The Athletic Football Show: A show about the NFL - The league's most cursed franchise, the determiners of floor and ceiling, the merits of Zac Taylor, and more in our final mailbag of the offseason

Episode Date: July 18, 2025

We're deep into July. Training camp is right around the corner. NFL people have all taken their vacations. It's official...the offseason is over. And with that comes the end of regular TAFS mailbag episodes. In our final mailbag of the offseason, Robert Mays and Derrik Klassen tackle questions on the league's most cursed franchise, the most important non-QB factors for floor and ceiling, Zac Taylor and his merits, Nick Caserio and his merits, one last question on fandom, and a whole lot more.Hosts: Robert Mays and Derrik KlassenWith: Michael BellerExecutive Producer: Michael BellerProducer: Michael BellerSubscribe to The Athletic Football Show...⁠Apple⁠⁠Spotify⁠⁠YouTube⁠Follow Robert on Bluesky: @robertmays.bsky.socialFollow Derrik on Bluesky: @qbklass.bsky.socialFollow Beller on Bluesky: @mbeller.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 the final mailbag of the summer. I'm back from vacation, moving this to Friday because we've got some other stuff we wanted to run a little bit earlier this week. But really enjoyed digging into our last mailbag with Derek Classen and Michael Bellar. Sincerely appreciate everyone who took the time to send in questions. Let's get to that discussion right now. It's not Monday, but it is mailbag day here on the athletic football show.

And it is the last mailbag. of the 2025 off season. We're going to be releasing this, I believe, on Friday. And I'm going to be leaving on my training camp travels tomorrow. I'm going to be at a training camp practice on Sunday. So the off season, as we define it here, Derek, on the athletic football show, is over. We are ramping up toward the season. And it flew by, and I'm not going to complain about that.

I am very, very excited to be around some actual football and some actual football conversations again. You know what? If you asked me that, like a week and a half ago, I don't think I would have agreed. I think I would have been like, nope, I'm very much like still feel like we're good without football. But it was literally like two days ago, I was like, man, I'm kind of itching a little bit. Like, I'm kind of itching to get some real football again. So the fact that we're here, the fact that training camp is here. And I feel like the mailbag now is like it literally is like the perfect when we're done with the mailbag.

We're into the new season. It's like a literal perfect cutoffer to get into a new era of work again. No more mailbags, Beller, which means you won't be able to read the mailback questions here for the rest of the off season as we get into the regular season. But I've enjoyed doing these. And I think that people have enjoyed you and your sultry tones asking us the questions. You know, about 10 minutes ago as I was coming back into my office to get this role and I said to my wife, like, last one, going to have to put the pipes back into mothballs for the rest of the 20, 25 calendar. year. But it has been a lot of fun. I've really enjoyed being a part of it. And I'm right there with you guys so pumped, so pumped that we are at this point of the calendar when the football season

really feels like it's coming back to us. Yeah, I'll be in Detroit this weekend. Sunday is my first camp practice and then we'll be around for the next few weeks. And we're still going to have four shows a week as we move through training camp. Things are going to look a little bit different just because I'm going to be on the road. But we will address that here very soon in terms of how the show in general is going to look over the next several months. We are very excited about a lot of the stuff we have on the horizon, but let's close the door here. Let's turn the page. Let's finish this chapter of the 2025 off season and get to our last mailbag of the summer. Beller, let's get to it. All right. Noah Klein has the first question for us. And he says, what components specifically

determine a team's floor and ceiling? Not something like elite quarterback play that obviously affects both at a high level, but more specific aspects of a team, coaching staff that have the most direct impact on a team's floor or ceiling. Derek, I'm going to let you take this one first because he mentions a recent episode where that brought this question to him where you said that the Packers have a higher ceiling, but a lower floor than the Lions. What leads specifically to a take like that? Yeah, so I kind of want to attack it from the angle of these two teams specifically.

I think when I'm considering the floor for the Lions, one, it's Dan Campbell. Like, I think having a head coach, one of that quality, but also like the style that Dan Campbell is where he, I think, is a little bit more of the CEO type. Obviously, he's involved in the offense a little bit, but also just like the energy he gets those guys to play with, that sort of thing. I think that is a high floor type of thing. Like, when I think of guys like that, it's Mike Tomlin, it's John Harbaugh is like this. And so I think that's where you get some of the floor element. And then I think Jared Goff, it's not a, it's not a quality thing with the quarterback thing so much for me. It's like a style of play. Like, Jared Goff is a calculated, consistent, you know what

you're getting every single play, every single drive type of quarterback, and there's value in that. But that to me is more of like a floor raising thing. And then when I think of the ceiling, like Jordan loves creativity, his aggressiveness, his like wild boy tendencies in and outside of the pocket, lend a little bit more to the hot streaks that I think can lead to high ceiling stuff. And then to me, the last element of it was just the coordinator stuff. Like I think when you have Matt Lafleur who has been calling the offense for a while now going into year three with Jordan Love, you can just find more nooks and crannies within the offense and within the system when you've been doing it for longer. And I think that you can reach higher heights that way. Obviously, now you're also moving into year two at Jeff Haffley.

So I think they can reach something else there. Whereas with the Lions, you're replacing two of the best coordinators in the league on both sides of the ball. And I just feel like it's going to be hard to tap into like top five offense and defense when you just have so much changing on that side. So outside of the quarterback, are there any aspects of the roster in Green Bay that you think give them a higher ceiling than the Lions because the fact that you think and have said this is interesting to me. Outside of the quarterback, is there anything inherent about how the Packers are built that you think gives them a higher ceiling than the Lions? I really think it's just like, I guess, the style of play on offense.

Like the fact that they are so dead set on like, we're just chucking it down the field all of the time. And again, part of that is Jordan Loves. Explosiveness. It's the explosiveness. And part of that is, again, it goes back to the quarterback, right? Like maybe Matt Lafleur wouldn't call the offense like that if Jordan Love wasn't the quarterback.

but the reality is Jordan Love is the quarterback and that's the way they want to play. And then even they go out in the draft this year and they draft Matthew Golden, who is a guy who is going to help you downfield a little bit. So I think it to me, it's a lot of just like style of play. Whereas with the Lions, and again, this goes back to the quarterback thing. Jared Goff has never been a quarterback that throws down the field. Like he didn't do it that much in L.A. And he doesn't really do it in Detroit. And I would be kind of shocked if that changes that much this year.

For me, if I'm looking outside of the quarterback, it's a good question. because I think we almost inherently just automatically equate sealing with how good the quarterback is and how dynamic the quarterback is. The area of this I've always kind of come to, and I think we've said this a decent amount over the last several years, I think offensive line quality sets the floor to a certain extent. And when I say that, I think if you have a good offensive line or a good system along the offensive line when it comes to pass protection, it's really hard to bottom out if you have good pass protection. You can be fine and functional as an offense. But if you look at the teams that have really bottomed out over the last couple of years, talking about the Bears last year for stretches, what the Seahawks looked like at times, what the Texans looked like at times, that was a past protection issue overall.

So I think the quality of the offensive line, but also the quality of your past protection plan, in a lot of ways, will set the floor for what your offense is going to be. And on the flip side of that, I think that the weapons often set the ceiling for what your offense is going to be. The perfect example of this to me is like the Broncos from last year. The Broncos did such a great job of setting their floor offensively last year because of what the pass protection was. But you could kind of feel the lack of ceiling because of what the past catching weapons felt like. So that's why I think that in a lot of ways, I don't know if I agree that the Lions have a lower ceiling than the Packers. The explosiveness point is a good one.

But as I think about the individual players and how the team is constructed, I think that the Lions, as of right now, have more high-end weapons than the Packers do, even if you're trying to paint an optimistic picture for what Matthew Golden can be. I think they do. Like, if I were to pick the five best players from these two rosters combined, like at least three of them are probably lions, I would guess. And so, like, they kind of have the talent advantage in that sense. It's just to me, it comes back to, like, again, you're putting in two new coordinators. So, like, what is the chance or capacity that you actually reach your ceiling? So I guess, I guess that's kind of, of more the framing is like, I just have less faith that the Lions can get to whatever their

ceiling is just because of all the change that they're going to go through. Whereas with the Packers, it's like if their ceiling is 13 wins, I feel more confident that they can get there than I do with the Lions, I think. That makes sense. But I think that, again, that's more about the circumstances than it is the roster talent necessarily. But that's kind of what I would go back to offensively, where the offensive line sets the floor and the past catchers, I think, to an extent, set the ceiling along with the play caller outside. If we're trying to take into account all the things outside of the quarterback. On defense, I think it's a little bit harder because I think on defense, like, the whole can be more than the sum of the parts in like a very real way. I go back

to what the Eagles were last year. Because at first glance, I think if I was trying to paint what the ceiling would look like for a specific defense, I would go to the pass rush first and foremost. Like that would be the first place my mind would go. But then you look at the last two years, the number one defense in the NFL. Jalen Carter is a good player, but it's not like that Eagles pass rush overall was like a devastating unit all season. They had some great moments including the Super Bowl, but they weren't driven by pressure rates and what the pass rush group looked like. And you could say the same thing about the Ravens from the previous year.

Like this is a collective thing. So I feel like figuring out what drives the ceiling on defense isn't necessarily just about high end players or just about high end pass rushers. So it's a little bit murkier for me on that side of the ball. I don't know where you land on that. Like, do you think that there's a certain makeup of what your defensive roster looks like that gives you a higher or lower ceiling? To me, it's probably just like, can you play man coverage?

Like, that to me is ultimately what it comes down to. And like, I think the Lions want to be that, but I do think without Carlton Davis in the building now, I think that actually probably makes that a little bit trickier. Like, DJ Reed is a good player, but that's not what I envision him to be necessarily, like a run-with-you-man player. But I guess to the same point, like, that's also not what the best. Packers are either. So I guess for me, like a lot of this like the ceiling thing really does boil down to just like how I feel watching the offense and like how I feel their hottest streaks can be rather

than the defense necessarily. Yeah. Defense I think I'd probably come down to like do you have two or three like real chess pieces defensively and are you extremely buttoned up on that side of the ball? And the Lions do have that role last year. Defensively right? So maybe I have to like think about that it because like Brian Branch is absolutely that. Aiden Hutchinson is not like a move around piece, but offenses have to respond to him because he's one of the best pass rushers in the league. And so those two alone kind of give it to you. Yeah, defense is a little bit harder to pin down. But I think on offense, I feel pretty good about what the non-quarterback elements that define the ceiling are. All right, but let's get the next one.

Okay. We just talked about it. Everyone's super pumped football season right around the corner, the ultimate hope time of year. Not so with this question from Connor Dempsey. Connor says, are the Vikings or Chargers more cursed? That's it. That's simple. What do you got here, Robert? I love this because it's so simple. It is the most simple question.

Connor asked a couple different questions, but this was the entirety of this question. It's the shortest one we've ever gotten, I think. It's like six words. The reason I love this question is that you can take it so many different directions. Okay. When it comes to fan bases, I think the Vikings fan base is more cursed than the Chargers fan base. the moving the team thing, like that's an entirely different conversation. Like, I don't think that layer of it is just hard to work through.

But just talking about what the product on the field has looked like for the past 5, 10, 20, 30 years. If you go back to like the 70s and like all the Vikings teams that were extremely close and didn't end up getting there. And I know the Chargers have some of that in the 80s. But I think those teams and just like moments where they felt fell short when, you know, they were arguably some of the best teams in the NFL during that stretch. And then to me, the reason that I think the fan base in Minnesota is a little bit more cursed is that it feels like the Vikings have been closer more often and have had more of these like kind of transcendent teams that ultimately didn't do it.

Like you look at what that team wasn't like 2017, like the Minneapolis Miracle team and you just get trounced in the NFC championship game when you feel like, okay, this might be like a really special year even after we lost our quarterback. The 98 Vikings and just what happened with that team in the playoffs and the fact. that that group never really made a ton of, did a ton of damage in the playoffs. Even the last couple of years, like 13, 14 win seasons that ultimately don't go anywhere. I just feel like the building up of the hope for Vikings fans only to have it ripped away from them over and over and over again would be enough to drive any person insane. So the fan base, I think, is more cursed in Minnesota. The players are more cursed in Los Angeles with the Chargers.

Like the fan base of Minnesota has been dragged along And had just been smashed like their hopes and dreams over and over and over again The Chargers facility the old facility and like before they built the new one might have been built on like some sort of cursed ground Like think about how many guys were on that Chargers team and ultimately like didn't reach their ceiling because they were hurt or things went awry Like even Derwin James and Joey Bosa like Derwin James and Joey Bosa have been good players neither of them have been good players neither of them have has reached the potential we thought they would based on what they were earlier in their careers. Joey Bosa just can't stay healthy. Derwin's been a little bit banged up and it's just been a little bit more of a winding road.

So I just think that the curse on the individual pieces of the organization are probably stronger with the Chargers. The curse on what the fans have had to go through is stronger with the Vikings. I think that's a good way to frame it. Because with I feel like with the Chargers, it's always been a lot of little things. Like it's just like a bunch of like kind of like what you're talking about with the Joey Bosa injuries here and there and Derwin James and a handful of other players. And then with them, it's like I almost feel less cursed, but unlucky that a lot of their

best teams were running up against the Tom Brady dynasties, Peyton Manning, like even to a lesser extent, the Steelers, right? Like they were kind of just the other team in a crowded AFC. And so I feel like they were a little bit unlucky in that sense. And then the last thing I would say about the charges is I feel like a lot of their failings, I feel less like they're cursed and more like their. just incompetent a lot of the time. So I think that's part of, and with the Vikings, I don't feel like they're incompetent. Because you have like these 13, 14 win teams and then it just doesn't work

out. And the other reason I would say the Vikings are more curse. You know, we talk a little bit about the injuries with the Chargers, but some of the particular quarterback injuries for the Vikings were multiple times you thought you had a guy and then something happens. Dante Colpepper obviously ends up blowing out his knee. That's a good one, actually. And then Teddy Bridgewater, like they They thought they had a guy and then just complete non-contact injury, like just such a fluke bizarre thing to have happened. And obviously that leads them into the, you know, a few years later, the Minneapolis miracle and all that stuff. But I think because of how close they've gotten and then the particular quarterback injuries that they've had, I feel like it's got to be the Vikings for more cursed. Yeah, I think that's probably right.

Because at least the Vikings have a couple player examples to go along with the fan base pain. And so I do think when you combine those two, Minnesota is probably the right answer. All right, guys. Alexander Norka has the next question here. He says, which teams or moments do you think of the most under the radar of what if? Things like, what if Team X drafted this player instead of that player or what if this specific player didn't get injured or even larger what if for league trends or individual careers? What do you got here, Derek?

So I think a very easy one is just any of the quarterback classes that had a ton of guys. So obviously 2021 comes to mind. 2018 comes to mind where obviously Baker Mayfield goes first overall and you guys did the redraft of this and like there were talks at the time that the Browns did maybe want to take Josh Allen but it's like does Josh Allen really become Josh Allen in Cleveland?

I don't know and like maybe Baker Mayfield figures it out if he ends up in Buffalo like it's just I think that class is such a fascinating like who ends up where that could have changed some stuff. The other, the one team I wanted, I thought might have been interesting if they had really kept things going was do you remember how insane the 20th? 15 Bengals were.

And like what they, I thought they were going to be going into that playoffs. And obviously they would have run into the 2015 Broncos defense, right? But like, how fun would that have been? Like the height of that offense with AJ Green and Tyler Eifford and how good that offensive line was against potentially that Broncos team, I think, could have been fun. And then the one other draft one I had, and this is less about like changing the fate of the franchise because obviously this franchise is done very well. But if the Eagles took Jalen Rager over Justin Jefferson. And the reason I'm interested in this is not because like, oh, imagine Justin Jefferson on the Eagles, but they probably wouldn't have taken Devontas Smith the year after the fact.

And then they probably wouldn't have like thought to trade for AJ Brown because it's like, well, we already have our superstar receiver. What do we need another one? So that to me is just like such an interesting domino of like where some of the best receivers in the league even fall and end up. So that one more to me is just like a butterfly effect type of one that I think would have been interesting. And then in that case, Minnesota doesn't get Justin Jefferson after trading Stefan Diggs. And so what does that ultimately mean for the Vikings? Like that move makes sense in retrospect and worked out just fine because they got Justin Jefferson. If you don't, how does that alter

what the next several years of Minnesota Vikings football looks like? That's, I like that and that's maybe they've got Devonzo Smith the next year. All the ones I picked were essentially, okay, this is going to affect the team that did it, but then also what are the league-wide effects? The first one to me, and again, they've made it very clear and they've told anyone who will listen and they wanted to do this. What happens if the chiefs don't get ahead of the Saints in the 2017 draft? And the Saints end up taking Patrick Mahomes. Man, dude.

It changes the next five years of the NFL. And so that's the first place my mind goes. One, like, what do the Chiefs do? Like, how do they navigate the post-Alex-Smith era? Do they try to find a guy? Do they keep trying to get over the hump with Alex Smith? Do they keep bumping up against their ceiling or they try to do something extreme and go find a different quarterback? So the entire Chiefs part of that, which I'm sure Chiefs fans don't want to even start thinking about is interesting.

But the Saints part of it, you potentially make good on that 2017 draft. All of the things that you did to kind of leverage your future and move money around, potentially pay off if you can win a Super Bowl with that group. And then think about Sean Payton. like Sean Payton with Patrick Mahomes, does he just become Andy Reid? Like do we get to play in 2020, and so Andy Reid is now considered one of the greatest head coaches

in the history of the sport, right? Probably like one of the five, six greatest head coaches of all time based on what's happened over the last eight years. The same thing probably happens to Sean Payton if he gets Patrick Mahomes, right? So just so many different things change

for the coaches, the teams, the organizations, and the quarterbacks if that ends up happening. The other one I had is that what if Tom Brady signs with the Bears instead of the Bucks in 2020? Don't do that to yourself. Come on, man. It's honestly not even that. It's just like that Bucks team just never, what does that Bucs team do? Like where do they seek out their quarterback?

Like that Super Bowl goes away. And I also think that we've talked about this a lot. That working to me set off a series of moves for other veteran quarterbacks over the next several off seasons. Like, if the Bucks don't win that Super Bowl with Tom Brady, do the Rams trade for Matthew Stafford? Maybe not. Like, maybe, like, do the Broncos trade for Russell Wilson?

Because, like, with the Rams, right, I think you could tell me that Sean McVeigh maybe wanted to move on from golf either way. But maybe their answer then isn't, oh, we'll go trade for Matthew Stafford. Maybe it's then, okay, we'll scrap everything. We'll get two first-round picks and we'll go trade up for, I don't remember what year that would have been. But for somebody, I don't know, Trey Lance, whatever it was. but they could have been such a very different.

20-21, yeah. They could have been the Trey Lance team. That's a fascinating one. All right. So then that brings me to my final one. What if the Niners just stick and pick Matt Jones in 2021? Oh, man. They'd probably be pretty good.

That one is a funny one because like I honestly truly feel like that would have worked out. But then we wouldn't have Brock Purdy. Like, I think that's probably the more interest. We wouldn't have Brock Purdy. So Brock Purdy, who is now making $50 million a year, potentially never becomes an NFL starter if he's thrown into a different situation. And the other thing for the Niners is, what if the Niners hang on to all of those picks?

What do the 2021 through 2025 Niners look like if they had all of those first round picks and had to spend none of them on a quarterback that they ultimately did not play? Dude, that would have been gnarly. Because like, here, what it, now I want to go think, like, what could they have done in like the 2022 draft if they had still had their pick? I think that would have been interesting to me. But I mean, like there had to be a pass rusher that they were going to go get.

So the guy who went one pick after the Niners would have picked in the 2022 draft was George Karloftus. Dog. Like, and what have we talked about over the last couple of years is that other than Nick Bosa, man, how far has their pass rush really deteriorated? But imagine if they had a George Karloftus right there. And they don't need superstar players. I think this is just a reminder of how much talent was missing from those teams. If you go to the 2023 draft, it's not as fun. There's not as clean of an option there.

Nolan Smith went one pick after they would have picked in the 2023 draft. I don't think they're ever picking Nolan Smith, just based on the types of players, the Niners chase at that position. But like the guys on the interior of the offensive line that went in the back half of that draft, Brian Branch went in the second round of that draft. There are just so many guys that if you drop even like a solid player from the second round of that draft onto the Niners, things just feel so much different. Like what if Cody Malk or Steve Avila is on that Niners offensive line right now instead of not having anybody from either one of those first rounds?

In theory, potentially changes like the entire complexion of the NFC over the last couple years if the Niners don't bottom out with some. of the depth concerns that they had because they missed out on those draft picks. Yeah, that's a really fascinating one. Because like, and what's, I think what's really interesting, too, is a lot of these, it's like, in retrospect, they didn't draft the player who we now know is very good. Like the Jalen Rager, Justin Jefferson thing. It's like, okay, the Eagles missed on Justin Jefferson, and we all know that Justin Jefferson's great now.

This one's an interesting one because it's like, okay, we saw Mack Jones be good for a year. And then he now he's a backup, and he's probably going to be a backup for the rest of his life. but I think if we consider what he would have been with Kyle Shanahan, it's like, well, I don't see why he couldn't do what Jimmy Garoppolo did for for eight years. Like, why not? Yeah, I don't think that, I do think that Brock Purdy gives the Niners a different sort of senior offensive than Matt Jones would have.

Like, I think that's worth admitting. But even if you're like the best offense in the league by a little bit less and have two more players, what does that mean for the Niners? I think is just a fun thing to consider. And even if we do get Mac Jones for a. stretch this year in San Francisco. Obviously, things are very different because you're operating without all of those draft picks that you would have had.

All right, guys. Let's get into the first break of the episode. Then we'll come back and answer a bunch more questions. Natan Gorin brings us out of break. Natanz says, I am a fan in the UK who decided to get into the sport five years ago. And with no ties to any team, I chose to support the one with the number one pick, the Cincinnati Bengals. I've fallen in love with Joe Burrow, Jamar Chase, and the sport in general.

However, I can't help but feel that the team's window for winning. the Super Bowl may have already closed despite the obvious talent. We've now given out three large contracts on the offense, all of which I think made sense, but we've stalled with our only all pro level defender. I know there are other franchises who have it much worse than us, and with Burrow Jason Higgins, you always have a chance, but is it possible for a team run the way the Bengals are to reach a Super Bowl when the QB isn't on his rookie deal? Robert, what do you got for this one?

Yes. It is very possible for that to happen. Yes. And I think I just love this question because. there's just like a real level of earnestness here as like Natan is like five years into his time as an NFL fan is already staring into the abyss about how this is going to go. If you have an offense that is as good or can be as good as the Cincinnati Bengals offense, even that what they were last year, you absolutely can win a Super Bowl with that group because your defense can stumble into some form of competency. And I think that can happen this year. I feel like some people have taken some of the relative pessimism about the state of the Bengals and the state of the Bengals defense as the Bengals defense is going to be terrible again and the Bengals aren't going to be good.

I don't believe that whatsoever. Like if you told me this year with some of the young pieces and a new defensive coordinator that the Bengals had like the 15th best defense in the league and they won 14 games, that's possible. Like I don't think that's off the table by any stretch. That's absolutely within a realm of outcomes that can happen. I think that what's important to keep in mind here, it's harder. If you operate this way, it's just harder. Is it possible? 100% it's possible.

When you have the most important things in place, you always give yourself a chance. But when you're not doing everything else, you're not giving yourself the best chance. And that's where I am with the Bengals. Like there's absolutely a world where they make this happen over the next two to three. years because of how good the quarterback and everything else is. I just think that they've put some impediments in front of themselves unnecessarily by some of the ways that they operate where they have to stumble and trip over things that some other teams don't.

It's also like if you've only really been watching football the last five years or so, the Eagles have dominated that stretch in particular and they've done it specifically by what they've been able to do with their GM in the way that they move money around. And so, like, if your narrow view of football is only those last five years where the Eagles have done it this way, it feels like you're way behind the eight ball if you're not doing it that way. And you kind of are, but, like, there are other ways to win. And, like, to me, I think the Bengals being the 15th best defense is a little rich potentially. Like, to me, that's not on the board.

But the good news is, I don't think you. But what would you have said about the Chargers last year? Would you have thought in any possible world the Chargers would have a top 10 defense last year? Probably not. And I guess part of that thing is like they did get lucky with some of their young. Not lucky, but obviously some of their young players played really well. But I guess I felt better about the Bengals front or the, excuse me, the Chargers front a little bit better than I do about the Bengals. But maybe that's not really enough.

But that's a good point. So it is on the table. I guess, I don't know. Part of that too was like they brought in Jim Harbaugh and I trusted whoever he was going to hire. whereas I think with the Bengals, they fired a defensive coordinator, I believe is good and one that I don't have as much faith in. So I think that's certainly part of it.

What I was going to say is like in what years were it? The 09, 2010 Saints, their defense was 20th in scoring. They won the Super Bowl because their offense was the best in the league. The 0607 Colts, their defense was 23rd in scoring, and they won the Super Bowl because their offense was the best in the league. And they're built kind of similarly, right? Like I think Breeze and Bro are like similar-ish quarterbacks. And then if you just look at the way that the Colts teams were built,

it was like superstar quarterback, two superstar receivers. They're going to figure it out. And then they did. And so obviously, again, you're having to thread a needle because those are both teams that only won one Super Bowl, as opposed to being able to go on a run the way the Chiefs have or the Eagles consistently getting their half. But so it's possible. It's harder, but it's definitely possible. Yeah, I just think that defense, there's,

so much volatility on defense, especially when you're incorporating a new play caller, that for me, it's hard to just say, this is how it's going to go. And I've learned that lesson a bunch of different times over the last, like, 15 years. The team I always come back to is the Saints were historically bad defensively for like multiple years in a row. And then they weren't anymore. And so I remember having a conversation before that season. And they were again after that. And they're just, there was a season where we were talking about it was on the bringer NFL show and we were talking about all the teams that can win the Super Bowl and the Saints we knew would have one of the best offenses in the league again and

I was like there's no way the defense will be good enough for them to compete for a Super Bowl and that's just it's almost never true like we you can pick up you can look at roster talent and you can try to make calculated guesses about how who's going to be really bad on defense and who's going to be really good but I think that there's enough volatility with how it's ultimately going to shake out that it's really hard to do. to make definitive proclamations about that going into an individual year. Even if you're worried about certain pockets of the roster talent, you can get by enough. This is an extreme example because they had one of the best offenses we've ever seen.

But the Falcons defense in 2016 was bad. Like there are bad defenses that have gotten to the doorstep of winning championships because of how good the offense is. And so the fact that you can still be, it's almost impossible now to win the Super Bowl if you have an objectively bad offense. If you have the 20th best offense in the league, I can't even imagine how good the defense would have to be for you to win the Super Bowl.

On the other side, it's very, it's not very easy, but it is possible to imagine what that version of a team looks like. And even with all of the doubts about what the Bengals are going to be defensively, if you told me right now, the Bengals have the 20th best defense in the league this year, okay, like, that's absolutely possible. And you combine that with what they are on offense, and they absolutely can win the Super Bowl with that sort of team. Yeah, that's a good point.

I mean, the defense wasn't that much better than that when they did go to the Super Bowl. I mean, they were probably like 17th. No, it was like 16th. Yeah, they were like 16, 17. So like if it's like, like you could tell me that the defense could be like a half tier worse than that. And they could get back to the Super Bowl. Because yeah, again. And the difference too, like now even compared to them like Joe Burrow is better than he was at that time.

Like Jamar Chase is better than he was. at that time. T. Higgins is better than you. Like, it's just they are better, the best players on the offense and the reason the offense is that good is even better now than it was at the time. Like they've just, they've grown and they've developed. And I think we forget it now because they've had seasons where they've been really good over the last three or four years because they have more talent and Spags is really good. The Chief's defense wasn't good in the early part of the Mahomes era.

Like in 2019 when they won the Super Bowl, they were not a good defense. 18th in EPA per play on defense. Like this is a very viable path even if it seems like it's a tough road based on how the last couple seasons have gone for the Bengals. And that's a good point too because we remember those defenses being

better than they were because like they did bow up a little bit in the playoffs. And like this, you know, Spagge would call some one off game plans and they would be really good. But like getting there was it was a lot of 32 to 28 type of games. Yes. Mostly in 2018. That was like really.

the case before they got Spags. But still, I think that this is more, this is a more popular way of getting to and potentially winning a Super Bowl than it probably seems if you're a fan. All right, Bill, we got another Bengals themed one. Let's just roll right into that one here. All right, let's hear it. It comes from David Shore Sheroda and he says that he's been a Bengals fan since 2005,

chose them in the Carson Palmer, Chad Johnson era, and, well, let's say I've had time to build character. So here's the question. What is Zach Taylor really? He rarely gets mentioned in coaching discussions. Is that because people see the offense as Joe Burroughs' offense making Zach expendable? Because we've also seen him makes clear schematic differences when Jake Browning was in. The offense looked totally different.

If the Bengals missed the playoffs again, mostly due to the defense, would it make sense to move on from Taylor and bring in a defensive-minded head coach, someone who could let Burrow run the offense while shoring up the other side of the ball? Or is having a capable offensive play caller too rare to let go of even if the defense continues to struggle. Derek, why don't you take this one first? It's a fantastic question. because I think I was guilty of this, especially earlier on in Zach Taylor's tenure,

where I kind of just, it's Joe Burroughs offense, it is what it is. I will say, I think, and I don't remember where I heard this, but it's always stuck with me. Maybe it was Eric Stoner like 10, 12 years ago, however long it was. But teams typically take on the personality

of their quarterback or their head coach. And for the Bengals, it's very obviously the quarterback, which complicates it when you get into a head coach who is like kind of also your offensive mind. But I do think, Robert, we had this discussion at some point. Maybe it was during last season where, again, you think about some of the stuff they do with Jake Browning, where it is a completely different offense.

And it's a very well put together offense. Like they sequenced their under center stuff well. The play action stuff was really good. But I think even beyond that, Taylor has shown really nice ability to, when the offensive line permits it, find stuff in the run game. Like they had the stretch in 2023 where they were like, all right, man, shotgun run game. That's all we got. And they figured it out. And it wasn't explosive, but it was efficient enough to let them be what they wanted to be.

I think even then this year their tweak was, okay, how do we maximize Jamar Chase? He's the best receiver in football. How do we do something more with him than, hey, line up outside and Joe's going to figure it out? They did a lot more putting him in the slot and moving him around, and I thought that that was creative. So even if I do believe on the whole,

like it is Joe Burroughs offense, just in the way that he wants to be in the shotgun more, he wants to be more pure pass, he wants to get the ball out quickly. I do believe all of that stuff is more Joe Burrow than Zach Taylor. but I do think like the longer these two work together, the more you see the offense without Joe Burrow at times, it's pretty clear that Taylor is,

I don't know if he's as good as Sean McVeigh or Kyle Shanahan or any of those guys, but I think he clearly is capable. And I actually, I respect him a lot more now than I did a year and a half, two years ago. I think that's fair. And we've talked a ton on this show over the last three years, Beller, about just some of the subtle tweaks and some of the subtle evolution from the Bengals offense.

And that example that you mentioned, Derek, about the gun run game is a very good one. And we talked about that in the moment. I remember they played that game against the Saints that season in like week four or five. They went almost exclusively to the shotgun. And they started tweaking the run game to be more of a downhill gap scheme run game. And they really were able to tap into a high level efficiency and the entire offense came together. And it's always going to be limited in terms of how much you can do when the quarterback's preferences dominate so much of it. If you look at some of those offenses that you mentioned, I think it's a lot easier to appreciate what Kyle Shanahan and Tua are because they're kind of operating with a blank slate.

Like the quarterback is just kind of a piece of the overall machine. So it's easier to appreciate the construction of the machine. Like that's what stands out to you. Zach Taylor isn't able to build an offense from scratch. He has to work with what Joe Burrow wants to because that's, I think, the best path forward for them. And I think within those constraints, I do like a lot of the stuff that they have done over the last few years. And I think that they deserve a lot of credit for that. Another area where I think Zach Taylor just doesn't get enough credit, but I think he's due plenty.

It's hard to manage the personalities in a building where the front office and ownership is consistently pissing off your players. Like just even let's go to the Trey-Henrickson thing. It's a hard thing to have to juggle. You are the person at the front of this. And with the Trey Hendrickson thing specifically, Trey was talking about him hearing from Zach Taylor as part of this. So Zach is having to massage the relationships with all of these guys as they're being disrespected in their minds by the front office because they're not getting the paydays

that they want. I think that is very difficult. So when you combine just some of the culture and personality management in a place where I think sometimes that's hard to do with some of the things that they've done on offense, I really like a lot of what Zach Taylor has been over the last few years. The area where I take the biggest issue with him is that I think some of his in-game decision-making from a strategic standpoint has been horrendous. There are so many moments, like if you look at the fourth down decisions over the last

couple years, it was better in 2024 than it had been. But in 2022, 2023, if you look at how often they were going forward on fourth down when they probably should have been, it was in the bottom half of the league and probably like in the bottom five or six teams. So I think there were a lot of issues there and even some specific instances. I think it was the Ravens game this year, the week five Ravens game, or was close down the stretch, and they played for like a 53-yard field goal that Evan McPherson missed. They have played for way too many long field goals at the end of some of these games, and it has come back to bite them. So I think some of the in-game decision-making, just from that perspective, that is probably my

biggest issue with Zach Taylor, but I don't think he gets enough credit in some of these other areas that he probably should have gotten over the last couple years. Do you think that is like a McVe-Shannahan tree thing? And like all of those guys struggle with it. So I think that's part of it. I can't explain it. But why would they share this characteristic? I don't know.

I think it's just a fundamental. Well, because I think what's interesting is what I was going to say is like Sean McVeigh and Kyle Shanahan specifically are. very clearly, or at least start it as like run first, like, we're going to control the game, that style of thing. And Zach Taylor obviously comes from that. But like, the Bengals have never been that. So you would think that at a certain point that you would break that thinking from your mind when you have Joe Burrow, Jamar Chase, like T. Higgins. Like it's fourth and three. Like, okay, maybe we want to run it. But like, dude, just like, we'll just throw a ball up in the air

and T. Higgins will go find it. Like, why don't they do stuff? Obviously, that's like a very simple way to put it, but it is kind of shocking they don't do it more. I'm almost surprised like Joe Burrow isn't more aggressive about it. Because like, part of the why the Ravens, I think, go for it so much is Lamar is just all of the time like, yeah, we're going for it. Like, keep me on the field. And so I almost wonder if like, I wonder what that, you know, situation is like, but it is kind of bizarre.

They don't go for it as often as they do. Or as often as they should. Why all of these young head coaches with these good offenses don't want to give their quarterbacks every single chance? It's just mystifying to me. Kyle Shanahan has been a little bit better about it over the last couple years, and McVeigh's been a little bit better about it. But the fact that this has been a consistent problem for all of these guys for multiple

years in a row, it is just always mystifying to me. Because I just don't get it. Like in so many ways, you're the one on the front foot. You're attacking. You have that mindset when it comes to the way that you construct your offense, the way that you're building the offense. And then in all of these high leverage moments, you're going to take your foot off the gas and suddenly become like a conservative person, it's just always been hard for me

to square. That's the funny thing. It's like so much of especially Kyle Shanahan, the way that they run the offense is like, I am in control. And then on fourth and one, you can be in control. You're in the driver's seat. And they're like, I think I'm good here. We'll hand it off to the defense. It's like, why? The number of like 35 yard field goals, I had to watch Robbie Gold kick over multiple straight years. It was not a huge fan of it. So overall, I think that Zach Taylor probably doesn't get enough credit for some of his strengths as a head coach, even if I do take issue with some of the other things that go into being a quality head coach in the NFL. Let me just read this to you guys. I actually watched the episode of quarterback last night where the Bengals, Ravens, overtime loss for

the Bengals is included. So the Bengals took over after a fumbled snap at Baltimore's 38, three straight Chase Brown runs and a missed 53 yard field. Yes. I was looking through my week five notes before we started recording this because I want to remember it. That's a tough one. That fumble is the most raven's shit ever, by the way. They were one and three.

They had the chiefs loss. They had the commander's loss. And then they finally got their first win. And this was the next game. In my notes, in my week five notes, it literally says, is this a season altering decision? And it was. In week five, it seemed like a strong thing to say, but you can make a very solid argument that it was a season altering decision.

Well, I think for them specifically, it's fair because that's literally like right after the tragedy of the Washington game. So to like lose that game that way and then have a game that you could have won and you fumble it that way, it's like, you kind of threw your season away pretty fast. That was the worst one. Like they missed a long field goal against the Chargers late in that game too, but they did at least try to throw the ball three times before they ended up kicking it. But you look back two years ago, I think they kicked 1350 yard field goals in 2023, which was the second most in the league. And Evan McPherson has not been that good of a kicker over the last couple of years. So their willingness to kick those field goals has been a consistent hindrance on what

this team could have been over the last couple seasons. All right, guys. Next question comes from Peter Hudson. And it's a similar theme. We just went from what exactly is Zach Taylor? We're going to do it with the GM. He says he can't decide whether or not Nick Casario has done a good job with the 10. Texans. He's made several good moves, drafting Derek Stingley and C.J. Stroud, making the move

for Will Anderson, the Deshawn Watson trade. But he's had some pretty big errors as well, including the early instability at head coach, drafting of Kenyon Green. And as you guys have talked about, the misalignment between where the team was and where he thought they were just last off season. The moves this off season did not help direct our friend Peter one way or the other. So he wants your help. Is Nick Casario a good GM who can build a true contender? What do you say, Robert? I think so. This is a good. I think so. This is a good question because I love these. I don't know the answer.

Like when somebody asks a question, I don't immediately have a good answer. I know that's a good question. That's kind of where I was with the Casario thing. Part of me was like, yeah, like he's made enough good moves for me to feel pretty good about it. And I do think that too often I'm guilty of this. And when you and David were talking about the Texans on that show, Derek, that inspired this question, I think that you guys were doing this a little bit too, where it's like, okay, are they going all in or are they not?

I don't think it has to be an either or thing with these teams in any given offseason. I think truly, if I'm looking back at the 2024 Texans offseason when we conceived of them just pushing all of their chips in, the only move they made as part of that entire push that I think was probably a little bit over-aggressive and they probably want back was the Stefan Dix trade. Like, signing DeNeil Hunter the way that they did and spending a little bit more money, I don't think there's that big of an issue there. I think the digs thing is probably one foot over the line. But if you look at everything they've done in the draft over the last couple of years in tandem

with some of that aggressiveness, Nick Asario has been very good at stealing draft picks pretty much every single year where he'll trade down in the second round. He traded down from the first round to the second round in last year's draft after they had made all of these all-in moves to get an additional 2025 third round pick. there's always like an extra second or an extra third somewhere in the mix for this team because they've offset some of the aggressiveness with a little bit more patience and asset accumulation, which I think you have to do. So I think that balance of making sure even if we're being aggressive with some of these assets,

trying to make sure we're picking nine, ten times a year every single year. I like that. And the only thing, so coming into this year, I feel pretty good about a majority of the moves that they made. I think this year the offensive line strategy is where I might take a little bit of issue. But for the most part, over the last two, three years, I think that they've done a solid job because even if they've done really aggressive things like the Will Anderson trade, I think they've made sure to offset that with a little bit more methodical team building

in the right moments. Yeah, I think he's been a good GM outside of the offensive line stuff. Like, again, hitting on C.J. Stroud, the Will Anderson trade. and then you mentioned the draft picks. Like they acquire all of these extra picks and stuff, which the whole point of that is you got to use them well, but they do. Like Nico Collins was a third round pick.

Tank Dell getting him where they got him. Jalen Petrie was not a first round pit. Like they do well with these mid and late round pick. Kamari Lasseter was not a first round pick. And again, part of that too is like that can get a little bit complicated, like some of the defensive guys, it's like, well, Damico Ryans is a fantastic coach. But even, again, some of the receivers that they've drafted

and done well with, I think it's pretty impressive. And so I think he is a good GM. And then like the two points I want to hit are one, the early instability at head coach. I honestly don't blame that for him at all. That to me was like a post-Dashon Watson. This is coming from above. I think the organization didn't even know what they wanted to be.

I don't really pin that on Casario. I think it was like kind of intended for them to not really stick with the head coach. So that I don't necessarily blame him for. And then the other point I wanted to hit was. So they go all in last year. And obviously it kind of blows up in their face. And I do think that even going into it, we all could have said that Stefan Diggs trade was a little aggressive. And I think I probably did say that going in, you know, just based on his age and what they were having to pay him and all that stuff.

But at the same time, was he wrong for believing in an offense that had C.J. Stroud? Was it his fault that Bobby Sloick didn't turn out to be the offensive coordinator they wanted? Like that to me, like some of the, to me, what we saw. saw last year with the offense was more an issue of offensive coaching failing, which to me actually falls less on Casario and more on D'Amico Rines. And again, I think D'Miko Ryans is a fantastic coach, but I think the coaching staff issues fall more on him. And so I don't really pin that on Casario. I think now we can look at this offseason and be like, I don't know if I love what they did with the offensive line. And I think even, again, you know, the Ken Yong green pick beforehand,

like some of the other acquisitions they made at the offensive line other than Tom which I don't even think was Casario. So again, I think outside of offensive line, he has been pretty firmly a good coordinator or a general manager to me. Yeah, he's been proactive in a lot of ways while also not being like aggressive in a way that's really going to hurt you because you're offsetting it with some of these moves where you're getting picks back. Like even the Kenyon Green for C.J. Gardner-Johnson trade.

Like that's just the type of trade that I think a proactive, you know, creative general manager makes. You're going out and getting one more piece on defense. This guy wasn't going to be part of your plans. And I can understand why the Eagles would do it too. But I think that being willing to do that kind of stuff, that to me is the mark of a good GM, where you're trying to be creative, you're trying to solve problems. And I think that he has done a solid job of that for the most part over the last few years. They're not the saints. Like they're not over leveraging themselves constantly and like not really getting stuff back. Like to your point, like they'll do a super aggressive thing, but then again, they'll trade out of the second round and then acquire a few more

picks. Or again, they'll do these weird swaps with a team that, you know, the, you know, C.J. Gardner Johnson maybe is overrun his stay in Philadelphia and they don't need him. Okay, then we're going to go get him. And like just, they do smart things like that, I think. Even like some of the smaller signings, like getting Dalton Schultz, like he's not the best tight end, but like he's a useful player. Like just little stuff like that. I think they've generally done well with that. Yeah, I agree. And even like small things. Like Sheldon Rankins was bad for the Bengals last year. Sheldon Rankins, I think, was making like $10 million to the Bengals last year.

He's making five for the Texans this year. So I think just some of the smaller veteran moves they've made to try to round out, you know, the roster over the last few years. I do think that they've done a solid job of that. So we'll see what happens with the floor of the offense kind of changed the way that this team feels overall. But I feel like we're probably a little bit too down on what the Casario era has been because of how last year went, when in reality,

it's probably somewhere between how we felt after the 23 season and how we felt after the 24 season. All right, we got a few more questions to get to before we close up the mailbag for the summer. But before we get to them, we are going to take our last break of the episode. Okay, guys, this next question comes from Sean, just Sean. And Sean wrote a long email about Bears linebackers coach, Richard Smith being one of the worst coordinators in NFL history, but a consistently good linebackers coach.

So his question was, is this the Peter Principal at work in the NFL? is this an example of someone who just was a great position coach, can't quite reach the coordinator level, and what other guys have we seen do a similar sort of job as to what he was talking about with Bears linebackers coach, Richard Smith. What do you got here, Robert? To me, it's always the best examples for me are coordinators to head coaches, where they were great coordinators and they ultimately just didn't have been becoming good

head coaches. The best recent example is just Vic Fangio. Like, I feel like Vic Fangio just should have stayed a defensive coordinator. Like, you should have just been a defensive coordinator. the Broncos thing didn't need to happen. Like, I'm glad he got his chance. He deserves it after an illustrious career. But there are also parts of me watching him in Denver.

I was like, does he want to be here? Like, is he enjoying this? It really doesn't seem like that sometimes. That's fair. But I think that, I think Vic specifically is somebody who just likes having his little kingdom that he gets to run and would be happier just doing that. And so I think there's a lot of examples of that where guys are very competent NFL coordinators and just aren't fit to be head coaches. Josh McDaniels is an example of this.

To me, the best one, though. And this is something I've written about and talked about a bunch over the last 10 years or so. And I've talked to a bunch of people about it. I think the ultimate example of this is Wade Phillips. Like, Wade Phillips was such a good defensive coordinator so many different times that he kept getting these head coaching jobs. And I don't think he ever really wanted them. Like he was just somebody that didn't. enjoy so many parts of being a head coach. And people have told me this. Like him having to cut players and having to do all of those logistical and kind of organizational things that comes with being a head coach, he didn't like doing that. And so there are some guys that are just

fit for these jobs where they can control their own little world and the scope is pretty limited. And when you expand that scope, they're just not really built for whatever the next version of the job looks like. It is kind of fascinating to how I feel. like a lot more of these guys are defensive guys. Like obviously, you know, we brought up Vic Fangio, Wade Phillips now. Jim Schwartz is kind of like this. Vance Joseph. Obviously, Steve Spagnolo has never taken another chance and he's been an incredible defensive coordinator at a number of spots. Like, it just feels like there's a lot of defensive guys. And I don't know why that is. Like, I wonder if this is getting like way too into like psychoanalysis. But obviously with the offensive guys, it's like,

you're trying to put up points. You're trying to make a thing happen. You're trying to be flashy. whereas defense is all about having things not happen and seeing things not happen, like seeing the score or knock gloves. So I wonder if there's just this like, I don't know, they kind of get, there's just like a comfort in things not happening and like not having to do as much if that makes sense. Which is like, I don't really know if I frame that very well, but I think that's why the defensive guys just being like, I'm happy just doing, getting into my zone. Exactly, exactly. And I think there's just, I don't know, there's something about those guys are wired that. They just enjoy that. And like even to go down to like the college level, like Brent Venables was an incredible

defensive coordinator for a long time. And I think he's been up and down as a head coach. I think there's plenty of examples of that. And so those are my favorite ones. The guys who are just these incredible defensive coordinators and they're so good that they keep getting these head coaching jobs. And it's just like, eh, maybe you're just a really good defensive coordinator. Like maybe Dennis Allen is just a really good defensive coordinator.

Yeah, that's another one. And there's nothing wrong with being like a really good defensive coordinator and making between like a million and two million dollars a year just for the rest of your life. Like that is a good life. Like what P. Carmichael got to do in New Orleans for years and years and years and years. There's nothing wrong with that. Like if you just want to have that be your job, obviously he wasn't the play caller. But I feel like guys could just just be comfortable. Like just be happy.

You're doing just fine in this job. Dude, and I'm trying to think of more examples. And I keep coming up with defensive guys. Like Romeo Crenel was kind of like this where he called a lot of really good defenses, but the head coaching stints were up and down. Like it's just, I can't tap into that many offensive guys. I mean, I guess like the most recent example right is Cliff Kingsbury last year. But it's really mostly like defensive guys.

Cliff is a good example of that. I mean, like we'll see what happens with Arthur Smith. Like Arthur Smith has been a very good offensive coordinator at times when given a chance. He did not succeed as a head coach. Josh McDaniels to me again is the best example. Like this has happened multiple different times with Josh McDaniels. But I think there are plenty of them still. But I think they're probably more defensive guys.

All right, guys. Michael Petchke has the next question here. He is an overseas Seahawks fan. And he is wondering, with good reason, how quickly can you improve the offensive line situation within a team? With questionable offensive play calling the center retiring midseason and a third round draft pick flaming out last season ended with Seattle's O line on the bottom tier once again. My question is, what realistic?

expectation can I have this year with a veteran coaching staff, a promising guard pick attempting to revive this unit. Is this a case of throwing darts at the draft board until something finally pays off? Or is there actual nuance to having offensive line coaches that know what they're doing? Brian Bueller also threw in something similar who's not exactly happy about the way that we've been talking about the Texas, the Texans, excuse me, offensive line situation. So that's what we've got here. What do you say about this, Derek? I think it's a really good question because we've talked a lot about this offseason with, I mean, those two teams specifically and probably a handful of others, the Bears included,

about how much the scheme can do for you. And I think it does depend a little bit like where you're coming from and what you're going to. Like in the case of the Seahawks, I don't think they had a very imaginative run game last year, but the issue was less about that. And it was more that like they tied their run game to their past game so poorly.

And I think that was just a product of Grub being more of a college guy and wasn't as necessary where he was coming from with the Washington Huskies because they could throw. the ball all over the yard. So I think they struggled for that reason. Obviously, now with Kubiak, it's going to be a little bit more of a stock standard Shanahan style system that we saw from him, obviously, last year with the New Orleans Saints. The thing I want to say about that, though, is that I do think going to that system can be

a little bit of a floor razor for your offensive line. I also think in a way, it's kind of like a Band-Aid solution rather than a like, we actually fixed something solution. Like I think it can get you from 29th to 21st or something like that, but I do think at the end of the day, the players are the players. And that's the point that I want to get to. I think when we're in July, we can all have these discussions for every single offensive line. Be like, oh, it's a weakling system. And our new right guard actually isn't that bad.

We're going to get to September and they're going to be that bad. Like somebody is going to be that bad. And like maybe it's not the Seahawks. Maybe it's not the Texans. But I look at some of these offensive lines. And it's like, we overestimates. made, I think, the quality of the worst players on a lot of these offensive lines at this time of year. And then also, injuries are just going to happen. And I look at the Seahawks depth and I'm not sure

I love it that much. So I just, I think they can be, they will be better than they were last year. I just think that the difference to me is probably more like 30th to 25th than like 30th to 20th or 18th or something like that. I think you can go from 30th to 20th based on what the Seahawks were last year. Because I think to me, it's a combination of not just an improvement with. some of the individual pieces. But when it comes to like offensive line ecosystems, I think that is extremely important. Like when you said this about the Seahawks, like that offense and what they were trying to do last year is the worst case scenario for maximizing or hiding your offensive line talent.

Like I can't think of a scenario or just a construction of an offense that would be more poorly set up to get the most out of your individual offensive line talent than what the Seahawks were doing last year. So just by virtue of going. The Bengals at least. But at least they throw the ball quicker. Burrow gets the ball out faster so that helps. But Burrow gets rid of the ball really quickly.

And I think the run game, it's still tied into the overall structure of the offense, even if there is no play action element to marry them. But what the Bengals, what the Seahawks were doing last year, like you are just, you're setting yourself up to fail on the offensive line. So I think if you go from that to at least setting yourself up to have a chance, that's a way that you can go from like. like 32nd to 25th immediately, even without adding better pieces along the offensive line. So I do think that the system is probably most important in a given offseason because

you can only add so many new players. Like I've said this before, I think if the Bears had just brought their 2024 offensive line back this year, it would look very, very different in a Ben Johnson offense than it looked in last year's offense. So I think that's one way that you can pretty quickly fix it. And my favorite example of this is you and David were talking about the Jags last year. And you were talking about the Jags offensive line this year. And you were talking about how last year Liam Cohen had one of the best offensive lines in the league.

What I would say to you is, did they have one of the best offensive lines in the league because all of the players are elite? Or did they have one of the best offensive lines in the league because Liam Cohen helped make the offensive line look better? It's hard to separate. Ben Bredison was free last off season. Okay. Cody Mock took a huge step forward. And Luke Deky is a solid player, but he looked a lot better in that situation. So even on a talent level, if the Jags have the 25th best offensive line in the league, and Liam Cohen can make them look like the 18th best offensive line in the league,

that goes a long way. So I do think that fixing the offensive line, quote unquote, is often helped in large part by moving to a situation where your coaching staff is going to maximize the offensive line. In order to have the best offensive line in the league or like one of the five, six, seven best offensive lines, you need really, really good talent. Like ultimately the players are going to dictate that. But I think when you're trying to go from really, really bad to acceptable, switching out systems, offensive line coaches and just how you're trying to hide those guys can go a really, really long way. That's a good point. I guess for really both of these teams, the goal isn't even to necessarily be the 17th best offensive line in the league.

it's to not be the 29th anymore. Because like, obviously we can tier offensive lines and there can be like six or whatever of them. But like honestly, offensive line like nine through probably like 22, you're like mostly probably getting relatively the same quality or like the things that you can do with them. You're just trying to get out of the gutter and not be 28th anymore. And I do think that there's a chance that Seahawks can do that.

I want to address the Texans part of it really quickly, though. To go back to again like the weak link idea. So like I will give credit to the young guys. Like I think there is a chance that Patterson can be better. And I do think Fisher, even though he struggled for a lot of last year, I do think could be better, especially with, again, a better ecosystem. So I'll set the younger guys off to the side. I think I just think that Cam Robinson is worse than a lot of other people do.

And then Lakin Tomlinson is a 33-year-old guard who's on his third team in three years. I just, again, it's one of those things where we can sell ourselves that that's a fine week link in July. And then we get to September and it's like, I don't know. man. Yeah, the idea that, like, and part of this email that Brian Bruehler was laying out is that the Texans have added all these pieces to the offensive line. It's raised the floor of the offensive line. I think the change in system will raise the floor of the offensive line.

The change in system is what will allow you to not bottom out there. I don't think Lake and Tomlinson, who's, like you just said, on his third team in the last three years and was a cast off from the worst offensive line in the league last year. And Trent Brown, who hasn't been a real NFL. player in three years are going to dictate this. Like, if you want to sell me on juice Scruggs and Jared Patterson being acceptable in a better situation, that's totally fine. And Shaq Mason being gone, like other people have pointed to that as an issue,

Shaq Mason was not good last year. He's not the Shaq Mason was part of the problem last year. So I think that there are a lot of things that point to the Texans' offensive line being better. Like, the idea that the Texans have the 30-second offensive line in the NFL, which a lot of rankings have said that they do. I think that's probably a little bit too low on what the pieces actually are. But the idea that they've been playing like some 4D chests with the way they've built this group with the guys they've added to it this offseason, I'm not buying whatsoever.

And I think there was, even in the question two, there was a thing of like, okay, it's a cap league and they're paying some other really expensive players at other points and offensive retooling is going to be ugly. And I agree with that. And I don't even necessarily disagree with them wanting to restructure the way that they did. Obviously, the Tunsel thing was too aggressive, but I get them wanting to have a bunch more new pieces. But that just doesn't mean I have to like the players this year. You know what I mean?

Like, I can agree and understand the vision, but I don't have to think that the players this year are that good. And that's, I think, ultimately, where I land with it. Like, I think long-term health-wise, this will probably be good for the offensive line by 2026 or 2027. I just, I still look at the 2025 unit. And I'm like, someone's got to be the 30th offensive line in the least. and I still think it might be the Texans.

And also just what you're going to be getting out of the left tackle, I think, could be a problem. Like if your options are Cam Robinson and a second round pick at left tackle, there's a chance that Ursary is fine over the next few years. But there is also a chance that left tackle is a problem for you this season specifically. I think I'm at a place now where if the past protection plan is better, the Texans offensive line could be acceptable this year. And I think that's really the only bar you're trying to.

to clear with that group if you're Houston going into this season. Yeah, I mean, we saw all CJ Stroud needed was acceptable as a rookie and we all thought he was the second coming of Christ. All right, guys, this is our final question of the offseason mailbag. Thank you to everyone who wrote in questions this off season. It's been a great series of episodes. We, of course, wrap it up. It's been a theme of these mailbags.

Questions about conflicted fandom. And that's where we wrap things up. this one comes from Rob Devine. Rob starts off his email by explaining that he grew up in a giant's family, but he chose the Jets to be different and is now a diehard Jets fan. So he says, my wife comes from a family of Colts and Packers fans, and they love the game as much as I do. Her oldest sister once suggested that the Packers could be my NFC team.

She has convinced her husband, a Colts fan, to go along with this, but I just cannot bite. The best explanation I have is that given the ineptitude and chaos that the Jets are, I feel like it would be wrong to jump on the bandwagon of a competent franchise like the Packers. When Packers v. Lions comes on, the Jets fan inside me cannot in good faith root for the Packers. The Lions are akin to my Jets. And I cannot imagine celebrating my first, quote, team, Super Bowl, not being the Jets, or at least being for a team that has history like the Packers. I like the players and even the coach, but when I see the players on the field with that logo, I cannot get there to root for them with vigor. Does my rationale make sense for this?

Do you think that you can only root for your significant others team in addition to yours if they are either in the same category or worse than your team, or am I just a stick in the mud, massacist waiting for jet successes that will never come. Robert, what do you got here? You don't have to do this. Like, you do not have to root for this team. I don't think you have to, if you're watching a Packer game with your wife, I think you can just kind of be like some moral support and some company as that happens.

Like, my wife does not watch sports. So we don't deal with this at all. Like, but when my wife is, when we're on vacation and she wants to go shopping, like, do I want to do that? Is that my favorite thing to be doing? No. I'm there for just like some competitive. companionship and for some support.

And I think you can do that in this case. Like, it's totally fine to just kind of be a bystander here and not be a full-fledged fan of your significant others team. I think that's more than okay in this scenario. That's how I was going to kind of take it. Like, I, you don't have to be, again, I think with fandom, I'm more like do whatever you want to do. But if you don't want to be a Packers fan in this instance,

the no, you don't have to, my suggestion would be like, let them kind of be in their own bucket. obviously you're a Jets fan so they're the only team you want to win they're the only team that you feel like you support you can have the other 30 teams in this i don't want you to win i hate you when i see you on sunday whatever tier that is you can put the bills in their own special hate tier if you really want to i would understand it if you're a jets fan but then just leave the packers in this tier of like okay if they win if they win the super bowl i'm not sitting here rooting for it along with my wife but like that is an acceptable and pleasant outcome to the season it's not as nice as if my jett's that's won the Super Bowl. But that is a pleasant outcome. Everything's fine here. I don't have to be pissed off that, you know, XYZ other AFC team won.

Yeah, I think that it is in any relationship, it's okay to just kind of be like a supportive voice in something, even if it's not totally your thing. Like my wife and I, thankfully, we have a lot of the same tastes, like movies that we, I love, she tends to love and vice versa. But there are some things like I'll go to a concert that she's really excited about that I don't necessarily care about because I'm trying to be supportive. Like, you can do that here.

You don't have to be the biggest fan whatever's going on. I don't expect you to be celebrating if the Packers win the Super Bowl, but sitting next to your wife as she does and being happy for her, I think is a more than reasonable way to approach this. The last thing I'll say here, Rob and his wife had a daughter, and he was actually sending this email the day after she was born. So I wanted to say congratulations to you guys. That is wonderful.

Appreciate you still be engaged with the show as all that is happening. and I appreciate everyone who sent in the questions, not only for this show, but for all of the mailbags that we have done this off season. The only reason that we do them and lean into them the way that we do is because of how good the questions are and because of how engaged you guys are. Sincerely appreciate everyone taking the time to send those in.

We are officially at the start of training camp. Our next show will be a training camp preview of sorts. We're going to be talking about the biggest questions we have as camps kick off, which they do, I believe next Wednesday, is when actual practices will be starting. But I'll be on the road starting tomorrow and for the foreseeable future.

So very excited to bring some stuff straight from camps to you guys, talk to some of our beatwriters, and just get going with what the early season NFL stuff looks like on the athletic football show. For now, that's all we got. Appreciate you guys listening. We'll talk to you very soon.