The Athletic Football Show: A show about the NFL - Monday Mailbag: Coordinator hires, the Steelers' QB situation, draft day shockers, and more

Episode Date: April 14, 2025

One of the many things we love about the TAFS mailbag is that it reflects the conversations real football fans are having in the moment. As such, it should come as no surprise that this edition of the mailbag is heavy on draft questions. What are some plausible draft day surprises we could see this year? Why do certain players seem to have dramatic climbs or tumbles down draft boards in March and April? Should teams recalibrate how the think about premium positions in a draft like this one? Robert Mays and Derrik Klassen dig into those questions, and a whole lot more.RundownHow much do teams know about other teams draft boards?Evaluating contact balance for college prospectsFavorite coordinator hires this cycleSurprising draft day tradesHow the Steelers have handled the QB positionWhy do players rise or fall on draft boardsDraft day shockersPremium position vs. premium talentWhich Georgia EDGE defender is the better bet?Favorite and least favorite metricsHow many Hall of Famers were active in 2024?Host: Robert MaysCo-Host: Derrik KlassenExecutive Producer: Michael BellerProducer: Michael BellerSubscribe to The Athletic Football Show...AppleSpotifyYouTubeFollow Robert on Bluesky: @robertmays.bsky.socialFollow Derrik on Bluesky: @qbklass.bsky.socialFollow Robert on X: @robertmaysFollow Derrik on X: @QBKlassTheme song: HauntedWritten by Dylan Slocum, Trevor Dietrich, Ruben Duarte, Kyle McAulay, and Meredith VanWoert / Performed by Spanish Love SongsCourtesy of Pure Noise / By arrangement with Bank Robber Music, LLC Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Welcome to the Athletic Football Show. I'm Robert Mays. It's another mailbag Monday. Me and Derek Classen digging into your guys' questions. Another great batch of questions. Chat a little bit about the Hall of Famers that we think might be playing in the NFL right now. Talked about a couple team-specific decisions in the top 10. Why the idea of maybe going for the most talented player over a more premium position is a little bit murkier that it might seem in a given class.

Talked about how teams build their draft boards, how much they take into account. some of the publicly available mock information. A lot of draft-centric questions in this one. Really enjoyed digging into this with Derek and Beller. Let's get to it right now. It's another Mailbag Monday here on the Athletic Football Show, like we've done for the last few episodes. Our producer Michael Beller is going to kick us the questions.

Derek, I think you've embraced the leaning into the mailbox, and I really appreciate that you have. This is something that, you know, I've been doing these for as long I can remember being in sports media. Obviously, my situation is colored a little bit differently because Bill Simmons used to be my boss. So I came from a very mailbag heavy universe when it comes to my sports media upbringing. But I appreciated that we've brought them back with such fervor this off season because I've

really enjoyed doing them. I've been enjoying them more and more. It's like my favorite. It's such a good. And for us, it's the end of the week when we record them. But it's such a good thing to look forward to at the end because it's a lot of, you know, I think I said this before after maybe the first or second one. It's a lot of questions and just framing that I wouldn't think of,

especially this time of year when that's all there is to think about is stuff that you wouldn't get to in, you know, week eight of the NFL season. So it's, it's been an incredible time. We have very good, very smart listeners. And I appreciate their insight on a lot of these things. And we had another good batch of questions. Bellar, why don't you just kick it off? Let's get into it.

Yeah, let's get into it, you guys. Stephen Lake has the first question for us. There's a lot of draft questions this time around, which makes a lot of sense. And Stephen gets us going there. He says, I love playing with all those NFL draft simulators. I learn so much about every draft class, even though they're only a game. These Sims, however, are least like the real NFL draft and that they all pre-ranked players for all participants to see. With some randomness factor and team needs mixed in, your computer opponents roughly adhere to those rankings as players come off the board.

So in this year's draft, I feel like a savvy Bears GM, often training down in the first round and sometimes even again at 39 or 41, because I can still land Caleb Johnson in the 50 to 60. range. Of course, that's a luxury Ryan Poles doesn't have. No NFL team has such foreknowledge over the rest of the league rates various players. So my question is this. How do NFL front novices know where other teams rank players? Or maybe the better question is, how much do they know about other teams' appraisals? Do they care? Are good GMs simply so confident and committed to their own draft boards that other team's draft boards be damned? Finally, how much of a role, if any, does the collective wisdom of the draft industrial complex and its many mock drafts and big boards play in teams coming to these assessments. Robert, get us going here with this one.

I love this. This is a conversation that we had at the NFL summit this year, Beller, and we were all sitting around that table talking about just the draft process and how much mock drafts actually matter to people in the league. The short answer, this is how I understand it, is that everything matters. These teams do mock scenarios going through the draft in order to, I think, figure out where certain runs on positions might happen. And I think that's the most important part of this. Why it matters what other teams are going to do is that if you want a player at a certain position and you think another team could take that player, that's a spot where you might have to trade in front of them. So I think that's why it becomes important is that the shelves of talent and

how certain positions might come off the board and where the needs align, that ends up mattering here. And I think when it comes to figuring out that order, everything matters. I was talking to a head coach this morning about this, just asking him, and what are the inputs when you guys are trying to figure out mock scenarios and consensus boards, etc. They look at all the public, some teams that are a little bit more forward-facing that have analytics departments that are robust and care about this stuff, which I think is probably most of them at this point. They use publicly available mock draft data and consensus boards to help build what they

think is the general order of the draft because those things are directionally accurate more years than not. And then other than that, it's a lot of like manual inputs, talking to agents, talking to scouts, talking to other GMs, talking to just people who might have a sense of what's happening, media members, etc. So some of it is a little bit more art rather than science, and some of it is based on actually public available data. And all of that goes in to try to build what you understand to be a larger draft board

and the order that guys might, again, directionally come off the board. The publicly available stuff is really good specifically for that. It's the draft runs. Is gauging like, okay, if we think five teams in the teens need a cornerback, And there are three players that are ranked on the consensus board in the teens till early 20s as cornerback. It's like, okay, then we can expect our run on corners to start at 11. And if we want one, then we got to go up and get one there.

I think in terms of the specifics in terms of how do other teams see other players on their board, it's most of it to me is probably just guesswork based on previous draft classes. Like certain organizations are going to have certain things that they favor. Like for the longest time, the Ted Thompson Green Bay Packers, if you were too short, had two short of arms, or if you were under 200 as like a receiver, they wouldn't draft you. And for all their offensive linemen, they wanted to grab left tackles and move them to other spots on the line.

So it's like you could probably start to kind of put together a board for what they were thinking. But again, with how many GMs generally change each year, even that is hard outside of the like five teams that have had the same, you know, structure for the last couple of decades. And you could build team needs into how you model this stuff, right? So if you have your pro scouting department, they have an understanding of where the holes are on individual rosters, and that can be something you build in as well. The example of this that I remember, and it's obviously a very narrow window that we're looking at this through, but remember a couple years ago, I think it was the 2021 draft, and there was that leaked video from the Panthers War Room,

and they were literally going through the top seven predicting what each team would do with those seven picks. and I think they got all of them right. Like, there is a lot of work that goes into it, this from the team side, in order to predict what they might have to do when it comes to trades. I think that's the most important thing. Who might be available when we're picking?

And is there a guy we really like, can we move up three spots because we think the draft is going to unfold a certain way right in front of us? And that probably matters the most inside the top 10, right? Where it's the lottery pick caliber of talents that you really want to make sure you're not going to miss out on. Whereas, like, if you're a team picking at 27, you've probably already accepted the fact that you're going to have to go into like whatever your plan C is just based on like how things might shake out on the board.

There are times, though, where you see it a little bit later in the draft. The draft run last year that I can remember, all those corners went off the board in sequence in the second round. So you had Dijin, Koolaid McKinstree, and I think it was Max Melton. They all went like right in a row there. And the Eagles traded up in front of those teams with Washington. in 240 to take Cooper DeGine. Whether that's an accident or whether they thought these teams might draft a corner, do we want to go up and get our guy?

I think it's probably at least a little bit of the latter in what drives that decision. And that's why being able to predict and model this stuff does have a lot of advantages. All right, Belor, let's get to our next one. All right. Nicholas Brown asks, how do you evaluate a college running back's contact balance by tape? One of Ashton Genti's supposed strengths is his ability to make maintained balance after being hit. However, shouldn't we expect Mountain West defenders to have poor tackling ability

than say Big Tenor SEC guys? How do you compare Genti to a guy like Quinshawn Judkins in this regard? What do you got for us here, Derek? So this is a great question because it's totally fair. Like for as fantastic as Ashton Genty is, one of the few drawbacks or concerns that you would have is like, okay, he mostly did this against guys who aren't going to sniff NFL rosters. where I think with Gentie, it's a little bit easier to get over.

I think there are two reasons for me why I think it's okay. One, when he did face actual competition, like the Oregon game, he looks good. And he's still doing the things that he was doing against all those scrubs against, like, Wyoming or whoever it was. So to me, the fact that he is still able to let it play against those, like, guys who are going to be NFL roster players, like Jeffrey Bossa for the linebacker for Oregon, like that's an NFL player. So the fact that he could do it against them, I think, kind of cross that off. And then with Gentie specifically, when you watch him do it in the Mountain West, it's not like, oh, this is pretty good and he's knocking some guys off every now and then, okay, that's a cool trait for him. It is like by far the most dominant player in college football doing it. And so it's like, okay, even if he's 10% worse at it at the NFL level, probably still going to be pretty good and still going to be one of the best guys at it.

So for me, it's just the fact that he was so dominant doing it. and when he had to face higher competition, he was still able to uphold that. Yeah, I think on a broader level, you have to take the competition into account, but on a granular level, you can still see some of those traits, even if you're playing against lower level competition.

But I tend to agree when it comes to the level of dominance you need to show in order for it to matter. That's typically the rule of thumb when it comes to smaller school prospects or guys that played at a slightly lower level of competition. You want to see them be absolutely dominant against those players for you to feel good. And I think Ashton Jentee's 2024 season would qualify as absolutely dominant.

I would say so. And the last thing to compare it back to Judkins, who our listener brought up as well, Judkins is very powerful and takes contact well. The difference between him and Jentee to me is that once Jentee makes a guy miss, his next two steps are unbelievably explosive for him to get away from whoever the next guy might be. Judkins, I think, takes a little bit longer to get back into high gear. And that, to me, is the difference between a good prospect and what we believe Genty to be as an elite prospect.

Yeah, that's a really good, that's a really good nuance and trying to figure out the difference between those two guys. What's our next one, Beller? Our next one is from Kai Gurkie. Kai says, my favorite NFL team, the Jaguars got a new regime. And I'm a big fan of the hirings. So that got me wondering, which coordinator is your favorite hire of this cycle in terms of game-changing influence, leadership,

and potential to become a head coach in a few years. Robert, if that previous one was Taylor Made for Derek, I think this one's Taylor made for you. So why don't you jump in here? We've talked about a few of these guys in this cycle. Of the coordinators that were hired in this cycle that I would have my eye on the most, and I've said this, this is not news.

It would probably be Nick Haley in Houston. Just based on what I think that system has done for offenses around the league, but also just his makeup, his personality. I just feel like he has, the goods of a guy who could be a head coach in the NFL at some point. And so I'm excited to see what he does down in Houston. The other one, I'm going to be cheating a little bit on the other side of the ball.

He's a guy that was not hired but retained. It's Patrick Graham. Like I feel like Patrick Graham continuing to do the job that he has done with the Raiders, I'd be very curious to watch what his trajectory looks like in the next three or four years. So if I'd pick one coordinator on each side of the ball that is starting with a new staff or was a new hire this spring, those are probably. the two that I would say. There's some other names I want to mention here, but I'll throw those two out just to start. Yeah, I think in terms of guys who are hired this year, it's hard for me because most of them

were just position coaches, so I don't have as much insight into it. The only time I've ever been convinced the position coach was going to be great was Aaron Glenn in New Orleans. And I've told that story before where it's like, you watch Ken Crawley execute the best speed turn you've ever seen and be like, okay, whoever's coaching these guys is going to be good. So typically that's hard. I would say It's a different job. It's a very different job and it does not always translate. It's important to remember that. Exactly.

And in some cases, like, you know, sometimes for maybe an offensive line coach, it's like, okay, is the offensive line coach good or is the play caller really good and setting it up? Well, like, that can be tricky too. But I would say Graham is a great one. Like, he's been one who you watch his defenses and the inputs are so, so good. It's just whether the offenses have been griefing him in certain years or just not having secondary talent, it's been hard for him to like truly elevate. The other one I would say, and this was a hiring last year, but I was.

so impressed by what his defense did with the pieces that it had outside of the front was Denard Wilson in Tennessee. His defense was so well put together, I thought. And so he's a guy where, you know, I don't know if Tennessee's defense necessarily has the talent to be elite this year and then jump him into head coaching positions. But I would be shocked if within the next five years, he's not getting calls for sure. So I had three guys who were hired in last year's cycle that I would mention as kind of a secondary bucket here.

Dernard Wilson was one of them. and two of the other ones, Jeff Hathley in Green Bay. I think just what he did with that defense, but again, also just he's been a head coach. He was a college head coach, and he carries himself like a head coach when he has like a conversation with Jeff Hathley. I think that he's somebody who is very put together,

I think is somebody that would be comfortable in the front of the room if necessary. Another guy I think is interesting is Brad Edzick from the Panthers, really young guy, but I think has an interesting background with Dave Canales. He was in Seattle, you know, has seen a couple different versions of offense. He's somebody that I would keep an eye on. And then the question comes from a Jags fan. I assume there's a little bit of what do you think of Grant Udinsky in part of this.

Grant Udinsky is absolutely somebody who I'm keeping an eye on over the next few years. And obviously it's difficult. And I want to do more work on this over the offseason because I think it's notable in a few different ways. One, what do non-play calling offensive coordinators do? Right. I think that's a question a lot of you probably have. It is a question I am interested in, and I think we should explore. So figuring out the input and the impact of those guys have can be difficult at times. But I think the archetype of person that we're seeing chosen for that job is very telling. Like, Grant Udinski and Declan Doyle being these young guys who are maybe a little bit more fluent

in the technology parts of this and some of the grunt work parts of this and being able to incorporate some newer ideas into how teams are. operate. I think there's a reason that teams are going a little bit younger and seeking out these types of coaches and these sorts of roles. Sandel wrote a really, really good piece about that during the Combine this year. If you guys have not read it, I would certainly go check that out. But I think it's something that we will explore more in depth at some point over the course of the offseason. Three defensive coordinator names I'll throw out as part of this because I also wanted to just mention them. I've said this a bunch. Christian Parker, who's the passing game coordinator

and DB's coach for the Eagles. I think he will be a defensive coordinator at some point. I think his name would have been in higher demand this offseason if they didn't go to the Super Bowl and teams weren't already filling their staffs. And then two other guys, Carl Scott, who's with the Seahawks right now, he was with Seattle when Pete Carroll was there. He didn't think is their passing game coordinator in Seattle. He came from the college game.

He's somebody I would keep an eye on. And then Aubrey Pleasant, who was the passing game coordinator for the Rams. He was in Detroit. Things kind of fizzled out there. He went back to L.A. with Sean McVeigh. he's there passing game coordinator in L.I. He's a young guy, a ton of energy. That's another person I'd probably keep an eye on for potentially a promotion at some point here in the next year or so. So those are like the six or seven names, I'd probably say. That's a lot. You brought a lot to the table.

Parker is an interesting one because obviously guys like Quinnian Mitchell and Cooper Deghine are very talented. But even if you're talented, it's hard to have two rookies hit like that in one position group. I also think if you look at his background, you know, he's worked with three coordinators. who run different sorts of schemes and want to do different sorts of things. He was with Adjero Evereaux in Denver after working with Vic Fangio. And I think that version of what Adjero wants to do with that scheme is different than what Vic wants to do. And so you're kind of translating those ideas back and forth.

And then when Vance Joseph came in, they ran similar stuff. But again, he's kind of communicating the ideas they ran the season before to Vance, but also incorporating what he's doing. And so the guys he's worked for, the fact that it's been Vic, Vance, Joseph, Agera, who I think is still a very well-respected defensive coordinator, even if the Carolina defenses haven't played that well. I think he's been surrounded by guys who have been successful, but do it differently. And I think he's learned a lot over the course of that process.

So he's somebody that, again, still very young. I think he's only like 33 or 34. I would be surprised if he didn't get an opportunity sooner rather than later to run his own defense based on what his history has looked like. All right, guys. Here's our next question. It is from Andrew Kamrowski. Andrew says, what are the most memorable screw your division rivals draft position trades from the past few years?

On some cruel scenarios, you could mock happening this year. Not exactly a one for one sort of thing, but I think there are some fun ones where we see teams jump in front of teams that are maybe looking for a similar sort of player. So what do you got for us here, Robert? I don't think the division ones happen that often. You know, the one that I can remember vividly, remember when the Ravens traded in front of the Steelers and picked Max Williams. and everyone thought that the Steelers are going to pick Max Williams that year and the Ravens got him instead. Like that happens every once in a while,

but I don't think it happens that often. The ones that stick with me when it comes to screwing another team or at least screwing them in the moment, screwing them in the long run might be a slightly different conversation. But there are so many moments where, again, you think a team is going to take a player at a certain position. You're worried about that. You want to get ahead of them in the run.

There are a couple of recent examples of this. The Steelers trading ahead of the Jets. for Broderick Jones in 2023. So the Jets were kind of sitting there. They pick Will McDonald with all the tackles off the board. The Lions in 2020 traded in front of Washington to get Brian Branch. They took Juan Martin like three picks later. The Bills in 20203 trading ahead of the Cowboys to get Dalton Kincaid.

When we all thought that the Cowboys were going to draft a tight end in that draft, they drafted Luke Schoonmaker in the second round instead of getting Kincaid in the first round. And then there are other examples of this. Like the Patriots traded up for Taekwon Thornton in 2022 to get ahead of like the pickens, Pierce, Sky Moore run. So this happens all the time to varying degrees of success. But I think those examples of we want to snipe a team that's looking for a similar

players than us, I think those happen more often than purposely trying to screw over or even accidentally screwing over a team in your division. I think that's it. A lot of it tends to just be circumstantial. Like it's you're trying to get ahead of like we talked about earlier, a positional run. And if one of those teams ahead of us happens to be our divisional rival, then that's That's great. I almost think, at least looking at the draft this year and in general, I almost think it's more interesting to think about it like the superpowers in the conference, like you're trying to get ahead of them. Like a scenario I'm looking at this year, the Ravens pick at 27 and just after them, the bills pick at 30. They both definitely need a corner. And you could argue that they both need a pass rush. I know the bills just signed Joey Bosa, but you could argue they still could use another guy to exactly what the Ravens need. So like I could envision a world where they want to jump up six spots. to get ahead of the Ravens and screw the team that they probably know they're going to have to play in the divisional or conference championship again.

I mean, think about other teams in that range. Like, the Packers need those exact things and they're picking a 23. So is there a chance that they feel like they have to get ahead of Green Bay if there's a guy that they like? So I think there are a lot of similarities and overlapping needs for teams picking in the bottom quarter of the first round. And will that create a little bit of urgency with some of those teams to move around in order to get the. the guy that they want. All right. Before we get to the rest of these,

we are going to take a quick break. All right, Valda, what's our next one here? Okay, our next one is from Jeremy Betts. Jeremy wants to know what is your guys take on the Steelers process in 2025, specifically at the quarterback position. Under Mike Tomlin, I feel the Steelers

are unique in that their quarterback play hasn't determined their floor necessarily, but it has affected their ceiling. The list of QBs to start for Pittsburgh since Ben Ralthusberger isn't exactly a who's who of quality passers, but it's not like they haven't tried to find an answer. You can take that in a number of different directions. So now as we enter 2025, where again, the group of available quarterbacks from free agency

to the draft lacks quality, especially where the Steelers are picking. Assuming Aaron Rogers signs as a bridge for 2025, is it a viable plan for the Steelers to avoid reaching for a QB this year and stay competitive while they load up on draft compensation for 2026? They're projected for four comp picks for their losses this off season, according to over the cap. It's a nice little bit of context there for a chance to move up for a more dynamic QB prospect in front of the home crowd for the 2026 draft in Pittsburgh. Derek, why don't you take this one first? Given their circumstance with letting Russell Wilson go and letting Justin Fields go and then looking at the rest of the crop of the free agents or potential trade guys and the draft class knowing they're not going to get Cam Ward, Aaron Rogers is probably was one of their best bets.

Like you could argue that like, yeah, Gino would be a better quarterback this year, but also Gino would have taken draft compensation to go again. And so maybe if that doesn't worry out for you, then you're screwed the next year. No, I'm not allowing this to happen. No, we can't do this. We can't do the, ah, it would have cost them more so they shouldn't have done that. At a certain point, you need a quarterback who's good. I'm fine. We can talk about the Gino thing.

I think Aaron Rogers is a fine path. But this idea of it would have cost a little more so we shouldn't have done that. I'm not letting that side. They should have done it. Anybody who could have gotten Gino should have done it. I'm just saying like I understand if they were already going to make the DK trade as well, why maybe they didn't want to give up like an entire draft class to go do that stuff. But I would have wanted to see Gino there.

My stance is you trade that second for Gino instead of DK. Instead of D. Okay, then you could have, yeah. Gino Smith. It just, we're doing this on paper. And we, they would have been had a chance to trade for him. and the Seahawks would have taken the second round pick, they should have done that.

We don't know how many teams Seattle called. We don't know if Pittsburgh could have even made that move. But I'm not going to hand wave away the Gino Smith thing for value or price reasons. Availability is the only reason they shouldn't have done that trade. That's all I'll say. Yeah, I mean, that probably is true. He, Gino was absolutely their actual best option. But I don't know.

With them trading for DK, I guess I just thought it was going to be off the board for them. but I think with the Steelers, why it's so interesting is and why I think Gino might have been tough, even though they're obviously going to sign Rogers. They've been kind of stuck in this cycle of getting all these guys recently who are just like one year stopgaps and they're going to do it again. But like Gino Smith, you probably have three, four years out of, but he's not the future.

And I think that's kind of like, I'm not going to feel that differently about the Steelers until they get the future. But that's why this class is complicated. It's because you're not going to find that in this class. And I don't blame them for passing on it. this class. Next year, I guess they can try again. I might feel differently about the Steelers that they had an actually good quarterback. That's enough for me. And I think Gino fills that even if it's a short-term solution.

When is the last time the Steelers got better than 20-second best quarterback in the NFL play at the position? Like 20-20? It's like the second to last Ben Rapposberger years, like five years ago. So even if we want to go back and forth about how good Gino is, Gino is a good. Gino is a good NFL quarterback, which is significantly better than anything the Steelers have done over the last five years. Even if it's not a 10-year answer, I would at least be interested in seeing the Pittsburgh Steelers with that level of quarterback play. The thing is, though, this gets back to how close are the Steelers actually?

And, like, Gino would certainly make them better, but, like, how good is that offense actually? We don't know anything about the offensive line. They just gave away their running back. you know, DK is interesting, but like they just don't have that many quality players. The Steelers right now are 11th in snap weighted age in 2024. To me, it doesn't really matter how close the Steelers actually are. With the rest of your roster, you got to try something.

You got to try something again, this version of the team over the top. You got Cam Award is 35, T.J. Watson is 30s. Like even if they're not that close in reality, I still think you owe you. yourself a slightly bigger swing. This is kind of, I'm kind of being silly and a little bit frivolous here. Gino was the only thing that could do that. So if we're going to move on from the Gino thing and just kind of put that aside, yeah, this is a viable path.

Like this is probably the best way to go about it. If you want to sign Rogers, great. I think that's totally reasonable based on the alternatives right now. If you want to bypass a quarterback in this year's draft, I think that's okay too. You don't have a second round pick. So you're picking a 21. do you like enough of these guys to pick them at 21? Probably not.

And if you don't do that, I think that's acceptable. I'd say you should probably continue to take swings at the position, but they don't have a second round pick and they only have six picks overall. But this idea of we're going to load up for next year, if you win nine games again and you're sitting there with the 17th pick, that's hard to do. When you look at recent history, there are some teams have been able to move up a little bit,

But not that much. You know, the Panthers went from 9 to 1 to draft Bryce Young. The other team that made a big move up the board recently to draft a quarterback was the Vikings, but they went up to 11 in a draft where there were five quarterbacks. So that's why it was an okay strategy last year for Minnesota to go from outside of the top half of the first round to quarterback range. There's no telling, even with a couple extra third and fourths in your back pocket, whether that next year's draft is going to line up. in a way where you'll be able to do that.

It's just hard. It's hard when you're picking in the back half of the first round to find your quarterback off ramp in a single offseason when you need to do it. That's why trying to give yourself multiple paths is worthwhile, trying to plan for the Ben Rathesberger off ramp period. But if you go back through history, there really wasn't a good time for them to do that. Like in 2020, they probably would have been in a ranch to take Jordan Love if they wanted to, but they had traded away their first round pick from Minka that year.

All the quarterbacks in 2021 were gone by the time they drafted it in the first round. And then in 2022, when they're in a spot where they need to do it, that's when they drafted Kenny Pickett and now we're back in this situation. I feel like last year they could have done it if they really wanted to. Sure. I think that was probably the crime more than anything is not whatever they're doing this offseason. It's that they felt they wanted to go like the double retread veteran. quarterback instead of trying to swing on one of those prostitouts.

And I'm going to be honest, I think we've kind of reconed the quality of some of those prospects. Like, J.J. McCarthy, Bownix, and Michael Pennix were not like surefire first round picks. At the same time, they are better than all of the non-ward prospects in this class. So you still would have given yourself a better chance than I think almost any of the guys that you're going to be left with this year. Where were the Steelers picking last year heading into the first round? The Steelers were at 20.

Yeah. The Steelers were at 20. okay so yeah i mean they could give up a ton i mean they could have gotten to nine and got any of mccarthy or nicks yeah you'd have to you have to love those guys to do it though right and that's always the complication with quarterback prospects you have to have the appetite for it yeah yeah and i think i can understand two years removed from the picket thing and one year removed from knowing the picket thing wasn't it didn't work out where you're kind of living with the aftermath of the kenny picket thing not having a really big appetite for one it's

another big swing on what might be the fourth or fifth best quarterback at that class. So at some point they're going to need to draft one. I just think that they've put themselves in a position where it's going to be hard to find the right situation to make that happen. I mean, not every team can find Lamar Jackson at 32. Like that, that's just, it's not happening as often as you wanted to. Or be the Cowboys where you get to like a fourth round pick and an undrafted guy who are like consistent pro bowlers.

That is a good thing to bring up, even if you're doing it in jest, because that is the benefit of just swinging. Sometimes it helps to just swing. And I think you could make an argument that to find a guy, you have to take multiple chances or you should take multiple chances. But again, you don't have a second round pick. You only got six picks. Are you going to burn your third round pick on a quarterback just to say you did it if you

don't like any of these guys? Should you anyway? I could understand the argument on both sides, but I don't have a super strong feeling about which side of the fence I land on. All right, guys. I think we're ready to move on to the next side. I think we might get a clip out of that one. Adam Hess is up here next.

Adam says every year it seems that the draft board tends to swing wildly from when the college football season ends up until the draft. Through the combine, free agency, and this pre-draft low period, we hear that player X's stock is rising or falling and it's not always tied to anything tangible like his combine or pro-day testing or even intangible like interview reports, character concerns, what have you. A good example of this to me is Michigan Corner Will Johnson. Johnson was Dame Bruegler's number one player in the preseason and was still number two. on Dane's top 50 on November 12th.

He ended up at 18th in The Beast. Make sure you go check out the Beast if you haven't checked that already. Download it, get it, you're going to want it for this lead up to the draft. Some people point to injury concerns and speed concerns with Johnson, but that doesn't exactly track to me as Dane's November 12th top 50 was more than a month after Johnson's last football game. To be fair, other injuries have lingered or popped up. So here's our question.

How much of this is really the player's stock going up or down and how much of it is just the general draft media and consensus big boards, eventually catching up with how NFL teams truly view players because they finally have the time to break them down in more detail, talk to scouts and sources, and better inform their evaluators. When you take this one first, Robert? I think it's more number one. I think risers and fallers are just changes based on a more complete picture that you get over the course of the process.

If we're taking Johnson specifically, Johnson was a guy we discussed on the most polarizing player show a little bit earlier in the week. and as Dane was trying to fill in the margins on what he looks like as a prospect, he didn't run. He's never going to run. So those speed concerns that you may have, those are not going to be alleviated at any point in this process. You're not going to have that data point. And I think for somebody like Johnson specifically, some of the context around all of that

missed time starts to come into focus a little bit as somebody like Dane or another evaluator goes through the process. This idea of him maybe not playing through some injuries that he could have this sheet. and what that does to his draft stock. I think it's just a matter of a fuller picture re-contextualizing a guy as we go a little bit deeper into the process rather than anybody rising and falling.

It's more so that whatever we're doing with a November top 100 is kind of an internet-based exercise and then this becomes the real thing. The draft stuff like draft work is basically just playing catch up to NFL teams until like the end of March. Because like they, by the time we get to, you know, the end of the NFL season, like all the

scouts and stuff inside the building, like, they've already watched all the guys that are going to be draftable. Like, their evaluation is their job. Yeah, it's their job. Like, they're not watching the NFL stuff. They are watching all these college games. So like, we're catching up to them in that sense. And so I think that's a lot of it.

And it happens especially around the combine. Like you said, because complete picture for medicals. You hear stuff about interviews with players and stuff like that. And then truthfully, like, media is talking to agents. They're talking to coaches. So, like, we just kind of start to catch up in a way that we weren't able to in the middle of the NFL season. I also think in very individual cases, you can just get some players who had a huge

reputation coming into the year, where it was like former five star. They play on this great college defense. And they get, like, a residually high draft grade throughout most of the college football season. But then when the season's over and we go back and watch them and we're like, eh, he's more of a day two type. Like to me, a recent example of this was like

the Marvin Laowell at Texas A&M. Former five star like hybrid pass rusher, all this stuff. People thought he was going to be a top 10 pick. And then by the end of his final season, it was like, well, you watch him more, he's not a good run defender. He's probably not as bendy as we like.

And like, so you just get a different gauge for a player as opposed to a lot of summer scouting is you're doing a little bit more guesswork in the picture, like you said, not as complete. There's a couple really good examples of Right. So like Malachi Starks was fourth on Dan's November big board. And I think that's just because everyone knew Malachi Starks was a good football player. He's going to play out in a good defense.

Like you can sell that to everybody. And then you start to poke some holes in what that season looks like. And then maybe what he is is a prospect when you kind of try to get a more 360 view of who he is as an NFL context. And that stuff can start to change a little bit more. So I think that happens every single year. I think that's absolutely worth bringing. up. And so risers and fallers from where guys were in November, I think is more about an incomplete picture rather than opinions on that player actually changing. It's just that the opinions

earlier in the process aren't that flushed out. All right, guys. Our next one comes from Adam Dickinson. He says each year in the draft, we have situations where something shocks us. This can come from a team selecting a position we didn't expect, Atlanta taking Michael Pennix last year. We all remember that. or a player going much higher than we expected Adam's personal favorite Darius Hayward Bay to the Raiders in 2009. So the question here is, what are some scenarios you could plausibly think of

happening this year? That would be the shocker. I can't remember who went for his last time. Derek, why don't you go here? Yeah, so I was trying to think of a few and I thought of one that was, this one, so I think if Denver trades up to like all the way up to eight for a tight end or,

or for Ashton Genti. Like that is one that I think, we all know that they need those positions and we all know that those are very good players, but I feel like them moving up that far into the top 10 would be a little bit of a shock. The other one to me is, and I think we have a comparison for this,

is Shadur Sanders completely falls out of the first round. I don't think that's that far outside of the realm of possibility, but I do think it would shock everybody the way that the draft has been framed where he's one of the biggest players that we talk about, but for him to potentially fall out of the first, to me, it reminds me of when Gino Smith was potentially quarterback one in his class and then fell all the way to the second round to like pick 36 or whatever it is. So I think that's a scenario where this class, it could pop up.

By the way, I think my favorite draft day moment like that, obviously the tons of one is very funny. But also, do you remember the reaction everybody had when the Patriots took Cole Strange? Who like turned out to be a fine player when he's healthy, but that's just one of the funniest everybody reacted. Like, what the hell did they just do? Yeah, I remember I was sitting next to Dane It was the greatest thing That's ever happened to Dane

Was when Cole Strange went in the first round. When a fourth round pick goes in the first He's like, this is my moment. I was, we were in Las Vegas I was sitting next to Dane I'm the most uncomfortable chair I've ever sat in for more than 20 straight minutes And he freaked out about the Cole Strange pick

I, There are a lot of these potentially on the board this year Just because there seems to be such a lack of consensus On what happens after the first five guys. So I'm in a lot of these. I remember we talked about this yesterday a little bit when we were discussing the defensive line prospects. And for me, this is coming from multiple different directions. This is about how murky it looks after Abdul Carter and Travis Hunter.

And it has to do with the quality of prospects at these two positions, but also the closing gap and value between these two positions. I could totally understand a team picking, let's say at 10, let's say hypothetically at 10, that you'd think would be in range for an edge rusher. and they look at all these edge rushers who are more ideas than actually productive players. And they look at somebody like a Derek Harmon or a Walter Nolan who was more productive at his position relatively to the edge rushers and say, I'm taking this guy. Like I just need pass rush help, it doesn't matter to me. So I think some of these guys who are the 18th, 20 first strength players on the board,

if they went 10 or if they went 9 to the Saints, I think there's going to be a lot of eye of beholder with this group just because there's such a lack of consensus. beyond the best players. And so I just feel like there could be a ton of surprises on draft night, even if we're having a hard time necessarily predicting them specifically right now. The defensive tackle versus edge thing is interesting because I think we've all framed it as a great edge class. And it's also a good defensive tackle class. But I think we've thought of it largely as after Mason Graham, there's going to be a big

drop in the first round in terms of where these guys go. But I actually, I think that's a good one. You can say the same thing about the edges, though. And Abdul Carter. I think you could make the same argument. You probably could, but I feel like I've seen more mocks of like Shamar Stewart at 8 or Michael Williams at 11 or like I feel like I've seen more of that. That's based on a notion of positional value about edge rushers that I think might be a tiny bit outdated

as we think about it in context of defensive tackles now. That's why I'm saying this is a good one. Like this might happen. And I think that like this idea of, and I've thought about it with the bear specifically, and I think you can make the same argument for San Francisco at 11, where it's like, all right, we have all these teams that need pass rush help. And even beyond that, if you keep going further down in the first round, there's so many teams you could say this about.

Miami not really, the Colts not really. Miami needs defensive tackle help, not edge help, but Atlanta, Arizona, Cincinnati, like all of those teams, you could say, all right, we need more juice in our pass rush. Where it comes from doesn't really matter because we kind of have needs at both of these spots. So I think there are a lot of teams, Carolina at eight, so like eight through 17, where you could make this argument. And I think that's why that line between the edges and the defensive tackles might get blurred a little bit because a lot of these teams have needs for both. I'm looking at some of the other ones here that are like some plausible surprises that I had written down.

The Jets are Saints taking a quarterback, I think would be a little bit of a surprise, but would anybody be shocked? Like maybe the Jets just loves Shadur Sanders, and we don't know. I've actually, I've come to, I don't think the Saints taking a quarterback would shock me that much. But the Jets would be because it seemed like a big selling point for Fields was that he was going to be the guy. We're probably right about that. Teams are going to tell you shit no matter what. But like that one would surprise me a little bit. That's probably right.

The Saints is more plausible. But if the Saints draft the quarterback a night, I don't think it would shock anybody. The Rams taking a quarterback at the end of the first round would be like one of those holy shit moments. but I don't think it'd be overly surprising, right, based on the year-to-year situation we have with Matthew Stafford here. My favorite one is a potential Travis Hunter trade. Like, let's say in this hypothetical, and I don't think this is going to happen just based on how things have kind of unfolded

over the last few weeks, but let's just play this out. Let's say the Giants draft Shradur Sanders at three. And now the Patriots are sitting there with Travis Hunter on the board at four. The Patriots need a tackle. They need one. And if you think that Travis Hunter is a corner, and you already have Christian Gonzalez and you just paid Carlton Davis,

and you think, yeah, he's a great player, but I just don't think he fits with what we're trying to build here. There is a team that would be willing to do this. Could this be a situation similar to the one we saw with Arizona in the 2023 draft, where they trade out of the Will Anderson pick and then come back up for Paris Johnson? So do the Patriots try to talk to a team

that really wants Travis Hunter that's picking somewhere just outside of the top 10, they do that. And then they're on the phone with the Jags or the Raiders or whoever at 5 and 6 being like, can I please come back up and get my tackle now? That would to me would be the most fun scenario that I don't think is like totally unhinged from reality. I think looking at teams just outside the top 10, I think Jerry Jones is potentially dying to make Travis Hunter at Dallas Cowboys.

Right. So that one I think is fun. And I think that's the one where it's like, yeah, do you need to stretch your imagination a tiny bit? Sure. But we have a recent example of this that I just loved it. I love Moni Austin for just like working the phones like, fucking Gordon Gecko, like just like making deals and back rooms. I very much enjoyed that. So if we get something similar to that this year, I think I'd have a great time.

And something crazy doesn't happen every year, but like was it on anyone's radar that Houston was going to draft C.J. Stroud and Will Anderson and trade up for one of those guys? No, no, because it's crazy. Like, why would you go? Like, nobody ever picks two times in the top three. And so, like, it doesn't happen every year, but something crazy could happen. Absolutely. I really hope it does because we're going to be live for four hours on that Thursday and I need stuff to talk about.

You were going to be live for like six to six and a half hours on that Thursday. Get serious. It is going to be comfortably going high. Thank you. Appreciate that. We're even more on Friday. And, yeah, don't forget about Friday either. Peter Hudson has our next question here.

Peter says it's universally agreed that the draft is light on blue chip talent, especially at certain premium positions. Yet in a lot of this discourse, it sounds like people are perhaps holding onto conventional logic a little too tightly, such as the valuations of those players at premium positions at the expense of just pure talent. So in the face of a dearth of blue chip talent, wouldn't this be the draft to challenge the conventional logic, not overthink things, and just add the most talented player? Stephen Hagland had a similar question for us that was specifically related to the tight end position looking back at Brock Bowers and the two guys we expect to go in the first round this year. But it's a fun question.

What do you got here, Robert? I understand what he's trying to say. This framing of it presumes a strong ability to identify who the most talented players are. And I just think we should always show more caution with that than we do in the process. The reason it's worth taking premium positions high is that the reward is very high. Right. So if you're taking a tight end or if you're taking a running back or a tackle with the eighth overall pick, the price your paying for those positions is the same, but the payout for the tackle or the edge rush or whatever is significantly higher. So let's say you have $10 to bet with. And on one bet, you get back your $10 if you win.

And the other bet, you make $20. How certain would you have to be that you were going to win the first. bet for you not to make the second bet. And I think that's kind of where we are with this. Like if you're telling me that Ashton Genty, and I assume that's what he's referring to here, is going to be Beijon Robinson or a top five back, okay, but we don't know that. It's like, what if he's Melvin Gordon? What if he's Trent Richardson?

The downside for missing on that pick is just as high if you do miss it, and the upside just isn't there. So that to me is why it's dicey to draft non-premian positions that. this spot because if you miss, you lose the same amount, and if you hit, you don't gain the same amount. So let's say you have a 75% chance of winning the first bet and a 50% chance of winning the second bet, which let's say that's kind of the thing with Gentie versus Tett McMillan or whoever. Is that good enough for you? Is that, are those chances good enough for you to say, I'm going to take the most talented guy? I think it's a little bit more complicated in any given

draft based on the uncertainty than we're making it out to be in this. situation here. Yeah, I have a few thoughts on this. I mostly agree with you and especially too. I think it depends like, okay, if you have maybe at the bottom of your truly special tier of prospects, you have like Ashton Gentie there. And then you have three, four players down in your next tier. It's like, is that enough of a jump to justify taking the significantly less valuable player? Probably not. If it's like a full tier or two down, then yeah, I think you take the certainty of a player that, like, if Genty falls all the way to like 17, like, yeah, at that point, you're probably not finding other players who are of his quality. So I think it totally makes

sense. The other thing is, I think, with some of these premium positions, it's a scarcity issue. Like, it tackles specifically, I think this is true. Go find all of the all pro tackles who are not first round picks. They don't exist. Like, you kind of have to take those guys that high. That's right. And so that, that's certainly part of it. And then the other one for me, specifically with this draft class is I just don't know who that applies to outside of Ashton Genti. Like who are the players in non-valiable positions that theoretically. The tight ends would be the other ones that you would throw in there. I guess it would be the tight ends.

But then even then, I can't think of any interior offensive linemen that that fits. Linebacker, you maybe have Campbell. I'm not the person to ask about that because I think Jehad Campbell is like sent from God. But I know people are probably not quite as high on him as that. So it just doesn't feel like there's that many other players at these non-valiable positions to get bumped up. But maybe the tight end one is good. Well, Stephen Hagelin's question was about,

so if it's difficult to identify tight ends and it's difficult to find a good tight end, wouldn't it make the tight ends in this class more valuable? Shouldn't they be drafted higher? So, well, I think the fact that we have a hard time identifying tight ends and a hard time developing them is a reason not to do this. Because the development and identification track record

for the position is very bad. And again, even if you get it right, you are not creating a ton of excess value and finding a player at that position. So I think that's a reason to not draft them high, even if you think they're some of the most talented players in any given class. It's the opposite of the tackle thing,

where it's like you can find good tight ends in a lot of places. And that's not to say that like... Linebackers is the same way, right? Running backs is the same way. Scarcity plays a huge role in this. And that's not to say you should never take these guys in the first round. Obviously, guys like Loveland and Warren are good enough to go in the top top.

20, it's just that there are going to be teams that feel like they can get away with taking whoever in the third round and they can at least get something pretty close to that level of production. I think the other thing, too, is specifically tight end. This is probably slightly less true now. I think we've seen a lot of young players be very good out of the gate, but it's typically a position that has a runway to being like a pro bowl level player. Whereas like sometimes you can just have a rookie receiver who's a pro bowl or like out of the gate. Whereas like some other positions that's just harder, especially a tight end. for the most part if you look at tight ends recently you know train mcbriden is an exception of this brock bowers is an exception of this but there was a long stretch where these guys were getting paid

before they'd really done anything like and joku and joku is the perfect example but even a guy like cole commet and like the contract the cold commet got for the most part the tight end development timeline is so long that you're not getting the best version of these guys when they're on their rookie contracts anyway so that's another reason that it might not actually actually be good to draft them very high because the value you're creating with that sort of pick isn't nearly as high as it might be at some of these more premium positions. And it's really hard to identify the good tight ends. We just don't have a good sense for who they're going to be. And so that level of uncertainty attached to a very high draft pick, I think is just kind of a

dicey proposition. Brock Bowers is great. But the recent history of first round tight ends is not great. It's actually very bad. The Brock Bowers thing is made more impressive by the fact that nobody else does that as a rookie tight end. That's that's why it's so cool. Or even a first round tight end. We just think back to the recent history of first round tight ends. It's just not that great. Dalton Kincaid, Eric Ebron, Evan Ingram, you know, both of those guys had good productive seasons, but they had them for the teams that didn't draft them. Ingram, I don't know some players where like you kind of lose. Yeah. Well, at least Kyle Pitts, his rookie year actually did look like what you thought he was going to be. That was just a whole other

stuff. Ingraham is one of those players where you know how sometimes you get deep enough into a player's career that you kind of just forget about what they were as prospects. I do not imagine Ingram as all as a first round pick. To me, he's just like a third, fourth round pick that kind of worked out. Like, I don't know why I'd like retconned him like that in my brain, but maybe it's just the style of player. The fact that you did, I think, is very indicative of how we should think about tight ends in the draft process. Because there are just as many who have that path as there are who have the Brock Bowers path more, way more. All right, we're going to come back and hit a few more of these, but first let's take one more quick break. All right, what's the next one?

All right. The next one comes to us from David Gibson. He says, hey, guys, I am an optimistic Panthers fan and I'm getting ready for the draft. I keep finding myself split between the Georgia edge guys who are complete opposites of one another from a build type and play style standpoint. In today's NFL, is it more important to have a run-stopping edge like, say, Michael Williams, or a hybrid type like, say, Jalen Walker? At this point, the Panthers will take any pass-rush juice, but which edge rusher, at this point, the Panthers will take any type of pass rush juice they can get, but which edge rusher type build gives you the best bang for your buck when drafting inside the top 10. Robert wanting to take this one first.

No, I want Derek to take this one first because I did the defense alignment earlier this week, and I'm very curious how he sees this. I think it's so obviously Michael Williams. Here's the thing. If you're drafting a guy in the top 10, he should probably look like like the prototype for the position. And Michael Williams absolutely does. He's 65-260, has an 86th percentile wingspan. And then you watch the film and he's already an incredible run defender. He's more than strong enough for like to be able to hold up on the edge.

And at minimum to me, I think you're going to get like a pretty good pocket pusher. So could you sell yourself that the speed of a guy like Jalen Walker is technically a higher ceiling? Sure. But I just think that Michael Williams's floor is so much higher and he looks like the prototype for the position. With Walker, if you go on mock draftable and put him specifically as an edge player, so he measured in at 6.1, 241 by the way, which 241 is probably heavier than he actually played at because he probably wanted to look big. He's second percentile in height among edge players and sixth percentile in weight.

I can't draft that in the top 10 as a pass rusher unless I'm like Brian Flores, where you run a very specific style of defense that I could see myself making that work. Whereas, like, Michael Williams, dude, you could drop him on all 32 teams and that's a value. And so to me, it's just for floor, ceiling, certainty, all of it, I would much rather prefer a player like Michael Williams. I would as well. And for me, I think it's the floor part of it. But that's why I think I could understand the J.L. Walker argument is that he might have a higher ceiling than a guy like Michael Williams, but I also think the floor is significantly lower.

And based on a lot of conversations we've had, I'm typically somebody who wants to shoot for the ceiling in the top 10, but I just worry about players like Jalen Walker. The recent history of players like this, I just feel like I'm a little bit scarred by so many of these guys who are these super athletic offball guys that I think now, and I think it's because of Michael Parsons, what we've done with some of these super athletic offball guys

is just said, well, maybe they can be an edge rusher. And it worked out with Micah Parsons, but there just aren't that many examples of it working out. For the most part, these are guys who have either been offball linebackers who are miscasted, like Devin White, where his best work is as a blitzer, but he's a very incomplete player. Or we have edge rushers that don't end up becoming very good edge rushers. Like maybe Jalen Walker becomes like a souped up version of Frankie Louvo. Is that a guy you want to draft at eight? No, no, it's absolutely not.

Like, not to me. That's probably the more realistic outcome rather than die at Michael Parsons. And that's my other thing is that I actually don't even believe that Walker has a higher ceiling. And the reason I would say it is this. I think if we want to just say like because he's fast and he does have long arms actually in big hands. So I guess you could sell yourself on some ceiling stuff there. But I don't think you can fundamentally be like a high ceiling player your position or at least in theory.

If you are incredibly small for your position, it just doesn't make sense. Like even I think Michael Parsons is incredibly small for his position. position. But that's again, but it's a very narrow path. Yes. Exactly. And like even, you know, I think we all think of von Miller as being a pretty smaller edge guy, but even he has like two inches and 10 to 15 pounds on what Walker was playing at. And so like even if that's on the lower end, like it just, it's hard for me to sell myself. Like if I'm going to sell myself on ceiling, it should be the guy that like, yeah, we don't make a whole lot of 65 to 265 the way that Michael Williams is. Those are harder to find. Von Miller also has 33-5-inch arms.

He has 86th percentile arm length for an outside linebacker compared to... And Jalen Walker doesn't have short arms. He has much longer arms. He has pretty large arms. Yeah, he's just... He's just slim. Yeah, so J-O-N-Walker has 32-inch arms. So it's still like when you talk about...

Think about this in comparison of the offensive tackle conversation. What tackle is, it's 33. So if you have 33 and a half as a defensive player, you have a length advantage over, like, the baseline for tackles. If you're at 32, Almost every tackle you are playing against who's going to have a lake advantage over you. Michael Williams had 34 and a half inch arms at the combine this year

when all of the guys had short arm length measurements. There's a chance he's at like 35 inches in reality or closer to that when you look at it historically. Michael Williams is an interesting one for me. Like I... The context that he was hurt this year, I think is very notable. Because when I watched him, you said at the very least you get a pocket pusher.

he's not a violent player to me like he's a little bit of like a finesse big player like he has length that he will use in the run game and I think that he uses it well in the run game like you watch that he's locking guys out all the time but he's not a violent player and so I'm not sure he's ever going to bring

like a pocket pushing presence to a defense the comparison that we talked about on the show that I thought was very good just stylistically when watching him and this is something Lance Zerline said in his write-up of him on NFL.com he compared to him to Greg Rousseau, that's kind of how I see Michael Williams, where Greg Rousseau is a very long player, but Greg Rousseau is not like a powerful pocket pusher type. He's somebody who like is a knifer and slasher and that's how he impacts the game. That's kind of how I see Michael Williams.

That's interesting. I think I have a little bit more faith and optimism in his like strength and violence as a player. I don't think he's quite as violent as like Shamar Stewart. Like if Shemar Stewart really wants to crush your face mask, he absolutely will. but I have, I think I like Michael Williams a little bit more than that. Go watch Michael Williams as the looper on stunts and what sort of authority he's arriving with in those moments. It's not my favorite. Again, we talked about this in the show.

When I watched, there are some guys who I watched this year, it was just, and I had the J.K. Simmons and whiplash response, it's like, not my tempo. Just, just not my tempo. Not my favorite. And for a team that needs an edge rusher at 10 and might draft one, I think no matter what happens, I'm going to be mildly disappointed. really you don't like any of them in that range no really i like the defense of tackles better i i like the defense tackles in this group better that's fair i really like derrick carman he's incredible but

he's my favorite purely on film as far as the edge guys go and i know that there are some off-field stuff with him i think mike green is like an easy top five pick but so mike green is the guy i did not watch as closely as the other ones so mike green is somebody that when i go back and study him that will be a potentially different conversation the problem is look at Dennis Allen's history and the types of players. He's going to be off the board. Mike Greene's not checking the boxes, but Mike L.

Kyle Williams and Shemar Stewart are. Yeah, I think for as much as I like, Mike Green, the 250 short-ish arms guys not going to be for Dennis Allen. This is always so fun because it's a very different exercise when it's just a theory and when it's my team. But going back to that,

why don't you just take the most talented player? At this point, I'm kind of like, eh, just take to Genti at 10 if he's there. Just take him at 10 and we'll just like figure out the rest later. I don't care anymore. Let's go. Yeah. Now that I've watched.

to edge guys and I'm just kind of like, this is leaving me cold. Yes. And I want to be clear about this. I am not a talent evaluator. It is difficult for me to look at a guy who is a ball of clay and imagine what he can eventually become just based

on traits. So the guys who are good and productive now are going to hit my brain in a way that is more pleasing than somebody who is a pure talent evaluator who's evaluating on traits and upside. I just, I don't have that background. I'm not going to be able to filter it through that sort of lens in the same way

as a guy like Dane is. And so when I watch a guy like, I want to see, it's like the money ball thing. It's like, well, if he's a good hit or why didn't he hit good? Like, if these guys are good pass rushers, why aren't they rushing the pass are good? This is what's happening in NFL front offices where it's the coaching staff versus the scouts where the scouts, it's on talent, maybe, but the coaches are like, well, I kind of need a guy who can give me something right now. I think I view the game much more through that lens than I do through the evaluator lens. And I absolutely think it colors the way that I'm looking at players in this sort of process. It's a battle.

Yeah, it's a battle that I'm sure I would lose. Like I promise you I'd be terrible at this. And that's why I don't pretend to be good at it. Got a couple more here, Bella. What's the next one? Yes, we do. Two more. The first of which comes to us from Ronald Glickman.

Ronald says, I'd love to know some of the different metrics you guys have come to love and loat over the years to evaluate professional play, schematic trends, really anything. What are some metrics that when you first saw them, but that's it? And now you've come to realize they're quite noisy or don't tell the full story you were hoping that they would tell. Derek, what do you got for us on this one?

So I think most completion percentage over expected stats are just like you can game them a little bit. And I say this as someone who like when I did my own quarterback charting, I basically do my own BS version of this. I just think a lot of the times it's like not representative of. like I would just much rather watch a player throw the ball. Like Patrick Mahomes has had plenty of years where he's like average or below average and completion percentage over expected.

Because he doesn't turn into tight windows. It's more about your receivers and your appetite for throwing the ball into tight windows than it is an indicator of quality. And that's exactly it. It is often an indicator of play style. And the example I would go to. He's at the top of the league every single year. Gino is always at the top because he presses the window and he is good at it.

So sometimes it can be a good thing, but like the two, I think at the top this year were Jalen Hertz and Joe Burrow. You know what? Those two get to do a lot. They get to just throw up a 50-50 ball to an all pro receiver. And like, sure, they are generally accurate quarterbacks as well. But they also get to boost their stats by just like having some gimmies in the offense. And also like completion percentage over expected, I think some of those stats can struggle with like drops. T. Higgins isn't dropping the ball, dude. Like he's got to catch the ball. you give him a chance he's going to get it. And so that was one of those ones, like when they first started to come to the forefront, it's like, man, this is better than completion percentage.

And then the longer I sit with it, I'm like, it is, but not by a significant margin to me. The one that came to mind for me was just pass rushing stats because I think there was a time, I don't know, when I started really doing this, like 2013, 2014. And I think the invoked thing back then was to be like, well, sacks are, you know, sacks are noisy, you know, sacks are circumstantial sometimes and, you know,

pressures are a truer measure of how often a guy is impacting the game as we like said while lowering our glasses. You know, that was kind of like what was happening on the football internet 10 years ago. And I think now we too often are going to that. And I think there are a few problems with that.

One, sacks are still really valuable. And there are reasons some guys get a lot of pressures but don't get a lot of sacks and trying to figure out the gap in those two things is telling when it comes. to evaluating players. Two, a lot of pressure numbers now are based on tracking data. And so it's tough to figure out, well, how, what kind of pressure was it? Was it an unblocked pressure? Is it something where this is a spot where he's just crushing the pocket but not actually

affecting the quarterbacks? And so a lot of pressure numbers, I think, deserve a lot of context now. And I think there are a lot of pass rushing numbers outside of that deserve a lot of context. If you look at like T.J. Watt last year and you look at T.J. Watt's pressure percentage, it was awful. His pressure percentage was now near the bottom of the league. And the double team numbers for something like NGS don't take into account like chips. So double teams are almost always bucketed with interior players when there's actually two guys blocking you. But if you get shipped by a tight end or you get influenced by somebody on the edge, that's not taken into account for double team numbers.

So if I was just looking at double team numbers and pressure rate and I looked at T.J. Watt from last year. I would have been like, oh, T.J. Watt was terrible last year. Like, he's like the 38th best edge rusher. But then you go actually watch the game and he's getting shipped almost every single play or he's being accounted for all the time, but it's not getting tracked as a double team. And so I just think that overall pressure numbers, a lot of them now based on player tracking and then just some of the nuance when it comes to, Brandon Thorne had a really

good threat about this today on Twitter, where he was talking about how throwing out non-true dropbacks for offensive linemen, while he understands the purpose behind it what people are trying to do, you're not really getting where you want to get to. You're throwing out valuable reps. There are different things that you're not accounting for. So I think a lot of the filters that we have now, especially on past blocking and past rushing type numbers, there's a lot of stuff to dig into with those. The pass-fushing one is a great one, especially because when that's the first started to come to the forefront, I don't think there was a lot of thinking about, like, how the data was being

accumulated. And a lot of it is just like chips in the player pads. And then when you kind of dig into, like, how and why gets to qualify as a pressure, you're like, okay, this is better than not having pressure stats, but you can't get into a situation where it's some of the ways that it gets put together is like not as reliable as you would want. And then, yeah, it almost gets to a point where you are devaluing the actual sacks because we can say they are not as reliable year to year, but also like getting them is one of the most valuable things that you can do in the sport. So it's probably good to hang on to a lot of the way that we talk about pass rushers and being like, yeah, getting 15 sacks is pretty damn good.

One good example of this. I was talking the other day about how I thought that Abdul Carter would be good for the Brown's defense because now you have another pass rusher. He goes with Miles Garrett. if the pass rush gets back to where it had been a couple years ago, does that make the secondary look better? And somebody rightfully pointed out, well, the Browns at the highest pressure rate in the league last year. Well, if Miles Garrett is getting a pressure on all of these different plays, but no one else is doing anything as a pass rush, you're pressuring the quarterback, quote, unquote, but he's not bothered by three of the other guys. Like, an entire side of the pocket is unaffected.

So that's not exactly painting the correct picture of what it is like to watch the other guys. the Brown's defense or play against it. And so that's another thing where, yeah, if you look at the chip, Miles Garrett is very close to the quarterback all of the time, but that doesn't mean your pass rush is good. That I would actually know, maybe I'll do this as like a summer project, but it would be fun to look at a team's pass rush, like pressure rate if you remove their best player on plays where he didn't get pressures. So like if you take out all of Miles Garrett's pressures, what is the Cleveland Brown's pressure

rate actually? Like something like that, I think would be kind of far. I'm sure it's bad. I know. If you look at the team of like more than 35 pressures, there are two teams that this very much applies to from last year. The Cleveland Browns are one of them and the Cincinnati Bengals are the other one of them. If you took out those two guys, we would be having a very different conversation.

The Bengals finished like 20th or something in pressure rate. That is not an accurate depiction of how good the Cleveland or the Cincinnati Bengals pass rush was last year. That is a hell of a Herculane effort from Mr. Trey Hendrickson. Last one here, Bella. let's do it. All right, guys, last one. When I saw this as I was going through the questions, not only did I know that we were doing it, but I knew I wanted it to be the question that we ended the show with. So thank you to Terry Kelly for giving us the capper of this mailbag episode.

It is simple. It is straightforward. It is. How many Hall of Famers played in the NFL in 2024? What do you got, Robert? I'm sure I'm going to miss some guys because there was like no clean way to do this. But I tried to do a position. So we can try to like, that's a decent way to try to keep it in a way. That's, I guess so. Okay. All right. Let's, I have a mind by position if we want to like use that as a baseline.

Okay. All right. Okay. Okay. Okay. So let's do, let's do quarterbacks first. Quarterbacks is Mahomes, Alan Lamar.

I think those guys are going to be Hall of Famers. And then Rogers, who obviously is not playing like a Hall of Fame right now. And then those are, I think the four sure fires. And then you get into the fringe cases of Stafford and Russ. But I think those are the four for sure Hall of Famers. I'm with you on that. I tend to think no on Stafford. Russ. I agree. And I'm not going to sit here and make the case for either of them. I think that

people are going to call me a hypocrite because I think that Philip Rivers deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. I don't think Matthew Stafford does. I think Matthew Stafford's a lot of good volume stats. I think that the efficiency numbers for Philip Rivers in the era that he played in, that is different to me than it was for Matthew Stafford. Matthew Stafford had some really good years where he's thrown for like 5,000 yards. But if you look at the overall quality of those seasons, I don't think that they stack up to a guy like Rippers personally. So I do not think that Matthew Stafford gets there. I think Matthew Stafford is a hall of very good sort of player.

Yeah, Matthew Stafford is the Hall of Fame for film watching, but not necessarily like actual Hall of Fame. And then running backs, it's probably just Derek Henry, right? I think it's just Derek Henry. I feel like CMC, you know, there is a path maybe, but I think just the overall production is just going to be difficult to get there. I think that what Derek Henry did last year, I kind of think he's in.

I think that last year might have been this season for Derek Henry to finally put him over the top. If you look at it right now, Derek Henry has rushed for 11,423 yards. He was a first or second team, all pro, one, two, only three times.

But the thing is it's interesting one. I tend to think just based on feel he is. Oh, I absolutely. Because he's like a folk hero. And you've said this before. Like he's the idea that we could have a 6-4, 250-pound running back, who is a home run hitter for some reason and has taken like a thousand more carries than

anybody at this age should ever have gotten to. Like he just crosses all these boxes of like, he's an Iron Man at the position. and he has legitimately historically good season. So, like, he to me is an easy one, actually. Yeah, I would probably put Derek Henry in there, too. He's 19th in career rushing yards at this point. If he has another year, not even like the one he had last year, let's say Derek Henry rushes for a thousand yards again next season,

here are the players he will pass on the all-time rushing list. Stephen Jackson, Fred Taylor, Thurman Thomas, Franco Harris, Marcus Allen, Edgaron James, Marshall Falk, Jim Brown. those are the guys he will pass. He will be 11th all time if he rushes for 1,000 yards next year. I think that's probably enough to put it over the top. Again, especially in an era where we've been like,

we don't need running backs. Like for him to be kind of one of the last ones is incredible. I would put him in there personally. That's just I would put him in there, but I do think that one more year is probably what solidifies it for Derek Ketteri. He was on my list. Receiver is the weirdest one. Receiver has some weird ones.

I think Mike Evans, because of the consistent thousand-yard thing, he's almost certainly going to get in. I think Devonte Adams probably gets in. And then you have Justin Jefferson and Jamar Chase who are like very obviously Hall of Fame talents, but it's so early that it would feel kind of weird to say that they should be,

but they probably will be. So the question was how many Hall of Famers played in 2024, not who based right now is going to the Hall of Fame. And so based on how many Hall of Famers played in 2024, I would say Jefferson and Chase are in there for me. I think that Devante is a tougher one than you're making it out to be. Because if you look at it, his career numbers aren't actually quite as good as you may think they are because he didn't have a ton of big time seasons early on.

In terms of his standing in the league, but even beyond that, though, if you look at his first few seasons in the league, first four years, he did not crack a thousand yards. his first thousand-yard season was his age 26th season in 2018. And so there isn't that like sustained historic production. And then if you look at career receiving yards, he is 33rd all time. He's behind Heinz Ward and Derek Mason. That's some crazy.

He'll still have a couple more years where he can bump at least the volume up. Yes. I think that's possible. I think the case for Devonite Adams is the longevity is solid. his counting stats aren't elite, but I think they'll be good enough for people. And then to me, there was a three-year stretch

where he was obviously the best receiver in football. And that's the team who puts it over the top. When you have a peak like that, it's like, and like when your quarterback, you're helping your quarterback win MVP's. Like it,

I think he will probably get in, would be my guess. I think he deserves to get in. I, again, this is sometimes just like a field thing for me. Like I think Devante Adams is in. What do you think about Hopkins? I think no chance.

I don't think no. Yeah, I think he gets too log jammed. Like, he's great player, had incredible peaks, but it feels like the log jam. You have to do something either historic like Evans has done or be the best receiver in the league at a given point. And Hopkins was fantastic, but I don't know if I ever thought of him as that. All right. So Hopkins has three first team all pros consecutively from 2017 through 2019, where he had 96 for 14,500, 115 for 1572, 104 for 1160. and then his first year in Arizona, he had 115 for 1407.

He was second team all pro. He has five first or second team all pros. And he has more career receiving yards of Devante Adams. Devante Adams has three first teams and none other than that. So the resume for DeAndre Hopkins is actually better than the resume for Devante Adams. See, but I've just never felt. I've tend to agree with you. Yeah, I've never felt Hopkins was a Hall of Fame.

Like he's obviously incredible, but I just never felt that. Whereas with Adams during his peak, it was like, oh, this is one of the best things I've ever seen. Uh, tight end. It's just, it's, okay. It's Kelsey and Kittle, but if we're doing guys, you I think are going to be there. I'm already willing to say it with Brock Bowers. Oh, come on now. It's been one year.

He's incredible. He's incredible. I'm already there. So you think Kittles just in? Uh, yes. And I actually, I do, I do think he's going to be a weirder case. I don't think he's automatic, but I did look this up. There are five tight ends in NFL history with at least five 900 yards seasons.

Tony Gonzalez did it nine times, which is crazy. Travis Kelsey did it eight times. Jason Whitten did it seven times. And then George Kittal and Antonio Gates have done it five times. Those are all Hall of Famers. And I think there are only three or other guys, three or four other guys with four such seasons. And I think two of them are Hall of Famers and one of them is Jimmy Graham.

It's a pretty insane list if you are able to do this that many times. I tend to think he's in. And I think that he being the second best player consensus at your position, and at times the best when another Hall of Famer like Kelsey was playing in your era, I think it's,

I would definitely throw him in there as well. So, Kiddle was on my list. Kelsey was on my list. Okay. Who'd you have for tackles? Tackles is tough, man. Like,

Trent and Lane Johnson are probably... Trent and Lane Johnson were the no doubt is for me and I had too early on Worf's. But it's, it's a lot of young guys, that's the problem.

Like, worst you could sell me and Sewell. That's the thing, but it's like, it feels a little early. early, but like, if they continue to do this, they probably will be in. I'd probably throw Worf's in there.

I mean, Worf's been, I think, a first team all pro at, like, two different positions over the last few years. I'd probably throw Worf's in there. And I think that Sewell's on his way, but I think it's probably a little bit too early. But yeah, Lane Johnson and Trent are the two guys that I had in there, pretty much no doubt. In two years, probably just Zach Martin as a guarantee. But this one does have one of the most interesting cases, which is Joe Tunney, who individually, I don't know if I can get there,

but when you consider a guy who's been to like six Super Bowls has won four of them, he does have two first team all pros. Like at a certain point, I just feel like the hardware is going to get too heavy for people to not put him in. It's a really good point. He was on my maybe list, the borderline list that I had, a couple other guys on there as well. But I think you could make the argument.

I'm not sure he gets there, but there's a chance that team success is what ultimately puts him over the top. So I don't hate that. And the other one I would throw in there just based on personal accolades, I guess Quentin Nelson is probably going to have at least a conversation as we get a little bit deeper into this. He's a weird one because usually you don't think of, like, I feel like his last few years have been a little bit more tumultuous with the injury stuff. But obviously his peak was like, unbelievable.

Ed Rushers is probably the most, has the most names to me. I had Miles Garrett, T.J. Watt, Vaughn Miller. Those are probably the easiest ones. And then Micah Parsons, I think, is well on his way. Nick Bosa, maybe, obviously the one year where he wasn't able to produce when he was injured kind of makes it tricky, but I think he is generally produced at that level. And then you have a lot of fringe guys. Like, Khalil Max is probably on the fringe. I think, like, Max Crosby and Daniel Hunter are insanely productive players. like, DeNeal Hunter has as many sacks before age 31 as Julius Peppers did.

Like, I don't think we think of DeNeal Hunter in that way, but he's one of those ones where, like, at a certain point, the counting stats might just be so crazy. I'm not sure I can do it with Daniel Hunter. I wouldn't, I wouldn't either, but I just, if he gets to, like, you could absolutely see the world where he gets to, like, 150 by the end of his career, right? And, like, it would be shocking if someone's still so young, he's still only 30. If he has like five, if he has like five more years with eight sacks, maybe we're having a different conversation.

I'm not willing to throw him in there yet. I wouldn't either, but it was just one where I was like, by the end, it could absolutely happen. Kalil Mack I'd probably throw in there. He has a defensive player of the year award. Like he was on the old decade team. Like I think the Kalil Mack is somebody I would probably throw in there, but that's probably the edge of the edge rushing list.

Michael was the on the edge guy to me. So Michael was there. And then the other younger guys I had, PS2 too early. Stingley too early, Sewell too early. I think AJ Brown still too early. I think AJ Brown could do it,

but I don't feel as good as I did about some of the younger receivers like Jefferson and Chase. Yeah, I'd probably agree with that. What interior defensive players? Chris Jones, probably, especially being part of the Chiefs, obviously. Cameron Hayward, I think we'll get it.

And it might be... Hayward and Jordan are both interesting. Here's the reason I think one will get in and the other won't. Because Hayward played for the Steelers, where it's just like this is a fun like this is the core of the NFL and he was all about what the Steelers are about. I think he'll get in whereas I think Jordan playing for a franchise that is a little bit

less connected to the history of the league in a sense. Maybe won't get in. Yeah, I think that's unfair. It's probably unfair to Cam Jordan. It is, but like that's just the way this goes sometimes. If you look at Cam Jordan, Cam Jordan was on the all decade team. He only has three first or second team all pros, but he does have a hundred and twenty one career sacks. I think both of them eventually probably get in when you look at the totality

of their resumes. That might be. I didn't take more time, but he could get in, yeah. Linebackers, I had Bobby Wagger and Fred Warner. Yeah, that's it. I think those are the only ones that even have a case, honestly. Like, Rochwan Smith's peaks are great, but I don't think he's ever been consistent enough to be in that range, and I don't think any other backer really is. What about cornerbacks? You mentioned PS2, who, like, purely from a talent perspective, I think, like, if he does this for another six years, I think he'll get in. Ramsey is interesting, but I think he's had too many lows to maybe qualify. I think a fascinating one in terms of like hardware and accomplishments is Stefan Gilmore.

Over 30 picks for his career. He's a defensive player of the year award. He's played really well for a number of different teams. Like, I don't know if I would put him in, but I could see a world where because there haven't been that many star cornerbacks in this particular era that him having the defensive player of the year award might actually get him in. I can't do it with him. I think he's on the edge, but I can't get there.

And I'll probably say the same about Ramsey. The other one that I had that I think is on the border that's worth at least mentioning is Tyron Smith. I don't think he gets in, but I think he's at least worth throwing out as a name in an exercise like this. I don't think I had a single safety. Do you have single safety? Kyle Hamilton. I would not be shot. Like it's probably too early in like the Micah Parsons tier or the Penaiseul tier where

it's like technically Hall of Fame peak, but I don't know if he's, you know, we'll see how it goes. But I just think he is so smart and so rare in the way that he moves that again, if he does this for another five,

six years, when you're a safety and people are saying maybe I should bet on this as defensive player of the year, pretty special, special player. So probably is rich, but I just love him.

So that overall is like 25 guys that we just mentioned. Which I think feels right. You know, it's like no more than two. guys at each position. Enough to make a starting 11 on each side, basically. That's basically where you get.

You start 11 on both sides. I think that's totally fair. All right. That is all we got. Sincerely appreciate you guys listening. We'll be back with some more shows this week. Next iteration of on the clock happens tomorrow, 19 through 25 tomorrow. And then we'll hit 26 through 32 the following week.

We'll have picked every single spot in the first round by then. So please come back and check that out. We're talking some past catchers a little bit later this week with Dane. And then we've got one more draft show with Dane and a special guest. I do not want to reveal it quite yet just in case it falls through. But a lot of fun stuff on tap for you guys this week. For now, that's all we got. Appreciate you listening.

We'll talk to you soon.