The Kevin Sheehan Show - When On Wentz?

Episode Date: November 9, 2022

Kevin on will they go to Wentz and if so, when? Ben Standig weighed in on the Wentz question as well before the guys got to some Washington Commanders' mid-season awards/questions. Scott Van Pelt jumped on to talk College Football Playoff Rankings, Terps' Football & Basketball, and he made a mid-season Super Bowl pick too.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

You don't want it. You don't need it. But you're going to get it anyway. The Kevin Cheehan Show. Here's Kevin. Two guests on the show today, and neither is Chris Cooley. He apologizes. I apologize. He called me and said he had to go to North Dakota.

And he started to talk about why he needed to go to North Dakota. And I'll be honest with you, I kind of tuned it out at that point. Not because I was angry or upset that he wasn't. coming on. I am upset that he's not coming on because I love it when he comes on, but I'm not angry about it. He is very generous to have done as much as he's done with us this year. And to commit to watching these games, or at least watching them after the fact and doing the film breakdown when he's done it. But I just, I think it had something to do with a piece of equipment, and I wasn't likely going to understand it anyway. But maybe he can come on on Friday.

And because they play on Monday night, because Washington plays on Monday night, it wouldn't be too late on Friday to look back to the Minnesota game. And then on Monday he can come on. We can talk about the NFL from Sunday and preview the Philly game. That's my plan anyway. We'll see if it works out. Actually, that reminds me of something. Our good friend Sabah from North Carolina, she is rather Taylor Heineke-obsessed. I mean, I don't think it's actually super healthy, and I've shared that with her.

She's a doctor. I can only imagine being one of her patients after she listens to somebody criticize Taylor Heineke. I mean, that would be the worst time to walk into her office, to be seen by her. But she sent me, I mean, it's one of 75 DMs I get a day from her. She sent me something the other day that I'm looking at. for right now as I'm speaking into the microphone and I'm looking to find it. She does send a lot of DMs direct messages via Twitter. Here it is. Sweetheart, she called me sweetheart. I think that's because I probably referred to her as sweetheart. And I did so in not a condescending or a sexist way. It was

very much tongue placed firmly in cheek. And by the way, Sabah has a sense of humor, which is great. And she's not overly sensitive. She is one, here's one for you. She's one tough broad. She is. It's one of the things I love about her. She said, sweetheart, you are doing all you can to blame Taylor.

Funny how after he wins, you don't want to talk about it a lot. You didn't even have Cooley review Taylor's performance after the last two wins. I'm sure you'll have him preview play-by-play this week. the best thing about Sabah, she is feisty. She keeps coming at you, which is great. It doesn't matter how wrong she is. She'll keep coming. Yeah.

Again, Cooley's not reviewing Taylor Heineke's performance today on the normal film day, even though your implication was he would be on this week to review play-by-play because I think even you understand Taylor did not have a great game on Sunday against Minnesota. But he's not on because the truth is that Taylor Heineke has nothing to do with Cooley's appearances on this podcast to do film breakdown. In fact, I think he did do a film breakdown after the Green Bay game of Taylor Heineke. Didn't he? I'm pretty sure he did. Because I think Sabas said, why don't you listen to Cooley more? He knows what he's talking about, which he does, of course.

and I had given, you know, Taylor, you know, glowing marks for the second half and horrific marks for the first half. And I think I ended up saying, you know, normally this would be a C performance, but I'm going to give him kind of a C plus B minus because, you know, he played so well in the second half. Which, by the way, I've been very complimentary of him for various portions of the games so far, not Sunday's game. Although I did compliment four or five throws and plays he made. But no, it really has nothing to do with, you know, Coley's only going to review him when he plays poorly, and he's going to ignore it when he plays great. Well, he hasn't played great at all, okay?

He hasn't played well for 60 minutes. He's had a couple of moments. He had the end of the indie game, and he had a really solid second half against Green Bay. Sunday he didn't play very well at all. And cost them, you know, was a major reason, not the only reason, but a big reason why they lost the game Sunday with that interception

at a backbreaking portion of the game to throw an interception in. Anyway, why do I even waste time? Keep the direct messages coming. I'm sure I will a few hours after this podcast goes out today have my phone

buzzing with stuff from Sabah. She is tough and she does love herself some Taylor Heineke. Okay. On the show today is a few things

before we get to Ben Standing and Scott. But with Ben, we're going to talk about Carson Wentz, and I'm going to talk a little bit about Carson Wentz here in the open as well, because I think he's going to play again, and I think he's going to play a week from Sunday at Houston.

And I'll tell you why here in a moment. We'll find out from Ben what he thinks. Also want to get into, with Ben, kind of some mid-season awards, which I will give you my answers to now, and then you'll hear Ben give his answers during his segment. And then with Scott, man, the college football playoff rankings and the college football playoff possibilities are really interesting. I think they are most years,

but there are some real interesting things that came out of the rankings last night. We'll talk to Scott about that. We'll get Scott's feelings about the Dan Snyder selling of the team, and other things, probably some NFL discussion with Scott as well. I've got that on my agenda with him. Before we get to some of that, there are a couple of things. Number one, there's a tweet that just went out from Mark Maskey at the Washington Post. Quote, the Office of D.C. Attorney General Carl Racine says he will hold a news conference Thursday

that would be tomorrow to make a major announcement related to the Washington commanders, closed quote. that's it um so maski and niki and niki and javala and liz clark wrote the story three weeks ago mid-october that carl racine's office had finished their investigation of snider and the commanders and they were planning to take further action in the case uh there was a quote from somebody on the condition of anonymity who said rassine and his team quote are moving full steam ahead. Dan Snyder, the commanders in the NFL, will soon face accountability for their actions. Snyder will no longer be able to dodge subpoenas or avoid testifying or answering questions, closed quote. I have no idea, and I said it at the time when the story came out,

I have no idea what this is about. You know, whether it's the Tiffany Johnston allegations or the Jason Friedman business impropriety allegations, I don't know what it's about. I don't know what it's about. If they really do have something and they can add to the likelihood that Dan sells the team, which I think is 90%, 90% plus, that's great. What I would be just really upset with is if this ends up being a story or, and I'm not talking about the post, I'm talking about Carl Racine. If this ends up being something where they don't have the goods on him, but they're going to go down some path of, I don't know, trying to indict him, trying to find him, I don't know what the attorney general has and what the possibilities are. But I said to Tommy

last week, after this news broke here on the podcast, I said, I'm 90% that this is all about a sale. The 10% is, this guy is incredibly impulsive. He's very reactive. And one of the things I think, I hope happens is that all of us, media, fans, et cetera, don't high step like we've already scored and won the game and the game is over. Because if somebody goes down the path of accusing or alleging or doing something that he believes isn't true, like the Jeffrey Epstein stuff, like, you know, the Tiffany Johnson and Friedman allegations, which clearly they feel like he's innocent of. And we don't know what the answer is because the Mary Joe White investigation isn't over yet. Just be careful, I would say, and I'm not talking about at the expense of women who

have come forward and have been victims to the organization, I would never advocate that they don't come forward and that they wait until he sold the team. But I'm really talking about other stuff. If it's not something that you really have, don't piss him off. Don't change his mind. Don't back him into a corner anymore. I mean, however he arrived at this decision last week, or a few days before last week, he came to it. And it really appears as if he's moving forward. And they understand, too, now, the jubilation in terms of the reaction, which just, I think, solidified certainly in the family's mind,

yeah, we're doing the right thing. You know, Sunday wasn't at FedEx Field, wasn't what it was against Green Bay. You know, I mean, there wasn't, I'm sure there was some Zelda team chance, but for the most part, the only chance were Taylor Heineke, which Sabah was leading, and Skoll Chants, the Minnesota Vikings chant. So I don't know what Carl Racine has. I'm sure we'll be talking about it tomorrow. Tommy and I'll do the show tomorrow, and hopefully that announcement will come out sometime

in the morning and not late in the day so that we can do a reaction to it. but I just hope whatever it is, it's substantial. It's not, you know, he said she said, or it's not something that came from, you know, a witness who's got some credibility issues. I hope it's not something that was set up where he was set up by a minority shareholder, which I think happened with Dwight Schar

and that India media company. He's made the decision. Let's just let it get done here and let it get done quickly. So we'll see on that. A couple of other things to get to here before I get to Carson Wentz. Number one is this. The news that Jay-Z and Bezos and Matthew McConaughey may be putting a bid together,

I put out a poll this morning after the radio show, or actually during the radio show, and we took some calls on the following question, and that is, you know, does celebrity ownership, or is celebrity ownership a good thing, a bad thing, or something that doesn't really matter? And 46.6% of the 2,000 votes or close to 2,000 votes in say it doesn't really matter. 39.5% say it's a good thing, and 13.9% say it's a bad thing. My answer to this is it doesn't really matter. And I say that understanding that it doesn't really matter for me.

And I personally don't think it'll really matter for the team. You know, Jay-Z owned the Brooklyn Nets. They didn't get LeBron or Dwayne Wade. They wanted to. Said they were going to get them. Didn't get them. I don't think that players in the league are just going to sign with Washington or a coach, a really good coach, or a really good general.

manager is just going to come here because there's celebrity ownership. And I also say this understanding that there may be a younger, untapped part of what will become the future fan base that might care about this kind of stuff. So I hold out the possibility that it's important from their standpoint because celebrity ownership could drive more interest in the team from a certain demographic to me that would be age-oriented younger. Bottom line is, my belief, you know, going back to my list of the things that I'm looking for in an owner, I think the most important thing is winning. I think having an organization whose total focus is on winning Super Bowls, contending for Super Bowls, and that everything around that

goal, that mission statement, is what the organization is about, that eventually all the rest of it will take care of itself. It'll become a desirable place. It will become desirable for fans of any age to start buying tickets, watching the games, buying merchandise, etc. Winning is the most important thing. But anyway, if you want to vote on that Twitter poll, go to at Kevin Sheen, D.C. There are a lot of good comments there as well from people. You know, a lot of people think that it is. I personally don't think it would attract players.

I don't think that's what would happen. I'm not discounting the possibility that if it came, if, you know, if the ownership group became really a thing, you know, by the way, Bezos is a celebrity as well. You know, Jay-Z, Matt McConaughey, Kevin Durant, you know, and they've got connections with players and agents. And, you know, I'm not suggesting that somehow, you know, it wouldn't become maybe the cool place, but it'll only be cool for a short period of time if you don't win. And if you're not a quality organization, and if you're not run well, and if you don't pay well, you know, all of those things will matter. I would imagine with Bezos, they'll pay well.

All right, to Carson Wentz. Actually, before we get to Carson Wentz, one other quick thing. I saw this last night that NFL games on average are three hours, one minute, and 55 seconds through nine weeks of NFL football this year. And that is the fastest average of an NFL game through nine weeks since 1993. and there was a lot of discussion online about why that is. First of all, if you don't know this, the NFL has had a thing with pace of play forever. They want their games to be wrapped up in a tidy three hours, give or take a couple of minutes.

And they've gotten it to that point now. Three hours, one minute, 55 seconds. Let's just call it three hours and two minutes is the average length of a game. there are several things here. Number one, I don't think NFL fans care about how long these games are. I think they care about things like the review time on replays, which they've cut down significantly. I think those things matter. I think the actual aggregate amount of time it takes to play an NFL game, it doesn't matter if it's three hours in 10 minutes, three hours in 20 minutes, or three hours in two minutes. I don't think that matters. Now, college football is different because those are,

games average well over three and a half hours and the games that are super high scoring can last nearly four hours. And the reason for that is they stop the clock after every first down. They don't have two minute warnings, but they stop the clock after every first down. And there are lots of explosive plays in college and a lot of first downs and a lot of touchdowns in a lot of these games. So you end up with much longer games. I mean, it's not unusual when you're sitting around Saturday afternoon, the game that started at 3.30, all of a sudden, it's 715 and the game's still going on. NFL games, you know, have historically always been shorter, much shorter, but I personally don't think it matters if it's three hours and 15 minutes or three hours and two minutes. I think

they're trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. You know, it's kind of like the taunting thing that they've emphasized in recent years. I think they're trying to solve a problem that isn't a problem. It's not like they've got meleys all the time, these ugly, hideous-looking fights that happen all the time in NFL games because of the taunting. And I think, you know, normal emotional reactions to really good plays, that needs to be a part of the game. Now, standing over somebody and pointing

and M-Fing somebody in their face after you make a big hit, that's taunting. But the stuff where the guy's going backwards and pointing after a big hit, that's not taunting. enough. So I think with the length of play, the pace of play thing, I think they've been trying to solve a problem that isn't a problem. However, these are the reasons, in my opinion, because I saw a lot of people saying, well, what are the reasons? And people said, well, they've cut down the amount of time that they're using on replay, on review. They're getting to an answer much faster.

That's great. But that may account for some of it. But here are the other reasons, I think, that games are shorter, which by the way, I've noticed that, you know, there was a game a few weeks ago, and I can't remember exactly what it was. It was in the one o'clock window. And the first quarter ended at 121 p.m. And I remember making a mental note. I was like, wow, that is a fast first quarter. One o'clock games kick off officially at 102 p.m. They don't kick off at one o'clock. They kick off at 102 p.m. I'm pretty sure. I know it's not one o'clock. I don't know if it's 101 or 102. But, you know, when you go to a game as a media member,

especially if you're in the broadcast, on the broadcast team, which as the co-host, as the host of the pregame show for as many years as I did it, and then many times sitting in the booth to watch the game with Larry Sonny Sam, Larry, Sunny, Cooley, Doc, etc. They pass out an itinerary, and they tell you, you know, ban comes on, teams introduced, coin toss it, you know, 1256. You know, teams go here.

and then 102 kickoff. It was never 1 o'clock. It was 102 p.m. And when a game, when the first quarter ends at 121, I mean, it's almost impossible for that to happen because you've got, I think, three to four two-minute commercial breaks that you have to run.

That's, you know, six to eight minutes. I forget if it's three or four. So you had a 19-minute quarter, which means somebody had a super-long drive where they couldn't go to a commercial. And then before you knew it, the next team had a really long drive where the clock was just running and the quarter was over. So the second quarter probably took a long time to play because they had to get in all the commercial breaks for the first half. Anyway, here are the reasons, in my opinion, that the games are speeding up.

Number one is scoring is down. Scoring's down by like four points. And so it's somewhere between four and five points at this point from last year. When you get a score, the clock stops. You kick an extra point, which is an untimed play. And both teams go to their sideline and the special teams units come out and you do a kickoff, usually with commercials in between. Sometimes not if you've used up all of your lot in the commercials, but a scoring play adds time to the game. Well, scoring's down.

Number two. Number two is completion percentages are very high. When there's an incomplete pass, the clock stops, and it doesn't start until the snap of the next down. When the ball is caught inbounds, the clock continues to run. If it's caught out of bounds, or if it's caught and then the guy goes out of bounds, the clock stops briefly, just like if a runner goes out of bounds, and it's not supposed to start again until the ball is spotted for play. More than that coming up in a moment.

But number one, scoring's down. Number two, completion percentages are very high. So the ball's not hitting the ground as much, which stops the clock. And then number three, watch for this. Because of the emphasis on pace of play and for the NFL, this obsession over the years of a three-hour, you know, tidy little package of game, which, again, I think is trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. They're not bleeding over into the late window games. games anymore because they move those games to 425 p.m. The double header games used to be those games

won at 405, then at 415, and now 425 because you can't, you know, you want the entire nation for that double header game on Fox or CBS to be done with their one o'clock games when that game kicks off. You want, you know, the advertisers to have everybody a full audience to advertise to. you know, back in the day, if the one o'clock audience wasn't always there, sometimes you wouldn't get your first commercial break until the majority of the audience had joined. Anyway, you watch when a player goes out of bounds the next time with the football, after a catch or after a run. The clock is supposed to stop, which it does,

and then it is not supposed to start again until the ball has been spotted for play. If you watch the clock stops, and within a few seconds this year, they're rolling it, whether the ball is ready to be played or not. And the other thing, and I think we've seen a lot of this over the years, if there's any doubt about whether or not a runner was stopped in bounds with forward progress, if there's any doubt, they roll the clock. I watched the Antonio Gibson play at the very end of the Minnesota game, because I had made this note that I think Gibbs,

got out of bounds on that final play. It's really close. You know, he was running sideways, and then he ran backwards to get out of bounds, but that's not an official forward progress stopped. And then he got tackled and he went down. It was really close as to whether or not the knee was down in bounds before the ball got out of bounds or not. But I actually thought there was, you know, a chance he got out of bounds. The referee didn't even think about it. There was contact in bounds, and he was rolling that arm, roll that clock. I hope we're not getting cheated on football. You know, there's a safety benefit to shorter games if there are fewer plays.

Now, I look this up. The median number of plays is the exact same from last year. The mean, the average number of plays is just down slightly. So it doesn't appear as if we're getting cheated, you know, in a significant way on play count. But, you know, the benefit for them is safety. Hey, we got a tidy little game. It's got less plays, less opportunity for serious injury. It's all good.

And nobody's really noticing. Well, I notice, I do notice the shortening of the games. I don't like it. I don't want there to be risk to the allotment of product that we get. Now, again, play counts aren't that much different from last year. I think the average difference is close to like a play-a-game. So we're down one play a game from last year. But what you do have this year, what you do have this year is you've got,

you know, the closest games through nine weeks since 1970. Schefter put this out. The average final score margin, 9.43 points. It's the lowest margin, final margin since 1970, since the merger. There have been 72 games decided by seven points or fewer. That's the most through week nine in NFL history. So, you know, the good thing is you're getting close games, competitive games, which may be one of the reasons you're also not seeing a dip in play count because of the attempt to shorten the game.

Because when you have close games, you've got more two-minute stuff at the end of games, which means more plays. this is all just for me kind of logical reasons why I think the games have been shortened. Certainly the scoring is a big part of that. Completion percentage is a big part of that. You know, the completion percentage is increasing over the years have shortened the games on its own. When you don't have as many incompletions in a game as you used to have, you have less stoppages of the clock. I just don't need to see the ref automatically want to wind the clock rather than stop the clock on an out-of-bounds play.

And I don't need to see the clock start rolling before the ball is spotted for play. I just don't think the emphasis, which there clearly has been for a while, to speed up the games, is necessary. I don't think they're solving a problem. If the games were three and a half hours on average, that would be one thing. They've never been that. You know, we're talking about the difference between like an average at some point of maybe three hours and six minutes versus where it is at three hours, one minute and 55 seconds. It's just not much of a problem. To me anyway.

All right. Last thing before we get to Ben, Carson Wentz. So I think Carson Wentz is going to start at Houston a week from Sunday. I'm not advocating it. I don't really care one way or the other because personally. I don't think it will matter one way or the other. I think Taylor's mobility, you know, offsets the benefit that you get, you know, I think it's an equal, I think their chances of winning right now are probably equal with either one of

them. He can throw the ball and stretch the ball and really threaten a defense down the field, but Taylor can make plays off schedule. And they need that because they've got a bad. offensive line when it comes to pass protection. But I think we're going to see it, and I think we're going to see it for a couple of reasons. Number one, they're not going to give up on being right about Carson Wentz. You know, Carson Wentz's, you know, first several games were an indictment, a major indictment on Ron Rivera, the personnel head. Okay? This was, you know, he's already made a ton of bad

moves when it comes to personnel. They had to cut their biggest free agent acquisition loose this year, had to trade them for basically peanuts. And, you know, now the quarterback, which they, you know, tried to tell you and convince all of you that they were, they were the group where Carson Wentz could resuscitate his career. And they got a great deal. And it was going to be a great thing. Carson Wentz was the guy. They had finally found their quarterback. The owner said that. You know, the owner, you know, predicted that they had their guy in front of the gaming commission in Maryland. They want another chance to be right about him. And in their minds, they're saying, we're better on defense than we were before he went out after the Chicago game. We're much

better on defense. We were getting better. Now we're legit good on defense. He was able to sit back and kind of watch here a little bit. The truth is he had a good game against Tennessee. You know, the game against Tennessee was one of his better games, 25 of 38, 359 yards, two touchdowns. They hit on big play after big play. You know, that was the Diami Brown game, the two touchdowns, including a 75-yarder. He had a 34-yard connection with McCorn. I mean, there were chunk plays all over the place in that game. I mean, they only ran the ball for 43 yards in that game.

And they had a chance at the end until he threw the interception. and, you know, he pretty much soiled himself there at the end. But he had taken a step forward from where he had been the previous weeks, where he got completely buried by the Eagles and Cowboys, in part because of him, but also in part because they were excellent defensive teams, and the offensive line was a mess. So the Chicago game wasn't pretty, but they can blame that on the injury. He wasn't healthy going in.

Remember the report about him, you know, being hurt. Kurt going into the game, and then he got injured during the game. So throwing for less than 100 yards in a game that they did win, but they certainly didn't win because of him, but they can blame that on the injury. They know what they have in Taylor Heineke. They have a backup. By the way, who's not signed for next year. Keep that in mind.

We haven't talked a lot about that, but Taylor Heineke's contract is up after this year. They signed him to a two-year deal after the 2020 season, and he's not under contract for next year. so it'll be interesting to see what they do. But they know, obviously, not obviously for everybody, obviously for most of you, that he's not the long-term answer. And so they're going to give Carson Wentz another chance to be the answer. Another reason for Carson Wentz, in addition to them not wanting to look horrible and having

another chance to look good, and rationalizing in their own mind that there's a chance he'll be much better because they're much better on defense. He's had a chance to sit back and watch and he's going to be healthier. And that is the NFC. I mean, the NFC right now is opening up for the possibility of an 8-9 team to grab that 7th spot. You know, 9-8, I would think right now is the max that you have to be to have a legitimate chance to get into the postseason. So at four and five, with eight games left, they're like, can we win five of them?

That would put us in. Winning four of the final eight, half of those games gives us a good chance. I mean, Philly, Dallas, and the Giants right now look like pretty good bets to make the postseason. You know, the Giants aren't as good as Philadelphia and Dallas, but they're six and two. Minnesota's seven and one, they're running away with that division. and if somehow they collapsed and didn't win the division, they'd still have nine wins, two more to be a wild card. The NFC South winner is going to produce a division champion,

but more likely than not nobody in contention for a wild card spot. They have two four and five teams in Tampa and Atlanta at the top. And then you've got Seattle at six and three in San Francisco at four and four in the NFC West. So the four division winners, let's call them Philly, Minnesota, Tampa, and Seattle, even though I think San Francisco will end up one. winning that division. And then you've got Dallas, the Giants at six and two, and then we're into the mess for the seventh seed. San Francisco right now has it at four and four. Then you've got teams at four and five. The Falcons would be at four and five. Washington would be at four and five.

You know, there's still only a half game out of the seven seed. They're looking at that. Remember in 2020, Ron Rivera thought the season was over and then he said it's not over. Look at the division, and we changed kind of the way we felt about the season. They're paying attention to this. They are tied for being a half game behind the 49ers for the seven spot. So I think when all is said and done, nine gives you a pretty good chance of snagging that last spot. Eight, who knows, it's possible. Now, San Francisco or Seattle would have to go backwards or the Giants would have to go.

backwards. But it's possible. And I think for those reasons and the reasons of Taylor Heineke wasn't overly impressive, even though he had some moments and the players like him, but the bottom line is if they lose to Philadelphia on Monday night and he doesn't play really well, because he hasn't played well. He's had moments, played well in the second half, played well down the stretch against Indy. Other than that, you know, it should have been three to four picks in turnovers in the first half against Green Bay. They really didn't do much offensively. They moved it a little bit here and there, but ultimately had just three points, you know, seven points, excuse me, going into the fourth quarter, going into the latter portion of the

fourth quarter against Indy. And last week, really offensively, let's face it, I mean, they got incredibly lucky on a 49-yard touchdown pass. They had a referee get screened, and they had a guy calling for a fair catch that got, you know, knocked out of the way by that referee who was setting the screen. And Curtis Samuel made a great play. But as Nick Ackridge, who was on the show yesterday, said, you know, that is a turnover-worthy play, and he's got too many of them, which is why his PFF rating is so low. It's very low, not just from Sunday.

It's been low throughout. I don't think it's all his fault, Sabah. I don't. And all of you that love Taylor Heineke, I think the offensive line's a problem. And I do think there are some things that Scott Turner could do, although I'm not nearly on board with most of you who think it's all Scott Turner. I don't agree with that at all. But I think we're going to get Carson Wentz, assuming he's healthy, I should have said that from the beginning, assuming that all is well, he comes off and he quarterbacks at Houston and they give it to them until they're out of contention. Or, you know, close enough to out of contention that they don't end up having the 70%

snaps that cost them a second rounder next year instead of a third rounder. Although, you know, you wonder with everything going on with ownership if Ron's even thinking about that draft choice. All right, Ben Standing next right after these words from a few of our sponsors. Don't forget to rate us and review us wherever you're listening to this podcast where it allows you to rate us and review us, especially on Apple and Spotify, Apple in particular, where they allow you to rate us up to five stars and write a quick one to two sentence review, saying how much you like the podcast. It really does help us. I know many of you have said over the years here while we've been doing this podcast that you love it when Ben Standing comes on the show,

and Ben is with me right now. Ben, of course, writes for the athletic. You can follow Ben on Twitter at Ben Standing. He's got his own podcast, Standing Room Only, and he makes appearances on radio on the Team 980, 430 to 630, with Craig Hoffman on Tuesdays. So tune in for that. So I'm going to start with this very simple question.

Will Carson Wentz play again? And if so, when? I was going to say, don't forget, I'm on some guys show Monday. and Friday mornings as well on 980. Yes, you are, but not for two hours. I mean, I'd love to have you on for two hours, but you're only on for about 20 minutes at 8 a.m. on Monday morning and Friday morning. Yeah, we'll have to discuss what happened this week with the Monday night game. But all that said, Carson went. I mean, this thing is, I've gone back and forth of this. Ultimately, I go back and forth because neither answer. This would be that

exciting at this point. I thought if they had if they had held on to beat the Vikings, I don't know how you go away from Taylor Heineke, regardless of his play almost, because he would have won three in a row. And, you know, he still has a winning record, or they still have a winning record

with him as a quarterback this year. He has as many wins as Went did over six games. I guess the thing, though, is what happened here with Philly. If they are just, you know, don't look like they can compete, then, you know, they probably would go back to Wendt when he's eligible. He's eligible to come off injured reserve after this

game. Is he ready? Is he healthy? Well, that's the question. I mean, well, that's the question. Also, it will be a short week, right, because they will practice, they will have a game Monday and then have an effort game Sunday. So I don't know, even if he's, quote-unquote, ready, he won't have as much practice time as normal. We'll see. You and I are talking here Wednesday morning because of the Monday night game. They pushed the whole practice schedule back at day,

so we won't hear from Ron Rivera until tomorrow, and therefore, you know, opposite we'll be asking at that point. I really don't know. I mean, Wednesday has been out there a little bit with the team, but, you know, we're only seeing a few minutes of practice, so I'm really not sure where he's at. It seems conceivable he could be back, but we'll have to get a better feel.

To me, I wouldn't be surprised if we don't see him until the, what was that big, the Atlanta game, just because of the short week. But what would have a better feel from when Rivera talked this week. Okay. So why would we see him for the Atlanta game? By the way, I don't think the six days personally will matter on a short week. I'm not saying that it won't. I just don't, I think if they lose Monday night and they lose resoundingly and Heineke plays sort of the way

he's played the last three games, or at least for the majority of it, and they're four and six, and the NFC's sitting there begging for somebody to go eight and nine or nine and eight for the seven seed. I think that they are going to put Wentz back in for the Houston game if he's healthy. By the way, I don't know if I'm for it or against it, because I don't think either option's very good. I'm just saying I think they'll do it. But if they do it, why will they do it? Well, at this point, just to focus on Heineke on this aspect of your question, last year, whenever we would ask Rivera about the quarterback,

could Heineke be your answer long term? He was always kind of like, hey, yeah, sure, right? I mean, you know, why not, basically? Then the season ended and he's like, hey, we've got to get a quarterback. This year, it feels like when we ask about the idea of Heineke and how is he playing, Rivera doesn't really hide it too much anymore. He's not pretending that Heineke's the answer. You know, you get what you get.

He seems almost exasperated at a time. He, of course, appreciates what Heineke does, no doubt, but in terms of just the limitations and some of the decision-making, I think Rivera is pretty transparent of thinking that this isn't the answer. And we know they made a huge investment to get Carson Wentz. You know, a lot will depend on Rivera's future how this game goes, not to mention the ownership deal. But a big factor will be how to say.

Carson Wentz play out, right? Yes, they can get rid of him after this season without any issue on the salary cap, but they would also mean they're still to have no quarterback for the long term, presumably. So that to me is like Carson Wentz is both playing him now would be to give you a chance to win now. Like you said, the energy is fairly wide open from the wildcard perspective. It will also help Rivera perhaps, help justify making the move, and then frankly give him a chance to say, do we have a quarterback for next year? Whereas He's more just like maybe he gives you the better chance to win that next game,

but they know the limitations exist and maybe he doesn't anyway. So that to me would be why Went would come back. I think Heineke may, if not have to win this week, would at least probably have to, you know, take the Eagles to the buzzer or that type of deal look pretty good on offense. To keep it would be my guess at this moment. Yeah, I think the part that I talked about is just they want, we know that they don't want to admit that they were wrong at this point. I mean, I don't think that this is a William Jackson situation yet for them. And I think they can rationalize that the defense is much improved from early in the season.

And that maybe, you know, stepping back and watching a little bit more and learning a little bit more about the offense. when it really comes down to it, it'll be, look, we traded for this guy. We said a lot of nice things about how he was the guy. I mean, I'm not saying they're saying that to each other, but they're saying it to themselves. This guy's got to do it for us. I mean, it would be one thing if Taylor were lighting it up, and it was so hard to go away from it. But, you know, it's not like we're going to lose the team at this point if we're four and six, and Taylor's been what he's been.

The team loves him, but they'll all understand. I just think it'll happen sooner. And then they'll give him a chance to make the run, you know, Atlanta. I mean, Houston and Atlanta and the Giants twice to position themselves for a potential, you know, late December, early January run to a wild card. And if they're not there through that stretch, then they sit them and maybe you get Taylor or maybe you get Sam Hal. But I think it's coming against Houston. It sounds like you think it's coming to, but it'll be against Atlanta.

I mean, by the way, I'm saying that based on the assumption that he is healthy enough to go. Yeah, I mean, look, it's basically healthy enough to go. And like you said, I mean, he's already, you know, he's already been playing with the team. So it's not like he's just some, you know, inexperienced guy. So, yeah, maybe the truth, the missing day of practice means nothing, totally conceivable. I'd get in my head with all their injuries, they seem to be fairly comfortable. conservative. So that's the only reason I guess maybe I'm thinking maybe they were to wait. But yeah, the Houston game, like if you want to give Carson Wentz sort of some

good opportunities going up against Houston, followed by Atlanta, would be just that. It could be harder to go to sit Heineke if he were to beat Houston, right? So yeah, it could make sense. You know, again, it goes back to the same conversation we've had with these quarterbacks throughout. Taylor Hineke, sorry, Carson Wentz raises your ceiling. debate, whatever, all you want about what he is or isn't, but he gives you the big play potential. And this offense, you know, the first two games, but they split them, they scored pretty well.

They have not scored more than 17. They've only scored 17 or more points. Although, I'll say it a little more time. They've only scored over 17 points once since those first two games. And some of those starts were with Went, of course, but, you know, it's also been Heineke. So Carson Wences gives you more. There's more reasons for Rivera to look at this short-term, long-term.

So, yeah, I think it makes sense, but ultimately what makes sense is viewing that they're going to have to go in the next off-season looking to get a better quarterback or a new playing a quarterback, because it doesn't feel like what they have right now is the answer. One more question on this, and you've kind of answered it, but I just want you to answer it definitively from your standard. point because we've been kind of talking about what the team, you know, how the team will handle it. My guess is they're going to go to Wence unless, you know, Heineke pulls out some miracle and not only wins the game, but plays exceptionally well. I guess there's context for, you know, a 38, 37 final. They get beat, you know, where it's all the defense's fault. But do you think if they go to Wence, and I would almost say when they go to Wence, that it'll make much of a difference? Not really

I mean like The offensive lines Concerned are still there I don't imagine Wendt has figured out How to improve his decision making In the pocket over the last few weeks You know

I mean Carson Wentz I think the big take player From the first six games with Wentz Is he is who he is And they ultimately didn't do enough To help prop him up You know he can do some really nice things with his arm,

but you've got to have a much better offensive line situation than they have. So I don't really think it makes much of a difference. Again, the variable would be because, like, with Taylor Heineke, it's just such a grind to kind of get points or get yourself in position for points. With Went, he can turn that in one play. Again, thinking in the end, you want the ball in your playmaker short and let them run with it, yeah, that'd be great, but Wendt's his arm can get you more. So I don't know. Ultimately, I don't think it matters too much one way or the other.

But, you know, I think it matters to Rivera, which is why I think, you know, he would probably go back to Went at this point. Where do you come in on the Scott Turner criticism? Yeah, I mean, you know, I didn't necessarily love everything I saw from the offense this week. You know, when Taylor Heineke's getting all those balls batted down, you know, it just sort of reminds. like, you know, should you try to get them out of the pocket more? But I think they did try to get them out of the pocket more this week. And, you know, sometimes it just feels like maybe the play calling is about trying to make some sort of, you know, look at me type plays instead of just saying, hey, we do these things well. Let's just go back to them over and over again.

But, you know, at the end of the day, you can drop all the perfect plays you want. You're just limited with either of the quarterbacks. in this case, Heineke, I mean, it's really, like, I know that we have an analytics for everything these days. I would love the analytics for, like, how terrible the decision would that pass occur to Samuel that ultimately turned into a touchdown. But to throw into triple coverage deep like that, wow, I mean, just such a poor choice that obviously, incredibly worked out, great, great catch by Samuel. But every time behind you he drops back the path, it feels like you're kind of just holding your breath. And then when he makes the play, you're like, wow, they actually did something. It's like a big exhale, and it's like you can't believe it.

But all this connects to Scott Turner. Like, you know, I don't know if he's changing enough of the offense to adjust to the different types of quarterbacks he's having in there. But that said, it's still, you know, I think you and I talked about this a lot in the off season, that we both thought Scott Turner did a pretty good job and was perhaps, derated his first two years and that now we'd maybe get to see the full-proated version of him with Wentz, and the reality is probably not. And maybe there is only so much you can do with, as a coordinator with these quarterbacks.

On the other hand, this is also like what makes quarterback or makes coaches, you know, the better ones who they are, like the Giants, Daniel Jones is still not exactly a dynamic quarterback, but they are finding ways to win by using his strengths. It doesn't always feel like that's happening here. Yeah, I think that you also have, in addition to the quarterback limitation, this year you've got a significant offensive line pass protection limitation. And that's a bad combination because really good quarterbacks, you know, sometimes can mask, you know, along with, you know, a good design and good play caller, et cetera, can occasionally mask the fact that you struggle in pass pro, but they have struggled since the jump.

And the same issues that have played Carson Wentz with the pass pro, pass protection, have really been an issue, I think, for Taylor Heineke as well. And I don't know if that's a fixable thing at this point. It probably isn't. Let's flip it to the other side of the ball. So this morning on radio with my producer Denton, I don't know how we got into it, Ben, but I said, I think this defense. right now for me and watching it, and especially on Sunday, there was something about, you know,

the all-black uniforms and just the nastiness that they played with. The constant, you know, shutting down to the run, the pressuring of the quarterback, the hitting of the quarterback, the tackling, you know, even when they gave up plays, you know, Minnesota really had to earn it. And I said to Denton this morning, this is the best either side of the ball has been, offense or defense since the 2016 offense. The offense of Cousins, Pierre, Deshawn, Jordan Reed, Chris Thompson, et cetera. That was a really good offensive team. This is the best either side of the ball, offense or defense has been this defense this year since that 2016 offense. I know it's not a lot to compare to. The 2020 defense was pretty good down the stretch, but they were playing, you know,

a bunch of third string quarterbacks, second string quarterbacks. But give it a second if you want to think about it, but do you think I'm right? Well, I mean, that's a big statement, and also not a big statement considering the play we've seen over that time. But, yeah, I mean, I think my issue in 2020, when this looked like this defense, you know, statistically was one of the best five in the league, I just remember, I just kept thinking, I don't know if I'm seeing it, you know, when they need stops, are they getting stops? I mean, Tampa Bay, you know, ravaged them for over 500 yards in the playoff game and all that.

So I didn't quite buy that. Now, this one, I think, I think your point is well-founded. I mean, the defensive line that we've talked about forever, about all this potential, you know, it feels like collectively they've gotten there. I mean, the Ron Payne and John Allen are problems all the time. And, you know, Montesquette has, you know, picked up his game as a season's gone along. And, you know, they've gotten some good work out of guys like King Smith-Williams F.A. al-Bada at

time. So, yeah, I mean, and then I think on top of it, you know, Jamie Davis is still a work in progress, but he's also making plays. He's at least being productive as opposed to just being sort of existing. And then, you know, the secondary has been

a bit less leaky since William Jackson got benched and heard and now traded. So, yeah, I think you can make that claim. I mean, you know, I'd have to think about all the units, but I definitely think the defense has played at a level in which if the offense was giving you more, then they would be talking about, wow, this defense

is really, you know, could be the key for them making a playoff run. So, yeah, I think it's been a pretty good turn. And, you know, kudos to Jack Al Rio, you know, a lot of people wanted them fired just at the other earlier in the season. But, you know, they have turned some things around for sure. and released this week with the Vikings. They played a real offense. It wasn't facing the Bears or the struggling Packers or Sam Elliger.

This was, you know, Kirk Cousins, Justin Jefferson, Dalvin Cook. Minnesota did some good things, but they only had seven points through the first three-quarters and that interception by Heineke set them up for their loan touchdown in the second half. So, yeah, I think the defense has definitely played well. Will Chase Young play this on Monday night? I would probably say no, but that's purely a speculative thing at this point. I mean, he last week was only working somewhat, as far as we know, with the team, and he was doing a lot of work on the side field with the training staff.

You know, as I said, we'll be back out there tomorrow, Thursday. If he's out there, you know, kind of in full, then that would be a different deal, perhaps. but if he's still sort of half and half, then I don't know. And Ron Rivera's comment when we asked about this on Monday, he didn't say definitively he would. He kind of said it'll see on his, you know, where he's at physically and his conditioning.

So kind of sounds to me like there could be another week to wait, but, you know, we'll see where he's at if he's able to do more this week in practice. What about Dotson? Is he coming back anytime soon, or is this going to be one of these, you know, soft tissue long haul? things. Yeah, I asked for the last week, considering how things went with the Curtis Samuel deal last year, if I are the possibility.

And Rivera, I don't think love that question. He said, no, he soon suggested Dodson will be back this week, at least in practice. So obviously, again, something to keep an eye on for Thursday. You know, he has now missed more games than he has played in this year. So he's had time to recover even after, which, re-agravating the injury. So, you know, based on what Rivera is saying, seemed like a decent chance Dobsom will be out of practice this week. And if he's able to go all week, then he would presumably be in the game on Monday. All right. Let's wrap this up. I've got four questions for you,

kind of mid-season questions as they've reached actually past the mid-season point. And I know you've got to run. You've got players to interview. So let me get to it right now. Number one, who's the offensive MVP? Oh, boy, good question. Who's the offensive? of MVP. I mean, I guess the easy answer is to say Terry McCorn, and I'm just trying to think if I have any pretty else. You know, probably, I don't know, the MVP's right term, but like, Charles Leno's been pretty solid over there all year, you know, whatever. He's not Jacoby or, you know, Lechay or whatever, but for an offensive line that has been beat up and ineffective in a

lot of ways, you know, having him there has been a pretty good help. So, you know, I guess I'd probably of McClorn, but I think Lano probably deserves some props as well. The correct answer is Terry McClorn. Who's been the defensive MVP through half the season, or a little bit more than half the season? Well, I hope we don't get into a fight on the sideline if I say John Allen over Durrown Payne. But, boy, it's hard to, it's really hard to pick one of the other of those two guys. I guess I'll go with Alan because I just feel like he's sort of the steadier force while being explosive, whereas Durant Payne has just been far more.

You know, he's just had some really dynamic plays. I don't know. I could go either one of those guys, I'll pick Allen, but, you know, Payne, you know, particularly this game, is really, really stepped up. All right, the biggest disappointment so far, you know, based on preseason expectations, it can be a player, It can be a unit. It can be anything you want it to be. The biggest disappointment so far for the commanders through their first nine games is what? Yeah, I mean, I'll just say, boring just go with the Carson Went situation.

I just think it's so frustrating that I understood why they made the deal and we can quivel over why they took on all the money, all the salary, and then gave up those picks as well. But when you started to see a play out, particularly on the offensive line, that they did not insulate him enough with the help. Fine, you want to let Brandon Sheriff go for all that money? I get it. But to just not have a better plan. Oh, look, Chase Ruey getting hurt, stink,

but it wasn't like that. They were already having issues before that. So, yeah, I just think like the Carson Went situation, you can't just make the move to get the guy. You've got to help him succeed, and it kind of just doesn't feel like they've done enough to do that. I mean, you know,

William Jack is now having been benched and now traded would be the defensive answer, I guess, but I'll go with the whole one situation. The thing you've been most surprised by. Yeah, I mean, I think the defense, you know, going back to the start of the season, I think I was having more questions about where this defense would be than I did with the offense,

which now seems almost comical, you know, in part because, case young's injury, you know, really had no feel the Jamie Davis was going to turn this around and look, I mean, he was a big story the first two or three weeks because he hadn't. And then, you know, we had questions in the secondary, which to some degree still exists, but at least they moved on from Jackson. But the fact that the defense has, you know, we know they have the talent up front, but you got to put it all together, they hadn't done it.

So I think especially afterward the defense was the first couple of weeks of the year to turn around the way they have, has been really impressive. Good answers. Well done. I'll talk to you on Friday on radio. Look forward to it, my gosh. Ben Standing, everybody. Always one of my favorite conversations.

By the way, my answers to the questions that I asked Ben with a little bit of extra, Terry McLorn would be, for me, the unanimous choice for offensive MVP. I really don't think there's that much of a debate. but if somebody said, I really think that Curtis Samuel deserves some consideration. I think he does. Not a lot of consideration, but he does lead the team in receptions. He also leads the team in targets. But Terry's overall impact, you know, from, you know, yards per catch to total yards

to the big catches he's had and the big plays he's had, the yards after catch, the number of first down catches he's had on the season. Terry's their best pound-for-pound offensive football player. I think Curtis Samuel is very valuable. I think Antonio Gibson, if he had been the lead back all along, might be in this conversation. I like when he's featured in space on the outside. I like when he gets the ball as the lead back between the tackles. But Terry McClorn is the answer to that. The answer for the defensive MVP is easy as well. It's John Allen. It's really not close. Duron Payne would be a runner-up, and I think that Montez Sweat would be there in the conversation for kind of the

runner-up to the runner-up. But John Allen is having, to me, an all-pro kind of season. He leads the team and tackles for loss. He's got four and a half sacks on the year, but the pressures have been what's been most impressive from him. He has been in multiple games, virtually unblockable, and has been very disruptive from that position. I think pain has been too, but Alan gets the nod for me. In terms of the thing that I'm most disappointed with, it is the offensive production. You know, I did think that, you know, while I was not a fan of the Carson Went's trade, and I didn't think it would provide a long-term answer, a quarterback, I did think there was a chance that the offense would be better this year.

With him at quarterback and with Dotson added to the offense and with Curtis Samuel back, I certainly didn't anticipate the issues that they would have along their offensive line with pass protection. And I think overall, the pass protection and the quarterback play has led to a very, very pedestrian offensive football team. And it's been a big disappointment. I expected more.

I think the biggest surprise for me, and it's not even close, is how good they are on defense, specifically how good they are as a run defense, number one in the league, DVOA-wise, per football outsiders, as a rush defense. I predicted before the season started that I thought that that could be a major concern this year because they didn't face a lot of run first teams last year, and they did this year. and I wasn't sure, based on what they had at linebacker in particular, that they could be a good, you know, consistent run-stopping team. Well, I was dead wrong.

They've been lights out against the run. They have improved in every other aspect of defensive football, and they've been well-coached, for the most part, defensively as well since the Dallas game, since the Jackson departure, for the most part. That has been the biggest surprise. And I think that is sustainable. going to play some better teams, obviously, starting Monday night. But I think the defense has become

a really good defense, a tough defense, a hard-nosed, disciplined, physical defense, especially against the run. And it's been fun to watch over the last, you know, five, six weeks as far as as that's concerned. All right. Scott Van Pelt up next right after these words from a few of our sponsors. This segment of the show brought you by My Bookie. Go to My Bookie. Go to My Bookie. use my promo code Kevin D.C and they'll match your first deposit dollar for dollar all the way up to $1,000. Take their free money, guys. You've got a great place to gamble there. It's totally fair, point spread wise, pricing wise. You get paid if you win. You don't have any worries with my bookie. They've got everything you need to, every single prop bet that you're looking for,

and lots of other things like online blackjack contests. They've got online casino games. They've Got online casino games, et cetera. But use my promo code Kevin D.C. And they will match your deposit, initial deposit, dollar for dollar, all the way up to $1,000. Use my promo code, Kevin, D.C. Scott Van Pelt is with us. I want to talk college football, playoff rankings with you, maybe a little NFL as well. But I'm curious, because I don't think we've talked about this.

Did you watch the Maryland opener the other night? the basketball opener. And if so, what did you think? Yeah, I mean, like everybody, I think, you know, you just want to see what it looked like. I think you saw an emphasis on a little bit of pace off-made buckets. Dante Scott looks fantastic. Everybody knew he, that's a turp fan, I should say, knew that he had really gotten

into great shape. I think you see that. And, you know, young played well. I mean, they I think they're probably one big short but they'll I don't know

I don't know I don't know I don't figure out ways to play with what they've got they've got talent if they're gonna they shot it well to start if they shoot well

from three then they're gonna they're gonna be able to be competitive in a bunch of ball games I would think but I don't know

I was just happy for Kevin I think he said it after he said it after he's been a wild seven months you know get to a new place cobbled together a roster and you're off and running so it was just fun to

watch and play basketball, you know? Yeah, I love this time of year, you know, and I'm looking forward to seeing what he has. He's got a hell of a schedule, that's for sure. But anyway, let's get to the main reason I called you to have you on the show today. What did you think of the college football playoff rankings last night? The only question was who's four, right? I mean, is Tennessee going to hang on to the top spot, one of the top four spots above TCU, which I don't think they should have. They didn't. TCU maintained. TCU maintains, their spot. But their TCU finds itself exactly where Tennessee

was last week in this sense. They're on the road and an underdog against the team that they're ranked ahead of as they play at Texas. We had Sonny Dykes on Sports Center on Tuesday and you know, he talked about his group and

how they've done a great job and not paying attention to anything and have they come back in a bunch of close games and come back from games, I should say, where they actually fell behind by a bunch of big scores. They happened to Kansas State, happened to Oklahoma State. I just, I think it's you and I look at it

and we see that, you know, Texas is given seven and we say, well, this is the end of that, right? I mean, it just seems like the spot where Texas wins because all signs point to that. But for the moment, you know, TCU's in the top four, and they should be, based on who they've

beaten. It's just going to be incredibly hard to stay there because they go from Austin to Baylor and then they have Iowa State who's always competitive. So, look, if they can hang on and win games, then they're obviously going to stay where they are and they ought to. But beyond that, I think the most interesting conversation is that, excuse me, I think we're setting up for a year where it would be really tough to be on the committee because you're going to have to make value judgments more than likely

to separate teams that have a loss. And I don't know what the criteria is going to be to sort that out. Yeah, so let's talk about that. So I think we both believe that Georgia will be undefeated headed to the SEC title game, so there's one spot, no matter what they do. They could lose the SEC title game by 50, and it wouldn't matter. The Ohio State Michigan winner is in.

Those are, I think, the two givens. And the third would be if TCU goes undefeated, they would be in, but neither one of us thinks they're going to be undefeated. It's not just that they've got, Texas, but they have to play at Baylor, and then they're going to have to play a big 12 championship game as well. So if we go with what is most likely going to happen in terms of, like, kind of gimmies here, Georgia and the Ohio State Michigan winner are two of the four teams, right? Yeah. Okay, so we would both rule TCU out with a loss, correct?

I mean, depends on who it's two and by how many, you know? I mean, if they, they lose by three in overtime to Texas, why should that be eliminating? I don't know. I guess, you know, if you were to compare it at the end of the year to a USC who, you know, went through UCLA and Notre Dame playing well and lost by a point to another team in the rankings. I think TCU, okay, that's fair. That's your opinion. I think TCU's out with a loss. Well, I mean, I guess it's just so then the question becomes like who's allowed to lose games. Like, that's the part about it that, you know.

I don't know for certain how that would go. I don't know. I mean, I think a more interesting comparison, I mean, look, and there's a million we could do is Oregon and Tennessee both lost to Georgia. But Oregon, you're going to say, got beat by 46 and wasn't in the game, and I'll say, okay, you're right. It was the first game of the year, and they don't look anything like that now, and Tennessee didn't lose by as many, but if you watch the game,

they had no chance to win it. and so Oregon would have a long list of wins. Tennessee would have a long list of wins. I think that's that's the most obvious sort of here's one team, here's the other, how do you choose between it? Right.

And that's, you're going to tell me Tennessee's got Kentucky, Bama, who else they beat? Oh, at LSU. Yeah. And I'm like, ooh, that's pretty good. And then Oregon will have UCLA. They're rooting for USC, obviously,

to run through them. and a much better Pact 12 than it's been in years past. And I don't know how you choose. Okay, let me just answer your question on TCU. Yeah, I don't think they're allowed a loss. I think out of the group of teams that we're talking about, USC, Oregon, Tennessee, you know, potentially Ole Miss, but I'm going to exclude them from the conversation,

potentially UCLA, but I don't think they're going to have one loss. but I think of the TCU, Tennessee, Oregon, USC conversation, they're not allowed to have a loss. I think the eye test and everything else would make it impossible for TCU to be in there with one loss. Now, unless everybody else ended up with multiple losses because they got upset, et cetera. To me, the real interesting thing,

by the way, I think that's very interesting too because if you end up with Ohio State and Georgia undefeated or Georgia and Michigan undefeated, meaning Georgia wins the SEC title game, you know, over an LSU or over somebody else out of the SEC West, then you're going to be talking about a lot of one-loss teams. You're going to be talking about, you know, the Michigan, Ohio State loser, Tennessee, and one of the PAC 12 teams, only one of the PAC 12 teams, but one of the PAC 12 teams. And I think your Oregon Tennessee thing is interesting because if you watched the Tennessee South Carolina game,

It felt like the Oregon Georgia game. Just the only difference being the score was significantly different. It was a beat down on Saturday. Tennessee got beat down in every way that it seemed Oregon got beat down. And Oregon played them week one. And I think they're a different team now.

But I don't know how the committee would handle that. Yeah. That's my point. And then it also comes down to, I mean, And like right now you can have this conversation about, you know, how many, how many SEC teams could you end up with? Well, I mean, I'm sure you could talk yourself into a bunch, right? Yeah. I mean, you could talk yourself into, you know, a number of them.

And that's okay, well, then that's because they're allowed to lose. Why is the Ohio State Michigan loser automatically knocked out? You and I had this conversation on the phone the other day. And then I had it on the air with Reese Davis. I said, if I'm the Big Ten, and I know it's sacrilege to talk about not playing that Thanksgiving weekend. But Oregon, excuse me, Ohio State and Michigan playing when they do, it becomes a de facto elimination game because you don't have any time to recover from a loss if you're on the wrong end of it.

And, you know, let's see you play in October, then the thing that has happened in years past with a team like Bama, as you lose early, but then you're able to win some games later, and then people go, oh, look at this one. I mean, look at what you just said. I don't know if USC can beat Notre Dame. Well, okay, Marshall beat Notre Dame. Stanford beat Notre Dame. But now, now you beat Notre Dame.

It's like, ooh, look at that. Well, okay, that's because it happened late. So it's just fascinating the way. It's such an interesting thing that you, yeah. I mean, they'd never do it, but I don't disagree with you. I think there'd be benefit to it, although I think this year they've got a chance to lose and get in both of them. But go ahead.

Maybe, but I don't think so because, you know, the, the recency bias, that's the last thing we saw, whereas if you're, say, let's just say it's Tennessee, well, if they went out, it's like, ah, they, you know, they only lost once, but it was to Georgia, and it's like, well, did you watch the game? Because Georgia was demonstrably better, and, you know, which doesn't mean that that's eliminating to Tennessee, but I'm just saying it was long enough ago that you kind of forget. And, oh, they just won three in a row. Well, who did beat?

You know, and those three was it like Vanderbilt, Kentucky, and I don't, Missouri, I guess, who it would be? No, they already played Kentucky. Missouri, South Carolina, of Andy. There you go. Okay, so, but you see what I'm saying? Like, I just, that, again, they'd never change. Change where it is on the schedule.

It's just, it most likely becomes an eliminator for them, um, barring the unforeseen. So, this is, all of these permutations we're talking about. This just feels really early for us.

Yeah, but it's fun. To be, no, no, without a doubt. It's just, it,

it, to me, what it illustrates about this year, is that I don't know how clean it's going to be, um, for, for the committee. And the good news is that we won't have to continue to do this.

Because think how much fun it would be to have a dozen this year, because, you know, you could, you could probably, you could, you know, figure out a path that Bama's in it with two losses. And for all the crowd that's screaming, you know, Bama is safe. I mean, I don't know that this is real life if they're like actual think pieces about Sabin's dynasty being over, whatever else. Like, is anyone actually doing that over a one-point loss and a three-point loss, both on the road to teams that are in the top ten?

Is that, are people actually spending their time doing that? I don't know. They don't look like Bama. I understand your point that they've got a one-point loss and a three-point loss, and the one-point loss came in overtime, and it's like, oh, my God, this is the end of saving and Bama. It's a great point, but they don't have the speed at wide receiver they've had, and it's one of the reasons they're where they are right now. No, and they don't have the bullies on either line that they've had,

And the counter to what I just said about their one-point loss and a three-point loss away from being nine and no is if they don't make a kick at Texas and if they don't get a stop on Texas A&M, you know, at their place. And an A&M team who's not good, you know, they could have four losses also. They're not. Brace Young didn't play. Right. Regardless. I mean, you know, you know, A&M starters didn't play either at quarterback. Right.

So at this point, at this point, Bama typically doesn't have four coin flip games, and they have had four coin flip games, and they've lost two of them. So my point is simply a dozen teams, including Bama, you know, would you want to deal with them in a playoff? No, I'd rather play someone else. I'd rather play someone else whose program hasn't been in these games time and time again. LSU is a fascinating conversation. Well, that's what I want to get to. because to me this is the most interesting,

even though both you and I would say they're in big trouble Saturday against Arkansas as a three-point favorite. But let's just for the purposes of this conversation assume that they went out, they go to the SEC championship game, and they beat Georgia. And I was watching the show

last night with Reese and Herb Street and Galloway and who else was on last night? They've got a rotating chair. Greg McElroy was on. And I was surprised. And I was surprised to hear Reese and Kirk Herbstre say, well, they might not be in. It's two losses. It's too tough.

And I said to you when we were talking last night, I said, fast forward to that Saturday night in December. And LSU is now on a seven-game winning streak. And they beat Bama a month ago. And they just beat Georgia. There isn't, we would both say to each other, this is the best team in the country right now. Period. And they're a conference champion, which, you know, it adds weight to the, to the resume. To me, there's zero chance that LSU wouldn't be in the playoff if they ran the table. And I don't understand why it couldn't understand why others didn't see it that way.

What am I missing? I mean, again, it comes down to who are we competing? Who are we choosing against? And this is the Ohio State-Pen State thing from several years ago. It's the exact same thing. Ohio State got in over Penn State. Penn State beat Ohio State. Penn State won the Big Ten, but Penn State had two losses, right? Yep.

The same exact thing. So in this case, LSU would have two losses, one of which was to Tennessee on its home field badly. and I think that's what Reese that's what Reese said to me anyway on Sports Center the other night is I just if I got to pick one of the other and I saw Tennessee beat them

on their home field by a lot that how do I pick another team ahead of and that's what happened to Penn State with Ohio State several years ago same scenario yeah but your your point's still well taken and it would be you would have beaten Bama

and you would have beaten Georgia And it'd be hard to deny the momentum of that. And then my question would be, well, because we're saying Georgia would get in, even if they lost in that spot, right? Of course, yes. So now it be Georgia, Ohio State, or Michigan, LSU, and now you're talking about the one-lost teams, Tennessee, the Pac-12 champion, and the Michigan-Ohio State loser.

And Tennessee, to me, That's what I'm saying. Go ahead. No, I was just going to say, if everything went like we think it could go with the one lost teams anyway, I still think Tennessee's resume would win out. And then you'd have three SEC teams and the Big Ten winner. And I don't. And that's why I think it wouldn't.

I think you'd have absolute outrage. Okay, but it doesn't matter. They tell you that they evaluate these teams as teams, not as part of conferences. Am I being naive? Yeah, but... I mean, how would you... The Ohio State example analogy isn't a good one because they wouldn't have beaten the team

that nobody thinks can be beaten in the conference championship to go in. Well, I wouldn't say that. I mean, I don't... I mean, Georgia played a... Missouri. Rock fight game at Missouri earlier this year. Yeah.

You know? Yeah. I mean, I don't think... I mean, look, they're... their good looks awfully good. Their ceiling is maybe higher than anybody else's. But, I mean, I just think it would be really difficult for the committee to say, hey, we've got all these carverses, and we're going to put three from one in the playoff.

I just don't think they'd do it. I think they would because I don't think they'd have a choice in that situation that we just laid out. Now, again, I don't think they're going to have that choice to make. Oregon wins its conference. Oregon wins its conference going away, they beat somebody big USC or whatever and they haven't lost since the week one and then it

really does come down to Tennessee and Oregon and now we're going to have to make a choice between the two and I don't know but at least you put it that way because I don't want to I don't think it would come down to Oregon or LSU

I think LSU would be in I mean but again history has, there was an example of this, and they chose the team with one loss. Yeah. Who lost to the team that had two. Right. So that's, that's, that's, that's where that.

But the team that lost two didn't beat Georgia, didn't beat Georgia in their conference title game. True. Wasn't it like Wisconsin, maybe? Something like that. It was a whole lot to a little bit. But, but anyway, I, I, what year was that? Was that 2017? I can't remember now.

whenever it was. I'm not good at stuff like that. That's where Stanford Steve's the best. He just has categorical recall of years and scores, and I just go, I don't know, I just didn't happen. Okay. I just don't, look, I'm not going to beat this dead horse again. If LSU runs the table, I would be absolutely outraged as a college football fan

if they weren't in the playoff, because I would think in that moment that they're the best team in America, period. And you have to put the best team in the country into the playoff, especially when they're a conference champion. You know, a third loss, of course not. But a third loss, they wouldn't have been there to begin with. And so the Tennessee thing, you know, then you get down to, yeah, it's them in Oregon, you know, or them in USC, or potentially them and, you know, a one-loss Ohio State or a one-loss Michigan.

But Tennessee's resume will look awfully, awfully good side-by-side with those other teams. the one thing that they wouldn't have against the PAC 12 champ is they wouldn't have a conference championship. And so maybe, you know, a one-loss Oregon or a one-loss USC would get in over Tennessee. And actually, in many ways, USC with the closing stretch of playing UCLA, Notre Dame, and then Oregon, could really have kind of that momentum going in there, and they might pass Tennessee. But I don't think they would pass LSU. At least Clemson's out of it. Well, yeah, they didn't look real good on South Bend on Saturday night.

Here's the big issue, though, for all this conversation. LSU is the three-point favorite against Arkansas who just lost the Liberty on Saturday. Liberty is good. You and I in our segments, the smell test and in winners, we'll just give folks a quick heads-up. Arkansas will be one of them. And Texas will be another. and both of those teams won't be in the conversation when we have it next week. But of the Pact 12 teams, to me, Oregon looks like the best team.

Who looks like the best team to you? I think so as well. When I've watched USC this year, and I want to be fair to them, they were horrible last year. Yep. Okay? Horrible. Not like not good for them. no, not good at all for anyone.

And so the fact that they were this quickly, this much better, is credit to that whole group, you know, and bringing in Caleb, who is the guy you and I, you know, and everybody in the area, the D.C. area is certainly known about for years since he was, well, like a sophomore in Gonzaga, it was a gang, and then that the math of the game winner, and it was like, holy crap, this kid's got it. well, it's not just him.

They've added a lot of pieces, and they're much better. But they also, you know, they were, I think they were fortunate early in the year to get a ton of turnover luck, if you want to call it that. I mean, you make turnovers happen. But the disparity was just not sustainable. And they won a game at Oregon State. It was like, I don't know, man, you want to keep pulling rabbits out of hats, so you're going to run out of rabbits.

But when I, but when they play to their ceiling, it's really good. I just think I think UCLA's a blast to watch as well, but Oregon gave it to them. And I think, I think it's Oregon.

And I think, I just, I like the Bo Nick story. I mean, here's a guy that, you know, I think Auburn would be better if they had him this year.

I mean, he's, he's been spectacular running and throwing the football. And I, I think that first, that first chance you get to make an impression on people.

They looked totally out over their skis against Georgia. And so maybe that's hard for some people to shake. But if you've seen them even a little bit since then, that teams are allowed to get better, and they certainly have their offense is humming. I think that's the best team. I think the USC, UCLA game is going to be unreal. Oh, I hope they go with the dark jersey combo,

both of them in the dark jerseys. They will. It's the best uniform game in football. I mean, we wear our powder blues, and you wear your... It didn't always happen there. It happened when we were kids, and then they went away from that, and now I think they're back to that, so that's good. I'm pretty sure that is... You know what? I think...

One of my inventing memories here, I think that's what they've been doing lately. Yes. By the way, I would just mention one other thing. Actually, Utah is a really good team in the Pac-12, and they can actually... get to the Pac-12 championship game. Yeah, that's who beat USC with a two-point conversion in the last 30 seconds of the game, and they play at Oregon in the couple of weeks. I'm sorry?

Correct. I said they did the exact same thing to SC that LSU did to Alabama. I shouldn't say exact same thing because it wasn't an overtime, but it was the same deal. I mean, Whittingham said, the hell with this. We don't want to play overtime against these guys. We got one play to win it, they got it. But that's the only loss of USC's got, which is an incredible, accomplishment given where they were a year ago.

But you know what, that league's way better because that league's been just totally ignored for several years in the conversation. This year the ACC, this year the ACC is not involved at all in the conversation. This year, the big 12 is right there, so is the PAC 12, and I think that only adds to making this more difficult to sort out

because there's more conferences at the table that have teams that have to be accounted for. What was your big takeaway from Maryland's loss at Wisconsin, which was never competitive? that the old analogy in football that you have to run to set up the path is sort of inverted with Maryland that I think their run game with Hemby this year has been pretty good but I think that the threat of Leah using his arm makes the running game better if that makes sense it's almost a backwards equation in my opinion and you know Stanford Stephen a bunch of

our buddies were up there in Madison, and they were like, bro, like, from the first three and out, it was just so clear that, you know, just body language, you know, you get Maryland guys on the side of ponchos, and it's raining, and it's windy, and it's, you know, the Maryland guys are just looking miserable, and the Wisconsin guys are just standing there just eating it. And, look, Wisconsin's offense isn't very good either, but it's just a line of scrimmage game, and that team's built to play a game like that, and Maryland isn't. Not an excuse.

I think that's the reality of the situation. With Maryland of one, if it was 60 and sunny, I'm not saying they would have. I think they would have had a hell of a lot better chance if their playbook was at their disposal. And it just didn't seem like it was from the very first couple of series in that game. Yeah, I think you nailed part of it there for sure with the line of scrimmage thing. It just seemed like they got manhandled at the line of scrimmage, both sides. Do they have any chance at Penn State Saturday? I don't know.

I mean, Penn State seems like a pretty popular pick at the window. I think that was the kind of game that makes people sort of maybe nationally just decide. I don't know. They'll get crushed. Here's the one thing that I'd say. The thing about the last couple of years of Maryland is that when they got to a big spot, they didn't just lose. They got obliterated.

and this year at Michigan we know it was a competitive game the Purdue game they lose by two the Wisconsin game was the first time they've looked that they've looked not to be on sort of the same kind of field footing I should say on the field as their opponent I think you just you'd love for it to be competitive

into the fourth quarter and have a chance you know I guess last last week's game is still lingering in my head and I just I don't know but I guess that they'd be competitive in this one because they have been all year. Your reaction to the news last week that Snyder, we think it's the news, that he is selling the team.

I think it has to happen for everybody. I don't know if you and I've had this conversation on your show, but I've just wondered forever, what could be fun about this at this point for him? Right. You know, what could possibly bring enjoyment out of this? when you know how you're viewed in the community, when you don't seem to have allies among the fraternity. And I mean, I think ultimately that's it, right?

You're one of 32. You're in that group. And so you get to be part of that fraternity. Well, a fraternity is a bunch of people that, I don't know, respect each other and maybe enjoy each other's company or whatever. I don't know. I wouldn't know what it's like to hang out with a group of billionaires. But I imagine you get together and you yuck it up and, hey, and it's fun to be us.

well, if you're sort of an outsider within that very small subset of the group, I don't know, and your city wants you to sell, and the fan base has gotten to the point where it's dissolved to almost nothing, and you could probably get $7 billion for it, well, then maybe you just call it a day. You know, I mean, and I think for the area and for the franchise and for all that has happened from where it once was, it feels like the one thing that would be the true reset button for everything and everybody. This morning on radio, I asked the question and we took calls, and I also put a Twitter poll out on the following. Would celebrity ownership, because of the stories about Jay Z and Matthew McConaughey, you know, being part of the Jeff Bezos bid, would celebrity ownership be a good thing, a bad thing, or something that doesn't really mean?

matter. How do you answer that? I think it doesn't matter. What difference does it make? I mean, just pick, I'm starting to go through, and it's, it's, I started to say, like, does everyone, does anyone know who owns? And then as I started to say a team, I like, well, you know, actually you do kind of know who owns most of these teams. But I mean, you know, say it's the Rooney family in Pittsburgh, like, you pick, pick the great ones, the ones that are the, the bellwethers, the ones that everybody else is sort of compared

to. I mean, being owned by, you know, a family who just acts right, does right by the community that they're in and whatever. That's nice to know. But ultimately, let's say it is famous people. So then what? Would we get more players because of that? No. I mean, is it a cooler thing to be part of in what way?

I mean, ultimately, you got to draft well, you've got to convince a quarterback to come here, and you've got to win games. I mean, that's all that matters. I just don't know how having a bunch of famous people owning it, just tell me, I'm not challenging you, but in what way would it make it better? How would it help? Well, I agree with you. My answer is I don't think it really matters at all.

I think ultimately what really matters is that you win and you become one of those franchises that, you know, are desired because of the winning and perhaps also some sort of aura around your franchise, which is something Washington had at one point, and over the last 25 years, they haven't. They've been a cellar dweller. You know, others have made the case that somebody like Jay-Z,

somebody with incredible celebrity and charisma and acumen, etc., could be attractive to young athletes in a free agent battle, perhaps. But if there is any benefit to that, then it would have been, significant to him when he owned the Brooklyn Nets, you know, and he was interested in, you know, Dwayne Wade and Robron James and didn't get either one of them. And so, I mean, I do think because this franchise has been such a bottom feeder, you know, with Cleveland and Detroit pretty much, you know, at the bottom for so long, that first of all, there will be a light that will shine on it just because Dan isn't here anymore to begin with. And then if you added some, you know,

some pizzazz to it with celebrity ownership that maybe initially there could be some benefit, but ultimately your organization is either a winning organization or not, and it's the winning thing that really ends up driving everything. Like I've said, Scott, I've said, go ahead, go ahead and talk. I just, what matters more is not that you appeal to athletes. what matters more is that you appeal to people in Bethesda and McLean and Poolsville and Manassas and Largo and Lanham and I mean that's what matters. It matters that you reach all corners of an area that was once connected to a franchise. I'd come in and say, listen, we're going back to commanders, that means nothing to anyone.

We're going back to Burgundy and gold. we'll put, we'll call it FC, I don't care, but we're going to look like we looked, we're going to turn to you the community and say, we need your help, we need your buy-in to give this franchise the sort of advantage that it once enjoyed, and we're going to lock arms with you, and we're going to put a product on the field that we can all rally around, and you're going to help make us better, but we need you. That's what they need. That's what ownership has to appeal to, that.

the sense of community that was once the greatest unifier that I knew as a kid growing up was the Washington Redskine. Period. End the story. When I go to church with my grandparents over at Tacoma Park, we'd be sitting there with my grandpa and I could see him looking at his watch.

And we were going to get that drive over there through Rock Creek Park, and we were going to get to the house, right around 1 o'clock. We're going to turn on CBS and we're going to watch the Redmond. That's what everybody in town did. So that's what the ownership group needs to do. appeal to that.

Wherever people are, wherever you're listening to this, wherever you're with your buddies and if you're like me and Kevin and you're older now, but you remember, you know, that that's the saddest thing. If you're young, you've got nothing to remember. Right. Well, that's the thing, is what you and I are looking for could be different from what somebody much younger is looking for.

And I try to take that into consideration, but that's why for me and for what you said too is part of kind of, I put a top 10 list of what I want my new owner together, what I want in the new owner together. Number one was I want the owner to be focused more than anything else on winning a Super Bowl. I don't care what the brand can do for them as far as pop culture or music or fashion or food or media. I want somebody who's totally dedicated to winning a Super Bowl, and that's all that matters. because I think all of that other stuff will come with a winner, with a sustained, you know, contender, which we have not had in over 30 years now.

And, you know, we didn't have for the last 23 years an owner that was focused on winning first. He was focused on figuring out how to extract every last penny out of what was a fan base that was already here when he bought the team. Marketing was what they really excelled in. And recently, and I forget if we've talked about this or not, but their chief marketing officer was quoted in like a magazine or an interview saying, you know, the name had to be more than just a football team name. You know, that's too restrictive. It had to go into a much bigger space, fashion, pop culture, music, media, food.

Well, no. It has to, the brand, it really doesn't matter. what it is, but I'll circle back to what you said, because I think a lot of people heard what you just said, and they're like, damn right. That's what they got to do. They got to get rid of this name, and they got to go back to some sort of Washington focus thing, because the Redskins people, that's not coming back. It's not coming back. But I want the brand of the organization to be contending for Super Bowls consistently. And everything else will work, and that's unfortunately not been what we've had for 25 years.

And I don't know that Jeff Bezos and Jay-Z and Beyonce and Matthew McConaughey wouldn't get that and be those kinds of owners. They might be. But that's the most important thing. But cashé comes, you said it right. I mean, cashé comes with winning. You don't get it. You don't win because you have cachet.

I don't think. I mean, this isn't honestly complicated. They just haven't won in a long time. and the things have deteriorated to such a point where, you know, you're going to have to create the momentum yourself. And that's why I think the ownership just appeal to your community, you know, ask for the help, ask for the buy-in. And then it becomes a roll up your sleeves and, you know,

do it together kind of of of it. Like that's the metaphor, you know. If somebody came to me from the new ownership group and said, give me a couple of ideas. Number one would be solely focused on winning a Super Bowl. Number two would be get rid of this name. You didn't buy a brand. This wasn't an existing brand. It's been around for nine, ten months. No. Get rid of this name and have the brand be Washington.

And the W on the helmets is fine, but we get back to our uniforms. And then number three is you've got to go cut a deal to build a stadium on the RFK site or somewhere in D.C., but more likely than not, that would be the RFK site. And there's your, and there's your, and Here's your list. And then hire somebody and let them run the football operation. And I'm talking about somebody. We've never had a general manager in charge of football operations

who's hired everybody and been solely responsible for the football operation. We've had an owner with his buddy Vinnie Serrato. And then we had, you know, the owner with Bruce Allen, who was more of a business guy than he was a talent procurement guy. And now we've got Ron Rivera running the whole show. And the bottom line is the owner's never been too far away from the show anyway. What's your Super Bowl pick here at the midway point of the season? I'll say Philly just because they looked apart.

I gave Steve the credit. He said very early on the Super Bowl goes through Philadelphia. Thank you. Dallas is interesting. A lot of people like the Niners. I mean, I don't know about that. but I mean, I'm sorry I didn't mean to slate your son, who's seven and one. No, no, no, you slighted me by not remembering that Philly was a team that I basically, you know,

bought the over on from April on and said they were going to win the NFC East and be a Super Bowl contender. But anyway, you're slighting my son. I actually think they are going to be better at the end of the year than they are right now. so I wouldn't count them out, but no, they wouldn't be in my top three in the end of school. I'll have a lot more, I'll have a lot more buy-in in a month, given that they play Buffalo, Dallas, New England, and the Jets. I think that's a month where you find out more about what they are. I think the AFC is really interesting.

I think I like Baltimore. I like their defense, and I know that Lamar Jackson's record in the playoffs hasn't been great, and that's sort of the thing that everyone's waiting to happen. But I just have a feeling that that group defensively is going to be an absolute reckoning ball coming out of their by. Their schedule is really easy. And I don't know, Philly Baltimore with now. You think Baltimore could go to Buffalo in January or Arrowhead in January and win?

Maybe both. I mean, that would have to do both. Well, that would be a really hard thing to do. Look, I love I love Josh Allen watching him play too I guess maybe it's just I'm the last thing I saw

was in loose the jet and now we don't know what his situation is with his arm I know and they play Minnesota I'm in the tank I'm in the tank for Baltimore

I just I just I love I just love how they do it so maybe I'm maybe I'm closet rooting for them don't tell anyone I think you are so Philly

is definitely in the hunt, but I am one of those people that kind of believes in San Francisco now. I think that they get it together and they're healthy going into the postseason. You know, I like Jalen Hertz a lot. I mean, I liked him last year and I like him even more this year. But Garoppolo, as bad as he is, he's always seemed to come up big in a playoff game, you know, when they've needed to have it.

Yeah, I mean, look, he was a quarterback. in a Super Bowl, which, I mean, that can always be a little bit, you know, assigning wins and losses to quarterbacks is often a fool there. But I just always thought he was better than he was sort of giving credit for. People talk about him, like he's a bum. I mean, if he was a bum, they wouldn't have been able to get there. All righty, good job. Appreciate it.

Always fun. I hope everybody out there has a nice deck. Scott Van Pelt, everybody, following the great Ben Standing. Not a bad show. even though he didn't have Culeon. He's in North Dakota. All right, back tomorrow with Tommy.