The Athletic Football Show: A show about the NFL - The best short-term heaters in NFL history

Episode Date: July 6, 2026

Thank you, TAFS fans, for once again bringing the goods for another mailbag episode. You all are truly on an all-time run. And speaking of that, what are the best Linsanity-style runs in NFL history? What sorts of trades from yesteryear—think Champ Bailey and a second-round pick for Clinton Portis—would you never see in today's NFL? Where do offensive line coaches develop? Robert Mays and Dave Helman answer those questions, and more, on this episode of The Athletic Football Show.Host: Robert MaysCo-Host: Dave HelmanExecutive Producer: Michael BellerSenior Producer: Katy DuffySocial Producer: Scott KrinchFollow Robert on Bluesky: @robertmays.bsky.socialFollow Dave on Bluesky: @davehelman.bsky.socialFollow Robert on X: @RobertMaysFollow Dave on X: @DaveHelman_Theme 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. Another Mailbag Monday for you guys. No Derek today, but me and Dave dug into all of your guys' questions. A lot of really good ones again on this show with Michael Beller. Let's get to that conversation right now. It's another mailbag Monday here on the Athletic Football Show, giving Derek a little bit of a breather.

It's the offseason. Not everyone has to do like six podcasts a week. We can kind of check in and out before we get into training camp. So he'll be back next week. Just the two of us and Beller today. Let's just dig into it, Bella. What's the first question? J.J. Grosser has the first question.

J.J. says, I've got an offensive line evaluation question. When looking at guards, centers, and tackles, would you rather have an elite pass blocker around the 90th percentile, but below average run blocker, around the 40th percentile, the opposite? Or a more well-rounded player who's around 80th percentile at both. How much of a liability is being weak? in one area and where does the curve shift from specialized elite becoming more valuable than being consistently very good at both does your answer change depending on if you're talking about

tackle versus guard versus center what do you got here robert i think my answer is that i'd rather have the well-rounded player just in general uh especially at guard and tackle at center it becomes an interesting question because i'd rather have my center be an elite past protection piece and the reason that I frame it that way is that even if he isn't like an elite one-on-one pass protector, having a center that can do everything to set protections to be like just a stabilizing force for the offense in general, that would probably be number one. So I think I'd actually rather have more pass protection from my center even if it's not a physical thing.

I think I'd rather have more well-rounded players across the board. Because even if you're a good run blocker, if you're a weak link in past protection, I think that would just keep me up at night as I was getting deeper into the season. And I think if you, even if you were an elite pass blocker, but you couldn't run block, we're in a period where you really do notice that as well. So I think I'd rather just have 75s across the board if I was picking. I had the same conclusion and I felt kind of crazy about it. So I went and asked somebody who played O-Line in the NFL.

And he said the same thing. He said, consistency's key. Give me the consistent player because the mistakes are what's going to ruin. right, whether it's flags, whether it's, you know, giving up a block and you lead to a negative play. Like, that's the type of stuff that derails drives. So I think the well-rounded player who you can count on across the board is probably the better option. So that's the way that I lean. I guess my caveat to that would probably be, I don't know, I feel like somewhere on your offensive line,

you need at least one dude who's really, really damn good at something. Like if your whole line was 75s, would that be good enough? Or do you need an elite pass protector or an elite run blocker somewhere on the unit? But in general, I'll take the 75s across the board. And then the other thing I wanted to point out as well is like, it sounds funny to say because tackle makes so much money and tackle is so important. but I do feel like you could scheme up a deficiency at tackle like run away from the tackle who can't run block or boot away from the tackle who's a liability

in pass protection whereas if you're just not up to snuff on the interior I think that stuff can just sink your ship that much faster not to say that tackle's not important but I think a good coach can out scheme that a little bit better as opposed to if your interior is just not good at all I tend to agree with that I think that obviously you can slide the center to help either one of your guards, but the defense, I think, can scheme around that as well. I think they can make it hard for you to do that.

I think you can do a really conscious job of helping out a tackle consistently over the course of a game. I'm trying to think of examples of players that kind of fall into these buckets to just illustrate what I'm thinking about. I feel like, this probably isn't fair, but a guy that comes to mind, maybe he's not an elite run blocker, but I think he's a much better run blocker than he was a pass protector. and this just isn't the type of player that I would feel super comfortable with if my line was made up of these guys.

It was like Ed Ingram last year. Ed Ingram really showed a lot in the run game, but he's still kind of a liability and pass protection. And so that type of player, I think that would just make me a little bit uneasy. I think I'd rather just have somebody that even if there are a tick worse at moving people on the ground, if I don't, I'm not sitting up at night thinking about what they're going to do

on third and seven when they just get beaten two seconds. I think I'd rather be living that sort of life. Yeah, and having said that I think you need at least one elite trait on your offensive line, I mean, that's definitely preferable. But if all five guys are solid players, depending on what the rest of your talent on offense looks like, a good coach should be able to work with that. Yeah, like I really do think that's the right answer. And it's actually a good way to think we're talking about helping out the tackle.

If I have one tackle that I can leave on an island and then I have another tackle that's kind of more of a right tackle. it's more of a mall or in the run game and I can help him out consistently. You can build your line that way. But yeah, I think you probably do want some elite skill sets to offset each other. But overall, in a vacuum, I think I'd rather have just solid across the board. All right, Bauer, what's the next one? Okay, Alex wants us to get back to naming some dudes. As in the spirit of naming some dudes, what are your favorite NFL Linsanity runs of all time?

This really skews toward random fantasy football one season wonders. I have some really fond memories of 2015 Gary Barnage, 2015, Travis Benjamin, 2016, Terrell Prior, 2020, Mike Davis, and 2020, Travis Fulgium for a beautiful five-week stretch. I mean, that Fulgium one was insane. Dave, why do you start us off with this one? I have two that I have to mention, and I'm not digging very deep. They're beyond obvious, depending on how old you are and how much you remember. But right around the time I was coming into the league, it's not about ability.

Unfortunately, he was not able to stay clear of the. outdated NFL substance abuse policy at the time. But like Josh Gordon's 2013 season is the ultimate just supernova season. It's like Haley's comet. You know, it only comes around like every 76 years. And those of us that remember it are like, no, he's like, you got to believe me. This guy was just putting up 120 yards every week. And then he never did it again.

2013 for the Browns, 16-406 yards, nine touchdowns. He won everybody's fantasy league that year. He was first team all pro. And yeah, like I said, he just, the substance abuse policy did not do him any favors at the time. And he was never really truly able to replicate that. But what a time to be alive that was. So many Browns as part of this. I know.

Hayden Ellis had the one season. Gary Barnage had the one season. Travis Benjamin, Josh Gordon. There's so many browns. A couple guys I'll throw out. The 2010 Brandon Lloyd season was a magical time. It was truly a magical time. He had 1,400 yards that year.

In no other season did he ever have more than 966. And he did it in his age 29 season. So we're talking like eight years into his career, Brandon Lloyd has at that point, up until that point, Brandon Lloyd had never had more than 733 receiving yards in a single season. And then he finished with 1448 in 2010. So that's one of my favorite ones. The other really random fantasy football one that I remember is Tim Hightower winning a bunch of people fantasy championships in 2015 with like a super random late season stretch after Mark Gingham got hurt. Those are probably the first two that come to mind for me. And then Peyton Hillis, obviously. I was going to say that one when you were talking about

the Browns. Peyton Hillis was another one of mine. And then I don't know if this guy won any fantasy championships, but if we're talking about a Lynn sanity type of run, I mean, I got to bring up Tim Tebow, right? Like the fact that Tim Tebow had that. I mean, it's one of those things that it's so weird to think back on and think like

what that Denver team did and how it came out of nowhere. The fact that it kind of launched like Hot Take TV, like Tim Tebow was one of those topics that, got so much airplay and so much scrutiny, like it really turned debate sports TV into prime time viewing. And then the other thing I wanted to shout out about that is Tim Tebow's run in 20, was that 2010 or 2011? 2011. The walkoff to Marius touchdown, you mean? Yeah, yeah, yeah. The Tim Tebow stretch in 2011 where he won seven games and got the Broncos to the playoffs. it was so crazy that they did an SNL skit about how Tim Tebow was like so lucky and like Jesus, Jason Sedakas played Jesus and came down and was like, you're asking too much of me right now.

Like, you know how big a sports story has to be to get a sketch on SNL? Like it was, it was a huge part of the cultural zeitgeist. And in 2026, it feels like it never happened. But it was a- that it did happen. I can't believe it happened. It's, this is going to be a horrible, horrible analogy, but it reminds me of things where you look back in history and something terrible

happened and you're like, man, that wasn't that long ago. I look at the Tim Tebow thing. I can't believe it was only 15 years ago. I cannot believe it was only 15 years ago that we did this with Tim Tebow. He went 10 of 21 in that playoff game that they won. in those playoffs combined in that two game run in the playoffs he was 19 of 47 that sounds about right i i love that time is it burned into my brain because i think you're exactly right man there's some hilarious stat lines he was six of 22 in a week 17 game against the chiefs that they lost

wait so the game the game that prompted the s nl sketch was against y'all's chicago bear it was I can't. I've never told this story before. Maybe you have and I didn't hear it. I don't know. That, well, that was the Marion Barber game. That was the game where Mary and Barbara went out of bounds and the, they would have won if he just hadn't gone out of bounds. And that, that Bears team at that point, the 2011 Bears were like a legitimately decent team. And at that point, they were, they were seven and four when they play, excuse me,

They were seven and five when they played that game. And it still felt like they had like a legitimate shot to maybe make the playoffs, even though things were kind of going off the rails at that point. And they lost that game just in horrifying, horrifying fashion. And I left Bill Simmons's house and just drove around Los Angeles for like two hours. I was just like aimlessly driving around after the game because I just couldn't process what I had just watched. And the idea that that team that again, the bears that year in 2011, were seven and three at one point before J. Carl broke his thumb on an interception.

Like that team was legitimately going to be a playoff team. And for the season to kind of get snuffed out by Tim Tebow in that moment, a man who went 126 of 271 that season, which if you're calculating at home is a cool 46.5% completion rate. It's terrible. It was a moment in time. And the other fun thing I realized looking back at this, because I obviously had to go watch the S&L.

skit with Jason Sudecas. I could have told you that Matt Prater had been in the league forever. But then I was like, holy shit, Matt Prater, who was kicking for the bills last year was Denver's kicker on this Tebow run and was played by Andy Samberg in an S&L sketch 15 years ago. Like that doesn't, that's an insane sentence. And none of that is true. There's no way that Matt Prater was the kicker on that team.

All of that is made up. I'm 100% with you, though, in the moment. and in like the zeitgeist and in sports media. Like that, it was my first year in sports media. And so that was the year we launched Grantland. And so it launched in July. And then the Tim Tebow craziness starts like three or four months later. I mean, we're milking that thing for all it was worth.

There was so much interest in it. And just the internet and the sports internet and sports media in general back then. It's just crazy to think about how different it is than it is right now. another much smaller one worth mentioning is what we just got from Tommy DeVito like two years ago where he just magically wins three games with the Giants and you know his agent is this wacky guy and everybody's talking about how his mom makes him cutlets at home and it was real fun I think it potentially cost the Giants a shot at Drake May but at least it was a cool three weeks let me do two really quick ones you guys a full season one rookie James Robinson in 2020 going for 1,400 yards from scrimmage and 10 touchdowns on a 1 in 15 Jaguars team. That was an awesome one. And then throwing it way back to when I first started playing fantasy football.

1999 Patrick Jeffers, wide receiver, Carolina Panthers. In the very first 12 weeks of the season, he had 28 catches for 365 yards and four touchdowns, week 13 through week 16 28 catchings 552 yards 6 touchdowns 1 leagues if you had him in there playing with Steve Berline as his quarterback that is one that just lives in my brain

and it was one of my first years playing fantasy and made me think like this is the coolest hobby anyone could have I do not remember that I was 12 years old at that point I do not remember the Patrick Drefer's run every every fantasy player does have a guy that they hold dear because of

some dumb run like that though for me And like this doesn't qualify for Linsanity because he was a pretty good player. But Eddie Kinnison won me a league when I was in high school because he just went on like a three-week heater at the end of a chief season. And I just, I'll always love Eddie Kinnison for that. Fantasy football is extremely stupid, but also very fun. All right, Bell, what's the next one here? All right, next one comes to us from E. Eskimos. And E. Eskimos says in a recent mailbag, it came up that we all have the idea of an O-line coach stereotype of a 55-year-year-old plus lifer.

where do online coaches actually develop? And is there a young 50-something hot shot that we're going to know the name of in the next couple of years? Robert, this one's for you. You look back at the history of a lot of the really good ones, and most of them have been line coaches for almost the entirety of their careers, and they started in college. Like, you look at Bill Callahan, Jeff Stoughtlin,

Dante Scarnikia, and pretty sure Bill Callahan, or Jeff Stoutland's first offensive line coach job was at Cornell in like the 80s. And then Scarnetia started in college. Bill Callahan's first, like, full-time offensive line job when he wasn't doing anything else on that staff, I think was like at Northern Arizona in like the late 80s. So a lot of these guys are just offensive line coaches from the start and they work their way up slowly with those jobs. And you look at some of the younger, some of the better younger offensive line coaches in the NFL right now. And they actually started as tight ends coaches.

Both Clayton Adams and Tony Sprano Jr. were tight ends coaches early in their careers before moving to the offensive line coach role. and Clayton Adams was an offensive lineman at Boise State. And so he obviously has a lot of history with the position before actually getting to coach it. But I think the stereotype creeps up because for two different reasons. I think it's a self-perpetuating thing. Like we have this opinion and we have the way that we talk about offensive line coaches and just like these guys just want to sit in the dark and be like isolated weirdos forever and just like let them do that.

And I think that's why fewer of them get coordinating jobs and get promoted to like these bigger roles and so they stay in the offensive line coach role forever but i also think there's some truth to that like i think there's some truth to a lot of these guys just wanting to do that job forever and not having any interest in doing anything else i think it kind of comes from both directions you already alluded to some of the successful guys that that have come from different places and and different positions but i was curious i so i just went and looked at the 32 o line coaches that are slated to coach their teams this season, something like 25 of the 32 played some form of offensive line.

Like a lot of them in the NFL, but at the very least, most of them played offensive line in college or at the very, very least, maybe even in high school. But like the vast majority of these guys played offensive line to some degree. And then a few of the exceptions, like you mentioned, Robert, are guys that played tight end, which is a position that you gain in. understanding of offensive line play if you play tight end. So there, that doesn't mean it's the only way to do it. Like there are a few guys in the NFL that just came to offensive line coaching another

way. And a few of those guys are like lifers, like the question alluded to. I mean, Bill Callahan was a college quarterback, but he's just been coaching since 1978. The Bears-O line coach, Dan Rocher, has been coaching for 45 years. And so I think you just, you take a position where you can get in and just sort of gravitate toward what you're good at over time. It does feel like if you didn't play offensive line or something offensive line adjacent, I do think it involves quite a bit of working your way up. And an example I came up with is actually a guy, I know personally, Kevin Carberry joined the Cowboys staff as a like QC slash a

slash whatever you need me to do. He joined that staff in 20, I think, 14. And again, was just like, whatever I can do. And he followed Bill Callahan to Washington. Well, Bill Callahan is a great guy to learn from if you want to coach offensive line. And then he wound up at Stanford where at the time with David Shaw and the style that they played, that is an offensive line factory. And from there, you get some offensive line jobs and now he coaches the Bucso line.

And so I do feel like it's either play offensive line at a high level or get ready to work your way through the ranks over the course of 10 plus years. Yeah. And yeah, I think that's right. I mean, Zach Streif is somebody that was kind of fast track, right? Like he's now an offensive line coach. He hasn't been doing it forever, but he played in the NFL for a very long time. It is funny, the fact that we have like an offensive line coach pipeline,

where multiple Stanford offensive line coaches are current NFL offensive line coaches because Mike Blumgren, who was the Brown's offensive line coach last year, also was the offensive line coach at Stanford at one point. So they've produced multiple guys, which I shouldn't be surprising considering Stanford's recent history, but still notable. I'm not curious how many other college programs have produced multiple NFL offensive line coaches

in the last 10 years. All right, we're going to take our first quick break and then come back and chat through some more of your questions. All right, Bellar, what's the next one? Matthew Ellison says, does Mel Kuiper belong in the Hall of Fame as a contributor? The NFL is a year-round sport in large part because of the offseason draft coverage.

He is the godfather of an industry that has thousands of experts and podcasts that drive this coverage. Put Mel in so we know where Matthew Ellison stands. Dave, what about you? So I think there's a way to address both of these things. And it's the Pete Roselle Radio and Television Award, which they hand out every year. And it has gone to some Titans in the industry. Like they give it to a lot of color comment. and play-by-play announcers and NFL reporters, but it's gone to plenty of other people that have

grown the game. I mean, Dick Ebersol was awarded with it somewhat recently. He's the guy that turned Sunday night football into the Titan that it is right now. Various TV executives have gotten it. And I, like, I absolutely, I think Mel Kuyper deserves to win an award like that. And it would be a great way to get him a place in Canton. As far as like a bust, I lean more toward thinking, like, if you're getting a bust in the Hall of Fame, it is as somebody who aided an NFL football team in succeeding, whether as a player, coach, scout, executive, or, or like, had a very, very tangible effect on the on-field product. And I know there are a few people in with busts in Canton who don't quite fit that description. There's only like two, though. It's really just the sables.

It's the sables. Yeah, it's the sables. And, you know, they're the reason why we, like, why the NFL is a documented thing going back to the early 60s. So I'm okay with that. So, yeah, like, I don't, I don't know if Mel Kuyper needs a bust just because I think that should be reserved for people with skin in the game of competing and winning for championships. But, uh, absolutely. he should get the Pete Roselle Award and his name belongs somewhere in Canton. 100% agree.

That was exactly what I was going to say. I think that the fact that the only two media contributors, the ones that I saw are the Sables, who truly change the way we understand and process and see professional football on a national level and the national consciousness. I think we can leave them as the only two media-centric members of the Hall of Fame as contributors.

But if you look at the list of people that have won the Pete Roselle Award, it's kind of shocking that Mel Kiper hasn't won it, considering his prominence in the business. Yeah, no, I would agree with that. I mean, I think that Mel Kuiper, not to, you know, not to besmirch any of the people who are in and take away from any of their accomplishments,

all of the people that are in and have won that award have made massive contributions to like what, to our experience, watching professional football, I guess is what I would say. Like Brett Musburger got in two years ago, right? Like these are people that have been truly like titans and fixtures in the way that we hear, see and process the game over the last several decades. But I would make a pretty serious argument that Mel Kuyper is absolutely one of those

people. I mean, like Mel Kuiper changed the way that we talk about an entire section and present information and coverage of an entire section of how we talk about the NFL. So I absolutely think that he deserves to be it. I hope he does get in. And I, yeah, I certainly, if it sounds like I am, I don't want to minimize any of his contributions to draft discourse, the way we cover the draft, the monster that the draft has become. His contributions are significant. And as a draft nerd, I appreciate and respect what he's done so much.

But yeah, like there is an award for contributors like Mel Kiper. Hi, Beller. Let's get to the next one. Alex Beck, we've spent a lot of time this offseason talking about league-wide prioritization of the tight-end position, part of a larger shift away from specialization and toward positional flexibility. Roster trends in the NFL move fast, but human development moves slow. It takes years for high school and college pipelines to incentivize and train a generation of would-be edge rushers or safeties to play tight-end or big nickel. So the question from Alex is, does this mean the player pipeline, is structurally doomed to always be a step behind the NFL trend. Robert, what do you got for this one?

Yeah, I don't think you can ever do it this way. I just don't think that you would be able to react to the larger meta trends in the league quickly enough to have any sort of impact on it. The one that I always go back to is I remember talking to people for a story that I wrote several years ago about how the depressed running back market, would that change how many really good athletes and really good players at the lower level wanted to play running back if those guys weren't making quite as much money. But they're not thinking that way when you're 13, 14 years old.

All you're doing is trying to make it. And if that's your best position to potentially get there, and I think it's two things. All you're trying to do is get to college and get to the NFL. If that's your best way of doing it, you're probably going to take that route. And two, college and high school coaches, they're just trying to win. Like, they're not trying to maximize your chances of being like a really good college prospect or a really good NFL.

player. They're just trying to win. I think this is more about what the talent pipeline looks like at lower levels influencing the way the game is played and the way the game feels at higher levels. Like that to me is the only way it can inform one can inform the other. Like the athletes playing quarterback at the lower levels of football now have drastically changed the way that football feels all the way up to the NFL. I think that's happening more often than the trends are affecting what the pipeline looks like. Yeah, I just I The pipeline's backward

Like I agree with you It's just not it's not realistic to think that the NFL influences the lower levels of football It's just that's not the case because yeah there's so many other things you're focused on at the lower levels I mean Robert over the years how many times have you heard a coach or a scout bitch about the college game and how hard it's making it to like evaluate players for the NFL like it's the only thing they want to talk about half the time It's incredible how often it happens. And now it's NIL. Now it's not just the, it used to be like the structure of the college game

and the way that the sport was played from an X's and O's perspective. Now it's like, well, with all this NIL, you know, we just, you can't, can't coach the kids. They're not staying at the same place for long enough. It's, it's crazy how often NFL coaches will bitch about that stuff when, almost unprompted.

So I'm glad that you said that. I will say, it is, it's an interesting thought, though, because so the lower levels influence the NFL way more than vice versa. But whether it's tightened or I'll just use like big nickel as an example because the question also mentioned that. Like if maybe like if a if a if a guy like Kyle Hamilton succeeding and and it's not fair because Kyle Hamilton's just a unicorn sort of guy. But that could influence players and coaches to try young players at positions that they might not have. given them a chance at before.

You know, I would, I would say seeing something like that might create a little bit more open-mindedness or creativity when it comes to like using players and maybe that gives more guys a shot to be the next big nickel. But by and large, I think high school and college influenced the NFL way more than vice versa. Yeah, I 100% agree with that. I just don't think you're going to see a kid in high school that's potentially, a defensive lineman and he's looking at Nate Borkature getting picked in the second round. And he's like, you know what?

Offensive line is, or tight end is better. Like a lot of tight ends got drafted on day two this year. I should make sure that I play tight end. I just don't think it'll ever be like that. Okay. Hey, speaking of the younger levels, we got a 14-year-old fan writing into us here. Hamilton has this question for you guys. Hamilton says, with all the recent rule changes to the NFL, I was wondering if the

league changed the rules to allow 12 players in the field, how do you think it would change the game? What positions would be added the most on offense and defense? Would we see more spread with an extra receiver, more 12 and 13 personnel with an extra alignment or tight end? Maybe more blitzing with an extra pass rusher and more zone coverage with an extra DB or safety. Dave, what do you got for this one? It's a really interesting thought to consider adding an extra player without specifying position. Like if we're just giving teams leeway to add where they think it's important, that could create.

a hell of a lot of opportunity for chaos. My go-to thought here was if you told an NFL team that they could add another player on defense, I've got to believe that they would want to add another coverage player in the mix. Just because, I mean, like, pass rushes are already getting so good. You're already seeing so many creative ways teams can get home with four and maybe five and SIM pressures and all of that stuff. but there's so much space in the passing game. I feel like adding another coverage player,

like the ability to rush four while dropping eight sounds like it would be maddening for offenses to deal with. And then the natural counter to that is, all right, what do you want to do as an offense to counter that? You could add another pass catcher. But in my mind, the field starts to get awfully crowded if two more, like if another route.

outrunner and another defender are in all of that space. And I wonder if an offense is counter to that would be, well, we'll just add another pass protector in that case. Like if we give our quarterback that much better of a shot to stand back there and exploit the openings will be okay. And how does a defense counter that? And like I said, the fact that the idea of it changing from game to game and snap to snap is very interesting to me.

And I feel like the NFL would eventually have to. rain it in and be like, no, this has to be a specific type of player. Otherwise, this is just chaos. Offensively, I think having six guys in protection, so having the back in fairly often in protection, but still being able to get five out, that to me, I think, would be the priority. Just if I was guessing, like, how do I make sure that I'm still getting five out into the route every single play while having six guys in protection?

So I'm not sure if that's adding an extra pass blocker necessarily, or if you would just more consistently use the back in pass protection if you knew you were getting five out to create like the requisite amount of space. So that would be my guess. That's not like a specific answer about what position that guy would play. But I think just having like maybe one more tight end you could use to be like somebody that ships and then gets out as like a flat controller because the back is not going to do it. That that'd be where I would land. How do I get five out in the route every single play while still having six guys in protection? On defense, I get what you're saying and I don't necessarily disagree with that.

but I wonder if you knew you were always going to have seven guys in coverage but you could create five one-on-ones every single play as a defense is that more attractive than having eight guys in coverage but only rushing four.

I don't know. I guess it depends on what the offense decides to do. Like the this would be like the this would be a coordinator's nightmare and like the people that have to track personnel because it already it's already hard as hell to do but like tracking personnel and making the proper substitutions if you could just add an extra player anywhere you want to on any given

play i that just sounds like a headache i think on third down i think on like defined passing situations i think on every play i'd still rather have five defensive linemen and seven guys in coverage i think in early downs you could play a five o front every single play and still have seven guys in coverage, right? You could still, you would lose nothing based on how we understand like sound coverage principles. And then on third down, imagine if you could do anything you wanted coverage-wise while having name your guy.

Arvel Reese is like a spinner on every single play. So you have five guys, but you could still play all the coverages that you used to. I don't know if that's the right answer, but that one's more appealing answer to me. I guess that makes, I mean, no, it makes perfect sense. I guess it just, yeah, I mean, it depends on what the offense is doing and how many guys they're leaving in protection. You're right. I mean, if, yeah, if you can create a one-on-one as often as possible, that does sound really appealing. But I don't know, man, like I said, having, if you have the leeway to drop that many bodies into space.

And like I said, we still know guys can get home, even if you don't have one-on-ones everywhere. I just think at a certain point, I guess my mindset is at a certain point, the space starts to disappear. And like even the most accurate, decisive quarterbacks stop having consistent windows to get the ball where they want it to go. Simple things. One, you're right. If you have six guys in protection, rushing five wouldn't give you five one-on-ones. You'd always have like a little bit of help. So that may change the calculus a little bit.

anecdotally, when I think about where I feel most uneasy as an offense, it's not drop eight plays. Drop eight plays are changeups. Drop eight plays are you're trying to catch somebody. That's not how you'd want to play, right? Like, I think it's a dangerous way to play because you're never getting home.

You're just trying to catch a guy making a mistake because there's one more guy in that space than there would be normally. And so I just think that I don't love that stuff. Like when I, that, that's, those are the plays that drive me crazy, like, watching the game, which is like the drop eight plays where no one gets home and the quarterback just sits back there and has all day.

And so the, we're kind of doing that, right? If you're dropping eight and only rushing four and they have six guys in protection, you're kind of living in what feels more like the drop eight world we have now. And I, that world gives me pause. If they're using six in protection, I agree, which, yeah, I mean, I think it hinges on what the offense wants to do with their extra. guy. It's a great question. I can't wait to ask a coach this question. He'd be like, what the f*** you talking about? It's, I mean, it is, it is a very, it's a very hard thing to

visualize without the parameters of like what is the, what position is getting added to the field. Like if you can just do, if both sides can do whatever the hell they want, then the permutations are endless and it's very hard to conceptualize. Also, if you did pose this question to someone, I'm sure they've never spent any time thinking about this. No one. going to have a canned answer to this question. I'm just imagining a salty old, like life or football coach being like, we got the Steelers week one and this is what you want to talk about? Like, we're fighting for our lives over here.

It would be very clear that the only people I would ask this question to are people I know very well. I would never ask this question to like a relative stranger. All right. Let's take one more quick break and then come back and chat through a few more guys's questions. All right, Bellar, what's the next one? Okay, this one comes from George Bellgrove.

George had a bit of preamble here, so I just tried to boil it down to the final question, which basically came down to this. Our teams now having to distinguish much more sharply between great athlete who plays quarterback and quarterback whose athleticism actually helps him solve NFL problems. This was based off of a recent discussion you guys have about, had about designed QB run, maybe not being quite as much part of the meta now as it was a couple of years ago. So, Robert, what do you got on this one? the answer is probably yes just because the idea of a quarterback being a central part of the run game is less valuable than it was five years ago, 10 years ago.

But even when that was happening, it was only happening in like little spikes. I don't think that, like I think back to the 2012 season to 2013 when you had RG3 and Colin Kaepernick that were really serious parts of the run game. Russell Wilson was doing it a little bit. and then when we got to like 2018, 2019, obviously Lamar was doing a lot of it. Jaylen Hertz early in his career was doing some of it. But I still don't think it was prevalent enough to be pushing guys up or down the draft.

I think it was kind of like an added bonus on top of whatever they were giving you as passers. So I'm not sure it ever played into quarterback evaluation that much to the point that now we're having to do it a little bit differently. I might be wrong about that, but this goes back to kind of what we're saying before, Dave. Like anytime you ever have a conversation with an NFL coach about running the quarterback, even when it was effective and teams were doing it more, there was always a really healthy amount of skepticism about whether it was the way that you should play and whether it was the way that you should build things. I'm trying to think, I mean, like, if we're talking about big time draft picks, like top 100 draft picks, when was the last time we had a guy get drafted highly for that?

athleticism and ability to run without it coming without some degree of passing ability. I mean, say what you want about Jailen Hertz is probably the best example. Say what you want about Jalen Hertz. He threw for almost 4,000 yards and 30 touchdowns his final season in college. I mean, again, however you feel about him, that stuff was there. It's not like he couldn't do it at any sort of high level and it's not like it wasn't on tape. So, you know, this just, we're so far past the era of like.

a wishbone quarterback who might only throw the ball a hundred times a season. Like that's just not happening anymore. So even if your passing ability is not great and we can pick it apart and maybe that's why you fall to pick 53 the way Jalen Hertz did, it's still there. So that is my, that's my number one response. And then my number two response, my very cynical response would be if you possess such a great deal of athleticism that you would be drafted highly even if the tape is questionable and it's like well you know how good of a quarterback are you really at the end of the day i still think the

vast majority of NFL teams are going to take a shot on their ability to develop you like if your athleticism is that undeniable i mean i feel like we dunk on him all the time but anthony Richardson is just such an obvious example where like if you possess that package of traits, call it arrogance, call it confidence, call it whatever you want, but I think NFL teams are still going to be willing to take you highly at the end of the day. And so I don't know how much we're really parsing that to begin with when, you know, after a certain level, you're going to get drafted no matter what. I also think that Anthony Richardson's appeal goes beyond just being an athlete, like the arm strength and the size and a lot of the other boxes he checks as a quarterback

prospect also feeds into this a little bit. So I think that I'm not sure it ever was that big of a distinction where like we were just picking great athletes who happen to play quarterback and we were pushing them up the board because quarterback runs were more valuable. And so yes, is that distinction great athlete who plays quarterback and quarterback who that athleticism helps them solve problems? Is that important? Yes. But I'm not sure it's more important than it's been at other points in like the NFL curve of like how the game is played.

Maybe you can make an argument that Jalen Hertz goes a little bit earlier in that draft than he would have if Lamar Jackson didn't have the season that he did in 2019. Like I'd be willing to hear that argument but I think those examples are scattered enough and sporadic enough that it doesn't require

any like wholesale changes in the way that people are thinking about this. I think it's more important now to have a requisite amount of athleticism to get yourself out of trouble, then it is where we have to make sure that guy can play quarterback. That is a great distinction. And it's,

this is not a new thought by me, but more and more you just see the statuess quarterback going completely out of style. Like there's a baseline amount of athleticism expected of a guy that's going to get drafted highly into the NFL. I have to look back at it. This is not looking at the list right now, but I remember talking to, I had a story about this in, I think it was 2020.

I think it was like one of the last things I wrote for the ringer. And it was right before the J-1 Hertz draft. And it was about this idea that the types of athletes who were playing quarterback had changed. And now we had these kind of playmaking quarterbacks. And I remember Jordan Palmer saying to me for that story, he's like, Jared Goff will be the last guy with that physical profile that goes number one overall. He'll be the last guy that can't move, really, that is the number one overall pick in the draft. and if you look back at the last however long, that's true.

I mean, like, Joe Burrow is probably the next least mobile guy among that group. And Joe Burrow is, yeah, I was going to say, Joe Burrow is an athlete, like, absolutely. So, yeah, that's. And Mendoza, maybe, but, like, look at what Mendoza did in college. I'm going to say. Mendoza is a perfectly fine athlete and scrambler. Those, Fernando Mendoza, Joe Burrow, that quarterback, who is the quintessential, like, prefers to play from the pocket. makes plenty of plays downfield

is still bringing you something as an athlete and a runner even if it's just extending plays it is a far cry from what the quote unquote like immobile quarterback used to look like my favorite example of this because I think it's a really good test of like

nature nurture is Arch like Arch's ability to run is a complete reflection of the way the game is played now Like we know what his DNA looks like. Eli wasn't moving like that. Okay, but keep in mind, that is completely fair. And Arch is a better athlete.

But Arch is Cooper's son and Cooper was a wide receiver. So, you know, it makes sense if his DNA has him moving a little bit better than his uncles. A little bit. I also think that we're at a place now where if you are a quarterback of any regard when you're younger and you have one of those quarterback trainers, you're doing so much stuff where it's, I have to make sure I have an escape hatch here. We're working on off schedule stuff.

What do I do as a scramble or off platform? That's just more a part of quarterback tutelage and the way that we develop the position now than it was 20 or 30 years ago. So you have a guy that, even if he is Cooper's kid and Cooper was a receiver, I'm not sure if you dropped Arch Manning. We put him in a time machine.

And he went through the same exact process where he was the number one recruit in the country 30 years ago, he would move and play the way that he does right now. No, that's completely fair. All right, Ballard, what's the next one? All right, we're going to go back down memory lane once again with Phil Goad. Phil says, I was looking at the champ Bailey trade recently and had to laugh at Denver, being the one to get a pick in the deal, along with a 26-year-old all-pro corner for a running back.

He got a second-round pick. It was a relatively high second-round pick, too. What are some moves, either trades or signings from the past that would never be done? in the modern NFL. Dave, you take this one first. I'm sure there are some smaller, lesser known ones that are worth bringing up

that have happened a little bit more recently than this. But if you're talking about stuff that would never, ever, ever happen now, two come to mind and they both center around running backs. And I have personal ties to both of them, ironically enough.

But in 1999, the Mike Ditka Saints traded their entire draft class plus a future one plus a future three to Washington for the number five picks so they could draft Ricky Williams. So not only did they give up a year and a half of draft picks for a running back, but technically a running back that we had like we had no clue how good he was going to be in the NFL. Obviously, Ricky was a He was a Heisman winner. He's an incredible college player and he had a very good NFL career. But doing all of that for what was officially an unknown commodity bat shit insane.

And then I would guess a lot of our listeners probably knew about that trade. But looking back at it, there's a fun wrinkle that I had forgotten about. And it's that the Saints were so desperate to do this that they tried it with multiple teams. The Cincinnati Bengals picked three in that draft. The Saints offered them a better haul. They offered them their entire 1999 draft class. plus two future ones and a future two. So three ones, your full 99 draft class,

and a future two for the number three pick in the draft. And the Bengals said no so they could draft Achilles Smith. Just incredible, incredible stuff happening in the 90s. Everything about the Ricky Williams trade is my answer. Everything about it. What they gave up. And we talked about the Tebow thing being expression. of what media felt like back in the day.

The idea that Ricky Williams was in a wedding dress on the cover of ESPN the magazine with Mike Dicca after that trade happened is just, is crazy to think about now. Like the power of print media in 1999, how iconic that moment was. So everything about the Ricky Williams trade is my answer. The Hershal Walker trade, same kind of deal.

Like a running back is just never fetching like that sort of haul. Even the Trent Richardson trade, that doesn't happen now. Like there's just no possible way the Trent Richardson trade happens in this current day and age. Like it just doesn't. There's no, no shot.

The Herschel Walker trade was my other one where fun wrinkle about that that I had forgotten about. I think, so Minnesota sent the farm to Dallas in exchange for Herschel Walker because they thought they were close and trying to get over the hump. Dallas used the picks to make, build the team that would win three Super Bowls. but what I had forgotten about, Minnesota originally offered Dallas five players and three draft picks. But the five players all came with compensatory rewards if they didn't remain on the team.

And Minnesota was like, oh, you're 0 and 5, you're terrible. These guys are obviously better than what you have. They'll stay on the team. Jimmy Johnson immediately cut or traded all five of them and was like, we'll take the comp picks. thank you very much. And so they wound up with eight draft picks in addition to a couple other players. And they used it on Emmett Smith and Darren Woodson

and a few other important guys. And like, yeah, the fact that a, the fact that one running back fetched that at any point in league history was the feeder of a dynasty. Was it was like this one running back trade was the starting point and the like the stimulus for an entire. dynasty. The NFL used to be a lawless, lawless place. There was no logic governing the decisions that were made. How about this guys? I don't remember this. I don't remember this at all, but I was

just clicking around as you guys were talking. And the Ricky Williams trade and Champ Bailey are connected because it, the, the saints actually traded up from 12. So they got 12 from Washington and flipped that to the Bears for seven in the 99 draft where they took Champ Bailey. How about that? And the Bears took Caden McNagena. I don't know how well that worked out. All I ever want to do is relive old drafts.

That's really it. Yeah, I think that led to Washington getting Champ Bailey. And I think they also used one of those Saints picks on Lavares Errington as well. So like it didn't, it obviously didn't really work out for Washington because they never had. success, but like, it led to them landing some fantastic football players. We should just go and just read the Wikipedia pages for various drafts on shows in June and July. But just pick them and just read them all the way through. Just read off the selections in order.

Sounds like a blast. Bo on this one, the, the, that second round pick that the Broncos got from Washington, along with Champ Bailey they used on Tatum Bell. So we got that too. we've remembered some guys. Let's move on to the next question from Switch, who says, based on your knowledge of a player's career in its entirety, stats, team success, cities where he played, injury. If you could vicariously live through one player's career,

who would you most want to be? So it's not just whether you're good on the field, but it's everything that goes into what that player's life was when he was in the league. Who would you want to be? Whose career would you want to have had? Robert, what do you got here? I went solely on, like, where I'd want to live. and just like the life, the life that I would want to have.

Because listen, all these guys are living fine. But just an example that jumped out to me, like, if I could have lived in these two places and made this amount of money, like having a Keem Hicks's career would have been amazing. You live in New Orleans for all of your 20s. You live in Chicago for all of your 30s. You make $70 million. Okay. At the risk of sounding like a shock jock, though, like if this is what we're doing, you don't care at all about like winning a chance. championship or being on like some really really kick-ass teams i care about that a little bit it's

not my number one factor but like that's that's that's what that's why you play the game to quote herm edwards just more thinking about quality of life like you could do both you could do both like if we're if we get to magically be whoever we want i'm trying to like win some shit personally i focus more on the second half of the question than the first half of the question I think, like, the team's success part of it, I guess I didn't really, I wasn't thinking about quite as much as like, where and how would I have wanted to live for my entire NFL life? Okay, so I think you can appreciate my answer.

I'm not that ambitious of a person. I, I just, I just melded the two things, because that did matter to me. That did matter to me, but if you could be anybody, if you could live the life of anybody in the NFL over recent history, it's Aaron Donald for me just like being the best player in the world from day one making a shit ton of money living in Los Angeles

and calling your shot in a Super Bowl and winning it for your team it's hard to imagine it getting a whole lot better than that like every accolade you could ever want to win the weather's great year round you can go to the beach whenever you want to and part of me did think like you know, it would be fun to be the man in a football crazy town.

Like, there would be a cool sort, you know, there would be a cool mystique to being a packer or a stealer and like being great and everybody loving you. But it's also probably pretty great to be Aaron Donald and be able to like move around L.A. at will and not that many people really care. Like that sounds pretty badass to me. Yeah, I was going to say that I almost Aaron Donald's almost too famous for like my perfect life. I would never, ever, ever aspire to be famous on the level that Aaron Donald is famous. But if there is one city where it's easier to be that, it's certainly Los Angeles. Okay, I've got a really good one that also, I think, mixes our two points. Because you're like, I'm not this overly ambitious guy.

But like if I'm going to play football, it would be cool to win a Super Bowl. How about this? And I'm not, I'm not kissing ass because he's our contemporary. I've never met him. I admire his work. I've never met Chris Long, but what a career. Like number two pick in the draft had a very good NFL career. He was drafted before the new CBA, which only increases your earning potential.

Like Chris Long made a shitload of money, was on two Super Bowl teams, and he's a legend in Philadelphia forever. But like he's not so famous that he can't do what he wants to. Like that sounds fantastic to me. Yeah, that's a good one. If we're going like a step down from that, again, the places where he got to live, the money that he made, the fact that he can go to dinner and not be bothered. Chase Daniel's NFL career sounds pretty appealing to me. Backup quarterback is the best job on planet Earth. So like any backup quarterback is fine by me.

Backup quarterback where you actually made like a lot of money. Like Chase Daniel made $42 million in the NFL. Like that and he lived in New Orleans. He, you know, Kansas City is a nice town, but it's not like. Like the place right most of living in the world. Chase lived everywhere at some point in his NFL career. He did two. He did multiple years in New Orleans, Chicago and Los Angeles.

Like those are three places that I would want to live from ages 23 to 35. And so I think he did it pretty good. I think that's one that I would be okay with. Yeah. Any backup quarterback that signed more than two or three contracts, like if you were in the league long enough to be around for six, seven, ten years, you're living right absolutely it's funny that like it says a lot about me

and my personality that I would like I would never want to be Tom Brady like that sounds terrible no I don't ever want to be like I don't want to have to have the room roped off at the restaurant or like have the hotel lobby cleared out if I need to use it or something like that I couldn't do that how do I make enough money to kind of do what I want in life and live a frictionless existence but no one knows who I am that that that's pretty much my goal.

I think the answer is be like a moderately successful like NFL lineman or yeah, like a quarterback who didn't actually play that much. Like, yes, I just, if, if this is what we're doing. Brandon Aubrey's killing it right now. There's just, there's way too many guys who have won championships. Like if I'm signing up for a decade in the NFL and all the sacrifice and pain that comes with it, I mean, I at least want to be part of a championship team. But I'm with you that I don't.

I really have no desire to be so famous that I can't walk down the street to my favorite deli, you know? I'll go with Chase Daniel then. He did win the Super Bowl when he was in New Orleans. Done. That's my answer. Backup quarterback. Let's do it. All right.

That's all we've got for today. Thank you to everyone who sent in your questions. We've got a really good week coming this week. We've got some shows that I am very excited about, especially to my. I'm not, I'm going to leave it as a surprise. I'm going to leave it as a surprise. I'm not going to ruin it. We've got a fun show coming tomorrow.

We're going to chat a little bit about the lessons we learned from the best offenses in the NFL last year with a special guest. Very much looking forward to that. Got one more lingering questions show coming this week. I've really enjoyed digging into all of those. I thought last week's with the Lions and Chiefs conversation specifically, really, really enjoyed that. Looking forward to doing one more of those.

So be on the lookout for all of that this week. For now, that's all we got. Appreciate you guys listening. We'll talk to you very soon. Thanks for tuning in. Make sure to hit that subscribe or follow button so you never miss an episode. If you enjoyed what you heard,

please like, comment, and leave a rating. We'll see you next time.