The Athletic Football Show: A show about the NFL - The TAFS mailbag is back!

Episode Date: February 16, 2026

We're into the offseason, which means we're once again checking the mail. The TAFS mailbag returns with more than a few questions about what we can learn—or not—from this season's Super Bowl teams. Robert Mays, Derrik Klassen and Dave Helman tackle questions on big nickel, attacking Mike Macdonald's meta, teams that experience a one-year turnaround similar to what we just saw from the Patriots, and a whole lot more.Connect with The Athletic Football ShowBuy our merch! http://theathletic.lnk.to/tafsmerchYT: https://www.youtube.com/@TAFootballShowPodcasts: https://podfollow.com/the-athletic-football-show/viewX: https://x.com/TA_FootballShowIG: https://www.instagram.com/tafootballshowTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@tafootballshowDiscord: http://discord.gg/theathleticfootballshowCall us: 847-448-0701Email us: [e-mail]: Robert MaysCo-Hosts: Derrik Klassen and Dave HelmanWith: Michael BellerExecutive Producer: Michael BellerVideo Producer: Katy DuffyAudio Producer: Michael BellerSocial Producer: Scott KrinchFollow Robert on Bluesky: @robertmays.bsky.socialFollow Derrik on Bluesky: @qbklass.bsky.socialFollow Robert on X: @robertmaysFollow Derrik on X: @QBKlassTheme song: HauntedWritten by Dylan Slocum, Trevor Dietrich, Ruben Duarte, Kyle McAulay, and Meredith VanWoert / Performed by Spanish Love SongsCourtesy of Pure Noise / By arrangement with Bank Robber Music, LLC Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Welcome to the athletic football show. I'm Robert Mayes. It's the first mailbag of the off season. Always enjoy doing these. Sincerely appreciate everyone who took the time to send questions in. We will be doing them regularly. We may not have one next week because of the combine, but after that, I plan on having them essentially weekly

throughout the entire off season. We do that in part because you guys do such a great job with the questions. Today was no exception. Dave and Derek joined me to answer the questions like we did last year. Beller is going to be the one teeing them up. So we got a little four-man weave going today. Really enjoyed this discussion. Hope you guys do as well.

Let's get to it right now. We are back with the off-season mailbags here on the Athletic Football Show. We did mailbag Monday last year. I'm not tying us to that because the off-season schedule is a little bit in flux, but we will be doing regular mailbags. The plan is to have them weekly outside of certain exceptions, free agency week combine next week all of that kind of stuff but we're going to be doing these throughout the entire off season as this is the first one as always sincerely appreciate everyone

who spent the time to send in questions we got a bunch of them a reminder i said this on the friday show just worth throwing out again we are going to be pulling questions from discord the entire off season and we're going to be pulling at least half of them from the discord so if you have not signed up for the discord now is the time to do that the link is in the show description below. Encourage you guys to get in there. It is going at all times. I mean, we've got people talking about offseason stuff, trades, coaching cycle. There are channels now for food and restaurants and movies and we're bouncing around in there. It's been a great community in season one of doing it. And so now if you have not signed up or not dug into that, now would be a good time because we

will be pulling a decent amount of the questions from the discord throughout the entire offseason reprising his role as the reader of the mailbag questions because he did such a fantastic job last year. It is our old buddy and super producer Michael Beller. Belar, thank you for doing this. I am great at reading. You know, I learned how to do it. I never forgot how to do it. And so I'm happy to do it again. You got the baritone for it too. Like you've just got a great like omniscient narrator voice. Well, thank you, Dave. I'm happy to be able to do this with you now. Last year it was just Robert and Derek. Now we've got you in the fold.

So four voices on the athletic football show, mailbags. And let's get into it right now with one of those questions from Discord. This comes to us from K Liang, Seattle. So I assume congratulations are in order for K Liang. Kay says among the league's worst teams, who has the best chance for a one-year turnaround to be the next Patriots? Robert, get us started on this one. I mean, the easy answer is the Titans, right? even if I don't really believe it, I think these answer is probably the Titans.

We have a year two quarterback next year that at least showed some flashes in year one, even if the overall numbers were terrible. I do think they have some pieces along the offensive line. Obviously, last year started off pretty rocky with J.C. Lathen being hurt. Dan Moore played terrible at the start of the season. I think things did gel a little bit better in the second half. This is a team that has a ton of money to spend. Like the idea of dropping Alec Pierce onto this team,

they're drafting in the top five. There are edge rushers available in the top five. That's exactly what they need. You could talk me into the Titans being a wild card team next year. Even though I want to just put on the record right now, there's a 0% chance I'm picking the Titans to make the playoffs next year. Zero percent chance. Zero percent.

But I do think they are the best among all of these teams to potentially do something like that. Yeah, because obviously the easy like pick is like, okay, which of the young quarterbacks on these terrible teams? do I believe in? And I do believe in Cam Warden. I do think that he could have a turnaround like that where maybe MVP level is a stretch. But he could play like he could suddenly jump up

into the top third of the league. And I don't think that it would be that crazy. I think the other one is like there's a world where you could have got me there on the Giants before they assembled the offensive staff. Now that it is what it is, I'm not sure I can get quite as excited to that level. Even if I do have some excitement about the defensive staff

and Harbaugh's overall like push over the, that organization. And then the other one, like, I think they ended the season too well to really count for this. But like the Saints are mildly interesting to me. They still count. They still count. They were in a last place.

Yeah, they only won six games in their division. And because that's the thing. Like if we're going, again, I don't think Shuck's ceiling is even as high as Cam Wards, but it's like he could play like a top half quarterback next year. I think the offensive line has some pieces. And the defense, even if old and losing a piece potentially in like Alante Taylor, they were pretty good last year, especially down the stretch.

Like there's a world that like one or two additions, maybe Shuck takes a step. Like they could win 10 games and be like a reasonably interesting team. I think those are all of the most obvious answers. And I like how Robert is going the exact opposite direction of me, whereas I'll just triple down. And I am tripling down on the Titans because when they did the Will Levis thing, I was like,

oh, surround your quarterback with talent, figure out if he's any good. okay, that didn't work. So you get the number one pick. Oh, they, he's Cam Ward. He's awesome. And they've added players around him. Thanks to Rand Carthon, he's got a better supporting cast. And it did not look like that freaking at all. And I'm here to tell you that I'll sign up one more time. I will sign up one more time with the Tennessee Titans. I love Cam. I don't care what the stats say. I'm sky high on what he could be. Not he is not yet. I know he's got a long way to go. But this team has $93 million in effective cap space for the amount of dumb things that they've done they're not like beholden to all of

these terrible contracts like the dan more contract they're kind of stuck with but you could get away from calvin ridley and jillel the gerius need if you want to like you're not stuck with all these albatrosses around your neck and you add that with the draft capital that they have we just watched robert sala make a beautiful chicken salad sandwich out of some bad parts in sanford Francisco by the end of that season. So the play caller on defense, whatever you think of Brian Dable, I think it's fair to say he can at least raise the floor there. And yeah, give him $100 million to spend in free agency. I'm absolutely in on the Titans. I do like the Saints shout though, Derek. I think that's worth bringing up. The $100 million is important because without looking

combined, how much cap space do you think the Giants and the Saints have? The Giants have shockingly little. The Giants have like $10 million in Cap's face. Between them it's zero. Because the Saints are $6 million over and the Giants are $6 million under. And so we're looking at negative $6, $6 and $100 million for the Titans. And I know that spending $100 million in free agency typically is not a good practice. But we just saw the Patriots spend hundreds of millions of dollars in free agency and then go

to the Super Bowl. We don't have to re-litigate all the reasons that they went to the Super Bowl. But if we're trying to figure out the team that can have that one year boost, I think all the money that the Titans have to throw around probably makes them the best candidate. Yeah, because Saints I might be a year early because I think in 2027, they have a lot more cap space in our like six than caps space. They were a blank team. It's in 2027, they have no players. This year, they're still over somehow. Can I, can I paint a picture for you all? it's uh it's it's it's april 27th or whatever night day one of the draft is and the new

Orleans saints draft jeremiah love and they just get killed by all of us nerds like what are you doing that you're in the top 10 there's so many other things you could do you don't need a running back and then jeremiah love turns their offense into a juggernaut behind a very underrated offensive line and Tyler Shuck in year two. I can picture this and get pretty excited about it. I think the argument for against the Raiders doing it is that they needed offensive winement.

The Saints need interior offensive linemen, but they have two tackles. And that's what you would typically draft in the top 10. And so we're projecting this out way further than we need to right now. I don't need to already be deciding whether Jeremiah Love is a good pick for the Saints at 8. I'm just saying it is slightly different

than what the Raiders did last year. I'm just getting reckless. And yeah, I mean, Eric McCoy has struggled with injury the last couple years, but if he's healthy and part of this thing, you could really, you could be cooking with some gas, which I don't think most people think of the Saints that way right now.

All right, let's get to the next one. All right, well, Dave, you take us to a question from Tom Skihill appropriate name with the Olympics going on. Tom says Big Nickel is like what you guys said about elite running backs last year. They can be gasoline,

but the fire already has to be lit. Using this framework, which teams do you think are, ready for that kind of player. I think everyone agrees the Raiders weren't ready for Gentie and the Jets don't have much use for a Breece Hall in their current state. Obviously, this is a bit scheme dependent, but which defenses are a big nickel away from catching fire? Derek, we're going to go to you first on this one. I think this is an extremely overplayed talking point. I don't really think that there are hardly any defenses where I think that this matters. The only one I could really look at

because it's partly a structural thing, right? Like not every defense even wants this. And so I was trying to look at defenses are like, okay, who tries to play this way and who doesn't have one. It's kind of just Jacksonville, I think. That really like wants to play this way already had a pretty good defense and might be able to supercharge it if they had something akin to Derwin James, Emin Worry, Kyle Hamilton, like a player of that mold. I think that they could do it. I also think the reason this is like a little bit overplayed is like, listen, the MNWari

stuff is cool, but he was like the ninth most useful player on the defense. And so it feels like an easy talking point that I feel like is a little bit missing the point of why the Seahawks were even good. I don't disagree with that in terms of how important he was and overall, like, having a player like this does. I still think that there are a couple defenses out there where it's like, all right, if they had a guy where they could just play a nickel all the time and then you look at the rest of their defense, like the team that immediately comes to mind because I really like their outside corners already. And I actually do think they have a couple pieces at safety. and I mean, I guess he does play a little bit closer to the box, but if you wanted to make him a more traditional safety, like if the Panthers had a player like this,

I'd be like, okay. I can get me on the Panthers. Yeah, that's a good one. The defense suddenly becomes like, because, you know, right now you've got Smith Chow Wade in there. It's like, if they had it's like a big nickel player where, all right, maybe this mitigates some of the questions

you have at linebacker, like, it's a very like thin needle to thread here. But looking at just the depth charts at that position, that was the first team that came to mind again because I already like the outside corners. You can tell I'm draft-pilled because I do building the beast, but I think about a lot of this in terms of who's coming out in this draft. And I'm already seeing the existential battle of wills

that's going on among several fan bases about Caleb Downs. And let's be really clear. Like Caleb Downs and Nickyman Worry are not like that similar of players. it's certainly not a one-to-one comp. Like Caleb Downs gives up two or three inches and like 25 pounds to nick him and worry. So I think you're making a mistake just thinking of them as the same guy. But in terms of a safety who can just be on the field at all times and strengthen the spine of your defense and be useful in a variety of ways, you look at the teams picking at the top of the draft.

And I do think Caleb Downs could make a hell of a lot of difference. for the New York Giants who like don't look like this, you know, like even with all the talent that they have, the defensive results have been lacking. But you have all the talent you could possibly want on the front. You have maybe not like the best corners in the league, but I'm encouraged by what the Giants have at cornerback between Paulsonadebo, what you saw from Drew Phillips this year. I would even throw in Cordell Flott. And then obviously, Javon, Holland. So I don't think they're that far away from being a much better defense. We all love DeNard Wilson and all the fun shit that he loves to do. I just think a player like that who is good

at everything. I mean, he's a plus run defender. He is good in coverage. You can move him around. He's not Nick and worry, but he is such a versatile player. I think there are going to be a lot of people saying, oh, you want to take a safety in the top five? And my reaction to that, would be yes yes i do i think caleb downs would unlock a lot of cool shit for the giants and several other teams but they were one of the first teams that came to my mind i want to say this about the nick mouinwari thing he doesn't have to look like nick mcm nick amenwari for this to work right like the idea that the inches and the pounds like the two guys who were doing this last year before we even know who nick amin warri was were jwin petri and cooper djean both of whom are like six foot or shorter and

200 pounds. You don't need to be 6.3-220 to allow your team to play nickel to everything. There are other body types as long as you clear certain bars and play a certain way that allows your team to play like this. And so I don't think we have to necessarily pin it to somebody with an Emanwari-type physical profile to fit this role within your defense, even though him and Kyle Hamilton are probably the two most visible examples of this and the best possible version of it. but it doesn't have to be the best possible version to be viable.

All right, Belar, let's get to the next one. All right, Reagan comes to us with this one. Reagan says in back-to-back years, the Seahawks and the Eagles have shown a team that has an elite defense, stud-wide receiver, and good offensive line can win a Super Bowl despite having a less than elite quarterback. Are these the exceptions that prove the rule? Or is this a signal of a shifting paradigm as schemes evolve and preferred body types, body types, excuse me, change?

If so, what does this mean for teams that have sold everything to obtain or retain the services of an elite quarterback. Dave, you take this one first. I mean, I think this is an example of not wanting to completely overreact to what we've seen most recently. Like, yes, I think it's really great that Philly and even less so Philly, Seattle in particular, like you can build a really great team around a good quarterback, like a top 15 quarterback. And I say less so Philly just because Philly had such a ridiculous roster.

I mean, they had all pros at like eight different positions. And while Seattle's roster was really, really deep, I don't think it had quite as much star power. Having said all of that nice stuff about those two teams, we still went through a stretch where Patrick Mahomes dragged the chiefs to three consecutive Super Bowls, the Josh Allen Bills and the Baltimore Ravens, with the exception of this year, have been in the mix every single season and have been a handful of plays away from reaching the Super Bowl. So I'm not ready to throw that aside. Like at the end of the

day, I'd still rather have, I'd rather have a top five quarterback than the alternative because I just think it gives you, there's less variables. There's less things that can go wrong. As long as you have the quarterback available, you will probably be a viable team. I think ideally that's the way you want to do it. It's just, it is a breath of fresh air from somebody who loves the league and talks about the league that we are seeing examples that you can do this another way. Because for so long, we were fixated on like, good is the enemy of great. Throw out your 12th overall quarterback because he's not good enough to get you to a championship. It's nice to get away from that viewpoint and understand that there are different ways to do this,

but all things being equal, I'd still rather have that elite quarterback if I had the choice. I'm going the other way on this. Really? I don't think that that's wrong. I just think this is like the astronaut meme. Like, it's always been like this. Like the quarterbacks winning the Super Bowls

that you've paid all this money for, that was the outlier over the last 20 years. Remember all the conversations that we were having in the last three or four years? about how you can only spend a certain percentage of your cap at quarterback and build the championship worthy team. Like, if you look back on it, I think the number was like 12.5%. Where if you spent more than 12.5% of the cap on a quarterback, it was going to be really hard

to win a championship. And then Mahomes won two in a row way above that number, but he was the one that wasn't like the others. I mean, there was a stretch for a very long time where a lot of teams were winning these championships with relatively cheap kind of top 12ish quarterbacks, and that was actually the norm. And so I think a return to that line of thinking actually brings us into what the league looked like

for most of the last 15 years. I think I kind of agree with that, actually. Like the Mahomes stuff is like that is the aberration. And then even within that relative time period, you got like the end of Brady winning it with like, not really an offensive-centric team anyway. Like it was kind of just like Tom Brady being able to beat the Rams and obviously their defense played really well.

And then Brady goes and lands on a Bucks team that was already really good and had a really good defense. And so I do kind of think that it is like having a full team, having guys at the other 21 positions is really important. It's like, I think to me, the teams that have the elite quarterbacks, those are the rule breakers. We just have to understand that like there will always be three or four teams in the NFL that always have one of those guys and will always be in the discussion.

but those teams winning it is the rule breaker. Don't you, do you think this is an example of the end result coloring perception? Because I mean, I tend to agree with what Dave is saying. Yes. The goal is to win the championship. But if I were to go back and look at the bracket every year, you can count on. Look, I know like the Packers famously fell short so many times after 2010. But when Rogers was available, they were the shit.

Like you could just pencil them into the bracket every single year. You could say the same thing about New England. Obviously, you've been able to say that about the chiefs up until this year with Mahomes. The bills haven't gotten it done. But there is a certain level of comfort in just knowing that you can write them into the bracket. And so I understand that the goal is to win the championship. But goofy stuff happens in the playoffs. And like I said, I just think I have, I think having the quarterback lessens the number of other variables.

and maybe you get six bites at the apple and you don't ever come away with a trophy and that really sucks, but I'll take my chances with that stabilizer at quarterback. Again, if I have the choice. And that's the cool thing, though, is like teams like Philly and Seattle don't get hung up on the fact that you don't have that guy. You can build a champion without him. But if I had the choice between the two, it just feels easier to team build if you can count on that. I think that's right. If I were, if I, if I could choose having a top, whatever number it is,

the numbers of the quarterbacks is already driving crazy. You're trying not to leave somebody out. It's February 12th. If I have one of like the MVP caliber quarterbacks, a top four to five guy, whatever the club you want to include, all that shit. But if I had one of those guys, right, I think that is the way I would typically go. Because I think that's your best chance to be like in the final four every single year. And I think that the end result of all of this skews.

it in a couple different ways. One, if you look back at the last 10 Super Bowls, how many of them were Tom Brady and Patrick Mahomes? And two, the cap percentage thing is completely skewed by the fact that Tom Brady never made as much as Tom Brady could. These teams were still driven by elite quarterback play. And so I agree with you, Dave. I do think the end result is skewing this a little bit.

But I think the point you made is exactly right. You can do it another way. That's exactly what this is a lesson of. You can get there in another way. It doesn't have to be the elite quarterback. path that takes you to this moment. It's very nice to put to bed that talking point because there are people every year that's like, and again, it doesn't have to be a specific quarterback.

There are a dozen of them where it's like he's not the guy. He can't do it. Like you just got to start over. You got to draft somebody new. And it's like, no, with all due respect to Jalen Hertz and Sam Darnold. Like you can build a champion around those guys and they are not elite quarterbacks. They never have been regardless of. however we want to talk about this.

And I think that's very encouraging. It's like you're not, you're not dreaming big enough if you think swapping out the quarterback is the only way to fix this thing. I have a hot take that I want to follow that up with. It is very funny to me that we spent all of last offseason. And when I say we, I mean a lot of other people debating about whether Jalen Hertz was a top five quarterback

because he won the Super Bowl. Sam Darnold was better than Jalen Hertz. this playoff run that the Seahawks just had, that conversation isn't even going to begin about Sam Darnold. And I think that's correct. But I just think it's so funny that Sam Darnold was better in these playoffs than J.1 Hertz was last year. And I don't think anybody's going to be beaten down the door to try to argue that Sam Donald is a top five quarterback. Which like is funny too, because I feel like that is obviously that is some element of like Sam Darnold had been cast away entirely early in his career. But I think also another part of that is like people saw what the Vikings, how the Vikings thing

ended and how he just got blown up in the playoffs and all that stuff. We had seen Jalen Hertz get blown up in the playoffs by Todd Bulls multiple times before he ended up winning the Super Bowl. So like I, it's just funny that we're doing it this way. I mean, Jalen Hertz played two mid to bad games in last year's playoffs. He just he played his, I will give him the credit of saying he was better as the games got bigger. He was excellent against the commanders.

And obviously he was fantastic in the Super Bowl. So I think that factors into it. But I will say this, Robert, this is just the nature of things. If Darnold hits J.S.N. on that, on that deep ball out of his own end zone early in the game. And it's like an 86 yard touchdown. We might be having a very different conversation. Even if it's just like a one throw difference. That's what's so funny to me, though, is that for Hertz last year, the Rams game ceased to matter by the time we got to the Super Bowl.

And for Darnold, the NFC championship game ceases to matter because it happened two weeks earlier. It just never happened. They're both good football players, and maybe we can just leave it at that. We can't, though. I promise you we can't just leave it at that. All right, let's take our first quick break and then come back and hit some more of these. All right, Bella, what's the next one? Okay, the next one comes to us from Brent.

Brent says, if the new defensive meta is the Seahawks and Mike McDonald's scheme, what offensive concepts and player types are best suited to attack it. Let's go to you, Robert. there are multiple layers to this answer. The first layer is the Seahawks is the defensive meta is not something that you should try to replicate. It's not replicable. Like the amount of talent that they have

and that talent allowing them to play a certain way, you can take the playbook from Seattle and drop it wherever you want. I don't think you're going to have the same type of results. So that's the first step of this. And I think we should start getting ahead of that as often as possible. playing with the structures they do on early downs and being the best run defense in the NFL while

playing that way should be impossible. It's a product of the players. And so I do think that is going to be really, really hard to take from one stop to the other. That being said, let's just say hypothetically here, we do get to a place where there are other teams that can play nickel to everything, still be a good run defense, be this really zone-based team, not half the blitz a lot to get home. what are the ways that you can beat this? The first thing I would say,

this is a team that wants to play with light bodies. So can you be, and essentially the answer here, in as many words is, just do all the stuff the Rams do. Okay? So can you be a team that can put a ton of heavy bodies on the field, they're going to match you with light bodies, and you can run the ball efficiently

because you have a size advantage. If you look at what the Rams were able to do on some of those 13 personnel runs, they're not ripping off huge gains, but they were able to move the ball efficiently on the ground, especially in the NFC championship game, in ways a lot of other teams weren't this season because they were willing to play in personnel groupings

that other teams can't access. So I think that's part of it. And the other part of it goes back to something that Derek did a great job of pointing out this year about how Stafford is kind of uniquely positioned to go after the Seahawks as a quarterback. And it's that clip from all the stuff that came out after the game where Julian Love is talking about Drake May

and how Drake May, as a young quarterback, this isn't even like a ding on Drake May. he needs to see stuff and get back to stuff and see it before he's willing to make some of these throws. Stafford creates his own windows within the defense, especially against zone heavy teams because of the way he plays the position. And so trying to steal as many aspects of what the Rams are when it comes to how they run the ball, the outside receiver talent that they have, because ultimately you're always going to be able to create one-on-ones on the outside, just no matter what coverages other teams are playing against. And so if you can really dominate

those matchups in the way the Rams were able to, combined with having a quarterback who is able to create his own windows within the defense because of how he plays. The last point I'll make about this, this to me, actually, I'm like workshopping this, but I think it's right. The Seahawks in the way that they play

and how well coached that they are and the fact that you really, those windows can't, you have to create those windows against them. One of the reasons I think they're so dominant and we're so dominant this year, is that we live and exist in a league with only young quarterbacks now.

So as quarterbacks get a little bit more advanced and get to a level that Matthew Stafford exists at in their mid-30s, where you have that mental side of it down to the degree that he has, not all of them are going to have his physical tools. But I do think that the league right now with the makeup of the quarterback position is it a unique disadvantage for taking advantage

of some of these defenses because some of these guys and most of these guys are so young. And this is also why I, listen, the Patriots deserved to have gotten to the Super Bowl, all that stuff. I really wish we could

have seen the bills against the Seahawks defense because I think that they were actually kind of uniquely set up to potentially beat them. One, because you have a veteran quarterback

who is insanely talented the way that, like just in terms of pure arm talent the way that Matthew Stafford is. I think Matthew Stafford is even a little bit more cerebral than Josh Allen is and that's no knock on Allen.

He's obviously incredibly smart. He's 10 years older. He's been a league for 10 more years. Exactly. He's been doing it. He's been running this show. for a long. Also, he gets to see them multiple times a year in a way that Josh Allen obviously does not. So there's even that element of it. But like the bills run game, both in terms of like the

offensive line talent, them getting two and three tight ends on the field. They have a fullback. Like their run game in theory would have actually been set up to do all the stuff that you were talking about. And then yeah, again, like Josh Allen was talented enough to go do all that stuff. And also the other small element of to me of this to me is part of the question was what are the types of players. And I actually do think having like a very dynamic running back and a guy who can potentially make people miss underneath could be like a small way to deal with this because like they are a defense that is not really going to give you those windows intermediate. And even if you're trying to throw deep. And I do think that you can scheme up their coverage deep like a lot of double post

concepts, scissors stuff where you're getting those, you know, the half or the quarter safety in the corner to kind of, you know, ruin their coverage a little bit. You can get them that way. The problem with that stuff is like it often requires dropback and you're probably not going to be able to protect against this front. And so that's the issue. And so I do think that like checking down is like kind of a way to deal with this team. It's just that there are very few running backs who I think can consistently make this particular set of players miss that many tackles. You just gave me the worst visions of half of Josh's dropbacks in a hypothetical Super Bowl just being eight second fire drills because the Seahawks. are stuffing his receivers in lockers

and he's got to try to make something happen. The way I looked at this, I'm curious for y'all's thoughts because y'all are scheme heads on another level from me. But like if the question was if you're like, if you're trying to build an offense

to give the Seahawks fits and I know I think that's overstated in today's NFL, but I think the place that I would start is just being big and efficient in the run game. Do you agree with that? Like Robert, you kind of alluded to that. I think that's where I would start is like, we need big bodies on the field. We need multiple tight ends that are plus blockers, and we need to be able to run effectively

against these guys no matter what. I think that's right. And the Rams, Matthew Stafford was the MVP. The Rams had the most efficient running back ground game by success rate in the last like decade in the NFL. Like that was a huge part of what made the Rams the Rams. And they did a lot of it with one of the heaviest personnel grouping. you can throw on the field.

Yeah, I think that that is absolutely the way that you want to do it. Like if their whole thing is going to be we're going to stay a nickel and we're going to dictate to you, you don't get to do this, you kind of have to get big and say, fuck you and run the ball all over them. And it's hard to do, obviously, but I do think that's like that has to be the way to do it. Exactly. Most teams cannot do it. And you look at the numbers, I was kind of shocked by this.

Like you're looking at some of the next gen numbers by the end of the season because I don't know the exact percentages on it, but we saw more jumbo this year than. at any point since I started covering the leak. A lot, a lot of teams went to it. The Patriots were an example of that. The Patriots used it like 19% of the times in the playoffs. But if you look at the run game efficiency out of a lot of those jumbo looks, it's actually pretty bad.

And I think some of the reason for that might be that most teams are matching that with base personnel. And so throwing out of those looks is actually more efficient. But there are not a lot of teams this year, I think in part because of how defense has matched it, that when they went jumbo, they were just grinding teams to dust on the ground. That just didn't happen. Or in some of them were just like not good run games and offensive lines to begin with.

And it was a band-a-I think the Texans. The Jaguars were like this where they were, you know, when they had their offensive line and they were putting Colvan Landon out there as a sixth guy. And it's like, well, they're doing that because like Brenton Strange was hurt and they didn't have any other way to run the ball at all. Yes. I think that's, that's, and I also think that the tight ends part of it, the teams that have the tight ends to do this are the teams that went away from Jembo.

the Rams didn't use any jumbo, the bills didn't use a lot of jumbo this year. And so I'll be curious what that looks like. How many teams seek out that, honestly, that to me, where we say like the Nick Amin Wari thing is a fool's errand because there are only so many Nick Mn Mouries. I think there are more Jackson Hawses in the world than there are Nicky Mnwaris. And I think that seeking out that skill set and what that can give your offense, like do we see a half around bump for guys that are specifically blocking tightness? ends because of where the league is going. I actually think that's more interesting.

Dane had a good bit on building the beast last week about how pretty much every tight end drafted this year should kick a percentage to Jackson Hawes for bumping his draft stock. I love that on. We're recording this on February 12th. And Robert is like, we need more Josh Oliver's and Tip Reimans and Jackson Hawes. And he's completely correct. I think that is the way the teams need to think about it. It's the offseason baby. Let's go. If you ever talk to football coaches it's hilarious like that's the type of shit they key on like you want to talk about all the sexy players and they're like no who allows me to like run the personnel packages i want to without exposing myself like that's it's everything you i with zero irony when i left cowboys training camp

last year one of my first thoughts is we should see more brevin span forward snaps this year for dallas and we did all right bell what's the next one brink preswell asked us a question, what are the wrong lessons that bad teams are going to take from the 2025 Seahawks? I think with what we just talked about here in the first question that we've hit that a little bit. So great question, Brent, but we're going to move on to our next one. This one comes to us for gaming. I'll answer this very quickly.

I'll answer this very quickly because I have a sustained, I have a succinct and specific example. There are going to be too many teams that become the 2022 Chargers version of the 2025 Seahawks where it's like, all right, all of these structures. ideas are really good and then they're going to put the wrong players in there and the whole thing is going to collapse like a house of cards. That's it. That's my answer. They're going to do it with the 24th best D-line instead of whatever the Seahawks said. The first by a mile and the best one I've seen in a really long time. All right. We can get an action bar. Let's do it. Here's the next one. This one is

from Gaming Antler. So you can see we're taking plenty of questions from Discord. Gaming Antler says, what's the deal, Seinfeld voice, with centers being paid less than guards. Centers handle a lot but seem undervalued. I think of Tyler Linderbaum not getting his option picked up and spot track valuing him at less than $18 million in average annual value. Derek, what do you got on this one? So I think there are a couple different directions to go. And I would say I would start with right or wrong.

The positions that are harder to find in the draft also tend to get paid less. outside of quarterback, obviously because the value is just insane for having a very good quarterback. But like I'm thinking of like linebackers typically get paid than less than other positions. Safetyes are paid less than their their counterparts at cornerback and stuff like that. Like these positions that can be a little bit more cerebral like center can be harder to find in the draft end up being paid a little bit less. And so I think that's harder to find in the draft. Easier to find in the draft. Right.

Yeah, yeah. Sorry. Yeah. Yeah. And I think the other element of this to me would be that like centers, they're obviously. incredibly talented players. They are less physically gifted than guards and tackles. Like there is an element of like there are just more guards and tackles who can really be force of nature type of like moving people in the run game, really holding one-on-ones in pass pro

and stuff like that. There's really just not that many centers who have that kind of value. And then I think like going beyond that, like because of the value so much of a really good center is mental, that can be a little bit contingent on like how, well is the coaching setting them up for success? How well are the guards next to them helping them? What is their connection like with the quarterback that they have? Like it's just there are so many other factors whereas like with the guard it's kind of just like does he fit okay enough in the system and can he kick ass? Like it's just a little bit simpler to me. I think that's pretty perfectly put Derek and to be more concise traits get you drafted. I mean let's you know there are there are only

so many guys who can line up on an island on the edge and handle the Miles Garrets of the world and deal with that. And there are just more guys with the physical archetype to play center. And like you just, you like as far as obviously you got to be a great athlete to play in the NFL. But by NFL standards, there's more guys that fit the bill to play center, which is, it is really unfair though.

I think it's a very good point by the, by gaming antler for asking the question that the difference that a top-notch safety can make is unbelievable. I mean, Jason Kelsey is obviously one of the first names that's going to come to mind, but I had a front row seat of Travis Frederick's career in Dallas. And the stuff that a center of that caliber can do from your offense from setting the protection, making life easier on the quarterback. Also just, I pick this up somewhere along the line from one of the many people who's taught

me about football, cutting the defense in half all the time. Like the way that a sinner can handle his assignment at the line, climb to the second level, and just wipe the backside pursuit out of a play. It's unbelievable. And it's such a ace up your sleeve if you have one. So, I mean, like, if you could guarantee me I was drafting Creed Humphrey, then you would draft that guy highly every time and pay him very handsomely. But those guys are easier or it's easier said than done to find those guys. Yeah, I think there's everything you guys said is right. I think the availability of players at every level of the draft is part of this.

Like, you just don't have to draft a center in the first round for the center to be good. And there are some positions where that just is the case. Like pass rushers are like this. Offensive tackles are like this. Obviously, there are exceptions. But if you look at the makeup of the players who are good at that position, it is drastically in favor of highly drafted players. Center doesn't have to be like that. And what you're asking of them physically, I was looking at the numbers where you guys were talking.

So centers looking at like the percentage of plays where they're in one-on-one situations as pass blockers, there was no center in the league this year who was above 50%. No one. If you look at tackles, there are a lot of guys up in like the 80% range. Like just what's being asked of you physically is different. The Seahawks just won the Super Bowl with an undrafted center. Like you can just get by with different kinds of players and a wider range of guys that you can pull from more different places. that doesn't mean that the value of a really good one is any less.

And so that's actually what I meant when I meant they're harder to find in the draft. In the sense of like when a pass rusher is really good in college, it is incredibly evident by his physical skill set and that he's like, you take him third overall and you don't even think about it. Whereas like with centers, it's like, man, they're kind of tricky to evaluate. Linebackers can be tricky safety. It's the cerebral positions are just trickier to evaluate so they fall a little bit. So that I went harder and easier is interesting.

because they're the best pass rushers are more scarce, but they're easier to identify. To identify. So centers are less scarce, but they're harder to identify because it's not an apparent skill set, the same way safeties and liebackers are. It does suck that like Creed Humphrey makes $6 million less a year than the best guard. And I don't know if I think that's fair. Like if you are of that caliber or like whatever deal Tyler Linderbaum gets here in a little bit, Like if you are of a certain caliber, I do think you're probably worth more.

But it speaks to what Robert just said that if you were going to have a late day three pick starting for you on your offensive line, you would probably prefer it to be your center. So you're probably you're contending with that aspect of it when you're talking about paying a guy. I mean, that's just the nature of markets, right? I mean, it doesn't really matter if you're the best player at your position. And if the value you give to that position outshines how.

we typically think of it with positional designations. Travis Kelsey was the most important pass catcher on multiple Super Bowl teams. He was still making drastically less than wide receivers because he happened to be a tight end. Like that's just how it works. All right. What's the next one? Okay, Boogie asks us, he says, you guys have a tight turnaround when watching primetime games before discussing them.

As a casual, I'm trying to understand what I should be looking at before and after a game. When reviewing, what's the first thing you guys go to to get the feel of it? Is it vibes based? Is there a stat you look at first? What do you got on this one, Dave? Oh, I love that you threw it to me because sorting out my thoughts in the 12 minutes between the end of the game and when we start talking about it is the most frantic part of my week. I'm just constantly, I'm trying to get it all into a good place and feeling like it's never going to happen. And so I appreciate the insinuation that maybe we do a good job at it.

It's interesting. So a couple things come to mind. Number one, I do think it's very vibes-based. I mean, just the more familiarity you get with the game of football, the more you can just watch a game play out and notice the trends. Like who, which team is struggling in past protection, which team is running the ball well, which, which, you know, is the defensive line constantly on the other side of the line of scrimmage? or is it the other way around?

So just tracking that stuff is probably where it starts for me. Other than that, like as far as stats that I'm looking at, I mean, I have, you know, I have the live stats up during any given game to see how the other team is affecting the quarterback, how efficiently, you know, each team is running the football. And I'd say, I look at that to confirm what I think. But after enough years doing it, I tend to. to just trust what I'm watching.

And I would say the other thing is, I noticed this. Have you guys ever noticed? Like, when I watch a game and I know that I'm not working, it is so vastly different than when I'm watching a game for the show. Oh, my God. Yeah. Like, you know, I'll be responding to texts or checking my social media

or seeing what y'all are saying about the game. And, like, it is a very cushy job. I'm not trying to make it sound hard. But like when I'm watching a game for the show, I'm like glued to the TV. I'm typically taking notes about every single snap and color coding it so I can find it later. So a big part of it is just I watch every single snap with a level of attention that I would never do if I didn't have to talk about it afterward. I think I'm kind of with Dave. Like it depends on the game a little bit.

Like you kind of know what you need to go back and look for depending on how the game went. Like there are going to be some games where if it really feels like a strong back and forth, then teams really weren't making mistakes. Then I'm going back and I'm trying to look at like success rates and trying to square that with like how the flow of the game went like who was really controlling the pace of the game. And then I kind of just look at like the easiest spot is just I scour over my notes and like what were the pivotal moments. There's going to be turnovers, missed opportunities, whether that's like dropped interceptions

or maybe a team missed a sack or maybe somebody put a ball on the ground, something like that. or chances where like seven points turned into three because somebody messed up in the red zone just stuff like that. Like I think you kind of understand. I'm kind of with Dave. Like you do this enough that you start to feel like what are the things that matter in a game.

Like there are going to be games like, this is the best example I can give. There are going to be some games where you watch both teams and blitz rate never even crosses into your mind. Like it's just like both teams were doing what they do. It wasn't weird. You didn't think about it, not even once. Then there's going to be times where,

where, like we, I think it was week one, the Bills and the Ravens played, and Sean McDermott was blitzing these shit out of the Ravens. And it, like, you track it. You're like, oh, that seems really weird. And then you look it up and it's like the bill's like sixth highest split straight in his entire era. And it's just little stuff like that.

You start to feel what feels weird about this game relative to who I know this team is. You could take it back to last week. I remember we were sitting together at Levi's Stadium. And Mike McDonald blitzed on his first two third downs of the game. And I was like, whoa, that's, that's different. Like, I don't typically see that many people going after the quarterback from Seattle. And that just comes with time on task, I guess. I think that, I mean, one of the tricks and one of like the little things I've leaned on when we know we're doing those in real time is that in some capacity for the last like four or five years when I've been watching games on TV, I see every play twice.

And I used to do that by having a second TV on. and I would just put it like 15 seconds or 10 seconds slower. And so I'd watch the play. And then if I wanted to rewatch it, I could just look at the other TV. Now with NextGen, I can see the dots on every play immediately after it happens.

And so that allows you to see what happened on every... Me, it allows me to see what happens on every play twice. And so I think that without that, it would be vastly different. Like, I would just catch so many, so fewer things. And the story I actually told this, I did a book event with Chuck Lawsterman a couple weeks ago, and he was talking about the way we see football on television

and how it kind of wires our brains in a certain way. And I don't know if I've actually told you guys this, I might have. But when I went to see the Bears game in week one, it was the first time that I had seen a game live without my computer or without like a second TV in the press box in a decade, probably. And so I'm watching the game and I'm getting like antsy because I'm only watching the play once and I'm like, there's not nearly enough information hitting my brain right now.

And so I took out my phone and I started watching the play. And then I would look down and watch the play again on my phone. Oh, you're broken, buddy. That was the only way I could do it. It was just like I can't, I can't only watch the play one time. I have to be able to see what actually happened. Watching a September NFL game and being like, why didn't that second, why did that second quarter blitz happen and being like, I need to figure it out?

It's like that's what's wrong with all of us here. That's really funny because the Super Bowl was the first big game I've gone to live in at least a couple years. And I was a beat writer for 10 years. So I used to, I watched. I was at every cowboy game with a bird's eye view and a pair of binoculars for like 10 years. And getting back into a stadium and being able to see the whole picture live, I was like, ah, this feels nice. I don't have to consult next gen. like I can just see where the safeties are right here.

I don't have to do any extra work. I'm always going to miss something watching the play live, though. You can only watch so much as it unfolds live. And so there's always going to be something I need to be answering. No, even then I got to do some rewinding every now. Sitting next to Derek for a live game was crazy. He's just like, oh yeah, like that guy, you know, he was a robber right there. He bounced backward and they dropped him out.

And like he's just pulling it all live. It blew my mind. All right. We're going to take one more quick break and then come back and hit a couple more. these. All right, Bellar, what's the next one? Okay, our next question is from Nick W. Nick says every year there's a unit that takes a huge jump due predominantly to a

coaching change. Which coordinator, play calling head coach changes do you have your eye on that could elevate a unit based on the coach alone? Derek, this one's for you. What do you got? So I think I had two pretty easy ones and then one that like I have to squint a little bit, but I can still get excited about. I think Jesse Minter and like Anthony Weaver, that staff in Baltimore, like,

They could go back from average to being like a top five defense and I don't think it would be crazy. The other easy one is obviously Mike McDaniel in Los Angeles. Like if they can fix the offensive line a little bit, I think obviously that's another one. The one where you do have to actually squint to see it and they do need to make some changes to actually get there. Dernard Wilson with the New York Giants. Like I, again, I really, we've talked about it a number of times. I love what he did with Tennessee. This front, especially like the edges are a lot more talented than he ever had in Tennessee.

so I'm interested to see how that goes. The secondary needs some work. Linebacker might need some work, but like one or two decent additions, I could totally see this thing swinging around to them being like the eighth or ninth best defense, something like that. I like all those.

The other one I would say, just being a caricature of myself, I'll be curious what Dallas's defense looks like with Christian Parker and not Matt Eberthluss. That's one where I'll at least be curious about it. I don't think they'll be like a great defense because the talent still isn't good enough,

but will they go from being the worst defense in the league to like the 17th best defense in the league and is that enough to make them scary. I think that's what I'm going to be looking for. Can they do what Patrick Graham did with the Raiders for like three years? Like that that is honestly the goal for them. Patrick Graham was a Patrick Graham was another one on my list where what he's done with lesser talent, you throw him into Pittsburgh with the amount of talent that they have. I'll be interested to watch that. I think Baltimore and the Chargers are boring answers. But the. the right answers.

And I guess I would throw out Zach Robinson in Tampa Bay, too. That's a good one, actually. That is a really good one. Because I think he was a little bit scapegoated. I mean, obviously, like, most of the staff got fired entirely, but like, I don't think he was nearly as bad

as it seemed that second year. I do think Robinson can probably be better and get the bucks back on track. I think that's a good one. I'll throw out one more. And we talked about it a little bit last week when we were discussing the coaching carousel. going from what the Raiders offensive infrastructure was last year

to like this sort of Kubiak-Shannahan world that lifts the floor of the offensive line. I would not be surprised if that, oh, they're kind of feisty and fun version of the Raiders we thought we were going to get this year. We actually get next year with Kubiak and Formana Mendoza. I don't know how good they'll be because they do need better talent across the board.

But I also wouldn't be surprised if like, oh shit, man, Brock Bowers, Ash and Gentie? Like, this thing's actually pretty enjoyable. Two years in a row where the cell for Kubiak is he's replacing a college guy and they're just going to run a normal, stable NFL offense. That's it. That's truly one of the most important improvements you can make. I'm not giving up on the Raiders and I'm not giving up on the Titans. I'm just pretending like nothing ever happened.

We're back to blind optimism. You are such a braver man than me. We'll see if I stick to any of that when we have to put the wind spool together. I, Bellar, we got one more here. Here we go. Last one, Evans Kronis writes in. Evan says, what big picture football inevitability is more intriguing to you? Patrick Mahomes' next head coach or Sean McVeigh's next quarterback.

Both feel like league altering opportunities that could be realized sooner rather than later. Robert, take us away on this one. I think it's McVeigh's next quarterback. Simply because I don't, it just feels not that inevitable may be the wrong word, but like we know it's going to happen. Like I'm not clamoring for Patrick Mahomes to have a different coach than Andy Reid. Like I don't spend my time sitting and thinking about what that will look like.

The Chief's offense has been frustrating over the last couple years. And I think that they could do with a new injection of ideas. But Andy Reid is one of the best offensive coaches in the history of the NFL. Like I don't, I'm not sitting here looking at my watch waiting for the day that Patrick Mahomes no longer has to play with Andy Reed. But with the quarterback, it's like it's hard not. to do little experiments in your mind about what McVeigh could do with this type of quarterback and that type of quarterback. And the fact that we know Stafford is probably in the last two to three years of his career,

I think it's pretty easy to bring yourself to that place. And so that's the answer for me. I think to me too, the Mahomes thing, like one, Mahomes is Mahomes. Like he's going to play at an incredibly high and cool level, almost regardless. And then I think the other thing with the Andy Reid and all of that is like, moving Andy Reid would obviously change this and affect this. But to me it's like I just want to see what the roster would look like with a new guy. And that would take so many different iterations.

It would take years to build all that stuff. Yeah. There are more moving parts with the Andy Reid one than there is with the Mahomes with the McVeigh one. Yeah. Yes. So many more. Whereas like if we tomorrow figured out who the new quarterback for Sean McVeigh was going to be, we could start doing so many calculations of like, okay, this is what the offense is going to look like.

And this is how they want to build it. and this is what he might do. Like it just, it to me is a more fun thought experiment. And I think we just also have proof over the last basically decade that Sean McVeigh can do so many different adaptations to his offense and be so many different things that I'm just, I'm kind of curious what he even seeks out at quarterback. Like that is really more interesting to me. I spend a lot of my free time. I shouldn't admit this. I spend a lot of my free time daydreaming about who the Rams next quarterback might be.

Like, was there a world before he signed where Dak Prescott plays for the Rams? Is there a world even though he did sign that Dak Prescott winds up on the Rams? Do the Rams draft Ty Simpson or Garrett Nussmeyer this year? Like, are they that interested in either of those guys? Are there any other veterans that might come available in the next few years that Sean McVeigh would identify? Like, I think that is so fascinating. And I respect the hell out of Andy Reid. He's one of the best coaches ever.

He's going to be in the Hall of Fame one day. LeBron James has had a shitload of great coaches. And he's had bad coaches too. And he was still LeBron James. Like Patrick Mahomes with a lesser coach, I would imagine, will still be Patrick Mahomes. Like, I'm not going to go as far as to say that's not interesting. But there's just, there is a floor of productivity there when you have Patrick Mahomes

to where it's not. it's not as interesting to me as trying to imagine what McVeigh wants and how he identifies it and what it looks like. I mean, just look at how wildly different and entertaining. First of all, the golf rams were wildly entertaining. And then they pivoted from that to a different, arguably, not arguably, much more entertaining team. And so to imagine how McVevay pivots from that and who he thinks is the guy to move forward with

after Stafford is very. very, very interesting to me. Why I think this is so compelling is that I could see arguments for different types of quarterbacks. But like Stafford, Stafford, and we don't have to do the whole Jared Gough, Sean McVeigh thing again. I think that Jared Gough has developed into a very good quarterback. I think that they scape go to Jared Gough a little bit and blame things on him that I think were endemic issues with the offense, a lot of different stuff and was involved there.

But there's no denying that they were able to enter a judge. different sort of dropback world with Matthew Stafford than they were able to access with Jared Gough from 2018 to 2020. I wonder, though, does he look at Matthew Stafford and say, that's just a different beast? Like, I'm not going to get that sort of quarterback, a guy who's been in the league for 10 years and can do all of these things. Because the reasons that Jimmy is an attractive backup to Sean McVeigh are very different than the reasons that Matthew Stafford is like the right person to make the rest of the

offense sing. And so is there a world where knowing you're working with a young player that you're going to have to build up? Does he go for more of a pocket-based? I think he's like, I think that like what Brock Purdy does for the Niners, is that the type of quarterback that the Rams are actually going to seek out where it's like I can play the position through you because I know I'm not going to get a Matthew Stafford type player. I could see that world. I can see him wanting a player like that as like the successor to what they have right now. Well, and also I think that's interesting because Purdy is an athlete. And like there before they made the trade for Matthew Stafford, Sean McVeigh was flirting with

some of these guys who could move around a little bit. The John Walford is the Bryce Perkins like guys who could kind of move around and do stuff. And obviously he's never committed to that any of those guys as like a long term starter. But like I wonder if post Stafford he kind of does like you're saying, Stafford was its own thing. that was kind of lightning in a bottle. It was such a rare circumstance for Detroit to want to trade a guy like that. I'm going to now go kind of reset the slate a little bit. I'm going to go see if I can do this entirely new pivot.

Go get me a guy who can run around a little bit and see what that does for the offense. I'm just looking over the NFL standings, like looking at each team and trying to imagine their quarterback in L.A. in a couple of years. Which I don't know. Yeah. Like is the guy in the league right now? is it a young player? You want to hear the meanest answer that I'd have for you?

Yes. Yes, he is in the league right now. It's Joe Burrow. I mean, Oh, that's so part of me, part of me wonders. And it's like so much easier said than done.

But after the experience that he's had with Stafford, I just don't think I buy that McVeigh wants to do that. Like I think like McVeigh is like, yes, I enjoy having a ready made product. Get me that. I don't want to have to worry about drafting a guy. and loving him up and building up his confidence

and suffering through his bad habits and all that stuff. Yeah, I want $10 million. Like, you don't necessarily have access to the next Matthew Stafford because you want one. I said it was easier said than done, but, you know, it's happened in Cincinnati before. Just saying, hey, I mean, are you kidding? Like, I'll support Joe Burrow wherever he goes.

And if he's playing with Sean McVeigh, I don't know, man. I might have to like just full-fledged jump on the Rams bandwagon. that would be so cool. To be clear, I don't think it's mean to you. I think it's mean to Bengals fans. It is. I will, okay, having just said that,

the way that people are just jumping to the Joe Burrow Bengals divorce right now is pretty ridiculous. Like, come on. We can, we can try to fix this for at least another year or two. Yeah, I want to be clear. I'm kidding.

Like, it's mean and far-fetched. I don't think that's actually going to happen. I'm not predicting that it's going to happen. but not in 2026, but maybe the 2029 athletic football show. If you don't think that the Rams would have their designs on being the destination for Joe Burrow if it eventually goes south in Cincinnati, I'll tell you right now, I assume they do. I haven't talked to anybody there about it.

They're not tampering with Joe Burrow. I want to be clear about this. I thought it was a very real possibility that he would land in L.A. Or that DAC would land in L.A. if he didn't resign with the Cowboys. I absolutely expect the Rams to try to live in that veteran quarterback world whenever Stafford goes. Well, we'll see when we get there. For now, that is all we've got from today's mailbag. We'll be doing a lot of these over the course of the offseason.

Next week we'll be back at the Combine, so we will not have one. But the week after that, we will, and we'll be having them consistently throughout the entire offseason. So whether it's in the Discord, which again, we took a ton of questions on the Discord today, So please go sign up for the Discord if you have not. It's a great way to get yourself included in the mailbag. And Athletic Football Show at Gmail.com, just keep sending the questions in. Like, we'll go through all of them each time when we look at them. So if you've got one on your mind, you don't have to wait for me to solicit the questions.

Athletic Football Show at gmail.com. One last reminder, we only have one more show coming to you guys this week. As you guys are listening to this, I will be in Peru. Dave will be in Italy and Derek will be here doing the show. So we're doing a little bit of time travel right here. But we will be back starting next week. We're going to have five shows coming your guys away from the combine. Very much looking forward to that.

But we have one more show on the docket for today or for this week. So please be on the lookout for that one. And then we'll be back with our regularly scheduled programming next week. For now, that's all we got. Appreciate you guys listening. We'll talk to you very soon.