. Oh, the Panthers are currently in last place?

Is that true? I believe they are. I think you're right. Oh, I definitely think the Panthers would. I had the Falcons, but just pencil on the NFC South team. I definitely think the Chargers could. I 100% think the Chargers are better than any of the teams in the NFC East right now. They're better, but they're cursed.

That's fair. have to fight the curse, but I would, I would trust Justin Herbert's talent in this situation and look past the curse. We will get to the Chargers later. Do you think the Jaguars as currently constructed could win the NFC East? I had a question mark next to them. No, I would say no, but I think the Bengals have a viable shot. I have the Bengals on my list. So I legitimately think five of the seven teams could win the NFC East. I think the Jaguars could not. And I think the NFC, the Jets could not. Those are the only teams that I don't think could. I agree.

Which says so much about the NFC East. And I mean, like, I don't think this is like one of the million chances. Like, I think the Niners would be favored to win the NFCs. I think the Lions would be. Favored by a decent amount. Favorite. And the 49ers with like, you know, 15 of their top 25 players injured. Like, I think that team could win the NFC East.

I totally agree. And I also think the Panthers would kind of definitively be the most impressive team in the NFC East right now. 100%. 100%. All right. Next question from Cyrus Amador. with all of the young successful... Are these real names you've chosen, by the way?

Swear to God. These are email questions. Cyrus Amador, they're really good names. I was very impressed with the overall name quality. Cyrus Amador, I don't want to bring this up to just play the hits again, does sound like a 90s action movie villain name. We did get an Eric Bogogian question, but I did not put that in the list. Thank you.

All right. Cyrus asks, with all the young successful quarterbacks coming into the the past few years, do you see a time in the near future where it's not as important to have above average quarterback play? And do we already see it to some extent with the play action offenses in San Francisco, Minnesota, Tennessee to an extent? So here's why I think this question is interesting for a couple different reasons. One, it feels like the overall competency of young quarterbacks has grown. Guys are just more ready to come in and play. I mean, you think about what two was even able to do last week. People would have lost their minds if a quarterback did that 15 years ago.

Of course. And I don't mean to dredge up some controversial stuff that you've written in the past. But I also think this kind of speaks to what you wrote about Jared Gough a couple years ago, where would the Rams be smart because they've built this kind of quarterback free machine to a certain degree, similar with the Niners have done, to trade a guy like golf and start over a quarterback because the level of competency is higher. So I think there's a lot to unpack here. But do you think that it's becoming less important to kind of have and, stick to your guy. Do you think there are circumstances that are allowing more and more

quarterbacks to succeed? And should that impact the way that teams think about building? I love that, by the way, we're in the part of the cycle where we're just flush with young quarterbacks and we're like, this will never run out. There's so many. And like three years from now, you know, it's going to be like, where are all the young quarterbacks? This is the end of football. That cycle always makes me laugh. I will say, I think your point about like the younger quarterbacks having more or being more effective from day one is 100% accurate. I think we've seen that over the past decade, even when I remember writing about the class of 2011 for Grantland back in the day, and the Russell Wilson, Andrew Luck, Robert Griffin

class, or even if Robert Griffin didn't have a great career on the long run, I mean, he was able to step in and be an effective quarterback from day one because that offense bore so many similarities to what he was running in college. I think we're seeing more similarities between the offense. His guys are running in college and the guys are running at the NFL level. They also did a bunch of stuff that is just good for quarterbacks. They had the record in the past eight years for play action percentage on dropbacks. You used play action 40% of their dropbacks that year in Washington.

So it's a perfect storm of a guy who threw the ball. I think that the passing boom at lower levels does play a role in this. I think guys have just thrown the ball more playing seven on seven from the time they're 10 years old by the time they get to the NFL. And their overall competency of the stuff they've seen, I think the same thing is true for receivers is higher. You combine that with rule changes and more teams being smart with play action. I think this is converging from like several different directions. Absolutely. I don't think it's one factor altogether, but I will say this much.

I mean, talk about the offenses where like quarterbacks were kind of middling or were kind of middling, like Garoppel, like cousins, like Tannahill, all of whom have played much better with heavy play action with more motion. That's going to make your baseline quarterback better. But at the same time, I think that's also going to make the great. ones even that much better. And I think the perfect example of that right now is Aaron Rogers in Green Bay, where that's become a very modern offense. And, oh, out of nowhere, Aaron Rogers, the guy who was, you know, fading for years is suddenly a absolutely terrifying MVP candidate from possession to possession now. Absolutely. So to me, I think it makes everyone better, but it makes the, it sort of doesn't change the distance between the guys at the bottom. You know,

you're sort of not replacement quarterbacks, but sort of your, you know, average to below average starters. And I think that there's still a pretty big chasm between those guys and the, you know, the Russell Wilson's, Aaron Rogers as Patrick Mahomes is the world. And I think the perfect example, right, is the Super Bowl, where, you know, we saw Mahomes eventually pull that game out because they threw the ball a ton. And eventually they were going to land on something that worked. And when they found something that worked, the Niners certainly have an answer. And when play action got taken out of the game, I know that we have. done studies saying that, you know, play action, you don't have, it doesn't matter if you're trailing. It doesn't matter if you're establishing the run. And I believe that. But when Gropolo

had to throw to win that football game, it's only a sample size of one. But in that game, he was two of ten for like 30 yards in the fourth quarter of that game or the final, you know, 10 passes of that game. So I, I don't think that it's going to make quarterbacks less important. I think it's just going to make them better as a whole in terms of the sort of basic. signed for that group. And I think it should make teams more open to the idea of moving on from a quarterback. That to me is where it would alter the thinking. I think that your quarterback is still going to be important because you want guys that can solve problems when the structure starts to break down, whether that's play action or whatever. But I also think that if you're a team

like the Rams, the amount of competent quarterbacks that are coming out should make you take a long look and say, all right, how many guys realistically on a rookie contract could give us the same sort of production that someone like Jared Gough is giving us. That's where I think it should change some of the thinking. I mean, I think the other part of that when it comes to the ramps is that your head coach is Sean freaking McVeigh. It's not like you have Dowell Loggins as your head coach. If you have Dowell Loggins as you go see, hold on to whatever you got because if you got a good quarterback with Dowell Loggins, he is pretty freaking good. But if you have Sean McVeigh, that changes things. So this is, I think, ties to a question I got a

bunch. And that is, what do you think the Niners should do a quarterback this offseason? Do you think that moving on from Jimmy Garoppolo is just a given? And if they do that, would you try to go the cheaper option and get one of those guys that's a little bit younger that you think you can just coach up? Or would you try to go get a Matthew Stafford or a Matt Ryan and dig into that bin of quarterbacks? What would you do if you were San Francisco? I read about this for ESPN.com, I believe last week. Jimmy Garoppolo. I'm familiar. Jimmy Garapolo, just to set the scene. I'll ask you what you think here. Jimmy Garoppolo, I guess my argument was that Jimmy Garoppolo has to be one of three things.

Because starting quarterbacks in the NFL have to be one of three things. They have to be cheap. They have to be healthy or they have to have a really high ceiling. Preferably, you want all three. Jimmy Garoplo does not check any of those boxes. He has $24 million-based salary. He has played more than six starts in a row once. And his ceiling is fine, but it's not like even last year with a great defense with a great running game.

with a great offensive line, that he was, you know, a all-pro caliber quarterback. He was holding up his end of the bargain, but this is a guy who threw like 23 passes in between the first two rounds of the postseason. He was not really why they were winning football games. So I, if there were me, I don't think it's a question. I think you force Cropo to take a major pay cut or you trade him. What they do otherwise, I think is very difficult. Because I think ideally you'd go after Kirk Cussons. I think that would be the, you know, it's not going to be the most exciting move,

but it's going to be stability. It's going to be a guy who's healthy, but he's $33 million a year. It's very expensive, but I think he'd be really good at that offense. And actually think it would be kind of fun to watch. Right. But like, is that confidence worth $33 million year,

which is the conversation we just had about, you know, going after a quarterback. I think if I were them, If I love Trey Lance, if I love Justin Fields, I would go for it. I would make my Carson-Wince trade thinking, okay, if we can get a competent quarterback on the cheap, we have enough around that guy right now. And with the money we can spend by not having a quarterback making $24 million a year, that we can win a Super Bowl.

I'm going to be fascinated by what that top 10 quarterback market looks like. Guys like Zach Wilson, who are playing really well and playing themselves into that top 10 conversation because there's somebody with a team that needs a quarterback, I was just looking at all the teams in the top 10 right now. It's like, man, in like Atlanta, teams like that, even the Giants, if they don't want to move on from Daniel Jones, how many teams are going to want to try to get into the top five? It's going to be, I think, the defining story of next off season.

And I think the Niners might absolutely be one of those teams. All right, these next two, I think, are somewhat related. And in my opinion, you're the perfect person to ask about that. Uh-oh. So Andy McMillan asks, I wondered if y'all, which I love, I wondered if y'all could talk about how analytical affects a game plan versus the typical of the analytics say you should go for it here. And he said he was particularly interested in the Panthers, who just seemed bent toward going for

it now in a way that was not necessarily a given under Ron Rivera. So here's what I wanted to ask you about this. To what extent do you feel like fourth down mindsets and analytics are now just woven into the fabric of how these decisions get made? Because I did some crude math today. And I believe that teams are going forward on fourth and five. or fewer, 35% of the time this year, which is up 10% from the record that was set last year. So I'm just kidding.

I think right now, if you were still doing thank you for not coaching, you would have a harder time finding material than you did, then you would have five or six years ago. Oh, I don't know. Mike McCarthy is still employed. I don't think I'd have too much for a problem. But you're right, though. I mean, I think the resistance towards that has changed. Like, I think the perfect example is Bill Belichick going forward and forth and two against the cults.

Like, that was... And we lost our minds. Yeah. People were crazy. That shut down football outsiders, that discussion. Now, like, there would be some discussion about it, but nobody would be like, that's insane. Or, I get, like, you would have, like, I'm not going to pick a media member, but you would have, like, one show be like, oh, that's insane. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

You can't trust the numbers. and most people would be like, ah, you know, it's defensible. I think I'd probably be one of the people saying it's a good move, but that's just me. You would say it exactly that way. It's like, oh, it's defensible. That's exactly how you would say it. I just, I don't have strong opinions about this stuff. Like, I think if you think your offense is good, go for it.

Like, I don't think you need the numbers for it. But I do think that idea of, oh, if we don't get this on fourth down, we're going to get killed by the media and by our fans, does not fly anymore. Because I think we've seen teams go for it or try to go for it and fail and had their fans say, well, like, it sucks that we didn't get it. And we've seen, you know, they'll take some criticism. But, like, it's not as if fans want you to go for it. Fans do want you to try and succeed as opposed to just letting the game go on forever. And this is a generation of fans who have played Madden relentlessly. It's a generation of fans who are more comfortable with analytics than they were 15 years ago.

And I think that's a real value opportunity for teams who do get aggressive in situations. And I think that when it comes to the Chiefs, like this is an era, this is especially a year, I should say, where teams are scoring, I think, two points more than they have at any point in league history. The Chiefs are, to me, you know, not adjusting for era, the scariest offense in the history of the National Football League, the offense I would want to face the least if I had to face an offense. A team that should alter your thing. about how many points you need more than any other team is ever done. I think if you're playing the Chiefs, like I think Anthony Lynn's decision to punt in overtime against the Chiefs is like the perfect example of like you cannot manage a game against the Chiefs like you're playing a game 30 years ago. If you're doing that, you are derelict in your duty.

I mean, this is a team where field position does not matter. They're going to move the ball, whether you like it or not. So 30 yards means no. nothing to the Kansas City Chiefs. Possession is everything. So yes, I think going forward and fourth down when you're playing a Chief's defense, that's not always been great against the run, the fake punt, which, I mean, hey, you want to run four verts against a punt coverage team. That was fantastic.

But I think having that stuff in your game plan where you're thinking, okay, every chance I get to hold on to the football, I have to take it because I don't want to turn things over to my defense. I mean, the Panthers were great in that game, and the Chiefs still had a enough to overcome them because just the chief's got the ball too many times. That was with a great game plan. So I think you have to change the way you think about your game plan based on your opponent. The opposite's true for the Jets. Like if you're playing the Jets, man, punt all day. That's fine. The offense on the Jets are going to give you the ball back anyway. So don't stress out about

it. But I think more than the numbers, more than, you know, the era, it's about knowing your team and knowing your opponent and coaching the game based on that as opposed to the rules you learned 25, 30 years ago. I totally agree. And so an extension of that question, Nicole Desai asked, do you think there's something that analytics slash nerd Twitter can do that can do a better job of in terms of framing these decisions and why they're important? And I want to try to tweak that question a little bit.

Okay. So if you were sitting down with a GM, If you were the head of analytics, the head of research for a team, and you had a half hour lunch with your GM, because I think this is the biggest gap between where the math is and where decisions are made. People may think that a team has an analytics person that the analytics are a huge part of decision making that organization. That's not how it works at all. Like, I heard a story about how the Ravens used analytics to eventually help pick Marlon Humphrey.

And it was like this massive step forward because analytics went into picking a first round guy. And it was like a revelation for that. That doesn't even happen, even for the teams that are some of the most analytically forward teams in the league. So if you were sitting down with the GM and you were trying to explain to him concisely, this is how I can help you. This is what we probably need to change about our decision making. What would that pitch sound like? I mean, this sounds like a job interview. So I feel like I should prepare more for it.

I think at the end of the day, building a fourth down model doesn't matter. Building a draft model doesn't matter. Like anyone can do that stuff. And I think there are teams that do it better than other teams, of course. But I think that's not the specifics. I don't think teams need to think all that much about, okay, should we go forward and fourth and three? Because that's not even, if you get to that point, you're asking the wrong questions.

It's about how are you integrating data? How are you integrating evidence into your decisions before you have to make that decision? Because I think, you know, I'm trying to think of the example that I heard about. I think it was John Robinson. We were hearing a story at Sloan one year about John Robinson from, you know, was talking about Logan Ryan, I think before the Patriots drafted him. And I apologize if I'm misparaphrasing this story. I think it was Thomas Demetrioff telling the story.

But he, Robinson was looking into this. And he saw that Logan Ryan had knocked away a lot of passes in college. and Logan Ryan was a prospect he really liked. And so he went and looked at the other defensive backs in the NFL and looked at their college performance. And so, hey, a lot of these guys have a bunch of passes knocked away. So that's a good sign. So that encouraged them to give Logan Ryan a high grade, eventually take Logan Ryan. Logan Ryan turned out to be a great player.

So in the long run, it turned out fine. But I think the issue there is that there's enormous confirmation bias in that because you're not starting from the perspective of how, you know, You're not starting from the perspective of a research question, which would be our past is defense, a good indicator, all other things being equal of NFL performance, which it may or may not be. I haven't done the study myself. But when you start from the perspective of Logan Ryan and liking Logan Ryan and trying to find reasons to draft Logan Ryan, you're going to look for the evidence that matters. Either, you know, I can't speak to John Robinson.

I don't know him. But if they had done that study and Logan Ryan had turned out to be, you know, that, that, you know, the guys at the top of the NFL hadn't had a lot of passes defensed in their college resumes. I think John Robinson went just sat there and said, okay, well, that doesn't matter. The numbers don't matter. I trust my eyes. I trust my gut. I'm going to pick that guy. And that's fine. But that's not how to use numbers. The numbers would be, you know, you want to use it in a way that's something you can apply across the board as opposed to using it to try and confirm your beliefs about one particular player or one particular instance. So I think, you know,

any team can hire analytics people and ask them to do some basic things. But I think you have to have buy-in from your general manager, from your owner, from your coach, at the very beginning of the process for evaluating players, for evaluating coaching decisions, for evaluating everything you do with the football team to get a sense of what matters and what doesn't matter, and then abide by that. Because what happens when you have a guy, Logan Ryan is, you know, let's say Logan Ryan didn't have many passes, defense and a lot of great cornerbacks of the NFL have incredible past defense numbers in college. You'd have to be willing and able to say, okay, even though I like Rogan Ryan, even though

I think the numbers say, or even though I think the film says Logan Ryan is a great player, because this indicator historically has been really strong and indicating that you need to have a lot of great passes defense to be a great player, I'm going to downgrade Logan Ryan. I mean, I take him off my bar all together, but seriously downgrade Logan Ryan because that's what the evidence says. And I think there are very few organizations around the league who will actually do that. I think the Ravens are one of them. I think there are a handful of others.

And I think the numbers aren't going to solve every problem. But that's not the bar. The bar is, can this help my decision making from the very first step I take? And I think in some cases, it absolutely can. So that was a very thoughtful, important question. I'm going to ask a very not thoughtful and not as important question here. here. Josh Raider asks, in honor of Alan Robinson this year, what is the best season ever by a

wide receiver with objectively horrible quarterback play? He submitted Larry Fitzgerald in 2011 and Megatron in 2008. I have my answer. I'm curious what yours is. Well, I want to hear your answer first. Josh Gordon in 2013. It's good. It's on my list.

It's on my list. 87 catches 1646 yards, nine touchdowns. 19 yards of reception. And if you look at the numbers, even with Josh Gordon on that team that year, Brandon Weeden finished 42nd of 44 quarterbacks at EPA per play. That is almost impossible to do when you have that many catches that are going for like monster yardage. Jason Campbell, Brandon Whedon, and Brian Hoyer at quarterback for that Josh Gordon season. I wrote down Odell with Eli just to troll myself.

I don't know if that was helpful. It's helpful to me. I could tell you that right now. I think, and this is one of the most fascinating teams in league history to me. 1995, the Detroit Lions. Herman Moore goes over 1650 yards. The Herman Moore year, yeah. Brett Paramond goes over 1,450 yards.

Two of the top 50 receiving seasons in the history of the national. National Football League by receiving yards. Do you know who the Lions quarterback was that year? Scott Mitchell. It was former Dolphins backup, Scott Mitchell. I don't understand it. Like, I'm trying to, I'm trying to contextualize, like, what that would be like. It would be like if, if two players, like, if two wide receivers have, like, 1,800

yards, like, one guy had an 1800-earth season and another guy had, like, a 1,600-yard season. and another guy had like a 1,600-yard season now with who would be... Mitchell Chubisky is the starting quarterback. I think that might be too harsh to Scott Mitchell now that I think about it. Like, Marcus Marriota would be too qualified. Like, it would be, I mean, like, there's not really a, like, C.J. Bethard maybe or somebody. Like, it's just, Scott Mitchell was fine. I guess who's a free agent?

Maybe that's not fair. Maybe Foles would be a good example. Like, maybe if Alan Robinson had an 1800-yard season and, um, Darno Mooney had a 1,600-yard season. Like, that would be what happened with Scott Mitchell. That's insane. I mean, it's just, it's, the fact that it's two guys, like it wasn't just one incredible fluke season.

It was like two receivers who blew away the competition. I feel like it is the difference here. All right, this is a really fun one. Moving on to the next question. Al-Kan Kaba asks, what is your Nathan Fielder-esque pitch to an NFL team? Is he had a couple examples that he had. So this is, and this is how I'm framing this. It's like a kind of wild idea that you sort of believe will work.

I think that that's what my answer was rooted in that notion. So what is yours? Mine is very silly. Mine is women love tall guys on Tinder. So the Broncos should only draft tall quarterbacks to attract more fans. They've already done that, though. I know. That's the point.

That's like, I'm saying that is the pitch that they actually executed. Mine is somewhat more serious. If I was given the reins and you're like, all right, you can shape what this team is like, I would have an offense that, like, I can get into some of the details of this, but I would only use play action on first and second down. There would be no dropback passes on first and second down. And that's it. I would have like 60% of my dropbacks be play action. Because there are teams that like are creeping up now.

There's more play action than there's ever been league one. in this version of the NFL, which seems incongruous with the fewer runs, but more teams are getting smart about what play action does for you. And I think the Patriots right now are around 40% of cams dropbacks. The Robert Griffin Washington team was it in 2012 was up there. That's as high as it's gone. I would go even further. And I'm talking no shotgun all under center.

And there are reasons you can't do this. Against certain pressure looks, it's hard to be under center against teams that are blitzing a lot. It's hard to use that much play action. there are tweaks you'd have to make, but I think you figure that out later. I would have just a semi-horror rule, no drop-back passes, no quick game on first or second down, and see how far it can take me. Okay. I have another one. It's also about the Broncos.

Okay. So Drew Locke rapping on the sideline went viral, correct? Of course, yes. So to go viral and get more attention for the Broncos, they should just have the entire team wrap. during breaks in play on the sideline. Because what's better than having one person rap is having 50 or 60 people rap? I love that yours is about driving fan interest, which it probably should be if it's a Nathan Fielder pitch.

But mine was actually about trying to build a successful football team. No, I didn't listen to a word you said. I was just thinking about the Vic Van Gio rapping the entire time. All right. I love this one. Miles Witt sent us a picture, a screenshot of the top 10 quarterbacks all time in passing touchdowns. And he said,

if you took this image to 2005 and showed it to someone, what would be the most surprising thing about it? So just for reference, the list is Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Peyton, Brett Farr, of Dan Marino, Philip Rivers, Aaron Rogers, Rathesberger, Eli Manning, Fran Targerton, Matt Ryan. Those are the top 11. And it shows how many teams those guys have played for. So if you showed this to someone 16 years ago or 15 years ago,

what would be the most surprising part about that image? Would it be Tom Brady playing for multiple times? teams, would it be Brett Farr playing for four teams? What is the most surprising element of this to you? I hadn't noticed that Brett Farrf had the four teams. Four teams. I think that would impress me. I'm not going to lie. Just the idea that that would happen. I said Matt Ryan, because in 2005, Matt Ryan was a sophomore quarterback at Boston College. He was not, he wasn't like, he was like, you know, I think the next year he was kind of getting buzzed as like a possible highspin candidate, but he was like a part-time player at that point. So the end of like, you know,

the second string guy or the borderline starter at Boston College was going to turn into a possible Hall of Fame canstead, would have surprised me the most. Yeah, that's number one because of that. He was the only one not in the league on this list when it would have, if you were to show it to somebody back then. I think that Peyton Manning being on two teams is even more surprising than Brett Farr being on four teams. I don't think so. You don't think so? I just think that at this point, it was 2005. We are in the heart of, the Peyton Manning Colts offensive dynasty. Sure. To me, it's really hard to imagine in that moment, Peyton Manning not retiring as a cult.

Because even if Tom Brady was winning Super Bowls by then, he wasn't Tom Brady the way that he is now. That didn't happen until 2007. And I think if you handed this to someone in 2005, if it was in April of 2005, the Packers already would have drafted Aaron Rogers. Sure. So you could see Brett Farv on maybe two teams

and then how two teams gets to three. I think that Matt Ryan is the number one part of this and I think that Tom Brady is or the Peyton Manning thing is probably number two. Also, you could probably say the longevity from Tom Brady would be up there too. Tom Brady playing until he's 43 years old is probably in that conversation as well.

I would have been pretty confused. I'm not going to lie. I would say, like I could have seen Peyton backing up Eli for the final year of his career or going to play for the Saints for the final year of his career. I could have seen that stuff happening. I guess that's fair. Okay.

I don't, I'm not doing this one to make you feel bad, But Michael Doudna asks. I'm not scared of Michael Doudna. Michael Duden asked two of the main regression candidates via one-score games last year were the Packers and the Seahawks. Neither of those teams has really regressed. That's not true. I mean, that's false.

The Packers were 13 and 3 last year. Okay, all right, okay. But the Packers are better than we thought they were. So I thought they were going to be. So, and I'm asking you this because I think it really does speak to how difficult projections are because I would have picked the Packers to regress too. I didn't pick them to win the division because it seemed like some of the directions they were going with the way they were building the team, everything else, even beyond the math said that they wouldn't. So what about the things

that those two teams have done do you think is kind of defied projections when it comes to their offensive efficiency? I want to reiterate. I'm going to ignore what you said and just point out here. The Packers are six and two. If you- So they're not on track to be 13 and three. I understand that. If you multiply by two, you will find that they are not 13. 13 and 3. They are one in one in close games. The difference between the Packers of 2019 and the Packers of 2020 is that Aaron Rogers has gone from being a guy who walked off the field eight times a game looking like he wanted to be in another football team. And now he is a guy who seems to throw four touchdown passes every week to a wide open and inexplicably wide open

Devante Adams. So that's what's changed for me. The Packers' offense has gone from being good to being one of the two or three best in all of football. The Seahawks are three or one in close games, and their offense has gotten a lot better, and I think that you can absolutely say the offense has approved, and they're playing better than I think I would have expected. They're also within two yards of being one and three in those games. Like, I think fundamentally they're not a different football team

if Cam runs that ball in from a yard out, or Alexander Madison converts that fourth and one if he picks the right hole. Like, the Seahawks are not a different football team because those two things happen. They're three and one in close games because when a defense that was getting gashed throughout the game needed to come up with a stop on fourth and one, they did. And that's great. But like, that's not sustainable. And we saw that in what happened on the Cardinals game, where they came up with a stop. And because the offense couldn't finish the job, the defense could have.

hold on long enough and they lost the football game because of it. So I think both those teams have been much better on offense than we probably would have given them credit for if they both changed our styles. And that's something you can't account for from year to year. But I think overall, I wouldn't go back and change those predictions whatsoever. Yeah, I think that's exactly right. And I think that those little tweaks about how you approach your offense, that's the type of stuff.

There's just no way to predict. There's no way to predict that the Packers would actually be a really advanced, incredibly creative, motion-based play-action monster creating all this space for Aaron Rogers, who was clearly bought in more than he had last year. And there's no way to know that the Seahawks would become the most pass-happy team on early downs in the entire NFL, considering what they had been in the last couple of years.

At a certain point, you can try to take all that stuff into account when you're trying to make these predictions, but there's no way to know how far teams will go in one direction or the other, especially when you have so much evidence pointing to them being a certain thing and then doing the opposite. We're also one yard away from both those predictions being correct. So I'm not like, there are things I will get wrong. Like I said, the Chargers were going to get better.

And I feel bad about that. I said the Cowboys were going to get better. And that did that happen? I don't feel too bad about the Packers and Seahawks. I feel like the instincts were correct there. So let's stick with the Chargers for a second because I wanted to ask you this and is somewhat related. Anna Adler asks, the Chargers have underperformed expectations in games decided by

seven points or less. Do you think there is anything inherently wrong with their strategies slash schemes? Okay. So you don't think that the math, oh, you think they're just cursed. Are you going to give me a real answer? I think that the decision making late in games for them has been absolutely horrific. And I think that even given how bad their decision making has been, they've still been unlucky. But I think that the idea that they would suddenly have a great record in close games,

is hard to imagine, given how brutally awful their decision-making has been in close games. I mean, even given the choices they made, you know, punting in overtime against the Chiefs on fourth and short, settling for a 50-yard field goal against the Buccaneers. I mean, committing that pass-reference penalty against the Broncos on the final play. You know, stuff like that is just bad coaching and bad, bad situational football. But, like, they had a 50-yard field goal in the Superdome against the Saints to win the game and missed it. They had two fades against the Raiders on Sunday, one of which was in Mike Williams' hands and fell out. The second of which was in Donald Parham's hands.

Donald Parham, yes. And was ruled a touchdown on the field. Like, that's how close they came. Like, even given the fact that they've been brutal with their decision-making, they've still done enough to win those games. and still haven't had things go their way. So I think it might limit their upside. Like I can't imagine them going six in one or seven and two in one score games just because they make so many mistakes when it comes to how they manage leads

and manage the final four minutes of football games. But even given that, I think they have been a little unlucky. I agree with you. And I don't want to, I want to be patient in how we talk about Anthony Lynn in these situations. Because for a long time, Andy Reid was also a situational disaster when it came to managing the clock. when I was rewatching the last couple minutes of that game lot on Sunday,

I had no idea they had three timeouts left. With the way that they were managing the clock, I thought they had no timeouts left. They let 28 seconds tick down between plays in the last two minutes when they had three timeouts. I was like, I was sitting there just screaming at the screen as I was rewatching it. That type of stuff is unforgivable. But it's also, it's like, all right,

well, are they throwing the ball to the middle of the field because they have a rookie quarterback who doesn't, isn't inclined to make these sort of decisions? It's not like they didn't have any routes to the same. sideline. He just threw a checkdown in the middle of the field when he probably shouldn't have. He's going to get better at that kind of stuff. So I just feel like there are a lot of things in play that are causing this. I think Anthony Wynn has done a really good job getting a banged up roster ready to play every single week. And the fact that this team is competitive with how many guys are

hurt right now, I think speaks to what they've been able to do as a coaching staff. So I'm trying not to overreact to how bad they've been in some of these moments and say a little tweak here, a little tweak there gets them where they want to go. Kellan Moore and Wade Phillips. So you're just done with the Chargers coaching staff. You're out. I can't watch. It's infuriating to watch it after week.

All right. I understand how you could get there. I'm not quite there yet because I do think that they're actually doing a lot of good things. Your baseline is also the Chicago Bears. That's very true. My baseline is very, very low. All right. Last one.

Ugly game on Twitter. Martin Caledine asked if you had to sign and sign and say, start the top five players with a given set of initials. Would you rather have all of the AJs, BJs, BJs, CJs, DJs, or TJs in the league? This is a ridiculous, great question. Can I curse on the show? Yes. Okay.

I just want to be clear. I fucking hate this question. I hate it, but I also put 20 minutes of research into finding the name. So I insist that we answer. You find all the names, which I really appreciate. Do you want me to just read them? Should I just read the names? Actually, let me start with this.

You have to eliminate BJ because you have Finney, Goodson, Hill. There are enough of them. There are enough. There are. I would say CJ is probably tough. You have Bethard, Bored, Bordwin, Ham, Henderson, Moore, Mosley, Pro Seis, Zoma. Too many role players in that group. Do you have mostly?

Yeah. That's really it, though. You have a quarterback in Bethard, that's really it. So BJ and C.J. And C.J. Henderson. You have a starting rookie corner that is theoretically promising. Sure. I would say even TJ.

You have Kerry, Clemmings, Edwards, Jones, Logan, Watt. Watt is great, but not much else there besides what. Yeah, Watt skewskis it up for sure. Or maybe bringing back T.J. Lang and T.J. Hushmanzada to fill out this team. So I would say BJ, C.J and T.J are all out, which leaves us A.J. And D.J. Now, before I say the names, do you have a lien just based on what you're thinking right now? My answer is A.J. Your answer is A. A.J.

Yes. So who are your five for AJ then? Well, it's AJ Boyer, A.J. Boy, A.J. Brown, AJ Greener Givens. Like, those three guys are like actual quality NFL players. You could build around those guys. AJ Cannes, same way. I mean, AJ Can is like a solid starter in the NFL. And then you have a lot.

I mean, AJ Klein, AJ Epinessa. AJ McKearney just had the game of his life according to John or GER. So it's, I mean, it's like, I think that AJ is probably the answer for me. I don't know. I don't know that I agree with that. Because on the DJ side, you have DJ Chark, you have DJ Humphreys, you have DJ Reader, DJ Moore. Yeah, you might be right. It might be DJ.

That's a good starting for. I mean, you could get DJ Swearinger, DJ White, DJ Fluker, DJ Hayden. I think DJ is the winner here. You've sold me. I think it's DJ too. DJ Moore, being able to play with a. plug that in. I didn't see that. That was a little bit further down the list. DJ readers, same way. All right. Let's go with DJ. DJ is the definitive answer. Okay. Problem solved. Now we can

stop the show. All right, buddy. Really appreciate you doing this. Always good to talk to you. That was very fun as it always is. And I am sure we will do something like this again down the road. Oh, I don't know. Now that I've given that speech about how to use analytics, I'm sure our ever NFL team is going to be knocking on my door. So I appreciate the time we spent together. All right, but I'll talk to you later. And I am thrilled now to be joined by the athletics own Greg Alman. Greg, how are you doing, man? I'm doing well.

Thanks to have me on. Good to be on the podcast. Is that how you pronounce your last name? It is. You're right. No, it's funny. You do these radio hits. And it's always cool on the producers.

Like, hey, let me check the pronounce you your last name. And then you'll get others. And it's really you don't care enough to correct people. But you'll be like Vancouver. And they're like, Greg Alman of the Atlantic. And you just kind of, no, you're right. Thank you for asking. Yeah, no worries.

I hate messing them up. So you cover the bar. for us, obviously. I wanted to have you on this week because they just seemed like a team that was going to be around until the end, which I still think they might be. I think they're a playoff team. They're obviously a very good team. But to a lot of people, I would say coming into last week, some people consider them the best team in the entire league. They were number one in DVOA.

They were top five in offense and defense, I believe. I think in a lot of ways, the most complete team in football through the first seven weeks of the season. Last couple weeks, I don't know how you describe it. a mini skid, I guess. They beat the Giants, but not in any sort of convincing fashion. That was more of a slog than people probably expected. And then they get blown out by the Saints. So I figured this was a good time to check in with the team that kind of was considered a known quantity and just a given to a lot of people before the last couple weeks.

So as you've kind of sat back over the last couple days here, I'm sure Ariens has talked. I'm sure Brady has talked. What is just the overall tone of what's going on down there in Tampa right now compared to what it might have been when this team was really rolling. Yeah, I mean, they were trying to do a good job of not getting too high and too big on themselves, even after destroying the Packers by 28 and beating the Raiders by 25. And then with the Giants game, like you said, the Giants game was very wobbly. They were fortunate to win that.

And I would have said that even if they hadn't given up the touchdown at the end. They win because of a missed two-point conversion, but even if it just finishes whatever, 25, 19 or whatever it was, it still looked way unimpressive. So I think you had that feeling after the Giants game. It's kind of like you say, boy, if they play like that against the Saints, they're going to lose. And it's almost as if they said, like, let's try and prove that right. If anything, they got worse. I mean, they did everything wrong Sunday night.

Offensively, defensively, defensively struggled badly on both sides of the ball. And when you do that against a team like the Saints that already knows you and has beaten you four times in a row, it's going to be as ugly as it was Sunday night. Yeah, and I think that you watch that game and you bring up the Packers game, I think that's a good comparison, actually. When you're playing against a good team in the NFL, every once in a while, you're just going to play these games where it all gets away from you. And I went back and I watched the first half today because I didn't have to watch anything

beyond that. And the Brady pick, it's like, and this is over. Now the ball just starts rolling downhill. The Saints are removing the ball efficiently, but you have three or four explosive plays of weird, Taysome Hill run, and then the pick. And it's like, all right, now the game has just completely gotten away from us. And it seems to be that's what happened. So when you take that night into account that was drastically bad and an uneven performance from the Giants into account, what aspects of this game stretch do you think are actually concerning for this team?

And which do you think are kind of a blip that won't be issues long term as we kind of project forward? There's two things I'll point to. They have an offensive line injury right now. Their left guard, Ali Marpet, is out with a concussion. And I think that exposed a lack of depth and a real problem on the left side of the line. Their left tackle Donovan Smith hasn't played especially well. But I mean, they don't have given up 10 sacks in the first eight games. This was something where it wasn't, if anything, O-Line was probably a point we would have said had exceeded expectations.

I think they had an argument to be the best offensive line in the league through the first seven weeks of the season. I mean, Brandon Thorne, my buddy, who is one of the best offensive line minds I know, I think he had three bucks on his midseason all pro team on the offensive line. Ali Maupat being one of them. So that's a huge step down when you go from an all pro left guard to somebody who, Joe Higgis historically played a lot of tackle. I felt bad for him on Sunday night. You could just see that he was having a rough night.

Right. Well, and it's one of those where what compounds it is that when you fall behind 21-0, the left side doesn't have to worry about stopping the run at all. They're not going to run it. So now you can just pin the ears back and pass rush. And Brady, I felt like played like a guy who knew he had about a second and a half to get rid of the ball. Absolutely. On his back.

And that's not usually him. He can be, you don't think of someone who gets rattled easily. He did on Sunday night. And as a result, it was, I mean, if he was going through two progressions on plays, I was impressed. The first couple drives, it was like drop back, there's Ronald Jones. I mean, the only four offensive touches in the first three series were Ronald Jones. And that's when you're rolling out Mike Evans and Grankowski and Antonio Brown and, we're writing about all this offensive talent.

And all they had were two handoffs and two dumpoffs, none of which got a first down. So by the time you get through that, it's 21 nothing. And the game, I mean, you can throw out your game plan. It doesn't really matter what you do once you're down 21. Nothing. The other thing, I'm sorry, to come back to it, offensive line, that created a problem. And then they're past secondary. I mean, they've got some really young cornerbacks.

I think Carlton Davis is playing like a pro bowler this season. But their other two corners have not played well in the last month. They flip flopped. It had been that Sean Murphy Bunting was in every down corner, and Jamel Dean came in on the outside when they went to nickel. And two weeks ago, they switched that. They made Dean an every down corner. And now Murphy Bunting was just the nickel.

But neither of them have really taken well with those roles. The first touchdown, Dean clearly thought he was giving up that receiver to somebody else. Murphy Bunting didn't think he was picking it up. And as a result, Trey Kwan Smith is in the back of the end zone with no defender within 10 yards of him. Did they explain that? They just said it was a miscommunication is what they said. I think there might have been some presumption of safety help that was not there at all. You know, they played a lot of zone Sunday.

And sometimes last year, that's something they had trouble with. And veteran quarterbacks almost had a better grip on where the seams were and where the holes were in those zones than the defenders who were supposed to be setting those zones. So it was a little bit of regression that way. They gave up, this was a team that had the number one run defense. They still have statistically the number one run defense in the NFL, but the last two teams have run for over 100. I think it was like 138 for the Saints on Sunday. Taysam Hill was a big part of that with some non-traditional runs,

but that's not what they're used to. They're used to giving up half as much as they gave up Sunday night. Yeah, that touchdown was interesting just because when I was watching it, it was actually really smart play design because they motioned Camara out to the number one receiver on that side. So the corner, you would assume, because he's the number one receiver would have him. They fake the screen and I think that's where some of the miscommunication happened. And dimensioning the veteran quarterback thing I think is so telling because with Breeze, I want to say

they blitzed him on about half of his dropbacks on Sunday, but they seem to not be able to be as aggressive against a guy like that as they'd want to against other quarterbacks. So they're playing more zone. They're playing a little more passively, which is not exactly what they want to do and some of that stuff gets exposed. So I think that's a really interesting point. And I think that The Jamel Dean thing over the last couple weeks, the Giants took advantage of him on some double moves, just him being really aggressive. And this defense in general, I think, is naturally aggressive.

That's what they want to be. But I feel like we're in this part of the season where offenses are figuring out how to use that aggressiveness against them. And whether that's Jamel Dean on double moves, teams are, I mean, the Saints did this explicitly. Devin White's an awesome athlete, he is not very sound in coverage at times. You can really put his head just turn.

it all the way around. That first touchdown to Troutman was a little shake route that they ran against him in space where he just kind of gets a little bit out of sorts. So I'm curious, does it feel like some of those mistakes where teams are really saying, we want you to play downhill and we want you to play with this and really respond to that initial stimuli? Do you think that's something where teams are figuring out that's the way they want to play against this team because they can use that aggressiveness as a weakness where it's supposed to be a strength? Yeah. My thought yesterday was like, can other teams see what the Saints did? and try and replicate it here in the second half of the season.

Because other teams don't have Drew Breeze, first of all. But if you look at Drew Breeze, in the four times he's played Todd Bowles, okay, no one has solved this defense better than Sean Payton and Drew Breeze. I think there have been five games where opponents have hit 75% of their passes. Breeze has three of them. He hit 83% on Sunday, right? So it's one of those where the best thing you can say is that if the Bucks play the Saints again, it bodes well for how the rest of the year is gone.

And if not, it might be the last time they have to face Drew Breeze. Dean, I felt like in the Giants game, there were at least three plays in the Giants game where Dean got beat and it was just Daniel Jones not being an accurate passer. And you overthrew guys that got behind the defense. And you're absolved of that because it's like, oh, your quarterback wasn't the mark. But again, you say, wow, if that happens next week,

Drew Breeze isn't going to miss on that throw. And it still was a problem in coverage. You mentioned Devin White. And Devin White has been both the best and at times the worst player in this defense. He's blitzed amazingly well. He has five sacks. He's been a huge part of this run defense. But like you said, it's not a good thing to drop him back and pass coverage too often.

And that he does get turned around. He and Labonte David, I think both got beat on tight-in touchdowns at one point Sunday night. So you're seeing vulnerabilities in this defense. I mean, statistically, it's every bit a top 10 defense. Even without Vita Vaya, it's a really. good run defense. They've managed to get through that. But like I said, you see vulnerabilities. You see good receivers and even some not so good receivers beating them and getting yards. And so far until Sunday it really hadn't been a problem. But now you wonder because now they've got,

you know, they have Carolina and obviously Teddy Bridgewater's had good games against them in last year. And then they go to the Rams. Then they go to the Chiefs. So this is not a good stretch for your past defense coming up right now. I feel like the Saints are a particularly bad matchup for a couple of reasons. One, just pinpoint accurate. See, there was that throw I'm thinking about early in the game where Breeze just put it right over Levanti David's hand to Tassum Hill kind of coming from right to left. That's just type of throw most guys can't make. And he had a couple of those on Sunday.

Then the other part of it is, I think you really see the weaknesses of this team in a past defense, from past defense's perspective, when you have to go to their base defense. So if you come out in heavy personnel and they're in that five-man front, teams really, I think, the Giants and the Saints did a really good job of this, attacking the flats when those linebackers are responsible

over the flats in three deep zones. Teams are doing that consistently. And when you have past rushers that have to be accountable for that, you're going to get burned. And I think teams are starting to pick up on that. So that's my question here is, and I don't think you or I would have the answer, how do the bucks now kind of come up with their next little wrinkle

now that teams are saying, all right, we're going to come out in heavy personnel and we're going to attack you these ways when your best past defenders are in the field. Is there a way that the bucks can say, all right, if you're going to do that, then we're going to do this.

I think that's the biggest question they're probably going to have to answer on that side of the ball down the stretcher. Yeah, what I felt like made this defense so good at their peak, if you will, when they were beating 20-point wins against the Packers and the Raiders, was that it had a different look almost every play. Like you'd go and you'd watch the Bucks on defense and just different exotic fronts, different looks, just switching between base and nickel.

They have an inside outlook where Levanti and Devin White are the outside pass rushers and they have Sue as a stand-up 300-pound middle linebacker. They're starting to use Jordan Whitehead kind of in that moneybacker. It used to be in Arizona. You'd see it a little bit of Deaconan, where he's like a hybrid linebacker safety who could flip, who can cover. And there's just a lot of really flexible pieces that have to be hard for opponents to,

it's kind of like in the time it takes you to process. They're in a dime. They're in a dime, but, you know, it's nothing of all. And I would wonder how often you're just tempted to, we're just going to call a timeout. out of this because I can't pick up on that. They've only shown that three times all year.

And there was less of that. I didn't see as much of that. Things got out of hand quickly enough Sunday night where I think maybe you just go back to keeping it simple, I guess. But I didn't see as much deception and disguise and so much of the complexity that's helped this defense go from good to great in the first half of this season. And that's what I'm really wondering about is,

is that a product of what you have to do against Breeze? you're not going to want to blitz him. You're not going to want to do all those things because you just feel like it's going to push you in a bad spot. And Mahomes is probably the same question. He's so good when teams send extra bodies after him. Do you want to say we're going to play some soft zone and have that be just the baseline of our defense against quarterbacks like this? Or do you respond and say, this is not what we're comfortable doing? I'd rather be a little bit more halfway between where we're not being as exotic as we would be against a novice quarterback,

but we can't be totally simple either because it's completely outside of our comfort zone. I think these are the questions they have to answer, and I'm curious what those answers would be. Right. I also don't think they got the pressure, or at least didn't get to Breeze with only four on Sunday. I think that that hurt them in that some of what they did, they had to be getting him. And there were a couple times where Breeze was able to shift within the pocket and reset himself and make some great throws. Where there was pressure, he just adjusted for it, at least once he dirted a pass when it would have been a sack. And he knows just what he needs to do to avoid a grounding call for the most part. So anyway, it's just what they did Sunday, you can throw that out.

It didn't work. You don't want to go near that game plan again, no matter who you're facing. So on the other side of the ball, it feels like it was kind of a surprising day because the Saints were playing a lot of just like sticky man coverage against a group of really good receivers, which was kind of shocking to me. And I know Marcus Lattimore brings it against Mike Evans, which he did again. But there were other things where I'm watching like CJ Gardner Johnson, sticking Antonio Brown's hip pocket and guys just not getting open.

that feels like an aberration. I mean, Tom Brady hasn't been good for the last couple of weeks that offensive seemed uneven, but I just can't imagine that that group of receivers is going to have that many down days if the offensive line gets a little bit healthier. On the Antonio Brown front, are you still surprised that they ended up making this decision?

I understand the upsides to it. I understand that you're two games away like they were from not looking very good on offense and seeming like you need more help. I still can't believe they ended up doing this, and there are so many reasons why they shouldn't have. Just your initial thoughts on that and kind of where you sit from it now that you've watched a game with him in the lineup. Yeah, I get it.

It's funny because it was, you had this when Brady came on board and you had it when Grant came on board where the fans are like, hey, they're going to get Tom Brady. And you have that like, no, they're not going to get Tom Brady. They're not. No, Tom Brady's not going to leave New England. If he did, he wouldn't come to Tampa. And then he did. And again, you're like, no, Krakowski's doing reality TV. He's very much enjoying retirement.

He's professional wrestler right now. He's not, no, actually, okay, he's back. He's back. So with Antonio Brown, there was at least that dismissal where Bruce was on with Tiki Barber on New York Radio in March, the week that Tom Brady came on. And they said, hey, if you get in the band back together, is Antonio Brown going to come and rejoin Tom Brady?

And Bruce was kind of more dismissive than you normally would be. Like normally, I think you'd be polite and just kind of say, well, he's got a lot of good options. so I'm sure he'll find a place to get back in the league. We're looking at, we look at every way to improve our roster. Right. There's easy ways to dance around it. And instead, Bruce said, no, that's not going to happen.

Like, he's not a fit. And like, sorry, the cap won't work. And then just shot it down to where you're like, okay, well, we don't have to worry about Antonio Brown anymore. So in August, in September, when people are asking him by Antonio Brown, I'm like, I think Bruce has made it pretty well known how he feels about Antonio Brown. And then, you know, you can talk about the injuries. I mean, they've definitely dealt with injuries at receiver. Chris Godwin has missed four games with three injuries already, none of which are related.

It's a concussion and a finger and a hamstring. And Mike Evans has been hurt and dinged up. And even though he's played, he hasn't been full-strength Pro Bowl Mike Evans. So I get that when Bruce calls it an insurance policy, he's right. I mean, if they lose one or both of those, last year at the end of last year, they lost both of those. And they had Bresad Paraman as there won for the last three games of the season. they don't want that. So what this does with obvious baggage that comes with it is it insulates them against an injury.

It makes sure Tom Brady has literally a third Pro Bowl receiver to throw to. And if they're all healthy, it's an absolute gluttony of talent on offense. And you can't possibly keep all of them happy. But if they are hurt, then you've done the right thing preemptively, knowing the trade deadline is gone now. You can't go get a Pro Bowl receiver off the street. except Antonio Brown. So like I said, I understand why they did it. There's definitely a PR hit that's come with it.

And there's definitely the risk of him messing with what was a really good chemistry in that locker room. Yeah, there's obviously a lot of baggage. There are questions about that. But when you're playing as well as you are, that was the thing to me. It's like, why would you even almost consider risking this and risking how well you're playing? But NFL teams have made decisions for less. So I completely, I mean, on that end of it, I guess I understand to a certain extent. But I think that on the football, on a purely football basis,

I'll be curious to see what that group looks like with a little bit more time together. Because on the one, the deep incompletion to Gronk in the first half, I think you saw Antonio Brown also broke open and took his route vertically and put his hand up. It was like, I'm open. And he does a lot of that stuff. And even though him and Brady had that short time together in New England, it wasn't much time. It's not like these guys have played together.

Yeah. So it's not as if it's been an entire off season or even multiple weeks together. So how that group ends up meshing, how Godwin plays with the finger, all of that. I have faith in that collective unit figuring it out and Brady playing much better than he has the last couple weeks. The last thing I'll ask of you, this is always something that whenever I talk to people that cover teams, it's one of the first things that comes to mind because you guys are so in tune with it. Are there any kind of lingering health issues, whether it's guys that aren't in the lineup or guys that are playing, like you mentioned with Mike Evans, that are playing like 75% that you think are going to affect this team down the stretch?

because I feel like the football watching public doesn't hone in on that stuff quite enough. Yeah, the things that stand out to me, they're really, really heavily leaning on their starters on defense. They have very little depth at outside linebacker. Jason Perpaul is 31 coming off a neck injury last year. He obviously had the hand injury. And he's playing 89% of the snaps on defense right now. And that's very much what Jason Peripal wants to do. He would not come off the field if he didn't have to.

but I worry that just the wear and tear of that is going to add up. Shaq Barrett, the other outside linebacker, really doesn't come off the field. I think he's probably 87%. So it's just two guys that aren't rotating out as much as you'd normally associate pass rushers going out. And behind them, there's not much. They got a kid named Anthony Nelson, who's a second year guy, doesn't have a sack this year. He's really the only one of those played. They have a guy named Cam Gill, who's an undrafted rookie who I think has played like 10 snaps on defense.

He would be their fourth outside line. backer. So I worry about the depth there and just almost preemptively worry about injury there. As well, you should. I think that's a huge deal. The fact that they've been so healthy, I think is probably a huge reason that they've been so good. I mean, those three, especially on defense, I think health and overall efficiency are typically tied together in a pretty pronounced way. Yeah. An offensive line, like we saw, offensive line, there's not a lot of proven depth behind the five starters. I think the five starters play at a really high level. And they had the whole week. It's not like Allie Marpet. tweaked his ankle on Friday. They had all week. And Joe Hague looked like someone who hasn't started a football game since 2018 and was kind of out of position. So they get back to their starting line.

I think their line's fine. But again, they're not well insulated against injury there either. My last question for you, what is this you've been like for you? As somebody who's covered the team for a while and now having Tampa be kind of the epicenter of the football universe with the greatest quarterback of all time being in place there, I know it's different because you're not in the locker room and that would be hugely different, I assume. But just from a day-to-day kind of perspective, what has this year been like for you? Yeah, as surreal.

Because again, it's like you want the teams you cover to have a relevance and importance nationally. Yes. I haven't had that. I've been on the beat full time. I've been on the beat since 13. I haven't covered a playoff game in Tampa or with Tampa yet. And they haven't even really been close that much. In 16, they went nine and seven and missed it on a tiebreaker.

that's the only winning record they'd had so far. So there's definitely been the local interest you have here, but the biggest national draws were like Winston is a number one overall pick, those kind of things. So it changes everything with Brady, with Brankowski, with you don't even get to LaShaul McCoy and Leonard Fournett and now Antonio Brown. The circus is in town.

It's crazy. So even with the unusual circumstances of COVID, where if we didn't have COVID, you'd have literally sell out crowds every week. There's Brady jerseys everywhere. It was neat in that even this spring, like when Brady came in, you'll do radio hits out of town. And usually it's just kind of here and there.

I was doing like the BBC. I had like three Canadian calls one week. You were reminded of how much people know and care about Tom Brady. Yeah. It's far beyond. Like if I told you to name a box player from two years ago, you're a casual football fan, I don't know that you can, wherein everybody's grandmother knows Tom Brady and they, you know, might have lost track of how many Super Bowls he's won,

but they know exactly who he is. They could pick him out if you saw him, you know, at an award show or something. So it changes everything. The national spotlight, prime time games. I think James Winston had five primetime games in five seasons here. That's incredible. They would have had five this year. COVID knocked one of them to the afternoon, But there's just, you know, to see Joe Buck, all right, like the Joe Buck Troy Akeman crew, I had no idea of the random vitriol that goes out toward that crew. Like when you say, by the way, Joe Buck, Troy Aikman have the game on Sunday on Fox. And there's just all this nastiness that I realized, like, I didn't know that because they just didn't

get that crew. You were very aware of how people felt about Dick Stockton. You were very in tune with it. I don't want to throw Dick Stockton on the bus. But I knew that people really didn't care that much about Dick Stockton. calling your game for the 34th year in a row. I was thinking about all you guys, the moment that it happened, like Jenna Lane and you and just everybody was like, man,

this is an entirely different sort of experience now for all of you, which is great. Yeah, well, it's funny because again, with COVID, I haven't had a face-to-face with Tom Brady yet. Yeah. It's strange. We get like within 20 feet of them at practice and we're like, that's probably going to be it.

It's so it's strange. And that he's here and you have all the attention and spot. spotlight and platform that comes with Tom Brady being here. But like you said, we miss out on that open locker room and talking to somebody or getting somebody on the side. He really hasn't done any one-on-ones with reporters at all. So even though it's here, like you said, you're kind of getting it from a distance compared to how crazy it would be under normal circumstance.

One thing I've always noticed about Tom Brady, the thing that jumps out to me every single time I'm in the same room with him. So tall. Really jumps out. You forget how tall he is. You forget that he's like a six five like prototyping. quarterback. It's the one thing that I've like every time I'm around him, I was like, yeah, Tom Brady, big guy, very tall man, which is just one of those things. Sometimes you just forget that when you're

not around NFL athletes all the time and then you're standing next to them. Well, and like with the combine, again, he's got kind of supposed to be this like every man and him and the boxers from the combine where it looks like just Joe Schmo stopping by to play 20 years in the NFL. No, he's, he's 43 and he's playing in the NFL. Like he takes amazingly good care of himself. So even though he's not, you know, walking around shirtless all day, to do what he's doing. It's like, you know, we try to talk to these people. You think about the number of people who have had productive, successful, meaningful seasons at 43. It's not a lot, especially not in the NFL.

So to see what he's doing, I think there had been two games in NFL history where someone started a game at 43 and threw a touchdown or started a game in one. So for him to be sitting here at six and three, he's like he did last year with every 42 two-year-old record. He's just completely reset things. And again, you have no doubt that he'll have fun being a 44-year-old next year the way he's going. Yeah, I think he'll be just fine. And it's been a rough couple weeks, but I think with the protection, getting back there and again, a little bit more time with those guys. I'm not worried about him. He was playing an extremely high level. And you were working at an extremely high level. Greg, I'm a thank you very much

for the time, man. I sincerely appreciate it. And we'll talk to you down the road. Thanks, Robert. Have a good one. All right, guys. That's all we got today. Thank you so much to Greg for coming out of chat about the bucks. Thank you so much to Bill for doing those mailback questions. I had a blast. I hope you guys did too. We'll be back tomorrow with Lindsay Jones doing our normal Thursday show. In the meantime, please rate and review the podcast on your favorite podcast platform. I would really appreciate it. Just go in, put a couple stars in there, leave a review. It would mean a lot to me. Also, please subscribe to The Athletic. It's theathletic. It's theathletic.com slash football show. We're doing the dollar a week promotion that is still going.

I promise you. You guys will not regret subscribing. It is an invaluable website. I've used it every single day before I started working here. I used it every single day now. You have no good reason to not sign up for it. Think about the ways you spend a dollar every single week. I promise you this is a better one. All right. Really appreciate it, guys.

Thank you so much for listening to The Athletic Football Show. We'll be back tomorrow. This was the Athletic Football Show.