The Kevin Sheehan Show - Commander Jackson?

Episode Date: March 8, 2023

Kevin opened today's show with more suggestions from around the league that Lamar Jackson to Washington makes sense. Is the sale process slowing down? Kevin with thoughts on that. Two guests on the show including Nick Akridge/Pro Football Focus talking quarterbacks including but not limited to Daniel Jones, Jackson, Derek Carr, Matt Ryan to Washington, Andy Dalton, Jacoby Brissett, Anthony Richardson, and plenty on the Indy Combine. Patrick Stevens/NCAA Bracketologist jumped on to talk Terps, Hoyas, UVA, and the upcoming unveiling of the Field of 68.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

You don't want it. You don't need it. But you're going to get it anyway. The Kevin Cheehan Show. Here's Kevin. If you are selling, you leave as a hero. You've delivered Lamar Jackson. You've taken him from the other team in your area while he's still in his prime.

And you bring him to your team and all of a sudden your team is relevant. Your team is a contender. Your team can be good after you're gone. And, you know, if the team does get better after Dan Snyder is gone because it can't get much. worse after he's gone. At least he can say it's not because of all the other changes that were made. It was because of me getting Lamar Jackson on my way out the door. That was Mike Floreo from Pro Football Talk once again spouting his theory, his hunch that Lamar Jackson to Washington makes sense. It was part of an interview with Zach Gelb on CBS

Sports Network earlier today. And there was much more to it where he kind of reiterated what we had played for you. I don't know, 10. days ago, two weeks ago, where he thinks that Dan Snyder would love to middle finger the league with a Deshawn Watson-style contract, guaranteed contract on his way out. I just don't see that at all, people. I think Florio is missing the most important part, and that is they can't afford Lamar Jackson. And even if they could, Dan Snyder ain't putting $200 million into escrow on his way out. It's why Duran Payne was franchised. It's why there's been no discussion of contract extensions with people like Montez Sweat or Cameron Curl at this point. It's why we're all kind of expecting

a very uneventful free agency period for the most part. No, Lamar Jackson is not coming to Washington. He's not. I think what's interesting is that Florio isn't the only person that has mentioned this. I was watching NFL live yesterday after we recorded the podcast and the Daniel Jones deal had been done and was being announced and the Jackson franchise tag was happening and all of this stuff was happening yesterday afternoon. And Ryan Clark, you know, came up with Washington for Lamar Jackson. Adam Schaefter suggested Washington for Lamar Jackson. I had a guest on the show, the radio show this morning, Ben Volan, who's a longtime NFL writer for the Boston, Globe. He mentioned Washington. Now, part of that is because when Jackson got tagged, there were a few teams that came out and immediately said, not interested. Atlanta, Carolina, Miami,

you know, I thought that was odd, you know, and I know that there's a lot of discussion about it playing into the, you know, the collusion theory that the NFL does not want another Deshawn Watson-style contract of guaranteed money. And so teams are immediately, you know, public certainly leaking out through various NFL reporters, including Diana Rusini, that they're not interested in Jackson. I did think that was a little bit strange. At the same time, you know, the Jackson situation is going to be an interesting one, and I'm going to talk more about it with one of the two guests that will be on the show today. Nick Ackridge, Pro Football Focus, love having Nick on. We'll talk a lot of quarterback stuff, stuff that

happened yesterday and draft Indy Combine, Washington, what they'll be looking for in a veteran backup to Sam Hal. By the way, after that, Patrick Stevens will jump on the show with us. Patrick, of course, a brackatologist follows a lot of local sports, a lot of local college basketball, does the brackatology for Washington Post, so we'll do some college hoops with Patrick to end the show today. But a lot of people have suggested watching. especially since the field of teams, at least right now based on reporting, seems to be thin. Like it's Baltimore and that it appears to be nobody else, obviously right now. We'll see. The Raiders apparently aren't interested. Atlanta, Carolina, Carolina, Miami not interested.

You know, if Aaron Rogers doesn't go to the Jets, maybe the Jets will be interested. It's very interesting that Atlanta, in particular, after being right there on the Deshawn Watson sweepstakes, a list, shortlist, that a year later they're not interested in Lamar Jackson. Look, I think the bottom line with Jackson is this. Contract is too much. Two first round picks have to be parted with. And he's been injured during the stretch run the last two years. And I think it's possible that Baltimore will look a little bit. shrewd at the end of this, having him go out, find out what he's worth on the open market,

finding out that he's not worth as much, and then Baltimore is going to get him in Baltimore this year for $32.5 million, didn't even have to use the exclusive tag, which I thought was coming. Anyway, no, I would bet big money, big money that Lamar Jackson to Washington is just conversation. and really in many ways, and I would not say this typically about Adam Schaefter in particular, kind of information that is not using a significant piece of data that is out there. And that is that this team appears to be not willing to put big money into escrow as it's being sold. Speaking of the sale,

Mark Maskey wrote a story about how the NFL owners, that are members of committees were in Palm Beach the last couple of days. And Maske's got some anonymous quotes in here and has some anonymous reporting in here from sources at the owner's meetings. I'll start with this. The NFL team owners discuss the potential sale of the Washington commanders and other issues regarding Snyder during these two days of committee meetings that concluded Tuesday but made no decision about the prospect of taking a vote to remove him from ownership if he refuses to sell the franchise. Some owners emerge from the meeting still hopeful that Snyder will agree to sell the commanders

without a vote to force a sale, said those people who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of confidentiality of the bidding and the possibility of an eventual legal conflict with Snyder. Yet the litigiousness of Snyder concerns all of these other owners. Other owners that Maskey spoke to apparently were not as optimistic about that prospect, the prospect of him selling the team without a vote to force a sale. Dan, by the way, did not attend these meetings. He's not part of, I don't believe, any of the committees. I could be wrong about that.

Tanya was at the league meetings. I'm not sure which committees she sits on, but there was more information about this potential sale, and this is the most important piece of information. Another person said Snyder's desire to be indemnified against future legal liability and costs remains a major issue. If the league and other NFL owners won't provide such indemnification, Snyder would be satisfied if a prospective buyer would do that.

But the demand threatens to keep a sale from occurring, said that person, who predicted the deliberations over the process could continue into the summer or even into the fall. The owners will not move toward a vote to remove Snyder at the March meeting. One person said such a maneuver by the owners to force Snyder to sell his team would require the approval of at least three quarters of the owners. So they had these committing meetings. They talked about Snyder, but the indemnification demand by Snyder, and this is assuming he doesn't get it from a prospective buyer, is right now a holdup.

It remains, quote, a major issue, closed quote, out of Maskey's story. These owners do not want to indemnify, Dan. Remember the original story on this from the Post suggested that some owners actually said, we should be getting indemnified from him. We should be getting protection from whatever's out there on him, as it relates to his team and maybe even the league. So, you know, Snyder in many ways in a weird way, because they so desperately want him to sell the team, has a little bit of leverage. He's trying to get as much out of this as he can.

He wants to sell, get out, and not have any worries about future lawsuits against him or the league. But that was to me the headline out of the story, that his demand to be. essentially free and clear of any legal liability and costs once he sells the team is a stumbling point right now. It's a bit of a roadblock right now, and he wants that before he sells the team. And the fact that some suggest that these deliberations and the process to sell the team could continue into the summer or even into the fall. My prediction remains. Snyder sells. My prediction also remains that he sells the team, sells the team to Josh Harris. The Wizards won last night, barely beating the worst team in the NBA on a buzzer-beater by Gafford after Beale Airbald a final second shot.

But they needed the win. All right. Two guests on the show as mentioned. We'll get to Nick Ackridge coming up. Don't forget to rate us and review us on Apple and Spotify, but specifically now also follow us. If you haven't followed us when you're listening to us on Apple, there's a big plus follow button in the upper right hand button, upper right hand corner. If you could follow us, that would be great. On Spotify, it's kind of mid-left on the page when you're listening to the podcast. If you can click and follow us, that would be awesome. M. Taylor, 8890, excellent show. Kevin is a great show runner.

Keeps the dialogue humming and offers great insight. Well, thank you, M. Taylor, 8890. Great show runner. That's the title, the term, or the title used for television show creators, managers, whatever you want to call them, whoever basically takes over a show idea or has the show idea and then is in charge of running that show, they're called a great show runner. They're called a show runner.

Some are great, some aren't. So I don't know if that's how you meant to describe the term. But yes, I am the show runner of the Kevin Sheehan Show podcast. I don't know how great I am, but I appreciate the compliment. very much. Rate us, review us, follow us wherever you can. That is very helpful.

All right, up next, Nick Ackridge. We'll get more into Daniel Jones, Lamar Jackson, a lot of the other quarterback stuff, including a lot of Washington quarterback stuff. That's next right after these words from a few of our sponsors. All right, jumping on with us right now is Nick Ackridge from Pro Football Focus.

Nick is one of my favorite guests here over the last couple of years. does a great job for PFF as a senior data analyst, but really knows our team here, Washington, and he's been looking at the draft. I want to get into some of that. You can follow Nick, by the way, on Twitter at PFF underscore Nick Ackridge, Akridge,

spelled, A-K-R-I-D-G-E. Before we get to the Indy Combine and some of your takeaways specific to the quarterbacks, what did you think of the Daniel Jones deal in New York? Yeah, I think that's kind of what you have to pay, you know, middle of the road quarterbacks now. I mean, we saw Chino Smith and now Brandon Jones obviously get paid, and it looks like a massive number, but I was kind of like reading up on it.

I think they can get out of it after like two years or so. So if he's terrible in two years, you just kind of get out of it. I don't think they have to eat much money. But the first year cap hit at $19 million, and that kind of seems about right. with, you know, what you're kind of paying for with middle of the road quarterback play. And that's kind of where he's been, his career. I know a lot of us kind of really like to make fun of Tanya Jones and the Giants, but he's kind of been a very average quarterback.

Last year, they really kind of used his legs, and he's very sneaky athletic. I know a lot of, you know, white quarterbacks get that tag. But he was very, very good in the run game, just a little safe in the passing game. And you kind of kind of tell from their offense last year. But I think it's kind of what you had to pay. Daniel Jones and that sort of quarterback play. When should we all as football fans and those of us that really watch the sport closely? When do we have to readjust when we give up on a quarterback?

Yes. I think you do. Every time these quarterbacks get drafted, it is so much dependent on their situation. And we've seen that very clear here in Washington. but it's so, so dependent on the situation. Patrick Mahomes would not be Patrick Mahomes. If he wasn't put into drafted by the chief, it was sit behind someone like Alex Smith,

learn from someone like Andy Reid, and now Eric Biedemy. That doesn't happen if he goes to, like, the Bears and has to start right away. It's just not, you know, the situation is so, so key for these guys. You can kind of tell with some of them, like the Trevor Lawrence situation last year,

I think it's a perfect example. A lot of people wanted to give up and say, until he's a bus, but Urban Myers, your head coach, and that team was absolutely awful. But you could still see from the quarterback position that he was playing it at a relatively high level, given everything around him. And then you saw it this year how they made the playoffs, and he looked incredible. So, yeah, you can kind of tell right away with some of these quarterbacks, like if they have it or if they don't have it.

I think Josh Allen is one of those guys that just kind of really look terrible his first three years and just instantly kind of clicked and turned a corner. but that's a very rare thing. You can usually tell pretty early on when you should kind of, you know, give up on somebody. But Daniel Jones was always kind of shown to be right in the middle. Like he had some plays that were really great, and for whatever reason every time he played Washington,

he looked incredible. But he was always just kind of a middle-of-the-road guy, and I think the Giants kind of knew that. And they're still a young team. They're still rebuilding. Obviously, they took a huge step this past year. And I think Jones is kind of a, good quarterback for them to just kind of, you know, see what he can do as that middle of the road

guy and see what you can kind of build around him and maybe make a run. Yeah, I mean, I think that it's interesting because Daniel Jones is a perfect guy to have this conversation about because six months ago, I mean, they brought in Tyrod Taylor because, you know, Daibble wasn't sure. Kafka wasn't sure. In fact, you know, if you were reading some of the stuff preseason, a lot of the Giants reporters said they predicted that Tyrod Taylor would end up playing. I mean, they didn't pick up his fifth year option. And the chances that they were going to extend him or be forced to franchise him if it came to that, you know, before this season started were a lot less than 50-50, you know, probably like a one-and-three chance that that was

going to happen. And then all of a sudden he gets, you know, the most, the best coaching staff he's had, the best offensive coordinator slash head coach he's had. I mean, this is a guy that went through Shermer and the Joe Judge disaster. He still had no weapons whatsoever. And, you know, his season wasn't like super spectacular as a passer, you know, throwing for 3,205 yards and just 15 touchdowns. I read this stat this morning, Nick. He's the only quarterback in the last three years for all three years as a starter to throw for

less touchdowns than games. As the number one guy going in to the season, he threw 15 touchdowns this year, 10 in 2021 and 11 in 2020. Not only that, he reduced his turnover issue completely. That was one of the biggest issues with Jones, is that he was a turnover machine. Five interceptions, one lost fumble on the season. So why the way you talked, and I think the way a lot of people talk, and I think maybe even I've sort of referred to it this way, that we've already seen what he can be, and maybe that was

this past season, he's still kind of a middling, middle of the road, you know, maybe in that 14 to 18 range, 14 in a good season, 18 in a not so good season. Why isn't his ceiling higher for a guy with size, with arm strength, and with incredible mobility, now that he's matched with a good coach? Kind of like you said with Mahomes. I'm not saying he is Mahomes. And And by the way, I think Mahomes could have been drafted by somebody else and still been really good. But I understand, you know, your point of being in the perfect situation. But why can't Daniel Jones take it to the next level and become a top 10, you know, legit franchise quarterback?

Yeah, I mean, it's an interesting point, but I think we've kind of seen it throughout these past years is when it comes to just pure passer, when it comes to Daniel Jones is just a pure passer sitting in the pocket, he struggles to kind of quickly get through his progression, his greed, and that could do a lot with how many times he's had to switch offenses. But that was kind of a huge thing in why his turnovers were down a bit. And now for us, for PSF, we still charted him with 21 turnover-worthy plays. Oh, you did? It might not have shown up in the actual, yeah.

You might not have shown him to the actual box score, but he was still in the top ten of turnover-orily played. Got it. So just defenses weren't really capitalizing on it as much. But he did. That was definitely lower than what he's had in the previous. years. He was always like near the top when it came to turnover where he played. But when they were able to move them out of the pocket, get him involved in the run game, it just made things easier for him. And it's kind of something that a lot of offenses are doing now with these younger

quarterbacks who have this athletic side to them, make things easier for them. And the floor for these guys is just a crazy athletic, you know, quarterback that can kind of turn into a runner. And you have that dual threat option back there. And that's a high floor to basically have. Like we saw with Justin Fields and now Dan. Daniel Jones, they might not be the greatest passers right now, but their floor is so high because of what they can add to the running game. And that's kind of what they did last year. They realized how good he was in the run game.

And it's what kind of kept that offensive float. And it still was not a great offense. I mean, their defense was very good. But, you know, he's just kind of that middle-the-road quarterback. And, you know, it's going to take a lot from him to kind of, you know, get to a spot mentally where he can progress quickly and work within the positive. and that was just kind of his big issue these past couple years. He was too slow, and with that offensive line, he needed to be quicker mentally to kind of know

when he needs to get out of the pocket and when he can stay in and stuff like that. And that's what kind of led to the fumbles and all the sacks he took over the past couple years. I mean, and he's had nothing around him. He's had major offensive line issues. He's had, you know, major receiver issues. I mean, I guess he did have, you know, Evan Ingram with him. and Ingram's excelled, obviously, in Jacksonville. But Barclay's been it.

So it would be interesting to see Daniel Jones with the same good, solid coaching staff, which you're going to get with Daebel and company here for another few years, and then put some weapons around them and see what happens. And, you know, the Jones conversation is a bit of a segue into the Lamar Jackson conversation, because I agree with you. I don't think I've ever been wowed by Daniel Jones hanging in the pocket on third and nine and making, you know, a really good play. Now, playing off schedule, he's been outstanding. But I think we would say the same thing about Lamar Jackson, even though he had that one season, the MVP season, in which he threw for 36 touchdowns.

But he still only threw for 3,100 yards that year. And I think the one criticism of Lamar Jackson, other than availability, injury availability, would be, you know, can he in a big game in January deliver from the pocket if it comes to that? And the answer so far has been not really sure, but it certainly isn't a definitive yes at this point. No, I mean, it's a fair question for him. I think you also kind of have to look at his situation, and that wide receiver core in Baltimore for years now has been completely non-existent. And it's a huge, huge run-heavy offense.

That's just kind of the best, that's not just Lamar Jackson, it's also the play caller that we've seen. I mean, he is one of the best run game coordinators. Greg Roman. The unique run game I've ever really seen, Greg Roman, yeah. And I think that's just kind of not really held him back, but I think you can see him work within a pocket. I think he's, you know, I think he's up there with some of the best, you have pure quarterback. There's a lot of plays that you can really see him work to progressions and know what the defense is showing in pre and post snap. And I think he can be a very successful quarterback if you just let him stop.

in the pocket. And then you just add the running ability and he's, you know, one of the best athletes on the field every time he steps on there. So I think that he has the ability to now these past couple years we've seen injury issues. His first two years, there weren't really injury problems. But these past few years kind of once the season gets down to the end, there's these injury concerns. But yeah, 25-year-old former MVP, I think still, the sky's limits still with his potential. Let me net out what I think of the Lamar Jackson situation. And, you know, then I want your opinion on it. Number one is, I think this comparison with Daniel Jones yesterday from a lot of different places was stupid. I think it's in a total apples and oranges.

Daniel Jones was already their player. They don't have to, let me be clear on this. I'm talking about the reaction. Like the reaction immediately on Lamar Jackson's non-exclusive franchise tag, which I thought it was going to be an exclusive tag. I was surprised by it was reporting that Atlanta and Carolina and Miami and even Washington are not interested. All of a sudden, there isn't that market that maybe he thinks he has. And a lot of people said, well, and then Daniel Jones gets this big contract. Well, Daniel Jones, okay, isn't going to require two first rounders from another team. A, B, the amount of guaranteed money appears to be in the $80 to $90 million range.

All right. The quarterback in Baltimore wants nearly two and a half times that. guaranteed money. So it's not the same at all. And by the way, he'll end up, you know, people are looking at his 32.5 on the franchise tag, non-exclusive tag, and Daniel Jones is at 40. Remember that 40 a year? Look at the guaranteed money, people. We've learned enough over the years, haven't we, to say these numbers are inflated on the aggregate totals of contracts and years, etc. It's the guaranteed money you want to look at. It's 80 to 90 million guaranteed. But the Ravens offered him $250 and $133 million in guaranteed money, and he turned it down before the season started.

By the way, I think where this is headed is I think it's going to turn out that Baltimore was a bit shrewd, realize there wouldn't be an overwhelming market for him because of the contract more than anything else, in my opinion. And they're going to play them on the non-exclusive tag at 32.5 and then figured out later, even though I think really the best case for him maybe would be for somebody to step up like and structure a deal similar to the one that Kirk had in Minnesota. You know, I know the Jets offered a lot more money, but he got the first totally guaranteed contract in NFL history, three years, 84 million.

Obviously the numbers would be much bigger. If he got something like three years and, you know, approaching 150 million, it would be the guaranteed money that, that perhaps is less than what he's looking for, but more what a team is looking to give, and maybe he gives up on years for a high A.A.V. and something close to guaranteed.

I don't know, but I think Baltimore is going to benefit from him essentially being able to test the market. What do you think? Yeah, no, it was so weird. The second we kind of heard, the Lamar Jackson situation, and all of these teams are instantly out on it, It's a little odd to hear that, considering they were all just kind of in on the Deshaun Watson situation the past year.

But I don't really get into that. I think, yeah, Atlanta especially, it's just very strange. But I think, like you said, obviously the guaranteed number is the biggest thing. And he's asking for basically a Sean Watson contract. And no other owner wants to give him that because then that kind of sets a precedent that, hey, maybe these guys can get, you know, these $200 million guaranteed contracts, these top quarterbacks. I think they will eventually kind of meet at a middle point. I think he stays with Baltimore. I was kind of shocked that they went on the non-aclusive tag.

It's just such an interesting situation. I kind of completely agree with you. I think he will be back at Baltimore play this next year on that $32 million, like you said. And they'll eventually kind of meet in the middle. I just don't know if he's going to budge off of what Sean Watson got because I think he's kind of proven that he can be a better quarterback, better player in the NFL than the shop. He's the former MVP, I think he's not really going to budge from that number. And it'll just be interesting to see.

If we hadn't gone through as football fans witnessing the last two years of Deshawn Watson's life, and we were just judging on his 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020 season, his first four in the league. and Watson and Jackson were both up for unrestricted free agency. Who would you prefer signing, Jackson or Watson, without all of the, you know, obviously baggage that he's got over the last year and a half to two years? I think if we're just looking at 2020, basically, when Watson played his last kind of his full season, I think I would lean to Sean Watson. Me too.

It's tough. I mean, I don't think you'd go wrong either. way. But I think I would lean to Sean Watson just because what he did in a terrible Texan organization was extremely impressive. And yeah, I think I would lean Watson just purely based on what we saw before 2020. Yeah, I want to put the Watson of the six games at the end of this past year out of my mind, except for, by the way, the three drives that he put together against Washington, which were really the three best drives of his six game run. at the end. I'm going to chalk it up to, you know, a weird situation coming in at the end,

having not played for a year and a half, et cetera. But if I think back to what I thought of Deshawn Watson before all the, you know, massage, happy ending stuff came out, I thought Deshawn Watson was right on the edge of an elite quarterback, like, you know, top six or seven in the league. And I don't think I felt that way about Jackson. I didn't think Jackson was much lower than that, but I think I would have taken Watson. I don't know what I'm getting in the person, Watson now. And I do think, you know, Lamar Jackson has proven to be an incredible teammate and beloved teammate, you know, and by the way, beloved by everybody in the organization for the last few years. But I just think Watson at his best a few years ago was better than Jackson.

Yeah, no, I think you could have made a case after the 2020 season that he was the top-top quarterback. I don't think anyone would really kind of scoff at that. In 2020, I'm just looking at now. He had a 92.5 overall grade for us, and that was, you know, the third best behind Brady and Rogers. So, yeah, I think those kind of proofs that he was an elite quarterback at that point. Yeah, the interesting thing about that season, and many people pointed it out to me, especially callers on the radio show, is they were horrible. that year. Houston was. And even though he was great, the team was horrible. So she and how can an elite quarterback go three and 13 or whatever they went that year? I forget exactly what their record was.

It was something like that. And that's a fair point, but that organization was incomplete and utter turmoil. I mean, it was a major problem organization at that point. All right. Before we get to Indy Combine stuff. Let's just say that Aaron Rogers does end up in New York and he's playing with the Jets. Do you consider them to be a Super Bowl contender? I don't know about Super Bowl contender just because the AFC is completely stacked. But I do think they'd make the playoffs. I think they would challenge the bills for the division.

I just don't know. Aaron Rogers was not great last year in terms of Aaron Rogers. but I think he would obviously be the best quarterback and just have had in a very, very long time. And I think he would kind of easily get them to the playoffs. I just don't know if that team can kind of get through the chiefs, the bills, and now even the Jaguars coming up and the Chargers and all of these other great teams that are now coming up.

I don't know if they would be in Super Bowl contenders, but I think they would definitely be in the playoffs and kind of in the shot to maybe get one or two wins. Yeah, I talked about this yesterday. my bookie who sponsors this podcast has them now as the fourth pick to win the AFC championship behind, obviously, Kansas City, Buffalo and Cincinnati, just on the possibility that he's going to end up in New York. And by the way, if people listened to the show yesterday, they were at plus 1150 or wherever

they were, they're at plus 9-10 now. So they are moving up the board. And I made the case, Nick, that if Washington acquired Aaron Rogers, which we know isn't really possible because they're just not spending any money and making any big deals, we don't think, that Washington could have been as high as the third pick in the NFC

behind San Francisco and Philadelphia to win the NFC championship. Because I view the Jets in Washington's rosters and situations as very similar because of the good young defense, really good playmakers, and just, you know, Washington's got some O-line issues, et cetera,

but really it's been quarterback play. that's been the biggest problem. Yeah, no, I agree. I think Washington and the Jeffs were kind of in, like you said, a very similar situation. And the only difference between the two is that the conference is like I even forgot to mention since he, which just makes the AFC incredible. Like you said, in the NFC, it's literally San Francisco and it's Philly and maybe the Cowboys.

We all kind of know what happens when that gets into the playoffs. But, yeah, I think, obviously if he came here, that'd be a dream. But like you said, I don't think it's going to happen. happen, but he would definitely push them to, you know, the top tier of an S2 team. All right. Let's get to the indie combine, which I will confess I didn't really watch any of it, but I read a lot of the write-ups, but I don't watch it usually. But you and I have talked about this particular person multiple times in the past.

In fact, I think the last time I talked to you, you had just reviewed his film and were high on him. I loved Anthony Richardson earlier in the year, and I talked about him a lot on the show. And then, you know, as you watched him, I realized he was majorly flawed as a pocket passer, in particular, with footwork and accuracy issues. But he blew away the combine like nobody has at that position ever. So my first question to you is, what's the latest he goes in the first round? Like, do you see him getting out of the top five, top ten? No, I think top 10 is 10 is absolute floor.

There's a lot of people that love the common like you. I don't really watch the combine. I don't think it adds much. There's some important measurements and metrics that you can take from it. But I don't think it really adds any. If you watch Anthony Richardson, you knew he was going to blow away the combine. Right. The athlete he is.

That doesn't really change anything from my evaluation at all. But like you said, his work within the, pocket is good. Like I think I said this on the last time I was on here is he took all the hard stuff really, really well when it comes to pocket manipulation, knowing where to go with the ball, when to get it out, when to run,

when to stay within the pocket. And then it just kind of comes down to the end where it's like his footworks and the accuracy just goes everywhere. But I think all of that stuff is kind of an easier fix for some of the better quarterback coaches and offensive coordinators and stuff like that. I think a lot of it is just kind of, he thinks his arm is, he knows his arm is so good that he can just kind of get away with lazy-ish footwork,

and he can still fire the ball 60 yards from basically a flat stand. But I think all of that is kind of fixable, but a lot of things that you see with Anthony Richardson, you don't see from these, you know, crazy athletic quarterbacks that, you know, people just think are just completely a toulsy type of quarterback and you have to work from the ground up. He is a very, very smart quarterback. You can see it from the way he plays, the way he stays within the pocket,

and the way he just kind of manipulates the pocket and stuff like that. So I think tennis is his absolute floor. Obviously, there were talks about maybe if he got to 16, what we were watching to do. I don't think there's any chance he gets there. But, yeah, I think it's 10 is the floor. I've seen a bunch of mocks now, him going as high as one, you know, three, four with the Raiders trading, whatever. This is one of those, and I talked about it yesterday, I've talked about it. it a lot over the years. This is one where I think it's always hard for us, including probably

you guys as well at PFF, in that the most important part of the evaluation of Anthony Richardson is what the coaches probably did in interviews with Richardson in Indianapolis, what they're doing behind the scenes and due diligence on Anthony Richardson, talking to his coaches, talking to teammates, finding out about him and his family, and what kind of, you know, how coachable he will be, he loves ball, you know, all of that stuff. And that's the stuff that we don't know. You're a big college football fan I am, and we watch every Saturday and we have these ideas, but we're missing a big chunk of how these guys are being evaluated.

So all we're looking at is, you know, what we think we know about football and how it projects to the next level. That makes, at this position in particular, it's so important to know. what you're getting because the investment ends up being so much larger. And obviously the amount of times he touches the ball and the leadership, all that stuff. But what have we heard about Anthony Richardson with respect to that? Have you followed that part of it at all? What do we know about him and what they're saying about him?

No, like you said, I think if I was able to just kind of be a fly on the wall in all of these conversations that he has with teams, I think it would change a lot of my evaluations from the past or my current evaluation. just because, like you said, that's a huge, huge part of it is the mental side of the game. And does he know what he's talking about? Does he know what he messed up on? Does he know where he should have gone or what he did and stuff like that? And I think I haven't heard anything bad about it.

You know, a lot of times you just kind of see the media guys just kind of pushing these guys up. And we heard it a lot with Malik Willis last year. We kind of saw how that turned out. But I haven't heard anything bad about my – but, you know, There's really not much coming out from that point, but I would just love to be a fly on the wall and kind of listen to what they talk about or how they go through, how they played last year.

So I saw you tweet out, and this looks like it was before the end of the combine. So I don't know if there's been an update to it, but give everybody your, you've got a top six here on quarterbacks in the draft. Go ahead. Yeah. Yeah, so I had Bryce Young first, Richardson, 2nd,

shroud third, Levis, fourth, Tanner McKee from Stanford, fifth, and then Hennon Hooker six. That's for the top six. That's the only six that I've watched. I don't think there's anybody else that would really kind of, you know, step in front of them. But yeah, that's the top six I have. I still think Bryce Young, I agree with you that he's number one overall. But did the expected, by the way, it was not a surprise that he's short and slight.

What level of worry should a team have that Bryce Young's tiny? Yeah, it's the only thing that's stopping me from giving him one of the highest rates I've given since Trevor Lawrence. And I haven't done this for too many years, but I think he's the smartest quarterback that I've evaluated in an extremely a long time. The only thing that's stopping me from saying he's a surefire, number one pick is going to be an elite quarterback is his size. But we saw him play in an SEC schedule. We saw him as a Tennessee fan. I saw him get absolutely killed by Tennessee's defensive line, and that Alabama O line last year was not good. No.

And he kept getting killed. He kept getting right back up, never left that game. So I think a lot of it is a bit overblown, but he's going to be an outlier. I mean, we've seen smaller quarterback now get drafted, and we've seen a Kyler Murray, but Kyler Murray was a lot bigger. I mean, Bryce Young did everything in his power just to get over 200 pounds. So he probably drank a lot of water the day and the night before. So, yeah, I think, like I said, that's the only thing that's really stopping me from saying he's the elite of the elite.

Yeah, I think, you know, from the pocket, his accuracy, his timing, his anticipation, his, he's clearly incredibly bright and two steps ahead of everybody. Then he's just magical as a play extender. There's just so much about him that I love. I don't know, maybe I'm completely naive on this, but I think in this day and age, I'm just not that. worried about his size with the way they protect quarterbacks. And, you know, I think probably a West Coast, you know, scheme probably would work incredibly well with him. Like, to see somebody like him with Sean Peyton in Denver, that would have been a magical

combination because there's a lot of breeze in him. So you have Richardson ahead of Stroud. I know, you know, you've expressed why you like Richardson. And, you know, I've actually referenced what you said maybe the last time or two times ago you were on that, you know, the athleticism is great and obvious, but maybe what's subtle about him is he's got incredibly fast processing speed, and he really makes the right reads, and yes, the footwork and the accuracy, etc. But C.J. Stroud, who I was down on, but that game against Georgia made me think twice.

It didn't make you think enough to put him at number two. Why? I just think that we've heard it a lot with Ohio State quarterback. I think he was just a tick slower than I would like, you know, my quarterbacks to be when it came to processing. And he had two absolute mammoths at left and right tackling. He had a ton of time in the pocket. And I think his floor is very high.

I just don't see his feeling is up there with someone like a Richardson or even a Bryceon. But he's extremely accurate. Some of the best ball placement among these top quarterbacks. and he knows what he's doing. He knows where to go with the ball. It's just for me, there were too many instances where he knew where he should go with the ball.

He was just a little late with it. And a lot of times he doesn't really, like he has the arm strength, but he doesn't really use it as much as I would like him to, if that makes sense. He doesn't really laser balls in there. He kind of bloats balls every now and again, and especially on these outbreaking routes.

It's kind of a problem. And the combine, he looked good from what I saw. But yeah, I think he's a very smart quarterback, accurate quarterback. I just don't think that he is really quick enough in the processing point to kind of put him up there with the top tier. And I think he can be. I just for whatever reason, I saw way too many instances of him just knowing where to go with it, looking at it, and then just kind of waiting, hesitating, a couple paths of the ball, little hitches.

So that's the only thing that's really kind of stopping me from putting him in that top too. But I think he does have a higher floor than most quarterback. The guy that, and I think we've talked about him before, but Will Levis is obviously among the four that are being considered his first round picks. I just thought that he, and I forget if we've talked about this together or if I've talked to somebody else about it. I thought there were games when I watched him where he did not deal with pressure well, that he would throw the ball to the other team and I'd be like, well, what were you even looking at? there were a couple of games. They lost to Vanderbilt. He had a terrible interception, and he was terrible in his accuracy.

And I think he can really throw the football. And by the way, I think he really looks the part. Like, he looks like an NFL pocket passing quarterback. By the way, he's mobile too. I mean, Levis can move if you haven't watched him and is a big dude. But I just thought decision-making, I was like, man, and that's in a pro-style offense at Kentucky, with a team that has always been defensive first under Stoops, but you've got Levis fourth.

What do you think of him? By the way, do you think of him as a first rounder? I wouldn't take him in the first round, just because I think these top three are just kind of a step above the rest of them. I wouldn't really take him in the first round. I could see maybe late first, early second. But if he came out last year, I think he would have been my number one. quarterback, just kind of looking at the grades I gave him. I think he would have, but it was a very

rough quarterback class last year. He's just, like you said, the pro-style offense, it's always something that talked about as a pro for him, but even if you play in a pro-style offense and you're not good, I see that as much of a pro. I mean, yes, you've played in a pro-style offense, but if you're not great in that offense, it doesn't really matter to me. He did have to switch coordinated this past year, and his offensive line was terrible, lost some weapons, So there's a lot of excuses that you can make for him, and they're valid excuses. I just think that, like you said, the Tennessee game was one of the worst quarterback games I've ever really seen. Against a not good defensive team, too.

Let's be fair. I know this is your team, but they couldn't stop most teams. No, they could not. He had a grade in the 30s. And I think it was one of, it was just, it was tough. It doesn't make much sense to me because even when he had clean pockets, it was just kind of everything was a bit slow. He was kind of slow to get through where he needed to get.

He didn't really pick up on one defense we were doing it. One of the examples that I think I'm going to post about later is where a team had five defensive linemen down, two edge rushers, and they had a blitz sent from one side, which usually means that that other edge rusher is going to drop off. But he didn't really understand that. He still threw into where that edge rush is dropping off, and he gets completely, blindsizer from the other side. He didn't understand where his hot route was. These little sort of things that he just wasn't really picking up on. And when you have a bad off offensive line, these are the areas where you have to be your best at. And it was just those

kind of subtle things where he just doesn't really understand where blitzers are coming from, how coverages are really being presented. And that's kind of the point that really sticks with me and why I wouldn't take him in the first round. And like you said, yes, he looks apart. Arm strength is up there. Athleticism is up there. And I think his accuracy is fine. at time. It's not going to be top tier like a C.J. Stroud or even a Bryce Young. But the arm is, you can make an arm, it is the best

in the class. It's up there with Anthony Richardson. But the rest of it is just kind of, it's just kind of rough. All right. Give me other quarterbacks that you think, you know, day two, day three that you like. You mentioned Tanner McKee from Stanford. You mentioned your guy, Hendon

Hooker, obviously coming off the ACL that he had against South Carolina. Carolina. Do you consider these guys to be potential, you know, future starters in the NFL, second, third, fourth round guys? Where do you have them? Yeah, I think Tanner McKee is literally just Davis-Mills reincarnated. I think the Stanford quarterbacks, they're all the same person, basically, and they just keep producing these guys, you know, these tall pocket passing quarterback that are very good at that spot, but they're not going to really offer much. So I think someone like Tanner McKee is pretty much a Davis Mills.

And Davis Mills is never really going to be, you know, a top-tier quarterback, but he's a type of guy who can be a backup and a spot starter. So I think that's kind of where Tanner McKee's dealing really is. I think he's, you know, a quick enough processor. And that Stanford Alls says was weird. I think they finally really got with the times of 2022 and 2023 and started including RPO's. And they went heavy, heavy RPO and screen game.

And it's just not really where he excelled. I think some of his best plays were in the intermediate to deep range throws. But they went heavy with RPO style, and he wasn't much of a threat to run it. So it was just kind of a weird offense. And maybe that kind of held back some of my evaluation, and we can see how he does in a better offense. But I think Tanner McKee is a type of guy that can be a spot starter and a career back in the NFL.

And Hennon Hooker, it's tough for me. Like you've mentioned, I'm a dire of Tennessee fan. I love everything he did for Tennessee. was an incredible year this past year, but he's 25 coming off a torn ACL. That offense does not provide much in terms of what he can do going forward. Everything in that offense was really predetermined. It just kind of based on alignment, based on what the defense was showing. If that wasn't open, he's just taken off to run.

Heavy, heavy RPO style offense was the beneficiary of a lot of busted coverage just because of that offense. So it pains me to say it, but I don't see much in Henan Hooker. I think maybe you're looking at hopefully the best case scenario for him as a career backup. But yeah, 25 years old already coming off in ACL does not help him at all. So that's just kind of where I haven't. As much as it hurts me to say it. Have you looked at anybody else?

No. Like I said, there's not many other players that really kind of stand out to me as someone who can maybe make that jump. And I made this mistake last year with Brock Purdy. so maybe I'm going to be wrong again. But maybe you kind of look at a guy like Aiden O'Connell from Purdue. That was one I was going to ask you about. Yeah. Yeah, I think Brock Purdy kind of maybe not really set a new precedent,

but kind of showed that maybe you should start looking more at these quarterbacks that have played four or five years. And, yeah, Aiden O'Connell is someone who's done that. He's played a lot with Purdue. DTR also at UCLA. Yeah. So I think those are maybe some guys you could look in later, rounds. I think those would be the type of players that I would look at.

Some of these played four or five years who knows what they're doing and has a higher floor than most. Jake Hainer kind of interested me from Fresno State. Athletic a little bit. But yeah, those are just the type of guys that I would look at. Even really Stets had Bennett, I think he's another guy that's played a decent amount, played with some really good talent. I think his floor is going to be higher than most. But I think those are the type of guys that you can really look at. Yeah, I think I was going to ask you about the, you mentioned two of them. I was going to ask you about Hainer and O'Connell if you had looked at them.

And I think Dorian Thompson, Robinson, DTR from UCLA also is an interesting guy. Like you said, has played a lot of football, you know, at UCLA. And we've seen some of that in recent years when you've played as much as Brock Purdy has. The adjustment isn't as great. All right, two more for Nick. Actually, one more. I got one more for you. So right now on March 8th, give me the quarterbacks that you would like to see, not who you think we'll see, who you'd like to see, that are reasonable, within reason,

understanding sort of their mindset here in the offseason, that you'd like to see on the training camp roster. Now, are you talking about free agents and draft kind of included? Yes. So there are three guys at least in the quarterback room. And you know one of them more likely than not is going to be kind of a veteran guy, more likely than not. So it's Sam Hal and give me two more. Yeah. So I've always kind of thought that they would go Sam Howell and then like you said, a veteran guy.

So someone like maybe like an Andy Dalton or Jacoby Brissette, someone like that that can kind of come in and just kind of be a nice mentor for Sam Howell. and if Howell is very, very bad, can step up and you won't lose much of a step with the guy like that. Andy Dalton last year was surprisingly really good with the Saints in kind of, you know, a weird situation. And Jacoby Brissette was also the same. Those are two guys that I would really like to see. They might even push for quarterback one spot the way they played last year. Well, you only get a choice of one because you're not going to sign both of them. Which one would you prefer?

Yeah. I think I would prefer Berset. I think we've seen him over these past couple of years kind of really be a pretty solid quarterback when he's had to step in. And then I would take somebody in like the fifth, six round that you can hopefully kind of develop, keep on a practice squad.

So someone like, I think I would go with Aidan O'Connell, someone who's played a lot of football and has kind of really shown some flashes at times. I mean, I read just from the thing that's just sticking in my head, like it's from a, I'm a Tennessee fan, the Purdue versus Tennessee bowl game last year, when it was just kind of a crazy back and forth off. Crazy game.

Really, really impressive in that one. So I think someone like that is what I would go with, but I've always kind of been of the mindset that it's going to be, like you said, a veteran, and then they draft someone late. I think that's just kind of how they go in with it and kind of give how will the quote-unquote QB1, but they just kind of let it play out in training camp too or where they go from there. I just pulled up the box score because that was one of the most exciting bowl

games in recent years. Purdue won at 4845 in overtime. O'Connell threw for 500. You didn't have to remind me about the Purdue winning. O'Connell threw for 534 yards, five touchdowns, three picks. Hooker threw for 378 and 5 touchdowns. So they combined for 912 yards passing and 10 touchdowns. Pretty good in that game. Yeah. Yeah. How do you feel about Matt Ryan? If you were to ask me last year, I would have been high. I thought I thought Matt Ryan would have been the better option than Carson. Me too.

Based on the year prior. Yeah. But after what I saw with the Colts, I don't know, he looked really, really bad in that Colts. Their offensive line was not as great when it came to pass protecting with him. But I would be intrigued. I just, I don't know how willing he would be to kind of be. a backup right now. I don't know if what his mindset

really is, but I mean, I would be intrigued. I don't know if I would really put him above a Burset or Dalton based solely on what we saw last year, but if you were to ask me two years ago, I would have been all in on it. I don't know what the PFF ranking was for him last year, but he had some games that were Matt

Ryan-esque. I mean, he had a game against Jacksonville where he was 42 of 58. I looked this up this morning, and I remember the game for 389 yards and three touchdowns. He had a game in the opener when they blew the lead and Houston came back. Bad Houston team came back and tied him where he threw for like 352 and I think through, you know, they completed 70% roughly of his passes. The only reason I brought it up is I had a guest

on this morning, this longtime NFL reporter out of Boston who said he's got Matt Ryan to Washington because he said Ron Rivera and Matt Ryan have had, you know, a decent relationship over the years. And I guess the reason is they were just in the same division. And they played some big games against one another, Carolina, you know, New Orleans, Atlanta during those years. But Matt Ryan mentor, great locker room guy, incredibly smart. The thing is, though, if you, I like Dalton too. And I thought Dalton was good last year. If you bring in Dalton, if you bring in Brissette, maybe if you bring in Ryan,

I mean, are you more tempted to just start them at the beginning of the year if Sam Hal is a little bit slower developing than you like? And then you don't get Sam Hal for 17 games, which I think a lot of people would like to see. I'd actually like to see him compete for a playoff spot with much better quarterback play because the roster is pretty good. And by the way, I think Dalton would be an upgrade. I think Brissette would be an upgrade. I think maybe Matt Ryan. I don't know what his physical status is, but I think Matt Ryan would, probably be an upgrade over what they've had here in recent years.

No, I mean, I completely agree. I think I've said multiple times how much of, how against the Carson Went's move I was last year, I think Carson is just really not there when it comes to the mental side of quarterback play. And like I said, two years ago, if you told me Matt Ryan, I would have been all for it. No, the games you mentioned were good. He did have some kind of impressive games. I think what really stuck out is the first five or six.

games for Ryan last year with the Colts were just really, really bad. He did start to kind of turn a corner towards the end of the year. They obviously benched him, but they went back to him at times. And he was pretty decent. But like you said, I think if he did come to Washington, I think he could push for that QB one job. And I know a lot of fans want to see Sam Howell, but we've only seen one game from him. So if you're just kind of going off that one game, I think it'll be tough to kind of say, let's go with Howell and keep someone like Ryan on the bench. Yeah, it's one of those things, Nick, where it's like, okay, great. There are a lot of people that saw what they needed to see in that one game,

and they're going back to where he should have been drafted, you know, based on the early projections and Washington got a steal and they've been saying nice things. But the possibility exists that he can't do it, people. Like, it's a strong possibility. Like the chances of him not being able to do it are greater than him. him being able to turn into the franchise quarterback. And by the way, they're not even close in terms of the odds going in. So if he's not the guy and everybody realizes it early on, it'd be better for next year anyway,

unless you're just openly in favor of going 2 and 15 and getting Caleb Williams, which I completely would buy into as well. But if you want to be competitive next year and Ron Rivera wants to be competitive, I would think. They got to sign somebody like Dalton Brissette. They got to have a legitimate starting NFL quarterback, you know, back half of the starting NFL quarterbacks, but something that they haven't had here in recent years that can run an offense, can make the throws, and can take advantage of a team that's in a roster that's not that bad. Yeah. It's just such, it's a weird spot that this team is in. In a very, in a very weak,

sneak NFC because they have one of the best rosters in the NFC if you're taking out just the quarterback position. They have, it's up there with some of the best rosters. Obviously, that offensive line needs a bit of work. You could use some secondary depth, but it's a very, very solid roster, and you're just waiting for that quarterback. We've been waiting for that quarterback forever. And if you see Sam Howell struggling, I don't see why they would kind of wait to put someone

in that, you know, they know can operate the offense at a high level. And I think that's what they were hoping for with Went. I think it was a weird choice to go with someone like Wentz. But, yeah, it's just such a weird spot that they're in because of how kind of weak the NFC really is. If expense weren't an issue, if they were, you know, their old selves, I would say go after Aaron Rogers, go after Lamar Jackson, swing big. I was in favor of swinging big last year. I would have been wrong about Russell Wilson. I was in favor of the year before with Matt Stafford and Deshawn Watson when it was obvious that he became.

available before all the stuff. It would also lead me to this, which I've talked about here recently. Maybe we've talked about this before, but remind me of what your answer is, but if they really like somebody, like if they really liked Anthony Richardson, and Richardson was still dangling there

at seven and eight in the draft with Carolina on the board, ready to snatch them up, I would say go trade up. Do whatever you need to get a guy that you're in love with. I'd feel the same way about Stroud or Young as well. I feel less so about Levis, and I think you and I are an agreement on that. But I think that they, since they're not swinging big via trade or free agency,

they should be thinking quarterback at 16 or higher if they like somebody. I am not opposed to that. Are you? No, not at all. I've always been of the mindset that if you really, really like a quarterback, you should do everything in your power to go get him. I think the quarterback position is the one position where you can't really overspend. Now, if you miss, obviously it's an overspend, and we've seen that problem in the past.

But if, like you said, if Richardson's sitting there at something like six or seven and they love him, you should do everything in your power to go get him. Even if they love someone like Will Levitt, if they love someone like Will Levitt and he's still sitting there at 16, I think you should take him. I wouldn't. but we've seen how quarterback evaluation can be kind of all over the place. So if they love someone like Will Love us, I think they have to do everything in their power to do it

because if you have that quarterback, it just makes everything so much easier. I agree. All right. This was The Quarterback Show with Nick Ackridge. We'll do more with him as we approach the draft and look at offensive linemen and corners, et cetera. Thanks for doing this, as always. I really appreciate it.

Yeah, of course. You have a good one. Nick Ackridge, pro football focus data analyst. Follow him at PFF underscore Nick Ackridge. All right. Up next, let's talk some college hoops. It's conference tournament time. We'll have the bracket unveiled on Sunday evening.

One of the best bracketologists out there is Patrick Stevens. He'll join us next. All right, this segment of the show is presented by MyBooky. Go to MyBooky.ag. Use My promo code, Kevin D.C. And they'll allow you to do something that most books don't allow you to do. They'll allow you to cash in and cash out quickly. You only have to bet your deposit amount one time and you can cash out right away.

And it's perfect for events like March Madness, the tournament, even conference tournaments this weekend, where you just feel like betting for the weekend, but you're not going to do it when baseball starts. MyBooky offers you that opportunity. MyBooky.ag, use my promo code, Kevin, D.C. Jumping on with us right now is Patrick Stevens. Of course, Patrick has been covering so many college sports in our area for such a long period of time and has been doing the college brackatology for the Washington Post for many years. You can follow Patrick on Twitter at D1S course.

C-O-U-R-S-E's with us right now as we are at, you know, mid-partion of conference tournament week. Maryland hasn't played a game. They'll play on Thursday night. And I want to start there because I think most of our listeners that are into college hoops or into the local teams, and we'll start with Maryland. What would they have been, where would you have had them on the seed line had they held on and beaten Penn State versus where you have them now? Yeah, that's probably at this point worth maybe a line.

I mean, I think I'd probably have them on the seven line if they've won that game. I mean, it's kind of fluid in that six, seven, eight, nine range at this point. There really isn't a massive difference between the tail end of the six line and basically most of the eight line at the beginnings of the nine line. So it's probably worth a little bit. But at the end of the day, you know, I think they've played themselves into a spot where they're probably going to have to deal with a line. one or a two seed if they do happen to win their first game in the NCAA tournament.

So is there anything they can do? We know that in more recent years that these conference tournaments haven't been weighted very heavily at all. Is there anything they can do in the Big Ten tournament to get out of the eight, nine situation where they've got to face a Houston or a Bama or a UCLA in the second round? I mean, maybe make the final. I mean, the thing is, first of all, You're right when you say that there has not been an overwhelming amount of weight placed on conference tournament of late.

You haven't had a situation like, for example, the classic 04 Maryland that was the sixth seat in the ACC tournament, ended up a six-seat overall in the NCAA tournament after winning that ACC tournament. You think about last year, Virginia Tech made that run in the ACC tournament. it netted them in 11th. So I think for Maryland, when you win two or three games, maybe you can get yourself up to the six line. The other thing to remember,

that Big Ten final doesn't end until about a half hour or so before the selection show. So, you know, you've seen plenty of times over the years where it looked like that game didn't have any sort of impact at all because, you know, it's hard for them to do a whole lot with it, right? Like, you know, and the process that they go through is they spend so much time on feeding

the field, and you're talking about one single game at the end of a 34, 35 game sample size. The thought is it just isn't going to move the needle that much one way or the other. You know, and that's, I think, something that people don't quite get that, A, every game is equal, and, two, that the seating is what the committee spends more time on than anything else by a, vast amount. The actual bracketing exercise is kind of haphazard. And they'd frankly be wise to build an extra couple hours into that or maybe kind of try to twist some arms and try to get some of those conference tournament games to be done maybe an hour or two early. You've been to a lot of Maryland games this year. What do you think of their chances next week? And you haven't seen a

bracket, but just overall, what kind of team do you think they have? What are they capable of? Well, I think at their best, they've obviously done very good work, but at their best, they've been at Hull. And I look at what they've done away from Hull, and the last time they beat a good team outside of College Park was before Thanksgiving. Since then, they've beaten Louisville and Minnesota, and nobody would accuse either of those teams of being particularly good. So I suspect that Maryland's season will come to an end sometime next weekend, whether that in a 7-10 or an 8-9 game where you're in a top-up situation or while dealing with a Houston or an Alabama or a UCLA or whoever it may be or Kansas or someone like that. I think Maryland has come pretty close to maxing out what it has.

you can certainly look at a few games that they gave up late, Nebraska, and Penn State are the two that come to mind immediately, and say, you know, they left a couple wins on the table. But I also think that when you look at what they've done at home, there's probably a few games there that you go, well, they played better than you could have possibly expected them to play against the Purdue, against an Indiana in the second half. And so I tend to think that for Maryland at this point, that simply getting into the tournament is a win based on what we would have thought of them back at the beginning of November. That said, I don't know if they're going to have the depth or the size to match up with some of the better teams in the country, a top eight type of team that they would likely have to face in a second round scenario. Yeah, I kind of have been saying all year long, I equate this team to kind of like the

2021 team, which was supposed to be a rebuilding season after the, you know, Big Ten championship year where they didn't get to play in the tournament. And I just thought they overachieved all year long. They beat Yukon, you know, as a 10 seed. I think Yukon was the seven. And then Alabama just had way too much for them, you know, in the second round. And I kind of envision something similar, you know, in an eight, nine game, I think. think you have them against Auburn, you know, in Auburn or in Arkansas, somebody like that. And then, you know. That's not a good matchup, by the way.

Neither one of them are really. I'm going to ask you just about the Big Ten in general here because I think some of the matchups are going to be interesting when they get into the field of 68. But I just think that this team, like Willard squeezed as much as you were going to squeeze out of this group. And I thought Turgeon, two years ago, squeezed as much as you were going to squeeze as. out of that 21 team that didn't have sticks or Cowan on it after they graduated? Yeah, I would agree with that. I thought that 21 was the best coaching job that Turgeon did in his time at Maryland. Now, he was also responsible for the state of that roster,

which was, you know, maybe his worst offseason going in here, which understandable in some ways because of the pandemic. But, you know, I think Kevin Willard did a fine job. I think when you look at the guys that they brought in, they got a lot of mileage out of Jemir Young. I thought he would be a guy that would average 13 or 14 a game in league play, or overall, I should say, when he arrived from Charlotte. He's been better than I thought he would be, and I was willing to give him a fair bit of credit. You know, Patrick a Million has been a really valuable piece for them. Supervary.

And for people that like basketball and enjoy watching. basketball. He's a really fun player to watch because of just how much stuff he does right. You know, and they got decent mileage out of Hakeem Hart and decent mileage at Dante Scott. And Julian Reese has gotten better

over the course of the season. They're just not particularly deep. In Martinez is a guy that got better this year today. So there was a lot of, there was a lot of improvement. But that said, you know, there is kind of, I think, a cap to what this team's

team can really do. And again, to kind of go back to the earlier point, you know, they've just been so much better as a home court team that you wonder how much anything is realistically going to travel for them here over the next couple weeks. Yeah. And they're an older team too, which helped a lot. But yeah, at least they don't have to play a true road game. And they were pretty good in their neutral floor games early in the year against St. Louis and Miami. All right. Tell me about the Big Ten and what your expectations are going into the tournament. How many teams in the Big Ten do you think can make the final four? Gosh, I don't think I trust any of them. So you don't trust Purdue? No, no, I don't. I don't trust Purdue. And I certainly don't

trust Indiana, and I certainly don't trust the Red. I mean, I've watched all these teams come through town basically, right? And I've seen them, you know, all of them lose. And so there's a little bit of, you know, do you trust what your eyes tell you. But there's also this issue that I think, you know, kind of gets overlooked in the discussion about the league, which is who's actually the good guards in this league?

Right? Purdue doesn't have them. Purdue doesn't have them. They're too young. Northwestern. Northwestern's got them. And it's certainly, certainly buoys, you know, a good guard, and Jemir Young's an excellent guard. Yeah, I mean, the list basically is Northwestern has the best back court in the league with Bowie and Aud Beach. And I don't even think it's particularly close that they have the best back court in the league. Okay, you got Jamir Young. You have Jail and Pickett at Penn State,

but he plays out of the post. Yeah, he does. So do you count him as a guard or not? I mean, he's guard side. And then, you know, Terrence Shannon is more of a wing, right? More of a, more of a two-slag three type than a one, and not even that much of a two, really. So those are your guard. Like, it's not a great guard league. And I think about, when I think, you know, consider what happens in March, it's such a, it's such a guard-driven thing. Like, you look at how teams have beaten Purdue, they've kind of just said, okay,

Zach Eadie is a seven-foot-four monster. and if he goes and gets 25 and 16 against us, but we slow down everybody else, we've got a pretty good chance to win. And you look at Indiana, and you say kind of the same thing about Trace Jackson-David. Let him get his, and if you can contain everybody else,

you're probably going to have a pretty good chance to win. And we can start going through the rest of the teams in that league, and, you know, Ruckers, if they do get in, they can't score enough to make a run. Iowa doesn't defend enough to, to be able to make a serious run. And I'm pretty much done replacing any faith in them after last season once they got into the tournament.

You know, we could run, you know, this is not a vintage Michigan State team by any stretch. It's not, but I would never count them out from just beating people up in the first two weekends to get to the next weekend. There's no doubt. And in some ways, maybe they're the best. Maybe they're the most likely final four team out of that week. I just know that I've watched enough of these teams, and it's not the most aesthetically pleasing basketball for sure. I just don't think they're that good.

I think that the thing is, it reminds me, the comparison I've made, is it reminds me of late 2000s ACC football, where you had like a bunch of eight and four teams, and we all could sit there and say, yeah, there's a bunch of teams in this league that are between 20 and 40 nationally. But, you know, how many of them are really that good? Like, how many of them are capable of hanging with the top ten in the country on a consistent basis? And the answer is that they didn't have those teams. And besides maybe Purdue, which I do think has a decent chance to make it to the second weekend, simply because, you know, EDI is a monster, and teams that haven't dealt with them are probably in a struggle a bit to cope with him. But this is

also the same Purdue team, granted, different points. players, but a same Purdue program that lost the St. Peter's last year. With Jade and Ivy. With Jade and Ivy. So, you know, I just look at the league, and, you know, at least this year we haven't had to listen to a constant drumbeat of how awesome the Big Ten is, because we all knew better to begin with. And now you have, you know, this crop of 11 and 9 and 12 and 18.

that you kind of size up and you go, you know what, they're decent, but they're nothing special. And, you know, there's certainly some teams that have a right to celebrate interesting or fun or surprising seasons. Like Northwestern should be thrilled. You know, Maryland should be thrilled. Penn State's had a nice season for what they are. But there's a few other teams like that, too.

But, again, kind of back to the larger point, I have a hard time seeing any of those teams winning four games in a row. Purdue and maybe Michigan State would be the two most likely of the bunch. I think I'd probably say Indiana right after that, but I don't feel like it's likely that we see any of those teams sticking around for the last weekend of the tournament, and I don't think we're going to see that many stick around for the second weekend of the tournament. It would not surprise me if we're sitting here in another two weeks or so,

and we're talking about how the Big Ten went five and eight on the first weekend and only got one team into the second weekend. Yeah, I don't think I'd be that surprised either. I'd be disappointed, but I wouldn't be that surprised. I think Indiana has, in Hood-Shafino, a player that could absolutely go on a tear and blow up. I've seen him play a few games at a ridiculously high level as a score. You know, in the back court, by the way. and I think they're an interesting team.

But the Purdue thing, I think, is fascinating. I thought those guards, those freshman guards early on, were going to be a problem for the rest of the league, and they just haven't been. And maybe they will be next year, but Edy won't be here. I just love Matt Painter as a coach, and yet, you know, they lose to St. Peters, and they lost to, whoever they lost to in the first round,

was it North Texas two years ago. And then... That sounds right, yeah. Something like that. And then, you know, the Carson Edwards game against UVA was really the chance for them to win the whole thing. And they had, you know, UVA dead to write multiple times and lost in overtime. And Virginia went on to win the national championship. But I think I'm with you with the Big Ten.

Look, the style of play has, for whatever reason, you know, worn teams out. And it seems like they've gotten to the, you know, the big tournament. And now all of a sudden you've got teams that want to run and teams that are run. running off made buckets, and it's not the same grinded out style. I don't know if that's hurt a little bit. Who knows? It's cyclical. I have one other thing that I think has some validity.

And that is that I don't think there's another power conference that has as much time zone crossover as you see in the Big Ten, where you have, you're constantly going from one time zone to another during the course of the season. You're playing a narrow game. The Big 12 is almost entirely in the... That's true, except for West Virginia, right? Right, right. The SEC has that crossover a little bit, too.

But, you know... Wait until USC and UCLA getting in the league. Yeah, and I think it's going to be interesting to see how that impacts things. But when you're going from, when you're playing one of those Sunday, Wednesday, Saturday combinations where you're, you know, your... at Minnesota, home on Wednesday, and then, let's say, at Ohio State on Sunday. I know I'm starting to sound like Kevin Wood. We're at Nebraska.

Yeah, even worse. Or whatever. Or whatever. Yeah. Right. But the point, the point being is that, you know, it's, you know, I think there's, I think there's more, more of a challenge to that than people give it credit for. Let's move on to Virginia.

I've watched them enough down the stretch. overly impressed. Losing at Carolina, the BC loss was bad. They should have lost to Notre Dame. They could have lost a Louisville on the road, which would have been a devastating loss. What do you think their upside is? Upside is a seed is probably the four line, maybe a three if they win the ACC tournament. But upside in terms of the actual season, I just don't think that they score enough to realistically be much more than maybe a sweet 16 team. I could see, I could see them slogging their way to a couple victories in Greensboro next weekend as a four or five seed, just kind of beating people up and winning 59, 55, or something

like that. But it's also, this is not one of those truly elite Virginia defense. They're good. You know, like Virginia is not going to feel the bad defense. a team. But this is not one of those smothering, just take you out of everything type of Virginia defenses that we've seen over the years. And so, yeah, I think that Virginia is obviously a team that takes some effort to adjust to and to deal with. But the deal is the same in terms of facing that team. If you have guards that can get to the bucket or you have outside shooters, you can beat them. That's how they were, you know, basically from 2016, you know, when Syracuse was able to shoot its way past them with that, you know, coming back from that

big deficit in the elite eight to 2018 with UMBC, basically shot 50% from three, had some little guards that could get to the bucket, you know, over and over and over again when we've seen Virginia struggle, that has a lot to do with it. And so there's a little bit of matchup oriented there. But I also think that the cohesion and sort of the program foundation, if you will, is strong enough for them to be able to win a game or two. But I don't think this is a national title contender by any stretch of the match. One more local question, and then I want to get back to some big picture questions on the tournament in the bracket.

Who gets the job at Georgetown? assuming Patrick is bought out and doesn't come back? Yeah, first of all, I think you almost have to assume that there will be some sort of an announcement in the next week or two about, you know, Ewing stepping aside and probably having a nice big check to cash, as well he should. You know, if somebody's willing to give you the contract extension, you shouldn't turn it down. He certainly shouldn't turn down the buyout money. It's an interesting question.

And, you know, I think that, you know, that a lot of the questions around Georgetown are, you know, who ultimately is kind of running things and who ultimately is also going to have a say in how your program is run. And so, you know, I don't know where they go. You know, I've thought of a couple names in recent weeks, you know, that might fit the profile, right? you know, there's a lot of like subtleties to that job. And the other thing, too, is they haven't had an open coaching search in 50 years, basically. You know, so you don't know, even if they do one, what it's going to look like. But I'll give you a name that I like, and it's possible that he's going to be in the mix for other gig.

But I think the biggest thing that Georgetown simply needs right now, and this sounds really obvious, but when you're as bad as they've been the last couple of years, you really do need to do it. They need a guy that can coach basketball. They just need a guy that's a good basketball coach. And a guy that comes to mind that has worked in cities, he's worked in Indianapolis, in Atlanta, and now in New Orleans, and a guy that really knows what he's doing,

has a great personality, would really kind of galvanize things as Ron Hunter down at Palais. The guy knows what he's doing. That would be a guy that would be on my radar. You know, the name that everybody wants to bring up is Rick Petino. I don't know if Rick Petino is the right match for Georgetown as an institution and how it wishes to portray itself. And I think you can read between the lines as the kind of what that implies. That doesn't mean Rick Petino can't coach.

It certainly doesn't mean Rick Patino can't recruit anybody that's been Iona this year and a fair number of other Metro Atlantic teams realizes that he recruited a championship team. Basically, they're just bigger and stronger and faster than everybody in that league. And he would certainly be able to do wonders at Georgetown if he was the head coach. But I don't know if that's the road

that the Hoyas are going to take. I tend to think that, you know, you look at what they've done in the past, you know, an assistant in Escherich was elevated, That was obviously sort of set up by John Thompson, Jr. J.T.3 comes in. He'd been the head coach at Princeton. Patrick Gilling, a former player and an NBA assistant. It's all been in the family. It's all been in the family. So there's no breadcrumbs to follow as to what they would do. I struggle to know what that would look like. I struggle to know what a Georgetown program looks like if it just behaves like a 21st century college basketball program that doesn't have.

have the secrecy and sort of a, you know, obviously the paranoia is the word associated with it. But it is a program that, you know, it's very much rooted in what it was 30, 40 years ago. And, you know, for them to be able to succeed moving forward, they are going to have to bring themselves into the 21st century completely. And I'll be curious to see if that happens, because I don't think it's a guarantee. Yeah, I mean, do you think Chris Holtman's going to be available after this year in Columbus? That's a good question. I joked after, you know, they lost to Maryland in college park in late January that the person that was most upset with the Buckeyes losing in the football semifinals was Chris Holman because suddenly people were going to start paying attention to him.

And then things never got any better from there. They were ranked at the time. They were ranked at the time, if you recall. They were. they were, but they were also erratic to that point. And so I think that, I think it's possible. I mean, I feel like... Because I think he's a good coach. I do think he's a good coach.

I don't know if he's a great coach, and I don't know how much they really care about basketball to, you know, if they're not just going to give him an extra year before, maybe they send him packing after next season or something. I don't know, again, I don't know if that's the right match. for Georgetown as well. But maybe, I mean, obviously spent time in the Big East to Butler. But, you know, there's a few other names that are floating around out there that

Chris Collins? Chris Collins, maybe, although I suspect that he can settle in for another five or six years at Northwestern now without too much trouble. I'll give you a name that I'm intrigued by just because I think he's going to be in the tournament this year. He's been in the tournament at his current school once before. He was in the tournament at another school previously. He's got a good personality, would be a good face of the program type. It is an East Coast guy, if not necessarily a D.C. guy. And that's Kevin Keith at N.C. State, who might be somebody that has kind of, after six years, realized that, you know,

even though Shoshisky and Roy Williams are gone, the Duke and Carolina, the emeth and the expectations of having to match those teams, those expectations wear on you after a while. And they've worn on pretty much everybody basically since Jim Valvano left or was ousted or however you want to put it. So I think that might be a guy that's given his background as somebody that has worked the portal reasonably well, might be somebody that could be of some appeal on the hilltop. NC State, they're going to make it, right? I think they're going to.

I mean, they play Virginia Tech later today, and I think as long as they win that game, there's not going to be much of a reason to keep them out. I keep saying that, you know, every year I say it, there's 36 at large as they're not going to just take 32. Every year, you and I say the same thing. It's like, no, Maryland doesn't have a chance. I'm like, they got to fill out the bracket. you've got to have 68 in the bracket, and it's hard to find him. By the way, Herb Sondek was the biggest kind of mistake they ever made

and not kind of realizing he was one hell of a coach, and they were winning and going to tournaments, because it's been a nightmare with the exception of that brief period of Gottfried. I actually think Kevin Keats is a good coach, and NC States, you would agree with this, right? It's a better job than Georgetown. Yeah, I think so. I think so.

Yeah. So, anyway. But, that said, you know, the Biggie still has some cachet. You've got a gleaming practice facility. Georgetown is a national brand, and you're not going to have people, like, constantly comparing you to your neighbors, basically. Like, you know, Georgetown and Maryland, yes, they operate in the same market, but they've sort of shadow-boxed, right, for basically the last 40 years. They just sort of been, you know, in almost their own little worlds, except for the rare intersections that they've had. Yeah, they shouldn't be, by the way. They shouldn't be.

They should play every year, but continue. But my point being, like, you don't have those comparisons. Instead, you're in a league full of city schools, which the biggie still basically is, even if it's more spread out than it's original iteration. and you're dealing with the Villanovas and the Providences and St.ton Halls and Xavier's of the world, you know, that is not the same, you know, and it's not quite the same pressure cooker. And let's be honest, like, if Georgetown let Patrick Ewing stick around after a year in which he went, what, 6 and 25 last year, then the rope's probably, the leash is probably going to be fairly long. Yeah, it's just falling off so much.

I mean, it's, you know, I look at Louisville this year and Georgetown of last year in particular, and it's almost impossible in this day and age to think of those two programs being as bad as they've been. Louisville, really, I mean, I don't know how Kenny Payne keeps his job, even though they just gave him that massive extension. It's crazy. All right, let's talk about the tournament real quickly. So give me kind of the big-time bubble teams. and I want to start with North Carolina. What do you think the chances,

what do they need to do in the ACC tournament to avoid becoming the first preseason AP number one team not to make the tournament? I think they need to win at least three games. I mean, because beating Boston College tonight isn't going to do them any good. So if they win that game, they get Virginia next. And then after that, you've got Clemson or NC State

or Virginia Tech waiting for you. and, you know, that's kind of a wobbly game there, right? Like, I mean, it's not that it would be a bad loss, but they need good win. And so I think they need to pick up a couple decent victories while they're in Greensboro. And frankly, I don't know if they can. You watch them and all year, they just haven't been right. And some of this comes down to the idea of, well, you know, we put a little too much faith and in, you know, they had a five-game winning streak at the right time last year,

and everybody thought they were going to be awesome. But even if they'd been a second-round team last year, and they still brought back R.J. Davis and Caleb Love and Armando Baycott and Leaky Black is kind of the core group, you would have looked at that, even without that final four, and that's probably the makings of a top 20 team. So, you know, and here they are, and you wouldn't even consider them a top 40 team at this point. and it's really been one of the more befuddling storylines of the season, why Carolina hasn't been able to figure things out.

And so I think it's going to require at least a trip to the ACC title game. What about Michigan, those two painful losses, to Illinois, a game that they seemingly had a really good chance to close out, and then to Indiana in overtime. Both of those games went to overtime. They lost both of them. People thought they needed at least one, if not both of them. What do they need to do in the Big Ten tournament to get there?

I think they have Rutgers, right, in that first game. I feel like they probably need to win at least twice while they're in Chicago. You know, beating Rutgers would be doubly good for them because it would help them and hurt Rutgers, which has played its way down to the edge of the field. but basically, you know, you look at the Scarlet Knight, and they have some good wins, and they also have those befuddling losses, and they haven't been the same since the Mag Kid got hurt. You know, defensively, they just haven't been the same team.

They're still good, but not the same team. And so, you know, Michigan wins that game, then they get Purdue. I think that would be the kind of thing that could bolt them into the field. I don't know if just one win is going to be able to do it for the world. You've got Penn State out. I thought when they tipped it in at the buzzer that that was their trip and that they were in on Sunday that they needed to beat Maryland. You still have them out. So do they need to beat Illinois to get in? I think they need at least one. I think their necessity is probably a little less than maybe a couple other teams in that league.

You look at their profile. It almost depends on what. which angle you're trying to look at it. In some ways, it's like, well, there's not a lot bad there, and then you kind of shake the etches, sketch a bit. Maybe there's not quite enough good there either. I think they're a team that will certainly be keeping an eye out for any sort of bid snatchers lurking in other leagues. There's not going to be one out of the West Coast conference, obviously,

after Gonzagel won that. But there's obviously some other conferences where you're going to have to be concerned with that sort of stuff. So for the moment, you know, I think, Penn State probably does have at least a little bit oracle left in front of it. All right. What do you think the committee, or what does the committee say they use more than anything in evaluating these teams? Is it the net rankings? Does Ken Palm come into this at all? Give us the criteria that that committee is looking at in evaluating teams.

The net ranking is a sorting tool. And so the way, that they use it is by saying, all right, this is how we're going to line up the number of quad one wins you have. And I think that I still believe the raw number of quality high-end victories is something that really moves the needle, which is why I don't think Wisconsin is done by any stretch of the imagination. I don't think Wisconsin's good, but you look at their profile and they have six quad one wins, and you'd say they're going to find their way, if they're not in the field, they're certainly in the conversation. So I think that's a big deal. The Ken Palm stuff, I think, is probably misinterpreted that the committee prefers the results-based metrics like

the KPI or the strength of record compared to the predictive metrics, such as Ken Palm or the stagger rate. So, you know, I think the Ken Palm numbers tend to get a little overrated. You know, ESPN's metric of choice tends to be overrated, although I think it only gets mentioned on basically one network. It really, you know, the committee

tries to look at that results-based stuff and who you beat and where you beat them. And, you know, do you have road wins? Did you did you not play a terrible non-conference schedule? There's all these little check marks on a profile, and, you know, sometimes the team that has the least defensive profile, it's like, well, they don't have any bad losses, and they didn't play an awful schedule, and they have a few decent wins, and maybe they're 19 and 12, but there's nothing that says, oh, God, they don't belong. Like, Michigan, for example, they haven't lost to Central Michigan, a team that's 300 plus in the net rankings. Like, that's a, that is one of those things that you go, well, you know, all these other teams don't have that. And so that's something.

a little extra that a team like that has to overcome. I think a fascinating case all year long, and I think even with the win over Kansas State over the weekend, it's probably not enough, is just West Virginia. And, you know, who they've beaten, and they have to have probably seven or eight quad one wins, I'm guessing somewhere in that neighborhood. It's like six. It's like six. Okay, it's six.

And then the teams they lost to, were all really good teams. pretty much all year as well. Like, you don't think they have a chance, even though you'd probably say, right, that they're one of the best 34 at-large teams. Like if they were to- No, no, I think they're almost, I think if they win the night against Texas Tech,

not only are they in the field, they don't go to Dayton. Interesting. They'll be fine. The team sheet has six numbers, six metrics that they have ranked that are listed there. and West Virginia is in the top 35 of all six of them.

This is a team, by the way, that is four games under 500 in their league people who aren't, most of our audience is not paying attention. West Virginia is 18 and 13, and they finish 7 and 11, and third to last in the Big 12, and they're probably going to go to the tournament. What's the worst conference record to ever make the NCAA tournament? Do you know? there's been there's been some four under 500 teams i feel like the big 12 had one of those a few years ago um i know there was a florida state team that went six and ten in the acc that got in um i don't remember that list off the top of my head if i was if i was doing this this sitting at my laptop i probably could have looked up pretty quickly for you uh but ultimately you know it's

happened before uh and it'll probably happen again as you have these super conferences continue to grow and grow and grow. Crazy. All right. Last one for Patrick Stevens. I know I kind of feel like we have said this the last few years, but I kind of view this field going into it as wide open. Like I literally think there are 15 teams that could potentially win the national championship

and maybe 20 to 25 that could make the final four. What do you think? I think it's probably something along those long. I think part of the reason people say that it is a wide open year is because we don't see Duke being awesome, or Carolina is not as relevant, or Kentucky hasn't been as good. So I think that's part of what's going on there. But I think part of it, too, is that, you know, you sit there and wonder, okay, well, Alabama is good, but they're not going to shoot the snot out of the ball every single game.

And so they're going to be a little vulnerable. You look at Houston, and I think I trust Houston more than any other teams of the field. Me too. But, you know, their offense isn't always the most beautiful thing in the world either. You know, we can run down the list of teams here. UCLA can't score or they can struggle to score. I mean, Kansas is good. And they're not as good as they were at.

Right. I think Houston's the team, you know, the more and more I think about him, first of all he does is win and win big everywhere he goes. And he's already gotten this team to the final four. And they've got, you know, they've got some veteran players on this team, obviously Sasser. I think that they, like, they're the team that I guess I would be surprised if they were bounced out early. Maybe that's the way to say it now.

Not if they're not, you know, in the final four. but if they got bounced out early because it is such a wide open field. But, yeah, so you see a lot of, if I were to tell you that a team not, you know, seated in the top 16 won the national championship, that's right outside your top 15. But let's just say got to the national championship game. Give me that team. You know, they've been really inconsistent all year, but they've also played well in the tournament. at the last couple seasons.

You know, Arkansas's healthier now. You know, maybe that's a team that could get on a burner. I'm trying to think of who else you might throw in there. Here's one, because they're finally healthy. Duke's finally healthy. They figured that they were going to be counting on the combination of Jeremy Roach, Dorek, Whitehead, and Derek lively this season, and John Shire's first year as head coach.

And they're not, by the way, just to let everybody know. they're not going to be a top four seat in a region. I just want people to understand that. Yeah. Yeah, they're going to be a five or six seed, probably. But they, you know, when you size up, you know, those guys didn't all play 25 minutes in the same game until about November, until about February 14th. So, you know, they haven't been together for this entire season. So I just, I think that's a.

team that has a chance to make a run. I think Kentucky has a chance to make a run, given how well it's play. Yeah, I agree. Yeah, that that's, that, that, that was the team that I was wondering if you would mention, because I think Kentucky right now with the way they're playing. And by the way, it's just kind of a, it's kind of a weird situation there. I mean, you have this sense that he's going to be the Texas head coach next year, right? I don't know. I don't know. I mean, certainly that wouldn't be the sort of thing that would be shocking based on, you know, the fact that it seems like his Kentucky thing has kind of played itself out, and Texas is willing to, you know, throw money at everybody and everything under the sun.

But ultimately, you know, that maybe Texas makes a run and their hand is forced a little bit. And Rodney Terry's the next head, full-time head coach. He would deserve it considering what happened there. And they're going to be a top two or three. They're going to be a two or a three seed. You've got them as a two, I think. I think they're the number six team on the board right now. I don't think they can fall past.

I don't think they're going to fall to the three law. All right. This is great, as usual. I've kept you too long. Patrick Stevens, follow him on Twitter at D1S course, C-O-R-S-E, him in the post. He covers so much in college sports and so much of it local college sports. Where are you right now? What tournament are you at right now? Well, I actually just pulled into the parking lot at the site of the media shuttle at the

ACC tournament. So I will be in Greensboro for the next couple days. All right. Enjoy that. I used to love Greensboro for the ACC tournament, but I'm a big 10 guy now, Patrick. So it's Chicago that I'll be focused on this weekend. Thanks, as always, hope you're well. Awesome. You take care, Kevin. All right, that's it for the show today. Thanks to Patrick Stevens. Thanks to Nick Ackridge. I'll be back tomorrow with Tommy.