The Kevin Sheehan Show - Payne or Curl?

Episode Date: February 3, 2023

Kevin opened with his response to a Barry Svrluga column pitching Brian Mitchell for the NFL Hall of Fame. Nick Akridge/Pro Football Focus came on the show to talk Commanders' 2022 season grades, the team's off-season QB plan, a breakdown of three of the QBs in the draft, and whether Daron Payne or Kamren Curl should be Washington's top off-season contract extension priority. Andy Pollin jumped on for the show's final segment to talk Bobby Beathard and more. Go to https://www.chime.com/kevindc to sign up for a Chime Credit Builder Visa Credit Card today! Thanks to Chime for supporting the show.  Get 20% Off and Free Shipping with the code KEVINDC at Manscaped.com and shoot your arrow with MANSCAPED™ this Valentine’s Day. To get ready, Roman Ready, for better sex this Valentine’s Day. Go to ro.co/athletic today to get 20% off your entire first order. Place before February 8th for guaranteed shipping in time. Find the perfect piece of jewelry for life’s special moments and save up to 50% now at bluenile.com 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 Cheyenne Show. Here's Kevin. Two guests on the show today. Senior data analysts from Pro Football Focus, Nick Ackridge, who we've had on before. We'll jump on with me in the next segment.

We'll recap the Washington 2020 season. Find out who the highest-graded players on offense and defense were. We'll look towards the draft, the off-season, the plan at quarterback. Nick is fully invested in the team locally and also works for PFF. So Nick will be on with us in the next segment. And then Andy Poland will jump on with me for the final segment. We'll talk about Bobby Bethard and other things with Andy as well. I want to start the show with an email that I just read.

And so I'm a little bit fired up over this email. So I'm going to read it to you. And then I'm going to respond to it here at the beginning of the show. And then I'll get to something else. of interest to me because we've talked about it before, but Barry's Verluga wrote about Brian Mitchell and his Hall of Fame case. Brian's not in the Hall of Fame. He won't be in the Hall of Fame in 2023. The finalist list down to 15 will get selected this Saturday before the Super Bowl, so a week from tomorrow. But anyway, I'll get to that in a moment. This email from Devin,

Devin writes, Kevin, been listening to you for years. I've always appreciated your straightforwardness and your ability to take on the team for its misdeeds in a way that's thoughtful and reasoned without the typical radio screaming and bullying. Sounds good so far. But I find myself on the complete other side of you on the rebrand discussion. And I think you're taking them off the hook and I'm suspicious as to the reasons why. The rebrand, I'll come back to that in a moment. The rebrand was terrible, and yes, they could have done much better. It wasn't as insurmountable a challenge as you described.

For starters, how about just listening to the fans? Red wolves, red hogs, either would have been okay, and both of them would have been a thousand times better than what they came up with. Instead, whatever they used research-wise, they went with boring, completely safe from any kind of controversy and a multi-syllable name that leaves no chance for even a nickname. They blew it. How do you not understand the importance of a full name and nickname for a sports franchise? Caps, Nats, whiz.

They're only one of three teams in the NFL with more than two syllables in their name. And the other two have easy nicknames, the Pats and the Bucks. So the other two NFL teams I'm adding right now are the Patriots and Buccaneers with more than two syllables in their team name. And you've got the commanders as well. And he's right, there is no easy nickname. Nobody's come up with a nickname at this point. He continues, Devin does. You are right when you take them to task for not knowing anything about the city, the fan base, the history of,

the team and you called you called them out for that stupid crest and they changed it. But the challenge wasn't what you made it out to be. And like with everything else, they made it harder on themselves than they needed to. And you took them off the hook. Yes, you've been highly critical of many things that they've done, but I am suspicious about why you're giving them so much leeway on this. first of all, thank you, Devin, for the email. And I do read a lot of the emails that you send through the website at the Kevin Sheehan Show.com. And you can also tweet me at Kevin Sheehan, D.C.

So first of all, you're 100% right about the nickname, and I didn't mention that, and that is an important thing. I agree with you on that. You know, it would have been much easier, and I'm surprised that there wasn't an emphasis on a team name that would have lent itself to an easy, obvious nickname. And that happens more often with two-syllable names, but in the case of the other two NFL teams with three syllables, it's easy with pats and bucks.

And there's nothing easy on commanders. You're right. And I have not mentioned that in the past. Maybe I have, but not emphasized it enough. And that was a big whiff. 100% right. That is something that they could have easily controlled and wasn't, you know, a massive challenge to say right from the jump, hey, whatever we come up with has to have an easy, obvious nickname off of it.

I do think that's important. I do. And not every NFL team has, you know, obviously the one-syllable teams, the bears, the lions, they don't have nicknames necessarily. but the two-syllable teams all do, you know, the cards, the hawks, the Niners, actually 49ers is, 49ers is four syllables. 40-9ers is four syllables. But again, easy nickname off of it, the Niners, et cetera. So I do agree with you on that.

I'm, I still, I disagree with you that this wasn't easy, but you didn't necessarily. necessarily say that. So I don't want to put words into your mouth. But I guess in in terms of the challenge, there were aspects of this challenge that they made more difficult on themselves. Agreed. I agree with you. And I also agree with you that it's very clear that they didn't really listen to the fan base like they said they would. Although I think Red Wolves and Red Hogs and some of those names. Remember, just because that's a trend on Twitter or some fan site puts out, you know, a poll and gets, you know, 150 votes on it and it's overwhelmingly Red Wolves, you know, Twitter isn't real life necessarily, but I agree with you that Red Wolves and or Red,

or Red Hogs would have gone over better. I agree with that. I think Red Hogs in particular, from my standpoint. Red Wolves, as I think, I think, I think, said from the very beginning felt to me very much like, you know, like a CYO sixth grade basketball team nickname. And they had trademark issues with that anyway. Was it Central Arkansas University? I think it's Central Arkansas University. But I think a lot of what you said, I agree with you. I do, I'm not taking them off the hook from this standpoint. I still think it was a process that was going to lead to the majority and the significant majority being disappointed and being angered about whatever they came up with. But, you know, I think we hammered them appropriately so

on the execution. And I think we've done that all along. But yeah, the name and the syllable thing and the no easy nickname, I mean, they're the only team in the league that is more than one syllable that doesn't really have a nickname. Now, as far as your comments about suspicious, you know, when you write, I think you're taking them off the hook and I'm suspicious as to the reasons why and why you're giving them so much leeway. I don't really feel like I'm giving them that much leeway. I'm just acknowledging that I think even if someone like me or many of you with, you know, inherent knowledge of the team and understanding of the customer base, even if we, we're not doing, even if we're not, you we had taken the project on, we wouldn't have pleased everybody. There's no way. I mean,

the bottom line is once the old name was gone, there's just a significant percentage of people that you were never going to please with a new name, which is why I still believe the right way to go is focusing on Washington as the brand. And then we can come up with our own nicknames like soccer teams do. And I'm sure marketing and branding experts will say that kind of thing works, you know, soccer overseas, but it won't work in the U.S. And they may have, you know, real reasons as to why. But I don't know, to me, that would make it easier. You know, I would just call them Washington, which I do most of the time anyway.

I would refer to them as the skins, which I do sometimes anyway. And we could move on, and I would just want the old uniforms back. But I have no problem with the helmet with the W. But as far as being suspicious, I don't know what you're talking about. referring to that somehow I have a relationship with some of the new people that are out there. That's not really true. I know when I talk to some of the new people out there, I do, but it does not stop me and it hasn't stopped me from being constructively critical when appropriate. And I've had conversations with some of those people at times when they haven't been very

happy with what I've said. But I have consistently given them the reasons why I felt that way. More times than not believe it or not, they backed up and said, okay, see where you're coming from. And by the way, you know, maybe some of that makes sense. But anyway, thank you for that email. And yeah, I do understand where you're coming from, netting it out. There were some things that they could have gotten a lot easier and weren't as challenging. And clearly the execution and the rollout, they, you know, they butchered seven ways to Sunday. day. Before we bring Nick Akron, I just wanted to touch on a story that Barry's Verluga wrote in the

Washington Post today. He makes the case for Brian Mitchell to be in the Hall of Fame. The story's titled, Brian Mitchell isn't in the Hall of Fame. It's time to write that wrong. And we've talked a lot about, you know, the players that are in the Hall of Fame and the players who aren't in the Hall of Fame. I truly believe that nobody comes next other than Jake. Joe Jacoby is the major missing Hall of Fame franchise piece. I think you can make cases for others, and I would say you can make a really good case for Gary Clark, actually. And I've mentioned that before. I mean, Gary Clark's numbers match up and exceed some other wide receivers who are in the Hall of Fame. But as it relates to be Mitch. I loved some of the quotes that Barry got for this story from the two coaches,

the two main coaches that coached him, Washington's Joe Gibbs, where he was here for 10 years, and Andy Reed in Philadelphia, where he was here for three years. He played in New York for the Giants for one year, but the quotes were all from Andy Reed, who said, quote, if you're evaluating for great players that love the game and understand the game, he would have to be one of them. Joe Gibbs had some really good quotes about B-Mitch. Quote, when I talk about our Super Bowl teams, I always say that we started with special teams. Our first meeting of each day was special teams. I always felt like special teams was the heart of your team,

because I think all the guys that played just offense or just defense, they had such tremendous respect for the guys that played special teams. There's that appreciation to run down there and field a punt when you got 11 guys coming down to try to kill you or to return upon. And he said about Brian, and this is something that I've heard so many times from so many people who played or coached around Brian Mitchell. Gibbs said, what you came to understand

is that he's really bright and he's really football smart, which is really important. And then Gibbs talked about, you know, B Mitch's physical toughness, and he was, you know, quite the competitor and quite the badass on the field. But I remember a story Norv Turner told about how he needed Brian Mitchell at times to help his young quarterbacks in the huddle call plays,

specifically Heath Schuller, that Brian Mitchell knew the playbook like the back of his hand and knew everybody's responsibility on every play. And literally, and I remember asking Brian about this, he said, yeah, there were, Norv had me at times calling the plays for Heath Schuels. jeweler in the huddle, or helping Heath to call the plays in the huddle and some of our other young quarterbacks. So on Brian Mitchell's case for the Hall of Fame, I think we all know, I think most of you know anyway, that Brian Mitchell, still to this day, is number two on the all-time,

all-purpose yardage NFL career list behind Jerry Rice. Jerry Rice is at 23,546 yards, B. Mitch is at 23,330 yards. B. Mitch literally only needed 247 more yards of all-purpose yardage to be number one on that list ahead of Jerry Rice. And then Walter Payton is literally like nearly 2,000 yards behind him. Emmett Smith the same. Of the four top all-purpose yardage guys, three are in the Hall of Fame, B. Mitch isn't. But Brian is the only special team teamer there.

Then Frank Gore is five. He's headed to the Hall of Fame. Darren Sproulz's six isn't in the Hall of Fame. Tim Brown, 7, Marshall Falk, 7 and 8, they're both in the Hall of Fame. I think for me, when I think about Brian Mitchell, who was, and I've told him this before, he was one of my favorite players. I thought he was a competitive badass. and I loved him as a returner, and I loved him offensively the way Gibbs would use him sometimes. And Brian always came up big in the team's biggest games. When you go, look, everybody was great on that 91 team, and they were never pressed. I mean, that season, by the way, the 91 season opened up, basically with Brian Mitchell returning a punt for a touchdown, second year of his career against Detroit on Sunday night football as part of a 45 to nothing absolute pounding of the lions, which was,

you know, a signal of what was to come in 91. And then in 92, as the defending champions, when they kind of, you know, got into the playoffs, backdoor style, faced Minnesota in the wild card round, Brian had 16 carries for 109 yards in a touchdown, rushing 38 of those yards on a fake punt as the up guy in the punt formation. I mean, Gibbs always had tricks and trick plays in postseason games. And then a week later at Candlestick, Brian was a big part of the comeback. They were down 17-3. They had the ball down 17-13 going in for the go-ahead score.

There's a hole that you could drive a truck through and rip and bobble the snap in the mud at Candlestick, and B-Mitch never got the ball. But if he did, Washington's probably going to the NFC championship game. then let's not forget in 2000, the Norve team that beat Detroit and then lost to Tampa. That's the last time they were anywhere near an NFC title game, the 99 skins with Brad Johnson. And we ended up with the Turks, you know, on the snap and the hold and no kick down 1413. But in that game, Brian gave him a 10-0 lead on a 100-yard kickoff return. And then he was in Philadelphia for three straight years of playoff game.

and had big games, including a 75-yard kickoff return in the NFC championship game on the opening kickoff in 2002 against Tampa. They lost that game. He played in 16 playoff games. He played a lot of playoff games. Does that yardage count as the all-purpose yardage? Because I'm looking at his all-time post-season yardage. He had 875 yards in kickoff returns in the postseason and 339 yards in punt returns in the postseason. Crazy.

And then had another 232 yards rushing in the postseason. Now, as far as Brian in the Hall of Fame, look, Devin Hester is on the finalist list. Brian's never even made it to the semi-finalist list. And I don't have a problem with Brian not being in the Hall of Fame. I think he was a great player. And I think that he's underrated as a player in looking back at the great special teamers and returners in history. By the way, don't forget Brian opened up the 93 season with Richie Pettibone as the starting running back and went for over 100 yards on Monday night football against the Cowboys who were the defending champions coming in.

That was the season that unraveled after Rippin got hurt. The franchise hasn't been any good since. Devin Hester, to me, is the all-time greatest and most electrifying returner in NFL history. There are only three special teamers in the Hall of Fame. Morton Anderson, Jan Stennerud, and Ray Guy. You know, Ray Guy passed away just in the last year, I think it was. So a punter and two kickers. There are no specialists in terms of returners in the Hall of Fame.

No Billy Whitechews Johnson in the Hall of Fame. Devin Hester, I do think, is going to be in the Hall of Fame. I don't know if it's going to be this go-around. I think Joe Thomas looks like a lock to me in this upcoming class. And I would also say that Dorel Revis is probably a lock in terms of the 15 finalists. I think if Devin Hester gets in, that will open up the conversation for another returner. and B. Mitch would be right there, near or at the top of the list. And the all-purpose yardage thing would definitely carry a big part of the conversation.

Number two to Jerry Rice, with nobody really coming close to him in the three spot. But I think Joe Jacoby is the next Washington player in. And then I think everybody else is debatable, but I'm okay with nobody else being in necessarily, including, by the way, a guy like Larry Brown who had a shortened career, even though he was an NFL MVP. But I think Devin Hester should get in, deserves to get in in front of Brian. But I think if he does get in, it could open up the way for at some point down the road for Brian to be more seriously considered other than just on the original list, not having been a semi-finalist or finalist ever.

But the underrated part of Brian was how smart of a football player he was and how he was. clutch of a football player he was. All right. Nick Ackridge from Pro Football Focus next, right after these words from a few of our sponsors. All right, this segment of the show presented by My Bookie, they've designed a unique deposit bonus that lets you cash in and cash out quickly. It's a unique deposit bonus for sports betters who want to focus on what to bet and not sweat the payout. Make your first deposit today.

use my promo code, Kevin D.C. Wager that deposit amount one time and you're eligible to cash out. If you want a sports book that gives you the most for your money, bet on the big game with My Booky, and they've got everything for next Sunday, pre-game, in-game, all the prop bets that you want to pick from. Go to MyBooky where you can bet anything, anytime, anywhere. Again, use my promo code, Kevin D.C., wager your deposit one time, and you're eligible to cash out.

All right, joining me on the show right now is Nick Ackridge. Nick has been on the show many times now. He is a D.C. sports fan. He's a Washington Commander's sports fan, but he's also a senior data analyst for pro football focus. And I was just thinking, you know, as we have this week in between Super Bowl and championship games, to kind of go back a little bit and then look forward

as far as Washington goes. Looking back on the 2022 season, from a pro football-focused standpoint, who were the best players on the team? Who were the highest rated top three or four players on the team? Yeah, I mean, it starts with Montes-Swatt. He was the highest-rated overall player per PFF with 86.4. Cameron Curl was right behind him, 82.9.

Jonathan Allen, 80.1, that's on the defensive side. offensive side it was Brian Robinson 82.5, Terry McCorn, 79.9. Those are kind of the highest five-graded players for us. Interesting that Cam Curl was the second highest-graded defensive player. By the way, where did Duran Payne end up defensively? Payne was 58.4, and it's been a huge talking point with BFF and Duran Payne's great over the past year or so. but the big thing with his grade is he's had, we chartered him with 12 mistackles on the year. So a big thing for him is those quick wins, but he's not finishing the job back there. Which, you know, you can make the argument that he's doing a good enough job, quickly winning and forcing the runner somewhere else, but we're still charting the mistackles,

and those 12 misdackles are the most among all interior defensive linemen. Sounds to me like... That's kind of why the grade is a bit lower. Sounds to me like you don't like the grade. No, I'm not a huge fan of it. I've always kind of argued maybe we shouldn't put so much emphasis on those mistackle in the back field, especially if he is forcing the runner somewhere else, maybe still chart the mistackles and maybe not downgraded as harsh. But that sounds like we've kind of gone back and forth on.

You know, that's interesting. And I mean, I think a lot of the PFF discussion over the years, there have always been, you know, at times for me and many others, there's always been a little bit of a disconnect here and there. And, you know, it's a grade based on obviously the process, not necessarily. always the results. I just think he was a massively impactful player this year as a disruptive force. And it's interesting that he had that many mistackles. I would not have guessed that. I would not have guessed that. But at the same time, I think that your instinct of ultimately his disruption ended up making it easier for someone else, almost as an assist for someone else, was beneficial in a

major way for the defense. I mean, I don't know what the defense would have been without him, but it wouldn't have been as good, in my opinion. You agree with that? No, yeah, and kind of speaking to that, I mean, it kind of leads to higher linebacker grade. You see a lot of times when your interior defensive linemen are, you know, kind of winning quickly in the run game. It helps boost the linebacker grade. And Jamie Davis is kind of a perfect example that he finished with the 62.1, and anything for our system above 60 is above average. So 62.1 for him after his first year, it's pretty promising. you know, a lot of those mistackles that Payne had, you know,

Davis was there to kind of clean it up. And same with Holcomb. He's always kind of graded well in our system. So, yeah, no, it does speak to, you know, the lineback grade being a little bit higher with someone like Payne kind of, you know, messing the play up a bit and making it easier for them. And in the pass rush, Geron Payne was, you know, 49 total pressures is up there.

That's two more than Jonathan Allen. So a pass rush was extremely impressive for him this past year. How important is tackles for loss as a number for you guys? Yeah, I mean, it's up there. We definitely grade those higher than normal tackles, but it all depends on how you get that tackle for loss. So, for example, if, again, if Jamie Davis is getting there unblocked, somebody else has already missed a tackle, and he's just kind of cleaning it up,

it's kind of a normal point five for us. But, you know, if he's beating a block, getting the tackle in the backfield by himself, then that's going to be graded higher than, you know, just kind of a cleanup or unblock. So tackle for loss are usually going to be graded higher, but again, there's a lot of context that goes into really, any single tackle. I mean, it's kind of why I'm not a huge fan of looking at tackles as a stat. I know it's kind of really the only thing we can look at for linebackers and whatnot,

but there's a lot of context that goes into each tackle. Like what is he doing? If you're beating a block? Is he just cleaning it up? How far downfield is that tackle? So stuff like that. And I think that where PFF grades are definitely useful, obviously there's a lot of context that goes into each grade.

And it's something that's kind of hard to portray on Twitter, which is why we get so much pushback at time. But I think it's definitely useful. The only reason I bring it up is for whatever reason this year was one of the first years I paid attention to it because I think somebody at some point said, look at how high up Duran Payne and John Allen are on TFLs for the year. What I noticed was the TFL list includes only great players. And if you go back in years, it's the same thing. Like this year, Nick Bosa, Max Crosby, Chris Jones were one, two, and three. Miles Garrett, Daron Payne, J.J. Watt, Brian Burns, Zadarius Smith.

Christian Wilkins, John Allen, Micah Parsons, and Josh Sweat were all in the top 10, you know, and I went back and looked in previous years. Last year, you know, the top players were Miller, Watt, Bosa, Donald Parsons. And so when you see, the year before that was Watt, Devin White, Roquan Smith, Aaron, Donald, Hassan Reddick, which, by the way, I'm still, I think Cooley said this to me earlier. It's like, how didn't it work out for Hassan Reddick in Arizona? But that's another subject for another day. But it's just one of those stats that for whatever reason, it's only great players that are always in that countdown. Like there are no average players that get kind of into the mix there. You know, it's definitely different than something like Sacks. Because again,

you see Sacks a lot of times boost it up. Exactly. I think Matthew Judon is kind of a perfect example this year. Like huge number in Sacks, but our past rushing grade is lower. Pressures are just kind of average. So He's been kind of the beneficiary of some lucky sacks. But, no, tackle for loss, it's a good, it's a very good stat. I mean, it's something that it's tough to kind of get cleanups on that, especially in the run game just because, you know, there's not a lot of time for you to really kind of get a cleanup tackle for loss. I mean, we use run stop.

It's kind of something we define as, you know, a win for the defense. So, like, a three-yard gain on first and ten would be considered a win for a defense or one-yard gain on second and three or any sort of third down stop. And I think that kind of speaks to the same thing. I mean, this past year, the top three were Christian Wilkins, Aaron Donald, Broderick Washington, Jr, and then Jonathan Allen was fourth-right behind that. So I think it kind of beaked the same sort of thing. So Montes-Swed was the highest-rated defensive player for Washington this year.

If you take all the quantifiable out, did your eyes tell you that he was their best defensive player? You know, it's kind of difficult. I think Cameron Currell and Jonathan Allanar, I think they're always going to be my one and two and whatever order. I just think Crow is so important to this defense and we saw it at the end of the year. I think Montes Sweat. And he led the team in pressures. He was just constantly a force. And I think he's a very, very, very solid player.

I don't know if he'll ever get to that elite level talent at edge, but I think he's just one of those really, really solid edge rushers. And I kind of compared him a lot to Preston Smith that we've had in the past that went on to the Packers. And, you know, they're both Mississippi State guys. and I think they're kind of similar in that role of, you know, very solid edge rushers. They're not going to really be those top-end elite kind of guys, but I think they're really solid guys to have in someone you should kind of prioritize keeping. Now it depends on, you know, the money, and if he kind of wants the high-end edge-rusher money,

I don't know if he kind of keep me for that. But no, I think he's a very, very solid player. And, yeah, the grades kind of speaks to that. I've mentioned this many times. For whatever reason, I mean, the Mississippi State defense, the year that they were ranked really high, played Alabama, didn't beat Alabama. I mean, the players that have come out of that school defensively over the last, you know, seven, eight years, you know, Simmons, who I consider to be, I consider personally Simmons to be number two behind Donald in terms of defensive

tackles. I don't know where you have them. I know Quinn and Williams is outstanding. Who do you think is the second best interior defensive linemen in the NFL? That's a tough question. I no, I can see Simmons up there. I can see Williams up there. I think you can also, I mean, bias, you can make a case for Jonathan Allen at times. But I think it's tough. I think there's obviously Donald's in that top tier.

I kind of like the group guys in tiers rather than like one, two, three, or four. And I think all of those guys are in the tier right below Aaron Donald. And I think you can make a case for really any of them. Right. All right. So on Cam Curl, he's a free agent. after next year. We, you know, we all here like to think that we've learned enough to know that

the franchise tag is not the path that you want to start down with a player that you really want, and you want to be here for a long period of time. So if they make a move to try to extend him in this off season, have you thought about what his contract looks like? No, I mean, I think it's going to be up there with top dollars. I mean, I think that's just, It's not going to be up there with Derwin James, isn't he at like $20 million a year? I mean, it's tough. I think that's what he's going to want. I mean, would it not be?

I think it's just the safety market is so volatile because safety play in general is just a volatile position. I mean, you don't see a lot of the plays that they make just because, you know, they're usually honestly just off the screen and you just don't see him. I think Cameron Crow is just, he's proven to be such a solid guy. I mean, and that's really all you want from the safety position is he's not making mistakes. He's constantly always in the right position, and he's always graded highly in our system. And I think he's just one of those guys that you really want on the back end, no matter what position you're playing in. I mean, he can match up in the plot, he can be a deep safety.

He can come down in the box, and I think he's just proven to be extremely valuable. And like I said earlier, we saw it in the past the last few weeks. The defense was just not the same without him. So many busted coverages, busted run fits, all that sort of stuff without someone like Camcroll. Obviously, it'll be tough to really kind of give him that much money, but I think that's what he's going to look for. I mean, we've seen his dad tweet on Twitter about all the money that he wants. But I think, you know, it's just tough.

I'm not a huge cap guy, but next year when our kind of our cap guy kind of goes through it, I think you could see him kind of command top $10, $80, I think. I saw Matt Paris from the Washington Times write this maybe last week. In the five games that Cameron Curl didn't play, Washington's team gave up 25 points in 332.4 yards per game. Now, I do think that there were some super short fields created by the offense in a couple of those games. And then with Curl, the defense allowed 18.2 points per game and 293 yards per game. There was no doubt that not having him, you know, in the first two, I think the first two games actually, were the most noticeable.

Because when he came back in week three, even against Philadelphia, when they had all those points in the second quarter, Washington, you could tell, was a different team defensively, even though they got blown out in that Philadelphia game because they really stopped Philadelphia on the ground in that game. I mean, Philadelphia, I think if my memory serves me, averaged less than three yards per carry in that game, but they had short fields,

and didn't they have a defensive touchdown? Didn't once turn it over in that game, early early. Yeah. But anyway, I think that's going to be like the curl Duran pain off season here. And, you know, as I, Nick and I have talked about this before, but for now, we're just assuming, like, it's a normal offseason, normal ownership, and Ron and Martin and Marty and everybody can do what they want to do.

I mean, who would you prioritize? If I told you that you could only keep one, curl on a long-term, extension or pain on a long-term extension, which of the two are you keeping? I think I would lean with Curl, and I know it might be a bit of an unpopular opinion, but I think that sort of safety play is so important, and it helps elevate other guys, too, and you can make the same argument for pain, but I think Payne's going to command top high-end dollars. I don't know if Curl will. Again, I'm not a huge guy with the cap numbers and all that sort of stuff, But me personally, I would pick Cam Curl.

I think, you know, you have a nice interior with Jonathan Allen. And again, last year I thought when they drafted Fiderian Mathis, I thought that was the replacement for Durant Payne. Right. And his injury just kind of makes everything a bit tougher. And you saw Durant Payne have a career year with his stack numbers and all that sort of stuff. So I don't know. I think there's going to be a lot of teams out there that are really going to push for Durant Payne.

And I think I think Curl will cost you less money. and honestly I think he might be the more important player. I know what you're saying, and the other part of this too, is that you really don't have a replacement for Curl on the roster right now, and you might have the replacement for Payne, because that's what you drafted in the second round last year. But I kind of err on the side of, I just want, like, I view Duran Payne as an A player,

and I don't want to give up A players. And I'm not saying that Cameron Curl isn't an A-player. player or isn't on the verge of becoming one. But if you told me right now, or asked me, who's the better player? I would say Duran Payne is. Not by a whole lot, but I would say he's the better player. And I think I would agree. I mean, I don't think you can have a wrong choice here. If you're picking just one, I don't think you can have a wrong choice. I think you can make a very good argument for pain and you can make a very good argument for curl. Obviously, we would all love for them to keep both of them. I don't know if you have the type of money for that. That all depends

on the quarterback situation. If you have a young rookie quarterback, you can afford to pay these guys. But no, I don't think you can have really a wrong answer here. Right. Well, I'll ask the follow-up to your comment. If you had a choice, if, you know, play general manager, of keeping them both but keeping the quarterback position super low in salary, including passing on maybe a big opportunity with a veteran quarterback,

Let's just throw Derek Carr, Aaron Rogers' name. I mean, the two are not similar. I've been throwing out Aaron Rogers. Like, if he actually were available, I would do whatever it took to get him here. But a lot of people, it's amazing to me, our fan base, and I don't know where you stand on this, how many people say, no, no, no, no, no, we don't need him and his problems and his whatever, you know, he's going to bring. And he was clearly in decline.

Just build up the offensive line, build up the defense, add some linebackers, signed Duran, extend Cameron Curl, and let's go with Sam Howl, as if they've got it all figured out. If you've got the choice of building up around a very low-salaried quarterback position or getting somebody like Aaron Rogers, what would you do? I would, it's so tough because we've seen them fail in both ways this past decade or so of going after the big-name guy or trying to trade up in the draft But I'm a huge believer in drafting quarterbacks. I think that's really the way to build a powerhouse team.

And that's honestly the goal. I mean, the goal is the Super Bowl. It should be the goal for every team. And I think the best way to do that is drafting that franchise quarterback. That's a lot tougher to do than me just saying, you know, just go get the guy. I think I was high on Howell last year. He was my quarterback number two in a week draft class. I think I would have been happy with taking him second or third round to get him.

and the fifth is great. I think that if you kind of roll with him this next year, I think you could see some sort of flashes. But if we're just going off of that one game he played in the preseason to kind of bet, push all your chips on Sanhout, this is the guy. I think that's absolutely insane. You mean, you just referred to it as a preseason game? Well, I was saying his last game and then his preseason. Oh, okay. His last game in preseason, got it. Okay. All right. Yeah. You could also make the case that sort of was a preseason game. but I think

I think if you have an opportunity to go for a guy like Rogers you can push all the chips in and be like hey this is our last this is our last chance I think if you have this group of this core you can go for it and say hey maybe we have a chance in a really weak

NFC now I mean I think we just saw the Eagles kind of cakewalk to the Super Bowl with there's almost no quarterback in the NFC right now everything is in the AFC so I think you can make that argument but it's just tough I mean

if you don't have something in Sam Howell, you're starting over again, and then that kind of ruins the window with this quarter of guys, and you're starting over again with another quarterback, and I think that you just need to keep swinging on quarterbacks, and I know it's tough to hear, and you think, you know, you get another quarterback and what your way from Sam Hal, but competition is a good thing for quarterbacks. You want them to kind of battle it out,

and if drafting a quarterback this year means that Sam Howell is like, okay, this isn't my team anymore, I'm done, then fine, you don't have the guy anyway. I think you just got to keep swinging. And you see all of these teams now on the AFC that are ascending and that are at the top. They got their guys. They got Mahomes. They've got Allen.

They've got Joe Burrow. They've got Trevor Lawrence. Like that's what you need. You need this franchise quarterback. And it makes everything around you easier when you have that franchise guy. Yeah. What you just said has been my mantra. It just keeps swinging until you land on one.

And I agree with you. Like if there is somebody in the draft at 16 or they feel they can trade up, you know, get a Richardson or a Levis or somebody that they really, really love. I would be totally in favor of that. To me, that's swinging. That's swinging big. But I also would I guess disagree with you to a certain degree. They have tried.

They just haven't landed as they have swung big. You know, they swung at Matt Stafford and missed. They swung for Russell Wilson and maybe it was a good thing that they missed. And we don't know what the swing on Deshawn Watson may have been had Watson not had all of those issues because this organization was never going to be for Deshawn Watson but I do know that there were people in the organization last year or the year before when they went after Stafford that liked Watson

a lot and I think that you know they thought about trading up for fields too it was fields or somebody so I think they've thought about swinging big but they just haven't landed like Alex Smith to me was not a big swing you know and in terms of the last administration. Robert Griffin was the last real big swing they took and landed on, and that was a major trade-up. Yeah. I think, unless I'm missing one. No, I think you're right. I mean, obviously, the last rookie quarterback, Twain, just kind of fell to them. They didn't have to really go up to beginning, so I think you're right with that. And the RG3 seemed to work out, obviously,

without the injuries and that whole debacle afterwards. But I think you can make an argument for both because, again, like you said, they've swung at big free agent quarterbacks before. Sometimes they miss. Sometimes they get their, like you said, big free agent quarterback. I don't know if you would put Alex Smith in that. It hasn't worked out. They've swung in the draft.

It hasn't worked out. And fans just kind of want to give up on both. Like, I mean, you have to keep swinging. Like you can't give up on it. I understand that, you know, you see something like the Robert Griffin trade or you see a Dwayne Haskins picking him and that kind of setting your franchise back. But you have to keep doing that. I mean, you can't just stop just because, you know, it didn't work out that one time.

You have to keep going for it. And again, if somebody falls to them at 16 that they really like, you have to take him. I think it would be crazy if you don't. If there's a chance for them to trade up for the right price to go get their guy, I think you have to do that. You have to continue to swing at the quarterback position because it's really the first thing that matters and the only only thing that matters. and you can't really be successful long-term in this league without a franchise guy.

Yeah, we're in agreement there. And I think the thing that worries me sometimes about this group is that they'll look at, you know, Brock Purdy, and they'll say, well, we can do that. Well, no, you can't because you're not Kyle Shanahan and that staff. And by the way, you don't have anywhere near the team around him. And oh, by the way, who knows what would have happened here? They may have been eliminated even if he had been healthy. Although, to be honest with you, the way San Francisco's defense played that first half, I think if Purdy had stayed healthy, the 49ers would have had a really good chance to win the game.

We're talking to Nick Ackridge. One more thing kind of about the overall Washington season. So Brian Robinson, Jr. ended up being the highest ranked offensive player. You know, last year, remember, it was we were in a really good spot, and then COVID came, et cetera. we had the injuries and if not for that we would have been a playoff team the whole thing. I wonder if they look at the Brian Robinson Jr., a player that they really like, that they really want to pound their chest about getting right in the third round and say, man, if we had just had him earlier in the season, we would have been a playoff team.

Do you think they would have been a playoff team had they had Brian Robinson Jr. from the beginning? I don't think so. At PFF, we're supposed to hate running backs. That's just kind of what we do. But I think Brian Robinson is another good example of just not drafting running backs early, not paying running back. Because you can find these guys in the third, the fourth round. Isaiah Pacheco, seventh round. Isaiah Pacheco.

Yeah, you find these guys all the time in these late rounds. And it sucks to say for the running back position in these guys. But you draft them, let them play out their rookie contracts. you draft another one. You just kind of keep that rotation going. And I think the running game is more so the offensive line than it is the running back itself. I think the running back can make more out of it, depending on how good he is. And that's kind of what speaks to our grades.

Like the higher you grade is the more you're taking out of what the blocking is giving you, essentially. You're making people miss. You're getting more yards than what's really kind of given to you. And Brian Rompton is a very good running back at that. But I don't think that he elevates the team any higher. and, you know, leads them to more wins and, you know, potentially the playoffs. Because Antonio Gibson in our system was the third highest-graded player. He was 76.3 overall.

So it just kind of speaks to the running back position being something that's very replaceable, very, something that you can really just kind of trade in and out of. And I know fans don't like that because we kind of fall in love with these guys, and Brian Romper's a story is incredible. He's a great athlete. And I think he can be a running back of the future here for the next couple years or so. But we've kind of seen this happen before it's running back. all the time. You just kind of, you just continue to cycle them in and out, and that sucks for them,

that sucks for the position itself, but that's just kind of the way it's gone these past little years. Yeah, meantime, Bijon Robinson will probably be a top 15 pick in the draft this year. Somebody will end up taking him. And he'll be a top 10 running back the second he answers the league, but I don't know how much that elevates your team. I mean, Seekoine Barclay is a perfect example. He's already a top five running back the second he stepped into the league, but the Giants were still three wins, four, wins, five wins, and that's just kind of the nature of the running back position. You know, that's a conversation, a deeper conversation for another day.

But I would also say just intuitively that scheme has a lot to do with it as well. Like if you've got a Derek Henry with kind of a dual threat quarterback, you know, and Tannahill has been that for, you know, certainly when Arthur Smith was there in calling plays, it can be a devastating attack and it can be worked. 12 wins and a number one seed. Now what happens after that? Who knows? All right.

A few more for you. I know you told me before we started this that you've started to look at the quarterbacks in the draft, but you've evaluated three of them. Bryce Young, Hendon Hooker, your guy, because you're a Tennessee guy, and Anthony Richardson, a guy that I've been talking about since the beginning of the season, the Utah game, which I think may have been the best game he played all year. So, but obviously you know C.J. Stroud and you know Will Levis. I mean, you're an SEC football fan. So tell me what you think over all of the quarterbacks in this draft.

I think it's an extremely intriguing class. I think there's high-end stuff with a lot of these guys, but there's also some deserving questions. Like Bryce Young, I think, is one of the smartest quarterbacks I've ever scouted. He's just, he's so good pre-snap. He knows exactly what's coming. He knows where the ball needs to go all the time. He's good within the pocket, but the question is going to be his size. Like, he is, he's tiny. Like, he is, like, Tyler Murray's height, but skinnier. He's not a big guy at all, and there's going to be legit questions there. But we've seen him play SEC schedules. I saw him in the Tennessee game. It just killed every single play, it seemed like, and he's just constantly copying back up.

So I think there's going to be questions there with his kind of size, but I think he's an incredible quarterback, and someone I would definitely bet on. Hendon Hooker is, like you said, he's my guy. I love Tennessee. I love what he did for Tennessee. Had an incredible year. I don't know how he'll translate to the NFL. I'm not a huge fan of him as a prospect.

I think a lot of times that offense kind of presented him with easy reads. It was just kind of first read if it wasn't there and you just take off. That's not to say he can't do it. We've seen this in the past with a lot of quarterback prospects. Justin Herbert's kind of a perfect example in that Oregon offense. You couldn't really see what he was fully capable of. And then you saw it in the NFL and you're like, okay, wow, a lot of do a miss on it. But you just didn't see it, so you didn't really know if he could do it.

And that could be the same thing with Henan Hooker. The injury kind of throws things off a lot, I think, that ACL thing will really push him back a bit. But I think that might be good because you can give him some time to really kind of learn the NFL offense and learn to play within the NFL. I think his arm strength is top tier. His deep ball accuracy is up there. He has to misses, obviously. But I think it's kind of with the best of them. You know, you just don't know what you can get with his anticipation play and kind of stuff within the pocket.

It's just there's too many questions there to really kind of take a swing with him early. All right. So tell me about a guy that I've talked about all season long. I'm really intrigued. I loved watching him play. There were games clearly for me. I was like, ah, doesn't look great. Anthony Richardson, at this point, I don't think he's going to be there at 16, but you said you've evaluated him.

What do you think? he is so intriguing i think the tools are obviously there everyone talks about it i think he's just if you're just looking at just tools i think he's the number one quarterback in this draft there are obviously questions with his accuracy and not the huge concern and i think it's what drives him down more but he is not your typical just a tool type of quarterback that you know can't really play within a system he showed consistently that he can work within a pocket and he can really play the quarterback at a high-level position. I mean, there is tons of plays that I've picked out

where he is identifying coverages quickly, identifying blitzes, working within the pocket, working through his progressions, and it's really high-end stuff. Like, it is really impressive to see. The accuracy is concerning. You see him a lot of times getting through his progression, making the right read, making the right decision, and then it's just overthrown, underthrown,

in front, all that sort of stuff, and a lot of that has to do with footwork. Yeah. But that's something that you can, clean up. That's something you can work on with him. You can't teach the arm strength. You can't teach the mobility and all that sort of stuff, but you can't work on footwork. And I think he's someone worth taking a big swing on. I really do. The tools are all there. And if you can get it to, you know, if you can kind of fix that accuracy, I think you can look at him being a really,

really great quarterback in the fleet because I think he's shown that he can play the quarterback exhibition at a high level. So do you think he'll be there at 16? I don't. I think someone's going to take a shot at him. I think, like I said, the tools are all there, and I think he has the most intriguing prospect in this draft. So I don't think he'll be there at 16. I do too. What about the kind of offense that you would want to play with him? Do you think it's Lamar Jackson, or do you think it's?

you know, something of a hybrid between Jackson and something else? You know, West Coast, whatever. I think you can put him into a normal NFL-style passing offense, and he can show that he can succeed. Again, the accuracy is the issue, but he showed in college that he can get through, you know, a normal progression tree and route tree and all that sort of stuff. He can do that.

I don't think you need to put him in a Lamar Jackson-style offense and force him to run, run, run. That could help him early on, just kind of get his feet wet and get him more experience. I think you can see him in an NFL offense, and you can see him, you know, succeed. Obviously, the accuracy will always be the question, and it's tough to kind of, you know, keep going with the guy if he has accuracy issues. But, no, I think you can see him kind of work through an NFL often.

Do we know anything beyond what you've watched and graded out? And I've watched as a college football fan, which are the things we never know that these teams do, you know, a ton of due diligence on. And that is what kind of person he is, what kind of person he is, what kind of. kind of, you know, does he love football? Does he study? Is he a quick learner? Do we know any of those things about Anthony Richardson? No, I haven't looked too far into that just yet.

I mean, you think you hear a lot of that when the combine kind of rolls around and stuff like that. But, I mean, I haven't seen any red flags or heard of any red flags just yet in that sort of area. But, yeah, no, I think we'll see it a lot more of the draft process really starts to pick up. Because I was thinking about this. I think, first of all, it's 6-4 and 240, 2-3-25-2-40. If you didn't watch Anthony Richardson play, I mean, he's a bigger version of Lamar Jackson as a runner. I mean, he has got great vision, great wiggle, unbelievable speed and power as a runner. He's got a big arm and Nick nailed it.

I mean, the footwork is terrible at times, which leads to the inaccuracy. I mean, you know, I've seen some games in which I think he gets down on him. himself a little bit too quickly, which bothered me a couple of times in watching him this year. I think it's one of those things that as we move through the spring towards the draft, if he's not a top half of the draft selection, then there's something that they learned about him that they didn't love, you know, beyond the physical. Because the physical stuff in the way and the number of teams that will commit to playing football, you know, even early in his career, you know, as a dual threat quarterback,

there are enough teams out there that will commit to that for a guy like this. And I just think he, I think he's going before 16. And I think what's interesting about this team, as we've talked about before, the emphasis on, you know, wanting to be a physical downhill running team. Well, Sam Howell is, you know, certainly capable of that as well. But I would personally, as long as the, you know, the other stuff that we don't know about checked out. I would not pass on him at 16 if he's there. And I would think about moving up a few spots if I were Washington for him. Yeah, no, I completely agree. I think he's the type of guy

you bet on. Obviously, he said we don't know what he's like off the field mentality and all that sort of stuff. But I think if you're just betting on the tools, there's nobody better to bet on tools. That's just kind of what you want to look at. And the Florida team that he was on, it's not Florida teams to pass. No, it's really bad. They were terrible on defense. Their receivers, their receivers are not great. There's a lot of passes that he is laying on the money and they're dropping, which leads to the completion percentage being down a bit.

Now, his adjusted completion percentage, which we adjust for drops and all the throwaways and all that sort of stuff. Still wasn't that high again because there is accuracy concerns, but there are a lot of plays where his wide receivers are kind of just either not on the same page with him. The offensive line was not great. I think it's, yeah, that Florida team was not great. It's also one of their worst defensive teams.

we've seen them have in a while. I mean, the one... Yeah, and he is... Yeah, go ahead. Sorry. Yeah, he's forced to throw because the defense is so good. He's forced to throw constantly, over and over and over again, and there's just leads to maybe 40, 50 plus a 10. Yeah, they, I don't know, the kid from Maryland, Jacob Copeland, who transferred from Florida, Maryland, and Maryland was low, you know, Terps were loaded at wide receiver, as they seemed to always be. Copeland would have been better off staying at Florida.

He would have been their number one guy this year. All right, just back to Washington for one moment now, since we're talking about quarterbacks in the draft. So right now on February 3rd, give me your guess on the quarterbacks that enter training camp in 2023. I think it's Sam Howell, I think it's, I think they draft another guy, maybe later. Maybe you look at a Hendon Hooker type of guy and draft him, and then I think you look better in backup. I think you look at a Bridgewater, you look at maybe a Jacoby-Bissette, something like that. I think they do want to really roll with Howell. I mean, again, we're kind of looking at it with, you know, a normal off-season ownership is the same and all that sort of stuff.

But I think that you kind of roll with Howell, and I think you have to see what you have there. I mean, it could be seeming like punning on the next year if he doesn't work out. But maybe if he doesn't work out, you're leading to a high pick and a really high-end, quarterback class next year. But, no, I think it's going to be Howell leading the way and maybe a veteran backup and then another rookie. Yeah, I think it's Hal and a veteran backup too. I've guessed, you know, between Berset and Dalton and Keenum and, you know, a guy like that. Because for me, and I don't know how you feel, I think if Brissette or Dalton had been the quarterback this year, you know, instead of Carson Wentz and Taylor Heineke, I actually think they would have won another game or two.

And they probably would have made the postseason. They wouldn't have been, you know, a threat in the postseason. But I think that the quarterback play in the offense would have been better with a guy like Brissette. I definitely think so with Dalton. What do you think? No, I completely agree. Because I think Brissette and Dalton are very smart in what they know they can and can't get away

with. So they're conservative in nature, and I think that would have led to maybe, unlike you said, another win or two and wouldn't see the volatility of Wenton and He kind of show up. All right. Two more for Nick Ackridge. Is there anything at the end of the year that all of you guys at PFF are surprised at? Maybe something that you thought you were convinced was right that isn't, or maybe the opposite of that, something that you were, you thought you were wrong about, that you're right about, just something that you learned. I mean, is there anything like that at the end of the year? Because the sport's always evolving. And maybe you don't have to be. You don't have to be. an answer for that. Maybe I didn't, you know, articulate it well enough. But is there anything at the end of the year that you guys learned about this season? No, I think the Brock Purdy situation is kind of a huge, real question mark, because again, at PSF, we're huge believers in the quarterback position, and that's really the thing that matters the most, and that's what kind of elevates your team

at most. But we saw what Brock Purdy kind of come in and just, he was fine, and just let his team to continue win, win after win after win. And his numbers in PFF weren't great. There were a lot turnover really plays that weren't capitalized on by the defense. But I think the Brock prurdy question is going to lead a lot of teams to really kind of change the way they sort of build their team. If you can get all pro guys at every single position like the Niners have, if you can get a great teamed up offense like the Kyle Shanahan offense, there are questions about the way he coaches and his conservative nature when it comes to fourth down and stuff like that. But if you can get that sort of offense, all pro players

around all these positions, and you just kind of get a guy. that can just kind of, you know, not make mistakes. You could maybe make another run like the 49ers did, but you saw that kind of all crumbling down when they're on their fourth, fifth quarterback, whatever, and that's just really just bad luck on their part. But I think the Brock Purdy situation is interesting because we're big believers in drafting quarterbacks high, and then you get a guy drafted with the very last pick, and he comes in and doesn't lose a game until the conference championship,

which he was actually injured in. So I think that's kind of the big question. It's something we can really look back on and maybe you don't have to go all in on drafting quarterback high. Yeah, I talked about this on the show last week. I forget if it was this podcast or the radio show, but I went through kind of, you know, basically if you look at the last 10 years of quarterbacks drafted, you know, essentially 12 were all top half of the first round. And then the other six, I mean, the lowest round.

was obviously Purdy at the end of the year, but really it was DAC in the fourth round. And this is, you know, Cousins was before the last 10 years. And then really the other teams were made up of a lot of veteran quarterbacks that were all, you know, either great quarterbacks or, you know, significant long-term veteran quarterbacks, Stafford, Brady, etc. And so the Bryce, the Brock Purdy model is really the diamond in a rough. And by the way, the surrounding. roundings have to include not only, as you said, finding pro bowlers at virtually every position

group, but having an outstanding coaching staff that out schemes just about everybody. And so I still think, you know, trying to find the franchise quarterback is the best way to ensure for a period of, you know, five plus years, you've got a chance to win double-digit games every year and be in the tournament. The dog's ready for you to jump off this thing. And you're ready to, you know, and you've got a chance to swing at a postseason run more often than not. I mean, I don't know. I think teams would make the mistake looking at the Brock Purdy thing and saying, oh, we can do that too. Yeah, and I think the Brock Purdy situation also kind of leads to another thing. Like when it comes to drafting quarterbacks, maybe you stop looking at guys with these tools,

these high-end tools, but haven't really kind of put it all together, and you look more towards the type of college quarterbacks that have played five, six years in college and have really been through a lot of games and have had a lot of experience. Maybe you kind of look towards those type of quarterbacks in the future. But, no, Brock Purdy kind of leads to a lot of questions when it comes to team building and quarterback drafting.

I think that last point is a really good one. I'd love to see some sort of study of the guys that played for three-plus years and how much of a career they had versus the guys that were incredibly talented but played for only one year. All right. Who do you like in the Super Bowl? I think it's the Chief. I keep the way the Eagles, I know it's the fan in me and the D.C. fan and I don't really like anything silly. But the way they got to the Super Bowl, it was one of the easiest trips we've ever seen to the Super Bowl, I think ever. I mean, one of the easiest schedules you've ever seen, they play Daniel Jones and Josh Johnson, essentially, to get to the Super Bowl.

And they have an incredible team. They have a great team, you know, Pro Bowl, all pro players at a lot of huge key positions. And Jalen Hertz has been really great this year. But I don't know if they've ever really been kind of questioned. And again, if I'm not a commander's fan, I'm probably not paying all this sort of stuff. But I just think you look at the Chief and I think best quarterback in the NFL, I think they have, I think they have it all. You know, there's questions in wide receiver position without a Tyree kill, but he's kind of proven to, you know, ascend above that. So I think it's the Chiefs. That's where I'll be putting my money. And, yeah, just kind of hoping it is them.

You know, it's funny, the 91 skins who I consider to be the greatest team in franchise history and one of the great, if not the greatest Super Bowl teams of all time. USA Today has them, you know, wrote a story a few years ago, listing Washington's 91 team is the greatest Super Bowl winner. And the DVOA metric football outsiders has Washington's 91 team is the greatest Super Bowl winner. But they faced two run-and-shoot teams led by Chris Miller and Eric Kramer in the postseason Atlanta and Detroit before they got to Jim Kelly and Buffalo. But they had a very easy postseason. Now, they had to go through the gauntlet in their own division, but they had a very very easy postseason. but they had a very easy, you know, two games swing at home against the Falcons and the Lions in the postseason to get to the Super Bowl. But, you know, you don't pick your opponents when you get to the postseason.

You don't pick them before the season either. It's not like college where you schedule. You create schedules on your own. Great job, as always. I really appreciate it. Nick does such a really good job for pro football focus. He's a huge DC sports fan. I would encourage you to follow him.

on Twitter at PFF underscore Nick Akridge spelled AKR-I-D-G-E. I will talk to you soon. Thanks. Take care. Yep, thanks as always. Andy Poland's going to jump on with me. We'll talk about, who knows, Bobby Bethard and a lot of different things. We'll finish up the show that way next right after these words from a few of our sponsors. Andy Poland's going to join me here momentarily. This final segment of the show is presented by Window Nation. They've got the coolest deal ever for keeping you warm.

Put no money down, make no payments, and pay no interest for 24 months. That's two years, zero percent financing, plus buy to get too free with no limit. Take advantage of Wind Donation's deep discounts, all the while reinvesting in your biggest asset, your home, not to mention the energy savings for years to come. Call Wind Donation at 8669. or go online at windownation.com. Mention my name. You'll get a free estimate.

There's nothing to lose. 86690 Nation or online at windownation. Andy is with me and we were just talking before we started to record this podcast and I said to you, I said, we asked each other. We talk, Andy and I texts back and forth and we talk every once in a while and I said, how are you doing? And you said, fine. And you said, how are you doing? I said, fine. And we started talking about the various shows that were involved in.

And I said to you, I said, I think I had this conversation with Scott recently. But when football season is over, what I've realized in recent years, and maybe more so this year, I don't love sports as much as I used to. I'm not as consumed with it as much as I used to. You know me. I'm watching basketball. I'm watching Maryland basketball, of course. but football season I love, you know, I love that.

But you gave me the explanation as to why it's not as much fun as it used to be. Tell everybody what you told me. Well, I mean, when I was coming up and as a sports fan and then, you know, segueing into being what they call a sportscaster, the sources of information were somewhat limited. You had newspapers, you had the AP, UPI wires, and you had a limited number of games on TV. Now you just swim in it all the time. And you've got to be on Twitter all the time.

You've got to be on the various website. And you never really get away from it. And you feel like even if you've been away for like 10 minutes, you've missed something. And I don't know, maybe it's just overexposure to it. And, you know, it used to be like I remember talking to my friend, you know, Mike Stone, who's been doing radio in Detroit for a hundred years. I've heard you mention his name before. Yeah, he worked for George Michael years ago.

We went to college together at AU, and we, you know, learned the ropes there at the college station. And he used to know everything. And at one time I said, how do you know that? Because I never miss a transaction, meaning he would read every little agon of the newspaper to get everything. Well, now, you know, you get it all the time, all the little transactions, you know. Adam Schuster makes $9 million a year to spit these little things out 24 hours a day. And I just think it's just like too much. And for younger people, you know, it's fine. You know, that's how they've grown up. But for those of us who kind of had to earn our knowledge on it,

to be assaulted by a 24 hours a day, maybe, you know, I'm a little burned out on it. I mean, you and I have talked about it. You know, I say I'm burned out on it, and then football season's always rejuvenation. Like, I love the football season rhythm, calendar. It's also, as you and I both know, it's easier to do during football season. There's just a lot of, you know, there's a lot of content. There's a lot of scheduled stuff because it's a scheduled sport. But I think, you know, I remember, look, you had to do this.

I didn't. You had to do a radio show before the Internet. I don't know how can Beatrice did it. Well, we do know that some of it was completely, you know, made up. But I don't know how I would sit here for three hours on radio in particular by myself, you know, every day and do a radio show without the internet. I mean, the amount of preparation that you'd have to put in, I don't know if it would be ultimately worth it.

Well, I don't know really of anybody prior to the start of sports radio that did three hours. And if you did three hours, you usually had a partner and more guests and things like that. Oh, Be interested. didn't. Now, but Beatrice was on for like two hours, I think. No, no, Andy, there were nights. On MAL, way back in the day, he was on 7 to 10, and then he had to, I remember one year he had scheduled it was like 10 to 1 a.m.

I mean, you know, he was, he was also, he was also caller dependent. Like, you know, in those days, you know, I do, I do a show mostly without calls. you do a lot of your show without calls, and you can do it, and you can also, you know, take recorded interviews, which I do a lot off, you know, the various shows, Dan Patrick and Rich Eisen, and, you know, so you have content like that. But, yeah, they were very much caller-driven, and given that that was the only show there was, that's the only place that the callers could go. So, you know, you had that. But, you know, it was different then in that he was the source of the information. He was the Internet, and, you know, you could believe what he was saying or not believe it, but he was all there was.

And now everybody has the same sources of information that you do, right? You know, the sources that you and I use, Twitter and various sites, at www.com, side.com, everybody has those. You know, you had, what he had was the wires, and he had the newspapers and allegedly sauces. but, you know, that was different now. Not for school boy ball. Not for school boy ball. He didn't have the sauces or resources for school boy ball. Yeah, exactly.

Yeah. I think that has a lot to do with it. You know, I look at my son who's, I mean, he grew up understanding that, yeah, this isn't as glamorous as some might think it is, and he got into teaching. But his knowledge of sports, especially the things he's really into, like college basketball, it's deeper than mine because he cares more about it and studies all the websites and message boards and things like that, you know, this is. Yeah, well, it's, you know, I think in our, well, I mean, you and I've had so many of these

conversations on the air and off the air together, but, you know, when we hear from people that say do more caps or do more wizards or do more this, I think one of the benefits actually of doing what we do in this city is that you really have to know one team so much more than the other. And by the way, have to have passion for that team to a certain degree, have to have, or at least previous life passion for the team, have to have some understanding of the team. But, you know, there are other markets where, you know, you go from one season and one sport into another season and that next sport is just as important as the one that you just came out of. That's not the case here. I don't know how it is now with the Rams, especially winning a Super Bowl, but some

years ago, knowing people who did sports talk in L.A., they said, oh, yeah, Lakers number one by a mile, Dodgers number two. And now maybe that's been up a little bit by the NFL, but here, Philadelphia, I worked in Dallas. New York is different because that's a baseball town. But I would say that most cities, football's king. It's what you talk about most of the year. Look at the rating. I'm sure you talked about it. You saw the rating for Cincinnati Kansas City game?

Ridicrous. 50 million people. Half a Super Bowl for that. It's unbelievable. I mean, you know, the city that is a very good friend of ours and your longtime co-host is now, I guess, you know, I mean, I think he was born and raised there the way he talks about Milwaukee. But I do think that that city is, you know, Packers driven, of course, but they've got a really good NBA team. You know, there's a baseball team that's been pretty good and competitive.

They've got the University of Wisconsin there, which is a big deal to people in those states. So he's got a, I think his new city, his new adopted city, Zabe we're talking about, I think he's got to do a lot more in terms of really understanding the other teams. Or am I wrong about that? No, I think he does. And also I discovered this about the sports radio business working in New York. And I shouldn't realize that if I was going to have a future in it, it wasn't going to be there, that the people who have done the best in each of the cities are New Yorkers.

Mike and the Mad Dog are New Yorkers. That's why if you had dropped that show in the middle of Chicago, it would have near the success that it had. And it's difficult for a guy like Dave, but I think I look at Dave a little bit like Tony, Tony Cornheiser, in that, you know, he came to Washington in 1979. And before sports radio started, which would have been what, of 12, 13 years later, he had name recognition through his newspaper column and knowledge of the city. Zabe didn't just start doing a talk show in Milwaukee. He was on a very popular morning show in Milwaukee as a 50-minute guest for years.

So he had footing down there. But yeah, I mean, the days of being dropped into a new city and being able to do a sports talk show, those days are gone. You have to have some institutional and historic knowledge to be able to. do this. I think that's always been true. I mean, I think going back many years, the shows, long before I got into the business and you had been in doing it for the station after being a part of the founding of the station in 92, I always preferred the people that were from those cities doing those shows that really had true understanding and passion for the local teams. I think

it always works out better that way. I'm sure there are examples of where, you know, it's, it's, it's, somebody from out of town ends up being super popular in a new town. But for the most part, the sports talk radio format is done better by people who are fans of the teams locally. And if they're not fans, they have intimate knowledge of the market in the teams. Yeah, well, look, Bobby Beatherd just passed away. You and I were able to do long sections on him. If you just came to Washington, even if you're old enough to have remembered Bobby Betherd, the general manager of the then Redskins, you wouldn't be able to talk about it in the depth

that you and I were able to do good, don't you think? Yeah, of course. I mean, we live through it. So I had Charlie Casserly on the show yesterday, and, you know, he said something that I found interesting. I said, why did it end with Bobby Bethard here? And he said, Bobby'll take, Bobby's taken that to his grave. and I said, well, it's always been kind of, you know, understood, right?

That he and Gibbs, maybe they didn't have a falling out, but that Gibbs just wanted a little bit more control over personnel. And Charlie kind of interrupted me and he said, Joe had plenty of control. That is not the reason. And anybody that thinks that reason is 100% wrong. Which I, and I was talking to Tom, me about this yesterday and Tommy goes, that was always my understanding as to why it ended here.

Was that your understanding as to why it ended here? Yeah, the way it worked in the early days is that they had a dispute over something. Took it to Cook. The Cook would make the final call on that. And sometimes they were united on some things like getting Wilbur Marshall where they had to give up two first-round picks, you know, prior to the days of free agency to get them. and they worked together to convince Cook to do that. But if there was a dispute, Cook, would side with one of them.

And what I had heard was that Betherd was feeling that Cook was siding too many times with Joe on that. The other story is his parents were getting older. He wanted to get back to the West Coast, which he did going to San Diego. So I don't really know, but when, and I know you played some of this, when Betherd went in the Hall of Fame, Gibbs did the induction video, for him. I guess Bobby had already had some signs of Alzheimer's at that point and couldn't give the speech. So whatever happened, they were able to smooth that out over the years. Yeah, but it sounds to me like that didn't, Charlie was adamant. Charlie was adamant that that

was not the case. And him saying it so emphatically that, you know, he's never going to divulge Charlie the reason Bobby Bethard left and Bobby's taken that to his grave, me turned it into a bit of a mystery for those of us that have followed the team. And, you know, I wonder what it was. Who knows? I don't know. You know what else was curious, too? What?

Kevin, about his departure, because it doesn't usually happen this way. Bobby Beather didn't leave immediately after the 1988 season. He did the draft that year and made the trade. I thought he left right before the draft. No, no, no. Oh, no, no, no. I thought he left after the 88 season before the 89 draft. Right, but usually when a GM leaves the team, he leaves at the end of the season before the draft. He stayed for the draft and then left. He didn't stay through that following season.

And he's the one that made the draft day deal trading Mike Oliphon for Ernest Biner, which was really key for that last Super Bowl. So that was kind of interesting. I don't think, have you ever seen that before that a GM will stay through a draft and then leave? I don't remember that. I didn't remember it that way to begin with, to be honest. I know he handled the 88 draft because I remember the olefin for Ernest Biner trade. And I also remember the Jim Lachey for Jay Schrader trade, which was that summer as well, which he made. Well, that was actually, that's an interesting story, too.

that the Raiders, I guess the Raiders played at Washington. Lechay plays in that game. They go back to Los Angeles, is where they were, and that's when they traded Jay Schrader. And that's an amazing thing, too, because Schrader had been demoted to third string because he was very unhappy about the fact that, you know, he lost his job to Doug Williams and he wasn't going to play.

So you got an unhappy player who, you know, probably was eventually going to be cut, and he managed to trade him for a guy, who was the best left tackle in the game for about three or four years. Amazing. I don't know if I've ever told you this story, but it's, you know, my first job was working at Channel 5 for Buck and for Ernie. And that training camp was my first, like, I was an intern,

and they literally hired me full time as I was an intern and sent me to Carlisle that summer. So there I am, you know, a full-time. you know, fresh-faced, you know, not really knowing anything about what I'm doing. And, you know, Ernie and Buck said, you know, go with, you know, whichever cameraman it was, go over and get some sound. And, you know, and I said, well, I'm going to ask, you know, I'm going to ask Gibbs about the Schrader thing. I'm going to ask Schrader about it because this is being rumored that he's going to be traded. And so right before kind of what we used to call the gang bang where everybody, you know,

all the mics and cameras. or, you know, with Gibbs and then with Schrader, the PR guy at the time, and I think his name was Charlie Dayton, I think was his name. Yes, I remember Charlie. Yeah, and he came over to a lot of us and said, hey, Joe's going to come over nothing about Jay Schrader. Nothing about Jay Schrader. And so, stop like, well, wait a minute.

Like, that's pretty much all anybody wants to know about. So I'm sitting there and people are firing questions away and no one's asking about Schrader. And I just said, what the hell? I said, coach, I said, what's your response to some of the stories out there that Jay Schrader is going to get traded? And he stared with a glare at me. And then, and I look, I'm looking at him and it's just this long glare.

and he said, yeah, I don't have anything to say about that. And like, I think he was expecting that no one would ask. And of course, Ernie and Buck loved it. Like, I brought it back, and they're like, oh, just the reaction alone is perfect. We're going to run this. But, God, man, that Charlie Dayton was pissed and registered all these complaints. And I said, well, I don't know. I just thought you should ask that because that's what everybody wants to know.

nobody cares about whether or not your backup left tackle is going to play, you know, a series or two in the preseason game, because it was during the preseason. Yeah. You know, that also illustrates how media was different then. And we felt that when Gibbs came back, because the first year, Zave and I did the radio show with Gibbs. Yeah. The second year, we did not. I know. I remember.

Because we asked an actual questions, which he asked them actual questions, which he asked him. He wasn't, you know, because the media that he did, his first time around, you know what his radio show was? His radio show was a script that Charlie Dayton wrote that he used to read on WTOP, and it lasted out of 90 seconds, two minutes, something like that. And that's all he did. So to be actually asked actual questions, like, hey, coach, how come you're not running the shotgun? You know, it's 2004 and 31 other teams of the league are doing it.

things like that, that he didn't like. Well, you know, that's the Buck story. You know, when Buck asked him, when Buck was out of practice before the Bears playoff game, this would have been after the 84 season, the 84 season. They're playing the Bears in the divisional round at home on New Year's Eve, 1984, practice leading up to facing that Bears defense. This was not the 85 Bears, but the precursor, which they were a hell of a defense already in the making. And they were practicing the shotgun.

and Buck noticed it and asked Gibbs. I saw that you were practicing the shotgun. And Gibbs is like, you got to be kidding me. What do you mean? And of course, I think they ran it once, maybe. Thysman got sacked, I think, seven times in that playoff game. Yeah, though they actually, they did run the shotgun once. And Rich Donnelly, because Bostic was hurt,

Rich Donnelly snapped it over Thysman's head. And that was the last that Gibbs ran it. So that's 1984. He doesn't run it again until 2005, I think, including the 11 years he was away. Yeah. He didn't run. He hated the shotgun even when he came back. What are your memories of Beatherd?

You know, I didn't really know him well, but I was out there a number of times. I was working for UPI and did some local stuff. And, you know, at a time when general managers then were usually in a coat and tie, he was in usually running shorts and a T-shirt. And he was just a really nice guy. I think that most people who remember being around him, remember how friendly and nice he was. And also, this would never happen now, I guess, but Charlie Cassidy preceded him and did the same thing. There would be a period of time where he would talk off the record.

I mean, you could really learn some things that you weren't allowed to use, and he was really good about telling you things. And, you know, obviously his performance speaks for itself. And, oh, and he was also, he was a big risk taker. You know, he did, I don't ever remember him moving up to a higher draft pick. It was usually moving down. And even in the first round, where you only lose, what, three of them and two of them became a whole. Hall of Famer. I think he may have even traded down on one or two of those. But he had an infatuation with white cornerback. Oh, my God. So true. You remember this? And memory

and memory of the Derry Nixon? And Brian. Brian Davis. Brian Davis. Brian Davis. At a Nebraska. Yeah. The Tori Nixon one thing, as I remember, he was a second round pick. But Bessert was so in love with them. He traded the following years number of. one to get him, to move up to two, to be able to take him, because he didn't have a pick in the second round or moving up in the second round. And I'm telling you, look this up, they traded Tori Nixon before the season started. He didn't even play a game. He played a couple of exhibition games, and they dealt him away. And if you do pop psychology, it might be because Bobby Betherd was a white cornerback who tried out for the Redskins after he finished

up at San Luis Obispo, I think was in college. Yeah. And the release. And I guess he was, you know, channeling. Because his brother was, you know, a pretty decent player in the league. His brother Pete Beather played about 10 years in the NFL as a quarterback. So, you know, might have been, you know, something like that. That may have been a little bit of a flaw that he had, but otherwise.

Well, he drafted Vernon Dean. He drafted Vernon. Vernon Dean was a second rounder and obviously ended up starting, you know, in the Super Bowl for back-to-back years in 82 and 83. The other thing, and I don't think I mentioned this to Tommy yesterday, and I thought about this, I think after the show, it may have been during the show. Who knows, that was all of yesterday.

He had a real San Diego State thing going. Don Warren, Don Warren was San Diego State. Vernon Dean was San Diego State. And then Brian Davis was San Diego State. I mean, Tori Nixon was San Diego State. And he had kind of this preference for kind of West Coast players a lot of the time. I was looking at his first draft here was Washington State Santa Clara Azusa Pacific, three players picked. The next draft had San Diego State Don Warren at the top.

And then, you know, you went a couple of years and had Washington State. Portland State, you know, with Clint Didier. I think a lot of, well, he always, you know, loved some of those smaller schools. I mean, but the San Diego State thing, and, yeah, I mean, neither Torrey Nixon nor Brian Davis could play. Neither one of them could play, and they were both taken in the second round. He missed on a lot of players, but hit on a lot of late rounders. Well, he did, but because he would always trade down, he had extra picks. This is also the Bill Walsh philosophy, you know, load up in the middle round.

If you miss on a few, it's okay. Probably the West Coast thing was that's where he has contact. There were probably a group of scouts and other people that he knew out there that he really trusted. So that may have had something to do with also the thoroughness that he had. In 1981, Neil Lomax was playing at Portland State. Yeah, that's how I did here. And he was, yeah, but that's an incredible story in that he didn't need a quarterback. You know, 1981, Joe Seisman in his prime.

what Seismus is, what, 31, 30, something like that. And he goes out to Portland State just to do his due diligence. And Neil Lomax on what was, I guess they called it Pro Day then, he's thrown to his buddy whose wide receiver diddier, and he looks at him and he says, I'm going to project him as a tight end. He's a wide receiver at a small college, projects as a tight end, takes him in the 12th round when they still had 12 rounds. And he was a key player on the first two Super Bowl teams.

20 players, six, seven years. Oh, yeah. Yeah. It was his motion on fourth and one. Yeah. That made Don McNeil slip a little bit. Yeah, and, you know, for what you've talked about, which is true, you know, the trading back and the accumulation of mid-round picks, I mentioned to Tommy yesterday.

You know, he comes in in 78, and George Allen's traded away, you know, for years, all of their, you know, top, not just their first rounders, their second, third, fourth rounders as well. His first pick ever in 1979 came in the sixth round. It was Tony Green in that he didn't have a first, second, third, fourth, or fifth to work with. And the first, first rounder since 1968 for the franchise was Art Monk in 1980. They had not had a first round pick since 1968. I know, it was crazy. But also, remember this, and this is an odd thing, too.

Jack Pardy also came to Washington in 1978. And they were oil and water. And the way I understand it, it was Pardt was hired first, and then they brought Betherd in. That's right. And Betherd looked around, and Pardt was kind of like a member of the old boys network. Because remember, he was an Allen guy. And some of the guys who were still on the team were Allen players, and they were old cronies. And he, and Betherd looks around and he goes, Jesus, everybody's overpaid.

and they're old. We need to get younger. We need to get better draft picks. And I heard you talking about this, and it is an excellent point. I don't know which way it would have gone, but had they beaten Dallas in that final game in 1979, and maybe they were good enough to win the Super Bowl,

you know, what happens between Party? I mean, certainly if they win the Super Bowl, he stays another few years. But let's say they go to the second round of the playoffs. Does he still, you know, get rid of Party after three years? I don't know. I asked Charlie about that, and I said, you know, what would have happened? And he said, I, he goes, it's an interesting question. He said, I mean, Bobby certainly had a plan. And, you know, he had, you know, Charlie also made an interesting point. I'd kind of

forgotten about this, that, you know, after they lose to Dallas at the end of 79, which, you know, I've mentioned many times is one of the most devastating fan losses of my lifetime. I can I think I was devastated and could not, you know, function for at least two days. That really was the all-time gut punch loss because you're two minutes away from the number one seed with home field advantage. And then, you know, literally five minutes of real time later, you're not even going to the playoffs. And it was awful. But he mentioned, he said, you know, in 1980, no Riggins, Mosley was awful in 1980, started off three of 13. and yet a lot of those games were really close games.

He's like, we went 6 and 10 in 1980, but we really weren't that bad of a team. We had a lot of close losses. We had no Rigo, and Mosley was horrible in 80. But it gave Betherd and then Cook, because Edward Bennett Williams was really then not in the decision-making process as he had been when he hired Part D. Cook then wanted Betherd to make the decisions and Betherd had his eye on Gibbs I mean nobody else did

but yeah if they win in 79 we've talked about this a lot over the years if they win that game in 79 they don't blow a 13 point lead in the final two and a half minutes of that game they go on to the postseason now Dallas lost the following week it was Roger Staubeck's

final game of his career they lost and home to the Rams. So maybe Washington loses that game, and that's a devastating loss, and Rigo says goodbye. But, you know, probably if they win that game at Dallas to win the division and win a game, Rigo's coming back in 80s a different season, and you never get Gibbs. That may be what happened. That's possible, although, you know, and I understand what Charlie's saying there, but I did radio with Monty Coleman for a number of years, and he was on that team at 80.

And he said, even going into the season, the word was out that they wanted to get rid of Pardy. And he said that hung over the season like a cloud. You know, certainly not having Riggins was a big deal. But he said the feeling the whole season was no matter what they did that they were getting rid of party. And it just, you know, kind of deteriorated from there. You know, it's interesting. And I know you remember this, but I bet many people who are listening don't remember this. when Jack Pardy got fired at the end of the 1980 season,

Betherd goes and hires Gibbs from San Diego, who's coaching for Cori-L, and Pardee goes to San Diego for the next season to be Correel's defensive coordinator for that one year. Yeah. And 81. You remember those teams that they had, the San Diego team? It was like Paul Westhead in basketball.

I mean, they were just trying out. They didn't even care what the defense did. Just get back on the field, so, you know, we can start throwing more touchdown passes. Chuck Muncie can have a few runs. I mean, they were, it was incredible to watch. And that's what I think Bethard envisioned for Gibbs coming here. You know, the way things turned out, I don't think was anything like he thought it would. It turned out.

I know he thought he was a good coach, but they were going to run a high-powered offense, which they really didn't. It was a run-based offense based on the personnel they had. The Chargers were ahead of their time. You know, Tommy and I were talking about Brady yesterday and doing sort of quarterback Mount Rushmore stuff. And, you know, Marino's always probably going to be on my Mount Rush. Marino threw for 5,000 yards before anybody,

except for Fouts, was throwing for 4,000 yards. I mean, he was way ahead of his time. But, you know, that Chargers team of 81 with Fouts and Muncie and Jefferson and Winslow and, you know, West Chandler and the long-time receiver there, Charlie Joyner. Charlie Joyner. They were unstoppable offensively. They put up some of the biggest numbers in the history of the league to that point. I think they were at that point the highest scoring team in NFL history. and Jack Pardee coached their defense.

And Pardee was the coach for that defense in that what I still believe to be, other than the Bill's Chiefs game from last year, the greatest playoff game I've ever seen, which was the Chargers Dolphins, you know, at the Orange Bowl, 4138 overtime game the Winslow game. Pardee was the defensive coordinator for the Chargers. And remember, they won that game, went on to Cincinnati, where it was 57 below with the wind chill.

you know, the following week and lost that game to the Bengals and Ken Anderson. And that was the 49ers, you know, first year with Montana winning it. But yeah, it is interesting to think about, you know, the Bethard thing who probably didn't want party, maybe Cook didn't want party, and maybe you're right, like Monty Coleman said. But if they had won in 79 and Rigo had come back, they probably would have been a competitive team the following year. And it would have been hard to fire a guy if he had won, you know, a playoff game in 79. you know, nine and seven and back to the playoffs in 80 or something like that.

Who knows? Right. And then Gibbs would have wound up someplace else, and we'd never know. We'd never know. We'd never know. Well, things work out for a reason. Doug Williams, 35 years ago earlier this week, was the first black quarterback to start and win a Super Bowl.

And I know you were talking about earlier today on your show. just the discussion around this upcoming Super Bowl being the first between black quarterbacks on both teams. So what was your discussion about? What were you talking about? Well, I mean, I was at that Super Bowl in San Diego. And the, you know, one of this, as we do this every year, what's the stupidest Super Bowl question? And somebody invariably says, somebody asked Doug Williams, how long have you been a black

quarterback, which was not the question that was asked. The question was from somebody from a paper in Mississippi, his last name was John's since passed away, but he had covered Doug Williams when he was at Brambling, and he said, Doug, obviously you've been a black quarterback your whole life. When did it start to matter? Which is a really good question. But you've been in the media scrums where it's three and four deep, and he was sort of in the back, and Williams doesn't hear it very well. He says, what? How long have I been a black quarterback? There's no video of this. There's no audio as far as I know. And somebody gave this nugget to the San Diego Union Tribune.

This is pre-Internet and everything. So everybody who's at the Super Bowl covering the game is reading the local paper, and they see this little nugget, and they run with it. Now, that's not what happened, you know. Interesting. I didn't know that. Yeah, yeah. And Williams has even said, and I think he's wrong, but he has said, oh, somebody asked me how long have I been a black quarterback? Well, they didn't ask that question, but that's how things work there.

And also, I remember this, and if you watch Dexter Manley Football Life, this little clip is in there, and I'm standing next to Larry Duvall, a longtime producer in town. And so Dexter is, this is where they have, you know, the various sections where the player is supposed to show up and the BDSA sits and waits for him. Dexter's late coming out. Wonder what's going on. Finally comes out sweating. He's got a newspaper under his arm, and he says,

I need to have questions in writing, in writing. And there's a real loud, and everybody jumps back, and the irony was, of course, that he couldn't read at that time. You know, there were a lot of things about that Super Bowl. But I was in the, I was working for WFAN then, and we were in what they called the Auxiliary Press. which is just basically a section of the stands. And there were these two Bronco fans behind me.

And that game was a disaster start for Washington could have been worse. Doubted nothing. But yeah, everything that could have gone wrong went wrong. And they are screaming. And I'm thinking, oh, God, this is going to be a long day. And that second quarter unfolded and halfway through it, they were gone. I mean, that was an explosion that I don't think, have we ever seen anything like that from any kind of a Washington team? 18 plays 35 points.

Yeah, it was incredible. Yeah. It's the most explosive anybody's ever been in the Super Bowl in that short of span. I mean, it was literally 18. I mean, for those of you that don't know, 18 plays 35 points in a quarter. They went from being down 10-0 to up 35-10 to winning the Super Bowl 42 to 10, with, by the way, a fifth round pick by Bobby Bethard, Timmy Smith, rushing for 204 yards in the Super Bowl. Crazy. What else?

How you been? Pretty good. Pretty good. You know, I'm a grandfather now. You know, moving along, you know, things are okay. and still doing what I do. So happy to be doing it. It's a time when a lot of people my age are out.

So no real complaints. All right. I'll talk to you soon. We'll get together for lunch. Sounds good. Good to talk to you. We're done for the day. I'll be back on Monday.