Cardinals Cut DeAndre Hopkins

Aaron Schatz — Fri, 26 May 2023 17:28:35 +0000

Cardinals Cut DeAndre Hopkins Aaron Schatz 26 May 2023, 01:28pm

Unable to find a trade with a team willing to take his contract, the Arizona Cardinals announced this afternoon that they are cutting superstar wide receiver DeAndre Hopkins. It is not a post-June 1 designation, so the Cardinals will take the entire $22.6 million cap hit in 2023. They are going to be very, very bad this year. Rumors have put Hopkins with a number of teams including Kansas City and Buffalo, so we'll have to see who wants to give him the biggest contract and a chance to win a Super Bowl.

Hopkins had his worst season by Football Outsiders numbers last year, but it wasn't exactly the best quarterback situation. He ranked 70th among qualifying receivers with 11 DYAR, and had -11.2% DVOA. Every other year except 2016, Hopkins has had a positive DVOA and he has seven seasons in the top 20 for receiving DYAR including 2020 and 2021 in Arizona. He's still excellent but will turn 31 next month.

#1 by guest from Europe // May 26, 2023 - 2:45pm

I haven't watched the Cardinals last year. Their top 4 WRs (Hopkins, Brown, Dortch, Moore) all have the same stat numbers (DVOA, DYAR, yards/catch). In DVOA they were 71st, 72nd, 64th, 70th, respectively. Isn't it likely that something wasn't working with Cardinals offense at all when they all look the same? Thus, isn't it possible that Hopkins is still very good?

And no team traded a 6th round pick for Hopkins on unguaranteed large salary ($17M or something). If he wouldn't be good in training camp, such a team could release him with no dead cap problems. I guess all of them think he isn't WR1 anymore.

Panthers, Texans and Colts have the cap space and no WR better than even 2022 Hopkins was. Couldn't they use an experienced WR for their new QBs? Ravens preferred Beckham for $15M guaranteed.

I think Hopkins can at least be a possession-type of older WR, like Boldin was for Ravens and 49ers, if not better. Hopkins wasn't often injured like Julio Jones or A.J. Green. He had the knee MCL tear in 2021.

Are Cardinals rebuilding under new GM?

#28 by RickD // May 31, 2023 - 11:26am

If Hopkins were significantly better than his teammates, I'd expect his DVOA to be noticeably better, even if the situation as a whole were not very good. I think it's possible he's still very good, but I wouldn't cite last season's DVOA to support that argument.

#32 by guest from Europe // May 31, 2023 - 2:26pm

it's possible he's still very good, but I wouldn't cite last season's DVOA to support that argument.

I tried to be objective, can't deny his 2022 DYAR or DVOA to force some argument. Barnwell wrote on ESPN that Hopkins last year was 17th among all WRs in yards per route run:

What went wrong: The Cardinals didn't get any return for Hopkins. We're only a year removed from Davante Adams and Tyreek Hill landing their respective former franchises first-round picks and additional selections in trades. Hopkins is 30 and coming off a season in which he was suspended six games for violating the league's policy on performance-enhancing drugs, but he posted a 64-717-3 line in nine games after returning, finishing 17th in yards per route run.

#2 by theslothook // May 26, 2023 - 3:02pm

They are going to be very, very bad this year.

Yah, the Cardinals job looked like one of the least attractive opportunities. Even worse than the Broncos situation honestly. They are financially tied to Murray; who even before he got injured, it was hard to know where he ranked as a QB. Now that he's coming off a devastating injury and he relies on his legs; there's extreme dangers all over the place. One doesn't even need to go back that far to remember the cautionary tale of Rg3; who went from being a shining star to an unplayable QB in the span of one gruesome leg injury.

#3 by BroncosGuyAgain // May 26, 2023 - 8:23pm

"Unable to find a trade with a team willing to take his contract". I presume this is the case, else the Cardinals front office would be beyond incompetent. Assuming this is true, pro scouting staffs around the league are not overwhelmed by Hopkins. Huge cap hit this year. This doesn't make the Texans' trade of Hopkins look good, necessarily, but perhaps less bad. Actually, much less bad. Perhaps the rare "lose-lose" transaction.

#4 by theslothook // May 26, 2023 - 9:21pm

It's an interesting question. At the time of the trade, there was no indication that'll fall off was coming from Hopkins. So I can't really credit them without the benefit of hindsight.

But even if they knew or suspected that Hopkins was going to decline, that move was one of the major reasons that DeShaun Watson ended up asking for a trade; which the nuclear disaster a franchise should always be trying to avoid. Now ironically, even that decision might end up working out for them

#5 by guest from Europe // May 27, 2023 - 2:24am

Huge cap hit this year.

This cap hit is to the Cardinals because in prior years they had artificially low cap hits for Hopkins. They paid him cash in bonuses, but cap hit was low because base salary was low. Now those bonuses add up to their cap.

A team that would have traded for Hopkins, would have him under contract for 2 remaining years, about $17M/year, all unguaranteed. Some team could trade for him, try him in training camp, if not satisfied release him in August and incur 0$ cap hit if i understand how that works. If released during the season, there is dead cap hit.

Currently there are 17 WRs paid more than $17M/year, 4 more are close to that + WRs on low rookie contracts (Jefferson, Chase, Higgins....)

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/average/wide-receiver/

WR2-types are paid $10-12M/year.

I think Hopkins can be at least high-end WR2 like Godwin on Bucs, if not WR1. There is a possibility he returns to pro bowl-level for a year or two.

The Bears don't know what QB Fields can do because they had no reliable WRs for 2 years. That is the narrative. Do Panthers, Colts and Texans have such WRs for their rookie QBs? If nothing else, Hopkins is a reliable pro.

He was a top-20 WR on Cardinals, as Schatz wrote. If his "true level" is 2021, than he is worth that high salary. If he has fallen to 70th best (2022) and there were no structural problems with Cardinals offense, than he would be only worth to Ravens, better Hopkins than Beckham+Agholor.

I guess teams saw what happened to Julio Jones, see that Hopkins is 31 years old and think the same will happen to him. Other WRs that are 31: D. Adams, K. Allen, Beckham, 30 year olds: Kupp, Evans, Diggs.

#7 by BigRichie // May 27, 2023 - 10:24pm

I don't see how you can deny that the Texans 'won' the DeAndre trade.

They got a 2nd Round draft choice for a guy who wanted both OUT!!! and a humongous contract from whomever the Texans traded him to. A contract he has not lived up to.

Just amazing how you folks so often forget that the NFL stands for Not For Long despite so much and so continual evidence that it is indeed so.

#8 by guest from Europe // May 28, 2023 - 2:52am

I don't see how you can deny that the Texans 'won' the DeAndre trade.

Because of this trade (March 2020) of all-pro WR Hopkins for often injured RB Johnson and 2nd round pick the Texans fired GM/coach O'Brien in October 2020. This was thought of as the worst trade of the decade by the Texans. Many articles were written about this.

They got a 2nd Round draft choice for a guy who wanted both OUT!!! and a humongous contract from whomever the Texans traded him to.

2nd round draft picks usually don't produce WR pro bowlers. Hopkins was already on a large contract by Texans. Cardinals guaranteed a lot of that money+signed an extension for 2023 and 2024. So they paid $55M cash for 3 years of Hopkins (19th by DYAR in 2020 and 2021). For Texans Hopkins was 17th, 2nd and 4th by DYAR in 3 years prior to this trade. He wasn't as good on the Cardinals, just in 2020 he was all pro 2nd team.

However, Hopkins was much better on Cardinals than D. Johnson on Texans. The Texans didn't pay Hopkins 18M/year, but paid RB Johnson 8M/year. 2nd round pick Texans used on R. Blacklock.

You can put this trade under lose-lose if you think Hopkins was severely overpaid. He was WR1 on Cardinals and played as such. He was top-20 WR in the NFL every season, but last one and in 2016. Since this trade the Texans had Cooks and some guys play WR position. They haven't won more than 4 games in a season and were dysfunctional for 3 years. With Hopkins they were in the playoffs in 2018 and 2019.

often forget that the NFL stands for Not For Long

I am probably guilty of this. That would mean that only QBs and linemen are worthy to be paid past age 30 or 31. For all other players rookie contracts + 1 or 2 more years.

Is there any player past age 30 from skill positions (pass catchers, DBs, ...) worth paying $12-17M/year on a 2+ years guaranteed contract?

#12 by theslothook // May 28, 2023 - 11:58am

I am probably guilty of this. That would mean that only QBs and linemen are worthy to be paid past age 30 or 31.

I think that's the correct way of looking at things, unless you are on the doorstep of a championship and you need one huge move to put you over the top. That's what the Von Miller signing was all about. Or the DeMarcus Ware signing by Denver

#13 by guest from Europe // May 28, 2023 - 3:30pm

As usual, we disagree. It is quite possible that i am wrong.

I would pay and play pro-bowl-level older skill position players past age 30, but not long, until about age 32. There is improvement in sports medicine and nutrition and careers last longer in all sports.

Older players that were worth paying past age 30 in no order: Boldin on Ravens and 49ers, S. Smith on Ravens, T. Kelce now, Gronkowski on Bucs, H. Ward, R. Wayne, Witten, Welker, Fitzgerald, Tony Gonzalez, ... high level players, all-pros. Hopkins was such a player and until proven otherwise to me he still is. The same for D. Adams, M. Evans, Kupp.... keep in mind that such a player if released is supposed to be replaced with a young player, usually a rookie. Many rookies are busts. There aren't 64 good young WRs or CBs in the league.

In my opinion O. Beckham isn't that level of Hopkins, Adams.

(when i wrote above that linemen should be paid past age 30, on what we agree, that included o-line, Whitworth, Peters... and d-line, Donald, Ware, Ngata, Suh, Miller, anybody that is good. They don't run far and often, it's easier for them. Plenty of them can play until age 34-36 if not injured)

#34 by Hoodie_Sleeves // May 31, 2023 - 3:08pm

You'll notice that every receiver on that list was a decade+ ago. Receivers seem to be aging quicker now.

TEs seem to have a little more life and still be useful a little older.

#36 by guest from Europe // Jun 01, 2023 - 12:10am

This is possible. Why would WRs have a shorter career now than a decade ago?

If it is so, there won't be a HOF WR for a long time among current and future players. The closest ones are Julio Jones, Antonio Brown and Hopkins. Probably only Julio gets in. Brown will have to wait. Hopkins depends on his next two years.

#77 by Theo // Jun 28, 2023 - 12:22am

Offensive systems and rule changes have made it easier to play receiver.

#37 by IlluminatusUIUC // Jun 03, 2023 - 11:19am

I don't know if wideouts are aging quicker necessarily, but younger wideouts are able to contribute much sooner (the whole "3 year" development thing seems to be out the window), and that throws off the cost-benefit of paying older guys.

#38 by guest from Europe // Jun 04, 2023 - 3:59am

i can think of 2 reasons why teams don't want to pay older WRs. Both are monetary:

QBs get huge contracts, there isn't enough money left to pay WRs
young WRs on rookie contracts offer good enough production on much cheaper contracts than veteran WRs

It's possible that in the future teams won't give long 2nd contracts to WRs like they don't to RBs nowadays.

#20 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 30, 2023 - 9:13am

It cost them their franchise QB, their coach, their entire front office, and made their owner a laughing stock in their town, which now mostly despises them.

You can starve to death winning that way.

#21 by BigRichie // May 30, 2023 - 11:16am

1) Umm, something else cost them their franchise QB. It did make the news, so Googling it should help you.

2) The coach made the trade, so no it didn't cost him his job. Losing too much later did, along with multiple other GM moves which didn't work out, capped off by a failed power play.

3) Winner of said power play lost his job well after a Hopkins trade which no one held him responsible for anyway (blaming aforesaid loser of power play). Easterby also had another problem or two.

4) Check 1) and 3) for how McNair became a Houston laughing stock. Which stockness will cease the nanosecond the Texans gain their next playoff berth. I guarantee McNair is also still the Biggest Kahuna in whatever super-posh Houston Country Club he belongs to, so I doubt he's losing any sleep at all over what folks in general (temporarily) think of him.

#22 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 30, 2023 - 11:31am

I guarantee McNair is also still the Biggest Kahuna in whatever super-posh Houston Country Club he belongs to, so I doubt he's losing any sleep at all over what folks in general (temporarily) think of him.

I rather suspect he's not.

Tillman Fertitta has way more influence on Houston than McNair has, and that's before you get into oil/shipping money and other Texas interests.

#25 by BigRichie // May 30, 2023 - 5:10pm

It's not just about $$$, or even power. If your Spoiled Brat Kid wants a football autographed by DeAndre- I mean, DeShaun- I mean, well, I guess CJ now. you don't go to Tillman for it. The local Sports Team Managing Owner has perks available that no one else has. Nor can you kibitz with Tillman about what the Texans are or should be doing right now. Well I guess you can, but it's way more a thrill doing it with the actual Sports Team Managing Owner.

#23 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 30, 2023 - 11:37am

1) Umm, something else cost them their franchise QB. It did make the news, so Googling it should help you.

Watson refused to play for Houston long before the scandal broke out. You don't recall the Free Deshaun protests?

https://touchdownwire.usatoday.com/2021/01/18/deshaun-watson-asks-houston-texans-fans-to-call-off-protest-march-on-his-behalf/
https://abc13.com/houston-texans-deshaun-watson-quarterback-rally/9777079/

That's why their was scuttlebutt early on that the accusations were a hit piece backed by McNair. It's not like this has never happened before.

https://calltothepen.com/2017/07/30/yankees-history-george-steinbrenner-suspended-for-life/

#24 by BigRichie // May 30, 2023 - 4:59pm

The scandal cost them their franchise QB. Unless you argue that without DeShaun's initial refusal, the Texans would've played him through the scandal.

Who cares which happened first. The scandal finished off DeShaun's Houston career.

#27 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 31, 2023 - 11:25am

They had already lost Watson when the scandal got started, so it could not have been what cost them Watson.

Regardless of what you think of Watson, cause and effect are pretty clear here.

#35 by BigRichie // May 31, 2023 - 6:00pm

No. it's like I sprained my ankle and was scheduled to miss a month, then got my leg shattered and so was out for the year. And you're trying to blame missing the year on the ankle because it happened first.

#26 by guest from Europe // May 31, 2023 - 1:44am

2) The coach made the trade, so no it didn't cost him his job. Losing too much later did, along with multiple other GM moves which didn't work out,

O'Brien was named GM in January 2020.

https://www.nfl.com/news/texans-coach-bill-o-brien-gains-general-manager-title-0ap3000001099559

Hopkins trade was his first official trade in March 2020. Later he traded for Cooks in April 2020.

At the beginning of 2020 season he lost 4 games, not many games. He was fired as a GM in October 2020, because of his managing moves, not as a coach, i think, but don't know for sure.

They also traded a 3rd round pick to Browns for RB Duke Johnson. He probably made the decisions to acquire Tunsil for lot of draft picks and send Clowney away. Officially those were made by an interim GM Olsen. He was interim June 7th 2019-January 2020.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_Houston_Texans_season

He was a good coach for 6 years. His problem was that the GM and coach was the same person. When GM got fired, that was him, the coach, as well.

A comprehensive article on this topic:

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/30048456/the-texans-fired-bill-obrien-now-barnwell-strange-timing-rocky-tenure-houston-future

#14 by CV12Hornet // May 29, 2023 - 12:36pm

The Bears don't know what QB Fields can do because they had no reliable WRs for 2 years. That is the narrative. Do Panthers, Colts and Texans have such WRs for their rookie QBs? If nothing else, Hopkins is a reliable pro.

The Panthers' wide receiver room consists of 2021 second-rounder Terrace Marshall; 2nd-round rookie Jonathan Mingo; free-agent pickups Adam Thielen, DJ Chark, and Laviska Shenault; tight end Hayden Hurst; and then mostly a bunch of guys you've never heard of. They have four legitimate rotation receivers and a tight end who can catch, but they'd all be second options at best on a better team. The Panthers would love peak Hopkins, but it's debatable whether that's worth taking an expensive gamble on him when they could get a breakthrough from Marshall or a really good rookie season from Mingo.

The Colts are in better shape. Michael Pittman is a legitimate #1, Alec Pierce and Jelani Woods had good rookie seasons they can hopefully build on, and Isaiah McKenzie and rookie Josh Downs competing for the slot position. IMO the Colts are probably best off letting their youngsters play and build chemistry with Anthony Richardson.

The Texans would absolutely benefit from adding Hopkins, their receiver room is Carolina's but somehow worse and with less potential upside. Nico Collins has shown flashes but little substance; rookie Tank Dell and basically-a-rookie John Metchie figure to take lots of snaps; Robert Woods may be cooked; and when Dalton Schultz is your most dangerous receiver Hopkins becomes basically their bet guy the minute he steps into the room, even at his recent level of play.

#17 by guest from Europe // May 29, 2023 - 7:23pm

This is a good and informative post. The only players that you mentioned that were better last year than Hopkins (in his worst season) was Thielen, 38th with 111 DYAR and Chark with 124 DYAR. Pittman's stats, the Colts' No. 1, were actually worse than Hopkins' on more targets.

What happens with these 2nd round drafted rookies, nobody knows. For example, the Titans traded away A. J. Brown, drafted a mid-1st round Burks and had a lot of problems with pass offense last year. The same with Packers and their 2nd round WRs last year. Eagles had many problems with various drafted WRs and got Brown in a trade and their pass offense improved greatly. On the other hand, rookie WR Wilson on the Jets looked like a star in a horrible offense.

In my opinion if all players in particular part of the team (in this case pass offense) are de facto rookies and it performs badly, it's difficult for a team to understand what and where is the problem. Is it QB or WRs or positional coaches or playcalling or head coach?

The Panthers WRs actually look ok. Hopkins may end up with the Chiefs for 1 year, like Smith-Schuster last year.

#9 by GwillyGecko // May 28, 2023 - 5:42am

Bill O'Brien coached DH for several years, so he must have thought he was more trouble than he was worth at this point in his career. Too bad for him he couldn't get the team to dump Watson back then too.

#29 by RickD // May 31, 2023 - 11:28am

I wouldn't say the Texans' trade looks less bad. The Cardinals got three seasons from him, and he was elite in 2020. A later injury doesn't count on the Texans side of the ledger. They needed a lot more from David Johnson to validate that trade.

#64 by ImNewAroundThe… // Jun 08, 2023 - 11:37am

And the 2nd rounder they got turned into Ross Blacklock, who started 3 games for then but is not longer employed by them. Cardinals traded for Nuk with 3 years remaining on his contract. He played 3 years and made a pro bowl.

Texans shouldn't be given brownie points for somehow knowing he'd miss games.

#6 by guest from Europe // May 27, 2023 - 4:04am

rare "lose-lose" transaction

D. Adams to Raiders on a large contract for drafting of inside linebacker Q. Walker and half (trade up in draft) of WR Watson.

MAR 10 2015 Nick Foles traded to St. Louis (STL) from Philadelphia (PHI) with 2016 2nd round pick (#43 - traded) and 2015 4th round pick (#119 Andrew Donnal) for Sam Bradford and 2015 5th round pick (#145 - traded)

Watson to Browns for 2022 1st round guard, RB Pierce and now Anderson. Texans still get a 2024 1st round from Browns, but lost a more valuable own 2024 1st round pick in Anderson trade

RGIII-trade

probably more

#10 by GwillyGecko // May 28, 2023 - 5:49am

The Eagles were able to swap Bradford a year later for a 2017 round 1 at least, although they used it on a mediocre de.

#11 by guest from Europe // May 28, 2023 - 6:25am

That was Vikings trading for a QB in a state of emergency. Beginning of year, September, they had no QB. Bridgewater got injured in training on August 30th!

It's better to be lucky than good in these things. Eagles drafted Wentz and Bradford would be a backup or a placeholder for a few weeks. Probably no team wanted Bradford (otherwise they would have traded Bradford away during that offseason) and Eagles got more for him than Packers for Favre or Rodgers.

Next year they would get Foles back and he would be Super Bowl MVP. This story would be nuts even for Hollywood.

#15 by BroncosGuyAgain // May 29, 2023 - 5:47pm

Dude. I didn't say there had never been another lose-lose trade in history. There have, I assume, been several. I guess "rare" is subjectively defined. I did not mean to imply a once-per-three-hundred-year-event. Unusual enough to be casually noted as such.

#16 by guest from Europe // May 29, 2023 - 6:46pm

I didn't say there had never been another lose-lose trade in history.

I didn't think you did this. I mentioned other such trades in a separate post, not a direct reply to you, in hope other people would write more about such trades. And a reminder that only after a few years they can be assessed properly. Usually when something happens, people react immediately and forget about it in a month...

Unusual enough to be casually noted as such.

I agree with this. For example after a year T. Hill-trade looks like a win-win, and D. Adams-trade like a lose-lose. After a few years, who knows what it will be.

I didn't disagree with you or mean anything contrarian or bad. It just shows how difficult it is for people to understand each other's tone here. Every sentence would have to include "i agree" or "i disagree" or not reply to anyone. When i reply to someone i am usually somewhere half-way between "agree" and "disagree" and am interested in a conversation. I don't write any other posts anywhere on internet... and don't talk about the NFL with anyone ever.

#30 by RickD // May 31, 2023 - 11:35am

The RGIII trade wasn't a loss for the Rams. They got a slew of draft picks.

Their mismanagement of their draft capital shouldn't count against the trade itself. It was a great trade for them.

As for the Redskins, they got the RotY QB who could have worked out, had he not gotten injured. A similar argument exists for them: their mismanagement of RGIII hurt them, and it's hard to blame that on the trade, unless one wishes to argue that RGIII would inevitably fail in the dysfunctional Washington system. An interesting argument, but it's hard to run an argument if lack of self-confidence is one of your axioms.

#31 by theslothook // May 31, 2023 - 12:07pm

Judging the Rg3 trade, ex ante, is one of the most fascinating discussion points. Forget Rg3's name for a second and just evaluate it as a top prospect QB that isn't considered a reach drafting him 1st or 2nd overall. Is that kind of player worth 3 first rounders, especially if you don't have a proven solution at QB?

The Rams, in some sense, were like the Bears this year. Both had first round QBs, but neither could be properly evaluated because of injuries or supporting casts. So the Rams, like the Bears, decided to punt on the QB and go the other route. Was that the right decision?

IMO, and I am saying this without the benefit of hindsight, I think both the Rams and Bears made a mistake.

#33 by guest from Europe // May 31, 2023 - 2:45pm

The RGIII trade wasn't a loss for the Rams. They got a slew of draft picks.

This is true if you only look at the trade, the picks exchanged. Like with any transaction, a trade up is a "loss", and a trade down is a "win" because it nets more draft picks, more opportunities to draft and develop good players. In that sense the Rams had a big "win" in RGIII-trade and a big "loss" in Goff-trade.

What i wrote, that RGIII-trade was a loss-loss, was looking at results only.

#18 by BroncosGuyAgain // May 29, 2023 - 7:25pm

It just shows how difficult it is for people to understand each other's tone here.

Upon this, we agree completely. My tone might have been misunderstood. Also, it might have been open to misunderstanding due to my poor choice of words.

I appreciate that your response is conciliatory, and while appreciative, I apologize that you felt the need to defend yourself. I was not intending to be that confrontational. In my defense, my earlier post did include the word "perhaps", an antidote to the world of absolutism, fire-bombing internet rhetoric.

#19 by guest from Europe // May 29, 2023 - 7:33pm

No problem.

#39 by theslothook // Jun 05, 2023 - 11:40am

Les Snead just did an econ talk episode. Highly recommend

https://www.econtalk.org/les-snead-on-risk-decisions-and-football/

tldr

Aside from some stories about the sb and life as a GM; from an analytics point of view, he dropped some interesting tidbits. For example, he did not blame Goff for the SB loss and said the decision to trade for Stafford was because Stafford's maturity and veteran knowledge more closely aligned with his team's current win now position. He also said he had a tremendous amount of confidence that Donald would be this ridiculous superstar. He also said that the NFL grades players on talent, intangibles like love of the game and maturity, and then other related things like scheme fit and such. But he said if a player 1 has A level talent and B level intangibles vs player 2 has B level talent and A level intangibles; player 2 tends to be more successful. He also said coaches tend to look at players in the moment this season but GMs look at players and how they will do years from now. Finally, he justified in part the trades he's made because the picks are likely to be late in the first round since the rams are a good team.

Interesting insights, but I am a little curious about some of these claims. I think it was Goff's fault the Rams lost the SB. I thought Belichick had him completely bamboozled. That wide open throw in the end zone that he missed is on Goff. Goff isn't the unplayable QB he looked in that SB, but it was his fault imo. I also heavily doubt Les knew Donald would be this amazing. If he did, he took a massive gamble that Donald would fall to him at pick 13. For a guy whos not afraid to trade first rounders; this is a really strange and hard to believe gamble he was willing to take. As for his justification for making these trades; I have to imagine Les knows how volatile the standings are and you can just never bank on being a good team. Seattle got burned badly by that Jamal Adams trade. The Rams ended up forking over the 6th pick in the draft this year. The Broncos forked over the 5th pick in the draft. The Texans gave up the 2nd pick in the draft when they made the deal for Tunsil. You just never know!!!!

#40 by RevBackjoy // Jun 05, 2023 - 5:13pm

I also heavily doubt Les knew Donald would be this amazing. If he did, he took a massive gamble that Donald would fall to him at pick 13.

If anyone had any idea of what Donald would become, the Texans would have drafted him #1 instead of Clowney. Either that, or they'd have traded down, for 3+ 1sts.

#41 by guest from Europe // Jun 05, 2023 - 5:36pm

i agree with you on everything you wrote and disagree with GM Snead. So why do you recommend to listen to this talk?

He is doing a horrible teardown/fire-sale of Rams this offseason. Last year he paid Wagner a lot of money and released him after 1 year.

This is the only interesting statement to me:

But he said if a player 1 has A level talent and B level intangibles vs player 2 has B level talent and A level intangibles; player 2 tends to be more successful.

In my opinion the best thing Snead did for Rams was the 2012 RGIII-trade. I don't think any college player is a "sure thing" enough to be worth 3 1st round picks+ 2nd rounder. Not even Luck. There is always a risk, an injury one if nothing else. (I think the same of this year's Panthers trade to No. 1 pick)

Snead took OT Robinson with pick No 2 (from Redskins!) in 2014, not Donald. He took Donald later with their own pick. As you wrote

I also heavily doubt Les knew Donald would be this amazing. If he did, he took a massive gamble that Donald would fall to him at pick 13.

So either Snead "was confident" more that Robinson would be a star player than Donald or he is a confident liar.

#42 by theslothook // Jun 05, 2023 - 5:54pm

Its still an interesting peak into his thinking; even if its ex post rationalization. We make a lot of assumptions about what these guys are thinking.

#43 by BJR // Jun 06, 2023 - 4:55am

Thanks for the link. I will listen later.

Though just from your summation, it does sound quite generic, wishy-washy, hindsight biased. Of course we shouldn't expect a current NFL GM to say anything too revealing in public.

The claim about Donald is especially outlandish. Did he mention any of his less successful decisions? Why did you give Todd Gurley a huge contract? Why did you draft a 165lb WR with a second round pick? That would be more revealing IMO.

#47 by theslothook // Jun 06, 2023 - 11:14am

He talked a bit about some of the duds, but no specific names or specific details why. He did mention that the sample sizes are all small and even with 10 years of evaluation, it's hard as the competition is fierce.

He wondered how new GMs are at a disadvantage because they don't have historical data to evaluate their decisions.

All in all, he sounds like a circumspect kind of guy who is aware that life in the NFL in any capacity is a tough job with a short lifespan.

I should also correct something I wrote above. It wasn't as if he engaged in a ton of self-agrandizing and backslapping for the Donald pick. He just said that he saw things about him that made him confident that he'd be amazing. In that sense, I think he's telling the truth. Once Donald panned out, all of the things you might like about his college tape will confirm that decision. But that doesn't really explain anything other than guys who get drafted have special abilities. Whether they translate to the NFL is a completely separate matter.

#44 by guest from Europe // Jun 06, 2023 - 5:10am

Why do you think any GM would tell the truth about his way of thinking? He can say some common cliches. This particular GM Snead does a lot of trades. If he says the truth, wouldn't other teams than know how he is thinking and "fleece him" in future trades?

Look at Snead's tenure: he takes over a bad, losing team. Gets a lot of picks in RGIII-trade. Selects good CB Jenkins and other not so good players. Fisher, the coach stabilizes the team and there are 7-9 seasons. Problems with offense, GM trades Bradford for Foles, than trades a lot of picks to get Goff (several changes in GM's strategy already!), those moves don't work. He fires the coach and hires the youngest coach in history. Probably Snead's job is in jeopardy. This wunderkind coach McVay comes and a lot of winning with the same losing roster ensumes. GM procedes to trade all high picks for years in order to get players on expensive contracts. This is another huge change in his strategy and exactly what a GM shouldn't do: as he said a coach should look at players to win now and a GM should look for future years. But McVay wins and wins more. After one bad year in 2022, this GM changes his strategy again and gives up on older players, not even getting draft picks.

If this weren't the Rams, i wouldn't be writing this long post. To me this is the strongest evidence that McVay is the best coach in the league during his tenure, better than Reid. There is no mahomes or brady on this roster. That's a HOF coach winning with suboptimal roster moves: Donald, Kupp, Ramsey, limited Goff and 3rd-5th round picks. If it was another coach (good ones like Fox, Fisher, Coughlin, O'Brien...), there would be less wins and GM Snead would be fired long ago. Rams' coach saved Rams' GM. Texans' coach O'Brien couldn't do this for Texans' GM O'Brien. Patriots have a similar problem with their GM. The coach is still great.

#46 by Aaron Brooks G… // Jun 06, 2023 - 9:01am

To me this is the strongest evidence that McVay is the best coach in the league during his tenure, better than Reid. There is no mahomes or brady on this roster.

Reid was in his 18th year as a HC before he had a HOF QB.

#48 by guest from Europe // Jun 06, 2023 - 11:51am

I was thinking only last 6 years, not what Belickick or Reid or Harbaugh bros have done before that. During McVay-era

Rams DVOA Chiefs Saints Patriots Packers 49ers

2017 27.6% 10.9% 35.0% 22.2% -4.5% -9.4%

2018 23.9% 33.2% 25.2% 13.5% -4.4% -22.0%

2019 5.3% 30.1% 32.7% 30.7% 7.7% 29.0%

2020 15.4% 19.6% 33.3% -7.1% 25.8% 5.4%

2021 21.6% 17.3% 4.7% 23.3% 11.8% 19.9%

2022 -11.0% 23.0% -1.7% -0.3% 3.6% 27.5%

average 13.8% 22.3% 21.5% 13.7% 6.6% 8.4%

Only 1 of these 5 teams didn't have a HOF QB in this QB-centric era with rules tilted to protect the QBs ("don't fall on the passer etc"). You can see how much McVay means. I added 49ers under Shanahan (similar offensive coach, better roster than Rams, no HOF QB) for comparison. This Rams roster reminds me of Texans a decade ago: Donald DPOY as Watt; Kupp as A. Johnson, later Hopkins; Stafford/Goff as Schaub. Texans had Clowney, Rams had Ramsey. Those Texans were contenders only in 2012 with 9.7% DVOA. Kubiak was a very good coach, but no McVay.

Reid with A. Smith on Chiefs roster: they were 10-16% DVOA, only 1 year at 25.5% in 2015. Chiefs had many 1st round picks over the years, Rams don't want no draft picks. Until the latest draft, they had 1 player drafted in top-50 slots during McVay's tenure: TE Everett in 2017. They had Akers at slot No. 52.

The highest peak recently had the Saints and they didn't even reach a Super Bowl. That's baffling. They had the best overall roster in my opinion.

#45 by Aaron Brooks G… // Jun 06, 2023 - 8:59am

I think he's full of it too, but plenty of posters here love to bloviate about draft slot and positional value, and would probably agree about letting a future HOF DT slide to 13 because he's a DT and they aren't worth that much.

#49 by theslothook // Jun 06, 2023 - 11:55am

In my opinion the best thing Snead did for Rams was the 2012 RGIII-trade. I don't think any college player is a "sure thing" enough to be worth 3 1st round picks+ 2nd rounder. Not even Luck. There is always a risk, an injury one if nothing else. (I think the same of this year's Panthers trade to No. 1 pick)

Let me turn it around and ask if the Panthers had had the first overall pick in this most recent draft and someone had offered 3 first rounders for it, should they have made that deal? Remember, their QB room prior to the trade was Andy Dalton and Matt Corral.

In a sense, the Browns kind of did that in the Wentz deal and got almost universally ripped for it once Wentz played like an MVP in his second year. Also note, that Browns team inevitably circled the drain and landed right back into the number 1 pick in back to back years. Should they have continued this cycle of trading the pick for three firsts? I suppose in some theoretical vacuum, its the right thing to do. But from a career perspective for everyone involved but the owner of the team; I don't think you can justify that decision.

The two times I've seen a front office embark on a naked tank job(Cleveland Browns, 76ers); the coach and the gm got fired and never got to actually play out the fruits of all that losing.

#50 by guest from Europe // Jun 06, 2023 - 12:25pm

Let me turn it around and ask if the Panthers had had the first overall pick in this most recent draft and someone had offered 3 first rounders for it, should they have made that deal?

Yes, they should. Panthers were watchable last year with Darnold.

A median No. 1 drafted QB is someone like Mayfield or Winston, not Manning, nor J. Russell.

Should they have continued this cycle of trading the pick for three firsts?

No, at some point a team has enough draft picks. Browns had plenty. They could have traded down from No.1 to No.3 or something (and select a QB), not to No. 10-15. If that draft didn't have 5 QBs, they could have traded for Garoppolo.

In general, i think any team should draft the best prospect, not necessarily a QB: Suh before Bradford etc.

The two times I've seen a front office embark on a naked tank job(Cleveland Browns, 76ers); the coach and the gm got fired

Just for info: Browns also fired the GM who drafted Mayfield. 76ers fired multiple GMs and coaches since Hinkie.

I don't endorse tanking in the NFL. Building a good roster from a bad one takes years. Teams are too impatient. In NBA, tanking is the way.

Lions probably selected the best player available in their drafts: Calvin Johnson, Stafford, Suh and they went on talent alone as far as talent takes a team.

#51 by theslothook // Jun 06, 2023 - 12:47pm

In general, i think any team should draft the best prospect, not necessarily a QB: Suh before Bradford etc.

Even if the best player is literally a guard? Once you start introducing positional importance, Qb becomes the trump card.

Lions probably selected the best player available in their drafts: Calvin Johnson, Stafford, Suh and they went on talent alone as far as talent takes a team.

What screwed the Lions was the fact that they shared the division with a QB overlord in Rodgers + all of those guys were drafted before the rookie wage scale; meaning they enjoyed none of the flexibility that all of these other teams have prior. And again, along the way, drafting CJ and Myles Garrett didn't help their teams avoid going 0-16.

This gets back to my original comment. QBs are simultaneously overrated and underrated. And the underrated part comes down to the effects they have on winning over the long term. Since sustained winning inevitably lands on the QB as a necessary, but not sufficient condition; you are in a forever cycle to chase one until you have him. That's why I don't favor trading away first round picks when you have a true QB prospect there nor do I think its wise to pass up on him for a higher rated pass rusher.

#52 by guest from Europe // Jun 06, 2023 - 1:37pm

Even if the best player is literally a guard?

Was this ever the case? In any draft class with hindsight bias included?

If the best prospect by far is the safety or linebacker, take them. If it's close, there is a tier of players of similar talent, than use positional value to distinguish between them and draft offense.

What screwed the Lions was the fact that they shared the division with a QB overlord in Rodgers + all of those guys were drafted before the rookie wage scale; meaning they enjoyed none of the flexibility that all of these other teams have prior. And again, along the way, drafting CJ and Myles Garrett didn't help their teams avoid going 0-16.

This gets back to my original comment. QBs are simultaneously overrated and underrated. And the underrated part comes down to the effects they have on winning over the long term.

I agree. Those Lions' players were worthy of their salaries. Rodgers was injured in some years...

Since sustained winning inevitably lands on the QB as a necessary, but not sufficient condition; you are in a forever cycle to chase one until you have him. That's why I don't favor trading away first round picks when you have a true QB prospect there nor do I think its wise to pass up on him for a higher rated pass rusher.

Disagree. A team can and should draft a highly regarded QB such as Lawrence. If no such prospect is available, a team can get veteran QB for draft picks. Trade down, get additional picks, trade them for a more expensive (salary) veteran QB. Panthers "paid" a lot more draft picks than the Jets for Rodgers. Chiefs got A. Smith, 49ers Garoppolo, Saints Carr...

If a team doesn't have a top pick nor a very good veteran, don't force yourself to draft D. Jones, but get some veteran past his prime such as Dalton, build other parts of roster and wait for another opportunity at QB next year(s). Be patient (like Steelers for decades).

This cycle of chasing a QB in order to have sustained winning: wouldn't then all the teams which don't have your Tier 1 QB be in this cycle? 28-30 teams each year? Steelers and Cowboys have this winning for decades now. Ravens since Harbaugh, before him less, Seahawks with Carroll, Eagles for 2 decades, Rams with McVay, Chiefs with Reid,...did any of these teams have a top-2 pick of a QB? There were Goff and Wentz sinkholes...

There just aren't that many QBs at any point in time that enable this. What should other 20-30 teams do? Draft a QB every 2 years until they get at least a Burrow-level one? (Burrow's stats aren't that great)

It's a zero sum game. Some teams have to lose. Then they talk about draft and potential in order to sell tickets and talk themselves into quick fixes: just draft a prodigy.

If the rules change more, it will become like that: nobody will be allowed to touch the QB, they will stand and pass until age 50 and only the best ones will win games.

#53 by theslothook // Jun 06, 2023 - 2:18pm

If a team doesn't have a top pick nor a very good veteran, don't force yourself to draft D. Jones

That's why I added the proviso that the prospect is worthy of being a top pick. It shouldn't be a reach. Kenny Pickett did not go high in the first round for a reason despite so many qb hungry teams.

You've listed some other teams that have had sustained winning; but I don't think those serve as counter examples either. The Eagles had a terrific QB in McNabb during the 2000s and have been up and down throughout the 2010s. The Steelers and Cowboys had terrific QB play for over 10 years. I didn't say you needed a Peyton Manning QB or nothing. You can get pretty far with Qbs of the quality of Romo, Big Ben, McNabb, or Russ Wilson. Those guys are still difference makers. The only team you can name that managed to achieve long term winning despite never getting tier 2 level QB play or close to it was the Ravens. The Chiefs, 49ers, and Rams have done it for half a decade but that eventually runs its course. Talent gets expensive and primes are only so long. The QB bridges that gap.

None of what you wrote above counters my basic premise: QBs are a necessary BUT NOT a sufficient condition for long term winning. That doesn't imply a good team should tear everything down and dive head first into a tankathon. But, it does imply that a team with the ability to draft that highly regarded QB should probably do it because the future upside is far higher in that position than any other position. Citing Lawrence or other examples where it didn't work doesn't invalidate the process. All picks of every stripe are unlikely to work. The first overall pick just offers the best odds at it; low as they are. The number 1 overall pick has produced more hall of famers than any other pick slot. John Elway and Peyton Manning are exactly the upside every team chases.

#54 by guest from Europe // Jun 06, 2023 - 3:33pm

you've listed some other teams that have had sustained winning; but I don't think those serve as counter examples either. The Eagles had a terrific QB in McNabb during the 2000s and have been up and down throughout the 2010s. The Steelers and Cowboys had terrific QB play for over 10 years.

Those teams didn't have a top- pick QB in the draft! That's why i listed them. I thought this is a conversation about top picks, No. 1, maybe No. 2. I don't think any of those teams traded up in the draft and gave multiple draft picks for a coveted No. 1 QB like the Panthers just did or Browns gave away a chance to draft Wentz.

Those QBs were (by team order) R. Wilson and G. Smith, McNabb, old Vick, Foles, Wentz, Hurts, A. Smith, Mahomes, Flacco, Jackson, Roethlisberger, K. Stewart, , O'Donell, M. Rudolph, Goff, older Stafford, Aikman, Romo, Prescott, Garoppolo, Purdy and of course Brady, Cassell, M. Jones. I don't see a drafting pattern. Most are non-top 5 1st rounders. Any team could have drafted most of them.

The pattern is great coaches: Tomlin, Harbaugh, Belichick, Reid, McVay, Carroll, Parcells, Cowher and however Cowboys are doing what they are doing.

Teams ran by QBs: Manning's and Rodgers' and Elway's and Marino's team. Brees and Payton are kind of half/half credit to each one.

But, it does imply that a team with the ability to draft that highly regarded QB should probably do it because the future upside is far higher in that position than any other position. Citing Lawrence or other examples where it didn't work doesn't invalidate the process. All picks of every stripe are unlikely to work. The first overall pick just offers the best odds at it; low as they are. The number 1 overall pick has produced more hall of famers than any other pick slot. John Elway and Peyton Manning are exactly the upside every team chases.

I agree with this. There just aren't that many highly regarded QB prospects. For example, Josh Allen and Lamar Jackson weren't those.

Teams chase a manning. Luck and Lawrence were such "sure" prospects. Mayfield, Goff, Burrow, Winston, Newton, Stafford, Russell, Murray, Bradford... weren't.

#55 by theslothook // Jun 06, 2023 - 7:15pm

The pattern is great coaches: Tomlin, Harbaugh, Belichick, Reid, McVay, Carroll, Parcells, Cowher and however Cowboys are doing what they are doing.

Ill be curious to see Tomlin and Carrol's reputation will look like in a few years, especially if neither Geno nor Pickett proves to be the long term answer.

For example, Josh Allen and Lamar Jackson weren't those.

Allen was mocked at times to go first overall. I agree Lamar was not. The point I was making is if there is a top prospect available and you have 0 credible answers incumbent at QB, you take that player. Broaden it to that definition.and suddenly there's larger sample of QBs that have panned out and helped a franchise. Big Ben was also in the same grading area as Rivers and Eli for example. And Rodgers was expected to be picked first by the 49ers.

Yes, Wilson and Romo and Brady have shown you don't need to spend a high first rounder on a QB. But those are even longer odds and I've maintained maybe 1 percent of the time you get Tom Brady and 99 percent of the time you get something closer to Sam Ehliger.

#56 by guest from Europe // Jun 07, 2023 - 4:08am

The point I was making is if there is a top prospect available and you have 0 credible answers incumbent at QB, you take that player.

Yes, of course, everyone agrees with you on this.

In reality, what i was writing about, usually there is 1 such prospect QB, sometimes 0, sometimes 2, and 4-8 teams really need a QB and 28 teams need a better one to reach your sustainable winning for a decade. There will never be such supply of top QBs. So teams should build their roster with different players available, they can't all trade up and reach for some prospect when there is only 1-2 available in any given year.

Patriots needed a QB. They waited in the draft and got an average M. Jones. To me that's better than trading 5 1st round picks to reach for Lawrence or 3 1st round picks for Lance. If no such prospect was available at draft slots #10-20, a team signs Dalton or Darnold or Bridgewater and waits for a year or two. In some years an old Rodgers or Favre or Brady is available. Or Carr or Tannehill or Garoppolo... for almost nothing in draft picks.

If Rodgers or Roethlisberger is available at draft slot #15, sure, take them. That was long time ago.

These were reviews of 2018 draft by F.O. staff:

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/audibles/2018/audibles-line-2018-nfl-draft-day-one

You can read how they thought that Bills "out-stupid everyone" with Allen pick and Cardinals are OK with Rosen. You can check comment #1 from some Bills fan about all 4 QBs, it turned out to be true, although everyone was laughing at it in the comments section.

I can think of 4 "sure thing" prospect of QBs in 40 years: Elway, Manning, Luck, Lawrence. Maybe Eli? Everyone else is a developmental project with talent. Some have more talent, some less. But development is very important. Such a player must be developed by the team: QB-coaching and roster construction plays a huge role in the development process. Here is why Marino was drafted low and what were the questions about him:

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2519683-nfl-urban-legends-dan-marino-drug-rumors-and-the-draft-day-slide

Ill be curious to see Tomlin and Carrol's reputation will look like in a few years, especially if neither Geno nor Pickett proves to be the long term answer.

I don't think Smith or Pickett are anything special, they are around 0% DVOA and that is good enough for 7-10 wins depending on the roster. Carroll is very old, 72. There is no "few years" left for him. If Tomlin can get to positive record with Mason Rudolph and others, he can with almost any QB. He has game management and details problems, but his players always play for him, there is no losing season, they don't complain about injuries, no QBs available, they don't tank or quit... if the rules were reverted towards the defense, Steelers with this roster are probably where they were with young game manager Roethlisberger or with Stewart. They were winning more with game manager Ben R. in 00s than because of leader Ben R. in 10s when he was a top QB.

To me Tomlin is almost as good a motivator as Carroll and almost as good a defensive coach as Belichick. That combination in one person is a HOF coach.

#58 by theslothook // Jun 07, 2023 - 12:45pm

I can think of 4 "sure thing" prospect of QBs in 40 years: Elway, Manning, Luck, Lawrence. Maybe Eli? Everyone else is a developmental project with talent. Some have more talent, some less.

Yes those are the names that were seen as can't miss. If Lawrence stays mostly the same, I think he will be seen as a disappointment. But I would broaden the group of Qbs to names like Carson Palmer, Matt Stafford, Sam Bradford, Zach Wilson - the names of players who fit the profile of a top flight QB but had some flaws to iron out. I got the sense someone like Murray or Bryce Young were considered in that same tier. Obviously, that group has bit hit or miss, but one can't credibly wait for a can't miss to land to them at the top of the draft. You have to plan in the best case scenarios for some of these other guys.

You bring up the Patriots and Mac Jones. I think that example is actually exactly what I mean. If Belichick didn't have the cache he has, I bet he's one season away from getting fired because Mac Jones appears to top out as a solid QB and the team isn't talented enough to get far with him at QB.

You say, "Wait for an Andy Dalton or Teddy B", but the coaches who did that got fired. Matt Rhule got fired doing exactly what you suggested - trying to build a full roster and trying to find a reclamation home run. It didn't work. Vic Fangio also got fired going that route with Flacco, Keenum, and Bridgewater. Going that route feels like you are just spinning the wheels of mediocrity until you inevitably fall apart.

Let's revisit the Panthers. Prior to the trade, exactly what options were available to them? None of the top QBs were going to fall to them at the spot they were in. Unless you intentionally plan to tank; theres no guarantee you are going to land a top pick and the top QB in next year's draft. Nor can you even know for sure that the next crop of QBs are going to be anywhere near as good as this group. Simply put; the low and slow approach could leave you in the exact same situation two seasons from now.

As we all know, the strategy they took is rife with downside risks.

#59 by guest from Europe // Jun 07, 2023 - 1:51pm

You say, "Wait for an Andy Dalton or Teddy B", but the coaches who did that got fired. Matt Rhule got fired doing exactly what you suggested - trying to build a full roster and trying to find a reclamation home run.

You missunderstood. If a team has a pick No. 9(Panthers this year) or 15 (Patriots in 2021) and the worthy QB prospects are gone, than draft another position and sign a bridgewater-type as a "bridge QB" for a year or max two, not make him a reclamation home run. Draft someone next year or trade for Rodgers, Jackson, Garoppolo, Carr, when those are available...

If a team has #1 pick and there is a palmer, stafford coming in the draft, ok, take them if you need a QB. At #3 or #7 or #15 it will probably be just a jones.

The point is, don't trade up, unless it's for Lawrence. Obviously only 1 team could trade for such a player. Jaguars don't give that pick for 4 1st rounders, maybe for 5-6 picks. For others, Murray, Lance, Z. Wilson,Bradford, Stafford... don't trade up. It's a low supply and high demand of these good prospects, 1-2 per year.. a super prospect is once in a decade.

All of the coaches and GMs who drafted these murrays, bradfords,... got fired (the same as M. Rhule). Only Les Snead got saved by McVay.

GMs should build for a decade-long period. There is no instant winning after the draft. Only Luck and Prescott achieved this. It's fools gold. Rookie R. Wilson and Roethlisberger and Brady were game managers on winning rosters.

Let's revisit the Panthers. Prior to the trade, exactly what options were available to them?

Keep Darnold for a year and try to draft next year or better: trade for Rodgers, Jackson, Garoppolo, Carr,...

theres no guarantee you are going to land a top pick and the top QB in next year's draft.

They didn't in this draft either.

You should answer to yourself and here if you want, what should the Jets and Cardinals have done? Jets trade up in this darft? Cardinals draft a QB at #3 or trade up to #1 and get rid of Murray? Both have tried drafting multiple times at very high draft slots and there is no winning for them. Rams had Bradford for 2 years and you wanted them to draft RGIII if i understand you. Bears should have drafted #1 QB and trade away Fields? My opinion: Jets and Cardinals show us emphirically for decades that this usually doesn't work. If they keep going on that route at some point they will draft their stafford and achieve what Lions achieved if they have their Megatron. To draft their own elway, it will take decades.

Simply put; the low and slow approach could leave you in the exact same situation two seasons from now.

True. The same is true for drafting Z. Wilson, Darnold, Mayfield, Bradford, Murray, Rosen, Winston, Marriota, Lance...

If Belichick didn't have the cache he has, I bet he's one season away from getting fired because Mac Jones appears to top out as a solid QB and the team isn't talented enough to get far with him at QB.

I think they are ok at 7-10 wins like Steelers with Pickett. Check Patriots in 2021 with M. Jones. They will win like that if they win. Noone should be fired for that.

Majority of teams have this "just a solid QB". They have to be better at other positions and coaching in order to win. Supply of QBs is just too low. Supply of QB prospects that will work in the draft is even lower: 0-2/year and than wait 2-3 years for development.

#60 by theslothook // Jun 07, 2023 - 3:31pm

There are two separate issues worth discussing. 1) What should a team do if they have the top pick in the draft but they don't really know whether or not their incumbent starter is really good enough. 2) What should teams trapped between picks 8-15 do when they have no answers at QB.

For choice 1, I have made my position clear. I would do what the Cardinals did with Murray and Rosen. Its not fool proof. It comes with a ton of tradeoffs. Get it. Too bad, such is life. But I can understand and appreciate the other side.

For choice 2; I think it really depends on what the asking price is. In this alternate universe where the Panthers keep the pick and go after some alternative in free agency to me has a predictable end game. Either you tread water and you end up right back in the same position the following year or it blows up spectacularly and the coach/gm get fired; which is what happened to the Colts. Through that lens, if I can get the first overall pick - it provides a clear path forward. If he busts; oh well, we are back to the drawing board. If he succeeds, we have clarity to build around him.

But again it comes down to the asking price. 3 first rounders is probably too rich for me. The Panthers didnt give up three first rounders, but they gave up a lot. 2 first rounders + a 2nd + DJ Moore who could be tremendously valuable considering he's put up good numbers in a disaster qb situation for four years. That's a lot and I am undecided about whether I would have made the decision if I were in the Panthers shoes. Probably would for the reasons I listed above.

Btw, you said sign/trade for Rodgers, Jimmy G, and Carr. Well Rodgers has to want to play for you, so thats not going to make sense if you are the Panthers. Jimmy G has well documented injury issues and so planning your season around him as your starter is just not viable. And Carr is overpaid for what he is so I am not sure that's a great end game either. So to me, none of the alternatives you have listed are saving you from the same dilemma that the Colts have lived through since the day Luck retired

#61 by guest from Europe // Jun 07, 2023 - 5:05pm

For issue 1) i am for trade away that pick unless Lawrence or Luck is to be drafted. This was the topic on Bears and Fields prior to this draft and i am in agreement with everyone else commenting here, but understand your thinking.

issue 2)

alternate universe where the Panthers keep the pick and go after some alternative in free agency to me has a predictable end game. Either you tread water and you end up right back in the same position the following year

Not if they trade for Rodgers or Jackson or get old Brady or old Manning in free agency. If no such player is available, than it's treading water at QB, draft at #9 some other position. Maybe they find another Watt or WR Jefferson. That is more probable than another Luck.

Well Rodgers has to want to play for you, so thats not going to make sense if you are the Panthers.

He was under contract with Packers. If he doesn't want to play, he can retire or sulk. Panthers had some defensive talent, NFC South is wide open, Rodgers on that team and they are the favourites in that division. NFC doesn't have many great teams: 49ers, maybe Eagles. This looks better to me than the Jets. Jackson would be a better long-term fit than Rodgers.

Through that lens, if I can get the first overall pick - it provides a clear path forward. If he busts; oh well, we are back to the drawing board. If he succeeds, we have clarity to build around him.

If he busts, GM is also fired. Probably coach as well. This success of #1 winning and turning around a losing team was Newton and Luck. Maybe Lawrence will be like that. Burrow almost had a career-ending injury in a first few games. Before that Manning. Stafford is Tier 3 for you.

If you want a young prospect for a QB, trade for Lance. He has 100 pass attempts, he is still an unknown, a 2 year older prospect. It would be a cheap trade, maybe a 2nd round pick. "If he busts; oh well, we are back to the drawing board. If he succeeds, we have clarity to build around him." How can anyone compare Lance to these new prospects? Both are unknowns.

But again it comes down to the asking price. 3 first rounders is probably too rich for me.

If you think Panthers took the best strategy, than teams such as Falcons,Jets, Commanders should have done the same. There would be auction bidding for #1 pick or at least for #3 to draft Richardson. So, at least 4 teams are bidding for #1 pick. The second highest offer gets #3. They will have to offer 5 or 7 or 9 picks. Like that each draft when a trade would be possible, such as 2016 or 2023. Why stop at 3 1st rounders when the alternative is "treading water and getting fired"?!

So to me, none of the alternatives you have listed are saving you from the same dilemma that the Colts have lived through since the day Luck retired

I think Colts had a good coach in Reich. Don't understand why he was fired. They did good with Rivers. Why that GM traded for Wentz, when Rams had to pay, give a draft pick to Lions to unload Goff contract, i didn't understand. That's what i thought at that moment. Stafford was traded for 1st rounder and 2nd rounder (similar to Rodgers) and a 1st rounder to unload Goff. Colts GM paid for Wentz contract and wasn't fired!

If you think this way of Colts, than they should have traded up from #4 to #1. So, outbid the Panthers and other teams or be stuck in this cycle since Luck. They got the 3rd QB drafted, bust probability is high, they are stuck in this cycle, so they should have offered 5 1st round picks or more.

Richardson's ceiling is probably to be Jackson-like and you think Jackson is between your Tier 2 and Tier 3. On Colts roster that isn't good enough for sustained winning!

Jets and Bills and Dolphins were in this dilemma for decades. You want a top-6 QB. Carr-level isn't good enough. How are 32 teams going to have top-6 QBs? Or Ravens don't need one for winning, so it's 31 teams.

#62 by BigRichie // Jun 07, 2023 - 6:45pm

What I saw was that Wentz was Reich's baby. He sold the GM+owner on it.

Don't know it's so, but it would explain 'Reich gone/GM still here'. (that and Irsay's current hallucinogenic of choice)

#63 by guest from Europe // Jun 08, 2023 - 2:38am

Maybe it was like that. Later they tried Ryan. It went bad. That can happen, no problem.

During the season they became totally dysfunctional. That must not happen. And the GM still has the job?! He has tried 4-6 different QBs in 4 seasons. These are no RBs, they have different strengths and weaknesses, offense must be tailored for them. Wentz wasn't bad on Colts, like Goff isn't bad on Lions. It's various flavours of variance around average. Goff fluctuates year-to-year, Wentz game-to-game. Lions did this much better than Colts, not their QB-choice, but at least having a strategy.

This is another example of what Snead said: GM must plan and build a roster for a decade, not listen to coaches win-now desires. If a team does what a coach wants, they can give him the GM position, like O'Brien or Belichick or Kelly on Eagles. Of course, Snead doesn't do what he says, he trades everything to win now. This should be done only if some HOFers are nearing career-end, like Rodgers on Packers, Brady on Bucs, Brees on Saints.

#65 by guest from Europe // Jun 08, 2023 - 2:49pm

if I can get the first overall pick - it provides a clear path forward. If he busts; oh well, we are back to the drawing board. If he succeeds, we have clarity to build around him.

Are these two the only possible outcomes? Isn't there another, unclear one: that #1 pick becomes a slightly above average QB, your Tier 3 players? Isn't this the most probable? Recent history: such are/were Murray, Goff, Winston, Bradford, Stafford, Eli, Vick? Busts were Couch, Carr, Mayfield, A. Smith, J. Russell. Tier 2 or above success: Luck, Newton, Burrow?, Peyton.

Palmer was injured and successful and traded, unwanted by Bengals... so he is everything above. Lawrence and Young, too early to tell.

2 out of 4 successes were generational talents that couldn't be traded for nor should anyone hope to draft such talents. One was discarded for the other by the same team.

Out of "normal", usual talents it's 2 out of 14 successes. (If i understand what you are looking for) With Palmer 3 out of 15

If Stafford/Eli- draft level is enough, why is Carr in free agency not acceptable alternative?

#66 by theslothook // Jun 08, 2023 - 3:02pm

If Stafford/Eli- draft level is enough, why is Carr in free agency not acceptable alternative?

Tier 3 also provides clarity - you build around them. I think the key difference between Carr in complete free agency and Carr the draft pick getting extended is you can usually coax that player into a more palatable contract. Remember, the player is underpaid as a rookie and is taking a chance by opting not to extend until he is literally a free agent. Often times, that qb will trade some extra cash for some security in the present.

That said, look I'm having an active debate about this. At some point, tier 3 QBs are going to cost enough money where its truly much better NOT to pay them. I don't know what that tipping point is. The other problem is, at the time the decision has to be made, you don't know if he's a tier 3 player or not.

When Murray was signed; I think Arizona and its fans hoped Murray would be better than tier 3. When Dak was signed, the team also hoped he'd be better than tier 3. The Eagles and the Ravens are assuming at this very moment that they have a tier 2 player. So did the Bills when they inked Allen after one awesome year coming off two bad years. I used to think the more prudent move is to wait until the last minute to sign the player because you have more evidence. But as you said quite correctly - even if the guy suffers an injury or backslides; he's still getting the bag. Lamar still got paid. Dak still got paid. Its probably inevitable.

#67 by guest from Europe // Jun 08, 2023 - 3:56pm

Tier 3 also provides clarity - you build around them.

I thought you didn't want this. You wrote that M. Jones is just like this or worse? and GM or coach would be close to fired if it wasn't Belichick.

I think such players could/should be drafted with picks #5 - #25. No need to trade up and draft them #1 just because they are QBs. That's why i originally wrote: take "sure thing" Suh over "maybe" Bradford.

Its probably inevitable.

It's not inevitable. I bet Belichick won't give a huge contract to M. Jones. It will be around $20M/year or less or they will let him go and draft someone else. That's what i would do. Panthers could have signed Darnold at $10M for a year and drafted Levis at #9 if their scouts think he is promising to be Tier 3. If they don't, just Darnold if Carr is expensive, Rodgers+Lazard don't want to go there etc..

Teams could be a little more adventurous with QB contracts. They don't have to be ruthless like they are towards RBs, but they don't have to pay 40M+ everyone either. Raiders did this with last Carr's contract and got out of it easily.

(I think Prescott is your Tier 2. he is no Tier 3. To me he is better than Burrow at the moment. )

#81 by theslothook // Jul 18, 2023 - 1:26pm

Mac Jones looks worse than Tier 3. I think a good example is Daniel Jones and the dilemma facing the Giants. Jones, after years of frankly awful play, just had a good year by his standards and because his 5th year option wasn't picked up, he became a free agent. The optics of letting Jones walk and having 0 credible replacements for him are too painful and thus now he comes with a big financial cost. What to do?

#82 by guest from Europe // Jul 18, 2023 - 7:04pm

Mac Jones looks worse than Tier 3.

I thought that your Tier 3 QBs are average starters with many players in it and Tier 4 are top backups and the few worst starters and Tier 5 are bad backups. You wrote somewhere here like that. I think your Tier 3 is too broad and should be split between let's say 7th-15th best starters in Tier 3 and 16th-24th (all arbitrary cutoffs) in Tier 4, and move others and backups down a tier.

If you think M. Jones looks just like a good backup, i would kind of disagree, but it's too early to tell. Last year in the worst offensive scheme (so say Pats fans) his DVOA was -10% and in rookie year was 6%. D. Jones in 2021 was -10%, last year 1%, a career high, but he adds rushing options.

To me they are both of very similar quality, different styles: they either belong to your broad Tier 3 or in Tier 4 with other 16th-24th best starters.

The optics of letting Jones walk and having 0 credible replacements for him are too painful and thus now he comes with a big financial cost. What to do?

I had a long discussion with Pat about this in March after they gave D. Jones that huge $41M/year contract. There were replacements available, free agents: Carr, Dalton, Garoppolo,... all better even last year than career-year of D. Jones. There were cheap QBs of similar quality to 2x Jones: Darnold, Brissett, Mariota. If Giants really were set on extending D. Jones, they should have given him a smaller contract than Garoppolo and G. Smith got, so $15-20M/year max. There was no other team interested in giving D. Jones a huge QB contract. McDaniels and Raiders wanted Garoppolo, Jets wanted Rodgers and Commanders are selling a team, signing noone expensive. Other teams were expected to draft or had QBs. In my opinion this is an example of sports agent totally winning contract negotiations versus team's management.

What would i do as Giants? Try to trade 1st, 2nd round pick + D. Jones for Jackson or get someone cheap for 1-2 years, whoever coach wants: Darnold or Dalton or Brissett. Or draft Lewis if Giants' scouts say so. They drafted at #24 a CB and at #57 a C.

Giants are fooling themselves if they think they are good now. A year ago they were expected to compete with Texans for the worst team, pick #1 in draft. Not much has changed in their player talent pool, just the head coach might be good or it was a fluke year. They were 21st by DVOA last year.

#85 by theslothook // Jul 20, 2023 - 11:10am

To me, tier 4 QBs are classic game managers. IE - put them in favorable circumstances and they can throw just enough to potentially win games. The highest version of that player was Alex Smith.

To me, tier 3 players are not QBs you hide when you have favorable circumstances. Kirk Cousins is a player teams are ok with throwing 30 times a game. If Alex Smith is throwing 30 times, something has gone terribly wrong. Other such players include Jacoby brissette, Tyrod Taylor, Andy Dalton, etc etc. The problem with these players is they have to be on good teams or they just are close to unplayable.

You mentioned Sam darnold above. Sam darnold is in tier 5 and that is the, "will get your coach fired" tier. I don't care if you put optimal circumstances around Sam darnold, he is going to be losing you games every week.

Circling back to Daniel Jones. Here's the issue with Jones. Ask any Giants fan and they will tell you the team around Jones prior to this year has been horrible. Even this year, I'm not convinced the talent is that great despite some real upgrades at the offensive line. So Jones effectively was in the same mystery box that Justin Fields currently occupied. So now he has a good year and You aren't sure if he's improved because things have gotten better or he just lucked into a better year in a contract year.

This brings us to that fork in the road and the commanders are one of the dead ends in that fork. IE - a team that has spent 5 years post Cousins wandering the QB desert, wasting away years of talented players because they got almost 0 from the QB position. I truly think what's happened to the commanders is the nightmare that every GM and coaching staff has when they have this quarterback conundrum.

#87 by guest from Europe // Jul 20, 2023 - 4:37pm

So Jones effectively was in the same mystery box that Justin Fields currently occupied. So now he has a good year and You aren't sure if he's improved because things have gotten better or he just lucked into a better year in a contract year.

1% DVOA isn't a good year. He has improved from bad to average. A team shouldn't pay 41-50M/year for that. They could have paid 15M to D. Jones or rather 5-8M to Dalton-, Brissett- types and spend money elsewhere. I wrote many options in the comment above and think D. Jones for $41M is the worst option economically. Unless you really like his running, D. Jones should be in the same tier as M. Jones.

is throwing 30 times, something has gone terribly wrong. Other such players include Jacoby brissette,

Brissett threw 390 passes in 11 games last year and his stats are good, better than D. Jones. He threw more per game than Hurts...

I don't care if you put optimal circumstances around Sam darnold, he is going to be losing you games every week.

This wasn't the case in 2022. He improved exactly like D. Jones in 2022, just played in less games and didn't qualify for DVOA table. His DVOA was positive. Some writer on this site wrote that it was 5-6% DVOA. In his 6 games Panthers were 4-2. Small sample.

So all three improved in 2022: Darnold, D. Jones, Brissett. Only one got overpaid.

I truly think what's happened to the commanders is the nightmare that every GM and coaching staff has when they have this quarterback conundrum.

Agree. They tried, but there was a career-ending injury and a bust drafted in 1st round. They will try again. During this time Giants with stability at QB position and ownership were worse than Commanders.

#88 by theslothook // Jul 20, 2023 - 4:56pm

Let me be clear: I don't like the Jones contract either. I was just defending the decision as a bad choice among bad choices. Brisette had a good year for him but that looks like a clear outlier. Darnold has failed with multiple teams and multiple coaches and his replacements have outplayed him.

An optimist could credibly argue that Jones has had 0 support prior to this year. Going into Tanier's Math, Jones' most likely outcome is probably tier 4. However, he has some probabilities of being tier 3 and maaaaybe tier 2 if you stretch it. If he became a tier 1; I would be truly shocked but I also need to remind myself that Drew Brees and Steve Young are in the dataset.

The same cannot be said for Jacoby or Dalton; whos probabilities are much more set in stone and the historical record for career backups becoming really good players is down to maybe just Gannon or maybe Trent Green.

At the end of the day; I knew the giant were in a truly unenviable position once the season ended; with their cornerstones on offense being Jones and Saquon as opposed to Burrow and Chase. This is the hand you get dealt. I think all paths are likely to end in firing, but paying Jones carries the best chance to survive and its mostly wasting the owner's money.

#90 by guest from Europe // Jul 21, 2023 - 9:56am

the decision as a bad choice among bad choices.

I think all paths are likely to end in firing, but paying Jones carries the best chance to survive and its mostly wasting the owner's money.

Would you really pay D. Jones 5 times more than Brissett or 8 times more per year than Dalton and for more years or more than Carr? Is he really that much better, has "higher upside". If he plays like your Tier 2, he will reach contract incentives and be paid close to $50M/year! I think Giants made the worst choice among bad choices. It's not just money because of salary cap constrictions. Because of this contract they will have to cut costs elsewhere. That is important, i don't care about money, salary. If $41-50M/year is just wasting owner's money, so would $90-99M/year be.

I think that Steelers and Patriots won't give such contracts to their limited QBs and will be more competitive than Giants and other teams because of that.

I would like to remind what choices Browns and Broncos made with their QB conundrum last year as they were in the same boat with Redskins/Commanders since Cousins and Manning left. Also Ravens and Eagles and Cardinals with their exorbitant extensions. All these QBs are injury risks or jail risk (Watson) and there is no way out of these expensive contracts. It's not just Giants and Commanders facing this problem.

Here is a list of QB salaries:

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/contracts/sort-average/quarterback/limit-100/

Which of these teams made a good choice regarding both veteran QB contracts (not looking at rookie contracts which are fixed) and your tiers of quality? The contracts are really high.

To me Chiefs, Bills, Titans, Raiders did good. Last year Bucs and Packers were there, not anymore. Jets are taking a risk now, Rodgers is old. Others overpaid from slightly, in 10-20% range (Vikings, Ravens, Cowboys, ...) to horribly, 100-200% (Giants). Seahawks can get out of contract after 1 year. Commanders are taking no such risk. 49ers overpaid in draft picks for Lance when they had Garoppolo, so they weren't on this "good" list. That's 4 out of 18 teams for me. (Salaries 19th and lower are rookie contracts and Commanders.) Other teams strategies are questionable and are hoping for "upside" without really looking at downside. If Flacco's contract could sink the mighty Ravens, many of these lesser teams will sink that way. (Keep in mind: there is inflation of QB contracts, so Prescott's old contract is not really the same as Stafford's new one in cap%.)

Allen and Jackson were in same draft and to me are in same quality tier. You have a lesser opinion of Jackson, so for you Ravens overpaid even more. Look at their contracts, Bills get an extra year for the same amount of money, "for free"!

#91 by theslothook // Jul 21, 2023 - 12:22pm

You are rating the Bills situation ex post, where in reality, they were starring at a similarly risky profile when they decided to pay him. To that point, Allen had two years of being horrible; albeit less horrible in his second year and then a massive, unseen jump into year 3. It was very much an open question as to what Allen was going to be at that point. There are many many universes where Allen regresses back to being bad. Or regresses to being just slightly above average and now the Bills are now just a lightweight contender like the Patriots and not an inner sanctum contender.

Again, the Cardinals faced this same question with Murray; who at least you could argue offered a better track record. Of course, he backslid instead of improving before getting injured(that's not something anyone can forecast).

That's why I keep coming back to - you have to make the decision with the information you have at the time. Jones offers a chance at upside far higher than Brissett's certainty of being tier 4. Maybe it won't happen, but that's the bet they are making.

Really though, we seem to be getting hung up less on Jones and more about the QB salaries. Look, I agree with you overall. The QB market is bananas and given the prices for the players in question; it only furthers the lead teams like the Chiefs and Bills have over everyone else. If Lamar turns out to be more of a lower tier 3 player or gets injured - the Ravens are screwed + they have to manage their roster with his salary on the books. Ditto for Hurts.

But again, you need to tell me what the palatable option is for these teams. Hurts is also a similar unknown to me like Allen was when he got extended. Just like Murray was when he got extended. There are universes where the Eagles end up in a disaster situation with Hurts. What is their alternative? Because signing Brissett or Dalton to me is just going the route of the Colts when they signed Brissett and then Rivers and then traded for Wentz and then inevitably collapsed.

#92 by guest from Europe // Jul 21, 2023 - 3:18pm

You are rating the Bills situation ex post,

True.

It was very much an open question as to what Allen was going to be at that point. There are many many universes where Allen regresses back to being bad.

You are right.

Hurts is also a similar unknown to me like Allen was when he got extended. Just like Murray was when he got extended. There are universes where the Eagles end up in a disaster situation with Hurts.

Totally agree.

Really though, we seem to be getting hung up less on Jones and more about the QB salaries.

i don't think we disagree. You just accept when a team doesn't have a clear good option that they should do what everyone else is doing. I don't think so.

Jones offers a chance at upside far higher than Brissett's

There isn't much evidence for this, but ok. No team should pay $40M/year for a chance, a bet. There was no competition for Jones' services like there wasn't for Brissett's. Giants should have paid 15-20M/year to Jones if they like him that much.

If Jones continues to play like he did in 2022 for 2-3 more years, would you give him another similar extension? Why yes or why no? Should Vikings extend Cousins? Why yes or why no? Should Raiders have kept Carr? Both are better and cheaper than D. Jones.

Maybe it won't happen, but that's the bet they are making.

They didn't have to make that "bet". Even Panthers "bet" of trading up to #1 pick and hoping it develops into some Tier 2 QB has much higher probability, is a better bet. Bears with Fields is a cheaper bet: maybe he develops into a jackson, so a better "bet".

Colts when they signed Brissett and then Rivers and then traded for Wentz and then inevitably collapsed.

Colapse wasn't inevitable! Rivers was good, but retired. He could have been your brady or favre (Vikings) or manning (Broncos). Or Ryan could have been your favre. Wentz could have been your stafford (Rams), but he was average. Why didn't Colts keep Wentz like Giants do keep Jones? He showed more upside than D. Jones!

what the palatable option is for these teams.

I think that Raiders did good in free agency, they got a better QB and cheaper than Giants. Titans got a better QB in Tannehill rather than continue to pay Mariotta. Bucs got Brady, didn't extend Winston. Rodgers was available... let's pretend those options weren't available, that there was noone in free agency. Then treat it like any other position: offer your Tier 3 QB lower contract, $20-ishM/year and invest in other positions. If he doesn't take that contract, trade him away and draft another Tier 3/Tier 4 QB, maybe he will develop better. It would be the same kind of bet for "upside", just much cheaper cap-wise and thus with smaller downside. If it becomes a bust, sacrifice a year and go for #1 pick and draft again. If there is no option in draft, get a dalton for 1 year and draft next year.

For example, here are contracts of left tackles

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/average/left-tackle/

The disparity between their salaries is much larger than among QBs. Some teams have great, expensive tackles, your Tier 1. Other teams don't have that and don't pretend that they must give everyone high contracts because there isn't enough of left tackles available and if they don't overpay their average left tackle, than the whole offense will be destroyed like the Chiefs' offense in Super Bowl vs. Bucs and nothing will work.

If Lamar turns out to be more of a lower tier 3 player or gets injured - the Ravens are screwed + they have to manage their roster with his salary on the books. Ditto for Hurts.

I think Ravens did everything right until this spring. They had to either pay Jackson what he demanded before (in September, October 2022), so $230M, or 1 year franchise tag and trade away.

Eagles paid unnecessary early, after only 1 good year and great Super Bowl. didn't get any discount, should have waited one more season. They had a similar QB experience in Foles. He had 1 great year in 2013.

Somehow Cowboys did very well with Prescott. They had him play out the 4 rookie contract years. Weren't sure, so 1 year franchise tag. Afterwards an expensive, but shorter contract. The QB gets a lot of money, the team guarantees only 2 years. Less downside, which is important.

D. Jones is nowhere near these QBs in anything but salary and running abilities! Eli Manning wasn't nearly as good as his brother or Rivers or Roethlisberger, but got the same money and Giants were an exactly .500 team unlike these other teams.

Another question for you: which of all NFL QBs should Colts traded for with their #4 pick? Remember that Lance (#3 pick) cost a lot more than Rodgers or Stafford, so theoretically Colts could have gotten almost anyone in such a trade.

Mahomes, Allen, Burrow, Young and Stroud they couldn't get. List QBs in order (on their current contracts) you would trade for with that draft pick. Imagine every team but these 5 says yes to trade.

Should Bears traded #1 pick for Jackson or Hurts? Which team says no?

#93 by theslothook // Jul 21, 2023 - 5:16pm

Another question for you: which of all NFL QBs should Colts traded for with their #4 pick? Remember that Lance (#3 pick) cost a lot more than Rodgers or Stafford, so theoretically Colts could have gotten almost anyone in such a trade.

Other than the names you mentioned, it really does not make sense for the Colts in their current situation to trade for one of these other QBs. They aren't anywhere near good enough such that adding this qb transforms them into a title contender. Maybe I could talk myself into Hurts given he has probably the highest potential upside of any of these QBs given we still don't know what he is. But uncertainty cuts both ways and the downside uncertainty + the certainty of a huge salary makes me leery.

The QB conundrum remains one of the most fascinating fork in the road events in the NFL. Very few teams have the stomach to be like the Redskins who let Cousins walk with 0 credible options on the table.

#94 by guest from Europe // Jul 22, 2023 - 1:49am

Noone??? Colts shouldn't get cheap Herbert nor expensive Hurts nor Prescott nor Jackson nor Lawrence...? Do you want to reconsider?

As far as teams with QB conundrum which team did better this offseason, Giants or Jets?

This just occured to me regarding #1 pick and Bears dilemma that you asked months ago. They should have asked around NFL and gotten some real QB for that pick: Herbert or Lawrence or Jackson. Then trade Fields to Bucs or Commanders for a late 3rd round pick. At that time i was thinking only about Rodgers and Jackson. Why do NFL teams value these high draft picks #1 or #2 or #3 more in trades than real QBs i don't understand. The data since RGIII-trade until Rodgers-trade shows that. Watson is the only exception, was valued as #1 pick.

Why do you think that there are "no palatable options" in trades for veterans? Jets, Broncos, Browns, 49ers (Garoppolo), Titans got their QBs this way recently. Vikings and Bucs and Saints in free agency. You wrote about Watson's stats and age and perception and potential when we were discussing Jackson vs. Watson. If you go a year back, should the Browns get your Tier 2 Watson or extend Mayfield? Mayfield after 2021 and D. Jones after 2022 have similar quality and future probabilities, don't they? Mayfield was a better prospect and had 2 above average years compared to 1 for D. Jones.

I just now saw Darnold's 2022 stats: 23% DVOA and 326 DYAR on 147 pass attempts in 6 games. Very similar to Purdy. Panthers were 4-2, one game lost to Brady's 4th quarter comeback. Why doesn't Darnold get the same treatment as D. Jones?

Everyone was praising Broncos last year. How do you explain what happened to R. Wilson last year if you think QBs are that independent and underrated for team's long term success and teams must have one?

Maybe I could talk myself into Hurts given he has probably the highest potential upside of any of these QBs given we still don't know what he is. But uncertainty cuts both ways and the downside uncertainty + the certainty of a huge salary makes me leery.

This statement alone is true and logical and should be applied to every player/contract. It seems to me that you don't apply it to D. Jones. Why doesn't his huge salary make you leery? Where are Giants going with this potentially/probably Tier 3 QB? How will they improve from 21st in DVOA ranking? Recently Colts in 2021 and 2020 were better than Giants in 2022 and 2021...

Also Lawrence and Herbert have more potential than Hurts in my opinion. Hurts could potentially be next Newton and these other 2 next Marino or something.

#89 by theslothook // Jul 20, 2023 - 5:00pm

#57 by guest from Europe // Jun 07, 2023 - 6:19am

The Eagles had a terrific QB in McNabb during the 2000s and have been up and down throughout the 2010s.

I don't think Eagles in 2000's were made by mostly McNabb. It's Reid's scheme.

In 10s they had a lot of dysfunction: fired Reid, hired Kelly, fired the GM, gave everything to Kelly, fired Kelly, hired the same GM, won a SB, fired the coach... total drama for years.

You can get pretty far with Qbs of the quality of Romo, Big Ben, McNabb, or Russ Wilson.

Look at what draft slots they were drafted, who developed/coached them, what quality of roster they were members of. Romo was the best of them and had the least wins.

The Chiefs, 49ers, and Rams have done it for half a decade but that eventually runs its course. Talent gets expensive and primes are only so long. The QB bridges that gap.

Yes, i agree. That is long enough for me. After half a decade or less roster talent will dissipate. That's what teams should reallistically aim for. Not for Packers or Chargers QBs for decades. Those are "pipe dreams".

The only team you can name that managed to achieve long term winning despite never getting tier 2 level QB play or close to it was the Ravens.

I am not arguing teams should have Dilfer at QB! They should treat it like any other position, try to get the best player available in draft or free agency or trade.

Winning for decade+ in Super Bowl era is rare: 80s Redskins, Patriots, Manning's teams, Steelers with many non-top QBs, Ravens, Reid's teams, 49ers with B. Walsh and HOFers, Cowboys with many QBs, Broncos with Elway, maybe Marino's Dolphins, Packers with 2 HOFers, 70s/80s Rams, old Vikings. That's not a list, those are outliers with 6 teams with top QB HOFers (2 of them multiple HOFers!), 3 teams also had HOF coaching in Shula and Belichick and Walsh, and 6 teams with various QBs over decades: 2 winning with defense+run game (Steelers, Ravens), 2 HOF coaches (Gibbs, Reid), 2 with defense (Vikings, Rams). Patriots won 11 games with Cassell and M. Jones, not just Brady!

There are many, many Tier-2 QBs who don't achieve this (R. Wilson and Seahawks won for 5-6 years). HOFers Favre and Rodgers and Brees don't really qualify for this long winning. They had a winning ceiling and .500 valley. Favre and Rodgers together on Packers do.

A list with Tier 1 and Tier 2 QBs who didn't win for decade+ would be much longer than a list of those who did win like that! Yes, you write it's a necessary but not sufficient condition to have such a QB. Such a goal of decade+ for a team is totally unreallistic.

If you want decade+ winning, I could write that a team should win like 40s Bears or 60s Packers or 70s Steelers and everything else isn't good enough. In that regard Manning and Brady were failures.

All picks of every stripe are unlikely to work. The first overall pick just offers the best odds at it; low as they are. The number 1 overall pick has produced more hall of famers than any other pick slot.

I agree.

I guess this comes back to Bears and Cardinals: Cardinals took Murray with No. 1 in 2019 and Bears traded it away in 2023. Both had a young QB. You really, really want a murray and no trade. If it's a murray, mayfield, goff, burrow, young, i'm for the trade down. Only if a luck or a lawrence is available, once in a decade QB, than take him and get rid of whoever you have: old Manning, Rosen, Fields.

If Cardinals didn't select a #1 QB in 2019, they get another one next year(s): maybe Herbert or Lance or Fields if they don't get draft pick #1. They had in this draft another pick, #3, but didn't select a QB.

Or for Rams: you didn't want RGIII-trade down, but want Goff-trade up. I am of the opposite opinion. If we were GMs, i would happily do these trades with you and with Les Snead.

#68 by LondonMonarch // Jun 19, 2023 - 4:42am

What's happened to this website?

I know it is the deep offseason, but as far as I can see it is now a whole month since the most recent substantive article (18 May) and even the last Extra Point posting was on 26 May. Their last tweet is also 18 May (though that account has recently "liked" some gambling posts by Chris Spagnuolo).

Really surprised no-one is commenting on this! Especially Aaron Schatz who is tweeting about football but saying nothing about Football Outsiders.......

#69 by LondonMonarch // Jun 19, 2023 - 3:18pm

See further discussion on the Anthony Richardson article comments.

#70 by guest from Europe // Jun 22, 2023 - 2:09pm

An old tweet by A. Schatz (i don't use twitter):

Aaron Schatz @FO_ASchatz 26th May

I've been playing around with a version of receiving DVOA based on routes run instead of targets. In this new version, DeAndre Hopkins has the second-largest improvement in DVOA (behind Tyreek Hill). He was a still excellent last year.

And Hopkins is still a free agent. I don't understand why this is as much as i don't understand this site being in hibernation. Why didn't ESPN already buy FO? They use DVOA and Schatz' articles on ESPN+.

#71 by Crouchback // Jun 22, 2023 - 6:10pm

Don't know what the deal is with FO but Hopkins seems pretty straightforward. Both the Titans & Patriots are interested in him and vice versa. So he's trying to decide between the two and presumably seeing who'll offer the most.

#72 by guest from Europe // Jun 23, 2023 - 3:37am

Sure, Titans and Patriots are interested.

If i understand Schatz's tweet, he is saying traditional DVOA wasn't precise about Hopkins in 2022. Hopkins is better than that and Schatz is looking to tweak DVOA for WRs. This is very rare. Or Schatz is "going against DVOA" with his opinion, even rarer.

This would mean Hopkins is still great and all teams looking for such WR1 play or top WR2 (probably a cheap contract for Hopkins now in June) should line up for Hopkins' services for a year or two. 32 teams don't have 2 WRs better/much cheaper than Hopkins.

Here is a list what teams have spent this offseason on low-supply of WRs:

https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/free-agents/wide-receiver/

Hopkins will be probably for 1 year in $5-7M range, like Chark, Hardman, Slayton. Less than Lazard, Beckham, Thielen, Woods...

#73 by theslothook // Jun 23, 2023 - 11:24am

I don't think DVOA works well for skill positions tbh.

The Broncos in 2011 had I believe the worst ranked skill positions players in the NFL. A year later, they ranked first with largely the same players. Ofc, they made a QB change that year.

#74 by guest from Europe // Jun 23, 2023 - 7:18pm

Maybe someone can ask A. Schatz on Twitter about Hopkins and what he is tweaking/adjusting about WR DVOA or at what tier would he rank Hopkins... He would like the Patriots to sign Hopkins, he tweeted that.

About WR stats, i quoted Barnwell in comment #32 above that Hopkins was No. 17 last year in yards/route run. That looks like a WR1-type of player on dysfunctional Cardinals offense with 4 starting QBs!

There are teams that are set at WR position: Bucs, Bengals, Raiders, Dolphins, Eagles, Steelers, Seahawks, then Commanders and Broncos with young WRs, Cowboys got Cooks, Bears got Moore and Claypool, Panthers chose Thielen to be veteran WR... but other 20 teams minus Cardinals? They don't want Hopkins to be WR2? They are sure that he is too old, so they sign equally old Woods, Thielen, Beckham or draft someone in 3rd/4th round? (Only Titans want him as WR1.)

I don't think DVOA works well for skill positions tbh.

We agree on this one. It's very difficult to measure individual player performance from data/plays made by team units/multiple players.

#75 by LondonMonarch // Jun 27, 2023 - 10:58am

If Hopkins is really available at $5-7m then a lot of those 20 teams would be piling in.

I would imagine he is looking for close to double that though - not obvious why he would be priced very much lower than OBJ ($15m) who is just 5 months younger, has a much worse injury record and hasn't been good since 2019.

#76 by guest from Europe // Jun 27, 2023 - 1:48pm

I would imagine he is looking for close to double that

He probably wants that, but no player will get such a contract in July. Teams have spent their money how they wanted to in March. He was under such a contract, 2 years $34M, all unguaranteed, no team traded a 6th round pick for that, Cardinals got nothing and released him. So, no team will sign him to a large contract, we know that.

Also, teams don't have much cap space now, only Bears, Panthers, Cardinals, Colts, Jets (they will need the space to rollover to next year for Rodgers' contract), Lions, Cowboys do have 20+ million. Most of these are set at WR. Cowboys traded a 5th and a 6th pick for 30 year old Cooks on 2 years $20M contract.

8 teams are already in the red for next year: https://overthecap.com/salary-cap-space

(How are Chargers $60M in red for 2024 with QB Herbert on a rookie contract?!)

The interested teams have $8M Titans and $15M Patriots. Titans are or aren't rebuilding, who knows? They changed the whole o-line. They could sure use a WR since A.J. Smith and C. Davis left. Patriots have Smith-Schuster at $8.5M and Parker at $6M and Bourne. That's why I guess that both teams offered a 1 year 5-6M contract, maybe less. If Hopkins doesn't take such a contract, he will remain unemployed.

(The whole AFC South at WR position is looking bizarre. There was C. Kirk last year at 4% DVOA and that's about it for 4 teams. Others are wishful thinking.)

#78 by guest from Europe // Jun 28, 2023 - 5:42am

Here is a look at what all teams have at skill positions (WR, TE, RB) by a former F.O. writer:

https://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/story/_/id/37899731/nfl-team-wide-receiver-tight-end-running-back-rankings-2023

(I would rank Bucs and Commanders and Broncos higher, but Jaguars and Ravens and Lions lower)

What those 10 lowest ranked teams are doing is peculiar to me: they are mostly trying out unknowns in various 2nd-5th round picks (exception are Patriots). History tells us that the majority of those picks will fail. They can't all have even a modest success, some must fail. When that happens excuses will be made a few years from now: "we drafted a 2nd round and 3rd round WR. Please wait for a few more years, we will draft again. There will be potential, it doesn't matter that we are bad now."

All of this in a league that is shifting everything towards passing offense, parity be damned, these teams don't have a single star offense player. Rams have 30 year old Kupp and nothing more. Broncos have injury problems.

(If somebody can't read insider, those low ranked teams are, from worst: Texans, Panthers, Cardinals, Titans, Packers, Giants, Patriots, Colts, Broncos, Rams)

#79 by theslothook // Jun 28, 2023 - 2:05pm

Signing Hopkins comes with some opportunity costs. Of the teams you have mentioned; only a handful are actually under any pressure to win immediately. The rest have some latitude to develop a younger option who is cheaper and offers potential longer term upside than Hopkins.

Who knows, btw, what Hopkins wants. If it turns out he wants a relatively large contract and multiple years - why exactly are you signing up for that if you aren't under a win now mandate? That's why this discussion is left in the land of speculation because we don't know what Hopkins and his camp is looking for.

#80 by guest from Europe // Jun 29, 2023 - 2:09am

I wrote comment #78 about teams building their pass offense in general, regardless of Hopkins. I hope someone might write what are these 10 teams doing, what is their strategy (exceptions Patriots and Broncos). Rams and Cardinals are having a fire sale despite having expensive QBs. It looks to me that 5 other teams have the same plan: rookie 1st round QB and rookie or de facto rookie 2nd rounder as WR1. Other WRs also very young and unproven. The Bears did this for last 2 years. If there will be problems with offense, how will they know what is the problem: QB, pass catchers or playcalling? Those 5 are Texans, Colts, Titans, Panthers, Packers. Titans have 1st rounder WR1 and high 2nd rounder QB. One Panthers' fan wrote above what Panthers are doing. They have 2 2nd rounders at WR + old Thielen as a mentor. Thielen has lost some steps. What is the probability that strategy of these 5 teams will fail based on draft history of WRs and QBs? 70-80%? Higher than that? (Panthers have the best success chances at 30-40%. They don't have a proven WR1, so it's closer to 30%.) Jaguars also had this problem when Lawrence was a rookie. Packers are a good organization, at least they will lean on run game and Shanaclan scheme by LaFleur.

On the other end of the Barnwell's list are 49ers: they also have 2 de facto rookie QBs, but they have the best set of proven pass catchers beyond any doubt. If there will be any problems with pass offense, 49ers will know the cause and be able to act. They had a lot of problems before Shanahan, they don't have a proven "franchise QB", but their strategy of roster construction seems much better to me. Not perfect, but better.

Who knows, btw, what Hopkins wants. If it turns out he wants a relatively large contract and multiple years

About this i wrote #76 and have nothing to add. No team wants to sign him for this. It will be cheap 1 year, maybe 2nd year team option or remain unemployed. I disagree with this, but my opinion doesn't matter.

if you aren't under a win now mandate

I would like to get an idea what people think about these rebuiding processes. Anyone can comment: how long does this last? When does it transition to win-something-mandate? 2 years? After losing for longer than that, usually coaches and some GMs are fired... How long are fans ok with this? Isn't this the main problem of roster construction: GMs want to "have their guy" at coach and QB, are doing a teardown in Year 1, than in Year 2 are drafting/developing and in Year 3 they have to win so they make bad decisions and are fired after that and the cycle continues: Browns, Jets, Bills for decades.

There is an annual article here about snap-weighted age of players in the NFL. They are young and careers are short. Lions and Chiefs at 25.3 years were young in 2022 and Saints and Patriots old at 27.3 years. So how long should a turnaround of team's fortunes last? 1 good draft? 2 or 3 years? After 4 years some players are retiring, some declining, some free agents... How long does a good or a bad team last? The Browns went from 0-16 to a first playoff win after decades in just 3 years... 49ers went from Super Bowl contention to disaster after Harbaugh left...

#83 by guest from Europe // Jul 18, 2023 - 7:46pm

I have a question about "WR market in 2023 free agency". It's a shame not many people will read this. Can anyone give a plausible explanation what was going on from teams perspective, this looks economically irrational:

March

Lazard and Meyers are signed for 2 years $22M + unguaranteed team option years

Smith-Schuster and Thielen for 2 years $18M + unguaranteed team option years

Cooks on 1 year $12M + team option year is traded for 5th and 6th round pick

other WRs are signed for less, about $5-6M/year

no team wants/signs Hopkins or Beckham

April

Beckham is signed for 1 year $15M because QB Jackson wants that

May

Hopkins is released from unguaranteed 2 year $34M contract

July

Hopkins is signed for 2 years $26M + likely $2-3M/year incentives, probably $13M is guaranteed

How is it possible that cheaper contracts, such as for Smith-Schuster, are made at the beginning of free agency period when teams have money to spend, and the most expensive one in July when there is not much money left?! Has this ever happened before? For comparison: Julio Jones was a free agent and signed a cheap 1 year $6M contract in July 2022.

It looks that a star offense player which isn't a RB will get what he wants, he just has to be patient/ hold out long enough: it worked for Watson, Jackson, Beckham, Hopkins, Rodgers, R. Wilson, Trent Williams, Orlando Brown ... A defensive equivalent would be if some team would now give Marcus Peters or Ngakoue or Clowney a large contract.

#84 by Aaron Brooks G… // Jul 20, 2023 - 9:46am

It's been a great 20 years guys.

Last one out remember to shut down the server.

#86 by super.mighty // Jul 20, 2023 - 11:44am

What are people using instead of KUBIAK this year?

#95 by theslothook // Jul 23, 2023 - 6:49pm

For mr guest room Europe or others with experience.

We want to visit the amalfi Coast but we are trying to find the right configuration as it comes with a few different challenges.

We will be driving from Naples so we will have a car but we don't need a car to get around. We want to see Capri one day and and then some of the smaller towns on the amalfi Coast line. Which city makes the most sense to stay in as a base for the Amalfi Coast?

#96 by guest from Europe // Jul 24, 2023 - 2:00am

Amalfi or Sorrento. Praiano if you want really small town. Positano is literally overcrowded with tourists. Salerno is more industrial. Anything is ok for your "base", just depends on accomodation. Sorrento is closest to Napoli if you are driving from Napoli. There you can get to Capri.

From Napoli to Amalfi is only 80km, but it takes more than 2 hours to drive, streets are really narrow and crowded, views are beautiful, but you can't look around because of traffic. Roads aren't straight, you aren't used to this. There are frequent local buses and taxis, you can look through the window... if you have enough money for it, you can rent a villa somewhere on the Amalfi coast and enjoy the view, don't have to go to Capri for that. Such a villa can be your "base" to go around.

Capri is further from Napoli. I would recommend Procida or Ischia for 1 day if you are taking a ferry. Procida is nice and quiet. Between Napoli and Sorrento are Pompei and Ercolano archeological sites. Highly recommend. Also archeological museum in Napoli, half a day.

All of this is really spectacular, you need at least a week... From Milano to Napoli is far, don't know how you can make to see all of this in 2 weeks. You will "butcher" something beautiful, something to enjoy, not rush through.

#97 by theslothook // Jul 24, 2023 - 11:19am

I openly acknowledge, it is a bad idea. Although, living in California and being an avid skier, it allows you to stomach long car rides. And formerly living in Los Angeles, it lets you stomach traffic. And having been to India many times, you get a stomach for the worst sense of overcrowding thab any place on the planet.

I wonder if you could be so kind as to recommend local places to eat in the following cities:

Rome, Firenze, Bologna, Parma, Venice, Capri/Sorrento, Sienna, and Milano

#98 by guest from Europe // Jul 24, 2023 - 12:52pm

This might be physically possible, but you will spend more time moving around than anything else. To give you a plastic idea what you are doing: if someone who has never watched NFL would try to watch one whole season in 4-5 hours: skip a lot of games, see some highlights and something of a Super Bowl. Instead of watching the Super Bowl you'll be parking a car.

The big problem is there isn't enough car parking space so many cars in Italy have dents on sides caused by close encounters.

Don't skip Pompeii and San Gimignano and Vatican museum. Also Roma at night, any time, after midnight, new National museum in Palazzo Massimo... for Villa Borghese you have to book a ticket months in advance. Watch Italian movie: La grande Bellezza to get an impression of Roma.

For restaurants it's probably the best to ask locals where they eat, some small restaurants with 4-5 tables, not more. A friend took me once to some restaurant in Napoli, it was really small like that in an alley, no tourists and a lot of locals outside waiting. Such places probably don't have a webpage. (Unfortunately Firenze, Sienna and especially Venezia are so full of tourists, it will be difficult to find the locals!) In Roma eat in Trastevere part of city.

Or some guide like these

https://www.slowfood.com/osterie-locande-ditalia-a-guide-to-traditional-places-to-eat-and-stay-in-italy/

https://approachguides.com/blog/eat-slow-food-italy/

Or you can eat around markets, try to find osterias near open-air food markets in the morning or early afternoon.

#99 by theslothook // Jul 24, 2023 - 9:24pm

I can attempt to describe it in the same football terms.

If someone genuinely wanted a good foray into the NFL but didn't commit to more than watching Sunday night football or highlights of the best teams, what might they gleam from it?

If I'm being honest, they'd come away thinking this Patrick Mahomes fella is pretty good and somehow the 49ers keep winning despite a lot of different starters and Philly seems to get to the QB a lot. Would they understand the game at a deeper, philosophical level or have a historical comparison of what Mahomes is versus some of the QBs of yesteryear? No. Would they know what makes Andy Reid so special? Absolutely not. Would they get even a clue of what Brady's acclaim is all about? Definitely not.

But I wouldn't claim the entire exercise was valueless, especially if they understood another sport intimately well enough to recognize what they know and don't know with so little time spent.

#100 by guest from Europe // Jul 25, 2023 - 3:03am

In football after watching highlights someone would get an impression that Eagles are good only because of running on 4th down, no defensive highlights, someone would think that Vikings are really good because of Jefferson catches and win-loss, wouldn't notice that 49ers changed QBs and probably would skip AFC championship game...and at the end would remember Mahomes.

It's not a valueless attempt. The human brain can take up information only up to some level. Italia offers probably the most of all countries in various history/architecture/art/museums/churches/food and wine info that noone can take it up that quickly, but you get a headache. I travel quite a lot and quickly and usually skip lunches and don't sleep much, but couldn't do this in twice the time. To enter many places tourists wait in long lines...

In 2 weeks you can go to highlights: Milano, Venezia, Roma, Amalfi, Pompeii maybe some smaller town along the way or you can stay north and see most of things between Milano and Sienna. It's just an advice, not an objection. Also, try to go to some concert, open-air or classical in churches.

Just to see major churches in Roma takes a few days. You can watch fountains on squares for a day or two. The only place i can compare it to are Jain temples in Gujarat. There are a lot more in Italia.

#101 by guest from Europe // Jul 25, 2023 - 4:49am

A study of NFL contracts extensions and cuts for all players after rookie contracts since 2011:

https://overthecap.com/nfl-contract-fates

Anyone can discuss this on reddit or discord or somewhere else.

I am surprised that edge rushers don't get better treatment than any other defenders.

CBs are really tough: a difficult position to learn and get only one extension. 0.5% get a second extension. They get the same treatment as RBs.

Left tackles get the most positive fates (pay raise or another extension) of veteran contracts, even better than QBs, 18.7% to 18.1%, and way ahead of WRs at 10%. Also LTs the least terminations. This is probably why teams draft tackles in 1st round more than WRs, no matter the outliers of Chase and Jefferson. However, left tackle contracts seem reasonable to me, there all kinds of salaries and contract lengths, teams don't give $20M/year to left tackles who don't deserve it like they give $40+ million/year on almost all QB extensions. At the moment 2 consecutive franchise tags to QBs are cheaper (about $70M for 2 years) than such extensions as jackiel wrote.

#102 by Beavis // Aug 08, 2023 - 11:40pm

Hey guys check your credit card statements, FO has tried twice in the past week or two to bill me $60 for something, god only knows what. Can you say FRAUD?

#103 by omaholic // Aug 15, 2023 - 7:32pm

It's for renewal of FO+ (lol). I don't remember it being on auto-renew before. Working on reversing the charges.

Rule Changes: Third QB, Thursday Flex

Aaron Schatz — Mon, 22 May 2023 21:14:57 +0000

Rule Changes: Third QB, Thursday Flex Aaron Schatz 22 May 2023, 05:14pm

The NFL passed a couple of important rule changes at the owners' meetings today, including the return of the third QB rule and flex scheduling for Thursday nights.

The third quarterback rule is a response to the 49ers running out of quarterbacks in the NFC Championship Game. The emergency quarterback has to be a player on the 53-man roster, not a practice squad player elevated for that week's game. However, the third quarterback becomes an extra active player. He can only come in if the team loses its first two quarterbacks due to injury or disqualification. If one of the other quarterbacks is cleared to return to the game, the emergency quarterback must be removed from the game.

What's ironic is that the 49ers had three quarterbacks on the active roster for the NFC Championship Game! The third was Jimmy Garoppolo. So even with this rule, they would not have had an emergency quarterback available unless they had put a fourth quarterback on their active roster.

Regarding Thursday flexing: The league will be able to switch Thursday and Sunday games with at least 28 days' notice from the league office, only in Weeks 13-17. No team will be able to play more than two Thursday games, or have more than one game flexed from Sunday to Thursday more than once. Have fun changing your hotel reservations for that one week when you plan on going to Vegas for your favorite team's Thursday night game with the Raiders and then it gets moved to Sunday...

Here are the full details https://t.co/kDNQz0YTvf pic.twitter.com/2R1n0Qu9R6

— Ian Rapoport (@RapSheet) May 22, 2023

A rule to change kickoffs so that any kickoff fair-caught within the 25-yard line would be brought out to the 25 was tabled until tomorrow. This is a terrible rule.

I don't like this rule because the kickoff basically becomes pointless. Among other things, it gets rid of strategic short kicking. Also I don't like it for selfish purposes, it will completely screw with the baselines for my special teams ratings. https://t.co/vqtVrp9tMi

— Aaron Schatz 🏈 (@FO_ASchatz) May 22, 2023

#1 by dbostedo // May 22, 2023 - 7:24pm

"Have fun changing your hotel reservations for that one week when you plan on going to Vegas for your favorite team's Thursday night game with the Raiders and then it gets moved to Sunday..."

But that can only happen to a single game, as the Raiders can't have more than one game moved. So at least it's very limited.

#3 by KnotMe // May 23, 2023 - 8:40am

Is this basically bc over half the Thursday games last year were terrible and Amazon got annoyed?

What is the point of that rule? It seems like it causes alot of trouble for everyone involved but doesn't really give them much more flexibility esp since they need 28 days notice. Now fans and networks have to worry that it COULD happen, but at the same time it's pretty restricted.

I guess games that can't be flexed (first 12 weeks or after the second Thursday game) become more important, as if I'm gonna plan to go to one game, I want to make darn sure it's there. I'm expecting certian amount of fan backlash on this one unless they actually warn people when buying tickets. ('This is a game that could possibly be moved').

#5 by Chuckc // May 23, 2023 - 9:04am

It's not going to meaningfully affect the quality of Thursday games because the main reason for drop in play is that it's played on Thursday. Which teams are playing doesn't really play into it

#2 by Theo // May 23, 2023 - 1:57am

if the team loses its first two quarterbacks due to injury or disqualification

I find it remarkable that they included disqualification to this.

Shouldn't it be a punishment? I guess the nfl wants games to be exciting and competitive above all else.

#4 by reggieDunlop // May 23, 2023 - 8:57am

The interesting thing to note is that if this rule were in place last year, it still wouldn't have helped the 49ers last year. They didn't have any other quarterbacks on their 53-man roster to be the 3rd quarterback as Lance and Garoppolo were still on the Injured Reserve... EDIT: I see in the gamebook that Garoppolo was listed as "Not Active" so he must have been on the 53-man roster. So he could have come in with the new rule. The Eagles would have also benefitted from this rule in 2020 when both Wentz and McCown were injured and Sudfeld could have come in as the 3rd quarterback.

#6 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 23, 2023 - 9:30am

Garopollo could have come in with the old rule.

#11 by IlluminatusUIUC // May 24, 2023 - 10:54am

The bigger issue is the part where, as soon as one of the other 2 QBs is cleared, the 3rd QB has to come out.

Purdy was cleared to return. The fact that he was incapable of throwing a pass didn't factor. So this would have solved nothing at all.

#15 by NoraDaddy // May 24, 2023 - 12:29pm

This begs the question of what the process is to take a player out for injury and then clear a player for return. If there's nothing keeping a team from taking a player out then clearing them for return for whatever reasons they decide than this rule just adds another active QB that just can't play at the same time as either of the other 2.

#18 by MJK // May 24, 2023 - 3:22pm

Yes, the old rule said once the emergency QB came into the game, all other QB's on the active roster became ineligible to return. I wonder if such wording is in the new rule?

#7 by BigRichie // May 23, 2023 - 11:00am

The big problem is for fans who planned to travel to a Sunday game that now gets switched to Thursday. "Boss, I know I'm out of vacation this being December and all, but you see, I now need this certain Wednesday+Thursday+Friday off ... "

I'm thinking this is going to be a disaster. Whichever game gets flexed into Thursday is going to leave however many hundreds of fans holding expensive tickets they now can't use.

#8 by Chuckc // May 23, 2023 - 8:58pm

Hundreds seems like an optimistically low estimate.

#9 by DraftMan // May 23, 2023 - 10:24pm

The college kickoff touchback rule has now been approved as well.

#10 by dryheat // May 24, 2023 - 8:35am

I can't wait for this to come back once again.....when 90% of the coaches in the league lobby to make that 3rd quarterback spot open to any player, because 99% of the time, an extra offensive lineman or cornerback is more useful than a 3rd quarterback.

And the circle of life goes round...

#13 by ImNewAroundThe… // May 24, 2023 - 11:49am

You're 100% correct. I see 0 reason though why we still (ever?) need active/inactive/practice squad designations. Just let them all be there on the roster.

#14 by IlluminatusUIUC // May 24, 2023 - 12:00pm

The Active/Inactive rule makes sense since teams don't have real short-term IR. If one team rolls in fully healthy and the other team has 6-7 guys nursing injuries, the inactive list allows them to field the same # of players.

#22 by MJK // May 24, 2023 - 3:50pm

Good point. Essentially, having a game day roster smaller than the team roster essentially creates an 8-man 1-week injured reserve, without the requirement that a player be injured to be placed on it.

The 53 man roster limits how many players a team can control the rights to at a time. The 45 man game day roster is a guess at how many players a team actually needs to have available to play the game. But the idea that "45" is the right number of active players is completely arbitrary, and has changed over the years.

I guess what the NFL is doing here amounts to them realizing what was realized when they got rid of the rule before... that *usually* it is far more valuable to carry an extra tackle, or receiver, or DB, than a third QB on your game day roster, and given the choice, most teams will do that. Except of course, when you actually need the 3rd QB, as the Niners did. It's like paying for car insurance or health insurance... it's generally more valuable to not pay for insurance and pocket the money (since the insurance companies are out to make money and will always take in more money than they pay out, if their actuaries are doing their job right at least). But when you really need insurance coverage, you're glad you have it. When you actually need your third QB, you're glad you have one. This is the NFL QB version of a law requiring people to carry car insurance or health insurance... an "individual QB mandate" as it were.

#31 by ImNewAroundThe… // Jun 07, 2023 - 11:44am

Eh, not sure that's true though (min. 3(?) weeks is arbitrary and subjective but could be considered "short") or necessary (you don't HAVE to have such rules).

Not that they actually play every single player. Nor that an inactive list inherently levels the playing field. They should be able to have an IR and sign replacements (that they won't use because players that far down the depth chart stink anyway, especially when you allow 63+, see college football).

#12 by IlluminatusUIUC // May 24, 2023 - 10:56am

The receiving team can only fair catch a kick if it has yet to touch the ground. So if you want to force a return, you'll have to squib.

#16 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 24, 2023 - 2:06pm

I'm curious about the wording.

If its any fair catch goes back to the 25, you might as well do a pop-up onside kick every time -- if they fair catch it, they have to go back to the 25.

#29 by DraftMan // May 25, 2023 - 8:33pm

https://operations.nfl.com/updates/football-ops/adopted-playing-rules-change-proposal-putting-ball-in-play-after-fair-catch/

"...unless a player on the receiving team makes a fair catch of a free kick behind the receiving team's 25-yard line, in which case the ball will be put in play at the receiving team's 25-yard line."

#30 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 26, 2023 - 9:09am

I figured they wouldn't be that stupid, but I also figured they wouldn't play on Thursdays or let Dan Snyder remain an owner.

#17 by BigRichie // May 24, 2023 - 2:13pm

Yeah, seems to me like all this does is take away the pooch kick. Which are really pretty boring plays.

If the numbers do show they're relatively dangerous plays also, good riddance.

(guess we'll see if some team decides to then just 'fair catch' every kickoff; doubt it myself, and that could be easily addressed the following year by placing the ball at the 20 rather than the 25)

#20 by MJK // May 24, 2023 - 3:40pm

I think there's a lot of space between "booming it out the back of the endzone" and "pooch kick". There's quite a bit of skill in kicking the ball far enough so it comes down at around the 1 or 2 yard line, straight enough so it's far from the end zones, and high enough that your gunners can get there, and teams the can do that well have a significant starting field position advantage that translates overall into a non-negligible increase in win percentage.

This rule gets rid of all that, and essentially takes skill at making and covering, and by extension at returning, kickoffs out of the equation. So while that might make Packers fans happy, it's overall a loss of one strategic and skill-based aspect of the game.

I'm also curious if the numbers do show that they are relatively dangerous plays. I know that's "common knowledge" that players get hurt during kickoff returns, but there's a lot of "common knowledge" out there that turns out just not to be true when you look at the statistics and properly account for biases. (FO, in fact, was founded to address those exact questions, e.g. "run to win"). Has there been a credible, statistically correct study that has concluded that having more fair catches would reduce injuries?

#23 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 24, 2023 - 5:47pm

The rate is higher.

Basically, the higher the delta-v between two players, the higher the likelihood of injury. Kickoffs (and punt returns) have high-delta-v collisions.

It is interesting to observe, and I've been quietly commenting about this for going on two decades, the efforts to open the game up also result in higher-delta-v collisions.

#19 by MJK // May 24, 2023 - 3:36pm

I think this new kickoff rule could have profound effects on how kickoffs are played, some of them possibly unintended. Possibly to the extreme that teams will start carrying completely different kinds of special teams players... the receiving team may move exclusively to people with great hands and no speed, and just fair catch every kickoff, and play for a possible surprise onside for every play, while the kicking team may move exclusively to really fast players with no tackling ability. Which will then prompt receiving teams to start actually returning kicks to take advantage of poor tacklers... will be interesting to see the pendulum swing and where it settles.

Think about it. Right now, assuming a normal kick (not a squib or an on-side attempt), teams are strongly disincentivized from ever returning it. If you catch it deep behind the 25 yard line, you have a lot to lose by attempting a return and a very small probability of a gain. If you're catching it just behind the 25 yard line, you have only a little to lose, but even less chance of getting a decent return. If you're catching it past the 25 yard line, even if the rule is written as "25 yard line or where you catch it, wherever is better", then you've already baked in a solid starting field position by fair catching and have almost no chance of any return (since the gunners are probably right on top of you at that point). And in all three cases, not fair catching non-negligibly increases the chance of muffing/fumbling and of injury to the returner. So most teams will fair catch most if not all of the time the ball is kicked up.

Given that, it would make sense for the receiving team to put just three-ish guys back with good hands to try to catch the ball, and (since they're never going to try for a return and there's no need to block), dispense with blockers and fill the rest of the roster up with "hands guys" and putting them in place to defeat a surprise on side attempt or a "pop up" onside attempt. So surprise onside kicks will become even more rare and less successful than they are.

For the kicking team, unless they can find benefit in squib kicking to force a return (which would be made a less effective strategy by all the "hands" receivers at short and mid range), they would just have to settle for giving the receiving team a 25 yard line start every time, and their optimal strategy would be to put as many people around the receiver to recover in case he muffs... so they prioritize fast guys that can get there, and not necessarily tackling ability.

#24 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 24, 2023 - 5:51pm

Looking at typical return formations, there's a fair amount of room to work with if someone can get good at advanced squib kicking.

#25 by duh // May 24, 2023 - 6:35pm

Yep guys will start trying to kickoff like they're skipping a stone or something

#21 by MJK // May 24, 2023 - 3:41pm

The rule change on kickoffs is supposedly to improve player safety. You know what else would improve player safety? Getting rid of tackling.

#26 by eggwasp // May 25, 2023 - 7:49am

Or indeed bringing in rugby tackle rules - you have to make an effort to wrap up the ball carrier, not just hit them - so its not just a collision at full speed. Also you could remove the armour which makes players think their are invincible. You dont have to worry about people tackling head-first in rugby because those people don't last very long.

And of course they still have a concussion problem - which is why the French have brought in a rule that you can only tackle below the navel. (moving to England as well I think, especially for kids).

It would be an interesting thing to trial at some point anyway...

#27 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 25, 2023 - 10:41am

Rugby absolutely has a player injury problem, but the sport is in more denial about it than American football is.
Neither blocking nor throwing are legal in rugby, so the environment in which tackling occurs is completely different.
Football has padding precisely because people were getting killed.
Tackling at the knees is just as dangerous as tackling up high. There's a chapter in Schneider's Head and Neck Injuries in Football that discusses collisions with ballcarrier's knees. It crippled and killed a bunch of players. There's an older reference from the leather days which talks about it, too. The other result was facial injuries, which is in part why helmets have face guards.

We've been down this road before. It was paved with lessons learned in blood.

It is interesting to observe that American football is rugby if rugby had soccer's off-sides rule.

#28 by MJK // May 25, 2023 - 12:34pm

To be clear, I wasn't advocating getting rid of tackling. It was meant to be tongue in cheek, to highlight the fact that attempts to improve the safety of the game will inevitably cause significant changes to the game as we know it.

#32 by BroncosGuyAgain // Jul 08, 2023 - 5:09pm

As described, this is a significant departure from the previous "emergency quarterback" rule, which, in the event of QB3 entering the game, forbade QB1 or QB2 from returning to the game. "If one of the other quarterbacks is cleared to return to the game, the emergency quarterback must be removed from the game." Huh? Cleared by whom? And what would be the point of such a rule? To prevent teams from fielding two quarterbacks at once? Including the emergency back-up to the back-up? This cannot possibly be accurate.

Jim Brown Dead at 87

Aaron Schatz — Fri, 19 May 2023 19:30:19 +0000

Jim Brown Dead at 87 Aaron Schatz 19 May 2023, 03:30pm

Jim Brown, considered one of the greatest players in NFL history, passed away today at the age of 87. They say that Brown may be the only man who was the greatest ever at two different sports. He was a legendary lacrosse player at Syracuse. In the modern world, I don't think any of us would choose a running back as the greatest player in NFL history but the position was more important in Brown's time and he definitely may have been the greatest. Brown is the only player to average over five yards per carry with a minimum of 1,500 attempts (5.22, to be exact).

Most yards per carry in NFL history (min 1500 attempts):
Jim Brown 5.22
Barry Sanders 4.99
Joe Perry 4.82
Derrick Henry 4.76
James Brooks 4.73

— Josh Dubow (@JoshDubowAP) May 19, 2023

No review of Brown's life would be complete without a discussion of his social activism as a prominent civil rights advocate after his early retirement from the NFL. He was also an actor in more than 30 films including "The Dirty Dozen" and "Any Given Sunday."

#1 by theslothook // May 19, 2023 - 3:37pm

When you first start to follow the game, certain names ring out over and over. It could be argued he had the highest esteem and reputation than any single player in NFL history.

#3 by guest from Europe // May 19, 2023 - 4:26pm

I would say Jerry Rice. He is way ahead of his peers and modern competition.

#4 by theslothook // May 19, 2023 - 4:48pm

I personally think Jerry Rice is the greatest football player of all time for the reason you listed out.

But the reason I think Jim Brown in particular holds this kind of reverence in a way. Jerry Rice does not comes down to the position he plays.

Football Is marketed as the ultimate tough guy sport. And running backs have that unique position of receiving punishment and doling out punishment.

Add to the fact that wide receivers are compliments to the quarterback at least in terms of narrative. So Jerry Rice's production is always tied to Hall of Fame quarterbacks whereas at least in that era, Jim Brown's production was perceived to be of his own making.

#9 by guest from Europe // May 20, 2023 - 3:26am

Jjim Brown was the best player of his era, where he was "the ultimate tough guy".

Rice was the best of his era.

Add to the fact that wide receivers are compliments to the quarterback at least in terms of narrative. So Jerry Rice's production is always tied to Hall of Fame quarterbacks

I don't agree with this narrative. Some examples of great pass catchers without HOF QBs: L. Fitzgerald and T. Gonzalez.

On a general level, QBs can't do great without good pass catchers. It's not a sport of QBs and ball boys. The main reason why i started writing these comments is because i got tired of reading that QBs are everything, which devolved into memes such as Cousins LOL and Brady GOAT.

Jim Brown in his era compared to his peers was probably better than any QB in this era. It was another era with other rules and other style of play.

#21 by theslothook // May 21, 2023 - 8:47pm

So just to be clear, I'm basing my comments not on my personal opinion, but my reading of conventional wisdom and perception by the common fan and standard media talking head. Jim Brown is perceived as a more physical player and more in control of his production than a wide receiver. You don't have to cite counter examples because this isn't how I view things.

Answer the topic of quarterbacks. I simultaneously think they're overrated and underrated at the same time. I think they're overrated in the sense that people have a very skewed view of how much any one game is determined by the quarterback. That player needs a supporting cast and good coaching to get anywhere meaningful.

Where QBs are underrated ties into their longevity and their consistency. Quarterbacks are able to maintain their primes longer than just about any position other than kicker or punter maybe and they are more consistent, weak to weaken game to game than any position, including punter and kicker. If you have ever had a chance to look at charting stats for cornerbacks receivers and other positions, you'll see how much variability there is week to week and year to year. Quarterbacks have variability as well, but it's far less than other positions.

Pat and I agree on a lot of things and disagree on a few things quite loudly, but even he agrees with me that the only pattern for sustained winning unless your team name is the Ravens is to have a quarterback.

#25 by guest from Europe // May 22, 2023 - 3:21am

I agree about variability of positional play, QBs being more consistent, the most important player and also overrated on winning a particular game.

only pattern for sustained winning

Here you are looking at decade+ probably. Over that time span only the QB and kicker are on that same team. Others retire, age, have shorter peaks. So it's not a team of players, it's a team in name only. Everything rotates, QB and kicker stay. And only very good QBs that aren't injured are in this sample.

If QBs are the pattern for sustained winning, they should be a pattern for sustained losing, as well. If you look like that, than the reason for Lions losing more than winning was Stafford and the reason for Giants being .500 was E. Manning. Both were very good QBs, had a long career and there wasn't much sustained winning over decade+. In my opinion if they were on a better team, there would be sustained winning. These are examples from the top of my head. Somebody can look at A. Smith's career without seeing him play and claim he was developing slowly when he was young and later became the reason why 49ers and Chiefs were winning 2011-2017.

I think a team should be looked at 4-5 years windows. That's the career top levels of most players assembled in a good team. So Shanahan's 49ers or McVay's Rams or Harbaugh's 49ers, even 2017-2022 Eagles, Fisher's Titans. Not only Ravens. Cowher's Steelers didn't have great QBs, but had sustained winning. I don't think Aikman was the reason for 90's Cowboys success. If you look at decade+ all teams decay and just a few outliers remain. Outliers are no pattern.

I guess you don't want Shula's Dolphins or 1970's Rams or Brown's Browns because that was a different era.

To exaggerate: teams could be looked throughout NFL history and they are all around 0.5 win-loss ratio and it's just noise without a pattern.

#35 by theslothook // May 22, 2023 - 10:50am

Both were very good QBs

This is why I prefer tiers because very good is too course a statement. Tier 3 QBs tend to need proper roster construction for them to sustain winning. Note I use the word sustain winning to distinguish between winning a super Bowl as that's much more a function of luck than we care to admit.

In that context, most QBs only afford a team 4 years if they are fortunate. Better QBs in the tier 2 range offer a longer window of time, like Roethlisberger or Rivers or Allen at the moment.

And tier 1 QBs almost always are threatening to at least make the playoffs even with heavily flawed rosters.

In a way, that's kind of why a highly drafted quarterback ending up just a tier three player is perceived as a disappointment unless they win a super Bowl. Kirk Cousins gets absolutely no respect around here for that reason.

#51 by guest from Europe // May 22, 2023 - 5:51pm

Here is a career DYAR list of QBs:

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/quick-reads/2021/qr-week-5-tom-brady-passes-peyton-manning-career-dyar

You can see how high Stafford is. Now, a year and a half later he is around Palmer, Romo. When he ends his career, he may be close to Ryan, Roethlisberger. And you say he is clearly below those players. I disagree and DYAR disagrees. They were better than Stafford. Maybe Stafford, Palmer and R. Wilson were in a Tier 2B (you need something like that). DYAR doesn't know he is only one on this list to be on losing teams with a high degree of difficulty of game-situation to perform well.

Similarly, Brees. He should be in your Tier 1 (at least DVOA, DYAR says so). But Saints had a lot of 0.500 -type of seasons. I see small difference between Brees and Brady. Brady was slightly better, Brees was mostly indoors.

Also, what is the explanation for pattern of sustained losing? There are such teams. If a QB causes sustained winning, why not sustained losing?

#52 by theslothook // May 22, 2023 - 6:36pm

Big Ben has nearly double the amount of DYAR that Stafford has. Philip Rivers even more so.

The only reason he is around the same areas as Romo is because Romo kept getting hurt and didn't throw as much. A look over the DVOA of both players paints a pretty clear picture that Romo at least by the numbers is better.

As for Brees, it took an epically awful set of defenses every year to push the Saints down to 500. Otherwise, the Saints were almost always threatening on offense. It sticks out like a sore thumb precisely because Brees got so little help from the other side of the ball. Given just a run of below average defenses and the saints are likely in the playoffs every year.

Sustained losing is easier to understand if a team keeps whiffing at QB.

#53 by guest from Europe // May 23, 2023 - 5:00am

As for Brees, it took an epically awful set of defenses every year to push the Saints down to 500. Otherwise, the Saints were almost always threatening on offense. It sticks out like a sore thumb precisely because Brees got so little help from the other side of the ball. Given just a run of below average defenses and the saints are likely in the playoffs every year.

Yes. In another words, total team, including defense is more important than MVP-level QB. Brees was at that level for many years but the Saints didn't win as much as they should. Similar with Rodgers and Packers. I am not claiming that the QB position isn't most important, most valuable to team success. If a team doesn't have a brees, than a flacco or a stafford or a palmer or e. manning or a cousins is good enough. If you say a pattern for winning is to draft a brees or a brady, to me that's no pattern, just a few outliers. Most teams draft e.manning and have to find a way to win with that.

Big Ben has nearly double the amount of DYAR that Stafford has. Philip Rivers even more so.

Stafford and Wilson are still playing and can accumulate this counting stat number. Rivers had 62.7 DYAR/game. Roethlisberger 60.7 Palmer 49.2 Stafford around 47, R. Wilson around 49, Romo 56.7

I think Stafford and Palmer are close to Roethlisberger, closer than Roethlisberger to Brady. If Brady and others is your Tier 1, Rivers, Romo and others Tier 2, than Stafford deserves at least Tier 2B label, not Tier 3 with Bridgewater and Tannehill and tens of other players. Just that.

Hypotheticals about what happens if Roethlisberger switched teams with Stafford (or E. Manning or Palmer) i won't write.

#29 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 22, 2023 - 9:07am

You really need to era-adjust for a guy who entered the league in 1957 and whose longevity was a personal choice due to a contract dispute -- he won MVP in his final season and led the league in rushing in all but one season.

\he also had a bunch of receiving value

#45 by serutan // May 22, 2023 - 1:52pm

You really need to era-adjust

Which is why I think the concept of a GOAT in any sport is ridiculous. 'All Time Great' is a reasonable designation. I'm more iffy on 'Greatest of their time' but I can at least see it since you're comparing like to like.

#47 by guest from Europe // May 22, 2023 - 3:12pm

i agree and am happy that somebody besides me wrote this. This is a team sport. No individual stats can be totally disentangled from team: RB from o-line, QB from WRs and o-line etc... it should be talked about on a team basis. Different positions can't be compared and than to compare all of that over eras, it's impossible.

Why people are so obsessed with individual players and rarely write about teams, i really don't understand.

Soon, somebody will write about Mahomes in these GOAT arguments.

#49 by theslothook // May 22, 2023 - 3:52pm

Why people are so obsessed with individual players and rarely write about teams, i really don't understand.

Because humans are curious about distilling things down to their atomic and subatomic levels. There is deeper meaning that you get when you try to parse down things to their individual level. Fundamentally, a GM has to decide how much credit or blame a player deserves when it comes to decisions about free agency and extensions. Also we have individual awards that require further endeavors into parsing out credit from supporting casts.

That said, I have had to be content with the idea that at some level this is completely unknowable. We really don't know how much Patrick Mahomes is benefiting from Andy Reid until Andy Reid is gone and that may never happen. We won't what would happen if Brady swapped places with Manning. It's still fun to try and reason it through.

#50 by guest from Europe // May 22, 2023 - 4:21pm

There are so many individual sports. Tennis is a beautiful sport.

This one is a very complex team sport: 22 starters+backups. So, the only stats that i completely accept are team ones. All the individual stuff is just too imprecise.

I think it's because fans want to identify themselves with individual players. Then individual player awards happen + all this hype industry.

#54 by barf // May 23, 2023 - 11:16am

"Soon, somebody will write about Mahomes in these GOAT arguments."

They should be.

5 straight AFCCG at home, 2 time NFL MVP, 2 time SB MVP, absurd TD/INT ratio and pretty much dominating the AFC when it is the strongest conference by far. Do I need to go on?

#55 by guest from Europe // May 23, 2023 - 1:39pm

At the moment Mahomes is among QBs what T. Davis is among RBs. The highest stats (traditional or DYAR) per game, but a short career.

Usually people prefer long careers. If you care only about 4-5 year peak, than it's between Mahomes, early 00's Manning and 2007-2012 Brady. Mahomes with more team success. Peaks were

Mahomes 2018-2022 had 8191 passing DYAR and 330 run DYAR.

Brady 2007-2012 (in 2008 injured) had 10633 pass DYAR and 128 run DYAR (sneaks).

Manning 2003-2007 had 9999 pass DYAR and -39 run DYAR.

Brees 2009-2013 had 8154 pass DYAR and 109 run DYAR or 2008-2012 pass 8147 DYAR.

Marino 1984-1988 (4 games less in 1987) had 8360 passing DYAR.

How much each one was influenced by teammates, pass catchers, coaching, scheme, playcalls nobody can tell.

#76 by RickD // May 30, 2023 - 10:17am

You would need to go on if you thought that was enough for GOAT.

Right now Mahomes is the GORN. Greatest of Right Now.

#82 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 30, 2023 - 3:25pm

So long as no one constructs a bamboo cannon, he should be in good shape.

#66 by SandyRiver // May 25, 2023 - 11:18am

IMO, Jim Brown stands farther beyond his positional peers, at least as a rusher, than any other player, at any position. His rushing YPG of 104.3 is just 4.5 above that of 2nd-place Barry Sanders, but compared to his contemporaries in his rush-heavy era, there's no real comparison. Gale Sayers' average YPG was 72.9 but only 1965 saw both players in the NFL. Steve Van Buren averaged 70.6 a decade-plus prior to Brown's career. Top contemporaries are Cookie Gilchrist at 66.0 for only 6 years (62-67), all AFL/AFC, and Jim Taylor (58-67, probably closest contemporary) had 64.6 YPG. No other contemporary rusher topped 60.

As a (then) NYG fan, I feared Brown far more than any other opposing player. Therefore, I treasure the 2 games against Cleveland that brought the Giants to the championship game with Baltimore. The first game was the season finale, with the Giants needing a win to force a playoff. First play from scrimmage, Brown broke through the middle and outran everyone for a 65-yard TD. The Browns could only score 3 more points that day, with Pat Summerall's 49-yard FG in the snowy dusk giving NY the 13-10 win. A week later, Sam Huff and company held Brown to almost nothing (10 carries, 12 yards, IIRC) in the 10-0 win. (Other than those two, Brown/Cleveland ate the Giants' lunch game by game.)

#69 by guest from Europe // May 25, 2023 - 5:00pm

This is a compelling argument. I checked Sayers and Taylor biographies and they had good yards per attempt, Taylor 4.8-5.4 in years 1960-1964, but less rushes per season and per game. Brown 280-300 per season (20-21/game) and Taylor 230-250 attempts (17-19/game). Sayers topped 200 rushes only twice. He was 15-16 attempts/game. Was Brown much bigger than everyone else in those years? His weight is larger than those other RBs.

Was Jim Brown's style similar to D. Henry nowadays?

A week later, Sam Huff and company held Brown to almost nothing (10 carries, 12 yards, IIRC) in the 10-0 win.

8 yards on 7 carries i found in some article. Why only 7 carries? What happened?

#70 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 26, 2023 - 9:05am

They only ran 40 plays. Everyone on the Browns played like crap that game.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/195812210nyg.htm

#2 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 19, 2023 - 3:49pm

Woof.

End of an era.

#5 by Boots Day // May 19, 2023 - 10:58pm

Jim Brown was probably the greatest rusher in NFL history. But Walter Payton was a better receiver, better blocker, and better passer, and wasn't too far behind as a rusher, so I'd call Sweetness the greatest running back in NFL history.

And so far as we know, Walter never threw a woman out a window.

#6 by theslothook // May 19, 2023 - 11:04pm

I've been told, although I don't believe it, that Walter Payton is considered more beloved than Michael Jordan

#19 by bravehoptoad // May 21, 2023 - 6:35pm

I think that's mainly because of his nickname. "Sweetness" is just a better one than "O.J." or "Barry."

#24 by Pen // May 22, 2023 - 3:19am

Believe it.

#30 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 22, 2023 - 9:08am

Jordan is far more admired than loved.

#77 by RickD // May 30, 2023 - 10:31am

Brown was so much a better rusher than Payton I don't see how the other categories matter.

Payton had a great career and certainly had great career totals, but there were also periods of his career when other RBs were considered better. Campbell, Dickerson, Allen...

He only led the NFL in rushing once in a 13-year career. Brown led the NFL in rushing 8 times in a 9-year career. We haven't seen any other RB dominate like Jim Brown did.

#7 by Will Allen // May 20, 2023 - 1:57am

I would have been content to simply note Brown's perhaps unparalleled greatness as a football player. If we are going to take time to praise his social activism, however, let it also be noted that Brown was a creep who habitually beat women.

#8 by guest from Europe // May 20, 2023 - 3:08am

I agree. All of this was written about in the ESPN article.

#10 by theslothook // May 20, 2023 - 11:13am

I didn't want to mention it as it would sound unseemly, but yes, I am glad you brought this up. All I ever knew of him was his esteem as a player and his activism for social justice. The ESPN article laid bare that he had perpetual issues that continued seemingly throughout his life.

Once more, the media tends to be ultra selective with who deserves our praise and who our scorn.

#11 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 20, 2023 - 12:02pm

Much like fighters, Brown somewhat gets a pass from society for his violent transgressions because his appeal was based on his transgressive violence. Fighters are expected to fight.

His social activism is in part tethered to his behavior with women in a manner that cuts both ways -- you can't raise that he defied social norms with women without also acknowledging that he defied social norms with women. (Either way you want to sort that) He's an interesting guy to handle from an intersectionality standpoint.

#12 by theslothook // May 20, 2023 - 2:37pm

I'll try to keep this to one comment. I was completely ignorant of Brown's past. But Brown's checkered history of acts that continued for decades is stunning to me.

#78 by RickD // May 30, 2023 - 10:33am

Sadly, Brown didn't "defy social norms with women". He was raised in an era when his behavior was not outside the norm.

#13 by BroncosGuyAgain // May 20, 2023 - 8:22pm

Will, your comment is, as usual, relevant and completely reasonable.

All my life, the conventional wisdom has been that Jim Brown was the greatest football player, ever. It might be true. There are reasonable arguments for others, mostly Sweetness and modern quarterbacks. But there really isn't an argument against Brown (other than, perhaps his early retirement to make the Dirty Dozen).

But if we consider the off-the-field record, and laud his leadership and impactful voice on issues of equality and fairness in an era of social upheaval, then we must also consider his troubling record of physical abuse toward women. Forgive me, as I will probably fail to be articulate on this dicey subject. His positive impact is not diminished by his failings; the positive impact stands alone. Also, his failings are not polished by his accomplishments. The failings, also, stand alone, undiminished.

He was a human, with strengths and weaknesses, each perhaps of greater magnitude than those of us mere mortals.

For my sports "heroes", I try to be agnostic regarding off-the-field matters. I appreciate them for their greatness in sport, but do not ascribe to them any greatness beyond that.

#14 by BigRichie // May 20, 2023 - 8:52pm

The argument against Jim Brown as the 'greatest football player ever' is that he was the worst ever at blocking, as he refused to do it. He was the worst ever at running fakes (play-action or other types), as he refused to do it.

Jim Brown was the greatest runner of the football ever, in some part greater than others like OJ/Sweetness/Barry Sanders/Adrian Peterson/etc because unlike them he wasted no energy blocking for teammates or running fakes for teammates. Which made each of them, along with additional guys like Ladainian Tomlinson and Marshall Faulk, better football players than Jim Brown. Whatever their team needed them to do on whichever particular play, they tried their best to do it.

#15 by guest from Europe // May 21, 2023 - 4:19am

It is difficult to compare players across eras. From Brown to Faulk it's a different playing style, almost another position.

Does anyone know of a good comprehensive article comparing careers of all these RBs? Probably many were written about anecdotes, total yards etc.

#16 by theslothook // May 21, 2023 - 11:20am

I don't think there is an analyst or film watcher alive that can accurately rate all of these rbs. You are taking about a period of time stretching from the 1950s to at least the year 2000. Sure, some born in 1940 could in theory have spanned the period to do so, but that feels unlikely.

But more to the point, once again I refer to something Zach Lowe said. When he discussed the Jordan versus LeBron debate he said, most pundits who are writing and analyzing or are scouts and coaches in the NBA came of age during the Jordan era. Jordan "felt" indomitable whereas they are analyzing Lebron in a more emotionally detached manner. Jordan was a larger than life figure to these people. I missed all but the tale end of Jordan, but his name rang out so much that everyone everywhere knew his name. I didn't follow the NFL or the NBA then, but I was always struck by how I knew practically 0 NFL players, but I knew the name Michael Jordan. You know that's going to color people's opinions.

The same has happened for Jim Brown and Walter Payton. Even though emmitt Smith won the rushing title, everyone sort of just brushed past him. Maybe right, maybe wrong; but mythology is playing at least some role in this.

#17 by guest from Europe // May 21, 2023 - 1:12pm

It can be 20 years old article or analysis or football site. Obviously for J. Brown there isn't enough film left, so it would have to be more data analysis.

By YPC and MVPs Brown is the best, by highlights Sanders is an out-of-this-world, by running-and-catching Faulk is the best, by single season peak Simpson 2000 yards in 14 games... E. Smith isn't really in this.

There is career AV since 1960, but that misses Brown's first 3 great years (2 MVPs) so Faulk comes on top: 132 AV to Brown 108. With all his years Brown would be around 160 weighted career AV.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/career_av_career.htm

So, i found following articles:

old football outsiders, only rushing, B. Sanders is on top by career z-score (many comments in the article, check out #59)

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stat-analysis/2005/different-look-best-running-backs-ever

An article combining many statistical categories rushing+receiving (Payton on top), including career attempts, not favouring Brown:

https://howtheyplay.com/team-sports/NFL-Top-10-Running-Backs-of-All-Time-Statistical-Ranking

An older article, many traditional stats/game rushing+receiving, Brown on top:

https://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/2008/5/5/473086/another-analysis-of-top-rb

The last two articles aren't statistically finest, but they include receiving production. Hopefully somebody can find something better.

Anyway, Brown and Sanders are probably 1 and 2, Payton third.

AV, which includes receiving does have Faulk and Tomlinson above Payton and Sanders!

Career DYAR (rushing+receiving):

Sanders 2673

Faulk 3702

Payton 1301, incomplete data, only 1981-1987

Brown no data

If anybody is interested, here are some z-scores per decade 1980-2020, McCoy best in 2010s:

https://harvardsportsanalysis.org/2022/01/the-best-nfl-running-backs-from-1980-2020/

(Of course, these stats are actually for a particular player in a particular offense with that o-line, it's not describing independent player quality)

#18 by BigRichie // May 21, 2023 - 5:43pm

Walter Payton was the best blocking tailback ever. Walter Payton helped Matt Suhey look like a good rusher. The Bears felt so confident of Payton's blocking ability that they let him pick up a blitzing Lawrence Taylor. (OK, that didn't work out well; at all)

Jim Brown refused to block.

20-some plays a game Payton did his job as well as any player of his position ever has. 20-some plays a game Brown took the play off, resting up for when HE! would next get the ball while letting his offensive teammates play 9-on-11.

Why would I put an ounce of faith in any analytical framework that tosses out 20-some plays each and every game??

#20 by BroncosGuyAgain // May 21, 2023 - 7:14pm

You have made clear your assertion that Jim Brown refused to block. What is the basis of this assertion?

#22 by BigRichie // May 21, 2023 - 9:03pm

All you gotta do is Google it, Dude.

(Brown's confessional line regarding Liberace and his piano is pretty cool)

#23 by Vincent Verhei // May 21, 2023 - 10:16pm

Found plenty of anecdotal criticism of Brown's blocking ... but in his nine NFL seasons the Browns had a league-best record of 79-34-5 and scored 2,934 points, second only to the Johnny Unitas Colts. So I'm skeptical that it really affected the game that much.

#26 by guest from Europe // May 22, 2023 - 3:28am

Does DYAR really count that modern receiving RBs (Faulk, Tomlinson...) are on aggregate better than 20th century rushing RBs (Sanders, Payton, E. Smith...)?

#32 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 22, 2023 - 9:17am

Sanders, Smith, and Faulk were all mutually contemporaries.

You also need to account that Smith, Faulk, and Tomlinson spent most of their career with HOF QBs (or HoVG at minimum) whereas Sanders and Payton did not.

\Brown is harder to assess here; his QBs weren't amazing, but the rest of the roster was

#48 by guest from Europe // May 22, 2023 - 3:52pm

My question was about DYAR as a pure stat. Any stat for an individuadal player is limited, it includes that RB with his particular o-line, scheme, playcalls. So we have to accept it with an asterisk.

Anyway, on that basis that old F.O. article from 2005 compared all-time best RBs using z-scores (compared to their peers for each season) and found for career aggregate:

Last Name Career Rush Yds. Z-scoreRush Yds.

SandersBarry 15,269 18.88

PaytonWalter 16,726 17.31

BrownJim 12,312 16.97

SmithEmmitt 18,355 14.13

SimpsonO.J. 11,236 11.76

This is only comparing rushing stats, no receiving. The 2 best individual seasons were by Simpson. Guys like Faulk and Tomlinson wouldn't be that close on this list. Brown is lower because he had less total seasons, with 1 more year he probably equals Sanders.

Now, DYAR accounts for both rushing and receiving. Sanders had 2376 total rushing DYAR and about 300 receiving DYAR. Faulk had 1792 rushing DYAR over career but also 1909 receiving DYAR. Does this mean that DYAR counts Faulk as a better total player than Sanders? It's a theoretical question for editors on this site.

#79 by RickD // May 30, 2023 - 10:41am

"Jim Brown refused to block."

Who was he supposed to block for?

Your comments display a huge chip on your shoulder. Brown didn't "take plays off". He certainly didn't force the Browns to play "9-on-11".

You want an analytic framework to insert your judgment calls on RB blocking? Good luck with that.

#31 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 22, 2023 - 9:11am

For what it's worth, Barry thought Jim Brown was better than he was.

\but Barry was a humble guy

#80 by RickD // May 30, 2023 - 10:42am

Brown was better than Sanders.

Sanders may have been a great open field runner, but so was Brown, and Brown could also blow through tacklers a la Earl Campbell. Sanders couldn't.

#83 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 30, 2023 - 3:31pm

Sanders could truck guys and very occasionally did. He also almost never needed to. How often did you see a defender square Barry up and hit him solidly?

They don't give you extra points for running a guy over, and it's faster to go around them.

#75 by BroncosGuyAgain // May 29, 2023 - 6:46pm

"worst ever at blocking". "worst ever at running fakes".

Your take is that in the history of the NFL, none of the thousands of running backs who played were less skilled than Jim Brown at these particular tasks. You clearly have an axe to grind.

#27 by Pen // May 22, 2023 - 3:29am

I'm a firm believer in innocent until proven guilty. He went on trial, he was found innocent. In three other incidents, no charges were filed. In one, the officer said his wife only called to have a report filed in case something ever did happen, ie. nothing actually happened. In the "threw a woman out a window" case, the woman said she fell. In the third case, the woman dropped the charges.

He never backed down on his innocence.

You can choose not to believe him or think the women lied, but you don't get to assert with authority that he's guilty.

#34 by Will Allen // May 22, 2023 - 10:36am

The "innocent before proven guilty" standard only need apply with regard to the state punishing a citizen for a criminal offense. Private citizens are ethically allowed to make their own reasonable conclusions. Hell, the state enforces civil judgements based upon a mere preponderance of the evidence.

O.J. Simpson was found not guilty at trial, of murdering Nicole Brown. That has nothing to do with the fact that he did slash her throat, nearly decapitating her.

Jim Brown habitually beat women.

#36 by theslothook // May 22, 2023 - 10:55am

I'm definitely one of those people who prefers not to pass judgment until the full facts and verdict are available. However, much like Deshawn, when the pattern keeps emerging in the same way over and over and over again, it becomes really hard to give the person the benefit of the doubt.

#28 by Theo // May 22, 2023 - 5:52am

So this site is going all "uuh Watson, dont want to talk about him!"

But when Jim Brown dies, we say nothing about what happened with the women that he encounteed.

See. This is why I take all that "holier than thou" talk with a grain of salt.

#33 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 22, 2023 - 9:36am

There is a substantial gulf between Deshaun Watson and Jim Brown on pretty much any axis you care to name.

But when Jim Brown dies, we say nothing about what happened with the women that he encounteed.

We are in fact talking about it. No one ever accused Brown of being an angel. But he is not the first great man who had a troubled personal history. Few are the men who do not.

#37 by Theo // May 22, 2023 - 12:23pm

I disagree.

Most men behave well. Thats why the ones that dont stand out.

Or I live in a very different society than yours. Could be.

And with "this site" I meant the FO editors.

#38 by theslothook // May 22, 2023 - 12:45pm

Milton Friedman had a great line. "People are people, some are good, some are bad, most are in between".

In my history class, we went through a lot different materials covering the horrible history of the gas chambers in WW2. My teacher bravely asked us not to simply write off the story as the results of evil men. That would be missing the point. Was there something about the culture, the environment, and the institutions that enabled otherwise good people to become participants to one of the worst atrocities ever committed by human beings?

#40 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 22, 2023 - 12:53pm

Philippe Petain was the hero of WWI and the villain of WWII. History is a tricky thing.

#46 by guest from Europe // May 22, 2023 - 2:48pm

Was there something about the culture, the environment, and the institutions that enabled otherwise good people to become participants to one of the worst atrocities ever committed by human beings?

You may want to read Hannah Arendt's work on this topic. Banality of evil. Moral, conscience, habits, will...

They did what they did because laws were like that, others did that etc. Very banal.

To simplify, what we call civilized behaviour is just a surface and we are capable, almost any of us, to do almost anything.

#39 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 22, 2023 - 12:52pm

Every man who founded this country was a traitor.

MLK was a womanizer. Malcolm X was a felon. Leaders are those who lead; they aren't angels.

#41 by theslothook // May 22, 2023 - 12:54pm

Washington literally started the French and Indian War and he did it by killing some people for the purpose of land acquisition. I still have him well regarded.

#81 by RickD // May 30, 2023 - 10:44am

I disagree that being born into a colony makes it so that a person who rebels against colonial status is a "traitor".

That would be a neat trick for colonialists.

#42 by Eddo // May 22, 2023 - 1:15pm

There are more comments on this thread about Brown's off-field behavior than his on-field play, so I'm not sure where this sentiment is coming from.

#43 by Theo // May 22, 2023 - 1:36pm

I meant FO writers/editors, not "we" as commenters.

My bad.

#44 by Mike B. In Va // May 22, 2023 - 1:37pm

There is nothing to argue about with his on-field play - the man was virtually an unstoppable force of nature, refusing to block or not.

His off-field behavior was troubling at times, and inspiring at times. Doing what you feel is right and being good at football doesn't remove your faults.

#56 by guest from Europe // May 24, 2023 - 3:18am

i wanted to know how "DVOA" or this site evaluates careers of these all-time great RBs. So i added their rushing DYAR and receiving DYAR, similar to Verhei in Quick Reads. I am very surprised, almost shocked by what came out:

Name Rush DYAR Receiving DYAR total career DYAR (rushing+receiving) total DYAR/game

Faulk 1792 1910 3702 21.0

Smith, E. 2859 -156 2703 11.96 (16.4 for first 11years)

Sanders 2376 297 2673 17.5

Tomlinson 1832 356 2188 12.87

Dickerson 1573 -223 1350 9.25

Peterson 1462 215 1677 9.11

Payton (incomplete data, 1981-1987) 1301, if his first 6 years are added, probably he has total DYAR around Sanders

Faulk in only 4 years 1999-2002 is around total 2500 DYAR, more than careers of Peterson and Tomlinson! His total career is far ahead of everyone else, about 1000 DYAR more than Sanders and Payton. For comparison E. Smith in 1992-1995 had about 1750 total DYAR. It looks that this site values Faulk's career as the best among all RBs. I don't think this gap can be explained by teammates, scheme. According to DVOA/DYAR Faulk's career was the most valuable among RBs due to his enormous value as a receiver. This is far off from "conventional wisdom".

Similarly in 2020, DYAR valued Kamara ahead of Henry because of Kamara's receiving although Henry had huge rushing value.

Surprising to me: Peterson is quite behind other great RBs, whereas Emmitt Smith is about equal to Sanders. His last 4 years, Smith was negative DYAR, so his career production comes from first 11 years. Too bad there is no such data for Jim Brown.

#57 by Theo // May 24, 2023 - 10:52am

As both a runner and a pass catcher, many do consider Faulk to be the best.

Not many will list him near the top of running back lists though, that is correct.

#58 by theslothook // May 24, 2023 - 12:14pm

Marshall Faulk goes on my very very short list of players who transcended the sport and revolutionized what you thought was possible from the position.

For me, that short list also includes Randy Moss, JJ Watt, Rob Gronkowski, and Aaron Donald to rattle of some names off the top of my head. Maybe Darrell Revis too.

Quite honestly, if I had to pick the most impactful non QB offensive player ever that I have personally seen(I only saw late career veteran Jerry Rice for the record) it would be a really hard choice between Moss and Marshall. Probably Moss has the bigger upside but Marshall fits more types of rosters and is far less of a headache.

#59 by guest from Europe // May 24, 2023 - 1:52pm

What is shocking to me is the difference from Faulk to Smith and Sanders. It's 1000 of total DYAR, almost 40% more. That's worth of another all-pro RB career: Gurley had 1085 total DYAR (and he was good at receiving, not just running). Faulk, Smith and Sanders were contemporaries. Faulk didn't have some super long career. His stats were great on both the Colts and the Rams.

A great receiving RB such as Kamara has total 1569 DYAR in 6 years and a pure rushing RB Henry has 1341 total DYAR in 7 years. They are much closer to each other and close to Peterson.

Only Rice has such a distance to all other players at his position (5398 receiving DYAR Rice, 17.8/game, total DYAR 18.8/game; 3944 receiving DYAR Moss, 18.1/game; 3480 DYAR Owens, 15.9/game) like Faulk does. Shocking.

#60 by theslothook // May 24, 2023 - 3:42pm

Its worth noting a few things.

1) Faulk wasn't working in isolation. That was one of the most talented offenses of all time. It currently has 1 HOF left tackle, 1 HOF QB, and 1 HOF WR in addition to the hall of fame Marshall Faulk. And in a few years, it will be adding another HOFer in Tory Holt. That would bring the total to 5 Hall of famers on one offense.

2) DVOA and DYAR are compared against a baseline average. IIRC, Running back receiving DVOAs are normalized by the average receiving production of an average running back. What that implies is its harder to be exceptional as a rusher and much easier(at least statistically) to be exceptional as a receiver from the rb position. That basically makes sense - its a position that's primarily used for rushing. Thats why Faulk being good at both makes him such an outlier. But it also means mechanically adding them up together doesn't imply Faulk was twice the RB that some of these other guys were/are

#61 by guest from Europe // May 24, 2023 - 4:29pm

Faulk wasn't working in isolation. That was one of the most talented offenses of all time.

The same is valid for Emmitt Smith. Faulk had a great year stats-wise on 1998 Colts. You can see above (#56) that just his career rush DYAR is above Peterson and very close to Tomlinson.

What that implies is its harder to be exceptional as a rusher and much easier(at least statistically) to be exceptional as a receiver from the rb position.

I agree.

But it also means mechanically adding them up together doesn't imply Faulk was twice the RB that some of these other guys were/are

I am not making any arguments which RB was better. You can see in the original comment i wrote that "this site" or "DVOA/DYAR" "values" their careers like that. So, according to DYAR Faulk was MVP, most valuable among RBs. This isn't my opinion, it's how DVOA/DYAR "see" their production. It's best to have no prejudice opinion on such matters. My opinion is that Sanders was better than Smith and Faulk. DVOA-metric doesn't like his boom-or-bust style.

Barnwell wrote in 2008:

That's led to a bit of a backlash against the idea that a metric like Defense-Adjusted Yards Over Replacement (DYAR) underrates boom-or-bust runners like Reggie Bush, Ryan Grant or Barry Sanders, with the thought being that their big-play ability makes up for their inability to pick up consistent yardage and move the chains. It's also led to discussions about Sanders being a player who is frowned upon by context-based systems like DYAR.

Anyway, Verhei adds up DYAR like this for RBs in Quick Reads articles. So did i. Example, Henry and Kamara:

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/quick-reads/2021/quick-reads-2020-review

I guess it's another implication of "passing is valued higher than running".

#62 by theslothook // May 24, 2023 - 4:55pm

I guess it's another implication of "passing is valued higher than running".

Pat is going to argue that you can't look at passing and rushing in isolation, above and beyond the fact that he doesn't particularly like the labels pass and run when it comes to separating plays.

Without wading down that rabbit hole, I tend to be on the side of passing is better than running. Even inefficient passing appears to be better than good running. In the NBA, it took a long time for the league to come to grips with the three point revolution.

I have long wondered if a team might be better served treating all but short yardage situations as pass only downs. Let me be clear, this comes with the caveat that you aren't in bleed the clock mode, you aren't in a horrible down and distance situation, or your isn't some rushing maverick who opens up the rest of the run game. This is strictly for traditional QBs. In that case, I might prefer a pass first, pass always approach.

To the extent that you need changeups to the pass; screens, dump offs, and end arounds serve as nice compliments and approximations to the running game.

Essentially, keep the ball in Mahomes' hand at all times. If he builds an insurmountable lead by the 3rd quarter, go ahead and lean heavy on the run game. But at this point, given the numbers, thats how I am inclined to treat things.

#63 by guest from Europe // May 25, 2023 - 3:19am

Pat is going to argue that you can't look at passing and rushing in isolation

On an academic level i agree with Pat. That would mean changing the baselines or assessing all plays together and having only 1 baseline for a play, no distinction between run and pass. Run would be a "conservative, less worth" type-of-play and pass a "riskier, possible higher reward" play. All players, RBs and WRs would have the same baseline. WRs would get a higher receiving DYAR, RBs would get probably negative receiving DYAR. RBs would be less valuable.

However, these are the data with separate baselines for run and pass. DYAR tries to assess both to get a total value of a player. And the difference between Faulk and rest is gigantic. Sanders and Payton were good at pass catching, they just didn't have the volume that Faulk had. E. Smith wasn't good at that.

Maybe the baseline for pass reception of a RB can be changed some, but that wouldn't bring Faulk's DYAR by 40% down. I certainly didn't expect him to be No. 1 by production. Another shocker: in 1998 Faulk and Colts o-line had 647 total DYAR, exactly the same as MVP T. Davis and Broncos.

For what it's worth, a simple yard per touch (run+reception) has Faulk and Sanders equal at 5.3 and Jim Brown (29% smaller volume than Faulk) No. 1 at 5.7. That doesn't include pass attempts that weren't caught nor opponent adjustment nor yearly adjustment to baseline 0. All these adjustments DYAR does make and gives out that Faulk (with his o-lines and QBs) had by far the highest production. It thinks Sanders' style with Lions o-line was unsustainable and slightly prefers E. Smith with Cowboys o-line in terms of volume. Payton with Bears o-line is probably close to them. Sanders is ahead in rate: DYAR/game.

In the few years that there are o-line data, 1996 and onwards, it is distinguished that Lions o-line was average, 10th, 13th and 29th at run blocking (adjusted line yards) while Sanders was clear No 1 in open field yards, whereas Cowboys' o-line was better than Lions' line at adjusted line yards but Cowboys RBs had 0.1yards per carry less than Cowboys o-line yards. So, E. Smith ran what Cowboys o-line made for him. 1999-2001 Rams line was the best at run blocking for Faulk and average, around 10-15th at pass blocking. 2002 bad o-line. 1998 Colts bad o-line run blocking for Faulk, but No. 1 in pass protection for rookie Manning.

#64 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 25, 2023 - 10:45am

I'm curious what DYAR thinks of Faulk if you treat him as a WR.

#65 by guest from Europe // May 25, 2023 - 10:57am

I guess his receiving DYAR plummets down (he had 6.8 yards/target compared to someone like Wes Welker 7.8Y/target) and running DYAR skyrockets.

#67 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 25, 2023 - 2:04pm

Probably. That's basically how it shook out when we rebaselined Cordarrele Patterson and CMC.

#68 by guest from Europe // May 25, 2023 - 3:53pm

Maybe all of Faulk's DYAR becomes negative. Deebo Samuel has more yards per carry and yards per target than Faulk. That is the only WR who had regular carries that i can think of and he has only 123 rushes. The other WR "runs" are mostly a few plays per season (end-arounds ...) with 6-7 yards per "run". It would be unfair to compare Faulk to those. Then all RBs must be compared to that. I think Faulk mostly lined up in the backfield behind or next to QB, so he is a RB.

What would Gronkowski or Kelce be if they are compared to WRs? Another Edelman? The only one that would be a HOFer is Gonzalez. And TEs are much closer to WRs than RBs are.

#71 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 26, 2023 - 9:08am

Don't forget Jim Brown's old backfield mate, Bobby Mitchell.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MitcBo00.htm

He basically played the Deebo role for the Browns.

There is precedent for what's basically a TE playing WR.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/C/CarmHa00.htm

Or even Don Hutson, who lined up as a quasi-TE a fair amount of the time.

#72 by theslothook // May 26, 2023 - 12:12pm

To me, there is a difference between guys who run routes over the middle and or are the designed 2nd/3rd option and guys who play from the outside. It's a totally different skill set and teams don't go into passing games where everyone has an equal opportunity to catch the pass. Plays are designed intentionally to throw somewhere contingent on what the defense is doing.

DVOA always favored throwing in the middle versus throwing on the outside. But that doesn't mean a team should therefore abandon throwing to the outside and drafting and acquiring only players who fit in the slot and and at tight end. NE I suppose made this strategy work for a time, but they had an ace offensive line and Tom Brady.

Circling back. I don't think it makes sense to judge Faulk to a receiver's standards. He's not a wide receiver and frankly, what he did was such an outlier that he deserves the eye popping DVOA stats.

And while I don't favor mechanically adding up his DVOA or DYAR and presto declaring him the best player ever, I do think his sterling metrics suggest he is an all timer and one of those guys that deserves to be recognized above and beyond the typical hall of famer.

#73 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 26, 2023 - 2:49pm

DVOA always favored throwing in the middle versus throwing on the outside.

Era-specific, I think. Before the rules made pass defense illegal, it was quite dangerous to throw over the middle. Bad passes got picked, which is one reason throwaways occur to the sides.

#74 by theslothook // May 26, 2023 - 2:59pm

Ya thats true. I would really love to see pass defense get a boost from the rules in some capacity.

#84 by guest from Europe // Jun 04, 2023 - 12:30pm

An article by Bryan Knowles about dominant RBs

https://underdognetwork.com/football/analysis/the-dirty-dozen-jim-brown-and-the-most-dominant-running-backs-in-nfl-history

including Larry Brown of the 70s Redskins (i didn't know anything about him).

Surprisingly, Faulk is very high on Knowles' list. Unsurprisingly, so is Jim Brown.

#85 by theslothook // Jun 04, 2023 - 3:09pm

It's an interesting list, though a lot of it is Brian's admittedly selective opinion based around the word "dominance". I'm sure Dallas fans will howl, boo, and hiss his list. For some reason, Emit has always gotten the, "ya but context" treatment around his numbers more so than other players. It's just left as implied that Walter Payton, Barry Sanders, and Jim Brown had a bunch of stiffs blocking for them. Maybe that's true, I don't know.

Offensive line play much like the secondary is so difficult to measure and I'm not convinced it was done properly in the past either.

#86 by guest from Europe // Jun 04, 2023 - 4:22pm

There were pro bowlers and all pros on 90s Cowboys o-line: Allen, Newton, Tuinei, Stepnoski, that's a lot. They were really big. For comparison Broncos o-line was smaller and used in Shanahan outside zone scheme where they had to move, run more.

It's just left as implied that Walter Payton, Barry Sanders, and Jim Brown had a bunch of stiffs blocking for them.

I don't think this is implied. There is a difference between a "normal" above average o-line and one full of pro bowlers.

Offensive line play much like the secondary is so difficult to measure and I'm not convinced it was done properly in the past either.

This site has adjusted line yards and RB yards. You can compare that for late 90s Cowboys and Lions and Broncos and Rams. Lions o-line wasn't that good. Sanders and T. Davis are ahead of E. Smith by a considerable margin in RB yards.

Emit has always gotten the, "ya but context" treatment around his numbers more so than other players.

Running DYAR takes RB and o-line together in their offense and Smith on Cowboys is about equal to Sanders on Lions career-wise. See comments above. No context there, pure numbers. To me E. Smith is similar to Fitzgerald among WRs. Very long career which aided in stats volume. Both are HOFers. There were only a few players better than them, no shame in that.

The Great Anthony Richardson Fantasy Football Debate

Chris Spags — Thu, 18 May 2023 14:21:52 +0000

The Great Anthony Richardson Fantasy Football Debate Chris Spags 18 May 2023, 10:21am

You have heard the Anthony Richardson fantasy football slander somewhere online. Maybe it's the SEC fan in your life with their "Trust me, I watched him" logic. Maybe it's someone on social media crippled by their 2022 Trey Lance blues. Maybe it's your fantasy football podcast co-host who loves the Skyy Moore and Laviska Shenault "undersized players with few real-life applications but cool names" tier of prospects but has a real blind spot to this potential generational talent.

The debate has pained me, one of the Internet's earliest unironic Josh Allen adopters in my days doing regular content for the fantasy data and betting analytics obsessives at Stokastic.com back in 2018. After a slow start for Allen as he adjusted from lesser competition at Wyoming (and a lot of public skepticism and scrutiny), he returned from injury and piled up four games of at least 99 rushing yards in his final six. That run was topped off by a Week 17 9-for-95, two-rushing touchdown day against Miami when he also threw for three touchdowns and a pick, a 41.5-point day in DraftKings scoring. Allen's tendencies to run and throw deep balls have been a hallmark of his career, even early on, and ones I identified years ago as key ones I want in my fantasy football portfolio.

There are historically two most prominent shades of fantasy productivity at quarterback. Your statuesque pocket passer who'll never run but can sling for 300-plus yards and create massive outlier performances for his pass-catchers is one. Your elite runner who gives you a floor with his rushing ability as well as the role to smash in touchdowns as they have carte blanche to carry the ball anywhere on the field is the other.

There are few who can truly do both. When they do, they typically find the chance to ascend to the hallowed air of your Allens, Jalen Hurts, or Lamar Jacksons. You have had your fleeting moments with Kyler Murray and the current aspirations for Justin Fields after he flashed a gaudy 0.34 Estimated Points Added per rush (a stat from our friends at the glorious data nirvana that is Sports Info Solutions; all the data points in here will come from them) but a woeful -34.5% passing DVOA in 2022.

The fact that we're comparing him to players like this alone should interest you in the concept of an Anthony Richardson, a player who can create value with his legs or through the air. There's a whole lot more to continue with that pro-Richardson sales pitch, one that I will personally swear by as my No. 1 take of the 2023 fantasy football season. But let's talk about his flaws first.

Anthony Richardson Core Passer Metrics

I fully acknowledge that there are some troubling data points from Richardson's star turn as Florida's starting quarterback in 2022. His 0.007 EPA per throw is perhaps only slightly better than a former James Bond actor might provide and well behind C.J. Stroud's 0.309 EPA per throw, Bryce Young's 0.238 EPA per throw, and right there with likely career backup Aidan O'Connell's same EPA mark in the final year for this draft class. Richardson does grade out better than fellow SEC competitor Will Levis and his -0.005 EPA per throw but, hey, they don't give out theoretical points for a surplus of mayo and banana peels in the body.

Will Levis eats banana peels and puts mayo in his coffee and it's possible NFL teams just drew the line with that and said no way.

— Dan Wetzel (@DanWetzel) April 28, 2023

How about some historical comparisons? I dug into the SIS database to find some more quarterbacks who are top outcomes for Richardson, prolific runners who come without a prototypical passing package. So we're talking heavyweights such as Josh Allen, Lamar Jackson, and Jalen Hurts, our current Holy Trinity of fantasy quarterbacks who can throw and run. The three faced varied levels of competition, with Hurts likely most aligned to the caliber of teams Richardson faced in the SEC, an important thing to keep in mind.

In these same EPA metrics, Hurts is the clear winner based off his 2019 Oklahoma season. Hurts' 0.388 EPA per throw easily beats the aforementioned 0.007 for Richardson. You can debate how much of that was Hurts and how much of that is Lincoln Riley's scheme, which has now vaulted multiple quarterbacks to NFL success (or at least high draft capital). But Richardson is behind Lamar Jackson's 0.101 EPA per throw at Louisville his last year and ahead of Allen's -0.045 EPA per throw.

Richardson is also the worst of these four with a 2.8% interception rate per attempt (that would also be in line with NFL league average). Hurts was remarkable with a 0.4% interception rate while Allen and Jackson are close to Richardson with a 2.2% and 2.3% interception rate respectively.

A lot has been made of Richardson's poor 53.7% completion rate at Florida last year. It's the weakest amongst the drafted rookies this year, even later picks such as Jaren Hall or an undrafted free agent such as Malik Cunningham. But it's not far off from Allen's 56.3% completion rate, Jackson's 59.1% completion rate, or Hurts' 60.4% completion rate, all likely to be considered "subpar."

The catchable ball rate is also in a similar range with Richardson in the rear. Richardson's 71.5% catchable ball rate is behind Allen's at 73.7%, while Jackson and Hurts both were decimals apart at 76.5% and 76.9% respectively.

Despite higher draft capital than these other three stars, it's safe to say that baseline passing metrics look unfavorably on Richardson even compared to these similar archetypes. One area he stands out is 14.5 yards per completion compared to 14.4 for Lamar, 11.9 for Allen, and 13.5 for Hurts ... but is that enough?

Anthony Richardson's Biggest Weakness

It has to get worse before it gets better in this Curious Case of Anthony Richardson, as Encyclopedia Brown may dub it. And it does not get much worse than Richardson's throws under 10 air yards. You can point to things like his footwork, which some tape-watchers have in prospect breakdowns. You could also point to a subpar cast at Florida that was perhaps unable to handle Richardson's Favre-ian 100 MPH heaters that will bust a knuckle or two at short range.

Anthony Richardson lowlights truly are some of the most mind-boggling plays ever pic.twitter.com/loL22IwHAk

— JA ' (@JKLNN4) May 11, 2023

Either way, Richardson's -0.44 EPA per throw on passes under 10 yards is abysmal, even accounting for the difficulty of stacking up a high EPA on catches likely to be surrounded by multiple defenders. He is worst in the 2023 draft in this area of the field but, oddly, right amidst these other guys with all four as negative-EPA passers in short range. Allen's -0.23 EPA per throw is second-worst, Hurts' -0.18 EPA per throw is third-worst, and Jackson's -0.02 EPA per throw leads the way. For reference, Stroud was tops among non-Stetson Bennett rookies with a 0.08 EPA per throw under 10 air yards while Bennett, unencumbered by any quest to achieve a college degree, notched a 0.18 EPA per throw for the short ones to lead the class.

The accuracy in this range is even worse of a look for Richardson. Richardson's 56.0% completion rate in throws under 10 yards is bottom of the draft class and lower than Allen's 65.2%, Jackson's 68.8%, and Hurts' closer-to-average 75.0% completion rate in this range. None of these guys make their living underneath as pros so perhaps you can excuse the failings of Richardson here. But I have to flag it as something that is downright unappealing and a fair critique, albeit one that explains his overall poor numbers with him schemed to take these under-10-yard throws on almost 50% of his dropbacks.

The good news? Things look up for Richardson from here.

Anthony Richardson Under Pressure

One area that stands out is how Richardson handles pressure. Let's watch a fun video to quickly illustrate:

Just remember of what Anthony Richardson is capable of 🔥 pic.twitter.com/Ezkbkvdv0f

— Ʊ Bring The Juice Ʊ (@BTJPod) May 9, 2023

He's an elite runner of the highest magnitude, which we'll get to in a moment. But his low sack rate really stands out. Once again, he's no Stetson Bennett with the 33rd-best NFL team supporting him on offense as they kept his pressure low at 20.5% and just a 2.1% sack rate. Richardson saw pressure on 37.2% of dropbacks and fought his way to just a 3.8% sack rate, lowest in the class besides well-protected pocket passers such as Bennett and Stroud. That's substantially better than Allen (sacked 7.3% of the time on an alarming 42.3% pressure rate), Hurts (with an identical 7.3% sack rate on a 37.3% pressure rate), and Jackson (5.7% sack rate on a 39.5% pressure rate).

Richardson still brought the lowest EPA of our rushing fantasy quarterback Holy Trinity with a -0.51 EPA per dropback versus pressure, a number behind Allen's 0.52 EPA per dropback, Jackson's -0.46 EPA per dropback, and Hurts' -0.15 EPA per dropback that would be the best in this year's draft class.

I'll take Richardson's core ability to keep plays alive as it relates to his peers, particularly when you account for competition and supporting cast.

Anthony Richardson's Throws over 10 Yards

This is where things get interesting to me. We have talked about the macro of Richardson's throwing ability, the overall counting stats with some advanced metrics that show he's adding some value despite inaccuracy but undeniably not enough value to vault him into the tier of his fellow first-round quarterback peers or most of our Holy Trinity. This is an Anthony Richardson doubter's main critique.

But where do we gain most of our value in fantasy football at the quarterback position? A player's ability to willingly create plays downfield and create value with those opportunities.

Going deep into Anthony Richardson as a prospect today, but I wanted to show this example of his "Get out of jail free" arm.

Just a "Vick-flick" of 50+ air yards. No big deal. pic.twitter.com/pxGM9FPcgO

— Doug Farrar ✍ (@NFL_DougFarrar) December 15, 2022

The situation looks better for Richardson when we isolate throws between 10 and 20 air yards. Richardson targeted this area on 27.0% of his throws with a 56.0% completion rate that would be higher than Allen's 55.0% (25.2% dropback rate) and Jackson's 55.7% (20.8% dropback rate) but behind Hurts' 71.3% completion rate (28.5% dropback rate).

Richardson also is only behind Hurts in this 10- to 20-air yard range by EPA metrics. Hurts had a 0.83 EPA per throw between 10 and 20 yards his final year in college, Richardson brings a 0.49 EPA per throw, then we see Allen's 0.45 EPA per throw and Jackson's 0.40 EPA per throw. Much like the other metrics that were bad for Richardson, I won't laud him too much for being slightly ahead of these guys at the same points in their careers. But, once again, he remains in a spectrum of performance one can say is "just as good, maybe better." He would also be ahead of Stroud's 0.44 EPA per throw in this part of the field while behind Young's 0.57 EPA per attempt.

Things get really fun as we move down the field with throws of 20-plus air yards. You may have seen Richardson's cannon at the NFL combine, but the metrics are even more favorable. Richardson attempted passes of 20-plus air yards on 15.4% of his throws, higher than Allen's 15.1% rate, Jackson's 14.9% rate, and behind Hurts' (brilliantly strategized) 18.8% rate. But Richardson leads all four in EPA per throw with a 0.78 EPA per attempt that inched ahead of Hurts' 0.76 EPA per attempt while worlds ahead of Allen's 0.02 EPA per attempt over 20 yards and Jackson's 0.07 EPA per attempt.

Richardson's completion rate also shines downfield in throws over 20 yards with a 42.1% completion rate that compares favorably to Allen's 31.3% and Jackson's 28.9%, but behind Hurts' 50.0% hit rate.

Anthony Richardson as a Rusher

Hopefully we have now started to better wrap our heads around Richardson as a passer with more nuance than the "he can't throw"/"he can sling it" type of debate. So let's get to our main event, the wagyu steak of whom Anthony Richardson is as a player: His rushing.

Win or lose, Anthony Richardson is ⚡️‼️

LSU +2 ✅💰
OVER 51.5 ✅💰pic.twitter.com/QouzNN5Utl

— Odds Shark (@OddsShark) October 16, 2022

Rushing provides a floor for fantasy scoring at quarterback and can open up tremendous passing opportunities if schemed correctly (i.e., the opposite of how the Bears have used Justin Fields for most of his career).

This 2023 NFL draft class does not have anyone in Richardson's tier as a rusher. Every single player besides Dorian Thompson-Robinson comes with a negative EPA per rush, with DTR only at 0.088 EPA per rush himself.

Jackson and Hurts ran a lot in their senior years. Jackson ran 17.9 times per game, Hurts ran 16.6 times. Allen also ran more than Richardson with 9.1 rushes per game compared to Richardson's 8.3 attempts.

Allen was the weakest rusher of the four. He ran for just 2.2 yards per rush (which, in college, does include the fallout from his 7.3% sack rate). He avoided tackles at a 14.3% rate, scored touchdowns on just 5.5% of his rushes, and had a shockingly unimpressive -0.162 EPA per rush. The body was willing but not exactly productive.

Hurts was much better. He averaged 5.6 yards per rush and a better 21.9% avoided tackle rate, a number that is surprisingly in line with Bryce Young in this 2023 class. Hurts had an 8.6% touchdown rate on run plays and a solid 0.058 EPA per rush.

Jackson's success as a rusher at Louisville is no surprise, particularly if you'll recall the ill-advised clamoring for him to enter the NFL as a wide receiver or running back. Lamar clocked 6.9 yards per rush and a great-for-a-RB-let-alone-a-quarterback 31.9% avoided tackle rate, and he scored touchdowns on 7.8% of his rush attempts, good for 0.159 EPA per rush.

Richardson averaged 6.4 yards per rush last season. He brought a 38.0% avoided tackle rate that would be higher than every running back in the class with only Bijan Robinson and college teammate Roschon Johnson coming close at 33.3% rates. Richardson scored touchdowns on 9.0% of his run plays and his 0.178 EPA per rush is the highest amongst Allen, Jackson, Hurts, and any quarterback you can find. (Justin Fields was at -0.008 EPA per rush his final year at Ohio State, since he was not included in everything here but I know one of you is wondering.)

Richardson grades out even against this lofty company as a transcendent runner. With avoided tackle rate generally a sticky stat in the leap from college to the pros—as well as his freakish athleticism and size covered ad nauseum at the combine—it's hard to see how Richardson can fail as a runner. If anything, it seems far more likely he'll be a mainstay on highlight reels the second he can break contain than someone who'll struggle to adjust to NFL speed.

Final AR-guments

Get it? His nickname is "AR." Don't worry, quality puns like that do not require an FO+ sub (though you can get one for 10% off with the promo code "SPAGS!").

My point, and reason for writing this article, is this: I have seen a lot of Anthony Richardson hate in the football and fantasy football communities. There's a lot of love too (shoutout to my fellow true Richardson believers). But it really baffles me how people cannot gravitate towards this guy as a prospect, particularly if you account for how great of a guy he seems so far off the field.

And really, I think a lot of it is a case of misunderstanding. You look at some core metrics or watch a bad mistake like that throw above against Kentucky, I can see how someone might file that away as "He's not good!" You see him soar up best ball drafts and hear people like me extol his virtues endlessly and he feels like some sort of meme cryptocurrency having a moment. You want to see him do it before you have any degree of faith.

From where I stand, there is no player more equipped for the modern NFL or fantasy football. There is no drafted quarterback who landed in a better spot with a coach like new Colts leader Shane Steichen, a man who has meaningfully mentored young guns such as Justin Herbert as the 2020 Chargers offensive coordinator and the last few years with Jalen Hurts as the Eagles OC. Anthony Richardson turns 21 on May 22 and could be a transformational talent in America's No. 1 sport for the next 10 years.

Do you want to be on the right side of history? Or do you want to be the guy who tweets or pops into a YouTube chat declaring that it's "reality" that Anthony Richardson will fail when we're still about four months away from the season?

I have done my best to articulate the case here to save the nonbelievers from themselves. The choice is now yours.

#1 by JS // May 18, 2023 - 11:39am

First of all, nice to see some content. Hope this all gets worked out soon, and hopefully the next thing I read from the core FO guys isn't the 2023 book.

Let's remember regarding comparisons to Josh Allen, the guy completely reworked his throwing mechanics, so AR being well behind Hurts, and roughly even with Allen and/or Jackson (a guy who many people - not me (mostly) - are not convinced of regarding his accuracy) is not encouraging. If AR is willing to change, and capable of changing his game, then yeah, he might be a good passer, but you can say that about anyone. High ceiling, sure, and for fantasy, absolutely. But hitting guys in the chest with the football is the sine qua non of NFL QBing, and Richardson is not convincing on that front. Also remember, you can't rack up fantasy points if you just punted.

Finally, I think it's worth understanding that for a QB who is a pocket passer, his job is in a real sense easier than a running or scrambling QB, as he has fewer options, and so fewer decisions to make. So a runner will likely learn competence at the NFL level more slowly. And Richardson has a LOT to learn.

Thus, I think the selling point for AR, at least in year one, is: lots and lots of running, and not so much of a disaster otherwise that they stop playing him. He might do better, sure, but don't expect it.

#2 by Chris Spags // May 18, 2023 - 12:56pm

I don't want to speak for anyone else but our full-time staff continues to work hard behind the scenes and remain prepared for the season and lead-up to it despite the ongoing issues. It's a stressful time but we're doing our best and I'm sure there will be more to come when things even out.

Re: AR, I ultimately think people view all these outcomes as binary when it's all on a scale of probabilities. What are the odds he hits some of Josh Allen's rookie rushing upside? 33-60%? That alone could make him pay off in most formats. If you account for Steichen's schematic genius (assuming we are giving a big portion of the Eagles' offensive growth to what he installed), I think the ability to hit that passing game upside also is closer to that 25-50% success rate. For fantasy, I'd much rather ride out the potential lows than miss out on the gamebreaking ceiling.

And if people really want a pure pocket passer, then there should be a lot more affinity for Stroud given how he was a monster plus-EPA thrower at every level of the field. I personally get the sense the market is not adjusting to rookies' abilities to be Day 1 starters who create fantasy value, if not real value, on the field from the jump.

#4 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 18, 2023 - 4:32pm

Because QB runs are so valuable, Richardson could become the sort of team-killing/fantasy-darling QB we accuse Fields of being and that rookie Allen, Tebow, and lesser Michael Vick probably were.

He needs a lot of leash, though.

#10 by turbohappy // May 18, 2023 - 8:50pm

I think that is the most reasonable sticking point. There's no guarantee Richardson will be on the field _at all_ from the jump. Can't create fantasy value from the bench. Reports from minicamp are positive but they pretty much always are this time of year so grain of salt. I'm very optimistic on Richardson in the long term given his attitude, but that doesn't make him a day 1 starter. Colts have been clear that he very well may not be, that they drafted him for what he can be year 3 not year 1.

#11 by Drivster // May 19, 2023 - 4:49am

Minshew has enough supporters and a high enough floor to keep Richardson on the bench this year. Especially if the Colts can hang around on the bubble of the playoff race into December which is quite possible because AFC South + mean regression.

If the o/u on games Richardson starts this year was at 2.5 I'd take the under. And I think we'll still be discussing articles like this one in 2025.

#14 by Chris Spags // May 19, 2023 - 10:02am

That is a really bad over/under. You don't get #3 market odds to be Rookie of the Year if you're not expected to start ~13 or more games. They've given quotes about their desire to get him on the field faster to accelerate his growth. Minshewmania is dead.

#17 by ImNewAroundThe… // May 19, 2023 - 11:13am

Yeah. That's an easy over. And for all intents and purposes YOUNG is the one 1st rounder that's gonna start on the bench it seems. Oddly (then again it IS Carolina).

Colts have been impressed by Richardson! And seem smart enough (remember Hurts started 4 games his rookie year then staved off rabid coded Minshew calls the next two year) to give the guy with little reps...uh...more reps. Minshewmania should be dead but thankfully the league shouldn't be listening to his fans.

#27 by turbohappy // May 21, 2023 - 5:37pm

I don't think that's a great expectation either. I'd have to put the O/U at 8.5 because honestly neither 17 or 0 would totally surprise me.

#3 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 18, 2023 - 4:27pm

a subpar cast at Florida is still made up of scholarship athletes at an SEC school.

We liked to pretend that's the same as the DII-caliber team Allen had his senior year, but it's not.

#7 by Chris Spags // May 18, 2023 - 8:44pm

That is fair, though they are not quite what say Young or Stroud had. Closer to Levis on that front and he blows him away in almost all metrics

#5 by KnotMe // May 18, 2023 - 6:16pm

Just for reference who would be the guys you would be selecting AR against/Over? Elite guys would be off the board of course. But who would be your likely other options?
Mac Jones? Tannehill? Davis Mills?

(This may be a "I don't understand fantasy that well question" but it seems interesting to me)

#8 by Chris Spags // May 18, 2023 - 8:46pm

AR currently goes around Watson, Dak and Tua in best ball ADPs on Underdog, which is the most reflective market right now. I'd say he should be closer to Trevor Lawrence due to the upside and ability to win you Week 17 in that format, which is when the biggest prize pools are

#6 by lenny65 // May 18, 2023 - 7:34pm

I'm not trying to be negative or deliberately contrary, but I'll be shocked if Richardson ever amounts to anything in the NFL. IMO the NFL is going to chew him up and spit him out.

#9 by Chris Spags // May 18, 2023 - 8:47pm

You are entitled to your opinion. If he landed somewhere besides with Steichen, I'd give it a higher likelihood. It only takes Josh Allen's rookie year rushing averages (55 rypg, 0.7 TD/game) plus 2500 yards passing, 15 TDs, and 14 INTs to have enough fantasy points to qualify as a Top 5 guy.

#13 by KnotMe // May 19, 2023 - 9:57am

It does seem like it's possible to be good fantasty qb(i.e. scoring) and a bad nfl qb(i.e. helping your team win). I guess qb running is really over-valued? I guess bc qb runs were rare when fantasy started(I think Brady and Manning were your top QB then) so runs have a big point value relative to their number of yards I guess.

#15 by Chris Spags // May 19, 2023 - 10:03am

Yeah, Sam Hoppen at 4for4 outlined it well in that quote above (my bad for not initially attributing). Lamar and Hurts also had similar runs their rookie years with much more of a rushing leash than a passing one, 18-24 FPPG. So you're talking the floor/ceiling combo we all die for, particularly in Best Ball format.

#19 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 19, 2023 - 12:39pm

Fantasy is older than that. It started pen/paper/mail. Think Elway, not Manning.

#30 by hifidelity // May 27, 2023 - 9:52am

Yep. When I saw that I thought Archie Manning

We played in the '80s

#18 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 19, 2023 - 12:38pm

Parent was talking about his real football utility, not his pretend football utility.

\this was once, nominally, a real-football site.
\\granted, it used to pay writers, too

#23 by Theo // May 19, 2023 - 10:05pm

There is still enough real-football articles on this site.

Though, I am a bit baffled by the obsession with fantasy football.

I played it for a few seasons but have never met a league that actually did what it promised.

Players came and left the moment they realized they were not going to win. Has any of that changed?

#24 by dbostedo // May 20, 2023 - 12:13am

I've been in the same league with mostly the same members/teams for like 15 years. Many other friends are in similar other leagues.

If you're joining random online leagues, maybe you get that effect. But most people (I think) are in leagues with people they know, that stick it out, and want to come back for future seasons.

#25 by BigRichie // May 20, 2023 - 8:57pm

If fantasy football articles pay their bills - which obviously is an issue for them - then I'm in favor of however many fantasy articles they put out there. (I can always not read those ones)

#26 by Chris Spags // May 21, 2023 - 10:10am

Large scale prize pools for best ball format are big to me. They're less data-obliterated than weekly DraftKings and FanDuel (which is still very fun) but offer the largest prize pools, including a $1m to first one on DraftKings and the flagship $3m to first one on Underdog. The shift of a focus to a draft rather than yearlong management is hugely appealing to me.

And also, I tend to believe there's more of a correlation between fantasy analytics and real life performance than people realize, both in the NFL and in other sports (NBA in particular). Being able to decipher who's a volume player versus who's a good player (i.e. someone who excels in DVOA/EPA/other adv analytics) is a helpful skill that many playing fantasy sports lack or don't have the resources on.

#12 by guest from Europe // May 19, 2023 - 6:21am

So he could be somewhere between bad J. Allen and Jackson. If Colts develop him, in a few years he could turn into a good J. Allen. At least there will be some excitement compared to last year.

There is potential and talent. What will happen, we'll see.

Anything is possible and everything is unlikely with these future projections.

#16 by Chris Spags // May 19, 2023 - 10:06am

That's the best lens through which to understand any prospect. My pain point with Richardson is a good amount of people, including some in these comments, view it as some 100% certainty he can't be a good player or even get on the field in Year 1. I think it's closer to 90% he's on the field very early and then it's a 50% chance he comes out and is lights out for fantasy while he cleans up passing refinement with his quality coaching (aka not quite where he needs to be to win games as a passer).

If there are people that want zero, I want 50% since that far more accurately reflects his likelihood of success.

#20 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 19, 2023 - 12:47pm

He'll certainly get on the field. He was drafted too highly to bury.

What you refuse to acknowledge is that his floor is Nathan Peterman, with more leash. There is a real chance he's Ryan Leaf or JaMarcus Russell or young Alex Smith bad.

And there's a solid chance he'll dig a crater that deep. He was overmatched as a passer in college in a really discouraging way, and it's unlikely that aspect will become easier in the pros.

#21 by guest from Europe // May 19, 2023 - 1:21pm

J. Allen rookie -32 % DVOA, 2nd year -12%

J. Russell rookie -22%, 2nd year -62%

R. Leaf 2nd year i found -35%

Ryan last year on Colts -22%

So, two points: Colts can't be much worse and this will depend on coaching/development by Steichen. (Like with any rookie QB, bust probability is high.) Maybe the scheme will be like those for 1st year of Hurts and Jackson, lots of designed running. Colts had great 2021 running with RB Taylor.

#22 by KnotMe // May 19, 2023 - 1:42pm

Zach Wilson when from ~ -32 to -16 DVOA and still got benched.

The QBase thing they use here actually has Richarson(-.95 TDYAR/A) behind Malik Willis (-.26 TDYAR/A). So...it seems reasonable that he may not see the field much year one. (Willis looked....really over matched by the pro game).

The Colts don't really have any options so it's possible he just gets thrown out there to give people a reason to buy tickets and they hope he can learn from it and not pick up any bad habits.

I can buy that the running will make him a decent fantasy option no matter how bad his passing is. It's not clear to me how much he would get on the field. I can't really think of many comps of guys drafted that high who were that raw and the team didn't have any options.

In terms of winning (and it's the AFCS...it's possible). Throwing Minshew out there for the first third/half/fraction of the season and hoping Richardson learns fast enough to help later in the season probably is their best bet.

#31 by hifidelity // May 27, 2023 - 9:57am

Players don't get benched because of their DVOA

They get benched because of their ability to win football games. This is where Wilson fails.

Jeff George had some excellent DVOA seasons and couldn't keep a job. db gonna db

#34 by Sisyphus // May 31, 2023 - 11:58pm

Jeff George was a dick who alienated his coaches, teammates and the fan base. An encouraging factor for AR is that he seems to want to be coached. He has a lot to learn but he appears to be in a good environment for that. Moreover neither the Colts or their fan base are expecting immediate success.

#28 by turbohappy // May 21, 2023 - 5:43pm

I see him as having way too good of an attitude and too excited to learn to be Leaf or Russell. He could easily be young Alex Smith, although he has more elite physical tools which might change the nature of his floor.

#29 by Noahrk // May 22, 2023 - 12:56pm

Yes. When people talk about how bad he was they should remember he only started one year. Waldman gushes about what a fast learner he is, compared for example to Levis, who he viewed as unable or unwilling to grow. That's what separates AR from your typical toolsy prospect. I'm pretty excited to see how he progresses.

#32 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 30, 2023 - 3:25pm

He's the uber-Peterman.

I'll use his freshman season as an example. He threw two passes. One was a TD. The other was an INT.

That's his floor and his ceiling.

#33 by guest from Europe // May 31, 2023 - 2:37am

He threw two passes. One was a TD. The other was an INT.

That's his floor and his ceiling.

This is true for any QB ever.

I don't know anything about this player. If he plays like that, than his comparison is Winston, not Peterman. I doubt that a Peterman-like player would be drafted so high.

You are skeptical about Richardson's abilities, NewAround likes him and then there was a clash about future projections...

Everyone should wait for 2-3 years to see how any draft pick develops. All the projections are imprecise.

#35 by lenny65 // Jun 02, 2023 - 6:45pm

The ruination of this site is really demoralizing and unfortunate. So much excellent, well-done reading material through the years. It's a major disappointment, whatever the cause.

#36 by Noahrk // Jun 04, 2023 - 12:03am

Tanier is also writing at underdognetwork now. And by the way, it may be a fantasy site, but Tanier and Bryan's articles are not fantasy. Pretty much the same quality as they had here.

So yeah, it's a real shame, but the talent carries on.

#37 by Ryan // Jun 08, 2023 - 6:25pm

Seconded. What a bummer. I have no idea what I'll do with myself on Monday mornings during the season.

#62 by Theo // Jun 26, 2023 - 12:16pm

Aaron cant even motivate himself to write an update about the future?

[edit] see Aaron's update below

#64 by theslothook // Jun 26, 2023 - 12:37pm

I don't think its because Aaron is lazy or is the primary culprit behind all of this. I bet its eating at him that he hasn't said anything, but I suspect the decision is deliberate and not to dodge blame.

#40 by malave // Jun 15, 2023 - 9:30am

I can make $200 an hour working on my home computer. {h42 I never thought it was possible, but my closest friend made $25,000 in just five weeks working on this historic project. convinced me to take part. For more information,
Click on the link below... Shorturl.at/eLX67

#41 by LondonMonarch // Jun 19, 2023 - 4:42am

What's happened to this website?

Really surprised no-one is commenting on this! Especially Aaron Schatz who is tweeting about football but saying nothing about Football Outsiders.......

#42 by ImNewAroundThe… // Jun 19, 2023 - 10:27am

Champion gaming isn't paying their writers.

#43 by LondonMonarch // Jun 19, 2023 - 11:32am

Certainly that was part of the story. But at the time of the initial dispute, while certain freelancers were refusing to write they were still publishing content and updating the site (they have staff writers don't they - including Aaron Schatz?). But now there is NOTHING happening.

#44 by Bryan Knowles // Jun 19, 2023 - 2:13pm

Stay tuned.

#45 by LondonMonarch // Jun 19, 2023 - 3:16pm

I will! And good luck! But the absence of anything - even a holding message - is very very odd, however things are intended to continue.

When the deal was done Aaron wrote this piece about how the deal was a "perfect complement" and "readers can feel good that all of their favorite columns and metrics will remain but with new opportunities to expand what we can do with them".

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/ramblings/2018/site-news-edjsports-acquires-football-outsiders

I know writers have said they feel they were lied to, and as a reader it is hard not to share that sentiment....

#46 by dbostedo // Jun 19, 2023 - 8:31pm

That message was with regard to EdjSports owning the site, and has nothing directly to do with the current issues.

The current issues are related to a merger of EdjSports with Champion Gaming Inc. in 2021, and their recent financial troubles. I'd hardly think it's at all fair to see the current issues/change, and reach back to 2018 and say you were lied to.

#47 by theslothook // Jun 20, 2023 - 10:51am

It's hard not to feel truly pessimistic about the future of this site.

I won't speak for Bryan, but not paying your employees and stringing them along may save your ass in the short term, but it destroys relationships and squanders whatever good will and trust you might have fostered.

#48 by LondonMonarch // Jun 20, 2023 - 5:08pm

But there's not much point doing a super-duper-continue-and-expand merger with the perfect partner, is there, if they are then going to be free to put the product in the hands of some shark-sounding online gambling wizards?

What Schatz has wrought might be viewed in contrast to Mike Florio - his deal with NBC appears to have allowed him to make money from the transaction but to retain control over his product (whether or not you like his unique style). Whereas Schatz seems to have abdicated control to a bunch of charlatans.

#49 by theslothook // Jun 20, 2023 - 6:35pm

Do we know if Florio gets to decide payroll? Presumably, he does not. That's the heart of the matter.

Clearly, someone is paying the cloud service that is hosting this website. Assuming DVOA is running on automated scripts, then that is also being paid for. All of that is comparatively peanuts in terms of cost. FO fundamentally is a labor service. Writers digest the results and provide commentary. If you have 0 content producing writers; you are left with ChatGPT and a bunch of weekly DVOA updates.

Let's see how long this site continues to attract and retain an audience in that case.

#50 by LondonMonarch // Jun 21, 2023 - 7:33am

I don't know if he gets to "decide payroll" but he appears to be allowed to have staff who are actually paid to write content for the website.

Even Schatz himself seems to have stopped!

#54 by cstoos // Jun 23, 2023 - 9:53am

Florio is likely running point for Collinsworth, who wants no competition for PFF.

Hell, they still haven't even covered the AFC West in the off season series. All other divisions were completed before the draft.

This is what you get with subscription models.

#51 by Will Allen // Jun 21, 2023 - 9:10am

If this is the end of FO, it's been great, and sorry to see it go. Thanks to Aaron and everybody else through the years for some terrific entertainment. Hard to believe, but the 1st great debate I remember participating in was the oddity of the Seahawks/Steelers Super Bowl, now nearly 20 years ago..... I'm tellin' ya', that holding call was ticky-tack!

#63 by Theo // Jun 26, 2023 - 12:21pm

I would put a bucket under the monitor to catch the tears from Seattle fans.

#52 by Jetspete // Jun 21, 2023 - 10:34am

The problem for FO was that, unlike Florio and other sites, the proprietary models were always bigger than the brand. The best comparison i can make is to Nate Silver and 538. Yes there are authors who are worth reading, but few were coming to this site for specific writers beyond Aaron. We were coming for DVOA, Kubiak and discussion off of that. And like Nate did, I'm kind of surprised Aaron didnt sell off to ESPN a decade ago.

I imagine the reason Aaron has gone radio silence is that he's working on an exit strategy to keep his models. Again like Nate, he can take the models anywhere and most of the FO audience will follow. Time will tell although i'm assuming we are not getting an almanac this year.

#53 by JS // Jun 21, 2023 - 12:40pm

Yeah, I'm happy to follow Aaron and the others wherever they go, but it'd be nice if they can tell us we will or won't be getting an almanac, so we can plan accordingly.

Best to all the writers.

#55 by Vincent Verhei // Jun 23, 2023 - 7:29pm

Your best bet is to pay attention to the Twitter accounts of people who have written for Football Outsiders in the past. I'm now here:

https://twitter.com/VincentVerhei

Mike Tanier is here:

https://twitter.com/MikeTanier

And I believe the other accounts listed on this page are still accurate:

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/info/meet-the-outsiders

#56 by Bryan Knowles // Jun 24, 2023 - 1:39pm

And I will repeat -- stay tuned.

#57 by guest from Europe // Jun 24, 2023 - 3:28pm

So, there is still hope for this site? And some of you writers coming back in some better future?

#58 by theslothook // Jun 24, 2023 - 3:28pm

You might be selling us false hope with that statement!

#59 by LondonMonarch // Jun 24, 2023 - 5:27pm

Sounds like there might be some sort of plan for some of the key individuals to buy back the rights to the models, or the brand, or something else from "Champion Gaming".

Ironically something like that could work very well for Aaron Schatz - sell your site to some fly-by-nights for $$$, wait for them to go bust and then buy it back for peanuts....

Does anyone have any idea what EdjSports or Champion Gaming were/are actually doing with the site? I don't understand why you would buy it for good money and then just shut it down.

#60 by guest from Europe // Jun 25, 2023 - 3:26am

I guess Schatz (or Champion Gaming) is negotiating with some company that would buy and "save" this site. I doubt he would gain a lot of profit out of this. There are no writers left. If he manages to keep the site going, he will have to persuade them to come back.

Probably this Champion Gaming won't sell it for peanuts. They bought it to gain profit out of it, it will be a tough negotiation. They are probably in some money problems when they don't pay employees. I don't know how much money Schatz has and if he can just buy back F.O. easily by himself.

Probably in worst case scenario Schatz can start a new site, he knows the models, and brand it otherwise: not DVOA, but something like SMART NFL, System Measurement Above Replacement Tier in NFL.... maybe change something so that he can't get sued by Champion Gaming and start over.

Anyway by late August, at the latest, this should be resolved. Once the NFL season starts, it will probably be too late.

#61 by Drivster // Jun 26, 2023 - 9:14am

Or try Catholic Match Girl’s Instagram and RoboPunter on Grindr

#65 by Aaron Schatz // Jun 26, 2023 - 1:27pm

Hi everyone. I apologize for the radio silence. It's not a question of motivation. I have my reasons, but there will be news in the next couple of weeks. Please be patient. Thanks.

#66 by ChrisLong // Jun 26, 2023 - 3:11pm

Alright then, keep your secrets

#72 by Noahrk // Jul 04, 2023 - 12:28pm

lol He's probably unable to comment for legal (or practical business) reasons. Bryan said as much in Twitter, IIRC. I'm confident we'll get good news "soon".

#68 by Theo // Jun 26, 2023 - 10:03pm

*Voice Over*

There was no news in the next couple of weeks.

#67 by LondonMonarch // Jun 26, 2023 - 3:39pm

It all seems so strange though!

Presumably when it was sold to Champion Gaming there was a plan which Aaron and the team must have been privy to, and they must have had confidence in the people at Champion (whoever they are - Chris Spagnuolo and some others, presumably) to execute it.

That plan presumably wasn't "pay money for the business then stop paying the staff so it creates no content" - so what was it? And why hasn't it been executed?

On the face of it, it looks like a good business with a great product is just being passed through the hands of less and less scrupulous people, with less and less explanation. Even if Aaron somehow rescues it, one wonders why future contributors would trust him, having been sold down the river twice already.

#110 by PatsFan // Jul 09, 2023 - 5:20pm

Aaron sold to Edj Sports back in 2018. Edj is who sold to Champion. Aaron may well or even likely have had zero say in the sale to Champion.

#69 by theslothook // Jul 03, 2023 - 4:37pm

It seems Aaron has effectively hit the eject button, per his twitter title - EIC/founder/not current owner @fboutsiders

I guess all we are waiting for now is a legal formality. Either way. RIP to this site and its numerous commentators who I've enjoyed debating with/arguing with.

For all the times I came off as an asshole, I apologize. I enjoyed debates that ranged beyond Football as well. It sounds trite to say, but I do truly learn more from disagreement than agreement.

I'll check in from time to time on the hopes that this gets resolved in happier circumstances, but I doubt it will. Such a shame because I was sincerely looking forward to seeing how last season's Eagles RAP metrics were going to shake out. Perhaps Philly would have been crowned as the top pass rushing pressure team in the last 15 + years or so.

#70 by guest from Europe // Jul 04, 2023 - 3:03am

It seems Aaron has effectively hit the eject button, per his twitter title - EIC/founder/not current owner @fboutsiders

I think your interpretation of this fact that he isn't the current owner and thus not responsible for money problems is too gloomy. It's just a fact.

RIP to this site

I'll check in from time to time on the hopes that this gets resolved in happier circumstances, but I doubt it will.

Based on comments made by Schatz and Knowles above, my guess is that something positive will happen. Either this site will be resurrected or Schatz will found a new one. If Simmons could do it after his Grantland site was terminated and he was banned, i don't see why Schatz couldn't do at least that.

Otherwise some of these writers would remain unemployed. It looks that underdognetwork doesn't employ Tanier and Knowles anymore.

(I am more of a pessimist in real life than you as our discussion about AI and human jobs showed. In this case you have to be patient. It takes time to resolve legal matters/negotiations/whatever they are trying to do. On a longer term basis AI is definitely coming for journalism profession...only talking heads in various videos will remain.)

#88 by Theo // Jul 06, 2023 - 8:12pm

Aaron had radio silence for forever and then didnt care to inform his guests/clients/readers at this very site.

He jumped ship.

This site will maybe continue as an empty shell and Aaron will write "10 things you didnt know, #7 will surprise you!" articles somehwere else.

The appeal of this site was black text on a white background talking about better stats.

I think that is history.

#71 by LondonMonarch // Jul 04, 2023 - 9:22am

I think it was made fairly clear that the Tanier/Knowles gig at Underdog was a short-term thing.

I also think the Schatz disclaimer has been on his twitter account for a while. Of course it doesn't really address how he put the site into current hands.

None of that stops them either buying the IP from Champion or doing some other site along similar lines. Tanier is a great writer who imagine will be in demand elsewhere, but for Schatz that is probably the only option unless he is going to retire and count his money.

#73 by LondonMonarch // Jul 06, 2023 - 10:06am

Came here from the Schatz resignation announcement on Twitter.

I guess we will see but it seems to make no sense from an FO perspective. He seems to say that (a) he is going, (b) he is taking the models, but (c) FO is continuing.

I just don't understand what Champion are up to here. Presumably they bought the site with the intention of continuing it, and he says that is still the plan. But if so, (a) what are they doing letting him go, (b) what are they planning to do, and (c) why are they not putting any content on here?

Seems mad to pay money for a successful website and just run it into the ground.

#74 by guest from Europe // Jul 06, 2023 - 11:05am

i would appreciate it if you could copy this announcement here for people like me who don't use twitter and can't see it.

I just don't understand what Champion are up to here. Presumably they bought the site with the intention of continuing it, and he says that is still the plan.

They probably in serious money problems/debt and don't think about content on this site.

b) he is taking the models, but (c) FO is continuing.

How is this possible? I thought DVOA models and data are owned by F.O. which is owned by Champion Gaming/Edj Sports. Are you sure Schatz is allowed to take DVOA to some other site? That would be an elegant solution for us readers.

#76 by theslothook // Jul 06, 2023 - 12:18pm

The part where he said, "I will be using DVOA and DYAR" could be interpreted as he's continuing to reference both statistics as they plan to live on without him.

There's no point in buying a website and not the intellectual property behind it. So I don't know what it means either. In the rosiest of outcomes, Aaron can start footballsuperoutsiders.com and continue life as a solo blogger with DVOA and DYAR updates. But I just don't think he gets to keep the intellectual property.

As for the strange and peculiar decisions to run this site into the ground; I think that's easily explained by the fact that the parent company has no money. If you can't pay your writers, you're not going to get any new content.

#78 by guest from Europe // Jul 06, 2023 - 12:43pm

The part where he said, "I will be using DVOA and DYAR" could be interpreted as he's continuing to reference both statistics as they plan to live on without him.

It looks that way. DVOA models will run on computers, somehow this site will run on a limited basis and Schatz will write somewhere else and quote DVOA numbers owned by Football Outsiders. The questionable part is how this site will go on. That's really doubtful now. Only numbers with no text?

Champion Gaming will go under, based on data in the article linked by JS below.

#75 by JS // Jul 06, 2023 - 11:53am

Yeah, I don't twitter either, but I found this:

https://awfulannouncing.com/nfl/football-outsiders-aaron-schatz-champion-gaming.html

#77 by guest from Europe // Jul 06, 2023 - 12:31pm

Thanks. It looks this Champion Gaming will be bankrupt. Hopefully some other company buys this site.

A. Schatz will be writing somewhere else... good luck to all the writers/contributors.

#81 by Theo // Jul 06, 2023 - 1:04pm

Probabaly a nothing company consisting of 2 imvestors who wanted to make a big buck.

Money money? Money.

#79 by theslothook // Jul 06, 2023 - 1:00pm

Something else worthy of being noted.

Some have wondered why Aaron or Champion Gaming didn't just sell FO to espn or some other entity. Well, espn is badly struggling right now and I believe 538, the FO version, is similarly being gutted.

It seems to me, the real entity with huge coffers to buy this would be the NFL. However, I don't think the NFL has much interest in team wide advanced stats. Why do I say that? Because when I was working with NGS several years ago; aside from the health and safety projects, every desire NGS had was for individual player advanced stats. And let me tell you, whatever they wanted, they could get including teams full of expensive talent. Absolutely none of their desires were based around team wide stats; at least when I was there.

That tells me; I don't think there is much appetite as big game hunting goes for team wide advanced stats. Which is unfortunate because I don't think individual player analysis will ever be good enough. I think the year to year variance is just so high in the NFL and so intertwined between scheme and supporting players that all but for a very very select group of players; its going to be too noisy.

#84 by guest from Europe // Jul 06, 2023 - 3:54pm

This is a very, very interesting comment to me on multiple levels. This kind of doesn't belong here, but i will write because there is a danger there will be no more this site and i am really curious: did you work on gene sequencing or is this something else? If it was about genes and genome, what did you do?

every desire NGS had was for individual player advanced stats.

Is someone trying to determine which genes cause people to be great athletes? I guess this could be done for basic athleticism, such as running and swimming. Why do they need advanced football stats, aren't raw stats enough?

However, I don't think the NFL has much interest in team wide advanced stats.

It seems to me that NFL is very conservative and they don't want anything advanced. Most of their audience wants to keep things simple. That's why the style of Buck and Aikman is so popular.

Which is unfortunate because I don't think individual player analysis will ever be good enough. I think the year to year variance is just so high in the NFL and so intertwined between scheme and supporting players that all but for a very very select group of players; its going to be too noisy.

i agree with every word of this and didn't know you thought this. Could have saved us a lot of time writing these comments. That's why i am mostly interested in team DVOA and not much else. It's a complex team sport. Unfortunately for me people prefer to write about and discuss individual players.

#87 by theslothook // Jul 06, 2023 - 5:42pm

Is someone trying to determine which genes cause people to be great athletes? I guess this could be done for basic athleticism, such as running and swimming. Why do they need advanced football stats, aren't raw stats enough?

Can raw stats tell you who the best receiver is? If it did, Larry Fitzgerald looks like one of the most inconsistent wide receivers in NFL history. How the heck does the guy sometimes post 1400 yard seasons and then not even get to a 1000?(that's intended snark for the record). And what raw stats can we use for defensive backs, linebackers or god forbid offensive linemen?

Most of their audience wants to keep things simple. That's why the style of Buck and Aikman is so popular.

I disagree. People love the passer rating even has it has sunk into an absolutely meaningless stat. If people didn't care, they would just be mindlessly referencing passing yards. People in this site and on reddit routinely use DVOA and DYAR to rank player X the best player in the league or whatever while fully aware that its not some intrinsic measure(no such measure exists).

As for individual player ratings. I will be forever curious and devote a ton of time trying to achieve this even as I know it is an impossibility. The reason why is you want to know how good your own players are, the free agents you bring in, and whether a draft pick worked out or not. How do we know if QB X sucks if the team around him sucks. If we know his receivers are bad, well, then its easier to explain why we should stick with him.

#92 by guest from Europe // Jul 07, 2023 - 3:30am

And what raw stats can we use for defensive backs, linebackers or god forbid offensive linemen?

If your NGS stands for genome sequencing (that's what it is in bio-science), any NFL longevity data, even games played, should do because you would be trying to determine which genes "provide" NFL players. I doubt that any human gene determines which player has 100 and which one 50 tackles in a season or which one will be 10th best CB and who will be 35th best CB or anything regarding subtle player quality differences.

If NGS is something about data, economy, statistics, that's different.

If people didn't care, they would just be mindlessly referencing passing yards.

I think that a large majority of the people in the world does this.

People in this site and on reddit routinely use DVOA and DYAR to rank player X

This is a small minority of people, i guess. Otherwise this site should be very profitable if everyone was using its data. Do various podcasts, sports radio shows and TV networks regularly quote DVOA? I don't know, i don't listen to/watch any of that.

Edit: recently Champion Gaming published how many readers were on this site in a year: about 2 million. It's a minute number compared to total NFL audience. I guess that majority of people just watch games. Some look at traditional yards. Probably less than 1% care about DVOA.

This will soon come up in the Eli Manning for HOF debate. A lot of people will quote his total career yards and touchdowns and 2 Super Bowl wins. Roethlisberger will get the same treatment. Minority will talk about their DYAR. The same for Frank Gore.

#95 by theslothook // Jul 07, 2023 - 10:40am

NGS stands for next gen stats

#98 by guest from Europe // Jul 07, 2023 - 12:09pm

Another missunderstanding, i apologize. If you write NGS in any internet search engine, DNA sequencing does come up first by a lot. All of us here have a different background... so it's difficult to understand what somebody means.

#80 by Theo // Jul 06, 2023 - 1:00pm

Wow.

Thanks Aaron, for the past 20 years on this site.

Bye!

#82 by OmahaChiefs13 // Jul 06, 2023 - 2:19pm

Well, at least we can all agree it was voting on comments that killed FO, amirite?

In all seriousness, I don't care about the site....Champion completely destroyed it via various upside-down practices, so oh well. I know Aaron does care, and I don't blame him, but the key to this place was always a collection of writers and what they were doing, not the site itself.

And I do very much care about the writers; they've become an intrinsic part of my football fandom, so I'll eagerly look for what comes next from each of them, and congratulations to whichever outlet or new enterprise lands them.

#85 by guest from Europe // Jul 06, 2023 - 4:11pm

And I do very much care about the writers; they've become an intrinsic part of my football fandom, so I'll eagerly look for what comes next from each of them, and congratulations to whichever outlet or new enterprise lands them.

The problem is that not all of these writers may get good new opportunities. Unless they stay together and form a new site, they might be forced to write about points spreads and bets on NFL games or fantasy or rumours and what could happen or some other nonsense.

#83 by theslothook // Jul 06, 2023 - 2:48pm

Sad day and a sad ending to what is probably a sad admission that football and footballoutsiders are too big a part of my life.

I found FO decades ago because it said my favorite player was an all time great QB. I became an active participant because of the writers and commenters.

I also came here for insights into the other 31 teams I follow. Now that avenue is gone.

#86 by IlluminatusUIUC // Jul 06, 2023 - 4:27pm

I'd like to thank the writers for some truly excellent insights over the years. I always felt like I came away from your articles having learned something valuable.

#89 by big10freak // Jul 06, 2023 - 8:22pm

I come to honor the memory of FO

Best of luck to all

#93 by Theo // Jul 07, 2023 - 8:50am

It is really sad that it had to come to this...

#90 by mansteel // Jul 06, 2023 - 10:13pm

Sad day indeed. I was introduced to this site by Aaron appearing on a Bill Simmons podcast the week before the first NYG/NE super bowl, and quite resented them chortling about the prospect of the Giants even keeping it close. Guess the joke was on them, though :) From that inauspicious beginning, I discovered a site full of serious statistical analysis and insight and have been a regular ever since.

I learned a lot from this site and got a lot of hours of enjoyment out it, often from the comments. A lot of intelligent, thoughtful people discoursing about a whole variety of topics. Football mostly, of course, but also statistics, labor law, medical stuff, random bits of trivia (e.g., I recently learned here how rare vanilla is, contrary to its reputation as being plain). And somehow, contrary to natural internet law, it was kept (mostly) civil.

And funny stuff, too: someone above referenced robopunter and Catholic Match Girl, but there were plenty of hilarious riffs, most memorably the Emmitt Smith promo video for the pork industry ("...saranate the whole stadium itself...", "come on out to Gameday Stadium", etc.), which might have been the hardest I've laughed as an adult.

Anyway, thanks to Aaron, all the writers, and the commenters. I've really enjoyed it.

#91 by Stendhal1 // Jul 07, 2023 - 1:03am

I miss you knuckleheads already, thank you all for providing good football knowledge.

But no one has called out the good news per Aaron — he says there WILL be an almanac this year. That’s my annual mid-summer, pre fantasy football draft treat.

#94 by Ryan // Jul 07, 2023 - 9:38am

So what is to become of this site? If it's a bunch of scabs replicating the past glory days (a la the modern Deadspin), pass. Either way, I will desperately miss (the old-school) Audibles, Quick Reads, Word of Muth, etc etc.

Attention media conglomerates: there might still be a couple more websites for you to destroy! Get to work!

#96 by JS // Jul 07, 2023 - 11:05am

What follows is all speculation, but it seems to me that this site will simply shutter, though Champion may be able to sell it for a bag of balls or something. Possibly any contracts they had with the writers, or for intellectual property, are or will soon be null and void (?, IANAL), and Aaron may get everything back, but Aaron likely isn't going to talk about that, because he definitely has a lawyer. There's probably no reason he can't get the band back together somewhere else. Anyway, somebody is writing the chapters for the hopefully-very-soon-to-be-released (help, I have a draft Aug 5!!!) almanac, right? Aaron and the others will have to wait out some no doubt infuriating legal crap, and find a money/infrastructure guy, and that might take some time, but in a few months there might be a FO-like website somewhere, with a lot of the same gentlemen doing the same things. In fact, if Champion is that far on the outs, their best deal may be to have Aaron and said new money guy buy this site back. It's really all a matter of how dead-in-the-water Champion is, which we don't really know. They seem to be continuing to talk about how everything is just fine, but then that's what any company in their position does, which is their right. Maybe they have some smart plan to get back on their feet, but if they don't, it seems that a new FO much like the old one may be possible.

Or that's my hope, anyway.

#97 by theslothook // Jul 07, 2023 - 11:37am

I hope they get the new site up and running before the season starts. We aren't that far away

#99 by guest from Europe // Jul 07, 2023 - 12:32pm

It's really all a matter of how dead-in-the-water Champion is, which we don't really know.

Based on that afwulannouncing article you linked to, which at the end describes their debts and assets, they are quite dead.

in a few months there might be a FO-like website somewhere, with a lot of the same gentlemen doing the same things. In fact, if Champion is that far on the outs, their best deal may be to have Aaron and said new money guy buy this site back.

This is what i thought would happen until yesterday's tweet. It looks like A. Schatz will just write articles on his own somewhere else and quote DVOA data, he is looking for an employer. That will probably happen. Some other site will hire Tanier. As for other contributors, i am worried about their future. (I am taking every sentence in that tweet as sincere, don't think that Schatz is waiting for contracts to be void and get this website back.) So, there would be no new F.O.

This site might go down or be subscription members only or become numbers data only or ChatGPT will write a weekly article about team DVOA and individual players DYAR.

#100 by guest from Europe // Jul 08, 2023 - 3:49am

If it remains like this on this website, what is highly probable, all of the people who enjoy writing and reading these comments could form a group of F.O. readers on one of "social networks" and chat about DVOA there. It won't be the same as here, but it would be something. (I don't use any of those networks, so i won't bother anyone.)

Probably there will be DVOA numbers published somewhere and A. Schatz will write articles about it, but likely there will be no reader's comments. Most internet sites don't enable those anymore or they turn into "internet fights".

#102 by Theo // Jul 08, 2023 - 11:09am

I'll wait and see what this site will become, but the current owners (CG) dont give a damn other than the money and Aaron will find a writing job somewhere else. Probably.

The concept of 'smart analysis and mostly friendly banter' might be gone.

#104 by LondonMonarch // Jul 08, 2023 - 2:53pm

I'm sure Champion don't care about anything but the money - I just can't understand what their plan is/was to make any money!

Surely if you are in the business of making a profit, you don't spend money to acquire something like FO and then simply put up the shutters, leaving most of the value (the staff and the stats) to wander off? What is/was the plan?

#106 by guest from Europe // Jul 08, 2023 - 3:33pm

They probably invested everything they had to acquire other companies and ran out of money, monthly profits were too low to finance their loans and so on. Economists can explain this, i think this happens quite a lot with these companies which don't produce anything, are in business of stocks, bets etc. Or they took loans with too high interest rates and are in debt they can't get out of.

Their plan was to let F.O. run as normal and they would collect profits. That's what owners "do". Now they don't have the money to pay monthly wages, so everything stopped.

There are rumours that another financial crisis similar to 2008 might be on the horizon...

#112 by fyo // Jul 10, 2023 - 11:28am

That theory relies on the assumption that Champion's management could not see that the sum of the number in the expense column was about 6x the number in their revenue column. In cases like this, I would "follow the money" and see who actually benefitted. There's the salary payout of $1 million (CAD) for the 3 months ending March 31, 2022. Prorated to a full year, that's $4 million being paid per year, although apparently much lower (a third?) now, but hundreds of thousands were still being paid out in the first 3 months of this year. Who was paid the bulk of this money? What about the ~ $16 million in share capital? Was that all just paper money in (two?) reverse acquisitions? No idea, but on the surface, it looks like the original owners of Edj got paid, along with the CEO+board of Champion Gaming Group.

#113 by guest from Europe // Jul 10, 2023 - 12:09pm

I don't have any of this information nor do i know where to find it, so i won't accuse anyone for money grabbing. Anything is possible. Either their management did their business strategy planning like amateurs or they overexposed themselves financially or somebody took some money and stashed it/spent it on luxury or whatever speculation. A combination of above is also possible.

I can tell you that i know an example of a large company with about 40 000 employees where their management were owner's sons and they took huge loans with 9% interest rates to acquire companies/expand in other countries and after a few years they couldn't repay their debts... and it doesn't end well.

In cases like this, I would "follow the money" and see who actually benefitted.

Agree.

#115 by LondonMonarch // Jul 11, 2023 - 3:42am

Interesting research!

I simply can't understand how the steps they have taken- namely taking over and then (a) making very few initial changes and (b) ceasing to fund ordinary operations - could ever have been consistent with a sustainable business plan.

Their actions don't appear to be consistent either (1) with an ambitious plan to do something expansive and different with the product that subsequently failed or (2) with a plan to keep the product running business-as-usual and turn a steady income from it.

#116 by guest from Europe // Jul 11, 2023 - 9:06am

I simply can't understand how the steps they have taken- namely taking over and then (a) making very few initial changes and (b) ceasing to fund ordinary operations - could ever have been consistent with a sustainable business plan.

your steps (a) and (b) weren't simulataneous. Something happened with their financials after step (a) occured and that caused (b).

Here is their financials summary over years: https://pitchbook.com/profiles/company/464158-81#financials

They bought EdjSports in September 2021, it looks ok for 2021 and in 2022 there is a huge debt and it's rising in 2023... Who knows how those debts appeared in the balance. Cameron Wickham, their finance guy knows.

Thank you fyo for the research and info in comment #117!

#117 by fyo // Jul 11, 2023 - 11:38am

Alright, so I did some digging and the story is completely different from what I thought, although I'll readily admit I never followed the whole business side of FO / Edj / Champion. As a note, dollar amounts below are in CAD unless otherwise specified (since the company is now Canadian).

tldr; there is no spoon (Champion), only EdjSports and they've been losing millions for years.

Long version:

Basically, Champion didn't buy EdjSports. Rather, Edj decided to go public via a SPAC (Special Purpose Acquisition Company). It's a simpler (although significantly less transparent) way of going public than an IPO. The SPAC is a publicly listed shell company that exists for the sole purpose of "buying" a company that wants to go public.

In this case, Edj merged with Champion Gaming Inc., a newly established (empty) holding company, with the objective of buying out the shareholders of a SPAC called Prime City One Capital Corp., a publicly held Canadian company with total assets of $15k and total liabilities of $86k (i.e. basically nothing), in a reverse takeover. The point being that the owners of Edj/Champ become the majority owners of the SPAC, which then renames itself to Champion, while still retaining the SPAC's public listing.Thus the official company headquarters are in Toronto where the SPAC was registered, but that's basically just a PO Box, while the effective headquarters are in Louisville, Kentucky, where EdjSports was (is), along with its roughly 30 employees.

Technically, the merger of EdjSports and Champion Gaming Inc. was *also* a reverse takeover, with the shareholders of EdjSports LLC obtaining control of Champion Gaming Inc. The purpose of that reverse takeover was likely to provide funding for the subsequent reverse takeover of the SPAC (along with some extra management).

Anyway, why all this? Was it EdjSports' insiders cashing out or what?

Well, Edj had been losing money hand over fist for years and insiders kept propping it up with millions of dollars in loans and deferred payments. In 2020, Edj raised $5 million in Series A fundraising, although I haven't been able to find the evaluation of the company set at that time. Considering the continued involvement of the EdjSports founders, it seems unlikely to me that this was purely a cash-out play, although I wouldn't begrudge them that, to be honest. Putting untold hours and tons of money into something for years takes its toll and at some point, it's nice to be rewarded for that.

After the two reverse takeovers, EdjSports (now Champion) was a publicly traded company headed by Sean O'Leary (as President of the Board of Directors) and Ken Hershman (as CEO, brought in with the initial Champion Gaming Inc. deal). Frank Frigo (EdjSports co-founder) was Chief Innovation Officer. The rest of the Board were from Edj and Champion Gaming Inc, with just one holdover from the SPAC.

The financials of the company are pretty bleak, from what I can tell. The total cost of taking the company public is listed in the 2021 financials as about $3.6 million. That contributed to a rather horrid 2021 with a total loss of over $9 million. 2022 "only" saw losses of just over $6 million, but was actually worse since there wasn't a huge one-time cost. Rather, revenue dropped from $2 million to $1.3 million. Total direct salaries dropped from $3.6 million to $2.5 million, but "share-based compensation" increased $1.6 million, so actual total employee compensation increased on much lower revenues.

Lest anyone think Champion is sitting on some sort of massive stash of cash, the total assets for 2022 were listed as $261k, compared to liabilities of nearly $5 million.

Current insider ownership of Champion Gaming Group is at 2.2%, so no one there is left holding the bag if worse comes to worse. It's not clear exactly who counts as an insider at the moment, though, and it's also not clear who the majority owners are, although it seems likely that the various venture funds in the Series A fundraising effort by EdjSports retain some ownership, although they could have cashed out during the SPAC "IPO".

In June of 2022, there was a major shakeup in the management of Champion. I'm not sure what caused it, but "money" is probably not a bad guess. The EdjSports guys (O'Leary and Frigo) stepped down as President and Chief Innovation Officer, respectively, while Hershman stepped down as CEO. O'Leary and Hershman remain on the Board of Directors, as far as I can tell, however.

Much of the information I'm missing almost certainly exists in various public filings, but there's a limit to how much I'm going to bother digging through this stuff. The details honestly aren't all that interesting to me, as opposed to the overall view.

There is a bunch of semi-interesting information in the various filings, like the revenue from FO+ subscriptions, the number of monthly active users, etc, but nothing that really explains the current situation. One interesting note somewhere stated that Aaron sold FO to EdjSports for $100 (one hundred USD) and 100k common shares of EdjSports (with an unknown valuation).

Anyway, the bottom line is that "this company" (EdjSports->Champion) isn't anywhere close to making any money (and hasn't ever been, as far as I can tell).

That also means complaints about "all current owners care about is the money" misses the spot somewhat. Annoyingly, I wasn't able to find a list of major shareholders (which should be public), but I'm not sure I can fault them for not spending millions a year propping up the business without taking a stern look at things.

It's perhaps worth noting that Champion Gaming Group's market cap has dropped by 40% (to $5.8 million) since Aaron announced his resignation.

EdjSports:

Sean O'Leary, CEO

Frank Frigo, co-founder

Championship Gaming (initially)

Sean O'Leary, President

Ken Hershman, CEO (former President of HBO Sports and VP at Showtime)

Frank Frigo, Chief Innovation Officer

David Lubotta, Director (co-founder of Championship Gaming with Hershmann)

Paxton Baker, Director

Cameron Wickham, Director (formerly a Director of the SPAC)

#118 by LondonMonarch // Jul 11, 2023 - 12:48pm

Excellent work! Although still fascinated to wonder where the creepy frat-style Spagnuolo guy fits in.

Interesting that Schatz's sell-out was not for cash but for shares. Gives 2 very different possible narratives:

(a) that FO was lossmaking and running out of cash, so he folded it into Edj for an interest in any upside if the combined entity worked.

(b) that standalone FO was viable but has been dragged down by a lossmaking Edj.

Either way leads to so many unanswered questions - including the way these deals were described and the baffling lack of explanation for pretty much everything.

And would rather invalidate the "Don't blame Aaron, he sold to Edj but they sold on to Champion" narrative.

#121 by theslothook // Jul 11, 2023 - 1:07pm

I don't think its as simple as A or B. Its important to remember a few things:

Aaron had lost writers like Barnwell and Tanier and Farrar at various points. He admitted, he simply did not have the budget to pay them what they wanted. A second point worth emphasizing; FO's methods are based on the play by play and churning out stats. But PFF looms as a competitor and it offers individual player grades which not only catch the attentions of the common fan, but they were alluring enough to grab the attention of Collinsworth and NBC. And then theres Next Gen Stats. So the competition was robust. And prior to this, FO had been relying on volunteer game charters.

I think Aaron likely felt that to grow the business, he needed additional funding or a merger that could beef up FO's profitability and market share. And lest we forget, as soon as the merger went through, the website got upgrades and there were changes made to enhance the user experience. So this notion of a profit grab is mistaken imo.

#123 by LondonMonarch // Jul 11, 2023 - 1:12pm

What was the additional funding/market share though? I don't think anyone had really heard of Edj before the deal, so they certainly weren't bringing some big following. And in terms of funding there was a mild website upgrade (to circa 2010 standards) but no evidence of anything gamechanging.

#119 by theslothook // Jul 11, 2023 - 12:56pm

Thanks for posting this.

You've gone through many of the gory details, but I suspected all along that this story is the same one so many many startups experience. In case people didn't know, almost all startups, including successful one's, spend years as unprofitable businesses with the hopes of turning it around one day. They go on like this because investors EVENTUALLY expect them to turn a profit. Its a risk.

In the end; companies that don't pay their employees aren't doing so because they are greedy. They don't pay them because they are desperate and its one of the few levers left in their arsenal. So I never saw this as a money grab. Like you wrote, cash comes in, more goes out and that musical chairs eventually ends most of the time in insolvency as the investment backers lose their stomach for it.

That said, I don't want to absolve the parent company for not paying their employees. Unpleasant as it sounds, it is truly much better to have a frank conversation with your employees and let them go rather than string them along for free labor while you hope to be able to turn things around. And here, hope means begging for some long shot investor. I have experienced this three times while working for startups that are at the end of their ropes. Everyone wants to be Meta's among Meta's first 100 employees, but many many other times, it ends like this.

Just as there's only one SB winner among 31 other "failed seasons"'; startup success is an even bigger long shot.

#124 by Bryan Knowles // Jul 11, 2023 - 1:48pm

Without going into too many details (because a) there's ongoing court cases, b) I don't feel comfortable using FO to talk about FO, and c) I don't know everything as just a freelancer!), I can confirm that I was never asked to write less or take any sort of paycut. In fact, they kept pressing for me to do more, and when I asked if they really wanted to pay for it, I was told yes, it's all in budget, this will be great.

#125 by theslothook // Jul 11, 2023 - 2:00pm

Yah...whatever benefit of the doubt I like to give people who are in uncomfortable, backed into a corner like situations has practically vanished. Not paying because you have no money is unpleasant; but part of life. Lying to your employees to keep working and commit additional hours when you have no money is usury to say the least.

#120 by guest from Europe // Jul 11, 2023 - 12:57pm

Well, Edj had been losing money hand over fist for years and insiders kept propping it up with millions of dollars in loans and deferred payments.

So, who loses money in such a case? Investors in EdjSports (some hedge funds, big players in finance world...)? Does this occur often to investors, so they win some and lose some on their investments or is this rare?

Thanks for the research.

#122 by theslothook // Jul 11, 2023 - 1:09pm

So, who loses money in such a case?

Broadly speaking; everyone does. The writers lose money in the form of lost wages. Aaron lost money in the sense that the shares may be totally worthless.

Remember, people who work for startups take wage cuts compared to larger businesses because of the allure of stock price increases. But in the strictest sense, whoever invested the money into the company is not getting it back. Usually, when the company is small; those are backed by Angel investors - either wealthy individuals who have a few million to play around with or the arm of a speculative investment firm. Once series A occurs; you get a larger pool of VC backed money. So my guess is its a local VC in Kentucky that lost and is now pulling the plug.

#126 by guest from Europe // Jul 11, 2023 - 2:59pm

Yes, i found a list of several venture capital investors to EdjSports at the bottom of the link https://pitchbook.com/profiles/company/232057-18#investors

This financial world is all news to me. I don't know anything about that.

#101 by Will Allen // Jul 08, 2023 - 11:01am

So long to everybody. It's been fun.

#103 by theslothook // Jul 08, 2023 - 12:21pm

One of my favorite features was Audibles because it gave updates on all of the other games that were going on.

I'm considering creating a reddit live thread for audibles if anyone is interested.

#105 by guest from Europe // Jul 08, 2023 - 3:12pm

I'm considering creating a reddit live thread for audibles if anyone is interested.

Just do it (if this doesn't cost you anything). If something positive happens on this site in September, people will stay here. If not, some people will join that thread on Mondays at least. 2 months from now it might be too late to announce this to other readers here... it's possible noone will be here.

Probably you readers who are interested should form some group somewhere now.

#107 by theslothook // Jul 08, 2023 - 6:03pm

ok I created it on reddit: ExFOAudibles.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ExFOAudibles/comments/14ugslv/welcome_fo_commentariate/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=2

#108 by Stendhal1 // Jul 08, 2023 - 11:30pm

Breaking news on Aaron and an upcoming almanac! $29.99 (cheap!)

Tanier, Knowles, Klassen, Gower, Cale Clinton, Yedor, Bassinger, Spratt, Verhei, Weintraub, Dan Pizzuta, Tyler Loechner, and Sirius XM fantasy channel host Jeff Ratcliffe also involved

https://www.ftnfantasy.com/articles/FTN/100065/aaron-schatzs-ftn-football-almanac-2023

#109 by billprudden // Jul 09, 2023 - 8:19am

Sir - Thanks for the update and link.

Bill

#111 by Sixknots // Jul 09, 2023 - 8:58pm

This is sad. Hope to enjoy your lively discussion again soon.

Sixknots (formerly Big Woody from many years ago).

#114 by Tundrapaddy // Jul 10, 2023 - 5:35pm

Aaron Schatz 'Almanac' and DVOA/DYAR stats available elsewhere now. https://www.ftnfantasy.com/articles/FTN/100065/aaron-schatzs-ftn-football-almanac-2023

Hopefully some new form of 'Football Outsiders' can take shape, as the core group over there reconstitutes its offerings and bandwidth.

As everyone else has been saying - so long, I will miss this space and the fairly intelligent discussion. When you stand back and consider it, FO has been a massive anomaly among football (and in general, 'sports') websites in that the stats and the comment threads have been pretty rational and intelligent.

As a courtesy reminder - consider going into your account profile and cancelling any 'annual autopay' for a product you will no longer receive here.

Apparently the South Park guys were right all along - you just can't trust those Canadians!

#128 by TADontAsk // Jul 14, 2023 - 10:27am

As a courtesy reminder - consider going into your account profile and cancelling any 'annual autopay' for a product you will no longer receive here.

Great advice. I had a terribly timed auto-renew on June 30. I knew things had slowed, but with no updates and it being the off-season, I gave them the benefit of the doubt. Then only days later Aaron announced his resignation. The worst part is that even the contact e-mail for this site doesn't work anymore. I got a bounceback that said "The recipient server did not accept our requests to connect." That's not good! Luckily I've been able to go through my credit card company to get this handed, because it doesn't look like anything is happening here. (The irony of this last article ending with a promotion code for a subscription.)

#136 by Dave0 // Jul 17, 2023 - 2:20pm

Thanks for the reminder! I was going to be rebilled in 2 days.

Goodbye FO, Aaron and crew, and all the real ones in the comment threads. Hope raiderjoe gets an appropriately high-profile signal somewhere else on the internets.

#127 by johonny12 // Jul 13, 2023 - 9:23am

The fact the company hasn't even posted a single update status notice tell you everything you need to know about what Aaron must have been going through. I've been reading these guys for so long. They were part of my morning routine. They will be missed by us.

#131 by Theo // Jul 16, 2023 - 1:18am

I dunno.

The lack of communication on this site regarding the future is pretty lame.

At least make an XP about what's going on. We've been your customers and kept your families afloat for two decades. The least you can do is show some respect and communicate.

#132 by LondonMonarch // Jul 16, 2023 - 6:16pm

This I agree with from all points of view. For Aaron, who is apparently moving on and intending to use many of the same stats and would presumably have FO users as a target audience. And for Champion/new ownership - even if they are underwater, you would think that the FO brand still has some value?

How long would it have taken (10 mins) to write a post explaining what happened - rather than leaving readers to do the sleuthing in these comments?

#133 by big10freak // Jul 16, 2023 - 10:31pm

It’s very likely that any separation agreement limits what can be shared publicly. And once someone has resigned then any access to the site to make a post is gone.

And what is Aaron took the bulk of payment in stock that is now worthless so he has seen his life’s work end with no monetary reward, then it’s likely too painful to discuss

I understand the annoyance. But given the nature of the folks involved there is almost certainly a reason or reasons. They aren’t just being rude

#134 by LondonMonarch // Jul 17, 2023 - 1:19pm

Not sure I really get that.

If Champion have any financial interest in the residual FO brand (even if the company is insolvent, it seems like a saleable asset of some value) there is surely merit in putting up a statement and trying to maintain goodwill.

If they have no interest at all, why bother restricting Schatz et al from saying something?

It does seem very odd the way a fairly substantial business has melted into the night with scarcely a word.

[EDIT - interestingly, Champion appears to have made market announcements as recently as 5 July, and filed accounts in Alberta on 30 June. Which is not really the sign of a dead organisation. Do they have any business other than FO?]

#135 by Jetspete // Jul 17, 2023 - 1:35pm

What was the FO brand though beyond Dvoa, Aaron and maybe KUBIAK? The only other author i attributed to the FO brand was barnwell and he left a while ago. If Aaron and the stats are gone, the brand is dead.

#137 by Theo // Jul 17, 2023 - 9:25pm

I'm not wasting time speculating what can be explained in 2 paragraphs by the ones involved.

If you can make an hour long podcast with 3 people, you can write a post that explains things.

#138 by Bryan Knowles // Jul 18, 2023 - 12:39pm

There is a legal difference between talking about an ongoing legal situation and filming a podcast.

#139 by Theo // Jul 18, 2023 - 12:46pm

Right.

#140 by big10freak // Jul 19, 2023 - 6:56am

Bryan

Some of us “get” that contract law is tough and a stray comment can possibly violate an agreement and therefore void a claim

Best of luck to all of FO in both the new jobs as well as pursuing whatever compensation is still outstanding

#141 by Theo // Jul 19, 2023 - 11:57am

I think everyone with 2 working brain cells 'gets' that.

The only thing I'm pointing out is that I find the lack of communication odd.

If the excuse is "legal battles" then I'd stay far away from Twitter, too.

#143 by LondonMonarch // Jul 20, 2023 - 4:52am

For my part the oddity is not with individual contributors like Bryan who have been short-changed and who understandably will be focused on recovering whatever money they can. Good luck to them!

It is on ownership - especially Aaron Schatz, who if the analysis above is correct would seem not simply to have sold speculatively to reckless new owners, but actually to have retained a significant stake in the continued running of the business. He seems to be saying as little as possible, for reasons which are unclear.

"What the heck happened?" is not such a very difficult question to answer.

#144 by guest from Europe // Jul 20, 2023 - 8:58am

He seems to be saying as little as possible, for reasons which are unclear.

Probably the reasons are legal ones: there might be "non disclosure agreeement" terms in sale contracts and/or in separation agreement if Schatz is still to use DVOA.

On a broader scale: wouldn't it be a cardinal sin for these writers if they were to write publicly bad things/facts about their employers? How would they get a new employment? When that Grantland site was terminated, the people who were employed there didn't say much about it, they made some podcasts saying "we all know what happened", "there are powers that be" and that was it.

It certainly is weird on behalf of EdjSports/Champion Gaming not to sell this nor to make any public statement.

#145 by LondonMonarch // Jul 20, 2023 - 11:13am

Oh for sure the writers will just move on, hopefully smoothly and with some money in their pockets. Good luck guys!

The interest is much more in the ownership/leadership, who between them seem to have run this site into the ground.

#147 by guest from Europe // Jul 20, 2023 - 4:00pm

At this point i think Schatz is a writer looking for employment. This is based on his twitter statement. So if he would put publicly anything what EdjSports did even if there were no "non disclosure terms", would any media company want to employ him? Or if he is to start something new, would any company sponsor him? (For this argument it's assumed that he got information how EdjSports/Champion were operating, what was going on. Maybe he didn't. Maybe he was "just a writer" once the site was sold. i have no opinion on this.)

He made a business error of selling F.O. to EdjSports. For this he paid by losing his job.

The usual statements by the company ownership/leadership in cases such as this one are PR crap anyway. There is no money for this site to operate properly. Exact financial/business plans of EdjSports we'll never find out. As they say in America "shit happens".

How Schatz is to continue using DVOA, which entity owns the DVOA data will be explained at the latest by him when he will write articles using it. That sure looks confusing now. Aaron Schatz is no "PR wizard". Some info, even vague, about his and DVOA's future would help him to retain more impatient readers...

#148 by LondonMonarch // Jul 21, 2023 - 3:10pm

I don't really buy the "shit happens" analysis. Very little about FO was changed after the Edj and Champion transactions. So if the model wasn't profitable when they bought it, I struggle to see how they were going to change that without making any alterations. You will also recall the Schatz statements I flagged above, spinning this as a strategic deal with symbiotic value. But it doesn't seem like any of that was ever attempted.

Based on the very good analysis in post #117, it would seem that Schatz would have been a shareholder in Champion, because he sold FO in exchange for Edj shares, and Edj then did a reverse takeover of Champion "with the shareholders of EdjSports LLC obtaining control of Champion Gaming Inc".

Indeed given that he was both selling into Edj/Champion the only element of the business which could have any real value/profit, and was continuing to run it, it would be strange indeed if he had not retained very substantial ownership and control. Otherwise he would just be giving stuff away.

So yes, certainly no PR wizard - but all of these uncertainties demonstrate exactly what the benefit of an explanation from the horse's mouth would be. In the absence of that, the natural inference from the outside looking in is that Schatz decided to share a wonderful enterprise with some sharks, and was party to its being run into the ground for no obvious reason or benefit.

#149 by guest from Europe // Jul 22, 2023 - 1:20am

I don't really buy the "shit happens" analysis.

I used this term regarding unknown EdjSports business model that was losing money all the time as written by fyo in #117 and caused this site to stop.

Very little about FO was changed after the Edj and Champion transactions. So if the model wasn't profitable

F.O. existed for more than a decade before the sale so they were financially at least above 0, probably not very profitable.

statements I flagged above, spinning this as a strategic deal with symbiotic value.

I read those as PR statements.

Indeed given that he was both selling into Edj/Champion the only element of the business which could have any real value/profit, and was continuing to run it, it would be strange indeed if he had not retained very substantial ownership and control. Otherwise he would just be giving stuff away.

We are in speculation territory. Maybe Schatz was being lied to about business model the same way Knowles was being lied to about salary payments. How much control/influence, if any at all, on EdjSports decisions Schatz had i don't know. Once he sold it, he was a shareholder in Edj and had control about writing on this site.

because he sold FO in exchange for Edj shares,

It really bothers you why he did this, based on what information, promises by EdjSports and what was their business arrangement...

Edit: to your credit you made similar comments when the sale was announced on this site and expressed your concerns. You can try to write an e-mail to Schatz or EdjSports/Champion. Probably you will get no explanation due to "non disclosure agreement".

My speculation regarding your comments #150 and #148: F.O. was financially stable, but not very profitable. EdjSports was supposed to bring expanded markets (fantasy or betting world), better PR, marketing, technical support, ultimately more profit... this they promised and planned and didn't really deliver. Schatz went along with this like Knowles and others went along with writing without getting paid. Maybe they were naive business-wise. From what Knowles and Tanier wrote it's implied that their confidence in Schatz in every way is undiminished.

#150 by LondonMonarch // Jul 22, 2023 - 4:45am

Yes it does bother me! None of it makes any sense!

Why take over a business making great promises about strategic synergies etc, then change nothing? Why just run into the ground?

EITHER - (a) the business was viable without changes - in which case, what went wrong? - or (b) the business required changes - in which case why didn't they make any?

And in either event, why did Aaron just go along with all of this?

#151 by Theo // Jul 23, 2023 - 11:12am

Look at what changed after the CG takeover.

They started to write many more fantasy betting and bookmaker articles.

Another thing they hoped would get off the ground was a football podcasts. Because podcasts bring in money.

I think they overestimated their ability to get it off the ground. Yes, fantasy football market is big - and DraftKings has shows about it, so my guess is that FO wanted a slice of the pie - but they couldn't get it off the ground.

I think the whole CG deal was an investment to expand, but they couldn't get any ROI.

#152 by theslothook // Jul 23, 2023 - 12:34pm

I know they also made code changes to modernize the website. Those sorts of improvements better organized the pages plus better serviced the premium section.

I think it's more like EDJs financial troubles embroiled FO and dragged it down with it

#153 by LondonMonarch // Jul 24, 2023 - 11:10am

None of that seems like the sort of ground-breaking stuff that would require/justify a takeover or would turn around a business otherwise doomed to fail.

Fixing up the website is paying a guy to do a few days' work. I think they took it from a 2008 level website to a 2013 level website maybe, at best.

Writing a few more gambling/fantasy-related articles is also a mild shift of focus but not much more that.

If that was really Schatz's grand plan then, to quote your man Walter Mondale - "Where's the beef"?

#146 by Bryan Knowles // Jul 20, 2023 - 12:31pm

This is as far as I can say on the subject at the moment, but it's not just the contracted writers who were shortchanged. Full-time employees were also not paid on time,

https://twitter.com/MikeTanier/status/1680944597495627777

As for Aaron...well, there's a reason the former writers are happily working on his Almanac.

#129 by theslothook // Jul 14, 2023 - 12:46pm

Since this thread has become a dumping ground for everything at this point, I thought I would encourage people to listen to the play callers podcast. Its a weighty and lengthy set of interviews with Kyle Shanahan and his disciples across the NFL.

As usual, I think the little too much of backslapping going on and a narrative twist that tells the tale as if all of these teams are powered by offense when in reality, especially in SF, A lot of their successes was driven by defense. But nevertheless, it's a very interesting insight into how NFL offensive coordinators think about innovation.

However, there is a character in this story that looms large in the back of all of this; and that's darth hoodie. There is just so much grudging respect for a guy who defanged all of these clever schemes. And he didn't just out execute you in the traditional coach speak but they point blank say he crafted defenses they had never seen before. Somewhere I think belichick's greatest triumphs that he personally revisits pleasantly are not The super Bowl rings but being able to outfox every single creative and clever offensive coordinator who bursts onto the scene.

I don't know what belichick's reputation and legacy will be in the years following Tom Brady's retirement, But anyone who thinks that the entire Patriots dynasty is built on Tom Brady's greatness is truly missing the point. You don't win multiple super bowls in low scoring affairs because your QB is otherworldly (and he is/was). Belichick might be the only coach in NFL history where you might debate his value versus his quarterback and it's not a completely laughable exercise.

#130 by guest from Europe // Jul 14, 2023 - 4:25pm

to listen to the play callers podcast. Its a weighty and lengthy set of interviews

Thank you for this information. I will do that later.

Since this thread has become a dumping ground for everything at this point,

I don't think this should continue on here. Soon there would be more than 150 comments and an overview will be lost. There will be no new articles here for some longer time. Therefore, it's better to move it to that reddit group that you created. Hopefully people will join you, if not immediately, than in September. Maybe you can point out there somehow that it's a replacement for Football Outsiders or put here some link and leave that as a last comment on this thread so that people can see that 2-3 months from now.

As a probable goodbye i leave a link to an appropriate music and movie about the end of this website.

ESPN: Biggest Post-Draft Hole for All 32 Teams

Aaron Schatz — Fri, 12 May 2023 13:51:50 +0000

ESPN: Biggest Post-Draft Hole for All 32 Teams Aaron Schatz 12 May 2023, 09:51am

Over on ESPN+, we look at the biggest remaining hole for each team, from the Washington quarterbacks to the Chicago edge rushers. For some teams, there are problems with a clear starter. For other teams, it's more about depth. Good luck finding holes on the roster for teams such as Philadelphia and Cincinnati.

#1 by halfjumpsuit // May 12, 2023 - 10:58am

I know you have a lot on your plate right now but you forgot about the existence of Josh Sweat, who is the starter, Brandon Graham is the backup.

#2 by Aaron Schatz // May 12, 2023 - 11:58am

Didn't forget him. Just didn't mention him! Graham and Sweat are both starters.

#3 by halfjumpsuit // May 12, 2023 - 12:44pm

No, Sweat and Reddick are the starters, Graham was first off the bench. Literally the only game Graham started last year was the one that Sweat missed, and he played more than half of snaps in only one other game.

#4 by rapierma // May 12, 2023 - 1:04pm

I love this site and I love the content the authors put out. But this right here is why I now have an ESPN+ account and I have not renewed my FO+ account.

#5 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 12, 2023 - 2:58pm

I would say it's also because ESPN pays their writers, but I'm starting to wonder if that's still true.

#6 by Drivster // May 12, 2023 - 5:47pm

The writers Iger doesn’t lay off will need to be redeployed to write Blade and Andor

Maybe it’s an op for FO writers

KANG: I have conquered a million universes!

DR STRANGE: That is but a counting stat… what is your DVOA?

#7 by dbostedo // May 13, 2023 - 11:29am

Defenders Value Over Avengers?

#8 by Mike B. In Va // May 15, 2023 - 12:46pm

Clearly you did not watch the Defenders series.

#9 by dbostedo // May 16, 2023 - 10:22am

Nothing says it has to be a positive value. :)

#10 by malave // Jun 15, 2023 - 9:33am

#11 by LondonMonarch // Jun 19, 2023 - 4:41am

What's happened to this website?

Really surprised no-one is commenting on this! Especially Aaron Schatz who is tweeting about football but saying nothing about Football Outsiders.......

#12 by MilesArcher // Jul 06, 2023 - 9:58pm

Apparently writers like to get paid for their work. Funny thing that.

NFL 2023 Schedule Release

Aaron Schatz — Wed, 10 May 2023 13:49:54 +0000

NFL 2023 Schedule Release Aaron Schatz 10 May 2023, 09:49am

The NFL began releasing the 2023 schedule on Wednesday and will finish on Thursday evening. Here's a place to discuss all of this year's games.

Some highlights so far:

The first-ever Black Friday game will be Dolphins at Jets.
Giants at Eagles on Christmas.
The Jaguars will play two straight games in England in Weeks 4-5, first against Atlanta and then Buffalo. Only one of those is technically a Jacksonville home game.
Two Germany games: Kansas City-Miami and New England-Indianapolis.

#1 by johonny12 // May 10, 2023 - 11:09am

I hate "home" games not at home. Unless the whole division loses a home game too, as a fan it feels unfair.

#2 by IlluminatusUIUC // May 10, 2023 - 11:46am

How about a "home" game where you have to travel but the "away" team is already there? Being the second half of that London swing is BS for Buffalo.

#3 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 10, 2023 - 12:35pm

I'm just waiting for a state legislature to pass a law that a professional team in their state cannot play a 'home' game outside the state boundaries.

#4 by Chuckc // May 10, 2023 - 12:38pm

Given the amount of money teams spend on their local legislature I think this is very unlikely

#5 by BigRichie // May 10, 2023 - 12:50pm

Unconstitutional, to boot.

#8 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 10, 2023 - 1:36pm

What part of it?

#13 by BigRichie // May 10, 2023 - 5:49pm

A state regulating interstate commerce. (even were both teams in-state, the broadcast goes outside of it)

A state ordering a private company to label its product this-way instead of that-way. Like ordering Campbell's Soup to use blue rather than red on its labels. Good luck on that in the courts.

#14 by serutan // May 10, 2023 - 7:12pm

A state regulating interstate commerce. (even were both teams in-state, the broadcast goes outside of it)

The NFL is a nationwide entity which makes it interstate commerce regardless of any other consideration.

#38 by RickD // May 12, 2023 - 10:21am

Are you arguing that businesses that operate both in and out of a state are beyond a state's jurisdiction?

That's dubious.

#20 by IlluminatusUIUC // May 11, 2023 - 11:20am

A state ordering a private company to label its product this-way instead of that-way. Like ordering Campbell's Soup to use blue rather than red on its labels. Good luck on that in the courts.

Your labeling example happens all the time - the California Prop 65 warning is a common example, but it's not alone in that regard.

If the state were going to try something like this, it would likely have to be included in the contract when they handed out state funds for a stadium. "Must play X home games a season or pay a penalty" etc.

#17 by Mike B. In Va // May 11, 2023 - 8:57am

That doesn't stop laws from being passed. It just redistributes wealth to lawyers.

#22 by MJK // May 11, 2023 - 11:21am

I think a state legislature could figure out a way to do it constitutionally. They could mandate that any professional sports team that wishes to receive public assistance from the state or cities within the state (including things like police at games, public transit to and from the stadium, and especially teams getting public financing for their stadiums) play at least 50% of their regular season games within the state borders, or else lose that support. They're not controlling interstate commerce then; they're just tying the support of their state's resources to teams that play at least half their games there.

They could also do it with tax laws... the state could pass a tax law that would massively tax ownership of a sports team or revenue generated by a professional sports team in the state... and they put a clause in that waives the tax increase if the team plays at least 50% of its games in the state borders. The tax increase could be massive enough that it would put a dent in the shared revenue that goes to the league. I think that approach is clearly constitutional, in the same way that it is consititutional for Massachusetts or California or whoever to tax business activity in their state even if that is conducted by out-of-staters.

#29 by BigRichie // May 11, 2023 - 3:12pm

Neither tax nor other laws can single out an individual entity.

While negotiating a subsidy, yes, the state/locality could negotiate in just about anything they can get the franchise to agree to. Afterwards? Uh-uh.

#34 by PackerPete // May 12, 2023 - 8:02am

Hard for every team to play at least half its games at home in a 17 game schedule. As the league has adopted an approach of 9 home games one season, 8 home games the next season, will the penalties just apply every other year?

I would imagine that teams playing overseas offer tickets for the foreign game to season ticket holders but don't charge for that game in the basic season ticket fee that year. As the fans aren't charged for the foreign game and that the game is available on television or streaming services that the fans can access, hard to figure a possible legal challenge to what a private league wants to do. Who has standing to sue?

#35 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 12, 2023 - 8:58am

Teams charge for pre-season games. Why on earth do you think they don't charge for foreign games?

#41 by BigRichie // May 12, 2023 - 10:58am

Ought to be some season ticket holder on here who can address this, you'd think. (or is every last one of us just too poor?)

Prior to which, my $$$ is with Packer Pete. I cannot imagine telling a Jacksonville Jaguar season ticket holder 'OK, you also owe us $100 (just about every season) for this game in Munich. Just gotta get yourself there, is all'.

#69 by Mike B. In Va // May 15, 2023 - 11:36am

Seems to me like that's exactly what they'd do. Have you met NFL owners?

#39 by RickD // May 12, 2023 - 10:25am

I shouldn't think any state legislature would want to take on the power of the NFL directly. For starters, they would be on legal thin ground. And most state legislatures would be overwhelmed by the financial resources of the NFL. And would this be a political winner? Just to get one home game protected? Maybe once per decade?

State governments are in constant competition to make their states more business-friendly. I cannot imagine such a process getting initiated.

Of course, that wouldn't stop the occasional legislator from loudly speaking about the NFL, as Arlen Specter did fifteen years ago. But it would just be so much theater.

#44 by Raiderfan // May 12, 2023 - 1:21pm

“State governments are in constant competition to make their states more business-friendly.”

Clearly, you do not live in California.

#45 by theslothook // May 12, 2023 - 1:35pm

San Francisco is the epicenter of a city doing everything it can to strangle the golden goose. If it weren't for nearby Silicon Valley, San Francisco would be Detroit 2.0 right now.

#57 by bravehoptoad // May 12, 2023 - 9:35pm

More likely it would just become a cute little bedroom community with a touristy downtown. That's what it was becoming in the 90s.

#59 by theslothook // May 12, 2023 - 10:09pm

Having lived there somewhat recently and as someone who visits quite often (we are in SF right now as of this comment), it has some pretty bad problems that have seriously eroded the quality of life in the city. There's a terrific Ethiopian restaurant in the tenderloin that to get there on foot means walking through streets filled with drug addicts and drug dealers. I didn't really care as I was used to it, but it scares plenty of people who aren't familiar with that kind of scene.

It wasn't always this way, but its decidedly gotten worse and I've been visiting SF since I was kid. That said, I still miss living there, but as a car owner, I intentionally parked up a giant hill so that they never broke into my car. Unfortunately, that's one of many all too common problems with the city these days.

#62 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 15, 2023 - 9:01am

Frankly, it sounds like Detroit, but more expensive.

#66 by bravehoptoad // May 15, 2023 - 9:36am

Dude, you need to use sarcastic font when you're being sarcastic.

#77 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 15, 2023 - 3:56pm

Detroit has gotten weird. The city has emptied out to much (it's down to a third of its maximum population) that it doesn't even have that many panhandlers/homeless, because there's not enough people left to keep them going.

The flipside though is that you are an obvious target and there's no one around to help. Detroit doesn't have *many* panhandlers, but the ones it has are aggressive. They will chase you down.

The strongest sense of Detroit is that everything is too large. The buildings, the streets, the area. Everything. There aren't enough people for all the space. It's almost Lovecraftian, or 15 minutes after the apocalypse. I know people who have hit pheasant on city streets, because urban prairie became a thing. I'll say this, though -- if you stuck it out, but price of living is pretty low. Everything is pretty affordable.

I'm not sure that will happen to SF, both for good and for ill. If SF does hollow out, it may bring prices down enough that the middle class moves back in. But if it doesn't... oof. Stagflated is a bad place to be.

#101 by bravehoptoad // May 19, 2023 - 2:56pm

Yeah, that doesn't sound anything at all like San Francisco. It doesn't sound unpleasant, particularly, but SF is a pretty vibrant place atm, and quite popular.

#65 by bravehoptoad // May 15, 2023 - 9:34am

I lived there from '93 to '20, and the tenderloin has always been scrungy. It's gotten a lot more upscale since the '90s.

People make the mistake of thinking that the presence of homeless people is a sign of flaws in a city, but the reason homeless people are there is because San Francisco takes care of them. If you see a city with no homeless people, that's a screwed-up city. They've all had to leave.

San Francisco's crime rate is at historic lows right now. It's one of the most popular tourist destinations in the world. The property prices are sky-high because of demand. It's got neighborhoods that rival anywhere on the planet for sheer pure cute.

Still, here are people making vague, anecdotal complaints about the place.

#67 by BigRichie // May 15, 2023 - 10:51am

If you bother to Google 'San Francisco crime rate', you'll get a truer picture. To what should be no one's surprise, it's pretty much smack dab in the middle of Slot and Brave.

This is really a simple value distinction. Slot believes homelessness speaks poorly of a city per se, Brave believes it speaks well of a city per se. Whichever is closer to your own view, go ahead and take your place in that line.

#68 by theslothook // May 15, 2023 - 11:01am

Ok, some thoughts:

1. Contrary to most people, I don't mind that they've decriminalized drug dealing. I don't think it's great policy sending people to jail for dealing drugs because there's a never-ending demand for it and all you are doing in the alternative is sending waves of people to jail and filling up our prisons. I am very libertarian on this topic.

2. I'd like to see the numbers on this, but I believe SF's generous homeless services are a big attraction for the homeless to congregate in SF. The usual story is homelessness is primarily made up of SF residents driven to the streets by sky high prices, but I am skeptical of that. If you are homeless, SF ostensibly is a pretty lousy place to be homeless. Its cold and rainy and has pretty busy streets with lots of noise. I'd rather be in Santa Monica(which also has a gigantic homeless population). In other words, the services are a pretty big magnet for the state's homeless. Much like Oregon is about to be with its very lenient set of policies. Whether this is a good thing or a bad thing is an interesting question, although even the very compassionate people that I meet are usually the first ones to call the cops if homeless set up a camp in their neighborhoods or shoot up drugs near their kids' schools. Everyone's first preference is compassion from a distance.

3. I do not trust crime stats for any major city, including San Francisco. Juking the stats appears to be a nationwide problem in seemingly all aspects, including education and crime.

4.I also don't like trusting anecdotes either, but having lived and worked in SF for 5 years lets you witness lots and lots of things. And since you don't like vagueness, I will be painfully detailed. My friend's wife was chased down the streets by a deranged homeless woman wielding a knife. They lived on Howard and Folsom. A classmate of mine abruptly left the city after a homeless man broke into his apartment looking for drugs. Another high school classmate of mine almost had his daughter kidnapped right in front of him. https://www.ktvu.com/news/san-francisco-kidnap-attempt-leaves-father-in-shock-possibly-homeless-woman-arrested

I have seen one homeless person smash another with a two by four. While walking down the tenderloin, I heard a bottle whizzing over my head, aimed at a woman walking ahead of me. It happily missed her. Many of my female colleagues did not feel safe at night alone in SF. I personally witnessed a drive by shooting and death at the Western Addition McDonalds while coming out of the bathroom. There is a police station literally a block away btw. Visit any of the grocery stores and just about everything worth stealing(except $50 bottles of wine) is behind glass and requires an attendant to retrieve. Yes, even the cheap Vodka is treated like grandma's pearls. I've seen fist fights breakout between embattled security guards against shoplifters and thieves. Thank god that wasn't Marlo Stanfield. Absolutely none of these events, except for the murder and attempted kidnapping, were reported to the police. Visit the bart station on Powell or Montgomery, especially at night, and it will remind you of a zombie movie. Drug addicts strung out or sleeping on the floor and riders needing to sift carefully around them, used needles, or human feces. I don't think these are isolated incidents affecting only me and some people around me. https://abc7news.com/sf-tourism-san-francisco-streets-international-travelers-conventions-in/12227886/

5. It's not just the tenderloin. *Deep Breaths* visit Soma, Mission, Richmond, North Beach, Fidi, parts of Haight Ashbury, and Hayes Valley and you will see homelessness eroding the quality of life. I have seen parents walking their kids to school and passing around a homeless person defecating into a bush on the plain sidewalk. Both the dad and the kid paid them no mind; as if it was so common an occurrence that there was nothing unusual or disgusting about it. Another day in SF. I used to work on California and Sansom. Drum Street is absolutely filthy. The Parks nearby and areas between FIDI and the ferry building along with the entire Embarcadero are littered with trash. Walk down any part of market street, beginning at Van Ness and or the Ferry building and you will see parades of homeless and drug addicts. I used to walk that daily on my way home after work. Not all of SF is like that of course. I had a studio in Pac Heights and so those areas north of Pine Street and West of Van Ness connecting to the Marina are nice. Presidio is absolutely gorgeous and largely free of the homeless. Even still, car break ins are numerous and I sure as hell would never own a Prius if I still lived there(or anywhere in the Bay Area for that matter, two of our friends have had their catalytic converters ripped off). https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/bayarea/heatherknight/article/catalytic-converter-theft-exodus-17838594.php

6. People are leaving SF and are clearly dissatisfied with the quality of life. Chesa Boudin was recalled for a reason and it wasn't exclusively because he pissed off the police union and the prosecutors office. Once more, I actually agreed with his softer stance on drug dealing, but the catch and release policy when it came to more serious felonies was a real thumb in the eye. https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/san-francisco/sf-da-boudin-blamed-by-some-for-release-of-parolee-suspected-of-fatal-nye-hit-and-run/2435759/

7. Through all of this, SF remains a ridiculously expensive city and that's squarely due to onerous regulations on building that has made it a nightmare to build new housing. When demand is high and supply is kept small, prices explode. Another sad fact of Bay Area politics that appears to snare even self described free market libertarians like Mark Andreesen or celebrity sports stars like Steph Curry. Nimbyism appears to be a bipartisan consensus.

8. In spite of everything I wrote above, I will always cherish my time in San Francisco. I loved living in the city and miss aspects of it all the time. I got to work and live around a diverse group of people very much outside of the bubble of Saratoga California. The doorman of my building is still a great friend who I keep in contact with years later. I simply never would have met him if I wasn't in SF. I also love the Bay Area. Despite all of the problems it has, I plan to live here the rest of my life.

Added some more links.

https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/common-sense-policy-reforms-california-housing#

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/22/opinion/california-housing-nimby.html

#76 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 15, 2023 - 3:52pm

If you are homeless, SF ostensibly is a pretty lousy place to be homeless. Its cold and rainy and has pretty busy streets with lots of noise. I'd rather be in Santa Monica(which also has a gigantic homeless population).

SF is still a pretty nice place to be homeless. It's almost never below freezing and rarely very hot. It's not arid, but never rains all that much.

I mean, jesus -- compare:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco#Climate
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_City#Climate

San Francisco is cooler, warmer, sunnier, and drier than NYC. There's little blue-collar crime other than other homeless people. I'd prefer Santa Monica, too, but San Franciscans seems to be softer touches.

#78 by theslothook // May 15, 2023 - 3:57pm

SF is pretty windy, foggy, generally quite cold even during peak summer months and the streets travel up high elevations. My point is, if you want a great weather place to be homeless, SF isn't it. By comparison, parts of the bay area directly south, north and east are more temperate. The services, however, are not so generous and the suburban population would turn into Texas gun holders the minute the homeless started camping where they live.

There is already major grumbling about the preponderance of RVs parked in neighborhoods in expensive zip codes.

#71 by Theo // May 15, 2023 - 12:36pm

Here's an anecdote:

[Edit]

I dont live there, and I wouldn't move there even if you paid my mortgage.

#72 by theslothook // May 15, 2023 - 12:41pm

Did you mean, "I wouldn't move there..."?

Or are you saying it's so attractive to live there, mortgage be damned?

#83 by Theo // May 17, 2023 - 12:33pm

*wouldn't

I couldnt live in the US. Beautiful country but too many problems.

#86 by theslothook // May 17, 2023 - 1:33pm

Is this your view for every country in Europe? All of their largest countries? Only nordic?

I recently had a spirited debate with someone about Europe vs America and the pros and cons. Its an utterly fascinating discussion and weighs a lot of personal value systems; especially with respect to equality vs growth vs immigration, etc etc.

I personally love visiting Europe and adore the food culture, but I'd rather be in the US.

#88 by guest from Europe // May 18, 2023 - 5:09am

Its an utterly fascinating discussion and weighs a lot of personal value systems; especially with respect to equality vs growth vs immigration, etc etc.

I thought this isn't allowed here. If it is, i can tell you that the largest problem with living in the USA for me and people that i know would be weapons, crimes... In a city of 1 million inhabitants in a poor EU country we have 1-5 murders/year and it's usually when fighting within a family.

I could write you many anecdotes what people who visited USA didn't like, but i suppose you prefer general arguments. Those are: it's another continent, totally different culture, different language that most Europeans don't speak, different life values, different news etc. Everyone loves American nature! Whoever moves to USA has to be ready to leave their "previous life" behind them and start a new one. That may be good economically eventually, but it's very hard for your identity.

In USA everything is valued by money, wealth, ownership... most people i met in various countries don't think that way and aren't interested in that. They just want to have affordable living. "You can eat only one lunch per day" no matter how rich you are. Example: people here know who is an owner of some NFL team, this appears on the TV etc. In Europe not. Only if such a rich "owner" does something bad and there is a riot, only then his name is mentioned.

USA is more tolerant towards immigrants than rich EU countries, there are better business opportunities, but there is much more risk, no health insurance etc. So people who go to another continent are usually those that "have nothing to lose in life" (young and poor) or want to take risks... some go to China, some to USA, some to Africa...

In my opinion the countries that are more similar to USA economically/culturally are Russia, Vietnam, Japan, modern China... not EU countries.

Every EU country is different (history, culture, language...). Europe is decaying, but there is still a lot of cultural "value" and "joy" in its diversity and "intelect".

Anecdote: last summer i met an older couple from California, San Francisco area. They moved to Mediterranean, spend about 5 months/year in California, run their business there. They told me that life here is much better and that they made more friends in 1 year living here than in their whole life in California.

#89 by Theo // May 18, 2023 - 9:46am

I said US, and you ask me about countries in Europe.

I used to live in the Netherlands, which is amazing. Safe, clean and excellent conditions.

Europe is generally good to live (except for the major cities, which have turned FUBAR by mass immigration) But 'Europe' is so different from place to place. Living in Italy is completely different from living in Nordic countries and you can't compare Belgium with Poland etc.

I have since moved to Taiwan and love it. Except for the traffic and air pollution it's great.

"I'd rather be in the US".

I don't know where you live in the US and what the living conditions are there. And of course, there are many places where I could live in the US. But generally - the country is messed up on a federal level. I mean... I don't want to get into politics or the other things where the population is divided on. So I'll stop here.

#90 by theslothook // May 18, 2023 - 12:20pm

Replying to both of you.

I apologize because I mistakenly assumed you came from Europe given you commented about Europe below. Note, I am going to be massively generalizing when I say, "Europe" and it really means continental Europe. I am also generalizing when I say, "US". Neither are homogenous blobs. Bethesda Maryland is very different from Baltimore or San Francisco or Palo Alto, just as I am sure Bologna is completely different from Naples which is very different from Copenhagen(I plan to visit both places in Italy this summer).

First to US and the gun policy. A thoughtful major crimes detective talked about this. Right now, we have a culture of gun ownership that's pretty hard wired and hard to break out of and the horse has left the barn door so to speak. And its doubly crazy that the weapons we desire look at lot less like hunting and self defense firearms and more like tactical infantry weapons. So this is a legitimately problematic issue with the US and not one easily solved with policy.

Of course, everyone has preferences and should live where they like. There is no one right answer at all. The US has many many problems but so does seemingly every country with large populations. To be honest, the parts that I find so fascinating touch on other dimensions. The major European countries have decided to have high marginal tax rates that are very broad so that they touch practically the entire tax base not just the rich, and in some cases, very onerous business regulations. They also have very generous welfare states such that extreme poverty is absolutely not a thing and health care access is provided to everyone. There is a sense that everyone is more or less equal in status(this is something I am curious if true btw. When I went to France, you could feel the same conspicuous consumption standards that I felt in New York or London). Europe has far better infrastructure, better mass transportation, and safer streets by in large.

The US, by comparison, has lower taxes and more favorable business regulations. It is much easier to fire people in the US, thus insecurity is higher in the US. But it does imply that the talented can make a lot more money in the US. Its partially why I have seen so many European engineers coming to America. The US also attracts more immigrants, both educated and uneducated. This has a truly transformative effect on their lives and of course, the US benefits greatly from all of the talent that comes to its shores. And of course, the US is is far more innovative than Europe in general. New ideas get created and used all over the world.

Thats my simple summary.

#91 by guest from Europe // May 18, 2023 - 4:27pm

Some tourist advice: if you want to visit everything between Bologna and Napoli, you need at least a month. Roma at least a week. Italian towns in middle ages were town-states and each one has a history and something to see. Bologna and Firenze are close geographically, but very different... all of this in just one country! All the other European countries are totally different.

There is absolutely nothing in common between European countries. On the other hand USA is comparatively more homogenous regarding language, history, culture, money. There are differences from city to city in everyday life.

There are readers here from Britain and other countries. Perhaps they can write something.

They also have very generous welfare states such that extreme poverty is absolutely not a thing and health care access is provided to everyone.

Yes, this is "Europe". Why would you have an organized country, if not for this welfare (if it can be provided)? Scandinavian countries are the best in the world at this. Then France, Benelux. European east is poorer, but within a country it used to be communism, so everyone was the same. Nowadays in east is more crony capitalism.

Europe has far better infrastructure, better mass transportation, and safer streets by in large.

This is very important to me, not tax rates.

There is a sense that everyone is more or less equal in status

Totally not true about status, due to history, nobility that you can't meet (like castes in India) etc. No American or Russian billionaire could ever really reach such status.

In larger western European cities there are ghettos formed by immigrants who mostly don't speak the language and came from a different culture and/or continent. There are many integration problems.

Some countries don't like other ones, look upon others... There are regions, dialects, rivalries within a country etc. I don't want to write history and sociology essays. So, it's large cultural inequality, not economical. In USA it's probably reverse.

When I went to France, you could feel the same conspicuous consumption standards that I felt in New York or London

It depends how you define this. I doubt that anyone ever matched the French in luxury, standards, fashion, consumption, food, style...

(Britain is quite different from continental Europe. They are closer to USA)

But it does imply that the talented can make a lot more money in the US. Its partially why I have seen so many European engineers coming to America. The US also attracts more immigrants, both educated and uneducated.

True. As i wrote in the previous post, not everyone chases money. There is no right or wrong in this, it's a personal choice.

#92 by theslothook // May 18, 2023 - 4:53pm

Some tourist advice: if you want to visit everything between Bologna and Napoli, you need at least a month. Roma at least a week. Italian towns in middle ages were town-states and each one has a history and something to see. Bologna and Firenze are close geographically, but very different... all of this in just one country! All the other European countries are totally different.

We have 14 days and we're going to be doing a very American style see it all in as little time as possible. I personally do not subscribe to this when visiting a new place. Low and slow is better. But unfortunately, when I posed this on Marginal Revolution, an overwhelming number of responses basically said you need to see all of these places because they are that iconic. As such, we are going to jam Venice, Padua, Bologna, Cinque Terre, Rome, Pompei, Amalfi, Pisa, and Parma all in one trip. It is ambitious for sure and not my first preference, but Italy has been the country I have wanted to visit since I was unemployed out of college and this was the ultimate ambition of mine. In that period, I have visited lots of countries but never this one for reasons I still can't understand.

#94 by guest from Europe // May 19, 2023 - 4:54am

You can skip Pisa and Parma. Fairly close to Venezia is Trieste, a very different town, more Austrian style, but on the coast. Not many tourists there.

In between geographically from Venezia to Napoli are Perugia, Assissi, Firenze, Siena, San Gimignano, Volterra, Ferrara, Ravenna, San Marino...all very interesting. Plus the Alps, Milano, coasts, Sicily, Sardinia...

You should leave out Roma, you don't have the time for it. And fly there another time. You can come to Italy every summer if you want. Flights are cheaper nowadays.

What you are doing is joining huge American summer tourist crowds. They piss all over Italian towns in the streets during the night! And you complain above about cleanliness in S.F.

I would recommend you to stay north: Venezia to Siena or south: Roma to Amalfi coast.

You can cover all of this by trains. Don't need a rent-a-car service. Italian streets are narrow and traffic is a large problem.

#96 by theslothook // May 19, 2023 - 9:53am

Should be clear, we are going in September, hopefully after Tourist season has ended.

I am personally not as big a fan of visiting major cities. Paris was nice, but we enjoyed traveling from Neice to Menton and wandering that area far more. However, it's Rome and it's iconic.

Any reason to skip the places you have mentioned? For the record, we are starting in Milan and going south. Seeing the alps is less of a priority as we visited Switzerland last year for a week before going to India. Btw, skiing Zermatt was a lifetime worthy experience.

#102 by guest from Europe // May 19, 2023 - 3:50pm

we are going in September, hopefully after Tourist season has ended

It never ends in Italy. It's a big tourist country. Those towns are small and narrow, everything in walking distance, crowded with tourists from all over the world.

Any reason to skip the places you have mentioned?

There isn't that much to see.

For the record, we are starting in Milan and going south. Seeing the alps is less of a priority

Milano is far north. From there you can see the lakes on the border with Switzerland. There is no way you can cover Milano to Roma in 2 weeks. So, try to start in Roma or Venezia, they have international airports. If it's Milano, than stay north: Milano, Como, Bergamo, Venezia, Padua, Cinque Terre, Ravenna, Ferrara, San Marino. If there is time, Tuscany: Lucca, Firenze, Volterra, Siena

Paris is very large. In Italy all the towns are more similar to Nice. I mostly walk in Rome. To see Rome 4 days is a minimum! That means skipping the churches

#93 by theslothook // May 18, 2023 - 4:59pm

That's why I feel its so fascinating. In some sense, you cant have generous welfare without a very wide and steep tax policy. And then once you have such a generous welfare state, you cannot then be very pro immigration.

I will say, the economist Bryan Caplan made a particularly interesting comment. He said, if he compared a middle class suburb of a decently large American city(he lives somewhere between Maryland and Virginia); he suggested those people enjoy a better quality of life on most dimensions as compared to similar people in Europe. He then pointed to the ability to owning a car, square footage of the house, meat consumption, and access to air conditioning as real difference makers between the two. Economist Valerie Ramey was talking about colleagues of hers in Europe don't use contractors because its so expensive, so they paint the houses themselves along with most repairs. On the other hand, my Bulgarian friend has real disdain for American laziness on this dimension and thinks its rather wonderful that he's so versed as a carpenter and mechanic.

I have cousins in Denmark who brought empty suitcases with them and loaded up on consumer goods when they were here. Even though San Francisco is notoriously expensive, they couldn't believe how cheap everything was. Costco felt like nirvana. I also learned from them that despite having two PHD professors as parents, they lived in a two story house where the top story was occupied by another family. The whole family relied on one shared car. In times prior to Covid, a person could not live almost anywhere in California without a car. I have a friend who has 4 between just he and his wife.

Even still, Denmark is reportedly the happiest place on earth so clearly they have far better amenities that make a huge difference.

#95 by guest from Europe // May 19, 2023 - 5:24am

In some sense, you cant have generous welfare without a very wide and steep tax policy.

The highest taxes have the Scandinavian countries. They are the best organized, have the most welfare, no homeless there (they would freeze), but no very rich people either. They want to pay the taxes. An anecdote: one guy immigrated to work in Sweden or Norway. After a few months he found some loophole how his company could pay a lot less taxes. He went with this to his bosses. They told him him: "we don't do this. we want to pay taxes". He lost his integrity.

And then once you have such a generous welfare state, you cannot then be very pro immigration.

Absolutely false. Scandinavians are the most benevolent towards immigrants. There is a very strong leftist public opinion, so they embrace immigrants. When immigrants don't integrate and form ghettos, some problems occur (e.g. Sweden). Countries that aren't so open to immigrants are poorer ones and also large ones, those which had many colonies in the past.

In USA you have larger houses because Europe is overcrowded. There is no space left. But most people in EU cities rent flats, about 90%. In countryside they own their houses.

in Europe don't use contractors because its so expensive, so they paint the houses themselves along with most repairs.

I guess this is countryside. Flat owner in a city has the duty to do the repairs.

He then pointed to the ability to owning a car, square footage of the house, meat consumption, and access to air conditioning as real difference makers between the two.

Europeans have all of this, you consume a lot more, 2-3 times more. Bulgarians and Romanians and Hungarians and Polish are poorer. They have to repair their own stuff.

Even though San Francisco is notoriously expensive, they couldn't believe how cheap everything was. Costco felt like nirvana.

Scandinavia is very expensive for everyone. Germany is cheaper than USA in some aspects: clothes... you have cheap electronics.

I also learned from them that despite having two PHD professors as parents, they lived in a two story house where the top story was occupied by another family. The whole family relied on one shared car.

This is a normal family. Modest. You don't have to buy stuff and throw it away the next year. Such a family in central Europe would be richer, have more stuff.

In times prior to Covid, a person could not live almost anywhere in California without a car. I have a friend who has 4 between just he and his wife.

This is disgusting. And you complain about homeless people. Your friend could help some of them. It would make you feel better than owning stupid cars. I rely on bicycle and public transport. Never had a driver's license.

Even still, Denmark is reportedly the happiest place on earth so clearly they have far better amenities that make a huge difference.

It's Finnland. All the Scandinavian countries are high on the list, along with New Zealand and Switzerland. Maybe it's because of infrastructure and high taxes, maybe because they are less populated.

i thought you were a libertarian who wants no taxes in Sillicon Valley. And then you write like this about Denmark. Taxes are absolutely necessary. Who will stop the fires in California? How will the roads be built? You should increase taxes and spend the money well on infrastructure and for social services to those who are poor. Not spend money on NFL stadiums.

(I hope my sentences aren't too blunt, this is just a lot to write)

#97 by theslothook // May 19, 2023 - 9:57am

i thought you were a libertarian who wants no taxes in Sillicon Valley

I never said this. Never intimated this either. In past posts with regards to taxes, I want to have an efficient tax code. Deciding how high or how low it should be is a different topic. But having an efficient tax system should be a bipartisan, universally accepted position. Economic theory gives us an idea of what kinds of taxes are efficient. Our current system is terribly inefficient.

This is disgusting. And you complain about homeless people. Your friend could help some of them. It would make you feel better than owning stupid cars. I rely on bicycle and public transport. Never had a driver's license.

I am going to stop going further on this thread as it has now moved well beyond football and into the realm of deep politics. I would only say the following: how much one gives to others or deems having 'enough' is very much a personal judgement. A value judgement. And I am always leery of applying personal values, even my own, onto everyone else.

#103 by guest from Europe // May 19, 2023 - 4:03pm

how much one gives to others or deems having 'enough' is very much a personal judgement. A value judgement.

I agree. As i wrote at the end of last comment, if my words are too blunt or aggresive, i apologize. This is not the easiest thing to do: to write about a lot of aspects of life in short comments in a foreign language.

Why would 2 people have 4 cars? Isn't that stupid?

#105 by theslothook // May 19, 2023 - 6:37pm

Why would 2 people have 4 cars? Isn't that stupid

1 of their cars is a pickup truck that was his wife's that she uses for various things. She owned this before marriage

1 is(was, he sold it after covid) an m5 bmw. He is a car enthusiast and lots of my friends are also car enthusiasts(I am not)

1 is a Tesla SUV which they wanted presumably now that they have two small children and needed a bigger vehicle

1 is one of the nicer model Teslas. I forgot why he got that one.

Before the m5, he had an e36 bmw that was a pet project of his.

He is by far the wealthiest person I am personally close friends with. That's what becoming a Google VP early in your career will get you. Puts the rest of us middle class techies to shame.

But I think the easiest way understand it is, he's a car enthusiast and cars are his hobby and he has the money to enjoy that hobby. My bulgarian friend is also a car enthusiast, specifically bmws. He has an older model m3, and older model e46 and his own pet project e36. He makes good money as a mech engineer, but nowhere close to the friend above. He still spends money on the cars because that's his passion.

Btw, I grew up with a father who despite coming from a pretty well off background, despises spending money at all. So much so that he has effectively 0 hobbies and made sure his wife never got to indulge much either. We never went out much to eat. Our vacations came when my mom had conferences and the plane ticket and hotel was paid. So I've seen the opposite side where you drive out all of the joy in anything in service to sitting on a pile of cash.

#106 by guest from Europe // May 20, 2023 - 4:25am

the opposite side where you drive out all of the joy in anything in service to sitting on a pile of cash.

There are many people in Germany that are like this.

My general point was that people are more important than things. Someone who is rich can try to help someone very poor. You can't help poor people in Argentina or some African country, but you can help someone in San Francisco: start some non-profit organization for homeless or something where they get free food that would be thrown away. Noone chooses to be homeless.

I am not patronizing what to do in life. However, this is more important than an abstract discussion. People are no resources or assets or garbage to walk over them. If anyone who is rich can help even 1 poor person to have a better life, it's a progress.

(this isn't directed at anyone particular, just general thoughts)

#98 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 19, 2023 - 12:57pm

Having encountered so many Europeans who hector Americans about literally everything, I have increasingly come to understand why my ancestors all left Europe for someplace else.

#100 by theslothook // May 19, 2023 - 1:26pm

My Bulgarian friend who is a mechanical engineer rants non stop about how bad Americans are. He has particular disdain for SUV drivers. He thinks the American work ethic is largely bad and is propped up by immigrant workers. He views America as founded on imperialism; that its effectively like the USSR but they have better PR to hoodwink its population. He thinks there too much sugar everywhere in American food(he's kind of right there).

In a way, I like having him as a general contrast to the typical person I interact with. The Indians I have met who have migrated here actually enjoy the US by in large.

I will say, I personally think American food values are not the greatest and its not aimed at just obesity. Once more, I am generalizing, but I think they've utterly destroyed standard Thai and Indian food as both have become absolutely mediocre versions of the real thing. And Olive Garden has probably warped the opinions of what proper Italian food should be. I had no idea what actual Chinese food was until I met some graduate students from China who introduced me to proper Sichuan and Dimsum. My few asian friends just assumed I wanted panda express and never introduced me to the concept of Chinese Banquet food.

To bring it back to football. Much like the rules have been bent to favor passing and points, so too has the American palate and that sucks for people who like spice, textures, and great defense.

#104 by guest from Europe // May 19, 2023 - 4:16pm

Europeans who hector Americans about literally everything,

This wasn't my intention. I apologize. I tried to write some matter-of-fact sentences about living conditions. I guess i failed. it's quite difficult to understand what anyone means here. Any sentence of yours can be interpreted in various ways.

There are large cultural differences between us. I don't think there is any superiority in this, no right or wrong as i have written somewhere above. Somebody chooses to live in Denmark, somebody else in California. Somebody is born in Iraq, somebody else in Sudan and can't leave. Luck plays a big role in life.

#75 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 15, 2023 - 3:43pm

I have to question your city design when your ideal state is 100% homelessness.

\mine exists in a indeterminate state which oscillates between utopian and dystopian until you open the box and measure the cat.

#81 by serutan // May 16, 2023 - 2:06pm

\mine exists in a indeterminate state which oscillates between utopian and dystopian until you open the box and measure the cat.

I had no idea there was such a thing as a Schroedinger city.

#82 by guest from Europe // May 17, 2023 - 4:55am

Here is a real life representation of that (non) cat:

https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/schroedinger-cat-zurich-switzerland

#99 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 19, 2023 - 12:58pm

It's not clear if it does, until you open the box.

#46 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 12, 2023 - 2:50pm

The same state governments that give the finger to the auto industry and the petrochemical industry?

The NFL's market cap isn't bad, but it's still smaller than Tesla or Toyota. In terms of revenue, they would be 30th, behind Mahindra (Indian tractor and knockoff jeep manufacturer). Their revenue is half of Isuzu's.

They'd be the 7th biggest oil company, but are less than 1/10th the size of Aramco. In revenue, they barely exist. They've be somewhere in the 70s, mixed in with companies you've never heard of. Big Oil makes more in profit each year than the NFL is worth as a whole.

Yet states mess with those guys, plus the medical industry, plus... There's no power like no accountability.

#51 by SandyRiver // May 12, 2023 - 4:22pm

When is the Aramco vs. BP game on TV and how many million viewers are anticipated? The NFL's public footprint/influence vs. its "GDP" is enormous.

#53 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 12, 2023 - 4:35pm

It's influence makes up most of its market cap. The NFL's revenue vs market cap is not particularly high. (It's cash-poor, basically. See also, Mark Davis)

#28 by Travis // May 11, 2023 - 3:05pm

The Rangers and Knicks can't play "home" games outside of Madison Square Garden because doing so would cause the teams to forfeit their property tax exemption.

#42 by IlluminatusUIUC // May 12, 2023 - 11:03am

Is that why? I recall when the Sabres played the Rangers in Queens, it was listed as a home game for the Sabres.

#70 by Mike B. In Va // May 15, 2023 - 11:40am

That fits with how NYC would handle things. They've lost plenty of teams to the suburbs.

#6 by theslothook // May 10, 2023 - 1:01pm

This is probably a good question for the guest from Europe, but how popular is the NFL in Germany and do these games actual foster a nascent and growing NFL fandom? What is the ultimate goal here, to have a team in London or reincarnate NFL Europe?

Gets to a second question of mine. Can football even be something the kids in Europe grow up watching and playing? I guess basketball has kind of paved the way forward, but it seems to me the NFL needs its version of Dirk before it can then start to get the next generation of Lukas, Jokic, Giannis, and Wemby.

#7 by Theo // May 10, 2023 - 1:30pm

NFL is very popular in Europe, it is not as big as soccer and other sports but some people really like it.

NFL Europe games sold out Rhein Stadium and whatever Galaxy played at.

Further away in Amsterdam, London and Barcelona it never really got off the ground.

Every city in Europe has a football team, but it goes from recreational sports (Netherlands, Belgium etc) to leagues that play Semi Pro in Germany, France, Italy.

If you could call it Semi Pro.

Kids play flag, play tackle after 16yo. Most clubs have a children division.

The problem is the time difference and the fact that there is no financial foundation to get enough people crazy enough to smash into each other just for fun.

In Europe, it really is only played by people who enjoy it. While in america people see it as a way to get through college and even further.

#9 by chrism // May 10, 2023 - 2:18pm

My understanding of NFL Europe was that it was a big hit in Germany due to American service-members stationed there, in a way that Spain, the Netherlands, and even the UK never had the same sort of "hundreds of thousands of young American men are here, and they want to feel like they are back home" effect. With the withdrawal of most American troops from Germany, is it popular enough with the locals?

#10 by guest from Europe // May 10, 2023 - 3:02pm

It's popular and gaining popularity. For the last 7-8 years it's on German TV 2 top games of the week + all playoff games. (I am no German but watch German TV.) The studio crew is quite funny, not insightful, but funny, jokes, tweets of fans in the middle of the night are shown. B. Werner shows some moves in the studio...

It's probably more or equally as popular as in the UK.

Theo wrote a good comment. He knows more than me.

I guess at some point there will be a division in Europe: 4 teams in London, somewhere in Germany (Munich?), maybe Paris or Madrid. Spanish people like sports. Maybe in Moscow. That way there would be a natural rivalry among the 4 teams.

#23 by Joey-Harringto… // May 11, 2023 - 1:28pm

”I guess at some point there will be a division in Europe: 4 teams in London, somewhere in Germany (Munich?), maybe Paris or Madrid. Spanish people like sports. Maybe in Moscow.”

The time zones and travel involved would make that a complete mess (unless and until there’s a major advancement in commercial air travel to mitigate the latter). Imagine the Munich team traveling to Los Angeles and back. By the time they get over the jet lag, it’ll be time for their next game. I think resurrecting NFL Europe (perhaps as a ‘minor league’) would be their best bet.

At the risk of violating rule #1, I don’t think the people in Moscow will want to be associated with anything American for a few generations.

#24 by guest from Europe // May 11, 2023 - 2:00pm

traveling logistics: probably a team from L.A. comes to Europe for 4 weeks and plays all four European teams on the road in a series of games, than flyes home, bye week, than 4 home games. A team from Munich flies twice per year to USA to play a series of 4 away games each time.

American sports are popular in Russia. American and Russian men have a lot in common, women not so much. Russian women wouldn't be interested in this, i think. It would be more probable there than in Italy or France or Scandinavia or Benelux or Turkey. This is a few decades away anyway.

#48 by IlluminatusUIUC // May 12, 2023 - 4:00pm

It would have to be the whole division at once. As in, all of the NFC North decamps to Europe for a month, then all of the Europe division comes to the MidWest for a month.

#50 by guest from Europe // May 12, 2023 - 4:15pm

Yes. Europe division plays away games in USA in September and December. The players are Americans. Training in summer in USA. December with family in USA.

Playoffs? I don't know. Fly on Tesla spacecrafts.

#84 by Theo // May 17, 2023 - 12:39pm

Nah. They want to actually arrive at the destination. Safely.

#61 by guest from Europe // May 13, 2023 - 4:28pm

In Europe, it really is only played by people who enjoy it. While in america people see it as a way to get through college and even further.

This applies to every major sport in Europe. It's played by young children on amateur level. When they show a lot of talent, they usually drop out of school during teenage years or finish some "simple" school (to be a waiter or similar) and sign a professional contract (their parents sign it because they are under age) and play it professionally.

There is no developed college system, sport stipends, college teams etc. what have you in USA. This is a big cultural difference. No university has a famous sports team that i know of. (There is rowing in Britain...) Whoever goes to university in Europe, goes to study.

In Europe major teams usually have B and C teams where they develop young players. They play the same sport in lower leagues. Weaker, poorer teams don't have that much money to pay the stars, so they employ young players, develop them and earn from their transfer fees to richer major clubs.

There are less famous individual sports where a professional athlete doesn't earn enough prize money and gets a job by the state to be part-time employed (example: biathlon pros are employed by the army to be shooting instructors).

There are olympic sports where athletes are still amateurs. I know of one guy who is a full-time waiter and earned Olympic gold in London 2012 in a minor sport. After that he came back home and continued working. Nothing changed. He participated in Rio 2016.

#85 by Theo // May 17, 2023 - 12:47pm

Many athletes can go pro during their career by the way of sponsorships though.

But you'd be very lucky if that career lasts more than 5 years. Kiss the stars if it's more than 10.

Ice skating is a good example in the Netherlands.

But yeah, soccer players will have to be picked up by a team thats willing to pay them.

Kids of 14 or 16 years old signing contracts (or, their parents) is not a weird thing in soccer.

#87 by guest from Europe // May 18, 2023 - 4:27am

Kids of 14 or 16 years old signing contracts (or, their parents) is not a weird thing in soccer.

It's quite regular. At that age even players from other continents are signed to contracts, are "imported" for development. In other sports with balls (basketball, handball, volleyball...) they sign pro contracts at age of 18-19.

Many athletes can go pro during their career by the way of sponsorships though.

I would guess this is true for some athletes, who play a semi-popular sport or if a rich country doesn't have many gold medalists, somebody will sponsor them. But if they have to compete with other athletes for a sponsor, not all of them get good deals. For example, who sponsors weight lifters or canoeists?

In poorer countries without rich industries, the state sponsors them by giving them a job or they are amateurs.

#11 by guest from Europe // May 10, 2023 - 3:29pm

Can football even be something the kids in Europe grow up watching and playing?

Watching yes, playing probably no. This would be limited to children who like wrestling or something. There are a small amount of people who play it. People see the collisions among players. This wouldn't be encouraged for children to do. In UK some people play rugby, but it's rare.

guess basketball has kind of paved the way forward, but it seems to me the NFL needs its version of Dirk

Inadverently you have insulted many people who play basketball. It was always popular, decades ago, the second most popular sport. It's played in schools. Maybe you can calculate the talent rate of basketball players in Lithuania, Serbia, Croatia, Greece, France, Spain add it up and compare it with USA. Something like NBA starters/ total population. You might be surprised.

American players are way more athletic. It is thought in many circles that "pure" basketball is played in Europe. Every game is important, no "star calls" by referees, no traveling, shooting, not dunking... Curry is the best example what would be an ideal European basketball player.

NBA became popular with Magic and Lakers. Dirk Nowitzki made it somewhat popular in Germany.

Countries where basketball isn't popular are UK and Germany and Scandinavian countries.

#12 by theslothook // May 10, 2023 - 4:27pm

Sorry that wasn't my intention. Clearly this isn't the topic I know much about so that's why I was asking. When I was watching basketball, there were only a handful of great players who were European born and raised. Dirk was the only one who was a true blue superstar while I was watching. Peja, Vlade, Tony Parker were all stars and really good but none transcendent.

Perhaps this is purely coincidence, but there's a real argument to be had that the four of the 10 best players in the NBA currently are all foreign-born players and three of them are from Europe. The top 3 MVP vote getters for the second year in a row were from Europe and Africa. And right now a generational prospect is coming from France.

If If it wasn't for positional diversity, You can make an argument that a five-man roster full of foreign born players would be better than a roster with all American players.

This represents quite a shift from the days I started watching.

#15 by guest from Europe // May 11, 2023 - 3:16am

Sorry that wasn't my intention. Clearly this isn't the topic I know much about so that's why I was asking.

I know. When i wrote that you offended some people crazy about basketball, i also didn't write that they are very irrational about it. So, they are real fanatics. Once when i was ouside of an arena in Athens, Greece during a basketball game i could sense some vibrations in my legs due to fans going crazy inside. Maybe it was just sound, maybe they caused a "minor earthquake". It can't be explained with words what they do during games. Search for some videos.

So you didn't really offend anyone sane. You don't have fanatics... and i used to strong of a word, it's not an insult.

You can make an argument that a five-man roster full of foreign born players would be better than a roster with all American players.

Basketball purists in Europe make this argument non-stop since Sydney Olympic games. There are players who claim they don't want to go to NBA.

(I know a lot more about basketball than about american football)

#26 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 11, 2023 - 2:10pm

The US puts together an ad-hoc team every few years, plays the best players from around the world under a different set of rules, and usually wins. It's considered a crisis if they do not.

The US isn't as far ahead as in football (where teams of graduating HS players and sub D-I college players regularly annihilate the best teams any other country can put together), but it's pretty far ahead in basketball.

#30 by guest from Europe // May 11, 2023 - 6:24pm

All true. The other countries closest to USA in basketball are small in population, the talent pool is too small. Add them up, and the population would still be smaller than in USA.

Brasil usually wins their football games for a similar reason. It's considered a crisis if they do not.

#31 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 11, 2023 - 10:31pm

I think it's important that the rules and dimensions are different.

You are basically putting together a Rugby League team from Rugby Union all-stars, giving them a week to prepare, and asking them to dominate. And they usually do.

#33 by guest from Europe // May 12, 2023 - 4:36am

This is a totally wrong exaggeration. There is a difference between rugby and NFL in forward passing! Your equivalent would be a rugby team coming to NFL and playing vs. NFL team without QBs, like 49ers in NFC CG.

The rules differences between various basketball leagues are minute in comparison. In other leagues there are no "unwritten star rules and calls".

#36 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 12, 2023 - 8:59am

FIBA literally has a different court and different rules than American basketball as taught from elementary school onwards. Europe plays a different game than the rest of the world.

\I'm always surprised at how the French conned everyone into thinking that their version of a given sport was the "International" one.

#37 by guest from Europe // May 12, 2023 - 9:20am

A smaller court size. A slightly closer 3-pt line. What different rules are this? Zone defense? I think in the last decade FIBA rules moved closer to those in the NBA. I remember that traveling rules changed in the NBA more than a decade ago. An extra step was allowed or something similar in the rule was redefined. Those rule differences are marginal at most. Similar to NFL rule changes. In short: both FIBA and NBA change rules slightly.

European rules are different from those in Argentina? Australia? China? Are you sure? As far as i know they play under FIBA rules.

You are writing this as if it were the same type of difference that exists between tennis and badminton or tennis and table tennis.

\I'm always surprised at how the French conned everyone into thinking that their version of a given sport was the "International" one.

I don't know what is this referencing. You know too much or are too cynical for me to understand every sentence of yours. So, please explain.

Or is this because of de Coubertin starting the olympic sports and defined some rules?

#47 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 12, 2023 - 2:57pm

FIBA is French, even though basketball was a Canadian/American sport and it had a central rules authority.

FIFA is French, even though football was British and had a central rules authority.

The International Rugby League is French, even though rugby is British and had (two!) central rules authorities (league vs union).

Then there is FIG, FIE, etc.

The French haven't taken cricket over yet, mostly because they don't play it.

There is a reason I used rugby league vs rugby union as my example. Despite being recognizably the same game, the rules are sufficiently different that how the game is played is different and the rule differences are sufficiently large as to present an obstacle to a player moving from one code to the other.

#49 by guest from Europe // May 12, 2023 - 4:07pm

Yeah, we are in the "you know too much" territory. I am just a child in comparison to you... i guess you tried to explain something to me, but i didn't get it.

I forgot to write comparing NBA and Euroleague: the rule differences practically don't matter because the best european players play in the NBA. When they go to a national team FIBA tournament, they have to adjust to the rules, like Americans. The same with NHL and european players: larger ice rink in Europe, different forechecking rules.

There is a reason I used rugby league vs rugby union as my example. Despite being recognizably the same game, the rules are sufficiently different that how the game is played is different and the rule differences are sufficiently large as to present an obstacle to a player moving from one code to the other.

i don't know much about rugby or what these rule differences are. I thought you were comparing rugby to NFL.

FIBA is in Switzerland and was founded in Switzerland.

FIFA is in Switzerland and was founded in France. The rest i've never heard of. What do you have against Switzerland? I guess they are there for diplomatic or money laundering reasons.

I have to ask: are you really human? Are you some alien or AI? Who knows all of these things? What is your education? You cover medicine, math, stats, phyiscs, general history, sports history, sports rules, economy, literature....

#54 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 12, 2023 - 4:37pm

Information has never been easier to find. It's just a matter of curiousity.

#55 by guest from Europe // May 12, 2023 - 5:05pm

I guess info about history and rules.

How can you find information that Shakespeare used other writers topics? You write about basic laws of mechanics, about viruses, some economy theories... these are no factual informations, it's knowledge.

#63 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 15, 2023 - 9:04am

Undergrad at least touched on all of these. Well, english majors love Shakespeare, but his plagiarism is not exactly hidden. It was common in an era where finding the original works was non-trivial. But it's also part of the legend of Francis Bacon or some other great writer using Shakespeare as a pseudonym. (Also, lit majors don't like talking about plagiarism, especially when it involves a Major Author, because it de-credits the entire field) The nature of the histories is more discussed academically.

#74 by guest from Europe // May 15, 2023 - 12:59pm

Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player

That struts and frets his hour upon the stage

And then is heard no more. It is a tale

Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury

Signifying nothing.

(my worldview is close to this)

#52 by SandyRiver // May 12, 2023 - 4:26pm

Does the European three-second-rule area still expand toward the baseline? That rule mitigates against the big men in the middle.

#56 by guest from Europe // May 12, 2023 - 5:20pm

The lane area? No, it's straight now. Since 2010 under FIBA even the lane size was changed and restricted area under basket introduced. All to make it more similar to NBA.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_(basketball)

The big differences are 40 minutes game, 5 fouls/player, less timeouts, shorter (by 3 feet) 3-pt line, smaller court, traveling is called, any type of defense allowed.

#64 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 15, 2023 - 9:05am

How times out work is different, and goal tending is different. Those are the two obvious differences at this point. It resembles NCAA basketball otherwise.

#73 by guest from Europe // May 15, 2023 - 12:55pm

How times out work is different,

This isn't really rules of basketball, it's number of timeouts for TV commercial purposes that you have.

and goal tending is different.

Goaltending was always the same: can't touch the ball when it starts going down toward the basket. You probably mean defensive 3 seconds: in NBA a defensive player isn't allowed to spend more than 3 seconds in the paint without being at arms length to an offense player. No such rule in Europe.

Decades ago there were differences: posession lasted 30 seconds, lane or paint had different shape, any movement of the pivot foot was called traveling, zone defense was dominant and wasn't allowed in NBA etc. It's been more than a decade since all these rules changed to resemble the NBA. Even that zone under the basket (where there is no offensive foul) was introduced. Nowadays the main players in Europe are Americans that don't work out in the NBA. Best Europeans play in the NBA the whole career (since Nowitzki, Parker, Gasol bros and Stojaković). There are some good, but not elite Greek and Turkish and Serbian players that don't go to NBA. Spanish try and fail in the NBA and come back to Spanish league.

#79 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 15, 2023 - 4:06pm

https://basketnews.com/news-176033-differences-between-nba-and-fiba-rules.html
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/447554-nba-vs-fiba-7-rules-to-play-by
https://www.fiba.basketball/rule-differences
https://twitter.com/coopmavs/status/1423411267067338755

In FIBA you can play a ball on the rim. There are no live-ball timeouts, and the scoring team cannot take a timeout in the last 2 minutes. There is no advancement of the ball on a timeout.

The end-game in FIBA is rather foreign to NBA players, because here you encounter most of the rule differences.

#80 by guest from Europe // May 15, 2023 - 5:14pm

All true. Timeouts in FIBA are like timeouts in NFL, to stop time a few times per game, not to change the end sequence totally. In NBA you can call timeout after opponent scores with 2-3 seconds left and still have a very good chance because of advancement of the ball. In NFL or FIBA in such case you got only 1 hail mary play which doesn't work. The last minute of NBA game is skewed. Does this exist in any other sport? I don't like this in the NBA. "Last minute" lasts for half an hour with all the TV timeouts. I don't watch it live anymore.

I read the first link. 3-pt distance difference is even smaller than i thought, about 0.5 meter or yard. Corner 3s are the same distance.

This is about travelling what i was writing above:

While the difference in calling the traveling violation has been one of the main differences throughout the last decades, several years ago, FIBA decided to bring its game closer to the NBA in that aspect.

The NBA has a so-called gather step when the player gains control of the basketball. It determines when and how the player can set its feet afterward. FIBA, meanwhile, has a so-called zero step.

After catching the ball, the foot that first touches the ground becomes the pivot from which all other actions can proceed. The player can then start dribbling the ball or take a two-step to finish the shot, hence, creating a three-step move together with a zero step.

Although the traveling rule took a leap closer to the NBA standard, FIBA referees are still way stricter in calling the violation compared to their colleagues on the other side of the pond.

All the other stuff is really minor marginal differences (touching the ball after it hits the rim is really rare).

So, recap: less timeouts, traveling called stricter, defensive 3 seconds allowed, 3-pt shorter at the top of the key, 40 minutes game with 5 fouls/player

You wrote at the beginning that it's like another sport, NBA players really have to adjust... well, they shouldn't travel! and should play basketball, not a game of timeouts.

I clearly "win" this argument, you are a loser and you have to give me a homeless car if i come to Detroit. (it will never happen)

#58 by bravehoptoad // May 12, 2023 - 9:42pm

Good heavens, I love this board.

#18 by BobbyDazzler // May 11, 2023 - 10:36am

As a UK NFL fan of 30+ years, there are loads of fans here and all of the London games sell out in a matter of minutes, regardless of who is playing. We have "American Football" leagues here too which have been going since the 1980's, albeit with the level of play probably only on a par with US high schools, but with social media etc it's obviously way easier to access NFL related stuff these days, so while I'm sceptical about a London NFL team being viable (given that everyone here already has their favourite NFL team and would be unlikely to change allegiance) there is more than enough interest to keep these international games going for the foreseeable future.

Clearly the NFL's ultimate goal here is revenue generation, so as long as they can keep making money out of it, they'll keep doing it.

#27 by BJR // May 11, 2023 - 2:27pm

Regular season NFL Sundays fall in a really nice time-slot here in the UK (and Western Europe). 6pm early kick-offs pretty much immediately follow the end of the weekend's Premier League schedule. Then it's on all night, depending on how long you can stay awake. I've got buddies who will go to great lengths to get away from their partners on a Sunday evening so they can watch Redzone in peace :-)

And unlike NBA/MLB you don't have to dedicate your entire life to keep track of it.

#16 by guest from Europe // May 11, 2023 - 3:19am

For more info on NFL in Germany and what German fans do and think, anyone can search #ranNFL on twitter and see a lot of funny stuff.

#19 by MJK // May 11, 2023 - 11:16am

Would have been nice to see Commanders-Eagles on Christmas instead, to have the red and green motif...

#21 by IlluminatusUIUC // May 11, 2023 - 11:21am

The Eagles are banned from Christmas for... well... you know.

#25 by mathesond // May 11, 2023 - 2:03pm

Eh, Santa's usually back at the North Pole by then :)

#32 by big10freak // May 12, 2023 - 4:10am

Somewhat surprised GB in multiple Sunday night and Monday nights games given the consensus is that the team will not be very good

Not complaining. Just didn’t think a bad team (per current assessments) would be of much interest

#40 by RickD // May 12, 2023 - 10:29am

They still have a large national following.

#43 by KnotMe // May 12, 2023 - 12:15pm

Same reason they keep sticking the Patriots in prime time. Large fanbase that hasn't dwindled quite yet.

#60 by Ben // May 13, 2023 - 11:45am

I know it’s been mentioned a lot around the web, but in case anyone’s missed it, the Titans schedule release video is worth a watch

https://twitter.com/titans/status/1656827454118412289

SWA 2022: Chiefs Both Young and Dominant

Aaron Schatz — Mon, 08 May 2023 13:44:39 +0000

SWA 2022: Chiefs Both Young and Dominant Aaron Schatz 08 May 2023, 09:44am

Youth was served in the NFL of 2022.

The Super Bowl champion Kansas City Chiefs ended up 31st with a total snap-weighted age (SWA) of just 25.4. The only team younger than them? The playoff-contending Detroit Lions at 25.3. Four of the eight teams with SWA below 26.0 made the playoffs, including not just the Chiefs but also the New York Giants (25.5), Cincinnati Bengals (25.7) and Dallas Cowboys (25.9)?

And on the other side of the table? The oldest team in the league, shockingly, was not the Tampa Bay Buccaneers with 45-year-old Tom Brady at quarterback. They finished third overall, although first on offense. The oldest team in the league also wasn't the Green Bay Packers with 39-year-old Aaron Rodgers at quarterback. They finished eighth. Instead, the oldest team in the league was the New Orleans Saints, who led the NFL with a snap-weighted age of 27.6, 0.27 ahead of the second-place Patriots. The Saints and Patriots were boosted in age by having the oldest and second-oldest defenses in the NFL, respectively. None of the six oldest teams in the league last season had a winning record, although the Tampa Bay Buccaneers did make the playoffs at 8-9 and there were playoff teams in the SWA top 10 and close to it. (Buffalo was seventh, San Francisco ninth, Minnesota 10th, and Philadelphia 11th).

Usually, there is some correlation where the better teams come out with a higher SWA. For the last five years, the correlation of SWA and total DVOA was 0.26. However, for just 2022, the correlation of SWA and DVOA was negative at -0.15. For just offense, the correlation was -0.27.

2022 Snap-Weighted Age: By Unit

The following table shows SWA for the overall team (TOT), along with the unit breakdown for offense, defense, and special teams. Units are ranked from oldest to youngest.

2022 Snap-Weighted Age
Team	TOT SWA	Rk	OFF SWA	Rk	DEF SWA	Rk	ST SWA	Rk
NO	27.6	1	27.4	7	28.0	1	27.0	5
NE	27.3	2	26.7	14	27.9	2	27.5	1
TB	27.2	3	28.0	1	26.8	8	25.9	19
ARI	27.0	4	27.9	2	25.9	22	27.3	2
LAR	27.0	5	27.7	3	26.9	6	25.5	24
DEN	26.9	6	27.4	6	26.9	7	26.0	16
BUF	26.8	7	27.1	9	26.4	14	27.0	4
GB	26.8	8	27.5	5	26.3	19	26.2	14
SF	26.8	9	27.1	8	26.3	17	26.7	7
MIN	26.7	10	26.4	22	27.6	3	25.4	29
PHI	26.6	11	26.6	15	27.3	4	25.1	31
HOU	26.6	12	26.6	16	26.6	12	26.9	6
WAS	26.6	13	27.6	4	25.8	24	25.9	20
SEA	26.6	14	26.5	18	26.7	11	26.6	9
LV	26.6	15	27.0	10	26.3	18	26.3	12
NYJ	26.6	16	26.9	12	26.5	13	26.1	15
IND	26.6	17	26.5	19	27.0	5	25.8	21
MIA	26.6	18	26.4	21	26.4	15	27.2	3
BAL	26.5	19	26.6	17	26.7	10	25.8	23
TEN	26.3	20	27.0	11	25.7	27	26.5	10
LAC	26.2	21	26.1	23	26.7	9	25.4	27
JAX	26.1	22	26.7	13	25.7	26	25.5	26
ATL	26.0	23	26.1	24	25.6	28	26.7	8
CHI	26.0	24	25.9	26	26.0	21	26.2	13
DAL	25.9	25	26.1	25	25.8	23	25.8	22
PIT	25.7	26	24.8	32	26.4	16	26.3	11
CAR	25.7	27	25.5	30	25.8	25	26.0	17
CIN	25.7	28	25.2	31	26.1	20	25.9	18
CLE	25.6	29	26.4	20	24.9	31	25.0	32
NYG	25.5	30	25.7	28	25.3	29	25.4	28
KC	25.4	31	25.6	29	25.2	30	25.4	30
DET	25.3	32	25.7	27	24.8	32	25.5	25
NFL	26.4	—	26.6	—	26.3	—	26.1	—

The youngest teams in 2022 were very young, historically young in fact. The overall SWA for the entire league has dropped gradually over a decade before stabalizing at 26.4 during the last four years. But one result of the league as a whole getting younger is that the youngest teams in SWA are all recent. The Lions were the fourth-youngest team since 2006 and the Chiefs ranked seventh.

Lowest Total SWA, 2006-2022
Team	Year	SWA
CLE	2017	24.63
DAL	2018	25.25
CLE	2018	25.26
DET	2022	25.28
DET	2021	25.33
JAX	2020	25.39
KC	2022	25.39
JAX	2014	25.41
STL	2013	25.43
CAR	2010	25.44

The Pittsurgh Steelers offense (24.8 SWA) was also close to the youngest we've tracked. The 2014 Jaguars were the only offense any younger at 24.7, and the only other offenses below 25.0 were the 2017 Browns and 2021 Lions. The Steelers were at least a year younger than the NFL average at every offensive position, although they weren't the youngest at any specific position.

If you've been following these snap-weighted age articles each year, you may remember that year-to-year correlation in SWA dropped dramatically in 2020 due in large part to COVID shuffling rosters (as well as veteran quarterbacks Tom Brady and Philip Rivers changing teams). Correlation for defense and special teams rebounded significantly in 2021, but not offense. Well, offensive SWA had a much stronger correlation from 2021 to 2022, with a lot less change for most teams. Here's a look at the year-to-year correlation for each part of snap-weighted age, both last year and over the past five years:

Year-to-Year Correlation of SWA, 2018-2022
Years	TOT	OFF	DEF	ST
2021-2022	0.65	0.60	0.67	0.66
2018-2022	0.54	0.48	0.56	0.71

The Saints were the only team that saw their SWA go up by 1.0 from the year before. They ended up with Andy Dalton starting 14 games at quarterback, and he was 35. Left tackle was supposed to get younger with rookie Trevor Penning, but he got hurt so 31-year-old James Hurst was the starter. The rest of the offense was pretty much the same players as the year before, only a year older. On defense, Bradley Roby (30) replaced C.J. Gardner-Johnson (24 in 2021) as the nickelback. Safety got both younger and older with Marcus Maye (29) and Tyrann Mathieu (30) replacing Malcolm Jenkins (34) and Marcus Williams (25). In the front seven, as on offense, the Saints mostly ran the same players out there as the year before except they were a year older. The rookies who played a lot mostly replaced other young players. Wide reciever Chris Olave (22) played instead of Deonte Harty (25) and cornerback Alontae Taylor (24) played instead of Marshon Lattimore (26). The Saints had only drafted five players and those are the only two who really played.

Here's a look at the units with the biggest change in SWA from 2021 to 2022:

Biggest Changes in SWA by Unit, 2022
Team	2021 SWA	Rk	2022 SWA	Rk	Diff
LV OFF	25.5	30	27.0	10	+1.6
TEN OFF	28.4	2	27.0	11	-1.4
DEN OFF	26.1	23	27.4	6	+1.3
PHI OFF	25.4	31	26.6	15	+1.2
NYJ DEF	25.3	32	26.5	13	+1.2
ATL DEF	26.8	11	25.6	28	-1.2

The Raiders got much older in a few places on offense. At wide receiver, you had Davante Adams (30) and Mack Hollins (29) as the outside starters instead of Zay Jones (26) and Bryan Edwards (23), plus Hunter Renfrow was a year older. Right tackle Alex Leatherwood (22) washed out quickly and was replaced by veteran Jermaine Eluemunor (28).

The youth movement for the Titans came primarily on the offensive line, although it wasn't all on purpose. Taylor Lewan (30) was injured while Rodger Saffold (33) and David Quessenberry (31) were gone. They were replaced by Dennis Daley (26), Aaron Brewer (25), and Nicholas Petit-Frere (23).

Denver's offense got older not only because of the arrival of 34-year-old Russell Wilson at quarterback but because of the snaps given to older running backs (including Latavius Murray, 32 and Melvin Gordon, 29) and older tight ends (Eric Saubert, 28 and Eric Tomlinson, 30).

Philadelphia's big changes included the return of guard Isaac Seumalo (29) playing instead of Jack Driscoll (24) as well as the small change of going from Jalen Reagor (22) to A.J. Brown (25). Most of the rest of the offense just stuck around and got a year older.

The New York Jets weren't particularly old on defense in 2022, they just were no longer extremely young as they had been in 2021. They got a full year from safety Lamarcus Joyner (32) and more snaps from players such as Sheldon Rankins (29). Free agent addition D.J. Reed wasn't very old at 26, but he was older than all the youngsters the Jets were putting at cornerback the year before.

For Atlanta, there was a lot of defensive turnover that led to a much younger unit in 2022. Safeties Erik Harris (31) and Duron Harmon (30) were replaced by Richie Grant (25) and Jaylinn Hawkins (25). On the defensive line, Tyeler Davison (29 in 2021) was out for the year and replaced by Abdullah Anderson (26). Linebacker got slightly younger by going from Deion Jones (27) and Foye Oluokun (26) to Rashaan Evans (27) and Mykal Walker (25).

Finally, a note about the New England Patriots. The Patriots had the biggest drop in special teams age from 2021 to 2022, going from 28.7 to 27.5. And yet, the Patriots still led the league in snap-weighted age on special teams for the fifth straight season! I would say this reliance on veterans is working out for them, except it isn't, as the Patriots fell to dead last in special teams DVOA last year. Things should be different in 2023, as the Patriots became the first team to draft both a rookie kicker and a rookie punter in the same year since the 2000 Oakland Raiders.

2022 Snap-Weighted Age by Position

Not all teams are old in the same ways. Because offensive SWA is so affected by the offensive line, and defensive SWA tends to give teams with young secondaries an advantage, it can be useful to see where teams are young or old in particular.

The following table lists every team's SWA in each positional group and is fully sortable. The colors trend from red (older) to blue (younger). Snaps listed are only offense or defense for all positions except special teams. The special teams number here differs from the special teams number above because on this table it only includes specialists (kicker, punter, and long snapper) instead of all special teams snaps by all players.

2022 Snap-Weighted Age by Position
Team	QB	RB	WR	TE	OL	DL	ER	LB	DB	ST
ARI	27.5	25.7	27.1	27.6	29.0	24.8	29.0	24.8	25.2	35.2
ATL	27.4	26.3	24.2	26.2	26.5	26.5	24.9	25.5	25.5	27.0
BAL	24.7	27.0	26.6	25.3	27.2	28.3	28.9	25.1	25.7	29.3
BUF	26.2	24.7	26.0	25.3	28.8	27.9	26.5	26.0	26.0	28.0
CAR	26.2	24.9	24.4	24.5	26.2	25.4	25.5	27.4	25.3	31.7
CHI	23.7	24.7	25.9	24.6	26.8	27.6	26.3	26.6	24.8	28.8
CIN	26.1	26.3	25.2	27.1	26.6	26.2	25.7	25.8	26.3	26.0
CLE	29.0	26.8	24.5	25.6	27.1	24.6	26.1	25.3	24.2	26.1
DAL	29.0	25.9	24.9	24.6	26.5	25.2	25.6	26.4	26.0	34.4
DEN	32.8	28.5	24.8	26.0	27.8	27.3	24.7	27.9	27.2	27.6
DET	28.0	25.4	25.6	24.5	25.7	24.9	23.9	25.8	24.6	26.7
GB	38.6	26.1	25.9	30.2	25.8	27.5	26.2	24.9	26.2	31.3
HOU	24.7	25.6	27.4	26.2	26.9	25.0	29.4	26.5	26.0	31.5
IND	34.2	24.1	24.3	26.2	26.7	27.8	25.5	26.2	27.8	27.9
JAX	23.1	23.7	27.7	28.3	27.0	28.3	24.6	25.3	25.4	25.2
KC	27.2	26.5	25.8	28.9	25.9	27.1	26.8	23.1	24.7	28.4
LAC	24.3	26.0	26.9	25.9	26.2	26.8	29.4	25.8	25.8	28.5
LAR	30.6	24.1	26.5	28.3	28.3	26.8	27.2	28.4	26.3	28.0
LV	30.3	25.9	29.1	26.5	25.8	26.5	27.2	26.7	25.7	27.0
MIA	25.0	27.6	26.2	26.7	26.4	27.2	27.1	27.0	25.5	29.2
MIN	33.7	26.5	26.6	25.8	24.9	26.3	27.4	29.4	27.5	28.3
NE	24.0	24.1	26.5	27.6	27.6	28.3	27.7	26.0	28.4	30.2
NO	33.1	28.1	25.4	25.9	27.1	27.3	28.5	28.8	27.8	27.0
NYG	25.3	25.6	25.9	24.7	25.9	27.4	24.7	25.2	24.7	30.7
NYJ	27.8	22.6	24.0	27.5	29.0	27.0	26.3	28.2	25.6	28.8
PHI	24.3	24.7	24.8	25.4	28.7	28.5	28.6	25.7	27.0	29.1
PIT	25.2	24.4	24.1	24.7	25.2	29.8	26.0	25.9	26.5	27.1
SEA	32.0	23.5	27.7	24.8	26.1	29.1	27.0	25.6	25.7	30.0
SF	27.6	27.5	25.0	28.5	27.6	27.6	25.9	25.6	26.6	33.1
TB	44.7	25.5	27.6	25.6	26.1	28.4	25.7	27.8	26.0	27.6
TEN	30.8	26.7	26.7	27.1	26.4	25.5	28.2	26.1	26.2	30.3
WAS	29.0	24.9	25.3	27.1	29.2	25.6	26.3	26.1	25.7	27.4
AVG	28.6	25.6	25.9	26.3	26.9	27.0	26.6	26.3	26.0	29.0

#1 by AFCNFCBowl // May 08, 2023 - 10:09am

NO didn't lose Brees this season

#2 by Aaron Schatz // May 08, 2023 - 10:27am

Well, that was a weird brain freeze on my part! I'll fix that.

#3 by RickD // May 08, 2023 - 10:32am

Editing note, Aaron. Last two paragraphs read "Further text".

#13 by Aaron Schatz // May 08, 2023 - 2:31pm

Yeah, you can tell where my brain has been at lately.

#24 by Theo // May 09, 2023 - 12:52pm

Actually, I can't.

Any news?

#42 by andrew // May 10, 2023 - 12:41pm

We know you can't say anything, but we appreciate all you have built and look forward to the day when this unfortunate saga is over and we can go back to just good, fun football analytics.

#4 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 08, 2023 - 10:45am

It seems worth remarking that the correlation between age and injuries seems to flow in the counter-intuitive direction that injuries result in a higher SWA.

#5 by theslothook // May 08, 2023 - 11:51am

I've always wondered something. Let's say a team spends exactly 1 dollar below the salary cap. Then suddenly, it has a rash of injuries and has to sign replacements to vet mins. Are they allowed to exceed the salary cap then?

#6 by KnotMe // May 08, 2023 - 12:10pm

Did this come up with the game in (2020?) when all the Bronco's QBs were dumb and got stuck in covid protocols so they had to start a WR? I suspect the league would grant waivers or something if something crazy (say a bus crash) happened but it's hard to see their being enough injuries for it to come up. That's partly why there IS a 53 man roster.

#7 by Lost Ti-Cats Fan // May 08, 2023 - 12:15pm

As a I understand it, it depends on the player's contract. If they still get paid on IR, it still counts against the cap, so adding a new player would put them over. If the player's contract provides that they get paid less if they end up on IR, then that would free up some room.

#9 by IlluminatusUIUC // May 08, 2023 - 1:15pm

Players on IR count against the cap but not the roster limit, so the team would not be able to sign anyone until they cleared enough cap to accommodate the minimum signings. Technically a team only needs 47-48 players active to play a game, so as long as they can roll out that many warm bodies - off you go.

If a team is so capped that it can't cut anyone without penalties and can't field a full gameday roster, then it would have to play shorthanded up to a point. I've never seen a rule on minimum roster sizes but the NFLPA would step in if it was becoming a safety hazard. At that point the NFL would either start voiding the team's contracts to clear space or forfeiting their games (likely the former).

#11 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 08, 2023 - 2:01pm

At that point the NFL would either start voiding the team's contracts to clear space or forfeiting their games (likely the former).

Players don't get paid for a forfeit. I suspect the NFLPA would push back hard on either prospect -- it's a team-created problem, the players won't bear the burden of the cost.

#18 by IlluminatusUIUC // May 08, 2023 - 5:15pm

As far as I can find, there's no explicit provision for a minimum roster size. If the healthy bodies dwindled to the point where guys are having to iron man the entire game, the NFLPA would likely have to lean on a generic provision about ensuring the safety of the players to make its protest. In that case, it's a negotiation and the owners and union would have to come to an agreement because there's no obvious precedent. That's what they did with the Bills-Bengals game this year even though there was a rule.

#14 by Noahrk // May 08, 2023 - 2:31pm

You got a downvote, but that is my understanding as well. However, in the past it didn't matter as only the top 51 players counted towards the cap IIRC. I seem to recall the Saints didn't field a full 53 in the recent past for at least a few games, but maybe I'm hallucinating.

#16 by IlluminatusUIUC // May 08, 2023 - 4:49pm

The Top 51 rule applies before the season to handle the expanded rosters. After the final cutdown, the cap applies to all 53 + the IR.

#12 by Raiderfan // May 08, 2023 - 2:16pm

To me, there is nothing counterintuitive about it. Teams try and get as many players on cheaper contracts (i.e. younger) that fit their roster build as they can. If they get hurt—except for training camp, when there is still time to train up new guys—then teams sign replacements who they know can step in and play (i.e. older/veterans). So, again to me, intuitively older players are more likely to get injured, but also intuitively injured players’ replacements are more likely to be older.

#8 by ImNewAroundThe… // May 08, 2023 - 12:54pm

Lol Marcedes single handily taking GBs TE room to the oldest despite only playing 41% of the snaps.

Thankfully, and finally, they're deciding to move on despite the pleas of casual fans and a couple players! 7.2 yards per game and no actual tangible evidence he's a good "mentor" to washed Jimmy Graham, out of the league Jace Sternberger, Deguara, Tyler Davis, Rob Tonyan (outside of his fluke year that many will blame his injury on it not continuing), etc.

Here's to youth.

#10 by Robopunter // May 08, 2023 - 1:55pm

Unless I've missed someone, the only age 30+ players currently on the Packers roster are Pat O'Donnell (32), David Bakhtiari (31) and Preston Smith (30) with De'Vondre Campbell also turning 30 this summer.

#15 by guest from Europe // May 08, 2023 - 3:46pm

All these teams are very close by snap-weighted age: from youngest to oldest the difference is only 2.3 years. They are all well below age 30. To me this shows that the career of a NFL player is short and thus a lifespan of a well-built team as well.

#17 by Lost Ti-Cats Fan // May 08, 2023 - 4:59pm

Careers are insanely short, especially the paid part of the career. Two to four years as an unpaid intern in college (this has changed slightly, but only slightly), followed by a chance at maybe three to five paying years, which is already winning the lottery, but then you need to win another lottery to have a career that stretches beyond five years. The pay during those paying years is great, in isolation, but when combined with the lifestyle, it doesn't amount to much. EDIT: meant to say, combined with the lifestyle common for young athletes, doesn't usually amount to enough savings to to survive on this career alone. Which isn't necessarily a problem - used wisely, the money they make can give them a great financial head start on their next career.

The only saving grace is that careers are over so quickly, the players are still young enough to learn a new trade to pursue for the rest of their working years.

#19 by theslothook // May 08, 2023 - 5:34pm

Dont NFL players accrue lifetime benefits based on years in the league?

#20 by Lost Ti-Cats Fan // May 08, 2023 - 7:21pm

Hmm, looks like they do earn a pension, which can typically be drawn starting at age 55. Looks like they need a minimum of 3 years (now, used to be 4 years prior to 2020).

Based on the numbers I'm seeing, for a 3 year career, the pension is $21,000 per year from age 55 onwards. I hope that's inflation adjusted, or else in the approximately 30 years from the end of their career to the start of the pension, that $21,000 per year will be worth about half that in real terms. For a 10+ year career, the pension maxes out at $105,000 per year.

#21 by theslothook // May 08, 2023 - 8:16pm

I thought they get lifetime health insurance.

#22 by apocalipstick // May 08, 2023 - 8:46pm

No, they don’t.

#23 by theslothook // May 08, 2023 - 9:27pm

U are right. They get 5 years. More generous than typical Americans but sadly not enough considering the profession

#25 by theslothook // May 09, 2023 - 3:42pm

Unlikely to make it as an extra point but I found this article on ESPN.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/37589684/witness-says-matt-araiza-present-alleged-rape

EDIT - curiously, the URL reads, "witness says matt araiza present alleged-rape" yet the title of the actual article, in case you don't click the link, says, " Witness says Matt Araiza wasn't present at time of alleged rape." The bold and italics are my emphasis.

Here's a link to a FO article where this topic came up.

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/walkthrough/2022/trey-lance-justin-fields-and-preseason-stock-index?page=0

Sure, it doesn't prove his innocence to the extent that can be done, but it is something worth considering. I bring it up now for people who remember the original FO thread discussing Matt Ariaza's release. Many of the comments were particularly galling in their certainty of his guilt and subsequent release. Some of the comments in there are flat out embarrassing and the authors should be ashamed of themselves.

I remember the general outrage that followed Araiza, effectively calling for his release and branding him a scumbag rapist. In the aftermath, as far as I know, there is little to no mention at all calling for him to be signed back in the NFL. I doubt, had there been an Extra Point in FO, that those same commenters would have the decency to walk back some of their rush to judgements. But its not surprising; the mob mentality's role for dolling out vigilante justice has little time for patience nor nuance, let alone logical consistency for that matter. As long as the firing squad hits the evil targets, who cares if a few innocent bystanders get shot dead along the way. Collateral damage. Out of sight, out of mind.

In the comments, I made the point that we need to exhibit a little caution before rushing to judgement. Let the full facts come to light before we feel the need to protest. Clearly, calls for patience and caution lost out to emotionally charged pearl clutching. A plea to everyone who reads this: If you are someone who is predisposed to just believing someone is guilty sight unseen; please please please do yourself and society at large a favor by waiting for the full facts to come out.

#26 by Lost Ti-Cats Fan // May 09, 2023 - 11:04pm

I've debated whether to post a reply or not, and decided to proceed. Not because I think it will change your mind. You have your philosophy and your view of the world. So consider this simply an attempt to explain why not everyone may see this the way you do.

From where I stand, what I see is that you're advocating for your own illogical inconsistencies and jumping to your own conclusions, and the solution you're proposing to the problem you perceive doesn't necessarily lead to a better society.

It's not logical, to my mind, to claim that employers should not be allowed to hire or not hire people based on the facts known to them at the time. It's not logical to assume that "the full facts" could ever come to light. It's particularly not logical to assume that the American justice system will surface and publicize the full facts. It certainly won't do so in a timely manner. And the standard that an employer sets for themselves need not conform to the standards of the criminal or the civil justice systems, and probably shouldn't.

People need to make decisions based on what they know at the time. Just like you're doing with this article you quoted. You've jumped to the conclusion that the information in this article is the final word on the matter, even though the trial hasn't even occurred yet (I believe it's set for October). Maybe conflicting facts will come out, maybe they won't. All that matters, from my perspective, is that the Bills were well within their rights to make their decision based on what they knew when the released Araiza.

Maybe the fact that Araiza admitted to having oral sex with a minor was sufficient grounds for the Bills not to want to employ him. Maybe what Araiza did or didn't tell them about the incident prior to the Bills drafting him was sufficient grounds for the Bills not to want to employ him. This doesn't seem to matter in your philosophy, because you're of the view that people should not be held accountable for their actions until sufficient evidence is presented to satisfy your standards. Which is fine, if you're the one hiring Araiza. Go ahead and put him on your football team if you'd like to employ him. I'd watch him play, doesn't fuss me. But if the Bills - and the other 31 NFL teams - don't want to hire him because of his past behavior, that doesn't fuss me either (absent collusion, which always lurks beneath the surface of NFL behavior, but that's going off on a different tangent).

This is not a case of vigilantes taking justice into their own hands. No one is being executed, contrary to your colorful rhetoric. The power of the state is not being wielded to oppress anyone. What is happening is that free people are exercising their free choice to employ, or not employ, to watch, or not watch, entertainers for reasons that are sufficient to them.

I know it galls you that those reasons are sufficient to others when they aren't to you. But your stated solution to this issue is to impose your standards on the whole of the rest of society. Everyone should wait, take their time before rushing to a judgment that differs from yours. In your mind, that's better. But I don't think it is. If someone other than the Bills wanted to hire Araiza, they could have. I think that's better. Not everyone has to have the same opinion, not everyone has to behave the same. Let people make up their own minds; let anyone who wants to influence their opinion do so, but ultimately we all make our own choice.

Your approach is to presume that the 17-year old was lying or mistaken, and until someone can prove to you otherwise, you're going to continue to presume that she's lying or mistaken. That's a reasonable position for the criminal law system to take - in fact, the best position for it to take, in my opinion, although it has the unfortunate side effect of encouraging sexual assault victims to shut up, lest they be assaulted a second time by a court system that presumes them to be liars - but it's a ridiculous standard to impose on everyone else. I can make up my own mind about who I want to associate with and spend my money on, and I'll do so for my own reasons, thank you very much. You're free to make a different decision.

I do think that you're right that people should look for facts and reserve judgment as best they're able. I just think it's unreasonable to expect them not to have an opinion, and even more unreasonable to expect them not to act on that opinion, during periods of uncertainty. Because things are almost always uncertain. And "do nothing until we know more" is absolutely not a neutral position. That's forming an opinion ("I'm good with this until I learn more"). It may be an opinion based on an underlying matter of principle for you, but it's still forming a current opinion that drives your behavior ("I'll act like this is nothing until I learn more").

#28 by theslothook // May 10, 2023 - 1:48am

Your post covered a lot so replying in a separate comment.

I think the source of our disagreement specifically to the Araiza being cut stems from the reasons why. If you think he was cut due to lies, or statutory rape, or other such issues...I agree, those are perfectly valid reasons.

However, if he was cut because of the outpouring of public outrage that an alleged rape perpetrator was playing for the bills and it was best to cut ties because he was merely a lowly punter, in my opinion I find that rational far less acceptable.

#29 by guest from Europe // May 10, 2023 - 4:19am

was cut because of the outpouring of public outrage that an alleged rape perpetrator was playing for the bills and it was best to cut ties because he was merely a lowly punter

Araiza was released and remained unemployed becuse of PR-reasons of rape accusation that you wrote and a punter can easily be replaced. A QB-position player accused of a series of rapes was sought by multiple other teams after the accusations and was suspended for 11 games. He will play for many years.

In NBA K. Bryant was arrested and about to be trialed for rape, it was settled out of court, nobody should talk about it and such a player is now a role-model and statues are built to celebrate him. NBA has great PR-department. He wasn't suspended for a single game during court trial. When a journalist wrote in 2020 that this occured, she was suspended:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/washington-post-suspends-reporter-after-kobe-bryant-rape-allegation-tweet-n1124031

If i may say, this seems to be the source of disagreement on a general level:

I do think that you're right that people should look for facts and reserve judgment as best they're able. I just think it's unreasonable to expect them not to have an opinion, and even more unreasonable to expect them not to act on that opinion, during periods of uncertainty.

You want to have full information until passing a purely rational judgement. Lost Ti-Cats Fan says people are allowed to have an opinion and make decissions, judgements without full information, based on some information.

Both worldviews are valid. It's an interesting discussion.

#30 by Eddo // May 10, 2023 - 9:24am

"You want to have full information until passing a purely rational judgement. Lost Ti-Cats Fan says people are allowed to have an opinion and make decissions, judgements without full information, based on some information.

"Both worldviews are valid. It's an interesting discussion."

This is really interesting, I agree. I actually think a far smaller number of decisions are rational than people think; our emotions guide so many of our choices. Even seemingly rational decisions like finances usually have some element of risk tolerance, which is a very emotional decision.

#39 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 10, 2023 - 12:26pm

It's probably easier to conceptualize human thinking as heuristic, rather than rational.

Consider stereotypes. Rationally, they are dubious. However, in the sense that they are 1) usually accurate and 2) vastly time-saving, we adopt them on a heuristic basis as extremely efficient.

#43 by guest from Europe // May 10, 2023 - 12:50pm

It's probably easier to conceptualize human thinking as heuristic, rather than rational.

All human thinking (concerning abstract things, society ... ) or some personal decisions (what to do, everyday stuff...)?

#49 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 10, 2023 - 1:37pm

*waves hands vaguely* Something like that. *waves hands vaguely*

#44 by Eddo // May 10, 2023 - 1:05pm

Very good points.

#34 by theslothook // May 10, 2023 - 11:33am

Your post about Kobe is something I touched on in the Gruden post and got universally slammed for it. Kobe was forgiven, raised to folk status, and has been lionized ever since even though he effectively admitted he raped her. Yet Matt Araiza was effectively labeled an evil rapist based on allegations and no formal proof at that moment.

More evidence that the mob is incredibly fickle about who deserves what punishment for what crime.

Let me quickly say that for me personally, I am inclined to lean on forgiveness when someone shows true contrition for a terrible mistake. Zach lowe touched on this in a podcast after Kobe 's death. Some years prior, Kobe reached out to Zach to discuss some things. Zach was leery to deal with Kobe because of deep reservations he has related to the Colorado incident. Zach was assured by many of his friends who knew Kobe that he had now gone out of his way to help women and showed real contrition for his actions.

#40 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 10, 2023 - 12:28pm

Kobe did an enormous amount of work to rehabilitate his image, although he was likely also enormously fortunate he had a daughter rather than a son.

\while Kobe was nearly a perfect clone of Michael Jordan, as it regards an awareness of larger social perception, Kobe was vastly better than MJ.

#47 by guest from Europe // May 10, 2023 - 1:21pm

This good work that rapist Bryant did, he did later, in his 30s. In his 20s he denied the rape, then used all his money and attorneys to try to attack the victim, they claimed that somebody else raped her the day before and that caused her injuries, they claimed she wants his money and so on. A full year of that. He got absolutely zero punishment for his actions! Even most of the sponsors such as Nike stayed with him, because "he is such a good player".

If anybody forgot, i found here the details of their testimonies to the police, what happened later, that she totally broke down, the details of his statement in trial and so on. Her blood was found on his t-shirt, he strangled her, there were marks around her neck. To me this is brutal rape.

So, no punishment is needed if someone sincerely does good social work years later? You surprise me, theslothook. I am no lawyer, nor sociologist. What would happen to any society if this became a praxis?

#48 by theslothook // May 10, 2023 - 1:36pm

My opinion on this caries no more authority than the ordinary person. So please take it for what its worth. The chargers were dropped and he was let out. Much like OJ, the criminal justice system failed but its his prerogative to beat it. Meanwhile, lots and lots of poor people are talked into plea deals because they don't have the money to poke holes in the prosecution's case and are forever labeled criminals.

For me personally, what can I do? Hate the man forever? Maybe I am too soft on this issue, but I tend to become swayed by people who express deep remorse. This isn't limited to rapists. Murderers who find redemption in prison write with remarkably clarity both a) how stupid their decision was and b) how monstrous the consequences were for the victim. Maybe I am being conned, but there is real remorse. I don't see prison as purely punitive. It should be rehabilitory. And I do think people feel great sadness for their actions. As Aaron Brooks mentioned, the fact that Kobe had a daughter probably impacted him even more on this issue.

#50 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 10, 2023 - 1:44pm

That may be true, but my take was somewhat more cynical in nature than that.

Much (but not all) of Kobe's public image rehabilitation was via his interactions with his second daughter, Gianna, and his pushing of female sports in the context of her sports activities. I don't know if that effort would have been so successful had his sports-forward children been sons, like MJ had, rather than daughters, like Kobe had.

Regardless, Kobe used everything at his disposal really effectively.

#53 by guest from Europe // May 10, 2023 - 2:18pm

The charges were dropped because she was psychologically unstable and didn't want to testify in court after all the things his lawyers did. She knew his lawyers would go at her with all their might about her sex life and her underwear and anything and everything....

who find redemption in prison write with remarkably clarity

On this i agree. For any act when someone is punished and they truly remorse i am for giving them a new, clean opportunity. The punishment doesn't have to be prison. Long social work is way better than prison.

However, this guy is a hero, it isn't allowed to talk about what he did or you may get fired, during all the years before his good work, he did a lot of bad work. For many years he showed no remorse.

Sure, you don't have to hate him. In a comment below you write that you want it to be universal treatment for everyone! That is the law treatment. Who gets such a treatment that rapist Bryant did?

The following is nothing personal: why do you then ask what some commenter wrote here after it was published that Araiza participated in gang-rape? They felt enraged after reading some article. Let's assume that Araiza is not-guilty. Maybe this will be proven a few years from now. Maybe then these commenters and general public will show genuine remorse like Bryant did. If you are willing to wait for years to Bryant show remorse and forgive him, you should do the same to anyone who wrote comments without having the full information. These two opinions of yours are in collision. Regarding Bryant you are thinking with hindsight bias.

On a general level, i agree with you, everyone should get the universal treatment. In practical sense this is really hard to achieve. There are too many people, too many events, conflicts between them...

#55 by guest from Europe // May 11, 2023 - 4:11am

I thought you would get a lot more scorn by others here, so i didn't want to "throw stones" at you, theslothook. It seems noone has reacted. So, i would really like to know how did you get to the thoughts you expressed here: at the same time you are worried what someone posts here because

"Once more, how would you feel if your own livelihood and reputation were tarnished based entirely on he said, she said statements?"

and you think the rapist Bryant reached redemption.

I know nothing about off-court Bryant except this rape case. I know he was an ego-maniac in the NBA, destroyed a championship team, held conferences on parking lots to destroy it even more years later, was a very selfish player until his last game. So, try to convince me that this man showed true remorse. What, when and where and how did he do this? Put some links with dates. I wrote above what his lawyers did, there is a link to details of police statements, evidence... you agree he commited rape and admitted it. Are you really sure the rape victim has had a good life in the last 2 decades? Did Bryant make anything good later towards her? (links please)

To me some PR-stuff or appearances or money donations or playing with children aren't good enough. Is there anything that he did for some rape victims in L. A. or something? Something with "his own hands" where he had to suffer with them, not just words?

Aaron Brooks wrote that he is cynical so he does or doesn't agree with you. He can speak for himself.

The way you wrote it, if you were a juror during trial you are willing to let anyone go if that person shows true remorse. Words are equally important to you as actions.

Maybe I am too soft on this issue, but I tend to become swayed by people who express deep remorse. This isn't limited to rapists.

You are very honest, so i will give you the benefit of a doubt as far as i can. On an abstract, idealistic level i agree with you and Immanuel Kant about reserving judgements. I wish i was that good of a person, but i am not.

#56 by theslothook // May 11, 2023 - 9:15am

To be 100 percent clear, I never myself forgave him. I am a warriors fan who hates the Lakers, so I never spent a minute rooting for him. And of course, the minute he retired, he largely disappeared from the NBA as far as I was concerned. He was never a color commentator. He never wrote recaps or long articles on a series. Yes he did Detail, but thats on ESPN insider and I didn't have access.

I mentioned the redemption angle because in a podcast with Zach Lowe, he had I believe Ramona Shelburne or Rachel Nichols, and they explained all the ways he had attempted to atone for his past. Up to that point, I had virtually the same opinion of Kobe that I always had. Great individual scorer, but largely an overrated all timer with a terrible past that was largely being ignored.

Kobe after his fifth ring had everything. An unending legacy, universal love and adulation, and untold millions. He simply didn't have to change a thing about his behavior or feel anything differently. But those women said Kobe did try. I then started to change my opinion on him.

Of course, he is now dead. I felt terrible that so many innocent people, including his daughter, died and in that way. I felt for his wife who lost two members of her family just like that. But as far as the topic of Kobe the person, well, his death has effectively ended any continuing thoughts on that as well.

#57 by guest from Europe // May 11, 2023 - 3:20pm

This has nothing to do with Bryant, the NBA player nor his family.

Are you saying that you thought he reached redemption because you heard it on Lowe podcast? That's it? Nothing more? Then you are very gullible, at least.

I searched now what he did for charities etc. It's a lot of money donations, public appearances, playing basketball with kids, a lot of PR. This is all fine. I can't find anything else quickly.

What i did find is this article https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-02-04/kobe-bryant-sexual-assault-survivors-legacy

You can read how she received serious death threats. This rape trauma doesn't go away. This will stay in her brain until her death.

Here is something with comprehensive thoughts of Bryant https://slate.com/culture/2020/01/kobe-bryant-rape-allegation-coverage.html

His donations are acknowledged, but it's also about this

Part of the legacy of that rape case was the extreme victim-shaming that Kobe’s lawyer did, and that the media ran with. The law didn’t protect her, the legal system didn’t protect her, and the media certainly didn’t protect her. And so a lot of people do remember that, and remember him never, never reckoning with that. Him still enforcing the nondisclosure agreement—a couple of years ago he did an interview with the Washington Post, a big feature, and they reached out to her and she couldn’t talk because of the NDA.

And that’s important. That impacted a lot of people too, as did, of course, his work in women’s basketball, and his relationship with his daughter. It all exists. And it’s uncomfortable that it all exists, but it does. And ignoring it doesn’t help. I think ignoring it just makes survivors from all communities feel more shame, feel more confused, and feel like they’re not a part of our culture, our society.

This is no redemption. Victims are more important than money donations.

Bryant was worse than Watson, in my opinion. He got away with unsanctioned rape. Watson may still be trialed or may "find redemption years from now".

Your comments from yesterday about Bryant are unacceptable to me.

(Again, maybe you or someone else has more info, where he really hepled her or any other rape victim. I found only rape denial.)

#58 by theslothook // May 11, 2023 - 3:41pm

Your comments from yesterday about Bryant are unacceptable to me.

I am genuinely confused what comments I made that you find so unacceptable. I never said I personally felt like he redeemed himself. As I mentioned above, Kobe practically vanished from my mind the minute he retired. He stopped appearing on tv or general media that I consume. Sure, his name was mentioned here and there but I tried to put it out of my mind. So again, he simply never entered my mind. Should I have remained outraged at him? Well, there's unfortunately lots of injustices in this world and it would be a sad universe if all anyone ever did was occupy their mind with the outrages of humanity. And this is not aimed as any kind of defense, but there are far worse monsters guilty of far worse crimes than Kobe to occupy one's mind if you so choose. Right now, we have one country waging a war against another country purely for megalomaniacal reasons. Senseless deaths and destruction, threatening a nuclear calamity, for no reason but a man's ego. Does it bother me? Yes. Can I do anything about it? No. So does it occupy my thoughts over everything else going on my life? No.

I guess you felt like I had forgiven Kobe because I mentioned Zach Lowe. Let me clarify this point. I said I personally don't take the position that once a monster, that person stays a monster. I have forgiveness in my heart(although god only knows if that would still be true if I or someone close to me were the victim of a crime).

I mentioned Zach Lowe because HE found something redemptive with Kobe. He did. Not me. However, because I respect Zach Lowe for his talent as a writer and podcaster, but also his general demeanor and character; it said a lot that he found a redemption in Kobe. So that made me start to change my mind about him.

#59 by guest from Europe // May 11, 2023 - 5:11pm

Then i misinterpret this comment of yours:

For me personally, what can I do? Hate the man forever? Maybe I am too soft on this issue, but I tend to become swayed by people who express deep remorse. This isn't limited to rapists. Murderers who find redemption in prison write with remarkably clarity both a) how stupid their decision was and b) how monstrous the consequences were for the victim. Maybe I am being conned, but there is real remorse. I don't see prison as purely punitive. It should be rehabilitory. And I do think people feel great sadness for their actions. As Aaron Brooks mentioned, the fact that Kobe had a daughter probably impacted him even more on this issue.

in combination what you wrote before about that Lowe podcast on Bryant.

I just heard this Lowe podcast from January 2020 with Shelbourne and Nichols about Bryant. You can listen to it again, i can tell you my opinion now: it's a lot of crap and aggrandizing a player that "there was something about him" "he is a legend", than how they sent texts to each other, that Bryant was good with the media, he would become a media master etc. They mention "he was a tragic figure", "he was good and bad", there is no redemption explained. It's about NBA and sports media. Maybe there is another podcast. Maybe you missremember something.

Lowe can be no authority on this matter. Please read the two links i posted above or read some other article on this or find anything by Lowe or anybody that clearly explains the redemption angle.

I said I personally don't take the position that once a monster, that person stays a monster. I have forgiveness in my heart

i can agree with this. This would mean Bryant did something like this hypothetical

I, like Smith, wonder, “Could Bryant have also been pushed to take more direct action to stop sexual violence, or done so of his own accord, and what would that action have looked like? Would he have been embraced?”

It’s a shame that never happened, especially when he publicly reckoned with his mistakes elsewhere.

Was Bryant the worst monster? No. Was he a true legend? Absolutely not. Was he a good person? No. He was a maniac on NBA courts and it was part of his personality. Was he equal to or worse than D. Watson? Yes. Did he help children? Yes.

You described recently Watson as a "scumbag". I can't accept anything less for Bryant.

This is nothing personal. I appologize for being stubborn. But this is more important than NBA or NFL. You and me write many comments here about meaningless NFL. Please take some time to think about this and later tomorrow let me know your opinion of Bryant.

#60 by theslothook // May 11, 2023 - 6:44pm

I don't have much to add that I haven't already said. Kobe has not been part of my thought for a very long time now stretching back to before his death.

I wouldn't say zach lowe or that podcast swayed me into anything other than perhaps he had changed. PERHAPS. And once again, since he was no longer alive, I didn't put further thought, research, or effort into whether it was genuine.

I can't tell if you think i'm somehow so devoted to his mythology that I'm desperate to believe he changed. Quite the contrary as I will maintain, I think he's one of the more overrated top whatever players in NBA history.

Rather, I share your general astonishment about how just about everyone has swept all of this completely under the rug.

#62 by guest from Europe // May 12, 2023 - 5:48am

I can't tell if you think i'm somehow so devoted to his mythology that I'm desperate to believe he changed.

No. It seems to me that you read/listened to this redemption story and "ate it all up". You didn't write anything "perhaps" in above comments. You wrote that there is a redemption angle you heard on Lowe podcast and you are willing to forgive a rapist or a murderer. For a murderer you described in which case you are forgiving them. So, it seemed you are forgiving Bryant!

And once again, since he was no longer alive, I didn't put further thought, research, or effort into whether it was genuine.

So i am asking you now for the last time to put effort and research if it's genuine. Send an e-mail to Z. Lowe if you will.

Why is this very important? In a few hours i was searching for this redemption story that you mentioned, i found many articles where there were death threats made to her. A man was coming to get her. Police stopped him! There are many Bryant fanatics. Do not play with this.

If you or Z. Lowe claim Bryant found redemption during his life, better be sure of it. Don't write maybes. The only person that could have given him full redemption was her. Not you, not me and certainly not media members. Otherwise you are somewhere between "insensitive to this matter" and "supporter of rape".

In the above quotes and links that i posted, you or anyone else can read how rape victims feel reading this. Do not do it.

Bryant could have publicly said many times "don't strangle women. That is wrong" or "don't send anyone death threats. This woman isn't guilty of anything" or he could have at least made a foundation for help to rape victims and actively participated in that counseling each summer of his life. Many rapes do happen.

He made a foundation to help children and donated some money. Nothing more, nothing less. In all the articles the journalists write he didn't do anything for rape problems. I take their word on that. She was not allowed to talk about it. That means there is no redemption. To me it's unsanctioned brutal rape.

Bryant issued a stetement of apology on this. So did D. Watson! Why did you call D. Watson a "ghoullish scumbag"? Maybe he will also make a foundation a decade from now, it will be a redemption story, statues to Watson in Houston will be built and we will all celebrate Watson and Bryant on Lowe podcast.

If anyone disagrees with me on this topic, bring some hard evidence or i can't talk to you about anything else. This is a "cold case". No new evidence will be presented. We had some police info, blood evidence, injuries.

If it's unclear to you what are the moral and legal problems with this "story", take a look at an artistic interpretation of this problem: The Godfather Part I, opening scene. It lasts only 6 minutes.

On Araiza story, i agree with you. It's unclear what happened there.

If you at the end, after you do the research, find no true redemption in Bryant's story, you should do something about your comments above. Edit them in a proper way. Don't just delete. This is real life, not a computer file. If you find redemption, explain it in detail. That was Bryant: attention to detail, including legal ones.

#63 by guest from Europe // May 12, 2023 - 2:49pm

This is a somewhat public sphere. You have to assume women, including raped women, are reading this. I am nobody in this, i don't matter.

Your comments were:

#25 we shouldn't condemn Araiza until more info (a possible rapist)

#34 Bryant rehabilitated his image (he was a rapist), you are for forgiveness

#48 you want to forgive rapists and murderers if they show remorse

When some woman reads this and adds it up, what is she supposed to think of you? You didn't mention the victims first and foremost, you go on about rights of rapists. It looks really bad. Try showing this to some woman and what happens?

You can't assume anyone knows what you are thinking. On such matters you have to express yourself carefully.

#64 by theslothook // May 12, 2023 - 3:04pm

Ok, I think you have overread what I wrote and now are implying things about me that I never stated or intended. If anyone, especially women, are reading this; allow me to make my stance on this absolutely firm. This is frankly the last time I am going to comment on this topic:

1) I have no idea if Matt Araiza is innocent. I have no idea if he is guilty. I am not a police officer investigating the case. I have no knowledge about what happened other than what has been reported by third parties. So as far as Matt Araiza is concerned, I have no comment to make other than I don't know and people shouldn't feel certainty in either direction.

2) For murders and rapists; my personal philosophy has room for forgiveness. Maybe right, maybe wrong but this is just my personal philosophy. Unlike other things, I don't claim to have any special insight into this either and certainly would not demand others share this philosophy. If someone else feels like murders and rapists can never be forgiven and should burn in hell for eternity - that's their view and they have every right to feel this. Once again, for me personally, I have forgiveness for them provided they show tremendous remorse for their actions and come to the full realization that their actions severely harmed another human being. This is somewhat unknowable and once again, I don't claim to have any kind of defined criteria for what constitutes "enough" remorse. However,I was convinced when reading about Tookie Williams and became convinced of his redemption and remorse. I have listened to two podcasts with Dwayne Betts going over his redemption story for being a car thief. So for me, it is possible.

3) For the last time, I have not been convinced of Bryant's redemption. I, however, started to wonder, Once again WONDER, if maybe he had. That was furthest extent. Saying I have forgiven Bryant as a rapist is utterly ridiculous. I never said that. If I may have intimated that, well, than that was a mistake and unintentional. Once again, I do not know if Bryant has redeemed himself or not.

#68 by guest from Europe // May 12, 2023 - 4:47pm

Good to clean up the misunderstanding.

#31 by Eddo // May 10, 2023 - 9:25am

"EDIT - curiously, the URL reads, "witness says matt araiza present alleged-rape" yet the title of the actual article, in case you don't click the link, says, " Witness says Matt Araiza wasn't present at time of alleged rape." The bold and italics are my emphasis."

I've seen this with various "slugifying" functions, where common enough words are removed from headlines. In this case, the common word ("wasn't") is pretty important to the meaning, but usually it's not as noticeable.

#61 by BSK // May 11, 2023 - 10:17pm

I gotta ask:

What was your take on Kaepernick's ouster from the league?

#70 by theslothook // May 31, 2023 - 3:04pm

Are you asking me?

I think it's sad. Kaepernick's heart was in the right place. I think he went about it poorly, but that doesn't mean he deserved to be blackballed by the NFL.

#27 by theslothook // May 10, 2023 - 1:38am

Let me start with the part of this post I have the hardest time with.

Your approach is to presume that the 17-year old was lying or mistaken, and until someone can prove to you otherwise, you're going to continue to presume that she's lying or mistaken.

I never said this. I don't even think I intimated this either. Saying one should wait for the full facts before passing judgement is absolutely not the same thing as assuming the alleged victim is lying. Furthermore, I never took the ESPN article as proof that Araiza was innocent either. I simply said, it helps to have all of the facts. Search all you want, but nowhere did I make the claim you have ascribed to me. Hard not to be personally offended reading that to be honest.

I also find it odd how much else you've ascribed to me based on the idea that judgement should be reserved before a proper accounting of the evidence has occurred. Or stated another way, why the heck should someone shoot from the hip and react when they aren't fully informed? Somehow, suggesting patience implies illogic?

I just think it's unreasonable to expect them not to have an opinion, and even more unreasonable to expect them not to act on that opinion, during periods of uncertainty.

This brings about some more questions to ponder:

You are saying, sometimes it's reasonable to act before all of the facts are present. Just when is it inappropriate to do so and who decides? Is it ok for some people to react with little evidence but not others, or should everyone be encouraged to behave this way?

If the evidence is pure hearsay, is it still ok for a mob of people to call for someone to be fired? What recourse do such people face when it turns out they were spectacularly wrong? Especially when we are talking about a diffuse group that is unlikely to be sued.

If it turns out Matt Araiza is innocent, is anyone going to be issuing a mea culpa and demanding he gets his job back? Is anyone here who wrote him off as a rapist psycho going to bother posting an apology?

Just why is it reasonable for people who are not informed on the full facts to be taking actions anyways? When does it start to go into overreach, or is that justified as well? Why should we be ok/encouraging people to action with little evidence in the first place? Is that how you would teach your kids?

Imagine if this were applied in other domains. How would you feel if climate policy, econ policy, prison sentencing, and other social issues were left to knee jerk public opinion based entirely on news articles and second hand gossip? Would you want this? Or is someone's lost livelihood and ruined reputation considered a perfectly acceptable low cost bad outcome?

You've jumped to the conclusion that the information in this article is the final word on the matter, even though the trial hasn't even occurred yet

I never said this either. I have never stated his innocence or his guilt. I will emphasize: I never claimed Araiza was guilty when the news first broke out, nor do I claim he is now innocent of what he has been accused about. Rather, I simply stated; I am uncomfortable going with knee jerk reactions proclaiming his guilt or his innocence when we aren't informed about the incident beyond surface level news reports and he said, she said testimonies.

#32 by Eddo // May 10, 2023 - 9:29am

"You are saying, sometimes it's reasonable to act before all of the facts are present. Just when is it inappropriate to do so and who decides? Is it ok for some people to react with little evidence but not others, or should everyone be encouraged to behave this way?"

It sounds like you're trying to determine some universal truth here, but that's not ever going to be the case. Every situation and decision maker is going to have different threshold here. They'll incorporate, either implicitly or explicitly, their own morals, time constraints, assumptions about public reaction, etc. In this case, I'm sure the Bills weighed the costs of cutting him when he's innocent vs. the cost of continuing to employ him when he was guilty, and decided the latter was greater.

And we know that even within the league, different teams have different thresholds. Some teams stayed away from Deshaun Watson for moral reasons. Others were probably interested, but didn't want to pay too much. And, of course, at least one team was willing to overlook all the risks and acquire him.

You've mentioned working in the machine learning field before, and I wonder if that's impacting your stances here. I work in software engineering and it's really tempting to find a "correct" and logical solution to things, but real life is never that clean. Humans are social and emotional creatures, and that impacts every decision everyone makes in some capacity, and will never really change.

#33 by theslothook // May 10, 2023 - 11:25am

I would probably blame my econ training for forcing decisions down a very logical set of rules and doing a bunch if and then analysis + on the one hand but also on the other.

Just a point to clarify. I don't blame the Bills at all for this situation. Given the circumstances, Matt Araiza was far more trouble than he was worth. And so those actions based on limited information make sense.

My argument is aimed mostly at the general outrage from ordinary people. Their knee jerk reaction, to me, is wrong and all of what I said above holds.

When I referenced the comments in that FO thread, it was aimed that way. I didn't even bother asking them, "But how do you even know that he's guilty?", because we all know they didn't but the presumption of guilt so neatly aligned with the need for righteous justice and what made them feel good.

Let me turn it around and ask you or anyone who cares to respond. "How do you feel about people demanding he lose his job before a full accounting of the facts are discovered? How would you feel now that the facts paint a much murkier story - video evidence and witness testimony say he wasn't at the party at the time the victim said the rape occurred? Once more, how would you feel if your own livelihood and reputation were tarnished based entirely on he said, she said statements?"

This reflexive need to demonize, unfortunately, I've seen way too many times manifested in the form of xenophobia. Some perceived ailment in society gets aimed squarely at the feed of some group that people don't like.

#35 by Eddo // May 10, 2023 - 12:05pm

I'll give it a go:

"How do you feel about people demanding he lose his job before a full accounting of the facts are discovered?"

I do sympathize with your implications (maybe even outright statements?) that the general public wants action faster than is ultimately reasonable, so I don't love that action was taken before all the facts were discovered. However, in reality, as others have pointed out, we still don't have a full accounting of the facts - and the Bills felt they needed to do something when the evidence at the time pointed to him being guilty of sexual assault. So I think people were justified based on the information at the time, especially given he had admitted to sexual activity with the underage victim.

"How would you feel now that the facts paint a much murkier story - video evidence and witness testimony say he wasn't at the party at the time the victim said the rape occurred?"

This isn't super cut-and-dried. I do believe there are instances where "guilt by association" is completely valid, albeit something that's very subjective and will vary on a case-by-case basis. Far too many people in privileged positions - whether that's a formal position of power or merely being a white man in a society that still favors them - stand by while injustices happen. So unless he left the party and tried to get the bad actors to stop, or has enough "goodness" about him that it offsets some of this badness, I'm not really going to feel bad that he doesn't get to make millions of dollars.

"Once more, how would you feel if your own livelihood and reputation were tarnished based entirely on he said, she said statements?"

This is tough. I mean, of course, nearly everyone is going to feel sorry for themselves if they get fired for any reason. No one wants that. But in reality, the chances of a completely innocent man being taken down by "he said, she said" accusations is very low - so it's not something I practically worry about for people who are not doing bad things.

It also takes a lot to actually tarnish someone's livelihood and reputation. Has he been unable to get a job that pays him well enough to live since then? At a personal level, it's hard for me to feel that my empathy for someone whose only consequence is no longer being able to have the seven-figure job they would have had, otherwise, unless they have been actually imprisoned or forced below the poverty line wrongly.

#37 by theslothook // May 10, 2023 - 12:12pm

Fair enough. And all are very reasonable positions to have.

I admit to demanding a universality to this. A any and always call is rigid and inflexible, but at the very least, is applied even handily and consistently across all cases. Thats probably a position unique to myself.

As to Matt Araiza himself. To me, there is a very big difference between left the party knowing a young girl was in the presence of a bunch of alcohol charged college students and knowingly participated in a gang rape of the young girl very much against her will. One of these suggests bad character and the other a violent criminal.

#54 by guest from Europe // May 10, 2023 - 2:40pm

demanding a universality to this.

This is supposed to be law. Hopefully it will be applied properly.

"Universality" in public opinion will never be reached. The only way i can think of is to stop expressing opinions about human behaviour and wait for "the institutions" to do their work. Which they may or may not do. In many countries they don't.

If Araiza did nothing wrong, hopefully he can sue the NFL in a few years and get some money from his contract back.

is applied even handily and consistently across all cases. Thats probably a position unique to myself.

It's not unique . It's moral idealism. Kant and others. I theoretically agree, but can't achieve this.

#41 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 10, 2023 - 12:33pm

Far too many people in privileged positions - whether that's a formal position of power or merely being a white man in a society that still favors them - stand by while injustices happen.

The first step in real bigotry is deciding your opponent is sub-human and can be othered without cost.

#45 by Eddo // May 10, 2023 - 1:06pm

I'll admit I'm not clear what your point is here - is it intended to be critical or supportive of mine?

#51 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 10, 2023 - 1:46pm

Critical.

Your 2nd through 4th paragraphs are basically classic examples of the lines of thinking that are required to result in really devastating examples of misjustice.

It's lynch mob and inquisition-type thinking.

#52 by theslothook // May 10, 2023 - 1:59pm

This is not aimed at your critique of Eddo's post. But just want to note; that's why I see an equivalence between Araiza and xenophobia. Reactions based off emotions can sometimes be understood/justified - a farmer in rural India murdering a man who raped his daughter. Or they can be really terrible; like residents in a village deciding an outbreak is the result of witchcraft and a subsequent stoning to death is warranted. (I was horrified to read about witchcraft in Tanzania that occurs EVEN to this day).

#36 by Eddo // May 10, 2023 - 12:11pm

I'll respond to this separately, as it's sort of a different thought:

"This reflexive need to demonize, unfortunately, I've seen way too many times manifested in the form of xenophobia. Some perceived ailment in society gets aimed squarely at the feed of some group that people don't like. "

I'm with you here, in general, but that's not the case here. Far more sexual assaults - particularly when committed by someone in a position of privilege, such as white male football player - go unpunished than punished. The group being marginalized when it comes to sexual assault are victims, overwhelmingly women. That's what the #metoo movement was going after, to show just how many women have experienced it and gone unacknowledged. I'm positive that's why there was such a quick reaction against Araiza, because on its face this seemed like yet another instance. #Metoo doesn't imply there are never any false allegations or women who lie, but if we over-correct by listening to more women and believing their stories, I don't think that's a bad thing. (The caveat there being that it should still take evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to actually take away someone's freedom, but that was not done to Araiza, at least not yet, as the trial hasn't even started.)

#38 by theslothook // May 10, 2023 - 12:20pm

Also a reasonable perspective, although my remaining issue here is once again, I see it applied unevenly.

Kobe is one example, but consider this article I read recently on Magic Johnson.

https://www.basketballnetwork.net/.amp/off-the-court/frank-brickowski-talks-about-magic-johnsons-notorious-house-parties

Here's a short excerpt from it:

"He would have the finest girls in L.A. there. The absolute finest. And at midnight you had to get busy with somebody or you had to get the (expletive) out. So if you were a guy, at midnight, you'd get as close as you could to the hottest possible woman. Magic went around in this freaky voyeuristic way. He'd check on you. He'd go throughout the house, the pool. He'd order people to start doing things. All you had to be was near a chick. There were guys who would yell, 'Magic, she's not getting busy! She's not!' He'd run over and she'd get busy. Celebrity is seductive in L.A. Girls have this desperation about them, like moths to a flame. It's sad. But when you're young and single, fame matters."

One could read that statement in many different ways, but I find it interesting what Magic's reputation is and how this article was actually written as a positive, celebratory piece.

#46 by Theo // May 10, 2023 - 1:15pm

There has been an over-correction that opened the door to false rape/violence allegations, if you want to quickly want to ruin a man's career. Or when you just want to save your own reputation.

You make an allegation and the mob does the work for you.

The harm is quickly done and the punishment when found out relatively low.

#65 by GwillyGecko // May 12, 2023 - 3:49pm

I thought at the time that Araiza was getting railroaded based on the questionable, egregious and fantastical accusations from a single person(back then the allegations seemed bogus, and it's ludicrous for anyone to now think he's anything but innocent) and I hope the Bills make things right and offer him a half decent contract to rejoin the team.

#66 by guest from Europe // May 12, 2023 - 4:22pm

A question about contract termination: on what grounds is that? Did he get his money? If not and everything you wrote is true, can he sue and get the full contract money?

#67 by KnotMe // May 12, 2023 - 4:38pm

I think NFL teams can terminate contracts with non-injured players whenever they want if they are willing to eat the cap hit. According to OTC he got 216K as dead money due to guarantees but that is it. Not sure but I think he is a FA now.

#69 by guest from Europe // May 12, 2023 - 4:59pm

Yes, i checked. His 6th round rookie contract was non-guaranteed. i thought all rookie contracts are guaranteed for 3 years. Apparently not. So, it was a release out of non-guaranteed contract.

Disclaimer: i don't have an opinion on this rape case. The reports are conflicting.

#71 by malave // Jun 15, 2023 - 9:33am

Eagles Soar, 49ers Faceplant in 2023 Draft Grades

Vincent Verhei — Wed, 03 May 2023 13:50:05 +0000

Eagles Soar, 49ers Faceplant in 2023 Draft Grades Vincent Verhei 03 May 2023, 09:50am

Consensus opinion tells us that the San Francisco 49ers had the worst draft class of 2023, while the Denver Broncos had the most perplexing. And then there are the Philadelphia Eagles, whose incoming rookie pool looks more promising than anything we have seen perhaps in decades.

Welcome to Football Outsiders' 2023 Draft Report Card Report. Everyone and their buddy is writing draft report cards these days, but one person's opinion is just one person's opinion, no matter how knowledgeable that person may be. By collecting a wide variety of grades, however, we can hopefully use the wisdom of the crowds to get a more accurate measurement of which teams drafted well and which have set themselves up for failure.

This year we collected 21 sets of draft grades from NFL experts around the Internet. Those experts:

Nate Davis, USA Today
DraftKings Staff, DraftKings
Ryan Dunleavy, New York Post
Kyle Dvorchak (NFC) and Eric Frotan (AFC), NBC Sports Edge
Luke Easterling, Athlon Sports
Doug Farrar, TouchdownWire
Fox Sports NFL Staff, Fox Sports
Ryan Gosling, Pro Football Network
Vinnie Iyer, Sporting News
Danny Kelly, The Ringer
Mel Kiper, ESPN
Kristopher Knox, Bleacher Report
Gilberto Manzano and Matt Verderame, Sports Illustrated
Mark Maske, Washington Post
Thor Nystrom, Fantasy Pros (AFC, NFC)
PFF Staff, Pro Football Focus
Mike Phillips, Fansided
Pete Prisco, CBS Sports
Chad Reuter, NFL.com
Evan Silva, Establish the Run (AFC, NFC)
And last but not least, Mike Tanier, Football Outsiders

Each year, we take these evaluations and convert each letter grade to a numeric scale, from 0.0 for an F to 4.3 for an A+, then calculate the grade point average for each team.

If you're interested in the past, previous NFL Draft Report Card Reports can be found here: (2022), (2021), (2020), (2019), (2018), (2017), (2016), (2015), (2014), (2013), (2012), (2011), (2010), (2009), (2008), (2007), (2006), (2005), (2004).

If you're interested in the present, then you're probably very interested in what the Eagles did last week.

Highest Draft Grades

1. Philadelphia Eagles

GPA: 4.17 (Highest GPA on record)
Highest Grade: A+ (13 total)
Lowest Grade: B+ (Reuter)

Nearly 20 years of doing this, and we have never seen a team get a higher GPA after the draft. Part of this is grade inflation, as we will get to later, but most of it is because people really liked the Eagles' draft—the next four highest GPAs are right in line with what we saw last year. Philadelphia general manager Howie Roseman may have found four starters on defense in lineman Jalen Carter, edge rusher Nolan Smith, safety Sydney Brown, and cornerback Kelee Ringo, plus one on offense in tackle Tyler Steen.

Over 60% of our graders gave Philadelphia an A+. That includes Tanier—we're counting his official grade of "BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRT" as a perfect score—who said "the Eagles did exactly what a Super Bowl contender should do in the draft: they aggressively pursued maximum-upside talent, because the 'safe' picks likely to fall to them in most spots are unlikely to be talented enough to make a difference." It also includes our old friend Farrar ("Once again, we have to stand back in wonderment at how Howie Roseman is getting away with all of this"), Kelly ("What I wrote about the Nolan Smith pick on Thursday night—'They can't keep getting away with this'—now applies to the Eagles' entire draft"), Davis ("Another year, another Howie Roseman masterclass"), Ralph Vacchiano of Fox Sports ("Is there a grade higher than A-plus?"), Phillips ("another home run class for the reigning NFC champs"), and Knox ("Roseman nailed this draft from start to finish").

Five others limited the Eagles to an A only because they refused to give out A+ scores. That includes Prisco ("Howie Roseman killed it with his haul this year") and Silva ("Firmly the best GM in the game, Roseman knocked this draft out of the park").

That leaves us with three graders out of 21 who gave at least one team a higher grade than the Eagles. Reuter (A- for Philadelphia, A grades for six teams) had concerns about Ringo's shoulder and work ethic. DraftKings gave Philly an A but Houston an A+ as Teddy Ricketson questioned how many of Roseman's new toys would be able to start right away. Easterling gave the Colts an A+ while the Eagles were a notch down at A, but it's not clear why; "They didn't reach for anyone, stole most of their picks later than they should have gone, and made arguably the league's most talented roster even better," he wrote. And these are the harshest criticisms of Philadelphia we could find.

NFL executives are reportedly "annoyed" with the media's growing adoration for all things Eagles, but they have nobody to blame but themselves for passing on all the players who end up playing so well in midnight green.

2. Pittsburgh Steelers

GPA: 3.91
Highest Grade: A+ (four total)
Lowest Grade: B+ (four total)

So, uh, quite a weekend for the Keystone State. The Steelers found potential starters on both offense (tackle Broderick Jones, tight end Darnell Washington) and defense (corner Joey Porter Jr., lineman Keeanu Benton). Pittsburgh received A+ grades from four evaluators. One, Iyer, gave both Pennsylvania teams an A+ but specifically ranked Pittsburgh over Philadelphia. "The Steelers crushed the first draft with GM Omar Khan," he wrote. "They filled their two biggest needs, a pass protector for Kenny Pickett and a big cover man to help Patrick Peterson." He also liked Pittsburgh's defenders from Wisconsin, Benton and linebacker Nick Herbig.

"I loved this team's haul in Omar Khan's first draft as general manager," Kelly wrote, "starting off with first-round tackle Broderick Jones and continuing through [Day 3]." Nystrom praised Pittsburgh's trade up for Jones and called Porter "a highway-robbery steal at a position of acute need," saying "This is how well-run organizations draft." Kelly and Nystrom both gave Pittsburgh an A+, as did the crew at Pro Football Focus.

3. Indianapolis Colts

GPA: 3.74
Highest Grade: A+ (five total)
Lowest Grade: B (Dunleavy, Kiper, Prisco)

The Colts resisted the urge to trade up, staying put at fourth overall, and still landed a franchise quarterback prospect in Florida's Anthony Richardson. His success or failure in the NFL will ultimately determine the quality of this draft class, but many observers are confident he'll be a star.

Easterling only gave out one A+ grade, and it went to Indianapolis. "[Richardson] is the perfect quarterback for this offense, and has the most upside of any player in the entire draft, regardless of position," he wrote. Iyer, who also gave Indy an A+, called Richardson "the highest-ceiling [quarterback] in the class." Pro Football Focus was also sufficiently impressed with Richardson—"arguably the most incredible athlete at the quarterback position we have ever seen"—to give the Colts an A+.

Richardson is just one of 12 players the Colts drafted this year, and the other 11 prospects hold promise too. Kelly also gave Indianapolis an A+, writing that the Colts "also added a pair of long-levered, athletic corners in Julius Brents (Kansas State) and Darius Rush (South Carolina), a shifty and explosive slot receiver in Josh Downs (North Carolina), and one of my favorite interior defensive lineman in this draft in Adetomiwa Adebawore (Northwestern)." Nystrom's A+ grade was based mostly on Richardson and Brents, but also on Adebawore, Downs, and BYU offensive tackle Blake Freeland, saying the three "were all bonanza values."

4. Seattle Seahawks

GPA: 3.65
Highest Grade: A+ (Farrar, Phillips)
Lowest Grade: C+ (Nystrom)

With the fifth overall pick, the Seahawks grabbed Illinois' Devon Witherspoon, the first corner off the board; later in the first round, they added Ohio State's Jaxon Smith-Njigba, the first wide receiver off the board. In the second round they took Auburn edge rusher Derick Hall and UCLA running back Zach Charbonnet; in later rounds they found a number of potential starters on both the offensive and defensive lines.

Farrar called Weatherspoon "perhaps the best defensive player" available, saying that he "has every attribute you want in a cornerback, and his combination of aggressiveness and match footwork should make him an instant star." His summary of Smith-Njigba was succinct: "He's Cooper Kupp, the sequel." Phillips called Witherspoon and Smith-Njigba the draft's best players at their positions, saying the Seahawks "hit a grand slam in this draft and remain in excellent position to challenge the 49ers in the NFC West." Tanier, who gave Seattle an A-, went even further, saying that right now, "the Seahawks have the best roster in their division."

5. New York Giants

GPA: 3.43
Highest Grade: A+ (PFF)
Lowest Grade: C- (Davis)

The Pro Football Focus staff were the only graders to give the Giants an A+. They called Maryland defensive back Deonte Banks, the 24th overall pick, "an elite athlete" and the third-best corner on their board. They said Minnesota center John Michael Schmitz, the 57th overall selection, could have been a first-round pick, calling him "one of the best run blockers at the position to enter the draft in recent years." In Round 3, the Giants drafted Tennessee receiver Jalin Hyatt, whom PFF called "a burner on the outside that needs some refinement but has all the athletic ability necessary to excel at the next level."

Four other writers gave the Giants an A. "The first four picks of this draft alone should have fans of Big Blue doing handsprings and huzzahs," Farrar wrote, referring to Banks, Schmitz, Hyatt, and Oklahoma running back Eric Gray. Dunleavy said that Joe Schoen "taught a master's class on how to use draft capital to target specific players," praising the general manager's trades up for Banks and Hyatt. Iyer and Phillips were the other two writers on New York's A train.

Lowest Draft Grades

32. San Francisco 49ers

GPA: 1.79
Highest Grade: B+ (Gosling)
Lowest Grade: F (Dunleavy, Dvorchak, Nystrom)

Our evaluators only gave out five F grades, and the 49ers got three of them. San Francisco's paucity of draft capital (they gave up their original first-, second-, third-, fourth-, and sixth-round picks in trades for Trey Lance, Christian McCaffrey, and Charles Omenihu) complicated things, though they gained back a bundle of compensatory picks. But the issue is not the picks the 49ers lost; it's what they did with those picks that remained.

"The 49ers failed this draft because they did poorly in the nine non-premium slots they were selecting in," Nystrom wrote. "We saw a procession of reaches. … This felt like a myopic process, where every pick is a luxury pick and nothing is at stake. Perhaps the 49ers have entered the pre-Rams-Super-Bowl 'f*** them picks' phase of their evolution."

Dvorchak criticized the decision to trade up for Penn State defensive back Ji'Ayir Brown, a questionable move for a team that had little draft capital to begin with. But the (ahem) kicker was San Francisco's second selection: Michigan placekicker Jake Moody at 99th overall. "Moody is the best kicker in the draft, but the 49ers opted for a low-impact position far too early," he wrote. "The NFL has placed an extremely low value on kickers in the draft and San Francisco doesn't have a roster so pristine that they can afford to take a luxury pick." Dunleavy pointed out that Moody was the highest-drafted kicker since Roberto Aguayo … who was cut after just one season in Tampa Bay and never played in the NFL again.

Dunleavy gave the 49ers a D, saying that "Kyle Shanahan himself admitted he got made fun of by his friends in the coaching ranks, and would have returned the favor to anyone else who had [drafted a kicker in the third round]. He gets the same treatment from us."

"Jake Moody should have been depth at receiver or on the interior offensive line, two units the 49ers didn't bother addressing, even with all of their Day 3 picks," wrote Tanier, who gave San Francisco a D+. Even some of the kinder graders questioned the 49ers' game plan; Phillips gave them a C-, but noted that "spending the first few picks on a safety and a kicker isn't great roster building, particularly after the 49ers failed to draft a single offensive lineman in a year they could use help at the position."

31. Washington Commanders

GPA: 2.20
Highest Grade: B+ (Prisco)
Lowest Grade: D- (Nystrom)

Nystrom felt that the Commanders overdrafted each of their first two picks, Mississippi State cornerback Emmanuel Forbes at 16th overall and Illinois safety Jartavius Martin at 47. Forbes was the second corner off the board, but Nystrom noted the draft's deep pool of talented cornerbacks (which includes Christian Gonzalez, who went to New England one pick later, and Deonte Banks, who went to the Giants at 24). He also pointed out that Detroit traded up ahead of Washington to take Brian Branch, the top safety in the draft, leaving Washington reaching for Martin.

Iyer and Phillips each gave Washington a D. Iyer agreed that Forbes and Martin were reaches, and also pointed out that the Commanders failed to address needs at linebacker, tight end, and "developmental quarterback." Phillips said this was "certainly a strange class for the Commanders," joining the chorus of voices calling Forbes a reach and saying that Washington's Day 2 choices (Martin and Arkansas offensive lineman Ricky Stromberg) were "mismatched" and "they could have gotten better value at other areas of need."

30. Denver Broncos

GPA: 2.28
Highest Grade: A- (Tanier)
Lowest Grade: F (Silva)

Well, that's quite a gap between high and low grade. We'll address the polarizing reactions to this draft and Denver's higher grades later. For now, let's discuss the low grades that put the Broncos in this section to begin with.

Silva was the only writer to give Denver a failing grade; he admitted that was largely due to the picks lost in the Russell Wilson trade and how badly that deal has worked out, but he also questioned the trade up for Oklahoma receiver Marvin Mims by a team that already has Courtland Sutton, Jerry Jeudy, and Tim Patrick. Knox and Phillips each gave Denver a D. Knox acknowledged that the draft will ultimately hinge on what Wilson and Sean Payton (who also cost the Broncos a draft pick) can do this year, but added that Mims was a major reach, going nearly 40 slots earlier than his spot on the Bleacher Report big board. Phillips was a fan of Arkansas linebacker Drew Sanders at 67 (Silva and Knox also conceded the value Sanders offered at that spot) but said "Denver needed to find more impactful pieces with its few early selections."

29. Miami Dolphins

GPA: 2.30
Highest Grade: B+ (Fox Sports)
Lowest Grade: D (Dunleavy, Phillips)

The Dolphins were also missing some draft capital, having one first-round pick taken away for attempted tampering with Sean Payton and Tom Brady and trading away another (originally acquired in the Trey Lance deal with San Francisco) to acquire Bradley Chubb from Denver, while losing other picks in trades for Tyreek Hill and Jalen Ramsey. Phillips didn't like Miami's first selection—South Carolina corner Cam Smith, taken 51st overall—because it wasn't a position of need for a team that already had Jalen Ramsey and Xavien Howard. Dunleavy had similar thoughts about Miami's third-round pick, Texas A&M running back Devon Achane, calling him "a strange choice after Miami re-signed free-agent running backs Raheem Mostert, Jeff Wilson and Myles Gaskin."

Matt Verderame gave the Dolphins a D+ for Sports Illustrated based entirely on their lack of draft capital; he had nothing but nice things to say about all four of Miami's draft picks, including sixth-round receiver Elijah Higgins out of Stanford and seventh-round tackle Ryan Hayes out of Michigan. All those trades make this a tough class to grade; Tanier gave the Dolphins a B- but said he would have gone with an A if including the Ramsey acquisition.

28. Dallas Cowboys

GPA: 2.30
Highest Grade: A (Prisco)
Lowest Grade: F (Nystrom)

Yes, the Cowboys are 28th and the Dolphins are 29th; tack on another couple of decimal points and they beat Miami 2.3048 to 2.3000. That's no thanks to Nystrom, though—he said he "didn't understand what the Cowboys were doing" with their first two picks: first-round defensive tackle Mazi Smith and second-round tight end Luke Schoonmaker, both out of Michigan. As Nystrom points out, if the Cowboys had started with a tight end first and then taken a lineman, they could have had Sam LaPorta or Michal Mayer in the first round and Zacch Pickens, Byron Young, or Siaki Ika in the second.

"The rest of the picks were more of the same, reaching for prospects in slots that didn't fit," Nystrom writes. "It felt like Dallas went into each day with a plan to take specific positions in specific slots, and were unable to move off the plan to take advantage of the values dropping to them."

Nystrom was by far Dallas' harshest critic. Davis, Dvorchack, and Kelly each gave the Cowboys a C-. Davis knocked Dallas for not finding a better, bigger running back than "diminutive sixth-rounder Deuce Vaughn" to split time with Tony Pollard. Dvorchak thought that the Smith and Schoonmaker selections both put too much weight on roster needs and not enough on available talent. Kelly agreed, saying that the Cowboys used too much capital on non-premium positions—their third pick was off-ball linebacker DeMarvion Overshown out of Texas.

Not everyone was so down on Dallas, however. Prisco even gave them an A, tied for his highest grade. He said Smith "will be a force on their front, especially in the run game" and called Schoonmaker "a nice pick." He was also impressed with fourth-round edge rusher Viliami Fehoko out of San Jose State: "He is a power player who plays with violence. He isn't twitchy, but he has the ability to get six or seven sacks a season. He will be in the rotation as a rookie."

Most Polarizing Grades

1. Denver Broncos

SD: 1.01
Highest Grade: A- (Tanier)
Lowest Grade: F (Silva)

As noted earlier, there was a lot of disagreement on the Broncos draft. Indeed, their standard deviation was more than a full letter grade—you could have them anywhere between a D+ and a B+ and honestly say you were agreeing with the majority.

Since we already addressed their critics, let's give this space to the Broncos' supporters. That starts with Tanier, who said that players such as Marvin Mims and Drew Sanders actually were need fits since Broncos receivers are always injured and the defense needs pass-rush help. He was especially impressed with Sanders: "Drew Sanders is my uberbinkie: he's an upgraded version of Baron Browning who can get after the quarterback, defend the run, and effectively drop into coverage a dozen times per game." He adds that these players will be a big help in 2024, which is likely the season the Broncos are actually drafting for.

Iyer, Gosling, and the PFF staff each gave Denver a B+. Iyer really liked what Denver did on defense, saying that Sanders, third-round corner Riley Moss (Iowa), and sixth-round safety JL Skinner (Boise State) would all be good fits in Vance Joseph's scheme. Gosling said that Mims and Sanders would both make an impact this year and suggested the Mims selection would let the Broncos trade one of their veteran receivers down the line.

2. San Francisco 49ers

SD: 0.93
Highest Grade: B+ (Gosling)
Lowest Grade: F (Dunleavy, Dvorchak, Nystrom)

Again, we have already covered the negatives here, so let's focus on the positives. Gosling was San Francisco's biggest fan—he said their draft had "plenty of value" and heralded the selections of South Alabama cornerback Darrell Luter Jr., Michigan wide receiver Ronnie Bell, and TCU linebacker Dee Winters on Day 3.

Four other evaluators gave San Francisco a B-. Iyer said that Ji'Ayir Brown could start at safety over Tashaun Gipson and that Jake Moody "is a bigger leg and needed young upgrade over Robbie Gould." Farrar mostly liked the selection of Brown, "who projects well as that kind of versatile safety the 49ers have loved through recent years," comparing him to Jimmie Ward. Kiper conceded this was "a strange class to try to grade," but said "I like a bunch of these picks, except for [Moody]. I get that it's a need, but that's incredibly early, and I didn't even have him as the best kicker in the class." He did have praise for Brown, Dee Winters, and third-round tight end Cameron Latu (Alabama). Reuter was most impressed with San Francisco's Day 3 picks: "[Darrell Luter] is a fierce cornerback who will step in for the Niners as a rookie, while [Robert Beal] will likely back up veterans on the edge. I love [Dee Winters] and [Jalen Graham] at linebacker, while [Ronnie Bell] plays receiver with linebacker-type toughness."

3. Detroit Lions

SD: 0.90
Highest Grade: A (Iyer, Knox, Prisco)
Lowest Grade: D (Dvorchak)

The most heavily criticized team of Night 1 actually finished in the middle of our rankings (2.71 GPA, 18th), but the Lions definitely had their detractors. Dvorchak liked Jahmyr Gibbs and Jack Campbell as players, and is also high on Iowa tight end Sam LaPorta, Alabama safety Brian Branch, and Tennessee quarterback Hendon Hooker. "However," he writes, "they egregiously missed on the concept of positional value by opting for a running back and an inside linebacker with their premium picks. They also likely misgauged the market as Gibbs went 13 picks ahead of his big board ranking and Campbell went 26 picks early."

Silva gave Detroit a D+, saying that GM Brad Holmes "completely bombed the first round" and calling Campbell a "coverage liability." "It was a sickening waste of precious draft capital at low-impact positions," he added, but he also said he "loved" the selections of Branch and Hooker. Davis and Phillips each gave the Lions a C-, with Davis calling their draft "a real mixed bag" and Phillips calling it "a wasted opportunity for the Lions to fully capitalize on their prime draft picks.

And yet three evaluators gave the Lions an A! Iyer said that Detroit is in "'win big' now mode" and that Gibbs and Campbell "will have massive immediate impact." Knox was a fan of the first-round trade-down, turning the sixth overall pick and a third-rounder into Gibbs, LaPorta, and a fifth-round pick. He expects each of Detroit's first four picks to make impacts this season while Hooker spends a year on the bench before taking over from Jared Goff in 2024. Prisco, even conceding that the 12th pick is too early for a player like Gibbs (who he called "more of an air back"), was very high on LaPorta, Hooker, and third-round defensive tackle Brodric Martin (Western Kentucky).

4. Cleveland Browns

SD: 0.84
Highest Grade: A- (Nystrom, PFF)
Lowest Grade: D (Davis)

Nystrom was a huge fan of Cleveland's draft—though they didn't have a pick in the top 70, they still got four of his top 70 prospects in Tennessee wide receiver Cedric Tillman, Baylor lineman Siaki Ika, Ohio State tackle Dawand Jones, and Missouri edge rusher Isaiah McGuire. He noted that Tillman and Ika would have been considered bargains at their draft slots a year ago, but were injured and/or ineffective in 2022. Jones fell after refusing to participate in the Senior Bowl and Ohio State's pro day. And McGuire brings rare athletic gifts the rest of the league somehow overlooked. The PFF staff agreed, specifically citing each player's size (a 215-pound wideout in a class full of Smurfs, two 350-plus-pound linemen, and a 274-pound edge rusher) as an asset.

Davis, however, dings this draft class because it includes picks used to acquire Deshaun Watson (no further comment necessary) and "underachieving Jets wide receiver Elijah Moore." And he does not see where Jones fits into Cleveland's plans. Nick Simon gave Cleveland a D+ at DraftKings, knocking the Watson and Moore acquisitions and saying that "Tillman and Ika are the only players that could carve out a decent number of snaps for themselves as rookies while the rest will be fighting to simply stick as members of the 53-man roster." The PFF staff said that Ika was "exactly what the doctor ordered" but also said "the oft-injured Tillman is a risk" and questioned the point of using a fifth-round pick on UCLA quarterback Dorian Thompson-Robinson.

5. Arizona Cardinals

SD: 0.82
Highest Grade: A+ (PFF)
Lowest Grade: D (Iyer)

There was some very, very close competition for the fifth spot here, with Arizona (0.8250 standard deviation) finishing a few decimal points ahead of Kansas City (0.8248) and Dallas (0.8243). Houston was the next team after that, which is fitting, since the Will Anderson trade has such a huge effect on the grades for both the Cardinals and the Texans. The Pro Football Focus crew loved the trade, and the ensuing selection of Ohio State tackle Paris Johnson at 12, saying he "ticks all the boxes physically." They were also fans of second-round edge rusher BJ Ojulari out of LSU ("he wins with a deep collection of pass-rush moves and a high motor off the edge"), third-round corner Garrett Williams out of Syracuse ("He boasts really good footwork as a smooth mover on the outside and was a three-year starter at Syracuse"), and third-round wideout Michael Wilson out of Stanford ("he has the frame to be a more-than-solid player in the NFL"). Finally, they said Houston's Clayton Tune was an accurate passer and underrated rusher who could fill in while Kyler Murray continues to rehab his torn ACL.

Arizona also got six A- grades. The common thread among those observers: the Cardinals get credit for the draft capital they added in 2024 (Houston's first- and third-rounders, plus picks from Tennessee and Philadelphia) since they're not going to contend in 2023 anyway.

Not everyone was so impressed. Iyer called the class "very underwhelming" and said Johnson was "a bit of a forced luxury pick." Nystrom gave Arizona a D+, specifically saying that the gap between Johnson and Broderick Jones wasn't significant enough to justify Arizona's trade up for the former. Gilberto Manzano at Sports Illustrated agreed, adding that Wilson's injury history made him a gamble, but still gave Arizona a B-. Indeed, consensus reaction to Arizona's draft was definitely positive—their GPA of 3.35 ranked seventh overall.

2023 NFL Draft Grades
Team	Highest	Lowest	GPA	Rk	StDev	Rk
PHI	A+ (13 total)	A- (Reuter)	4.17	1	0.18	32
PIT	A+ (4 total)	B+ (4 total)	3.91	2	0.33	31
IND	A+ (5 total)	B+ (3 total)	3.74	3	0.45	28
SEA	A+ (Farrar, Phillips)	C+ (Nystrom)	3.65	4	0.47	26
NYG	A+ (PFF)	C- (Davis)	3.43	5	0.62	19
HOU	A+ (DraftKings)	D (NBC Sports Edge)	3.36	6	0.79	8
ARI	A+ (PFF)	D (Iyer)	3.35	7	0.82	5
CHI	A (5 total)	D (Nystrom)	3.31	8	0.70	13
CIN	A (3 total)	B- (3 total)	3.30	9	0.42	29
CAR	A (SI)	C- (Silva)	3.21	10	0.52	25
BAL	A (3 total)	C+ (Prisco, Silva)	3.18	11	0.47	27
BUF	A (3 total)	C (Iyer)	3.14	12	0.54	23
TEN	A (PFF)	C- (Davis, Silva)	3.08	13	0.71	12
NE	A (Reuter, PFF)	C- (Iyer, Tanier)	3.05	14	0.66	16
GB	A (Phillips)	C- (Iyer, Nystrom)	2.95	15	0.61	20
LV	A (Knox)	C+ (Fox Sports, SI)	2.94	16	0.40	30
TB	A (Reuter)	C- (Davis)	2.90	17	0.52	24
DET	A (3 total)	D (NBC Sports Edge)	2.71	18	0.90	3
LAC	A- (Kelly, PFF)	C- (Iyer, DraftKings)	2.69	19	0.57	21
KC	A (Iyer)	D- (Nystrom)	2.69	20	0.82	6
NO	A- (Gosling)	D+ (Dunleavy)	2.68	21	0.57	22
CLE	A- (Nystrom, PFF)	D (Davis)	2.62	22	0.84	4
LAR	A- (Reuter, PFF)	D+ (Silva)	2.61	23	0.71	11
MIN	A- (Reuter)	D (Dunleavy)	2.60	24	0.68	14
NYJ	A (Silva)	D (Iyer)	2.60	25	0.72	10
ATL	A- (Reuter)	C- (5 total)	2.50	26	0.63	17
JAX	B+ (Reuter)	D+ (Davis, Dunleavy)	2.45	27	0.63	18
DAL	A (Prisco)	F (Nystrom)	2.30	28	0.82	7
MIA	B+ (Fox Sports)	D (Dunleavy, Phillips)	2.30	29	0.67	15
DEN	A- (Tanier)	F (Silva)	2.28	30	1.01	1
WAS	B+ (Prisco)	D- (Nystrom)	2.20	31	0.72	9
SF	B+ (Gosling)	F (3 total)	1.79	32	0.93	2

Grading the Graders

The long-term trend of graders being kinder to teams continued in 2023. We used to see about three A+ grade for every F, but this year there were 27 of the former but only five of the latter. And those A+ grades were spread far and wide, too—nearly half went to Philadelphia, but the Steelers, Colts, Seahawks, Giants, Texans, and Cardinals each got at least one A+ too. That's nearly one-quarter of the league that convinced somebody they had earned a perfect grade. Even the worst teams had their fans; all 32 NFL franchises had at least one grade of a B+ or higher. The average GPA this year was 2.93, as high as we have seen in recent years, with a standard deviation of 0.78, as low as we have seen in recent years. There are apparently no bad teams in the NFL, just various levels of good ones.

For the fifth straight season, Reuter was the kindest grader, delivering a GPA of 3.43; his lowest grade was a C+ for Detroit while he had six teams at A and 11 more at A-. Yes, that's literally half the league at an exceptional level. Perhaps it's worth pointing out that Reuter writes for NFL.com, and if the NFL owners were writing your paychecks, you'd probably say lots of good things about their teams too. This does make it ironic that he was responsible for Philadelphia's worst grade, an A- … but if other clubs truly are tired of hearing how great the Eagles are, then that relatively low score may have won Reuter some friends in high places. Reuter was followed here by the PFF staff (3.37 GPA) and Farrar (3.28).

Nystrom and Silva routinely battle for the title of harshest grader, and this year it was Nystrom (2.38) taking the gold for cruelty while Silva (2.49) took silver and Dunleavy (2.53) settled for bronze. Though Nystrom gave out seven grades of A- or better (about average), he also led our sample with eight grades of D+ or worse, including two of our five F grades.

Easterling's grades had a correlation of 0.859 with the overall averages; his opinions most closely matched the consensus, followed by Dunleavy (0.848) and Kelly (0.829). Prisco (0.441) had the weirdest picks; while there was no team he was unusually low on, he gave A grades to Dallas and Detroit, and B+ grades to Cleveland and Washington, ranking those teams much higher than most. Iyer (0.499) had Detroit and Kansas City at an A, Denver and Minnesota at a B+, and San Francisco at a B-, but deemed Arizona worthy of only a D. Gosling (0.604) was another outlier—he gave B- grades to San Francisco and Denver, and an A- to New Orleans.

We're about 5,000 words in now, and it's fair to ask: does any of this really mean anything? And the answer is "probably not." After recapping the 2017 draft a few weeks ago, we broke out the Draft Report Card Report from that year and compared select evaluator's grades to the actual Approximate Value produced by each team's draft class. The good news is that every evaluator finished with a positive correlation—nobody was so wrong that you could make money betting against them. The bad news is that the strongest correlation was just 0.088, which is effectively random noise.

Draft grades are great for discussion and debate, and hopefully good for a lot of clicks, but they remain highly inaccurate at telling us which players from this year's class are destined for success.

2023 NFL Draft Evaluators
Writer	Highest	Lowest	GPA	Rk	StDev	Rk	Correlation w/Consensus	Rk
Reuter	A (6 total)	C+ (DET)	3.43	1	0.46	20	0.620	17
PFF	A+ (5 total)	C- (SF)	3.37	2	0.67	14	0.736	7
Farrar	A+ (PHI, SEA)	C (GB)	3.28	3	0.57	18	0.723	8
Gosling	A (PHI, SEA)	C (3 total)	3.16	4	0.56	19	0.604	19
Kiper	A (PHI, SEA)	B- (ATL, NO)	3.14	5	0.33	21	0.681	14
Easterling	A+ (IND)	D (SF)	3.03	6	0.66	15	0.859	1
Knox	A+ (PHI)	D (DEN)	3.03	7	0.85	9	0.682	13
DraftKings	A+ (HOU)	D+ (CLE)	3.01	8	0.78	10	0.688	10
Kelly	A+ (3 total)	C- (4 total)	2.95	9	0.86	8	0.829	3
Iyer	A+ (3 total)	D (3 total)	2.94	10	1.04	3	0.499	20
Tanier	A+ (PHI)	D+ (SF)	2.93	11	0.74	12	0.640	15
Prisco	A (3 total)	C- (4 total)	2.93	12	0.70	13	0.441	21
Fox Sports	A+ (PHI)	C- (DEN)	2.92	13	0.60	16	0.693	9
Phillips	A+ (PHI, SEA)	D (3 total)	2.89	14	0.95	6	0.805	4
SI	A+ (PHI)	D+ (DEN, MIA)	2.84	15	0.77	11	0.794	5
Maske	A (HOU, PHI)	C- (3 total)	2.82	16	0.59	17	0.743	6
NBC Sports Edge	A+ (PHI)	F (SF)	2.73	17	0.95	5	0.683	12
Davis	A+ (PHI)	D- (DEN)	2.68	18	0.96	4	0.639	16
Dunleavy	A+ (PHI)	F (SF)	2.53	19	1.11	2	0.848	2
Silva	A (3 total)	F (DEN)	2.49	20	0.89	7	0.684	11
Nystrom	A+ (3 total)	F (DAL, SF)	2.38	21	1.23	1	0.617	18

#1 by Will Allen // May 03, 2023 - 10:18am

On top of all the other variables, how well, or how poorly, these rookies get coached has a huge impact on how productive they become. I can guarantee that the odds of a young defensive player drafted by the Vikings having a decent career improves significantly, by being coached on a defensive staff headed up by Brian Flores, instead of Ed Donatell. Getting Mike Patricia off the Patriots staff immediately improves the career prospects of Patriots' draft picks.

#4 by guest from Europe // May 03, 2023 - 10:43am

On top of all the other variables, how well, or how poorly, these rookies get coached has a huge impact on how productive they become.

I agree with this. It seems that we are in the minority, that most people think talent is way more important than coaching.

#6 by Will Allen // May 03, 2023 - 10:54am

Then there is the further context added by teammates, along with coaching. Call me nuts, but I'd wager that a wr drafted in the 2nd round by the Chiefs has a significantly better chance of getting to his 2nd contract, than if that same player is drafted by the Saints.

#10 by KnotMe // May 03, 2023 - 11:22am

Totally agree. Develpment matters. Although the sample sizers are so small it's hard often hard to say how much is real and how much is variation. Chargers do great QB. The Eagles do great with lines. The Jets and Bears do not have good luck with QB so far. NE is death for WR but also a backup QB factory for some reason.

Honestly, given that Shannahan reached the NFCCG with the last pick I think coaching and talent are probably about equally necessary although there are probably some minimum thresholds that can't be compensated for no matter what.

#13 by Will Allen // May 03, 2023 - 11:48am

I can pretty much guarantee that qb development in San Diego is due to random chance. No, there is not a special qb sauce that the Spanos family has used, from Brees to Rivers to Herbert, across multiple GMs and coaches.

My comment with regard to the Chiefs and Saints was a simple observation that any wr drafted in the 2nd round, as the Chiefs did this year, has a better shot at his 2nd contract, with Mahomes and Reid around, than he would have with whomever has those roles in New Orleans, or with most other teams.

#24 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 03, 2023 - 4:31pm

San Diego has had great QBs since their AFL days.

#28 by Will Allen // May 03, 2023 - 5:12pm

None of it has been due to development prowess since Coryell left.

#41 by guest from Europe // May 04, 2023 - 1:31am

Ryan Leaf?

#14 by guest from Europe // May 03, 2023 - 12:22pm

Great at developing: Steelers WRs, Packers O-line, Reid QBs, Ravens defensive front 7... Patriots were very good with O-line until Scarnecchia retired.

Honestly, given that Shannahan reached the NFCCG with the last pick I think coaching and talent are probably about equally necessary although there are probably some minimum thresholds that can't be compensated for no matter what.

Of course they have to be talented. Otherwise they would never be drafted like you and me. All these NFL players were better than their peers at some level when they were young, they all have raw talent. Not the same amount of talent, there are gradients among them.

Someone like R. Leaf was very talented.

#104 by RobotBoy // Aug 27, 2023 - 9:38pm

I'd say NE's greatest strength is developing DBs, especially UDFAs: Malcolm Butler (2014), Jonathan Jones (2016), J.C. Jackson (2018), Myles Bryant...

Belichick has hit on a lot of long shots there.

#55 by Run dmc // May 04, 2023 - 6:21pm

Mecole Hardman agrees to disagree.

#15 by theslothook // May 03, 2023 - 12:24pm

I would say my position is the minority one. Will and I agree on most things, but on this topic, I tend to disagree.

His example of the Chiefs and Saints vis a vi wr is an interesting one. Chris Olave looks like a successful pick despite no Sean Payton wizardry or Drew Brees. And while I agree, a wide receiver on the Chiefs might look good with respect to numbers, I would be highly skeptical if that wide receiver were to go elsewhere how he might do. Sure, sometimes they become like Davante Adams, but most of the time they are like James Jones.

#16 by guest from Europe // May 03, 2023 - 1:41pm

Will and I agree on most things, but on this topic, I tend to disagree.

Why would it be different from any other profession? Whatever someone does, some considerable talent for it is needed, and then you do it for many, many days until you become good. You learn basic and advanced stuff, then search for some new angles, if you are really great, you invent something and so on. Call this process "coaching" or "development" or "practice", whatever, the term doesn't matter. On top of all this NFL player has to be in sync with his teammates and coaches scheme, playcalling. We know that coaches teach players the scheme and playcall jargon they are running.

I am talking about general NFL players. HOFers are outliers, that is where supreme talent meets practice time.

Similarly for a pianist: talent is needed, but they practice a lot from small age to be able to become really good and play concerts.

If there are any studies that found that talent is paramount for performance in the NFL, i am willing to change my mind. Maybe Aaron Brooks knows something, he knows a lot of various stuff.

#20 by theslothook // May 03, 2023 - 3:40pm

It's a reasonable theory to have, But it's hard to prove statistically. If a player fails, then we won't know for sure if it was bad coaching or bad talent. Was jamarcus Russell failed or was it of his own making? What about David Carr. Most of the time when we answer these questions we're speculating at the cause.

There are other bits of ancillary data points that make me suspicious about the coaching argument. If it were true we would see it repeated over a very long cycle. Ie - if Belichick is a wizard with defensive backs, then why was someone like Brandon merriweather a failure? He also went through a pretty famous lull during the late 2000s when it came to drafting defensive players.

And then there are the examples of reclamation projects who absolutely never pan out even when they leave their supposedly terrible circumstances and go to healthier ones. Just how many highly drafted quarterbacks ended up succeeding elsewhere? The sample is so limited that we remember them and plainly forget all of the other times it never worked out. I suppose you could argue by that point. Bad coaching had wrecked them as prospects but that again is speculative.

#42 by guest from Europe // May 04, 2023 - 2:17am

i am not claiming it's all coaching. Talent is absolutely needed, so is willingness to learn, adaptability, no off-field distractions etc.

And then there are the examples of reclamation projects who absolutely never pan out even when they leave their supposedly terrible circumstances and go to healthier ones.

Reclamation projects probably don't get a longer chance. They go somewhere else and have 1 or max 2 years to turn around and succeed, not just improve! If there is no big improvement after a year, they get discarded to special teams, released... On the other hand most of the rookies aren't very good at the beginning of careers, but that is tolerated with hope for a better future. Notoriously CBs and TEs have to "adapt to NFL", "it's a steep learning curve"...

There are many more players than coaches, not everyone can be coached individually, there is not enough time, they have to function and thus be coached as synchronised units etc.

If you put the NFL players that dissappointed to compete vs. college players, they probably destroy all college teams. B. Merriweather "failed" (he did play for 8 years and was released because of freelancing on the field, like J. Collins later) at NFL level, but was probably still better than huge majority of college DBs at the time.

This all depends on the position a player plays. Linemen both O and D must be coached (scheme, protection, working as a unit, stunts, blitzing, otherwise talented pass-rushers just get double-teamed...) and talent matters less, while outside WRs and man-to-man CBs work more individually, more on talent. The position where it's pure talent is probably kicker if they are mentally stable game-time. There is no large difference between kickers, someone kicks 83%, someone 87% field goals. Coaches can't do much about that.

#22 by Noahrk // May 03, 2023 - 4:05pm

I've said this before in response to theslothook, but his mind is made up on this -at least on doubting it. The only reason we don't have statistical proof that this happens in football (or other areas) is because the data is very muddled, but empirically there's no question coaching/teaching matters a lot in pretty much all areas of human affairs.

#35 by theslothook // May 03, 2023 - 6:39pm

Look I don't want to come off as a perpetual contrarian. Or worse, an ideologue. I myself have benefited greatly from the stewardship and mentorship that has come with having a great manager. I've had some teachers who inspired me and stoked my passions and I've had other teachers who sucked the life out of a subject and made every day in class a painful slog So of course, I recognize the value of coaching.

I just wish I saw more consistent evidence for it. Like you said, the data is murky and full of noise and so absence of proof does not imply a proof of absence. But I listed some circumstantial data points that lead to the nature vs nurture side of things.

#65 by carlosla // May 05, 2023 - 9:01am

Strongly in the camp of player development matters more than most give it credit for.

You ask for evidence, and I guess I’d point to data around long term sustain success and long term sustained failure across the league. Management matters big time.

Frankly that should not be surprising at all. The clubs all have the same salary cap. The weighted schedule is meant to drive parity. The draft is meant to drive parity. Yet, over long stretches we see clubs that are awful for a decade-plus and a few teams that sustain success for long stretches.

As Guest said, this is how it works in every other industry and profession. No reason to believe it’s different in the NFL.

#29 by Will Allen // May 03, 2023 - 5:14pm

If the numbers look good, somebody's giving him a 2nd contract. That was my point.

#56 by Run dmc // May 04, 2023 - 6:22pm

I have a feeling Sean Payton without Drew Brees is going to be just as much a wizard as Bill Belichick without Tom Brady.

#59 by guest from Europe // May 05, 2023 - 3:16am

In a very small sample size Payton and Saints were 5-0 with Bridgeawater starting one year (2019?) when Brees was injured. In 2021 he got something out of combination of Winston and T. Hill.

Belichick is a defense coach. He doesn't coach offense. Patriots defense is very very good recently even though there are no star players, maybe Judon. Patriots offense was good when McDaniels was there, even in 2021 with rookie M. Jones.

#57 by Run dmc // May 04, 2023 - 6:23pm

Vis a vis.

#9 by Joey-Harringto… // May 03, 2023 - 11:22am

"Getting Mike Patricia off the Patriots staff immediately improves the career prospects of Patriots' draft picks."

Whenever someone asks me why, Jeff Okudah, one of the most physically talented, highly-regarded cornerback prospects in the past half-decade, with zero character or work-ethic concerns, didn't pan out, I can type up several paragraphs of explanation (which I have). But the TL:DR answer is, "Matt Patricia"

#53 by ChrisS // May 04, 2023 - 4:17pm

The Eagles hiring Patricia would definitely downgrade my opinion on their drafted defensive players. How can he be employable after Detroit and last year at NE and most of his NE career.

#11 by Raiderfan // May 03, 2023 - 11:27am

“Getting Mike Patricia off the Patriots staff”

Did he get fired the same day as Matt? Are they brothers? Twins?

#12 by Will Allen // May 03, 2023 - 11:37am

Hey, I was going with an Evil Twin expĺanation.....

#25 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 03, 2023 - 4:34pm

Mike Patricia has no goatee, so…

#99 by sibowa1336 // May 25, 2023 - 3:38pm

NICE

#100 by sibowa1336 // May 25, 2023 - 3:39pm

My final salary was $8750, just eco work 12 hours a week. My neighbor long ago gave an estimate of $15,000″ and worked about 20 hours in seven days…!n77 I couldn’t believe how easy

it was after trying the info on ———————-> /2no.co/Hiring

#2 by ImNewAroundThe… // May 03, 2023 - 10:20am

I appreciate Thor grading on a curve instead of saying everyone did great (or horrible I guess)

Other random musings

Colts passing on OCyrus was suspicious. Thought Richardson could vouch for him. Brents was much further down the consensus board too. May have spooked other teams too.
Thought the Bengals should've hedged and drafted a QB (on day 3) in the slim chance Burrow asks for too much.
Love Tank Dell for the Texans

#32 by laurin // May 03, 2023 - 5:50pm

Brents was 55th on the CBB and got picked at 44, that isn't far down at all. and Bengals should have definitely drafted a QB, just for the sake of having a decent backup

#39 by ImNewAroundThe… // May 03, 2023 - 11:24pm

Guessing you're using Arifs but he's 59 while OCyrus is 29 here. Would've been a sweet upgrade over Will Fries at RG.

#3 by guest from Europe // May 03, 2023 - 10:41am

The average GPA this year was 2.93, as high as we have seen in recent years, with a standard deviation of 0.78, as low as we have seen in recent years. There are apparently no bad teams in the NFL, just various levels of good ones.

This is what the draft graders do: everyone gets a "good" or better grade.

The bad news is that the strongest correlation was just 0.088, which is effectively random noise. Draft grades are great for discussion and debate, and hopefully good for a lot of clicks, but they remain highly inaccurate at telling us which players from this year's class are destined for success.

This is reality.

#17 by bravehoptoad // May 03, 2023 - 2:41pm

Yeah, I love that article on Historic Draft Grades. Someone who has a pretty good reputation like Rob Rang, no more effective than a blowhard like Pete Prisco. Someone steeped in analytics like Chris Burke, ditto.

#34 by Lost Ti-Cats Fan // May 03, 2023 - 6:12pm

I give Prisco negative points for insisting every year that the only grades that matter are the ones assigned immediately after the draft and that how things turn out in the future is backwards-looking revisionism. Which is a reasonable position to take on any single draft choice, since we know any given player may pan out or flop, but is a ridiculous position to take on draft grades overall. At some sample size, for the immediate draft grades to carry any meaning, the people who assign the draft grades need to be able to demonstrate that on average their A-graded drafts perform better than their D-graded drafts. The data says otherwise.

And yeah, I'm quite surprised that Prisco's grades are basically random noise and not a negative predictor.

#69 by Stendhal1 // May 06, 2023 - 1:11am

Pete Prisco wrote this year shortly before the draft that the Panthers should not take Bryce Young because it was too risky to use the first pick in the draft on a quarterback that small, but that the Texans should take him with the second pick. Unbelievable.

#5 by anotheroldguy // May 03, 2023 - 10:52am

Hi Vince, thanks for all the unpaid work. Good read.

#8 by Will Allen // May 03, 2023 - 11:11am

Yikes, I just brought myself up to speed with the origin of your comment. This is unacceptable, especially with regard to actual employees. If payroll can't be met, and vendors can't be paid, due to debt servicing, this is what the bankruptcy court is for. I'm ignorant regarding employment law, especially with employees who reside in multiple states, and the parent corporation being Canadian, but from I read, this has been going on for approaching 5 months now. Egads.

#18 by bravehoptoad // May 03, 2023 - 2:43pm

It's this weird existential threat hovering in the background: FO may not be around for much longer.

#30 by Will Allen // May 03, 2023 - 5:27pm

It's a bad time in media of all types, including sports media, but the stuff that is done here is, I would hope, respected as having enough unique value, for the most popular spectator sport in the country, that some media/sports/tech entity would want it. I hear DVOA being mentioned all the time now on the most popular podcasts in the country. An outfit like DraftKings pays about 10 million a year to sponsor the LeBatard podcast, for instance. I've got to believe that this is more an instance of the Canadian firm being terribly managed, than FO not having intrinsic value.

#36 by bravehoptoad // May 03, 2023 - 10:06pm

The thing I would miss the most about FO is its audience. Nowhere else on the internet have I found anything close to the dialog that can be found here about football. Hard to believe I've been coming here for 20 years.

The other cool thing about this site is how it's an incubator for good football writers who go out and colonize sports sites. Barnwell, Farrar, etc. etc. have graduated to good careers.

A bunch of the current FO writers have moved over to https://underdognetwork.com/football, like Bryan Knowles, but it's a fantasy site with no comments...not really what I'm in it for.

#38 by Will Allen // May 03, 2023 - 10:54pm

Yeah, I have no interest in Fantasy; was in on it in its infancy, 40+ years ago, as a teen making picks for some gamblers who were putting up real, if not hugely serious, money. After that highly entertaining (to the point it became so entertaining I thought I best walk away) experience, the idea of doing it just for fun no longer interested me.

I don't pay as much attention to the game as I used to, but I still find it compelling, intellectually, and due the respect I have for what it takes to compete at the highest level in the game. This is far and away the best site I've encountered for examining what happens, and discussing it with non-meatheads who share my interest. I'd hate to see it end, but, good grief, people gotta get paid for their work, and it really makes me angry that they're getting stiffed. I wish I knew how to help, but it seems as if even sending more revenue to FO at this point just rewards the effin' deadbeats who've brought this state of affairs about, without really helping ensure the survival of the place. The ideal solution is that FO gets sold to honest, competent, managers with adequate capital, but I have no idea how likely that is, especially in this environment.

#47 by bravehoptoad // May 04, 2023 - 11:09am

I frittered away my youth among chess players. They're a much less interesting lot than gamblers, by and large.

Here's to FO ending up in competent hands!

#52 by guest from Europe // May 04, 2023 - 4:06pm

Do you still play chess? What was your rating? Chess is a very noble game. A lot of thinking, calculating, knowing theoretical openings, strategy, tactics...

I started playing a year ago. During the world chess championship match i was very sad to see a super GM such as Ding lose a match on time control from a better position. This is how i usually lose.

#58 by bravehoptoad // May 04, 2023 - 7:41pm

USCF 1938, Class A. It was a thing I did with my dad, but I only realized that it was a dad-thing once he was gone, so I haven't played in 15 years.

I switched to games of incomplete information when my wife and I became Texas hold'em players. That's a fun way to spend Christmas eve, around a poker table, let me tell you.

#60 by guest from Europe // May 05, 2023 - 3:21am

I got to 1710 FIDE. By quick calculation that is 1787 in USCF. Chess is very serious, it's like an intelectual fight and a form of self-torture. Not much fun, but there is something addictive in it for the brain.

I usually think too much, have only basic education in it.

Playing various card games is more fun.

#19 by theslothook // May 03, 2023 - 2:46pm

Having experienced this personally myself, its leadership malfeasance at best and usury at worst. I watched management completely ruin my friend's business reputation with an entire engineering team, myself included, when he recruited us from our jobs to join his startup. It wasn't his fault, but two months of lies will do that

#7 by Scott P. // May 03, 2023 - 11:05am

After recapping the 2017 draft a few weeks ago, we broke out the Draft Report Card Report from that year and compared select evaluator's grades to the actual Approximate Value produced by each team's draft class.

Is that analysis available anywhere?

#90 by Vincent Verhei // May 08, 2023 - 7:44pm

Not immediately, but if you click the Draft Report Card Report link you quoted, you can see which report cards are still up and collect the grades yourself. It took me less than a half-hour to do. Then you can look up the AV for each class at PFR here:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2017/draft.htm

#21 by johonny12 // May 03, 2023 - 3:40pm

Anyone that watched Jalen Ramsey and Xavien Howard play last year has a right to assume CB could very well be a need position this year and almost certainly by 2024. Likewise, it's not as if Miami's RBs corps is exactly young and Miami's return game felt non-existent last season. I really had no problem taking talent over need when the need picks just weren't there when Miami drafted and the players taken have some obvious role in 2023 and beyond.

#23 by Noahrk // May 03, 2023 - 4:08pm

Same here. Give me talent over need any day of the week. The odds already work against you in the draft, getting picky on top of that seems foolish. Check back in six months, let alone a year, and we'll see if the team doesn't have a need at those positions.

#26 by bravehoptoad // May 03, 2023 - 5:00pm

I don't think that's an easy question, talent vs. need. It depends on where you are in your team's power cycle. If you're a Super Bowl contender, then maybe you fill the need first because that might get you over the hump. Or how about this for an extreme example: if you have no QB but an otherwise great roster, you take the mediocre QB over the generational Mike linebacker. And if your team is a nobody, take the talent.

Trickier is talent vs. character. When to emphasize one, when the other? That depends a lot on your current roster and coaching staff, right? Some teams have very solid locker rooms and can draft questionable characters with more fearlessness.

#31 by ImNewAroundThe… // May 03, 2023 - 5:50pm

Talent vs need has always been a bit of a myth. If you strictly go "talent" you end up with 2 RBs then 5(!) QBs. Pick any mock draft sim, any team and just blindly pick the top player of their big board every round and you'll see what I mean

Or in more practical terms, Kansas City picks Levis at 31, which, uh, no, of course it wouldn't have made sense. Panthers would've traded up for Will Anderson, which yeah would be silly. Stuff like that. Unconsciously or not, need is somehow being factored in.

#37 by bravehoptoad // May 03, 2023 - 10:10pm

Yes, but the talent vs. character conundrum comes up all the time. Every year teams get "steals" with bad character. Will Jalen Carter work out? Maybe. Rueben Foster didn't. Warren Sapp did. And every team needs some try-hard character guys.

#44 by ImNewAroundThe… // May 04, 2023 - 10:13am

IDK about all the time. Certainly not every player that falls is due to some vague psychoanalysis that's probably just culture difference.

#46 by Noahrk // May 04, 2023 - 10:40am

Ok, point taken. I suppose what I'm saying is in this day and age, with so much player movement, not to mention injuries, needs can change pretty quickly for middle class and lower class teams. While certain positions will be no-nos for certain teams and a QB is a must if you don't have one, in general it's best not to get too cute with needs. When the tactics are uncertain, a complex strategy will do more harm than good, like when a coach implements a system that's too complex for the players to execute.

#48 by ImNewAroundThe… // May 04, 2023 - 11:48am

I guess I think of it in a broader sense. You can always try to foresee things. Probably don't need to draft several TEs if you already have several under contract for several years each.

But teams probably don't have every edge locked up for longer so it's probably fine to grab another one or two at some point. But grabbing 4+ in a draft probably doesn't make sense, in any year.

Like you can run 5 WRs, you need to carry at least that many, so selecting them is almost always a need to some degree. For example, someone here said JSN to Seattle made no sense at 20, pre draft, when in reality, yes they do have their starters in Lockett and Metcalf. But they're only under contract for 3 more years. At 20 that's 4+1 years! And nowadays WR3 is essentially starting now and their only other WRs of note were Eskridge and Dareke Young. Ideally they would be further down the depth chart and now they are at least WR4+ which is awesome. They still have a spot on the team but they haven't showed that much that they can stop you from drafting consensus WR1 in the class (without trading up) and upgrading a spot that very well could start on his rookie contract! WRs rotate. Them and DB are rarely drafted at overkill. You can fit so many on the field at a time.

I can't really think of many real life scenarios where a pick was clearly "BPA" or strictly need based one (and where they passed up on a clearly better and more talented prospect).

#61 by guest from Europe // May 05, 2023 - 3:34am

strictly need based one (and where they passed up on a clearly better and more talented prospect).

Maybe Brandon Weeden? Cole Strange recently? Tampa Bay drafting a kicker Aguayo high? I don't follow draft much, this is just off the top of my head.

#54 by IlluminatusUIUC // May 04, 2023 - 5:45pm

The Almanac had an article about this years ago, but an underrated benefit of BPA is that the guy has the benefit of coming into a limited role to start. Wide receiver was absolutely not a need for the Seahawks, but JSN going there means he gets to learn the NFL while working underneath two pros, in a role that's tailor made for him. If he had gone somewhere like Baltimore or the Giants, he would have needed to take on much more responsibility much sooner.

#27 by nath // May 03, 2023 - 5:07pm

Yeah, it was funny to read one evaluator say the Dolphins shouldn't have taken Devon Achane because they already had Raheem Mostert, Jeff Wilson, and Myles Gaskin. Yeah, because those three guys really move the needle at RB.

#33 by ImNewAroundThe… // May 03, 2023 - 5:57pm

Maybe Salvon Ahmed instead of Gaskin but could be fair to question how the touches divy out when they should be going to Tyreek and Waddle more anyway.

#40 by theslothook // May 04, 2023 - 12:50am

We should start a discord channel in case this is the end...

#43 by andrewmilne // May 04, 2023 - 9:39am

Drafts are weird and draft grades are weird. If Detroit had drafted the same players in a different order (say, Hooker, Branch, Gibbs, Campbell, LaPorta) no one would have blinked and I'm guessing their grades would have been high. But they got the same players, and the only difference is their salaries. (And 5th year for Hooker.)

I would like a post-draft article that was much more "Here is how the outside-the-NFL community consensus misvalued players given where they were drafted" rather than all the "Here is how NFL teams screwed up because their choices didn't line up with the consensus" articles everywhere. It's not that NFL teams don't screw up (they do) but I think the screw-ups are probably more often in the external consensus.

The other advantage of such an article is that there would be real things to find out and say - why was the consensus wrong? What was missed? Which rankings that went against the consensus of particular players were closer to what actually happened?

#45 by ImNewAroundThe… // May 04, 2023 - 10:17am

It's about the process.

And I don't think it's necessary to go against consensus and our own views when the NFL has a bad track record all the time (ie Mayock Raiders). In fact it's proven! Reaches are real, more so than steals.

#68 by Joey-Harringto… // May 05, 2023 - 1:27pm

"If Detroit had drafted the same players in a different order (say, Hooker, Branch, Gibbs, Campbell, LaPorta) no one would have blinked and I'm guessing their grades would have been high. But they got the same players, and the only difference is their salaries."

"It's about the process."

I've had this argument with fellow Lions fans already. When they say "They still got good players!", or "Gibbs may be OROY, and J. Campbell might turn out to be awesome!", I say it was still bad process, even if they end up getting lucky. That will still remain true if Gibbs turns out to be better than Christian McCaffrey, and Campbell turns out to be better than prime Bobby Wagner.

In that context, I still think it's fair to grade teams' process before anyone knows how good the players turn out to be.

#71 by ImNewAroundThe… // May 06, 2023 - 11:06pm

Hooker at 12 (or 18) definitely would've rose some eyebrows anyway. People were mocking mocks that had him going at 23, with an older QB.

Regardless, a different order ignores the signals it tells us. Hooker was passed up 67 times. Shouldn't be the most reassuring thing to hear that essentially the whole league passed on him multiple times. That means something. Probably not going to give him as long as a leash either (for better or worse) instead it'll go to...a RB and LB. Which, not just one person, but the consensus, wasn't that high on. Not just based on nothing, but they can watch tape too.

Oh and the penalties from moving on are different. As expected Clelin wasn't as good as Josh Allen. Unfortunately he was selected so high they couldn't move on from him despite Maxx Crosby hitting in the same draft.

That goes for every player too of course.

#74 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 08, 2023 - 10:40am

Shouldn't be the most reassuring thing to hear that essentially the whole league passed on him multiple times. That means something.

It means no one knows anything.

There are 13 HOF QBs (or locks to be HOF QBs) who were drafted after the 1st round, including Tom Brady, Brett Favre, Drew Brees, Johnny U, Joe Montana, Fran Tarkenton, and Bart Starr. Warner and Moon weren't drafted at all.

Basically, there are more non-1st round QBs in the Hall than there are 1st round guys in the Hall. No one knows anything.

\Staubach and Starr were taken in rounds that don't exist anymore.

#76 by ImNewAroundThe… // May 08, 2023 - 12:43pm

You seriously can't be comparing 32 picks (or less like this year) to literally every other infinite mechanism to acquiring a QB.

Very disingenuous. Unsurprisingly the top QBs, Mahomes, Burrow, Herbert, Tua, Rodgers, Allen, Lamar, Watson, Lawrence, Kyler etc. are 1st round picks and Jake Fromm, Matt Corral, Malik Willis, Chris Oladokun, Bailey Zappe, Skylar Thompson, Mike White, etc. weren't.

#77 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 08, 2023 - 2:06pm

Let's look at the rest of the top of the list.

Brady was a 6th rounder. Jimmy G, Geno, and Hurts were 2nds. Cousins and Dak were 4ths. Cousins wasn't even the first QB taken by his team in that year's draft.

Most guys will suck. About half your hits will be from outside the 1st round.

#79 by guest from Europe // May 08, 2023 - 2:19pm

Theslothook wrote that a success of QB draft pick depending on draft slot number is a negative logarithmic curve: it falls down from top pick really fast and plateaus in late rounds. Studies were made on that. Success of #1 pick is about 45% in 21st century (by my counting). Other 1st round picks of QBs around 20%.

#81 by ImNewAroundThe… // May 08, 2023 - 2:36pm

There's no way you're still doing this. I mean, surely, you'd recognize your group pales in comparison.

Or realize Todd Husack, Spergon Wynn, Tee Martin, Chris Redman, Giovanni Carmazzi weren't as good as Chad Pennington. Or Garrett Gilbert, Tajh Boyd, Keith Wenning, David Fales, Zach Mettenberger, AJ Mccarron, Aaron Murray, Tom Savage, and Logan Thomas aren't as good as Bridgewater. Or Sean Renfree, BJ Daniels, Zac Dysert, Brad Sorensen, Landry Jones, Tyler Wilson, Ryan Nassib, Matt Barkley, and Mike Glennon have less wAV than EJ Manuel. Or no one is taking Nate Stanley, Tommy Stevens, Ben Dinucci, Cole Mcdonald, Jake Luton, James Morgan, or Jacob Eason over Jordan Love. Or that Chandler Harnish, BJ Coleman, Ryan Lindley, Nick Foles, and Brock Osweiler are unemployed while Ryan Tannehill isn't. Or why Brandon Doughty, Jeff Driskel, Brandon Allen, Jake Rudock, Nate Sudfeld, Kevin Hogan, Cardale Jones, Connor Cook, Cody Kessler, Jacoby Brissett and Christian Hackenberg couldn't make a Pro Bowl but Carson Wentz did.

Just because you only look at college comp% doesn't mean others don't watch college tape and have an idea on what they're doing.

#85 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 08, 2023 - 4:57pm

I kind of marvel at how you arrived at your position while observing that for the last 30 years the Packers haven't a had a QB who wasn't passed over by at least 23 teams.

What is it you think teams know? Whatever it is, you should tell the teams about it.

#86 by ImNewAroundThe… // May 08, 2023 - 5:42pm

Aaron Brooks marveling at someone not being obtuse with hit rates and trying to skew stats to garner a response. Unsurprising.

But yeah definitely comparable to surprise falls of lower magnitudes. No wonder a wide variety forming a consensus confuses you as you base your opinion of Anthony Richardson off of comp%.

I don't have to tell teams anything, the league already told you but you think it's completely random because Dak hit. As opposed to the countless others that didn't around him. Although I apparently have to tell yall to stop comparing 1 round sample size vs the infinite rest of the field.

The things this board supports...

#93 by Rdm // May 09, 2023 - 5:02pm

I’d say Richardson leans more towards bust than viable starter.

#78 by guest from Europe // May 08, 2023 - 2:07pm

I don't understand do you agree with this pick of QB Hooker or not. In the other draft discussion you wrote he could be R. Wilson, see comment #33 and #43:

Lions are somewhat recognizing Goof (and Sudfeld aren't/) isn't it! Trying to break the purgatory that even Sean McVay got tired of, with a guy they can mold themselves. And if he isn't, so what, most aren't at the range but who knows, maybe he's Russ (oh sorry, I know the next rebuttal).

#80 by ImNewAroundThe… // May 08, 2023 - 2:23pm

Come on man. Think a little more about it. It's not that hard to understand. Reread if you must.

#82 by guest from Europe // May 08, 2023 - 4:18pm

You wrote that Hooker is a "Forward looking pick and worth the gamble" in #43 here. Also, that

Pretty much every consensus board had Hooker higher than where he was drafted so it's not even a reach in a vacuum.

That means you like that pick, doesn't it?

On the other hand, in this thread you are writing that "he was passed 67 times by the league and that tells us something". So, you are saying he isn't worth to be drafted in 1st round? But you still like it? Or not? You wrote that "maybe he is next Russ" and here have listed a lot of lower drafted QBs (like Hooker) who were just waste of draft picks.

#83 by ImNewAroundThe… // May 08, 2023 - 4:34pm

Come on man

And if he isn't, so what, most aren't at the range

Don't understand how you can't understand liking something but being realistic and knowing hit rates. Simply and truly don't understand how it's that complex. Think.

#87 by guest from Europe // May 08, 2023 - 5:44pm

So, you like this pick. I don't understand where is your disagreement with what Aaron Brooks wrote here in comment #77: "most draft picks will suck". Some drafted in 1st round will be hits, some drafted later will be hits. Hit rates for 1st round QB picks which aren't No. 1 pick are below 20%. For later rounds less than that. That is what Aaron Brooks wrote using other words.

I don't have to think what you mean. You should explain your own thoughts. That would be polite.

#88 by ImNewAroundThe… // May 08, 2023 - 5:52pm

Probably because yall love being obtuse and playing gotcha

Shouldn't be the most reassuring thing to hear that essentially the whole league passed on him multiple times. That means something.

It means no one knows anything.

False. They aren't blind hat draws and nowhere near what I meant or implied. He was reviewed each and every pick and they deemed him not worth. Yeah, it's not a good thing. And when the consensus outside agrees and doesn't blink at the "fall" it means they don't find it surprising because they watched his tape!

There are 13 HOF QBs (or locks to be HOF QBs) who were drafted after the 1st round, including Tom Brady, Brett Favre, Drew Brees, Johnny U, Joe Montana, Fran Tarkenton, and Bart Starr. Warner and Moon weren't drafted at all.

Basically, there are more non-1st round QBs in the Hall than there are 1st round guys in the Hall. No one knows anything.

\Staubach and Starr were taken in rounds that don't exist anymore.

The dude compared ONE round of 32 (tops of 5 QBs throughout history) to the ENTIRE rest of the field where the rest of the draft consists of 222+ picks (more than 5 QBs) and literal infinite UDFAs. Seriously, that's what you're siding with.

Stop defending it and feigning ignorance for purposefully antagonistic rebuttals then tone policing when I literally bring up more evidence of how faulty it is. My words or the words of other entities like TDN.

#89 by guest from Europe // May 08, 2023 - 6:54pm

I am not siding with anyone. I asked you about your opinion, you wrote i should think and reread and so on. Now you are calling me obtuse. Your opinion seemed contradictory to me:

He was reviewed each and every pick and they deemed him not worth. Yeah, it's not a good thing. And when the consensus outside agrees

This would mean this Hooker isn't a good prospect. Again, you compared him to R. Wilson. You really liked this pick in the other thread. In this thread it appears that you are realistic about this young player's chances and don't think he will succeed. That would be a waste of a 3rd round pick...

They aren't blind hat draws

I agree with this.

The dude compared ONE round of 32 (tops of 5 QBs throughout history) to the ENTIRE rest of the field where the rest of the draft consists of 222+ picks (more than 5 QBs) and literal infinite UDFAs.

There are no infinite number of UDFA QBs. In this draft there were 3 QBs in the 1st round and 11 in other rounds. In 2021 5 in 1st round, 5 in other rounds, in 2020 4 out of 13 drafted in 1st round, in 2019 3 out of 11 in 1st round... etc. Most of these QB picks fail! Most of 1st round QBs fail. 1st rounders are better and way more coveted prospects that don't succeed that much. A month ago this #1 pick QB was worth more than A. Rodgers in a trade! Similarly, T. Lance got more picks in a trade than Rodgers. Consensus by the league, if you will.

If you add the probabilties of success for 1st round QBs, you will get a higher number than if you add the probabilities for QBs drafted in lower rounds. That's why it was easy for you to list all those failures of QBs. Lower rounds any position of players will mostly fail!

However, there are surprising number of successes for a coveted QB position in lower rounds. Aaron Brooks listed those. I don't understand why are you angry. You listed 10 good QBs drafted in 1st round, he listed 6 good ones drafted later and he acknowledged that the number of such successes is about half of your 1st rounders. He didn't even write Purdy.

#91 by ImNewAroundThe… // May 08, 2023 - 10:33pm

I am not siding with anyone. I asked you about your opinion, you wrote i should think and reread and so on. Now you are calling me obtuse. Your opinion seemed contradictory to me:

You're constantly getting confused or trying to play a petty game of gotcha. You can't marry any ideas it seems. You take things like RBSDM to the literal extreme. Annoying.

This would mean this Hooker isn't a good prospect.

Only here would I be blasted for this yet when the league literally complains about ten 1st round grades every year, you let it pass and cant figure out how the quality of prospect and the probability of a gamble works in cohesion as ideas. Goodness.

Again, you compared him to R. Wilson.

That's not his literal comp, geez.

I agree with this.

Yet here you were bringing up the antagonistic Aaron as if that wasn't the point of my reply.

There are no infinite number of UDFA QBs.

Yet, again, taking things to the literal extreme.

In this draft there were 3 QBs in the 1st round and 11 in other rounds. In 2021 5 in 1st round, 5 in other rounds, in 2020 4 out of 13 drafted in 1st round, in 2019 3 out of 11 in 1st round... etc. Most of these QB picks fail! Most of 1st round QBs fail. 1st rounders are better and way more coveted prospects that don't succeed that much.

Click the hyperlink dude.

However, there are surprising number of successes for a coveted QB position in lower rounds. Aaron Brooks listed those.

He listed those to be annoyingly obtuse to reinforce the stupid idea that "we dont know anything" as he blathers on about Richardson being bad. Geez.

. I don't understand why are you angry.

Because, AGAIN, you're constantly being obtuse and confused about what I say in separate areas, tallying them in a game of gotcha for likes. Not a slight hint of trying to piece things together yourself.

and he acknowledged that the number of such successes is about half of your 1st rounders.

He didn't. Otherwise his original reply is even more worthless than intended. Because his WHOLE THING was predicated that we know nothing therefore you can pick anyone anywhere and that the league themselves are entirely stupid and that not selecting them doesn't matter and shows no signal. That's his entire schtick here. Being antagonistically obtuse for a reaction and likes. Yours is feigning ignorance because you think all my ideas are contradictory instead taking a second to think how they can work together.

#92 by guest from Europe // May 09, 2023 - 3:50am

You can't know what i or anyone else thinks. I don't know what you think. You can only read some comment and have a conversation. I ask a question when i don't understand what somebody writes, i don't think what their idea is or isn't or might be.

Yet you are the only one here putting labels on people you have never met. Here you are clashing with me and Aaron Brooks. In this thread you are clashing with Theo, BroncosGuy and LionInAz. When some Lions fan wrote something about G. Jennings with Packers, you literally responded that "he hates you" because you disagreed. Before you had a lot of clashes with Pat, once with Will Allen, you wrote that people here write racist comments about players etc. A common denominator in all of these is you. Only you.

I brought all these links just because you asked me to: to put links to your comments the first time you called me "weird".

For some reason when you don't agree with someone here, you clash with people and write in general that "these boards will never change" and "they don't bring anything of substance".

Believe it or not, i agree with you on many things: i agree about Rodgers, Jackson, Ramsey, Gilmore, D. Jones, older CBs that still play well... but when i ask you something you call me "ignorant", "obtuse" and a "difficult person".

Why don't you write all these things to Packers' fans and Packers' GM who don't think like you about Rodgers and are happy to get rid of him? Tanier wrote for last few years many articles ridiculing Rodgers and Packers. Why didn't you put all these labels on him? For some reason you do this with Lions' fans.

The way you deliberately ridicule Goff naming him "Goof".

You are not dumb. You know much more than me about NFL. But this is no video game where player A is graded 91 points out of 100 and player B 87 points and thus player A must be better than player B and you see this somewhere and everyone must agree with you. Nobody has to know your thoughts. It's your responsibility to explain what you write.

#84 by ImNewAroundThe… // May 08, 2023 - 4:34pm

And think again.

#94 by Hoodie_Sleeves // May 11, 2023 - 9:53am

"You seriously can't be comparing 32 picks (or less like this year) to literally every other infinite mechanism to acquiring a QB."

Why not?

The point here is that 1st round picks are supposed to be much more likely to succeed than later round picks, and while they are more likely, it's not nearly as much as the draft point/values or the analysts on TV seem to think.

The 1.1 is more likely to be a starter, and more likely to be a all pro/HOF'er/etc - but he's still more likely to fail than succeed.

#49 by scraps // May 04, 2023 - 11:56am

That's nearly one-quarter of the league that convinced somebody they had earned a perfect grade.

A+ is not necessarily a perfect grade, i.e., 4.0. Usually it's about 3.7 to 4.0.

#50 by Eddo // May 04, 2023 - 1:30pm

I think the general practice in the states when calculating GPA - for schools that acknowledge pluses and minuses - is to add 0.3 for a plus and substract 0.3 for a minus. So you'd wind up with:

A+: 4.3
A: 4.0
A-: 3.7
B+: 3.3
B: 3.0
B-: 2.7
C+: 2.3
etc.

#51 by paxrockatansky // May 04, 2023 - 3:02pm

Has FO ever done an evaluation of "safe" vs other ("bet on measurables") picks using the Approximate Value method?

With individual pick grades limited to the first round, you might be limited to that, but correlation amongst grades at the time could serve as a proxy for "safe" picks, vs "reaches". All the discussion here made me think it might be interesting to know if safe picks are really that much safer, or if their range of outcomes is just as dispersed as picks viewed as riskier.

#63 by Pen // May 05, 2023 - 5:35am

I used wAV for a similar purpose just last week. I repost it here.

The Myth of Best Player Available.

No one can draft the ‘best player available”. That’s not a thing. When someone says they’re drafting the bpa, what they’re really saying is “I like this guy so much I’m drafting him instead of someone we actually need.” This was most famously done when Tim Ruskell drafted Aaron Curry at LBer, declaring him the “best player available.”

Which, of course, Curry was not.

But in all fairness, neither has any NFL player ever selected in the draft. Despite thousands of hours scouting and watching tape and Combines and Pro Days and awards, no one in the NFL knows if a player is the best player available, let alone if they are even the best player at their position.

And I can prove it.

Go to pro-football-reference.com and look up past drafts. Go back at least ten years so that most players drafted will have finished their careers. Order the players by weighted Average Value (wAV). This will tell you who all the best players were in the NFL that were drafted that year. If you go to 2012’s draft, Russell Wilson sits on top and Bobby Wagner is second. But check out as many drafts as you want. Do you notice something?

That’s seldom the #1 pick sitting atop that list. That’s seldom the #2 pick sitting at second. Some of the top ten guys each year were drafted 4th, 5th, even 7th round. Usually, only a couple of guys drafted top 10 actually ARE top ten players.

Let’s look at Ruskell’s last draft, the infamous Curry draft of 2009. We see the bpa and first overall pick actually were the same: Matt Stafford. He was the only top ten pick who actually was a top ten player. 20 teams didn’t realize Alex Mack was the next bpa. Every team in the NFL overlooked Julian Edelman until the seventh round. They didn’t realize that he was the 7th best player available. Only five of the ten best players available were first round picks.

Now let’s look at 2000. Cuz, why not? Mainly because I haven’t yet, so I’m about to go in blind.

Lol, I promise, it didn’t even dawn on me. Tom Brady was the bpa OF ALL TIME. He went in the 6th. This actually was a pretty good draft because of the top ten best players available, 7 were first round picks. Not bad. Not many picked in the top 10, but not bad. Seattle got the bpa remaining on the board when they took Alexander, but 18 other teams didn’t realize and passed on him.

Which gets me to my point: Nobody knows who is the bpa. BPA is not a thing. You might as well throw darts at a board. But not just any dart board. A special dart board.

One that has all the best PLAYERS available.

Because when you look at that list of highest wAV players, you notice that it is full of 1st, 2nd, and 3rd round picks. Some 6th and 7th rd players peek through as well as a few other rounds, but it is mostly the top three rounds.

Throw a dart at a board full of top three round picks and you’ll likely do quite well in the draft. Nobody knows who the bpa is but all that scouting, tape, combines, etc. give teams a good idea of who the best playerS available (bp’sa) are.

Which means there is no excuse not to draft for need. You know who the bp’sa are at each position and you know what positions you have a need at. Rd’s 1 thru 3 should be used filling those positions with the bp’sa at each position.

Witherspoon may actually turn out to be the bpa. He’s nearly certain to be one of the bp’sa. But if you already have three of the bp’sa at CB, then you should draft one of the bp’sa at a position of need.

When Seattle first got it’s franchise, had they known who the bpa was – or had any NFL team been capable of drafting bpa, which nobody can do, by the time 1980 rolled around, this would have been some of the names on their team (noting that they can’t draft all the bpa’s, some get taken by other teams and they only have so many picks, so, for example, no Tony Dorsett for you):

Mike Haynes, Lester Hayes, Nolan Cromwell, Jackie Slater, Harry Carson, Steve Largent, Gary Fencik, Chuck Muncie, Stanley Morgan, Drew Hill, Joe Klecko, Rod Martin, Ozzie Newsome….and Joe Montana. And many more.

But drafting bpa isn’t really a thing.

Drafting from the bp’sa for need in the first three rounds is, however.

Let’s go back to that 2009 draft. If you order the draft by position something jumps out. Nearly all the bp’sa at each position are gone by the 3rd round. There are some busts in there, but not many, just as there are some gems to be found in later rds, but they are extremely rare.

If you’ve got a glaring hole and you don’t fill it by rd 3, you’re not going to.

You have a need for a run stopping DI? He better be picked by rd 3, the sooner, the better. You need a RB? People rail on Pete for his high picks, but if he’s going to get a RB, he has to pick one in the first three rounds.

Pete’s turned fifth round CBs into stars. It’s his superpower. Perhaps using pick 5 on the one position his team can actually get away with filling after round 3 was a waste of a pick that could have filled a positional need. Perhaps, however, Witherspoon is just that good.

But looking at this through the lens of bp’sa, not bpa, picking Mazi Smith at 5 may have looked outrageous to the ‘experts’, it would have been a great choice from a fill the team up with talent where we need it standpoint. Our pick at 20 was an excellent choice. We needed a slot WR. He was one of the bp’sa at that position.

Charbonett has as good a chance of being a quality RB pick as any and we needed a RB in case KW gets injured and just to take the load off of him.

In short, history says that with the exception of winning the crapshoot that is round 4 and beyond, teams really only get draft picks in the first three rounds. Everything else is camp fodder. So Seattle had 5 picks this year to find real talent.

Trading our 3rd for a fourth really sucks. Trading it for a fourth and next years third is a good deal if you really don’t like what’s left in the 3rd round this year and think next years class – the first to have missed covid class – will be better.

But boy, that pick of Witherspoon and buying into the myth of bpa really sticks out. While Pete believes in building from the back up, he could have flexed his superpower in the fifth. It would have been like having a sixth pick this year to find quality. then used that #5 pick to grab one of the bp’sa at a position of need.

#66 by dbostedo // May 05, 2023 - 12:54pm

I like that write-up, and I like the argument to draft early for need.

But I've never thought BPA was "the player we KNOW is the best available". I've always thought of BPA as "the player we're guessing is the best available", or "the player we think is the best available". I don't know that anyone would argue otherwise, so I feel like you have a bit of a straw-man setup, from my point of view.

#67 by Joey-Harringto… // May 05, 2023 - 1:20pm

I'm going to remain bitter about the Seahawks taking Witherspoon, because all indications point to the Lions being in love with him (in a way they weren't in love with Gonzalez for some reason)...quintessential Dan Campbell guy, a pit bull, the defense version of Amon-Ra St. Brown. Would have been a perfect fit.

Some posters have commented that the Lions panicked when the Falcons picked Robinson, didn't have a plan B, then took Gibbs. Part of me thinks it was Witherspoon going off the board, not Robinson, that induced them to reach for Gibbs (they traded out of #6 immediately after Seattle's pick was in).

This is not the first time the Seahawks have pipped the Lions: in 2000, Seattle picked Shaun Alexander at #19, and the Lions were stuck with Stockar McDougle at #20 (imagine Alexander being Barry's successor), and the very next year, the Seahawks picked Steve Hutchinson at #17, and the Lions picked his college teammate Jeff Backus at #18 as a consolation prize.

#95 by LionInAZ // May 13, 2023 - 12:42am

Hutchinson may be a Hall of Fame guard, but Backus was more than adequate at LT, despite what some might still think after Stafford's first shoulder injury. It was Julius Peppers, for Pete's sake!

Kevin Seifert at ESPN once reported that Backus was considered the best LT in the NFC North by NFCN execs. Probably a better pick given that the team became more focused on passing.

#62 by Pen // May 05, 2023 - 5:26am

I still chuckle at the Seahawks grades for 2011 and 2012, which history and wAV rankings make the greatest drafts in NFL history. 2011 ranked 32nd and 2012 ranked 30th with the admonition "Wilson will be lucky to be the next Seneca Wallace.

uhhhhh.

#64 by guest from Europe // May 05, 2023 - 6:41am

This is off topic: Napoli has just won the Italian football championship a month in advance. That city will burn the whole summer, if not longer, due to fierce partying (including with the dead on graveyards!). Here are some scenes from yesterday: https://twitter.com/i/status/1654220672799854592 This is on a stadium where no match is played! They just watch the away game on stadium screens.

If anyone will go on a summer vacation to Europe, i recommend visiting Naples, Italy.

#70 by Stendhal1 // May 06, 2023 - 1:18am

I love the name for the Serie A championship that Napoli has won: the Scudetto.

Even better is the name and design of the trophy for the Giro d’Italia winner. Look it up, the trophy is an expanding gold spiral ribbon and the name of each year’s winner is added to the top of the ribbon. The trophy is named Trofeo Senza Fine — Trophy Without End. Very, very cool. Italian style is real.

#72 by Theo // May 07, 2023 - 11:17am

"The Little Shield"

A badge of honor that the reigning champ may wear.

Also, a star above it means 10 championships.

So Juventus wears 3 stars on their chest.

And yes, Italian style is real. When entering an office or an airport, there is a 100% chance I can pick who the Italian is.

Their mothers wont allow them to leave the house dressed like a slob.

#73 by guest from Europe // May 07, 2023 - 12:38pm

There is a rivalry between French and Italians regarding style. French are more into classy design or extravagant houte couture, while Italians prefer shiny flair. French are more diverse, not to everyone's liking.

#75 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 08, 2023 - 10:42am

Their mothers wont allow them to leave the house dressed like a slob.

Four words too many.

#96 by LionInAZ // May 13, 2023 - 12:47am

... I recommend visting Naples...

Not during a garbage strike by the Camorra.

#101 by malave // Jun 15, 2023 - 9:34am

Post-Draft Fantasy Questions for Each NFL Team

Chris Spags — Tue, 02 May 2023 13:50:04 +0000

Post-Draft Fantasy Questions for Each NFL Team Chris Spags 02 May 2023, 09:50am

The draft is another key information period in the NFL offseason that meaningfully affects everything for teams. More importantly for you, it's also a key milestone in fantasy football that can be something of a double-edged sword of opportunity.

We now know more about how teams value players previously on the roster as well as their new additions via free agency dollars and draft capital deployed. This opens a lot of opportunity to be directionally correct with your team and player evaluations and build "super teams" before markets catch up in high-dollar best ball tournaments such as Underdog Fantasy's Best Ball Mania IV that features an industry-high $3 million to first place (use promo code OUTSIDERS to double your first deposit up to $100!). If you're right panning for gold amongst this year's rookie running backs or undervalued backups, you could end up with league-winners like the Dameon Pierces or Tyler Allgeiers and Jamaal Williamses or Rhamondre Stevensons of last year.

This post-draft period also offers a lot of opportunity to be completely wrong about players based on misreading the tea leaves for certain situations. Markets took all of training camp and countless beat writer reports to properly value players ranging from George Pickens to Tyreek Hill last year. Hill in particular was basically ignored in some circles after his offseason trade from Kansas City to Miami as his ADP relatively cratered. That blind spot ended up costly as he became one of the best second- to third-round values in a pass-happy Miami offense.

I'm sick enough to admit: Speculation season and the chance to be right about lower-probability things that the rest of the public treats as binary outcomes is the fun part for me. So let's go team by team and try to read the proverbial greens of their most interesting acquisitions this offseason as we tackle 32 fantasy football questions for each team following the draft.

Arizona Cardinals

How likely are they to hit the skids before Kyler Murray returns?

You could pin this Cardinals question to the non-moves around DeAndre Hopkins, but the question more closely aligns with the core of drafting Arizona players this year. I have avoided the Cardinals in my 100-plus best ball drafts so far in 2023 because I view a ton more downside than upside in their current situation. Yes, they have finally shed the fake sharp Kliff Kingsbury and his strained relationship with franchise quarterback Kyler Murray. But the move to former Eagles defensive coordinator Jonathan Gannon as head coach with new offensive coordinator Drew Petzing, most recently the Browns' 2022 quarterback coach, doesn't offer a ton of new inspiration.

Even with that aside, the ACL tear and recovery window for Murray is a bigger issue. Murray tore his ACL in mid-December of 2022. Everyone from Chris Godwin to Hendon Hooker has shown miraculous ACL recoveries and the fantasy world hopes the same for under-25-year-olds such as Breece Hall and Javonte Williams this year (with full recovery generally regarded as more achievable within that age window). For Murray, who turns 26 in August, there are some age and timing concerns. What if he isn't good to go until November and the Cardinals are 2-6 at that point? Would they be inclined to fully push Murray? Will they also avoid a potential distraction with DeAndre Hopkins if they can't find someone who wants to take on his 2023 $19.5-million base salary? That's a lot to worry about for a team that was mostly sleepwalking through last season with only James Conner showing up to work by the end of the campaign.

I have largely avoided Cardinals so far in drafts besides Conner, whom I expect to quite literally run out the clock on this Arizona season if things go awry. Maybe Houston gunslinger Clayton Tune, with his draft-class-high 73.4% on-target ball rate according to Sports Info Solutions, can come in for a banged-up and iffy Colt McCoy to get the Cardinals through Murray's recovery. With markets currently pinning the Cardinals at the bottom of 2024 Super Bowl winner odds at +20,000, I'd tend to err on the side of disaster.

Atlanta Falcons

Are the Falcons going to run the ball 35-plus times per game?

The Falcons selected electric Texas running back Bijan Robinson with the eighth overall pick with the hope of shoring up a backfield that already had fifth-round steal Tyler Allgeier near the tops among rookies in EPA per rush, rush DVOA, and avoided tackle rate. Despite that, Arthur Smith claims he want to pass more.

Arthur Smith, pointedly, says the team wants to throw more often this season

"More balance. The way we want to play."

they better. Just 24.4 pass att per game last year (31st) pic.twitter.com/kGVmSy8XJu

— Josh Norris (@JoshNorris) April 28, 2023

I'll spare you and myself having to craft a vintage Memento "Don't believe his lies" meme with Arthur Smith and, really, any head coach talking about his team's intents this time of year. But let's just say I don't expect Smith to suddenly Air Raid this thing after years of offenses that look like Bronko Nagurski is involved in the backfield. Sorry to the remaining lovers of the immensely talented Drake London and Kyle Pitts.

So the bigger question is if Bijan Robinson will pay off lofty real-life draft capital as a top-eight pick as well as a spot in the first round of fantasy football drafts. I tend to think his arrival in Atlanta does two things:

It hurts the value of Tyler Allgeier, a player going top-100 based on his outlier rookie year with an assumption of becoming a bellcow back this year.
It hurts the value of Bijan Robinson with Allgeier already being called a "goal-line sledgehammer" by Arthur Smith as it relates to their two roles.

Robinson is a monster, a guy who landed in an offense that will use him as a souped-up version of Allgeier, a player who only saw 11.1 routes per game in 2022 despite a 41.2% receiving DVOA. But I think he'll be a bit overvalued with Allgeier likely to carve out 10-ish touches for himself, some of which could be of the highest value. And if it ends up being more of a timeshare than expected—as well as potential contingent value if Robinson were hurt at any point—I wouldn't be shocked if Allgeier is fantastic leverage against the highly drafted Robinson, with Allgeier likely to fall precipitously in ADP in the coming weeks and months.

Baltimore Ravens

How much will new offensive coordinator Todd Monken have Lamar Jackson throw?

Zay Flowers crossed off a very important milestone for potential fantasy production with draft capital closely aligned with opportunity. He finds himself in a wide receiver corps with new addition Odell Beckham and previous high draft pick Rashod Bateman, plus two ball-hungry tight ends in Mark Andrews and Isaiah Likely. He also finds himself on a team that we know loves to run the ball with both its quarterback and any running back it can trot out, ideally stud J.K. Dobbins and his 28.6% rushing DVOA.

We know there would be a pretty low likelihood of Flowers reaching his potential in a Greg Roman offense that saw Jackson drop back just 31.5 times per game in 2022, almost 15 times less than guys such as Justin Herbert and Tom Brady and even new Miami backup Mike White. It's hard to sustain a passing offense with a need for massive efficiency to balance out the lack of volume.

If Monken opens things up as he did at times at Georgia, Flowers could benefit from increased pass attempts as well as more effective usage of the other weapons to open things up for him. If Monken falls in line with previous Ravens rhetoric and establishes that run, it'd be hard to imagine Flowers keeping up with his rookie peers with five or fewer targets per game. I want to believe in this offense with a newly paid Jackson, but I really worry about the ability to adeptly give Beckham his requisite targets, develop Bateman and Flowers, and feed their outlier tight ends. Some of those things will occur, but not all.

Buffalo Bills

Will the Bills really use Dalton Kincaid as a big slot receiver?

All offseason long, I have been locked in on Dalton Kincaid as a tight end to watch for fantasy. At Utah, he crushed my alma mater USC with a massive 234-yard performance that sunk the Trojans' national title dreams. He creates a ton of value in short targets with a gaudy 0.396 EPA per target on throws under 10 air yards according to Sports Info Solutions. He's also a beast in the slot with 4.5 slot targets per game leading to a 0.646 EPA per target when running a route there, behind just low-volume Brenton Strange in this class.

But we know the Bills and, more importantly, Josh Allen love Dawson Knox. Knox brings an in-line blocking element that is not expected to be a major part of Kincaid's game, with Kincaid more of an adept catch-and-runner with his 29% avoided tackle rate at Utah. The only pathway for Kincaid to reach his potential early on is for him to be used in Travis Kelce fashion in a high-octane offense.

Kincaid clearly brings a dimension that the Bills did not add during this offseason, unless you think the diminutive Deonte Harty is that guy. But there is a real blocker (some pun intended) to Kincaid's playing time in the team's comfort with Knox. With early drafts seeming frothy for Kincaid, I worry he may be in a spot that's tough to come through unless the Bills basically treat him as their WR3 (or WR2 when Gabe Davis does his annual disappearing act for 10 to 15 weeks of the season).

Carolina Panthers

Will Bryce Young be more than a game manager with upside in Year 1?

It's easy to see why the likable, Alabama-coached Bryce Young landed as the No. 1 overall pick. It's hard to imagine how he outright kills the Panthers even if he lacks the gunslinger mentality of C.J. Stroud or the world-beating athleticism and deep-ball arm of Anthony Richardson. With a solid defense previously under Steve Wilks, the Panthers were able to hang in the NFC South race despite the Matt Rhule, Baker Mayfield, and Christian McCaffrey misfires to start the year.

The Panthers can win this division if that defense holds up. If that's the case, it seems very possible this team relies a lot more on free-agency running back contract-winner Miles Sanders than it allows Young to get out there and feed new signings DJ Chark, Adam Thielen, and Hayden Hurst as well as the A.J. Brown-looking second-rounder Jonathan Mingo and up-and-comer Terrace Marshall, who flashed a freak-level 0.46 EPA per target in 2022.

I tend to think that Young will end up more of a West Coast-style dink-and-dunk player in this offense. Even at Alabama, he only threw passes of 20-plus air yards on 10.3% of dropbacks. (Stroud and Richardson clocked in at 13.3% and 15.4% of theirs.) When you combine that with the defense's potential, it's hard to see a ton of upside for this offense with its mix of replacement-level vets and rookies being blocked by them.

Chicago Bears

Can Justin Fields actually pass in this offense?

I won't pin the Bears' oft-anemic pass game solely on Fields. We saw at Ohio State he has no fear of forcing the ball downfield at volume. But this Bears team through two regimes has shown little interest in Fields as a traditional passer with his 29.3 dropbacks per game even lower than that Lamar Jackson number we worried about earlier.

With DJ Moore, Chase Claypool, Darnell Mooney, Cole Kmet, and the new addition of rookie Tyler Scott, it does seem like the Bears have now invested in getting Fields weapons (even if you disagree with the draft capital used to get Claypool in particular). But much like Baltimore, there will only be value provided to all of these players if there's a real commitment to playing differently and allowing Fields to use his rushing ability to set up the pass. There were flashes of those concepts towards the end of last year, but it's not like Fields lit the world on fire with a brutal 60% on-target throw rate.

Fields has an appealing 30 ADP on Underdog Fantasy to start the season, much cheaper than the holy triumvirate of Allen, Hurts, and Mahomes despite similar fantasy ceilings. It's still safe to wonder if he'll make the leap he needs as a passer to create material fantasy value for his pass-catchers.

Bonus question: Can Roschon Johnson win this backfield by the time the fantasy playoffs roll around? He may be a bigger, better D'Onta Foreman and a better pass-protector than Khalil Herbert.

Cincinnati Bengals

Is Joe Mixon going to get cut?

With a need to extend Joe Burrow and likely Tee Higgins, Joe Mixon represents big potential cap savings as a post-June 1 cut for a team in desperate need of flexibility. Mixon's legal issues have also made the team give some iffy non-statements of support that make his future with the team seem even more murky.

If Mixon is cut, newly drafted running back Chase Brown is being deeply undervalued thus far in fantasy football. Brown wasn't great at Illinois in advanced metrics, but he did earn himself 29.6 touches per game according to Sports Info Solutions, including 27.3 rush attempts each time out. He had an iffy 17% avoided tackle rate and slightly negative -0.034 EPA per rush, but he does come with an elite athletic profile, including a 4.38s 40-yard dash.

People currently view Brown as another in the Chris Evans school of Bengals running backs, a pass-catcher unlikely to seize a guaranteed role despite the departure of Samaje Perine. There remains a risk the Bengals add another street free agent—guys such as Kareem Hunt and Ezekiel Elliott could be had for a song and a dance—but Brown is not being treated like a potential high-upside weapon in a top AFC offense.

Cleveland Browns

Are the Browns a potential AFC North sleeper?

If we assume stable production and maybe some growth, the AFC North could end up as one of the toughest divisions in the league. The Bengals are alive as long as they have Joe Burrow slinging it to elite weapons. The Ravens should see at least a slightly less impotent offense with a chance of becoming downright explosive. And the Steelers have accrued a lot of quality weapons to give Kenny Pickett all the runway he needs to grow or prove himself not the quarterback of the future.

Meanwhile, the Browns are in their first full year and offseason with the troublesome Deshaun Watson. They have cemented their backfield as belonging to Nick Chubb, and either he'll rise to more receiving work or the young Jerome Ford could step up to take some pass game downs left behind by Kareem Hunt. They have real weapons with the perpetually underrated and younger-than-you-realize Amari Cooper, Donovan Peoples-Jones, David Njoku, and new additions such as slot Elijah Moore and another big bodied outside weapon in Cedric Tillman.

If they are able to start hot with an offense that showed whiffs of explosiveness last year, this is a tremendously undervalued team that will likely need to score points to achieve wins in its division. Watson also ran six times per game, giving him a little juice as a rusher to add additional fantasy upside. Hold your ethical nose and grab some Watson stacks because the Browns are treated like a non-factor despite perfectly middle-of-the-pack Super Bowl odds at +2800.

Dallas Cowboys

Are the Cowboys going to regress on offense?

I hated that the Cowboys lost Kellen Moore, even if it does mean that Justin Herbert reaches the height of his powers. I hated it even more that Mike McCarthy made quotes after Moore left about the team's desire to run the football and limit risks, a.k.a. inhibit the pass game. And I hated it the most that McCarthy hired legendary run-establisher Brian Schottenheimer as the architect of this new approach.

Despite that, false flags like the acquisition of aging burner Brandin Cooks, releasing Ezekiel Elliott while giving Tony Pollard a presumed bellcow role, and a sneaky tight end addition of the undervalued Luke Schoonmaker and his 0.441 EPA per target in 2022 have given the public more hope for the Cowboys offense.

I remain unsold. CeeDee Lamb is my least favorite end-of-the-first round receiver with a likely reduced target share. Ronald Jones lurks as a cheap veteran whom you could absolutely see the Cowboys force-feeding Elliott's prior workload in a way that hurts Pollard's upside. And the Cowboys defense is good enough to win real games without making an appealing fantasy output.

I absolutely think the Cowboys are a contender and in the hunt once again to be a thorn in the Eagles and Giants' NFC East prospects. But the way they get there feels a lot less like an explosive, high-octane offense even though they are certainly being drafted like one.

Denver Broncos

Are the Broncos more likely to end up a top team or blow it all up?

Marvin Mims was one of my preferred second-/third-round receivers in this draft, a player who can really get downfield and play big outside despite iffy size. Now he finds himself behind Jerry Jeudy, Courtland Sutton, and the returning Tim Patrick with some real questions about how this new Broncos offense will look with Sean Payton taking over.

We also have questions about Russell Wilson, who showed signs of life towards the end of last season but doesn't necessarily seem beloved by his new head coach. We have seen highly regarded second-year tight end Greg Dulcich find new competition after Payton acquired his stalwart Adam Trautman. We have seen multiple trade rumors about Jeudy and Sutton, concerns about Javonte Williams' recovery from a catastrophic knee injury, and a lot of question marks all around with the assumption that it'll all be smoothed over by the genius of Payton.

The Broncos are a top-12 contender according to Super Bowl futures with +2500 odds as of press time. They are being treated like a real contender. But there are genuinely a lot of questions and the potential for concern if Payton decides they need to rebuild in his image for 2024. There could be a lot of wasted potential for all of these players in that process.

Detroit Lions

Are the Lions really a blockbuster offense in waiting?

I like Dan Campbell. He's fiery, he plays aggressively and shockingly analytically sound on fourth-down calls, and he clearly gets a lot out of his players. That said, I think there has been lot of crowning the Lions as both an NFC North champ and fantasy juggernaut that feels a bit outside the pale to me.

Amon-Ra St. Brown looks great. He'll get an extra six games as the unquestioned alpha target with Jameson Williams' iffy gambling suspension, but both should have monster ceilings when you need to win a league or best ball tournament. David Montgomery also got one of free agency's biggest running back contracts and could potentially soak up all of that Jamaal Williams goal-line work that created a ton of value for him in 2022. For whatever flaws in draft capital management it was to take Jahmyr Gibbs at No. 12 or Sam LaPorta as the No. 2 tight end off the board, these are quality players who avoid tackles at a high rate and should provide value from Day 1.

But we have a potential end to the Jared Goff era coming in the form of the big-armed and mobile Hendon Hooker, a player who took advantage of Tennessee's occasionally gimmicky offense to put up a class-best 83% catchable ball rate prior to his ACL injury. Goff's big contract can be exited cheaply after this season.

You also have an improved defense that was fairly aggressive in the offseason and has to be better than last year, perhaps necessitating less offensive explosiveness if it can keep opposing offenses under control.

Does this mean I'm avoiding Lions stacks or some of their key parts? Not at all. But I think the journey to these guys achieving their value may not be as binary as it seems. The NFC North has teams that I expect to be better than they seem, particularly the Bears and now-youthful Packers. The Vikings also should be less of a paper tiger than they were last year with offensive additions and the coaching stability of new defensive coordinator Brian Flores.

The Lions are treated and priced like the Bengals of the NFC North. They have done nothing to warrant that mantle yet. Keep that in mind if you find yourself heavily leaning on these guys in every team you build.

Green Bay Packers

Can Jordan Love and a young Packers corps overcome the specter of Aaron Rodgers?

The Packers are, in a lot of ways, treated like the inverse of the Lions. No one expects anything from them and everyone expects massive regression after losing Hall of Famer Aaron Rodgers to his new home in New York.

Despite that, I'm intrigued by the situation. Christian Watson had one of the highest EPAs per target of all players, not just rookies, in 2022 with a 0.47 EPA per target according to Sports Info Solutions. Romeo Doubs had his moments and some sharp draft experts liked Jaylen Reed more than the public, which showed with the draft capital the Packers used to get him. Luke Musgrave also showed tremendous upside in his two games prior to injury in 2022 with an ungodly 0.605 EPA per target as Oregon State hit him downfield with five targets of 10-plus air yards in that small sample size. (Tucker Kraft excites me less, but he's a better catch-and-run guy who'll be taking a big leap in competition from South Dakota State.) And let's not forget that Aaron Jones and AJ Dillon remain one of the most solid backfield duos in the league for fantasy.

I personally love taking a cheap Packers stack with Jordan Love in the hopes he can be good from Day 1 after years toiling behind Rodgers. He should bring mobility and, again, the weapons are the thing. I'm sure there's also a bit of a chip on Matt LaFleur's shoulder to show that perhaps Rodgers was more of an inhibitor than asset down the end of his Green Bay career. The Packers should NOT be world-beaters. But you may find more competitive games from them as a result and, if their defense continues to backslide, maybe potential for shootouts not unlike what Detroit faced in 2022.

Houston Texans

Though he went No. 2 overall, do people understand the upside of C.J. Stroud?

Nothing frustrated me more than the home stretch of the draft than whatever happened with C.J. Stroud. Whether it was opportunistic marketing for S2 testing or a team trying to smoke-screen to get Stroud to fall, Stroud didn't deserve the last week of slander before he landed with draft capital he deserved.

Stroud's numbers leap off the page as a prototypical gunslinger who can create value even for his middling Texans receivers. Stroud had a class-high 10.5% touchdown rate per dropback and he excelled with the deep ball, notching a 50% completion rate on throws over 20 air yards with a class-high 0.93 EPA. He was also deathly accurate with an 81.2% catchable ball rate according to SIS.

This is the kind of player who can raise the tide of his entire pass-catching corps. And even though guys like Dalton Schultz and Devin Singletary are closer to replacement level than outliers, they are competent in ways that previous Texans roster slots have not been.

The Texans may try to let their defense win games given who DeMeco Ryans portends to be as head coach and his staff's largely 49ers-driven pedigrees. If that defense takes some time to congeal as one would expect, there could be a lot of slinging by Stroud. I don't think the markets properly reflect how good this guy can be and I'd love to get some cheap Stroud-John Metchie stacks now before the Athletic summer hype cycle starts up.

Indianapolis Colts

Is Anthony Richardson's landing spot the most perfect in recent memory?

For literal months on Splash Play, my FO-affiliated podcast with my pal Pete Overzet, I have clamored for the elite rushing and deep-throwing Anthony Richardson to meet his potential in a pairing with new Colts head coach Shane Steichen. And now that it's upon us, people seem to have the appropriate reaction to Richardson landing with the Jalen Hurts-shaping mentor who schemed a beautiful Eagles offense.

Despite the love for the pairing and Richardson as an elite rusher with a better-than-most-running-backs 38% avoided tackle rate, people still seem to find Richardson rawer than expected. As a result, guys such as Michael Pittman and Alec Pierce are often not paired up with Richardson with the idea being he can't get them the ball.

Richardson's accuracy numbers glow red in my data sheet with a bad 53.7% completion rate, 71.5% catchable ball rate, and egregiously ugly 58% on-target rate according to SIS. He was impossibly bad in throws under 10 yards with a -0.44 EPA and 56% completion rate.

What people miss: Richardson's 0.78 EPA per throw of 20-plus air yards is second behind Stroud amongst highly drafted quarterbacks. His 0.49 EPA on throws between 10 and 20 yards was better than that of Stroud, Will Levis, Tanner McKee, Hendon Hooker, or Clayton Tune.

Shane Steichen will scheme up throws that Richardson can hit. He will use Richardson in a lot of similar ways that worked best for Jalen Hurts. He will find ways to get the ball downfield to give guys such as Pittman and Pierce more opportunity than the noodle-armed Colts pupu platter provided in 2022. If you treat Richardson just as a rusher, you won't capture the full upside of what he and this new staff bring to the table.

Jacksonville Jaguars

Is Travis Etienne doomed?

This question is teetering on Stephen A. Smith-style hyperbole, but it's a real question. Last season, the Jaguars showed a bizarre aversion to using Travis Etienne as a pass-catcher, with only 18.6 routes per game and an ugly 13.6% target per route run rate. This season, they used a third-round pick on pure runner Tank Bigsby. Bigsby, while stuffed at the line a very high 24.2% of rushes according to SIS in a way not befitting the name Tank, is regarded as a power runner who can force people to miss with a solid 28.1% avoided tackle rate.

What does that leave behind for the sleight-of-build Etienne, who was already on the low end with 13 rushes per game? It doesn't seem great, especially when you account for the 33.3 ADP that Etienne currently has on Underdog Fantasy, good for RB13.

Perhaps this Jacksonville offense is so good that the sheer weight of the pass game with Calvin Ridley added creates a lot more rushing and scoring opportunities for all. Maybe Bigsby, new signing D'Ernest Johnson, the returning JaMycal Hasty, and second-year back Snoop Conner, all fall in line behind an improving Etienne and I'm dead wrong. To me, though, Etienne is now one of the most overvalued players as a result of this offseason's signifiers that show a real lack of trust at worst—and a big desire to save Etienne's health and efficiency at best.

Kansas City Chiefs

Is Rashee Rice a stud thanks to his landing spot, or is he just the new Skyy Moore?

I have already heard a lot of people I know and respect talk about how they won't fall for another Skyy Moore after loving him last year. As someone who casted a more skeptical eye towards Moore, I'm far more ready to embrace and potentially be burned by Rashee Rice.

While both come from smaller schools with Moore out of Western Michigan and Rice from SMU, Rice was an unreal target earner in a way Moore was not. Rice's 38% target per route run rate in college likely reflects the quality of his teammates and opponents, something that won't be the case with guys such as Kadarius Toney and Travis Kelce competing for looks. But the ability to be a target-earner at that volume as he averaged 112.8 yards per game does seem like something that could carry over to some level.

I also see Rice's 3.1 targets per game on throws of 20-plus air yards to be a huge difference-maker. Moore thrives in short spaces while Rice brings a 0.758 EPA per target on deep throws that is somehow even better than a downfield beast like Quentin Johnston in this class.

Maybe Rice ends up another Skyy Moore. Right now, you're paying such a cheap price at a 176.2 ADP that I'd take that flyer, one that could grow even stronger if Marquez Valdes-Scantling ends up cut at some point this offseason.

Las Vegas Raiders

Will fantasy players learn the value of newly signed Jimmy Garoppolo?

It made sense last year why no one drafted Jimmy Garoppolo with the 49ers seemingly handing the keys to Trey Lance as they sought a way out of their capped ceiling with Jimmy G. At a 181.2 ADP on Underdog thus far, I see less of a reason why people should still feel that way.

Is Jimmy Garoppolo an electric runner with a big arm who will force his offense to massive fantasy upside? Of course not. He is, however, surrounded by offensive talent, including elite-upside guys such as Davante Adams and Josh Jacobs, with a contract that ensures he'll get a lot of runway before the Raiders would consider moving on. Aidan O'Connell is not necessarily putting the fear of God of Garoppolo not finishing the season as starter, even if he does end up a perfectly fine backup or more.

The reason you draft Garoppolo is to cut your parlay on items to get correct in a lineup. Adams is a slate-breaker at wide receiver. Jakobi Meyers saw relatively big offseason money. Michael Mayer is a highly drafted tight end who should quickly usurp Austin Hooper and O.J. Howard. Jacobs will eventually come to terms with their attempt at franchise tagging him and likely be just as effective as he was last year. It's entirely possible Garoppolo rides the wave of this offensive production around him to a very usable year in a division that is predisposed to high scoring games.

Los Angeles Chargers

Who will be this team's greatest fantasy weapon?

Austin Ekeler requested a trade this offseason with the Chargers disinclined from extending the undersized stud as he turns 28 in May. With his contract coming to an end and some uncertainty as to the future of the partnership, it's possible an Isaiah Spiller, on whom the Chargers spent solid draft capital in 2022, carves out a role as an understudy back with contingent value. If not, perhaps the steady-running Josh Kelley gets there. Either way, there is a world where Ekeler regresses from a role where he had 87% of the Chargers' rushing touchdowns and 44% of their total touchdowns in 2022.

If that's the case, particularly in a more vertical offense curated by new offensive coordinator Kellen Moore, you could see the power shift to new first-rounder Quentin Johnston. Sure, Mike Williams is a better high-point receiver and downfield target. Keenan Allen is the better route-runner by a wide margin. But the 21-year-old Johnston now gets to learn from both while bringing his superpower of a dominant 38.3% avoided tackle rate in 2022 according to SIS data.

Johnston's ADP fell a lot prior to the draft. With one weekend's worth of data, his ADP is now up to 102 on Underdog Fantasy. I wouldn't be shocked if that rises exponentially over the summer, especially if we see some of those ballyhooed camp reports about being unable to tell him and Mike Williams apart as Johnston makes big play after big play. I'd get in on his discount now with a chance he emerges as a key part of this offense—and possibly ends up the top dynasty wide receiver in the class as he comes of age alongside Justin Herbert.

Los Angeles Rams

Will Stetson Bennett start at some point this year?

I have had a lot of doubts about Matthew Stafford's return to form with his spinal injuries posing a lot of risk for a guy who has taken a ton of hits in his career. I now have a lot less doubts in the Rams' ability to continue to produce for fantasy if Stafford faces setbacks thanks to addition of Stetson Bennett.

Again, I'm a USC sycophant and not a Georgia one. I don't think Bennett was anywhere near the top of the class as some diehard Bulldogs fans may have sworn. But he is a guy who had a 0.328 EPA per throw at Georgia and was incredibly good at everything, with positive EPAs at every level of throw (though admittedly not great on deep balls with only a 39% completion rate and 0.31 EPA per throw over 20 yards). Either way, that won't really affect a guy like Cooper Kupp who just needs someone to stand in the pocket and feed him the ball in close range. Teams will likely not load the box against Cam Akers (or Kyren Williams or Zach Evans if Akers falls out of favor yet again) thanks to Bennett's ability to at least keep them honest.

I share Mike Tanier's views generally that Bennett is not Brock Purdy. However, I think this was one of the best possible landing spots for him. If he does start at some point this year, I genuinely think he can keep the ship afloat even if I don't expect him to be an Anthony Richardson or C.J. Stroud-style Day 1 world-beater.

Miami Dolphins

Does Devon Achane immediately usurp Raheem Mostert and Jeff Wilson's roles?

One of the worst-held secrets of the draft process was how similarly people viewed Devon Achane's ability to Raheem Mostert's. He's a one-cut runner with crazy straight-line speed who handled a ton of volume with 23.2 touches per game at Texas A&M. He doesn't have the avoided tackle rate I'd like for a shifty runner, just a 21% missed tackle rate and a bleh 0.013 EPA per rush.

I believe a lot in this Miami offense, though. Their pass rate over expectation was one of the highest in the league in 2022, and there's no reason to expect that to change with the modern-minded Mike McDaniel pulling the strings. The Dolphins' elite receivers will create a lot of red zone rushing opportunities, particularly since neither Tyreek Hill nor Jaylen Waddle is exactly a goal-line, go-up-and-get-it type of receiver.

The net-net is that there will be a lot of rushing opportunity in this offense. Is Achane appreciably better than Mostert or Wilson right now? I'd say no. Is he guaranteed to see touches in Week 1? I wouldn't be shocked if he were inactive, unless he ends up as a kick returner as well. But rookies tend to rise as the season goes on. By the time the fantasy football playoffs come around in Weeks 15 to 17, it's hard to imagine Achane not earning himself some portion of this backfield if not the lion's share of the work. And that could easily be worth his weight in gold for an end-of-season spike week.

Minnesota Vikings

Will Dalvin Cook finally get cut?

Dalvin Cook and Joe Mixon rumors have swirled this entire offseason, with both generally universally regarded as likely to be post-June 1 cap casualties. Cook's backup Alexander Mattison signed a "bigger than a backup" contract this offseason and, even with shoddy draft capital in the seventh round, UAB running back DeWayne McBride grades out as a potential bellcow with 21.2 rush attempts per game and a solid 32% avoided tackle rate. Coaches may also fall in love with his ability to move a pile; McBride's 0.198 EPA per rush against eight-man boxes was only behind Roschon Johnson, but McBride has a much larger sample size. It may shock you to hear UAB didn't have a ton of elite weapons to take the pressure off him.

Point being: right now Dalvin Cook is still being drafted at a 57.7 ADP. I tend to think that's one of the most egregious errors of the offseason. The musical chairs of running back spots with genuine upside are dwindling and, if Cook doesn't stay in Minnesota, he could find himself closer to Latavius Murray "I'll sign for anyone and run reliably at replacement level" territory than his previous first-round production.

With both Mattison and McBride going cheaply as well as an offense that should continue to improve with a full season of T.J. Hockenson and more elite talent at wide receiver in Jordan Addison, I'd be deathly afraid to get stuck holding dead Dalvin Cook bags.

New England Patriots

Is Rhamondre Stevenson completely locked in as the anchor of this offense?

With a 33.2 ADP currently on Underdog Fantasy, people expect another year of Rhamondre Stevenson as a New England bellcow back. He had 17.5 intended touches per game and, while his -0.8% rushing DVOA or -0.05 EPA per rush aren't lighting the world on fire, he seemed to earn the trust of Bill Belichick over the course of the season.

That said, I have my doubts. Not only do we have a new, at least replacement-level offensive coordinator in Bill O'Brien stepping in for out-of-his-depth-but-lushly-bearded Matt Patricia. We also have a noteworthy contract going to James Robinson and a very interesting young back in Pierre Strong entering his second year behind Stevenson. They didn't spend any draft capital on the position, so clearly they feel good about their stable for now after the free-agency departure of Damien Harris.

Is it possible they feel better about the depth than they do Stevenson as a whole? If Stevenson were to end up closer to 13 touches per game than 18, it would be very hard for him to dig out of his draft position. It would also make a Strong or Robinson very interesting leverage for the end of the season against a much more highly drafted Stevenson.

Stevenson carried a lot of my best ball teams last year as a tremendous zero running back draft value. That was as a pick in the 80s to 120s. I'll still take some shares of Stevenson at his elevated ADP but I would avoid going whole hog personally. Just when you think you won't get Belichick'd is when you get Belichick'd the hardest.

New Orleans Saints

Can Derek Carr and Michael Thomas regain their previous fantasy mojo?

The first thing I'll say here has nothing to do with new Saints quarterback Derek Carr or the shocking return of Michael Thomas. It is this: you need to stop drafting the likely-to-be-suspended-for-half-a-season-ish Alvin Kamara and start drafting third-rounder Kendre Miller. Jamaal Williams will clean up a lot of the early work, but Miller and his 29.5% avoided tackle rate at TCU according to SIS is the kind of guy who should earn a role by Week 17. This is a great landing spot for him and it wouldn't be shocking to see Kamara fade out of the Saints' long-term plans (as if him ceding tons of snaps to Mark Ingram last year didn't do that enough).

That said, the team's future really comes down to if Carr and Thomas can be their former selves. Carr was miscast in a checkdown-heavy offense in Las Vegas while the Saints have sworn they'll use his verticality to create value for weapons such as Chris Olave, Rasheed Shaheed, Juwan Johnson, and vaguely compelling rookie AT Perry. If Carr is successful, we'll either see more downfield value for Michael Thomas—who actually was good in his limited 2022 run with a 0.55 EPA per target and 31.1% receiving DVOA—or more space for him underneath to point-per-reception every opponent to death.

Carr's contract is so oversized that I would err on the side of hoping he comes through. He'll get every possible shot to pay off the $30-million-plus average annual value his contract carries in the first three years, and this is a team that wasn't shy allowing Andy Dalton to sling it at times last year. I love a New Orleans stack and the potential for Michael Thomas to return and add value at a time everyone has written him off. Buy the dip.

New York Giants

Why does a team that runs as often as the Giants need roughly 50 wide receivers? AND Does Saquon Barkley know how replaceable he is?

Our first official two-pronged question comes very late in this article when I should be trying to hit the finish line. But I really am baffled by the addition of Jalin Hyatt to a crowded New York receiver corps with Darius Slayton, Wan'Dale Robinson, Sterling Shepard, late-season breakout Isaiah Hodgins, and new signing Parris Campbell. They also added Jamison Crowder and still have previously-in-the-rotation David Sills as well as former Jets wideout Jeff Smith.

Daniel Jones dropped back a "meh" 35.6 times per game in 2022 and perhaps the team will try to run him less than his 7.5 times per game to preserve him on a big deal. I still find it hard to believe this team can create fantasy value with this many weapons, particularly when you account for new tight end Darren Waller as well. I'll continue to take Hyatt, Robinson, and Slayton in best ball drafts for their ceiling when the ADP aligns, but I wouldn't be shocked if not a single Giants wide reciver ends up in the top 30 at the position by the end of the year.

Similarly, one draft move that stood out to me was the addition of former Oklahoma running back Eric Gray. He hardly came up in the draft process, but stood out to me with a 23% avoided tackle rate and very low 12.7% stuffed run rate along with a 0.154 EPA per rush. He also had a 31% target per route run rate with 36% avoided tackles on his smallish sample size of 11.5 routes per game. He's the kind of back who could quite literally be a better and fresher version of Saquon Barkley in this offense with the ability to handle serious volume at 20.5 touches per game last year.

With reports that Barkley wants to "reconvene" on his contract as he refuses to sign his franchise tag, Gray could be a much larger threat to Barkley than a Matt Breida was in 2022. If Barkley realizes that too late, don't be surprised if the unheralded Gray soars in media reports and eventually ADPs.

New York Jets

Is Breece Hall as likely to be a bellcow back as the markets suggest?

Let's put aside the expected questioning of Aaron Rodgers and how his persona may affect a team on the rise with exciting young weapons such as Breece Hall and Garrett Wilson. Let's ask the questions people are afraid to ask about the beloved second-year running back Hall, coming off a torn ACL with a 24.9 ADP on Underdog Fantasy.

As I mentioned earlier, Hall is young as he turns 22 in May. There is strong data that aligns with players under age 25 being more likely to recover fully from an ACL injury, though there is also data that suggests it makes the injury more likely to recur. I'm willing to take the flyer on the health.

What I worry about is now a heightened version of what I was already worried about: the Jets may simply not want to give Hall the workload he saw last year. He is clearly a key part of future plans but with Zonovan Knight flashing some skill, newly drafted Israel Abanikanda bringing game-breaking speed and an ability to handle carries at volume, and Michael Carter bringing a pass-game dimension that Rodgers may need, there's a chance Hall is in a whole new world. There's also new offensive coordinator Nathaniel Hackett to overcome, a man who's no stranger to committee backfields.

Hall is a running back, and they're always at risk of being vultured by a backup. Even if you love his ADP and upside, this is a lot of risks for a guy being drafted like a certainty.

Philadelphia Eagles

How will this Eagles backfield break down?

I have never been a D'Andre Swift guy. It's nothing against him or his talent but more so about how his roles line up against the public's perception of him. Fantasy players love D'Andre Swift. He has had outlier rushing and receiving days, great pedigree coming from Georgia, and he's still just 24 years old. His 15.2% rushing DVOA last year is nothing to sneeze at, even if it misaligns somewhat with the outsized love for him as a fantasy football player.

There is real concern for him in this backfield at his current 62.8 ADP that has quickly risen since his trade to Philly. There is also real concern for Rashaad Penny (102.9 ADP) and Kenneth Gainwell (160.2 ADP). The difference is those guys are both substantially cheaper as leverage against the more highly drafted Swift.

Penny's contract would be an easy cap cut, but he is quite possibly a better rusher AND receiver than Swift. If nothing else, he's more likely to be a two-down sledgehammer. Gainwell has also shown massive upside in this Philadelphia offense, albeit without his expected real pass game role or even reliable touches.

There is nothing wrong with D'Andre Swift. However, I feel like he's another player being crowned before he has shown the ability to match his production to how the public views him. I'd rather have Penny or get Gainwell for free. Hell, you can even take a spin with a free Trey Sermon after he landed on the Eagles at the end of last year. You don't get bonus points because D'Andre Swift grew up in Philly and people keep thinking he's on the cusp of a breakout every year.

Pittsburgh Steelers

Will Matt Canada avoid blowing the Steelers' young offense?

There are flaws in Pittsburgh, to be clear. Najee Harris is more of a pure volume back than a player with anything useful about him (as his -4.4% rushing DVOA and -9.8% receiving DVOA might suggest). Diontae Johnson is not a WR1, even if he's probably more due for positive touchdown regression than anyone in the league. Kenny Pickett is not C.J. Stroud or Anthony Richardson, no matter how many jerseys he may sell to Sheetz frequenters.

But good god is there a lot of talent here now. George Pickens was an EPA world-beater with 0.38 EPA per target as a rookie and a respectable 15.6% receiving DVOA. Pat Freiermuth is an above average tight end with 0.07 EPA per target and a 2.8% receiving DVOA. And rookie Darnell Washington, despite some medical red flags that made him fall in the draft, had 0.399 EPA per target at Georgia according to SIS, and he blocks like Juggernaut.

There is no reason this team shouldn't be greatly improved ... other than their offensive coordinator, Matt Canada, who inexplicably returned despite some egregious errors in 2022. Coaches, much like players, can grow and improve, and that's why I'm willing to buy in on cheap Pittsburgh stacks in an AFC North that, again, will score points in a lot of games. If Canada is going to save his job, it comes with increased fantasy production from multiples of these guys and Kenny Pickett as a low ADP (171.3 on Underdog Fantasy) vessel for it all.

I love trying to capture young, underpriced teams on the upswing, so I'm willing to ride with the questionable play calling in the hopes I nail a lower probability outcome according to the markets. If it fails, embrace Kyle Broflovski's mother's ethos in 1999's South Park: The Movie as you loudly and proudly blame Canada.

San Francisco 49ers

Is Trey Lance a value or a sucker's bet?

We all love the prospect of a dual-threat rusher and thrower with the kind of size and youth of Trey Lance. You also can't argue how snakebitten he has been with iffy starts his first year and less than two games, one of them during a monsoon, he played his second year before a season-ending leg injury.

The team has seemingly indicated it prefers former Mr. Irrelevant Brock Purdy to start, but Purdy himself comes with major risk in a UCL tear that reports seemingly say could have him back for the start of the season or to miss the entire year. The 49ers added Sam Darnold as necessary depth to get through training camp and the preseason, but now reports are he could also start over Lance if the moon and sun align.

I will caveat this as saying: no one burned me as bad as Trey Lance last year as he ended up in roughly 25% of my best ball teams. I have genuine concerns with how he flashed absolutely nothing last year with an impossibly bad -0.522 EPA per pass according to SIS (again: small sample size, but bad is bad is bad). He should be able to run and avoid tackles, but this 49ers team has now seen how it can function with someone slinging the ball downfield with some skill and accuracy. They can't have Lance submarining talent like Brandon Aiyuk and George Kittle downfield, let alone killing the short pass game with Christian McCaffrey and Deebo Samuel.

Lance's current 152.1 ADP on Underdog Fantasy feels about right, especially when contrasted with the 198.2 ADP of Brock Purdy. Then you look at guys like C.J. Stroud going after Lance and I get genuinely concerned.

Draft Lance when he materializes as an ADP value and you have other 49ers to stack him with, be careful of your overall exposure, and don't be surprised if he blows up in our faces once again.

Seattle Seahawks

Can Jaxon Smith-Njigba have an impact this year in Seattle's wide receiver corps?

Jaxon Smith-Njigba reminded me a lot of Ja'Marr Chase in this draft process after he mostly sat out 2022 thanks to a lingering hamstring issue. JSN doesn't bring the same athletic profile with obvious outside receiver potential, but he is an absolute game-changer who had a class-high 0.86 EPA per target in 2021 with massive value in throws under 20 air yards, including a 0.769 EPA per target in throws under 10 yards and a 0.804 EPA in throws between 10 and 20 air yards.

Teams and fantasy players then found ways to talk themselves out of him with size, athletic profile, and even the high quality of teammates reflecting poorly upon JSN for no particular reason. Now he lands in Seattle, safely lodged behind DK Metcalf and Tyler Lockett in perceived target shares as well as competing with the fantasy draft-overvalued Kenneth Walker with three-down stud rookie Zach Charbonnet about to breathe down his neck for production overall.

There have been reports that Lockett could move outside more to allow JSN to take his natural slot position. Even if that's the case, this is the quintessential fantasy football paradox: do you buy in on the talent or the situation? Situations can create production. Talent creates upside over the course of time.

As a result, I love JSN in dynasty and wouldn't be shocked if he still is worth being the No. 1 fantasy wide receiver off the board, especially next year with Lockett's contract at a potential exit point. With pristine landing spots for guys such as Quentin Johnston and even a case to be made for Jordan Addison, I'm less inclined to lock in that JSN will be the top rookie wide receiver for this year, particularly if his 60.5 ADP holds. The game-to-game and future upside is there, though, so you'd be a fool to not have shares.

Tampa Bay Buccaneers

Do the Bucs think they're good with this team right now?

The Buccaneers remind me a lot of the Cardinals' situation discussed earlier now that they no longer have Tom Brady to keep them viable in the top tier of the NFC. They seem to be inclined to run the roster back with no moves for Mike Evans or Chris Godwin, Baker Mayfield and Kyle Trask likely to compete for the starting quarterback job, and Rachaad White only facing competition from free-agent pickup Chase Edmonds, who clearly lost some luster in 2022.

The Bucs currently have the seventh-lowest Super Bowl win odds at +6500. They have unproven offensive coaching with former Seahawks quarterback coach Dave Canales replacing Byron Leftwich as offensive coordinator. They have veteran talent who likely would quickly fall by the wayside if the Bucs fell out of NFC South contention—though, admittedly, I'm not sure there's another team in the division that can run away from them.

The only sure thing right now seems to be that Rachaad White will have a real chance to seize the lead role in this situation at a 78.1 ADP that shows the market has started to catch on. Don't be surprised if he soars up to a fifth- or sixth-rounder with a chance to see meaningful run-game and pass-game work. And keep an eye on rookie Trey Palmer, one of the few bona fide outside receivers in this class who could learn a lot from the Mike Evans route tree (which admittedly is missing a branch or two). Besides that, it all feels gross and flimsy.

Tennessee Titans

Will the Titans run back their Derrick Henry heliocentric offense?

Derrick Henry's 24.3 intended touches per game were the most in the NFL in 2022. He even saw some catches, with 2.4 targets per game to go with those 21.8 rushes.

As Henry enters his age-29 season, it feels like the Titans should try to save him by either throwing the ball more overall or using Tulane rookie Tyjae Spears to take some of the onus off of him as both a rusher and pass-catcher.

The Titans have historically shown little interest in anything besides Henry. Potential stud outside wide receiver Treylon Burks saw just 4.8 targets per game. Trendy tight end prospect Chig Okonkwo saw only 2.6 targets per game. It's hard to expect that pass-game volume to increase with either Ryan Tannehill or "quarterback of the future" ~~Malik Willis~~ Will Levis behind center.

With rumors the Titans hoped to find a trade market for Henry, something has to give. If I had to guess, you're more likely to see Spears involved than any other previous Titans running back farmhand thanks to the fact that he's not just a Henry doppleganger like 2022 draft pick Hassan Haskins is. But I'll have to see proof the Titans won't run Henry into the ground again with how little things have changed for them other than a concerted effort to improve the defense, something which would only make a run-heavy approach more appealing to them.

Washington Commanders

Are we sure that Sam Howell will hold onto the starting quarterback job?

I was interested in Sam Howell last season simply because he's a guy who grades out as a willing downfield passer on a team that had little of interest at quarterback last year. This year, people seem to be borderline excited for Howell despite the fact that the Commanders are paying a healthy contract to new "backup" Jacoby Brissett with a contract that could total $10 million.

This battle intrigues me since:

Brissett was genuinely good last year as a Deshaun Watson stopgap with a 13.0% passing DVOA and 27.2% rushing DVOA.
The Commanders are fairly loaded offensively with Terry McLaurin underappreciated as a 0.32 EPA per target outside receiver, rookie Jahan Dotson also flashing when healthy, and interesting running backs with a healthier Brian Robinson and maybe resurgent Antonio Gibson (I omit Curtis Samuel here since he's potentially a cap casualty).

Howell snuck out an end-of-season win against Dallas that put him on people's radar. But he brought a -18.5% DVOA on the year and a -0.43 EPA per pass that will not win you a job in the XFL or USFL, let alone the NFC East. I'm not sold that Howell is the quarterback of the future, and if I were new Commanders offensive coordinator Eric Bieniemy, I'm not sure I'd want my first-run play calling to die in the hands of a small fifth-rounder who won a game before I was hired.

I'd watch out for Brissett here. This is a talented young team who is worth drafting multiple pieces from. If you end up wrong with Howell, it can be crippling even if McLaurin, Dotson, and Robinson/Gibson end up having outlier seasons.

Stay tuned later this week for an update to my SPAGS Fantasy Football Rankings to reflect all this above as well as the new ADPs from Underdog's Best Ball Mania tournament (use promo code SPAGS to save 10% on an FO+ subscription).

Follow me on Twitter @ChrisSpags and don't be afraid to check out my show Splash Play, where we'll be drafting teams for the 2023 season all week. It may seem early, but this is when the fun truly begins for fantasy football. Let's hope we get some things right along the way.

#1 by alex.michel // Jul 05, 2023 - 10:35am

Amazing article! Could you please explain a little more what you mean by "leverage"? As in "It would also make a Strong or Robinson very interesting leverage for the end of the season against a much more highly drafted Stevenson." I love Strong, and I like this concept, but I'm not totally sure I get what you mean by leverage and I'd love to hear more! Thank you!

NFL Draft 2023 (Non) Grades

Mike Tanier — Mon, 01 May 2023 13:20:04 +0000

NFL Draft 2023 (Non) Grades Mike Tanier 01 May 2023, 09:20am

The 2023 NFL Draft Performance Assessments have arrived! And what have we learned?

The Pittsburgh Steelers had an awesome weekend.
Bill Belichick did Bill Belichick stuff.
The Philadelphia Eagles broke the multiverse. Or at least the Georgiaverse.
Dan Campbell did Dan Campbell stuff.
Will Levis fell out of the first-round frying pan and into the Tennessee Titans fire.
The Indianapolis Colts and Chicago Bears earned rare Walkthrough praise.
The Atlanta Falcons did not.

A reminder: these are performance assessments, not "grades." Draft grades are silly clickbait. This grade-like substance is actually pure science, just like a "cognitive test" administered on an old Nintendo 64 by certified experts in neuropigskin scientific marketing.

Sometimes recent trades like the Aaron Rodgers deal count. Sometimes they don't. Sometimes they count for one of the trade partners but not the other. It doesn't matter. You already stopped reading the intro and scrolled to your team. Wise choice. Let's get on with it.

AFC East

Buffalo Bills

Improved Roster: B
Used Resources Well: C
Met Needs: B-
FINAL PPA: B-

Dalton Kincaid represents an athletic upgrade over Dawson Knox and should beef up the 12 package this year. O'Cyrus Torrence is an excellent second-round value. Both can help the Bills optimize an offense that appeared to max out at "good enough" at a few positions last year.

Dorian Williams is an undersized try-hard defender. Justin Shorter is an ironically named king-sized receiver who runs lumbering routes. Both look more like core special teamers than defensive/offensive contributors on a Super Bowl short-lister. Shorter might be a useful interference blocker on receiver screens, but Ken Dorsey doesn't like receiver screens.

This draft class lacks the masterstroke move that Bills Mafia probably wanted and the Bills themselves probably need: a trade up for a missing-piece playmaker, a DeAndre Hopkins deal, whatever.

The Bengals and Chiefs didn't do much wheeling and dealing either. But they are the teams the Bills are trying to catch. That means the Bills should have been willing to take some extra risks and bigger swings.

Miami Dolphins

Improved Roster: B
Used Resources Well: B-
Met Needs: C+
FINAL PPA: B-

Count the Jalen Ramsey trade and the grades would have been more like

Improved Roster: A
Used Resources Well: A+
Met Needs: B+
FINAL PPA: A

Cam Smith has Pro Bowl upside if he can learn to keep his hands off receivers. Devon Achane is a Nyheim Hynes type who could solve the Dolphins' punt/kick return issues. Elijah Higgins is more or less Mike Gesicki reimagined as a slot receiver (that's not an endorsement).

Some reinforcements on the offensive line and the edge (where there is zero depth) would have been swell. But the Dolphins lacked a first-round pick yet added an All-Pro cornerback in a sheriff's auction trade, so let's not sweat the details too much.

New England Patriots

Improved Roster: B+
Used Resources Well: B
Met Needs: D-
FINAL PPA: C-

Christian Gonzalez will be another J.C. Jackson or Stephon Gilmore, and the Patriots traded down for extra capital before landing him. Keion White is another Deatrich Wise type and a true Belichick scheme/culture fit. Seriously: the fellow already looks miserable!

Then we get to the kickers, punters, and self-indulgent noodling.

The quintessential Patriots draft pick these days is a lad with an unusual name from a college better known for producing creative writing professors than football players. Less than 1% of the draft media actually scouted this theoretical prospect, but all of us whipped up a pre-draft dossier om him based on a highlight video and some Shrine Bowl scuttlebutt, specifically so we can all say things like, "Oooh I loved edge rusher/fullback Gabba Booboogagaganesh coming out of Oral Hygiene University. Bill Belichick is SUCH a genius."

Yes, Belichick gets some benefit of the doubt on such players. But you may have noticed that Mac Jones is mediocre at best and that the Patriots receiver corps is, frankly, embarrassing. They needed more than Kayshon Boutte (vaporware) and Demario Douglas (the Malik Willis of slot receivers). They could have loaded up on the Josh Downs/Tyler Scott/Charlie Jones type receivers who slipped, thrown in a tight end who can block, and built a YAC machine for Jones starting in the third round. Instead, they goofed around with kickers and beefed up the interior line with small-school sleepers to compete with last year's small-school interior-line sleepers.

Hence the "D-" for meeting needs. The Patriots went out of their way to avoid meeting needs. This draft is just going to make the 2020s Patriots more like themselves, capable of hanging around the wild-card chase each year by beating bad teams by 16-13 final scores. And that score assumes this kicker pans out.

New York Jets

Improved Roster: A
Used Resources Well: D
Met Needs: B+
FINAL PPA: B-

In an effort to not enrage Jets fans any more than necessary, the Aaron Rodgers trade was included in these grades. Hence the "A" (they got a let's-say top-12 quarterback) and the "B+" for filling their most pressing need.

The "D" for resources comes not just from giving up a lot for Rodgers—I don't think they got snookered, but I don't want to hear anyone lecture me about "leverage" on the Internet again—but from sitting still when the Steelers leap-frogged them for Broderick Jones. Local guy Carter Warren feels like a consolation prize at tackle, while Israel Abanikanda is more of a fantasy-community binkie and Look Aaron: skill-position talent! selection than someone who will really help the Jets.

Will McDonald IV has intriguing tools on the edge. Joe Tippmann fills a need. And it's great to finally be able to get on with our lives after the Rodgers trade. But the Jets drafted like they had a lump in their throats because they were afraid to make a mistake. They should get used to that feeling.

AFC North

Baltimore Ravens

Improved Roster: B+
Used Resources Well: B
Met Needs: C
FINAL PPA: B

Zay Flowers became crystal clickmeth this draft season. Homer fans and bloggers around the NFL watched the same 10-play Flowers sizzle reel over and over until they were certain he was Tyreek Hill 2.0. He may be, but he's much more likely to be Mecole Hardman 2.0, or something in the wide range in between.

Granted, Flowers made a fine gift for the Lamar Jackson renewal-of-vows ceremony. But Hollywood Brown was a better prospect.

Trenton Simpson is a speedy linebacker who should never leave the field, and Tavius Robinson is big and rugged, has some pass-rush moves, and makes a lot of hustle plays. Kyu Blu Kelly was impressive in Mobile. As Daniel Jeremiah (I think) said on air: they all look like Ravens picks, as does Flowers. Maybe I have just gotten used to the Ravens coming away from draft weekend with a dozen of these guys because of compensatory picks and fourth-round hoarding.

Cincinnati Bengals

Improved Roster: A
Used Resources Well: B
Met Needs: B-
FINAL PPA: B+

Confession time: I thought Charlie Jones wasn't entering the draft until 2024. I thought that was the case for far too long. Like, until two weeks ago. I took preliminary notes on him while scouting Aidan O'Connell and Payne Durham and was like, "interesting smol-but-plays-big, finds-a-way receiver; better keep tabs on him." Whoops!

Jones does not exactly fill a need, but the Bengals won't need to worry about injuries at receiver, and good luck covering him with a linebacker on third-and-6.

Chase Brown is on my radar as a stealth Rookie of the Year candidate. Joe Mixon has legal issues and has lost some burst; Brown is a no-nonsense rusher with burst and receiving chops. Yes, he's an older prospect; I want to win a prop bet, not marry him (though he's a swell lad!). I could not find Brown odds on Sunday, even at sportsbooks offering action on Evan Null and Zach Kuntz. The house knows I am a dangerous sharp!

DJ Turner was an outstanding second-round value: faster than the Turnpike at midnight, good technique, great physicality. Myles Murphy and Jordan Battle are fine, with Battle taking over for Jessie Bates. Some offensive line reinforcements, a tight end, or some inspired early move would have earned the Bengals an A.

Cleveland Browns

Improved Roster: B+
Used Resources Well: B
Met Needs: B+
FINAL PPA: B+

Take it away, friend-of-Walkthrough Jared Mueller!

If the Browns draft Dawand Jones after already drafting Siaki Ika, the team won't be able to play in their home stadium. The foundations built on a trash dump aren't strong enough to hold those two

— Jared Mueller (@JaredKMueller) April 29, 2023

I am a Siaki Ika stan, and he fills the Browns' need for sheer ballast. Dawand Jones can be an NFL starter; in the short term, the Browns could have a really nasty short-yardage six-lineman package. Luke Wypler was very high on my board; center depth can stave off a crisis. Dorian Thompson-Robinson's selection reflects that the Browns need to spend as little money as possible backing up Deshaun Watson.

Cedric Tillman is the key to this draft. The banged-up 2022 version of Tillman would have barely been worth drafting. The 2021 version could be the versatile WR2 the Browns desperately need. I would have nabbed a falling Josh Downs or Jalin Hyatt (Tillman's teammate at Tennessee) instead; both have higher upside, especially for a team that already has a go-to receiver, and much lower risk. Still, the Browns accomplished quite a bit with the draft capital they possessed.

Pittsburgh Steelers

Improved Roster: A+
Used Resources Well: A
Met Needs: A
FINAL PPA: A

Darnell Washington apparently has a bad foot. Like, a really bad foot. Frankly, his foot could have fallen off in the National Championship Game—perhaps it came loose as he was stomping over some TCU defender—and he still would be an outstanding value at 93rd overall.

Washington won't get many touches, but he will be a matchup migraine in 12 packages and a blocking nightmare in both the running and screen games.

The Joey Porter Jr. slide was semi-predictable. The dude jams like he's in an Allman Brothers tribute band: very well but far too long. He doesn't look like a natural fit in the Steelers secondary, but he's as athletically impressive as a cornerback can be, and of course the Steelers could not have found a better "culture" fit unless they drafted Franco Greene HamLambert IV.

I fell in lurve with Keeanu Benton in Mobile and never fell out. Broderick Jones doesn't meet a critical need—Dan Moore got the job done last year—but that makes him an excellent pick. Adding Nick Herbig in the fourth round was just showing off.

The Steelers, as usual, are building at their own pace instead of panicking. They still have questions—the team and the fan base are more sold on Kenny Pickett than outside observers are—but they always look like a franchise that knows exactly what it's doing on draft weekend.

AFC South

Houston Texans

Improved Roster: A+
Used Resources Well: D+
Met Needs: A+
FINAL PPA: B+

The Texans are the sort of team that our draft assessment rubric was designed for. Obviously, C.J. Stroud and Will Anderson are excellent additions. Obviously, trading a first-round pick in 2024, among other assets, was a hefty price to pay for Anderson. The Texans improved their roster, but they would have had to be geniuses of self-sabotage not to, and all of the geniuses of self-sabotage are supposed to be out of the building.

The Stroud/Anderson acquisitions announce that the Texans are a football team again, not a youth ministry/performance art installation. That alone is valuable: it's a sign that the franchise is committed to DeMeco Ryans and a signal both to current players and the rest of the league to start taking the Texans seriously again.

Juice ~~Newton~~ Scruggs fills a need, though other quality centers were on the board when the Texans traded up (again) for him. Tank Dell is a fun little slotcar of a receiver, but Jalin Hyatt and Josh Downs were still on the board when the Texans traded up (yet again) for a 165-pounder. The Texans could have used the fifth- and sixth-round picks they traded away, but Nick Caserio appears to still be semi-dedicated to providing a halfway house for Derek Rivers/Christian Kirksey types on the back of the depth chart.

Ultimately, Thursday night marked the dawn of the DeMeco/Stroud/Anderson era. Those are three names worth getting behind, so we should keep our concerns about pick-value optimization under our hats. For now.

Indianapolis Colts

Improved Roster: A
Used Resources Well: A
Met Needs: A
FINAL PPA: A

I loved the Colts draft class! Does that mean Jim Irsay and I are now on the same wavelength? I have been listening to a lot of the Grateful Dead and ~~pounding down fistfuls of cannabis gummies~~ drinking a lot of herbal tea lately.

Whatever the reason, this was the sort of bold, thorough draft that the Colts have needed for years but couldn't accomplish because they kept trading draft picks for terrible quarterbacks.

Julius Brents is a high-effort, high-character, high-above-the-ground-because-he-is-tall defender. Seventh-rounder Jaylon Jones is similar to Brents though not as athletic or polished. Josh Downs and Adetomiwa Adebawore were outstanding values at their draft positions. Blake Freeland could develop into a starting left tackle. Evan Hull is another of my favorites: watch him gain an immediate role as a reliable third-down back behind Jonathan Taylor.

As for Anthony Richardson, he's the risk the Colts never wanted to take, and look where it got them. It's not hard to see a championship nucleus in this class if Richardson and some high-upside guys like Adebawore pan out. What more can a team ask for from the draft?

Jacksonville Jaguars

Improved Roster: D+
Used Resources Well: B+
Met Needs: C-
FINAL PPA: C

The Jaguars traded down twice before selecting Anton Harrison, then traded down again in the second round before choosing Brenton Strange. They accumulated a stockpile of about 83 Day 3 picks, most of which were used on players I either didn't like or did not do any real legwork on.

From a purity-of-analytics standpoint, therefore, the Jaguars did the right thing by not reaching for "their guy" and getting lots of extra rolls of the dice.

The Jaguars clearly like their secondary and interior defensive line more than I do (Antonio Johnson was a swell late addition). They liked Strange and Ventrell Miller more than I do. They may be a smidge more confident in Calvin Ridley/Christian Kirk/Zay Jones than they should be. Yeah, I am rooting for Ridley too. I haven't seen the cat since 2020, and "rooting for" is different from "analyzing" (at least, that's how I do it).

Trevor Lawrence gives Trent Baalke and Doug Pederson lots of margin for error when drafting. That doesn't mean they have to use it. But again: one or two Day 3 sleepers in the bushel could change the complexion of this class quickly.

Tennessee Titans

Improved Roster: C+
Used Resources Well: B
Met Needs: C-
FINAL PPA: C

Tyjae Spears, one of my giga-binkies, apparently doesn't have an ACL in one of his knees. That's right: he tore his ACL one too many times in the past, so that little sucker just packed its bags and noped out. That makes Spears an odd change-of-pace/insurance policy/heir apparent for Derrick Henry, but maybe Henry can protect Spears within the bubble of his Curse of 370 Cancellation spell.

Anyway, the Titans draft comes down to Will Levis. Acquiring Levis in the second round was worth the risk, the price of the second-round trade-up (a 2024 third-rounder and some late-round reshuffling) negligible for a theoretical quarterback solution. Peter Skoronski bulwarks the offensive line, and Jaelyn Duncan is an intriguing sixth-round lottery ticket at tackle.

Now, if someone can explain to me how Levis, who struggled in 2022 because of a depleted receiving corps (so the pro-Levis story goes, anyway), will develop while throwing to Treylon Burks, Nick Westbrook-Ikhine, Chris Moore, Racey McMath, Kyle Philips, Chigozeim Okonkwo, and some Day 3 randos, I will hang up and listen.

AFC West

Denver Broncos

Improved Roster: A
Used Resources Well: A+
Met Needs: C
FINAL PPA: A-

The Broncos did not draft for need. Or did they? They're loaded at wide receiver on paper, but it feels like they always have two guys on injured reserve and a third on the trading block. Their defense is always stout, but Dre'Mont Jones (who's now in Seattle) led the team with just 6.5 sacks last season, and there's always room for more talent at cornerback.

Marvin Mims should be fine as a seam-stretcher. Drew Sanders is my uberbinkie: he's an upgraded version of Baron Browning who can get after the quarterback, defend the run, and effectively drop into coverage a dozen times per game. JL Skinner is a fun 'tweener; players like Skinner end up washing out when drafted on Day 2 by bad teams but become quality role players for better defenses (who do not expect them to instantly become Tyrann Mathieu) when taken on Day 3.

As for Riley Moss: take it away, padawan...

Riley Moss is the fastest white Bronco since O.J’s car pic.twitter.com/lPBKe7GzMN

— Jarrett Bailey (@JBaileyNFL) April 29, 2023

The Broncos should not be drafting "for need" anyway. Either Russell Wilson rebounds and they reach the playoffs or he disappears further down into his own navel. The later scenario is more likely, and the Sean Payton regime spent the weekend adding fresh talent and starting to place its stamp on the roster in case a rebuild is imminent.

Kansas City Chiefs

Improved Roster: B+
Used Resources Well: B
Met Needs: B
FINAL PPA: B

Rashee Rice will either be an absolute revelation as Patrick Mahomes' new deep threat—an upgraded Marquez Valdes-Scantling, perhaps—or a small-school mirage. As a tall, one-dimensional boundary threat, Rice could not have landed in a better place, except perhaps Buffalo.

Wanya Morris will be starting at one of the tackle positions in 2024. Keondre Coburn can provide 30 space-eating snaps in the middle of the defense right away.

Felix Anudike-Uzomah is Captain Moldable Traits. BJ Thompson was a small-school pro day standout. Perennial contenders like the Chiefs must keep taking big swings like this on the edge because they are never in position to draft Will Anderson and get diminishing returns from ring-chasing rentals such as Carlos Dunlap.

It's a Super Bowl winner's draft. It's only going to be so thrilling.

Las Vegas Raiders

Improved Roster: C+
Used Resources Well: B
Met Needs: C+
FINAL PPA: B-

A solid but scattered draft class. Tyree Wilson and Michael Mayer are just peachy at the top. Mayer was an excellent value with the 35th pick and will see a lot of action immediately. Christopher Smith and Jakorian Bennett are quality upgrades in the secondary; Smith could start early, while Bennett has starting potential.

Tre Tucker charmed me at the Senior Bowl (he's quick and nifty) and the combine (he's an engaging interview). I like him as a return man and slot depth piece, but not as a third-round pick.

Aidan O'Connell is so immobile that I cannot imagine him developing into even a useful backup. The Raiders should have just grabbed more offensive line or front-seven talent instead of pretending that Josh McDaniels has any interest in a long-range quarterback solution.

Searching for rhyme or reason in a Raiders draft class has been a fool's errand since the Jon Gruden era, and really for most of the last 35 years. Enjoy the guy with the long arms, the tight end, and the feisty punt returner, and try not to think about what it all means.

Los Angeles Chargers

Improved Roster: B+
Used Resources Well: B
Met Needs: A
FINAL PPA: B+

This may have been the most by-the-books draft of the weekend. Receiver for Justin Herbert in the first round? Check. Beef up the defense on Day 2? Check. The Chargers did not even make a trade in the first three rounds. Maybe Tom Telesco was saving mental energy for the task of wringing the Herbert contract out of Dean Spanos.

Quentin Johnston is more of a Mike Williams than a Keenan Allen, but there was no Allen-type once Jaxon Smith-Njigba was gone. Derius Davis (Tank Dell without the buzz) was a strong fourth-round value.

Tuli Tuipulotu adds size, versatility, and a nasty hop-out move to the defensive front. Daiyan Henley may be old for a prospect, but he's younger than Eric Kendricks and could push the aging free-agent acquisition for a starting job.

Max Duggan can back Herbert up for three years at the league-minimum salary. In the event that Herbert suffers a minor injury, Duggan has enough big-game experience to get the Chargers through a week without suffering panic attacks.

NFC East

Dallas Cowboys

Improved Roster: B
Used Resources Well: B-
Met Needs: B
FINAL PPA: B

We enter every draft expecting the Cowboys to do loopy, splashy stuff. In most cases, they just add a collection of big/strong/fast guys, most of whom fill a need and come with a round-appropriate scouting report, perhaps with a dash of splash.

Mazi Smith is going to make Micah Parsons and Tank Lawrence better by munching about 45 double-teams per game. I also enjoyed Parsons' "no more sneaks" messaging. I don't think defenses can solve the quarterback sneak issue with manpower, but it's interesting to watch teams and players try to address the problem.

Luke Schoonmaker is a talented athlete and a sturdy blocker. He's a solid system fit for a team that probably plans to feature its receivers and use the tight end as a safety valve in the passing game, though Schoonmaker is fast enough to beat linebackers up the seam.

Yes, Deuce Vaughn's father works for the Cowboys, and he's only 5-foot-5. Vaughn's a thick little bocce ball, though, and the fact that the Cowboys pursued a Tony Pollard change-up in the sixth round instead of a Zeke Elliott surrogate in the first or second round illustrates the difference between Cowboys philosophies and Cowboys Internet memes.

The rest of the Cowboys draft class isn't all that interesting, and they didn't do any significant trading. Like the Bills, Bengals, and Chiefs (but not the Eagles), they acted like a Super Bowl contender just looking to plug holes and fine-tune the roster. But they are the Cowboys, so we always expect something more, or less, or just more COWBOYS.

New York Giants

Improved Roster: B
Used Resources Well: C+
Met Needs: B+
FINAL PPA: B+

Joe Schoen and Brian Daboll run a tidy ship. From contract negotiations to free agency to the draft board, you never look at a Giants decision over the last 16 months and ask, "WTF was that all about!" It's refreshing. It's also a little boring. Like, creating a reasonable B-tier compensation package for Daniel Jones took some subtle general management and careful balancing of risks with rewards. But it also just means Daniel Jones is your quarterback for the next two years.

Deonte Banks and John Michael Schmitz are strong prospects who solve immediate problems. Jalin Hyatt slipped, and Schoen grabbed the deep threat Kenny Golladay was supposed to be. Eric Gray is versatile enough to be a featured back during one of Saquon Barkley's absences.

Solid, by-the-book stuff. But remember: the Giants aren't as talented as the typical nine-win team. A by-the-book draft could land them back at eight wins or less. They would have benefitted from finding ways to be more active on Day 3. Or maybe they could have really hammered on one unit (receiver, secondary) like the Commanders did. This was a solid effort, not a special one. Schoen may need to break out the "special" to get the Giants ahead, because Jones will never be Josh Allen.

Philadelphia Eagles

Improved Roster: Brrt.
Used Resources Well: Brrrrt.
Met Needs: Brrrrrrrrrrt.
FINAL PPA: BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRT.

I led my New York Times draft summary with the Eagles and do not want to repeat myself or belabor any common talking points.

The worst thing that can be said about the Eagles draft is that Jalen Carter might become a character-issue bust, Nolan Smith may just be a workout warrior, Kelee Ringo might have fallen to the fourth round for a reason, D'Andre Swift could be just a non-factor with a recognizable name, and the whole Georgia meme merely a sign of Howie Roseman getting too cutesy-poo. Indeed, Jordan Davis and Nakobe Dean did not do much last year.

Fine, the worst-case scenario is possible, maybe a little plausible. But the Eagles did exactly what a Super Bowl contender should do in the draft: they aggressively pursued maximum-upside talent, because the "safe" picks likely to fall to them in most spots are unlikely to be talented enough to make a difference.

Also, Eagles fans are going to love Sydney Brown, and I wish the Eagles had drafted Chase Brown too.

Washington Commanders

Improved Roster: B+
Used Resources Well: B-
Met Needs: C-
FINAL PPA: C

Emmanuel Forbes and Jartavius Martin are good, though the Commanders could easily have had a more talented cornerback tandem in those same slots.

The overall Commanders draft strategy, on the other hand, was bad. That's not just a quarterback thing: Chase Young's option was not picked up, which means every edge rusher on the roster becomes a free agent next year, yet the Commanders waited until the fifth round to address that position.

I also don't get Chris Rodriguez, who essentially duplicates Brian Robinson as a thumper but is slow-footed and has a DUI arrest on his record. It's a quibble, but it speaks to the Commanders' aimless roster construction.

The Commanders don't really have a plan right now. That's understandable during an ownership change, but it's hardly optimal.

NFC North

Chicago Bears

Improved Roster: A+
Used Resources Well: A+
Met Needs: A-
FINAL PPA: A

Eight picks before the fifth round? Love it. An extra trade down in the first round? Elegant. Darnell Wright? One of my favorite prospects. Gervon Dexter and Thicch Zacch Pickens adding a zillion pounds of gristle to the defensive line? On brand. Tyler Scott (fast, great at fetching bad balls), Noah Sewell (too chonk for his own good, but with upside as a Sam/situational edge), and Terrell Smith (potential starting cornerback) on Day 3? Outstanding resource husbandry.

DJ Moore? An extra first-round pick next year? Five stars. No notes.

Detroit Lions

Improved Roster: A+
Used Resources Well: B-
Met Needs: B+
FINAL PPA: A-

You will likely read many deep-dive treatises into the Lions draft this week from evangelical analytics navel-gazers, Dan Campbell apologists, Lions-for-Super-Bowl early adopters, Hendon Hooker stans, and gambling/fantasy experts who think Jahmyr Gibbs +900 for Offensive Rookie of the Year looks tasty (it does). I tried to sum the Lions draft experience up succinctly in The New York Times, and I have neither the time nor patience to bloat the wordcount of this piece.

Overall, the Lions had a very good weekend. But they also could have added Christian Gonzalez, Lukas Van Ness, or Jaxon Smith-Ngiba instead of Gibbs, then added some running back later in the draft, kept D'Andre Swift, or perhaps grabbed Austin Ekeler for a Day 3 pick if they really felt they needed a receiver out of the backfield.

Had they selected one of those other players, the Lions would have had an objectively better weekend, and any stealth-contender talk would have been a little more serious.

Green Bay Packers

Improved Roster: B
Used Resources Well: C+
Met Needs: C+
FINAL PPA: C+

The first and last initials of all the skill position players the Packers drafted spell out the words "F*ck You, Rodgers."

OK, not really. But there were still some reaches among the team's post-Rodgers celebration bouquet.

I am not a big Luke Musgrave fan; he strikes me as a future airport All-Star who is always hurt and never blocks well enough to be a quality starter. Tucker Kraft could end up starting instead, which is fine, except the Packers should have grabbed a cornerback or a wide receiver (or a linebacker, or something) with the 42nd pick. Unless the goal was just to deny the Jets Musgrave.

Jayden Reed also felt a bit high. If you are passing on Jalin Hyatt or Josh Downs because they weigh 177 pounds, then don't draft a receiver who weighs exactly 180 pounds. Dontayvian Wicks dropped 15 passes in the last two years and was not targeted that much. There's also a small-school running back and a kicker lurking at the bottom of the board.

That said, Lukas Van Ness and Karl Brooks give up some strong Preston Smith and Rashan Gary vibes, Kraft is interesting, and the sheer size of this draft class (13 players) will be useful for a team at the dawn of a not-so-soft reboot.

Minnesota Vikings

Improved Roster: C
Used Resources Well: C
Met Needs: C-
FINAL PPA: C-

Some readers may think I go into around-the-league features like these looking for ways to troll Vikings fans. I do not. The Vikings keep forcing my hand.

Here are some of the notes I wrote in mid-February about DeWayne McBride: "Five career receptions is a glowing red flag, and McBride put up pinball numbers against opponents such as Georgia Southern (223 yards, four touchdowns) and Liberty (177, one). So we're looking at a midmajor workhorse with no receiving value: not exactly a great value in a deep running back class. Five fumbles (four lost) in 2022 are another cause for concern."

And here are some of my Jaren Hall notes: "Hall has a C+ NFL arm. ... Hall's passes often sail high, sometimes in traffic over the middle. He has good touch but below-average velocity in the 10- to 20-yard range, and defenders can jump his softer stuff. … There was lots of pro-Hall buzz entering the Senior Bowl, but he laid an egg during practice week. It was one of the worst weeks of practice I have seen by a quarterback in Mobile since Kellen Moore."

Jordan Addison is fine, but I did not have Mekhi Blackmon among my top 20 cornerbacks, and it does not appear that many other analysts did.

So what am I supposed to do here? The Vikings need youth and speed everywhere, probably should have saturation-drafted their secondary, and would have benefitted from expanding the depth chart at edge, on the offensive line, and at linebacker. Instead, they drafted Kellen Mond 2.0 and a fumble-prone running back. This is how they stay the Vikings.

Central tendency is about to hit this poor franchise like a freight train.

NFC South

Atlanta Falcons

Improved Roster: B-
Used Resources Well: C-
Met Needs: C
FINAL PPA: C

Bijan Robinson transforms the Falcons from a nine-win team into an SEO-friendly nine-win team. The Falcons had absolutely zero business drafting a running back in the first round. None.

There's something unforgivably mid about the Arthur Smith Falcons' ambitions and taste in draft picks (and free agents in most cases). Clark Phillips was an excellent value, but Mathew Bergeron and Zach Harrison are low-upside prospects, and the same can be said about a huge chunk of the non-Jessie Bates members of the Falcons' free-agent shopping cart. Smith is definitely the guy who orders the chicken parm at the four-star Italian bistro.

The Falcons are burning money and resources to win the NFC South and only the NFC South. They're like the Saints without the financial-tightrope-walking flair. And at least the Saints really know what they have at quarterback.

Carolina Panthers

Improved Roster: C+
Used Resources Well: C+
Met Needs: A
FINAL PPA: B-

Quarterback was the need. Bryce Young filled it. Trading up for Young weakened both the roster (DJ Moore is a huge loss) and the Panthers' spending power in the draft.

Jonathan Mingo joins DJ Chark and Adam Thielen in a too slow/too injured/too old receiver corps, which could hamper Young's early career development. Mingo would have fit better on a team that needed a hard-blocking trips-formation receiver and third-and-6 guy, not one that might need someone to soak up a dozen targets per game by October.

I like adding Chandler Zavala to Ickey Ekwonu, potentially creating an all-Wolfpack offensive line, and both DJ Johnson and Jammie Robinson are interesting defensive pieces, but the Panthers could have used some late-round picks to churn the depth chart.

Don't be surprised—or too concerned—if Bryce Young has a Trevor Lawrence rookie year.

New Orleans Saints

Improved Roster: C+
Used Resources Well: C+
Met Needs: C
FINAL PPA: C+

Bryan Bresee has All-Pro upside but dealt with family and personal medical issues in college. Isaiah Foskey is big and toolsy; he could fill the Marcus Davenport role of "edge rusher everyone keeps waiting to break out."

A.T. Perry is tall and crafty, but he's 23 years old and slow-footed off the line. Kendre Miller is an upright runner with limited receiving value.

Jake Haener? He's a pepperpot, and I could see him as a cheap finish-the-game backup for Jalen Hurts or Patrick Mahomes. He'll be stuck on the third string in New Orleans, because Jameis Winston is backing up Derek Carr. The Saints must keep Winston because they agreed to restructure his contract to save cap space. The Saints have this weird need to burn midround picks on quarterback prospects such as Ian Book and Garrett Grayson who just don't have the tools to do more than soak up preseason snaps.

Don't read too much into the Saints' grades. Thinking about the way they have done business since Drew Brees' retirement just makes my head hurt, and I don't think even they really know what their plan is.

Tampa Bay Buccaneers

Improved Roster: B+
Used Resources Well: B
Met Needs: C
FINAL PPA: B

As promised/threatened, the Buccaneers did nothing at quarterback. This is Kyle Trask and Baker Mayfield's team to crash into the Shoals of Tankeria now, for better or worse.

Calijah Kancey and YaYa Diaby are athletic tough-guys who can help with the soft reboot on defense. Cody Mauch fills Jason Licht's never-satiated craving for gap-toothed small-program offensive linemen. I love Payne Durham as a block-first tight end with a little juice and Trey Palmer as a fast-fast-fast receiver/returner who can bounce right up after he takes a licking.

The "C" grade for "met needs" may be harsh; the Bucs have needs that they could not have possibly met on draft weekend. But they could have done something inspired like trade out of the first round (an extra first-rounder in 2024 could help them achieve their goals), stockpile more picks, liberate Mike Evans, etc.

Hmm, then maybe they should be dinged for "Used Resources Well." Whatever. Enjoy the concert by the Mayfield Trask Blues Band.

NFC West

Arizona Cardinals

Improved Roster: B-
Used Resources Well: A+
Met Needs: B-
FINAL PPA: B

To everything there is a season. A time to trade up. A time to trade down. A time to rebuild. A time to win now. A time to draft the best player available. A time to wait and add picks for next year.

The Cardinals added a 2024 first-round pick and two third-rounders through various trades this weekend, and I love it. The roster is in disarray, and so is the front office: my guess is that general manager Monti Ossenfort needs to restructure some things before he can really trust his personnel department's decision-making. The Cardinals need a fallow-field year more than they needed someone like Will Anderson to notch 10 sacks for a six-win team.

That said, Paris Johnson and BJ Ojulari are fine picks, but the Cardinals needed more mid-round offensive line reinforcements than just Jon Gaines. Owen Pappoe is the last thing the Cardinals need: another pumped-up safety with great workout numbers and mediocre instincts trying to play linebacker.

Clayton Tune does not have fifth-round talent; Jeff Driskel or David Blough could easily beat him in training camp, especially if the Cardinals need a September starter due to Kyler Murray's injury. Michael Wilson hasn't looked like a third-round value since 2019, and if DeAndre Hopkins is staying put, the Cardinals didn't need to invest at receiver.

Every draft grade is actually "to be determined in a few years." The Cardinals' true draft grade is "check back and see whom they select in 2024."

Los Angeles Rams

Improved Roster: C
Used Resources Well: C+
Met Needs: C-
FINAL PPA: C

The problem with Stetson Bennett is that he lacks starting-quarterback upside but possesses the illusion of starting-quarterback upside.

Fans will clamor for Bennett the first time Matthew Stafford has one of his turnover sprees. Sean McVay is highly capable of outsmarting himself into thinking he can win with Bennett after the rookie "leads" the Rams to a 19-13 victory over the Cardinals. Next thing you know, the Rams are wasting a season on a pint-sized spray-shooting AJ McCarron type.

Bennett would have made a fine backup for someone such as Joe Burrow or Justin Herbert: his best attribute is that the spotlight won't bother him if he's thrown into a big game, and a contender could then shop him to some patsy if he delivers some "clutch" relief wins instead of being the patsies themselves.

Anyway, Steve Avila and Byron Young are very good players, Kobie Turner a bootleg knockoff weak-tea store-brand Aaron Donald (Turner's fine, but the Rams look like they are trying a little too hard to catch lightning in the bottle by drafting him), and trading down twice in the third round for extra late-round capital (some of which went into Bennett, some into fundersized edge rusher Nick Hampton) was a graceful little move. Puka Nacua could be a useful receiver, and it was fun to watch the Rams get bored at the end and just keep drafting guys named "Evans."

The Rams could have gotten Hendon Hooker—or Will Levis if they liked him—with little trouble instead of adding a guard, a B-tier edge, and a wishful-thinking heir apparent to a Hall of Famer. Maybe it won't matter. Maybe it's the only thing that would have mattered.

San Francisco 49ers

Improved Roster: D
Used Resources Well: B-
Met Needs: C-
FINAL PPA: D+

I don't understand most of what the 49ers did, and I don't really care to.

Drafting a kicker was, well, the kicker. Yes, I know Robbie Gould is gone. If the 49ers had first- or second-round picks, I might have overlooked a third-round kicker. But the 49ers needed to get all the bang they could from their three bucks worth of Day 2 draft capital.

Ji'Ayir Brown was a fine choice. Cameron Latu makes some sense as a system fit. Jake Moody should have been depth at receiver or on the interior offensive line, two units the 49ers didn't bother addressing, even with all of their Day 3 picks.

The 49ers keep succeeding despite weird drafts because of a high home run rate, Kyle Shanahan's clever game-planning, and a string of inspired defensive coordinators. But it's frustrating to watch them almost purposely make things harder on themselves.

Seattle Seahawks

Improved Roster: A+
Used Resources Well: B
Met Needs: B+
FINAL PPA: A-

Let's leave Pete Carroll alone so he can enjoy his running backs. Yes, the Seahawks draft one too early every darn year. And guess what? They end up needing them all, because running backs get hurt a lot.

How many times have the Seahawks started the season stacked at running back but then been forced to pull P.J. Piscataway off the practice squad or lure Abe Vigoda Peterson out of retirement? Both Zach Charbonnet and Kenny McIntosh are going to contribute this year. McIntosh would probably have been sufficient behind Kenny Walker, but whatever.

Let's concentrate instead on Devon Witherspoon, who will get the Seahawks back on brand; Jaxon Smith-Njigba, the best WR3 the Seahawks have employed since their Super Bowl era (and a future go-to guy); Derick Hall, a thumping edge; Mike Morris, a run-stopping rotational defensive end with upside; and a pair of useful interior offensive line pieces. And the Seahawks can be forgiven for not fly-fishing for a maybe-kinda-sorta quarterback-of-the-future late in the draft to cloud the Geno Smith picture this year.

The Seahawks may not have perfectly optimized their draft board. But they didn't revert to their late-2010s Bonkersville drafts, either. And right now, the Seahawks have the best roster in their division. Sorry, 49ers fans!

#1 by theslothook // May 01, 2023 - 10:02am

I don't watch college football, so I can't use that as background primer for any of these draft picks.

However, listening to what the pundits have been saying about Anthony Richardson, I have real concerns. He has very limited experience as a starter and his on the field performance was at best characterized as "uneven". At worst, he was described as having no feel for the passing game and the ball just sprayed everywhere. Hmmm....ok :/

But then you hear he's an athletic beast who destroyed the combine. I am more worried now that Richardson was drafted because he looks the part and past QBs with similar accuracy concerns happened to work out so this time will too plus you get all of that juicy upside. And of course, since Steichen was there with Herbert and Hurts, there's some confidence he can work his magic with Richardson in the same ways. If that were true, then Steichen is a more valuable coach than Andy Reid or Bill Belichick.

I am not a fan. I really really wished the Texans had done something loopy and CJ Stroud had fallen to the Colts. I was tantalized by that. Failing that, I knew the Colts needed a qb but being at pick 4 meant one of these remaining guys was going to get over drafted. It's a reminder of why pick 4 is a far worse draft position than pick 1 or 2 despite being only a few picks away.

#18 by Lebo // May 01, 2023 - 2:51pm

I would recommend reading Matt Waldman's profile of Anthony Richardson. Waldman is very positive about aspects of Richardson's game that aren't based on purely physical ability. He actually likes Richardson more than he did Trevor Lawrence when Lawrence was drafted.

#25 by theslothook // May 01, 2023 - 4:06pm

I read it. Curiously, his position asserts essentially the opposite of what the standard punditry has been saying. I guess I would need to watch Florida's film to somehow square these diametrically opposing views.

#123 by DoubleB // May 03, 2023 - 1:11pm

I'll only add this. I saw a lot of Brock Purdy in college and he a) single-handedly lost ISU a Big 12 Championship in 2020 and was b) nearly benched at the beginning of 2021. Matt Campbell is a good football coach (ISU's head guy), but there is some ELITE NFL coaching that can bring the best out in players. It certainly helps to have great talent around him (although he had a fair amount of that at Iowa State).

I have zero idea if Anthony Richardson will be a good NFL QB. The floor feels incredibly low. But his superior physical skills can probably still be developed with the right coaching and support despite his underwhelming college career.

#140 by Pen // May 04, 2023 - 4:54pm

the kid's only 20. They've essentially drafted a sophomore out of college. Most pundits look at raw stats or lack thereof and compare. You can't do that with a kid who is just 20. Compare him to Stroud and Bryce when they were 20 maybe. But there's no sample size. His completion percentage isn't low when compared to most 20 yr. olds.

AR was drafted based on pure athletic freakishness. Whether he will develop into a starting quality QB is unknown.

Personally, I think he needed to go to a team that had time to let him sit on the bench a couple of years. Throwing him to the NFL wolves at that young age is only going to shell shock him.

#51 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 02, 2023 - 9:53am

Richardson could be really, really good.

The thing is, his floor is also potentially lower than George Plimpton's.

#2 by johonny12 // May 01, 2023 - 10:05am

I like Miami's draft. I just wish they had that number 1 pick. The team still feels light on TEs and could use a G. Post draft free agency here we come.

#3 by Romodini // May 01, 2023 - 11:35am

Dallas's decision to forgo drafting an offensive lineman until the fifth round is worrisome. When Tyron Smith gets his annual injury, who takes over? Josh Ball? Chuma Edoga? Asim Richards? A wish, a prayer, and a fifth round pick are not enough to address a line that gets abused by the 49ers every year in the playoffs, and one that has to deal with the Eagles twice a year.

#4 by actuarillysound // May 01, 2023 - 11:46am

You're really criticizing the Vikings for their 7TH ROUND RB pick? Or their 5TH ROUND QB? The odds of any pick in that round doing anything are slim. Addison fills the needs as well as their many selections at CB (which fine, Mekhi wasn't anyone's top pick, give you that). Seems like typical analysis of "team has no draft capital, so they are punished." Vikings were a top five team in % of capital used at premium positions. They did about as good as I could expect, definitely not poor.

#5 by actuarillysound // May 01, 2023 - 11:46am

#7 by Will Allen // May 01, 2023 - 11:50am

Being critical of 6th or 7th round draft picks is kind of peak off- season NFL journo silliness. Hey, content is needed!

#11 by ImNewAroundThe… // May 01, 2023 - 12:46pm

I mean, I guess with that way of thinking all...5th+ rounders aren't worth commenting on?

#14 by Will Allen // May 01, 2023 - 1:01pm

Sure, as long as it is leavened with a good dose of intellectually honest recognition that such decisions are in good measure wild-assed guessing.

#15 by stevenemacks // May 01, 2023 - 2:04pm

"I promise I'm not trolling Vikings fans, so I'm going to be especially critical of their 7th round draft selection."

I mean.... Maybe he just doesn't see it....

#16 by stevenemacks // May 01, 2023 - 2:10pm

Additionally, I think this pick was 100% about inconsistently converting short yardage via the run with little intention of doing much more with McBride than that for a while

#26 by actuarillysound // May 01, 2023 - 4:16pm

lol How can he not? Ridiculous.

#52 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 02, 2023 - 10:01am

It's not like he was getting paid to write it.

#6 by Will Allen // May 01, 2023 - 11:47am

Since the Wilfs bought the Vikings after the 2005 season, with a roster that was somewhat depleted by cheapskate former ownership, the franchise has had the 12th best winning percentage in the league, 2 conference championship appearances, 5 division titles, 2 more playoff appearances. This happened in a division where they frequently have had the 3rd or 4th best qb, and qb quality is hugely affected by random chance.

That's not a world-beating outcome, of course, but it's not bad. Mike has some odd cognitive blindspots.

(edit) To put it in further perspective, 8 more wins since the current Vikings ownership took control after the 2005 season, would have put the Vikings in the top 10 in winning percentage in that span, and ahead of the Eagles. When a about a half win a season seperates what is thought to be competent and incompetent performance, you're not thinking about this very usefully.

#10 by theslothook // May 01, 2023 - 12:36pm

This is why I have said, if you plot the utility(or euphoria) curve by wins in a season; its largely flat until you get this sugar induced surge at the end of the SB(but only if you win). And then people wonder why so many fans advocate for tanking. If going 2-14 is effectively no different than going 12-4 but not winning the Sb, then sure...sign up for the tank job and watch cut ups of Bryce Young and CJ Stroud instead of anyone on an NFL roster. Mike's btw not particularly consistent on this - effectively lambasting tankers while apparently relegating "success" to an extremely narrow definition.

For those who think this way; I would submit they have not been fans of teams with prolonged losing streaks. This past season for the Colts was a case study in fan drudgery - watching an aimless team with 0 interesting prospects for the future suck and be terrible in the same crappy way for 17 weeks. They did get to upset the Chiefs, one nice moment in an otherwise coma inducing season.

#13 by Will Allen // May 01, 2023 - 12:58pm

Being paid to offer entertaining opinions is not a job that promotes reasonable, context-rich, perspective. Which is in good measure, why, in addition to the prevalence of digital communication, the opposite dominates discourse in so much of our society. No matter if the topic at hand is of vital importance, or of fairly trivial significance.

#53 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 02, 2023 - 10:03am

Being paid to offer entertaining opinions is not a job that promotes reasonable, context-rich, perspective.

Which is why I so badly miss Terry Pratchett.

#60 by Mike B. In Va // May 02, 2023 - 10:21am

Or not being paid, in some cases.

#21 by guest from Europe // May 01, 2023 - 3:34pm

To put it in further perspective, 8 more wins since the current Vikings ownership took control after the 2005 season, would have put the Vikings in the top 10 in winning percentage in that span, and ahead of the Eagles. When a about a half win a season seperates what is thought to be competent and incompetent performance, you're not thinking about this very usefully.

Apparently the majority of people prefer a good team with a higher variance such as the Eagles or Seahawks to a more consistent team that doesn't reach the Super Bowl such as the Cowboys or Vikings (21st century).

There are already voices saying that the Patriots aren't good anymore, they are just competent, it was all Brady, Billy B isn't that great and so on.

#27 by Will Allen // May 01, 2023 - 4:31pm

Of course, people can prefer whatever they want. As a matter of observable reality, however, it just doesn't make much sense to imply that a team like the Vikings has been poor, or even not above average, in managing personnel in recent history. Once you get to a sample size approaching a couple hundred games, the wins are the wins, especially when the team has used about 8 or 9 qbs.

#29 by guest from Europe // May 01, 2023 - 4:46pm

I think Tanier writes for the crowds. There are a lot of jokes and pop references in his articles. In that sense he repeats some tropes about several teams such as the Vikings, Texans, Cowboys...

#31 by Will Allen // May 01, 2023 - 5:09pm

In looking at winning % from 2006 on, I was surprised at how high the Cowboys ranked, and I'm sure that surprise was rooted in my cognitive blind spot regarding the owner. I didn't fully incorporate into my priors that the owner's son has done a good job, for more than a decade now, of putting a brake on the owner's worst impulses. It really is a shame that the son didn't have his head turned, when dad was struck by the impulse to draft Johnny Manziel!

#39 by guest from Europe // May 02, 2023 - 2:12am

Without looking at any data i would say that the Cowboys have been the most consistent good team in the NFC in the 21st century. It's between them and the Packers. All these good years and they always find new and highly entertaining ways to lose playoff games all the way back since the Romo fumble on the field goal try. They are climbing really high on those Knowles' dynasty of heartbreak rankings.

#72 by LyleNM // May 02, 2023 - 11:18am

Also Seahawks.

#99 by Vincent Verhei // May 02, 2023 - 3:07pm

Here's one way to look at the data -- most 10-win regular seasons, 2000-2022:

AFC

NE: 19
IND: 15
BAL: 13
PIT: 13
KC: 12
CIN: 8
DEN: 8
TEN: 7
MIA: 6
LAC: 6
NYJ: 5
LV: 5
BUF: 4
HOU: 4
JAX: 3
CLE: 2

NFC

GB: 15
PHI: 12
SEA: 11
NO: 10
SF: 8
DAL: 8
MIN: 8
ATL: 7
NYG: 7
LAR: 7
CAR: 6
TB: 6
CHI: 6
ARI: 5
WAS: 2
DET: 2

(I love that the Texans have more good seasons than the Jaguars, Browns, Commanders, or Lions despite not even existing until 2002.)

#101 by guest from Europe // May 02, 2023 - 4:01pm

Thanks for the info. I was wrong about the Cowboys: they were not as good as Eagles and Seahawks. Maybe i thought they were better during Romo-years than they were.

#105 by Romodini // May 02, 2023 - 6:29pm

The Cowboys are also the only team in that timeframe with at least 7 or more 10 win seasons not to have reached a conference championship game, so they've had pretty terrible playoff luck.

#106 by Will Allen // May 02, 2023 - 7:46pm

Given the number of really excellent qb seasons the Ravens have had in that time frame, that's a phenomenal performance. Ozzie is the man.

#113 by guest from Europe // May 03, 2023 - 2:14am

They have had only 1 such a season, 2019. Otherwise from bad (Boller) to above average in other Jackson's seasons and some of Flacco's.

On that list teams without many excellent QB seasons: Reid's teams with McNabb and A. Smith and Steelers in 00's. Those were mostly above average QB play. Also 49ers with all their QBs and Seahawks. R. Wilson had a few excellent seasons (2019 and 2015). In 2012 and 2013 he was 8th and 9th in DYAR. Hasselbeck had 3 top-6 seasons (2002, 2003, 2005).

It can be done without a MVP-contention level of QB play.

#117 by Raiderfan // May 03, 2023 - 11:38am

Whoosh! That was his point, and why he was complimenting the GM.

#120 by guest from Europe // May 03, 2023 - 12:09pm

Yes, and i agree. I didn't make any counter to what Will Allen wrote. His sentence induced me to write about other similar teams without MVPs or HOF QBs because a lot of people claim that for long term success such a QB is a necessity.

I think the Ravens and Steelers are the best at this overall team management.

#118 by Raiderfan // May 03, 2023 - 11:40am

You left off the other TB, with 19, and the PM with 14.

#122 by spybloom // May 03, 2023 - 1:10pm

I've been toying with a ranking system for judging teams by decade, based on win-loss, playoff success, and team quality. If you take the average of the 2000s and 2010s ranks (not a perfect measure, but works all right for this), you get

Packers
Eagles
Seahawks
Saints
Vikings
Cowboys (tied with the Falcons(!))

Looking at the combined data makes Cowboys-Vikings basically a coin flip, although Vikings have done better in the playoffs. The other four teams are pretty solidly ahead, though.

#130 by guest from Europe // May 04, 2023 - 1:12am

I wish you wrote this a few days ago. Maybe more people would discuss.

Eagles were very good under Reid, and Falcons were good in most of Ryan-years.

based on win-loss, playoff success, and team quality.

What is team quality here? Something like DVOA ordinal ranking?

#135 by spybloom // May 04, 2023 - 11:13am

This is very much in the "kill some time at work" phase, so the team quality isn't really scientific. It consists of total points for/against, average off/def Points rank, average SRS, number of pro bowlers/all-pros/MVPs, and number of coaches/distinct leading passers (to try to account for some semblance of year-over-year consistency). It's all subjective in how the numbers add up for which team is better, but part of the project is to try and gauge what public perception of the teams were at the time. Also, again: early stages, killing time

I've only done the past couple decades since I'm able to judge those against my memory and adjust accordingly, but I'm interested to see what'll happen as I keep going back in time.

#138 by guest from Europe // May 04, 2023 - 4:25pm

Good luck with the project!

If i may suggest, awards such as All Pro and MVP are subjective and granular. Maybe it's good not to put too much weight to those. For example Brees was always in the MVP-contention but never got the award. That doesn't make him a lesser player. Or some WR who finished 4th for All Pro voting. Top 3 WRs are recognized, the fourth one was also good, but didn't get that accolade...

Maybe decades are too long time spans. A core of some team usually lasts less: Legion of Boom Seahawks 2012-2016, J.J. Watt and Hopkins on Texans etc. Maybe you should compare teams like that, depending on how long did the main unit of the team last.

#36 by bravehoptoad // May 01, 2023 - 9:07pm

But also he writes for the nerds. There are plenty of D&D and Tudor Games references, too.

#143 by LionInAZ // May 05, 2023 - 1:01am

Writing for the crowds is what they do at sites like ESPN and Bleacher Report.

#54 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 02, 2023 - 10:04am

An entire generation was raised on the Pats never losing more than 4 games. They are more spoiled than Yankees fans.

\consider Bayern Munich or Real Madrid fans

#97 by SandyRiver // May 02, 2023 - 2:53pm

21st century Pats fans, maybe. We graybeards who lived thru the Victor Kiam/Rod Rust era and other such comedies know well that history could repeat.

#103 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 02, 2023 - 4:32pm

The Pats briefly sucked during the Tecmo Bowl era, but even your fallow period involved two SB appearances. You basically sucked from 1967-1975, and 1989-1993.

There are some AARP members who recall you sucking when they were in elementary school.

#116 by SandyRiver // May 03, 2023 - 11:31am

Even when the pre-Brady/Belichick Pats were good, they usually face-planted at critical moments, getting blasted 51-10 by the Chargers in the 1963 AFL championship and IMO suffering the worst beat-down in SB history. Advanced stats say otherwise, but I consider the Pats the most totally outclassed of any SB team when they played the Bears. Payton puts the ball on the ground on the 1st play from scrimmage, Eason throws 3 incompletes then a FG. Next time they sniffed a score was mid-4th down 44-3. Eason's "performance", 0-for-6 plus 3 sacks (one strip sack), has to be the worst QB play in any Super Bowl.

#121 by DoubleB // May 03, 2023 - 12:48pm

Craig Morton, Super Bowl XII--4 of 15, 39 yards, 4 picks.

And a shoutout to the entire Dolphins of Super Bowl XVII, 4 of 17, 95 yards, 1 TD, 1 pick. The completions were 3 hitches and a long hitch and go for an 80 yard TD.

#125 by SandyRiver // May 03, 2023 - 2:08pm

More quantity of awfulness, that's true, though it may be due to Eason getting yanked late in the 2nd Q. But his net gain of about -30 yards is outstanding - at the bottom.

#129 by DoubleB // May 03, 2023 - 5:56pm

Eason might be the only guy who looked legitimately scared playing in the Super Bowl, but you can at least argue he somewhat protected the ball. Morton threw one good ball to Haven Moses and then might as well have been playing FOR the Cowboys.

Dallas didn't play well in that game either and if Morton had just protected the ball, Denver might have been able to sneak out an ugly Super Bowl V type of win.

#108 by LionInAZ // May 02, 2023 - 10:43pm

Just to play devil's advocate... how have the Vikings done since they broke the bank for Kirk Cousins? Or since the most recent GM has been hired? It says much when your best record came from one of the worst teams. Sort of like that one that got blown out by the Giants 23 years ago.

I think Tanier's criticism is a tendency toward mediocrity in player drafting. Strangely enough, that was a view expressed by a colleague at the University of Minnesota when I was a postdoc there. The state wanted to be good, but not too good. 1

#112 by Will Allen // May 02, 2023 - 11:24pm

The most recent GM is a 17 game sample. Since the last GM signed Cousins, they have gone 46-35-1, so basically 9-7.

I could only assume Mike's description of Vikings performance was referring to the era under the current owners, because otherwise he's either referring to a 1 year sample, which is kind of dumb, or he's writing as if the last GM and the current GM are a single entity, which is even more dumb. If he's going back 62 years, and 3 ownership groups, for some unfathomable reason, the Vikings have, iirc, about the 6th best winning % in the league. So I think the most charitable interpretation is that he's referring to Vikings performance since the current owners were hiring GMs and coaches. As a matter of observable reality, it's simply an error to describe the team's performance as bad or poor, or even not above average, and I say that as somebody who wouldn't be the least surprised if they only won 4 or 5 games this season.

I don't care if they win or lose like I did 30, or even 10 years ago. In the last few years, I have noticed how journalists on all beats are prone to some pretty obvious cognitive blindspots, and it results in some pretty sloppy work. Hell, it's made me much more sensitive to my own cognitive blindspots, and I've tried to compensate. I suspect it's no worse now than it ever was, and the means of dissemination combined with the ease of fact checking just makes the phenomena more readily recognizable. This beat is just entertainment, so I've probably written way too much on the topic already.

#144 by LionInAZ // May 05, 2023 - 1:08am

A very lawyerly response, which I expected.

#8 by IlluminatusUIUC // May 01, 2023 - 11:59am

The Bengals and Chiefs didn't do much wheeling and dealing either. But they are the teams the Bills are trying to catch. That means the Bills should have been willing to take some extra risks and bigger swings.

The Bills made swings last year and then everyone got hurt and we got outschemed. It wasn't really feasible to make a huge splash this year with Von Miller's megadeal still on the books and all the "cheap" vets we signed and picks we hit in 2017/18 now starting new contracts. Just have to hope the vets stay healthy and the young and cheap players we've got now (Cook, Elam, Rousseau, etc) make the leap.

#19 by guest from Europe // May 01, 2023 - 3:02pm

The Bills were No. 1 in DVOA ratings by a considerable margin. How are they trying to catch the Bengals?! This is some playoff-winz writing. Was every team trying to catch the Rams and Bengals last year?

#30 by IlluminatusUIUC // May 01, 2023 - 4:47pm

How are they trying to catch the Bengals?!

The Bengals blew our doors off at home and have made it farther than us in each of the last two seasons, I think it's a fair claim

#40 by guest from Europe // May 02, 2023 - 2:24am

This is one playoff game, not the 2022 season. Disclaimer: I was rooting hard for the Bengals in that game beause they got royally screwed at the end of the season by the league and playoff home field potentially decided by coin tosses, playing on a neutral field... all that mess. I was rooting for Bengals vs. Chiefs for the same reason.

To those who forgot DVOA season ratings are Bills 35% and Bengals 18%. Bengals were as close to the Bills as they were to the Jets and Steelers. Bengals were improving at the end, higher weighted DVOA etc. but the whole season counts.

If you go by the playoff exits, someone might claim that the Jaguars and Giants were as good as the Bills. All lost convincigly in divisional games.

About 2021 Bills season, do i have to remind what happened in the Chiefs-Bills playoff game?! That later there were complaints about overtime rules, coin tosses and so on.

#47 by Chuckc // May 02, 2023 - 9:43am

The objective of the season is to win playoff games. The Bengals have been much more successful in that regard in the last 2 years.

#70 by guest from Europe // May 02, 2023 - 11:02am

A playoff game is very important. Nevertheless, it's only one game. In 2022 season the Chiefs lost a single game to the Colts and barely beat the Texans. That doesn't mean that the Colts are better than Chiefs. Stuff can happen in any one game.

Playoffs are made of single-elimination games. That's how you get 2007 Giants and 2005 Steelers as champs or Flacco and Foles as MVPs.

It's argued in the article that the Bills' roster isn't good enough, that they should have added someone to be as good as Bengals. In other words, Tanier could have filled out that DVOA-article form: is clearly ranked because and written: DVOA is clearly wrong about Bills and Bengals because playoff wins.

By that argument teams should have tried to get Foles after he fulfilled the objective of 2017 season.

If the Bengals vs Bills were as closely matched in full season ratings as the Chiefs vs Eagles, i wouldn't have written anything. 1 or 2 % isn't much. However, there was a large DVOA gap between Bills and Bengals and definitely not in favour of Bengals. If Jackson didn't get injured, probably Ravens finish ahead of the Bengals in AFC North. These were their ratings prior to the Jackson injury, Ravens ahead of Bengals:

https://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/nfl/historical-lookup-by-week/2022/13/overall

#75 by IlluminatusUIUC // May 02, 2023 - 11:31am

A playoff game is very important. Nevertheless, it's only one game. In 2022 season the Chiefs lost a single game to the Colts and barely beat the Texans. That doesn't mean that the Colts are better than Chiefs. Stuff can happen in any one game.

Right, but Buffalo is past the "We're just happy to be here" stage of competence (that's where we were in 2019 and 20, basically where Jax was this year and Cincy was in 21) and into the "We're contenders and it's time to finally get some hardware." Cincy had some real issues last year and probably wouldn't have made it out of the wild card round if Huntley doesn't try to go over the pile from the 2 yard line, but the fact remains that they had an answer when it counted and for multiple years Buffalo has not.

I'm happy that the team moved on from Frazier, I think he was responsible for some of the stability in the regular season, but it calcified into predictibility in the playoffs.

#61 by Mike B. In Va // May 02, 2023 - 10:24am

It's established that Mike's columns only tangentially touch on what DVOA actually shows. Plus, the biggest things the Bills did towards "catching" the other teams were not in the draft. So as a draft-only article, I was fine with it until we got to Hopkins commentary.

#77 by Hoodie_Sleeves // May 02, 2023 - 11:33am

Tanier is a hack, and his presence at this site hugely undermines the mission of this site. Half the shit he says is the more modern equivalent of "you need to establish the run"

#107 by hoegher // May 02, 2023 - 8:03pm

Tell us how you really feel, dang.

#109 by LionInAZ // May 02, 2023 - 10:50pm

Yeah, of course that's why he slams teams that take a RB in the first round.

The overwhelming presence of uncritical Patriots apologists in the comments section undermines the value of the site.

#126 by LondonMonarch // May 03, 2023 - 3:36pm

Actual laugh out loud! He is the best writer on this site by a country mile. Funny, and able to tell the statistical wood from the trees.

#179 by scraps // May 11, 2023 - 1:05am

Good god. He's not a hack, but he's certainly not the best writer here. Most self-conscious writer, maybe; most self-congratulatory writer, definitely.

#9 by liquidmuse3 // May 01, 2023 - 12:22pm

I’m confused by this constant “the Bucs have so many needs!” notion. 1st & 2nd round picks at QB, 3rd at RB, Evans/Godwin/Gage at WR, Wirfs/Jensen on the line and high picks the rest of it, 2 starting-caliber TEs, Vea, Gaines, & 2 high picks on the line, David and White at LB and Barrett and a 1st at OLB, Dean, Davis, Winfield, & now Neal in the secondary. How are they bereft of talent?

#20 by guest from Europe // May 01, 2023 - 3:16pm

There is definitely a lot of talented players on that team. Some are getting old, some weren't playing as good as their name suggests in 2022. This is the modern NFL: QB is supposed to be everything, he gets all the credit. The Bucs look similar in player-quality to the Eagles after Wentz was traded away. Bucs have better WRs, worse O-line.

#57 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 02, 2023 - 10:07am

Tampa is looking creaky in the way Minnesota and New Orleans were a few years back -- they still have the names, but the talent is getting old/injured.

#12 by serutan // May 01, 2023 - 12:52pm

{...} a contender could then shop him to some patsy if he delivers some "clutch" relief wins instead of being the patsies themselves.

Why do I get the feeling you were thinking of Kevin Kolb when you wrote this?

#63 by Mike B. In Va // May 02, 2023 - 10:27am

What's next, ending your career by falling on a mat?

#98 by Joe L // May 02, 2023 - 3:03pm

Or AJ Feeley!

#104 by Joey-Harringto… // May 02, 2023 - 5:28pm

Rob Johnson says hi.

#17 by takeleavebelieve // May 01, 2023 - 2:15pm

In fairness to the Vikings, they’ve put together a phenomenal crop of UDFA signings.

#22 by Steve in WI // May 01, 2023 - 3:35pm

So in the end, the Bears exchanged the #1 overall pick and the 136th pick for:

DJ Moore
Darnell Wright
Tyrique Stevenson
a 2024 1st
a 2024 4th
a 2025 2nd

I am really happy with that.

Personally, I didn't want them to take Jalen Carter because of the risk but also because they desperately needed to solidify the tackle position, hopefully for years going forward but also for 2023 specifically. Barring injury, if Fields does not take a significant step forward in 2023 then the Bears have their answer and can start looking for their next QB (with 6 1st/2nd round picks in the next 2 drafts to help them if they want to trade up).

#23 by theslothook // May 01, 2023 - 3:54pm

Let's leave aside the optics of all of this if Bryce Young or CJ Stroud become massive hits, because they would be coming with the benefit of hindsight.

The bigger issue that I have is, there's no guarantee the Bears will be bad enough to land another top 3 pick even if Fields doesn't improve. I think they were fortunate they got the first pick in the first place and that was with the 32nd ranked defense. Now, you could argue they can just package all of those picks and trade up, but there's no guarantee that a team will want to do that and you could be stuck like the 49ers were - trading a huge haul for the third choice at QB.

And then there's this. If the Bears are now taking a QB next year, presumably that will have been 2 straight losing seasons for the Bears and now the coaching staff needs to deliver a winner to stave off the calls for their firing. And since rookie QBs are usually bad, that could mean a new regime 2 years from now and it's once again a limbo situation.

Its for those reasons I would have rather they kept the pick

#28 by guest from Europe // May 01, 2023 - 4:41pm

The Bears got a lot more picks in this trade than the Packers for Rodgers! If they really want to improve immediately, they could have traded some of those picks for some veteran QB. They had a lot of cap space. They could have signed any free agent QB. There were a lot of those. I think they should have done that. Apparently they don't develop QBs well.

And since rookie QBs are usually bad, that could mean a new regime 2 years from now and it's once again a limbo situation.

If you are assuming that some rookie next year will be bad, you have to do the same for this year rookie, a hypothetical Bears' player.

#32 by theslothook // May 01, 2023 - 6:53pm

I am arguing that giving Fields a chance and accumulating draft capital by trading the pick isn't a costless move as many think it is.

#42 by guest from Europe // May 02, 2023 - 3:46am

In this you are right. All of these options have a lot of inherent risk and most will fail. If they fail, they will try in the future with other picks. You are saying that the No. 1 pick has the highest chance of success. QB #2 or #3 has a much smaller success rate than the one drafted #1. In the future the Bears probably won't have #1 pick.

Should the Texans or the Colts traded up to No. 1? Or would that be ridiculed?

The Panthers gave a lot of picks. What is their way out if the rookie is nothing special in the next 3-4 years? The list of such No. 1 successes in modern QB-centered NFL is short: Newton, Luck, Burrow. Undecided: Lawrence Failures: Winston, Mayfield, Goff, Murray Less than 50% success!

QB drafted at #2: no successes! some failures

Yet Tanier now writes that the Texans are a serious team again because of potential. Between Jaguars and Texans and Colts, who have the same team-building, only 1 can win that division and be #4 seed. The rest will fail. Probably none of them will be a contender in the AFC.

But people sure love draft picks and potential and unknown future. I repeat: there were many veteran QBs available for less draft picks than what Panthers gave in the trade to No. 1. Two of them were recent MVPs! Bears had both the cap space and draft picks. They chose Fields.

#44 by David // May 02, 2023 - 5:22am

The list of such No. 1 successes in modern QB-centered NFL is short: Newton, Luck, Burrow. Undecided: Lawrence Failures: Winston, Mayfield, Goff, Murray Less than 50% success!

This is pretty specious - if you move Murray to the success column then it's over 50% success rate, and the Cardinals would certainly consider him a success. If Burrow is a success, then Goff must be, as well (been to a SuperBowl, got offered a big contract from drafting team). Now we've got five successes and only two failures - this is looking pretty good!

So, uh, yeah, this is very small sample size, and you can pretty much make it argue whatever you want.

#45 by guest from Europe // May 02, 2023 - 5:47am

I put Goff under failure because the team actively traded him away, didn't want him, had to include a high draft pick to get rid of him. Isn't the point of this drafting to have the QB for a long time? Murray and Cardinals don't have much success, you can put him under unknown.

Yes, it's a small sample size. If you include all 1st round drafted QBs, the success rate is waaay smaller! I limited it to #1 picks because theslothook argued that such a pick is so worthy and the Bears probably won't have #1 in the future, but #4 or #5 or some pick.

The conditions were that it's a bad team such as 2022 Bears and the #1 pick QB lifts them and makes them good, above Cousins or Carr-level if you will. Goff isn't that good, it was McVay and Luck got on a somewhat competent playoff team, better than Bears...

Why above Carr-level? Carr was on a contract and available for any pick, the Raiders released him, the Bears didn't want him either.

#68 by theslothook // May 02, 2023 - 10:34am

The low probability of finding an NFL superstar with the top overall pick doesn't invalidate the process. Finding a superstar QB itself is a low odds position. It's just, the top overall pick routinely gets you the best chance at it.

#74 by guest from Europe // May 02, 2023 - 11:26am

Yes, you are right. That's why i included only #1 picks, not other picks who have a lot higher failure rate. You are right that if a team wants to draft a star QB, probably it needs a #1 pick. (I wrote "probably", so that noone comes with names such as Allen or Mahomes.)

The Bears problem is that they don't develop QBs. Maybe Aaron Brooks knows who was their last good drafted QB.

However, the Bears had this year a road to 2 certain star QBs via trade. They could have gotten Jackson on a very large contract for Fields and #9 pick, maybe another 3rd round pick. Ravens would need a QB, so they take Fields. This is assuming that Packers would never trade Rodgers to the Bears.

#79 by theslothook // May 02, 2023 - 11:36am

However, the Bears had this year a road to 2 certain star QBs via trade. They could have gotten Jackson on a very large contract for Fields and #9 pick, maybe another 3rd round pick. Ravens would need a QB, so they take Fields. This is assuming that Packers would never trade Rodgers to the Bears.

Would the Ravens have accepted this deal? I doubt it. I suspect the Ravens either knew directly or suspected that once one of these qbs up for an extension was going to sign without getting all of it guaranteed, Lamar was going to come around as well. Of course; it cost them some additional cash in the negotiating process, but now they have Lamar at (seemingly) more palatable contract.

The Bears problem is that they don't develop QBs. Maybe Aaron Brooks knows who was their last good drafted QB.

Pat and I have gone back and forth on this topic so many times that I won't belabor it here. But to me, I don't believe this line nor do I think it matters. The QB is so important that you are better off even in that scenario drafting one and hoping he develops anyways a la Andrew Luck.

#80 by guest from Europe // May 02, 2023 - 12:14pm

Would the Ravens have accepted this deal?

The Bears would have to offer such a contract that Ravens don't match. Watson-contract.

The QB is so important that you are better off even in that scenario drafting one and hoping he develops anyways a la Andrew Luck.

Then they should have used #1 pick. If you were their GM, you would do it.

I looked a bit at QBs drafted in round 1 for non- playoff teams (top 20 picks) and there are only a few good QBs who weren't drafted #1: Ryan, Allen, Mahomes, Rivers, Roethlisberger, Flacco. The bust rate is quite high! About 7 out of 35 successes. Let's include Herbert as good. In 2011 there were Locker, Ponder and Gabbert busts:

https://www.drafthistory.com/index.php/positions/qb

#82 by theslothook // May 02, 2023 - 12:41pm

Lots of studies, including mine, have plotted draft value as a function of the location of the pick. It's basically a logarithmic function - essentially decaying rapidly before thinning out slowly.

You can cut and slice the examples and sample size all you want - the fact is, no single pick has produced more hall of famers, especially hall of fame QBs, than the first overall pick. The fact that the bust rate or lack of success rate is super high doesn't change that fact. Yes, you can find hall of famers later in the draft. You can also find them out of the draft completely. That take way doesn't get around the basic fact that your best chance of landing that player is with the first overall pick.

#84 by guest from Europe // May 02, 2023 - 1:09pm

If it's unclear from my posts above, i agree with you about draft.

I wrote everything to point out that

even #1 pick has less than 50% success
and Bears had veteran-QB options: from Carr to Rodgers

You would prefer they used that #1, i would prefer they got a known QB in a trade.

(Apparently #2 QB pick was not historically successful at all!)

#91 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 02, 2023 - 1:21pm

Maybe Aaron Brooks knows who was their last good drafted QB.

Drafted? Either McMahon or Jim Harbaugh.

Drafted and developed? Sid Luckman. You could make a case for Ed Brown.

\yes, one of Chicago's best QB draft picks was as famous for being a punter as for being a QB.

\\Seriously, this list is dire: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/chi/draft.htm

#93 by guest from Europe // May 02, 2023 - 1:45pm

Wasn't Luckman the pioneer among the QBs? Or was it only S. Baugh?

So they got the first-ever good one and never again?

For this reason i think they need a "known value" at QB.

#58 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 02, 2023 - 10:10am

The list of such No. 1 successes in modern QB-centered NFL is short: Newton, Luck, Burrow. Undecided: Lawrence Failures: Winston, Mayfield, Goff, Murray Less than 50% success!

No Stafford? He actually has a ring.

#76 by guest from Europe // May 02, 2023 - 11:33am

I didn't go to expensive #1 picks, pre-2011 rookie salary cap.

We can add those:

success: Stafford, Palmer, E. Manning

failure: J. Russell, older Carr, A. Smith, Bradford

The failure rate stays almost the same. 20th century list is for somebody else, maybe you.

Success or failure is to the team that is bad and drafts this QB and he lifts them while on the rookie contract, not 10 years later.

#78 by IlluminatusUIUC // May 02, 2023 - 11:34am

It seems like the cutoff the poster was using is the rookie wage scale (2011), otherwise Bradford would fall in the bust category too.

#110 by LionInAZ // May 02, 2023 - 10:58pm

Bradford was pretty much a bust despite his yet again injury shortened renaissance

#43 by guest from Europe // May 02, 2023 - 3:46am

double post

#34 by Lost Ti-Cats Fan // May 01, 2023 - 7:42pm

I think that's weak logic. It starts with the premise that the Bears won't get another top 3 pick "if Fields doesn't improve" and then continues on to "if the Bears are now taking a QB next year". And then finishes with the QB two years from now will likely be bad.

You're completely missing the scenario of "if Fields develops, how do we build a Super Bowl team?" The answer to that is "don't waste draft picks on more QBs than we can try and develop at once". You're also missing the other ways teams who are otherwise competitive have to find competent QBs.

The Bears have a young QB and pretty much nothing else. They need to start building a better football team.

#35 by theslothook // May 01, 2023 - 8:37pm

It starts with the premise that the Bears won't get another top 3 pick "if Fields doesn't improve" and then continues on to "if the Bears are now taking a QB next year".

When you consider that this team traded a bunch of its good players mid season; finished with the 32nd ranked defense and saw Fields finish as the 32nd ranked passer AND yet were still fortunate to land the top overall pick; I'd say it's risky to assume this team will once again finish with a bottom 3 pick. Even mild improvement in one or more areas could see them vault from 1 to 5 or even 8.

The Bears have a young QB and pretty much nothing else. They need to start building a better football team.

I have a hard time with this argument as well. Lots and lots of teams have been horrible and finished with the first overall pick. Should that have precluded them from taking the QB? The Jaguars with Lawrence? The Colts with Luck? the Bengals with Burrow?

#37 by Eddo // May 01, 2023 - 10:33pm

The Jaguars and Bengals both declined to use top five picks on QBs after Lawrence and Burrow's rookie years - first overall for the Jaguars - so I'm not sure how the last paragraph is an example against what the Bears did.

#38 by theslothook // May 01, 2023 - 10:49pm

I was referring to the idea that if your team is God awful, you should build a good football team; ie- give the guy support before taking the QB. I may have been misinterpreting the point made, but that's what I was responding to.

That aside, this was Fields' second season. His two years thus far have been beyond terrible. Let me state very quickly, if he turns out to be a good quarterback I won't be shocked considering the team appears to be bereft of talent around him. But I would still be surprised. The historical record for quarterbacks this bad after their first two seasons is to put it charitably not good

#86 by KnotMe // May 02, 2023 - 1:12pm

What you do with the first overall pick really depends on the situation. The Jags were pretty confident in Lawrence (and his rookie year was better than any of Fields's years even with Meyer), while Fields has 2 years of being pretty bad. (see... Z Wilson).

Basically, this was one of those "insufficient info" scenarios. I feel like the team is probably in the best chance to know since they have more information but at the same time....teams still get this sort of stuff wrong a lot. I feel like the GM basicly chose the choice that is less likely to get them fired (i.e. if they pick Young that basically destroys Fields trade value so you would get pennies at best), so it becomes a knock on him even if Young is good and it works out, esp if they trade Fields and he improves somewhere else.

#87 by Lost Ti-Cats Fan // May 02, 2023 - 1:14pm

It seems to me that this is your entire premise. You believe the Bears should have moved on from Fields and used their no. 1 pick to choose his successor. All of your arguments are based on Fields not succeeding. You could have just said "Fields suck, Bears need a new QB". I'd respect that. But when you start layering "if ...", "then ..." arguments when assessing whether the Bears made the right choice and don't include the "if Fields develops into a good QB" outcome, it undermines the rest of your argument.

#94 by theslothook // May 02, 2023 - 1:51pm

I should have been clearer, though I don't want to say point blank, "Fields sucks" because I don't know for sure that he does. I can 100 percent believe he's made to look a lot worse because the circumstances around him are so bad. But I will come out and say, the chances he turns into a real difference maker - effectively an upper tier 3 to tier 2 player looks fairly dire at this point. Could still happen; but it seems like a long shot.

But there is more to it than that. If the Bears had been picking 9th, would I still advocate they dump Fields and take, say, Will Levis? No. Because part and parcel with Justin Fields is the fact that the Bears would have their choice of the top QB in the draft. And this draft, per the punditry, were adamant that both CJ Stroud and Bryce Young were worthy first overall picks. This isn't last year with Kenny Pickett.

#127 by LondonMonarch // May 03, 2023 - 3:58pm

The punditry were far from unanimous on that (although certainly warmer than they were about last year's class!)

The other problem with taking QB this year is that you would have been putting that guy into a dumpster fire of an offense. At least now, if Fields underwhelms then whoever the QB solution is will be coming into a (more) functional offense.

#24 by big10freak // May 01, 2023 - 4:04pm

I liked the Packers draft.

The lineman taken in the 6th round was a fun watch in the MAC. No idea what will translate to the pros

#33 by Jackson87 // May 01, 2023 - 7:00pm

It's no surprise that 170 lb. Martin Mayhew thought a 166 lb. corner was worth the 16th pick.

#41 by guest from Europe // May 02, 2023 - 2:35am

A question to Chiefs' fans: is your RT Niang good enough to start for the whole year or will it be 3rd round rookie?

#46 by guest from Europe // May 02, 2023 - 5:56am

A question for everyone: what do you think of Texans' rebuild? They are doing "everything by the book": stripping the team of expensive parts, getting draft picks in trades, being bad for a few years, now drafting a QB and a pass rusher... recently the Jaguars and Browns and Bengals did this.

Do you prefer this way (be bad, hope for the future) or what the teams such as Seahawks, Steelers and Patriots (no rebuild, try to compete) are doing?

#50 by Murphquake // May 02, 2023 - 9:50am

"getting draft picks in trades"?! they could have sat at 12 and got some defensive help, maybe even traded down to the Steelers who were looking to grab the last OT on the board...

Instead they gave up their 2nd, as well as their 1st and 3rd next year (which is crazy because that first might be the first overall pick next year) to get Anderson.

They also could have traded from 12 to 6 like the Cards ended up doing, dumping that same 2nd rounder...keeping their picks next year, and getting Tyree Wilson or Jalen Carter instead of Anderson.

That 2024 Texans 1st is an unbelievable asset....

#55 by guest from Europe // May 02, 2023 - 10:05am

"getting draft picks in trades"?!

No, this was in years before, draft picks for Watson and other players. Multi-year rebuilding process... that is what they are doing. I asked about a broader picture, team (re)construction, not this draft or any particular draft.

Instead they gave up their 2nd, as well as their 1st and 3rd next year (which is crazy because that first might be the first overall pick next year) to get Anderson.

This is a very good point.

#62 by Murphquake // May 02, 2023 - 10:25am

ah right...yes the Watson trade was a good haul and the 2022 draft was solid...but they have too many holes to fill for that trade up from 12 to make any sense...

#67 by theslothook // May 02, 2023 - 10:29am

I don't like giving the Texans credit for trading Watson considering they found themselves in that position entirely due to idiotic decisions that ran counter to their stated objective.

It would be like crediting Tom Synkowki's success to his car accident.

#64 by theslothook // May 02, 2023 - 10:27am

Giving the Texans an A for the draft completely misses the point. The price they paid for the third pick implies that player has to be an elite star for it be justified. I mentioned in a separate thread, unless he becomes Khalil Mack, that trade will look like a giant overpay. That would still be true even if he kind of works out and becomes Clowney.

#66 by Murphquake // May 02, 2023 - 10:29am

Even if he's Khalil Mack...if that pick is #1 next year, it''ll look like a giant overpay

#88 by Lost Ti-Cats Fan // May 02, 2023 - 1:17pm

That's my take as well. If Anderson is a superstar, they paid fair price for him. If he's anything less than a regular pro bowler, they overpaid. This type of move would have made sense for a team with solid talent across the board in "win now" mode. It made absolutely no sense for a team like the Texans.

#90 by KnotMe // May 02, 2023 - 1:21pm

Agree. Giving up another first was pretty bad there. At best, they needed like a "protected pick" concept.

#114 by guest from Europe // May 03, 2023 - 7:42am

Apparently the Cardinals "won" their draft days trades in such a manner that they "added" a #2 pick out of nothing! Jaguars also did very well, and Texans gave away what amounts to a #2 pick in trades, see table at the end of this link.

The Texans gave something in the range of #5- #11 pick to move up and draft Anderson, as decribed at the beginning of linked article.

#59 by RickD // May 02, 2023 - 10:13am

The Patriots are doing a rebuild. They just didn't blow things up as a step to do that.

The Texans had the luxury of multiple high picks, thanks to the Browns. If you have the picks, you use them.

Most of the elite teams don't get to the top by deliberately going to the bottom first. In the AFC at least, a small number of teams have been winning consistently for the past 20 years: Patriots, Ravens, Steelers, and wherever Peyton was at the moment.

Building a good roster takes a while and has a lot more to do with building depth than getting a few top picks. The teams that break through do so by getting optimal value from their picks.

#65 by Murphquake // May 02, 2023 - 10:28am

Don't know...doesn't feel like the Pats are doing anything different (off the field)...

#71 by guest from Europe // May 02, 2023 - 11:13am

The Texans had the luxury of multiple high picks, thanks to the Browns. If you have the picks, you use them.

They had their own #2 pick, used on a QB. They had that pick because they weren't interested in winning in 2022, unlike Patriots.

They got #12 in a trade from Browns and used it in another trade to #3.

That's why i asked if people prefer what Texans or Patriots are doing. Call it a rebuild or something else, doesn't matter.

#73 by theslothook // May 02, 2023 - 11:19am

In cold analytics terms, the best probabilistic path to a quick rebuild is to intentionally tank multiple seasons to acquire difference makers at QB, WR, and ER and have a clean cap sheet to sign a competent supporting cast in free agency. That is effectively what the Bengals did with Burrow and the Colts did with Manning.

However, that's not how the NFL works. Notice, neither the GM nor the coach of the Texans, who began the process of a teardown, actually survived the results to see it through. In fact, multiple coaches did not. This was also true for the Browns and true for the 76ers, who embarked on the longest and most flagrant tank job in league history.

So returning to your question, absolutely 0 coaches and GMs will take the route the Texans took.

#81 by guest from Europe // May 02, 2023 - 12:41pm

I agree on this. This is what 2016 and 2017 Browns did and 00's Lions. They improved from horrible to wild-card or out of playoffs by drafting Mayfield/ Garrett and Suh/Stafford/Megatron. 00's Rams tried this and got Bradford. No team became a "real contender".

Bengals? I am not sure that they tanked. In 2018 they were 6-10, changed coach and their 2019 season fell appart:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Cincinnati_Bengals_season#Preseason

They were trying and losing with Dalton. They lucked into Burrow the same way the Colts lucked into Luck. Then Burrow was injured and they got Chase.

So returning to your question, absolutely 0 coaches and GMs will take the route the Texans took.

i was asking fans, not GMs. What do you want Colts to do? They tried to compete with Rivers and Ryan, now are in a full-teardown rebuild. Which do you prefer and for how long?

#83 by theslothook // May 02, 2023 - 12:44pm

As a fan, I'm torn. I would probably sit Richardson the whole year, stink badly to get the first overall pick and then trade that for a kings ransom and then play Richardson in year 2.

However, as a fan, I don't like the idea of watching 17 miserable weeks of horrible football for yet another season. The Colts are probably going to be bad next year, but at least Richardson gives me something to be excited about.

#85 by IlluminatusUIUC // May 02, 2023 - 1:09pm

They were trying and losing with Dalton. They lucked into Burrow the same way the Colts lucked into Luck.

Even moreso. Luck was expected to be a generational talent from high school, same as Lawrence, and the Colts got "lucky" in that their previous generational talent QB had a severe injury that kept him out an entire year.

Burrow was a middling starter as a Junior transfer, and then *exploded* as a Senior for arguably the best CFB season of all time. At best one could claim Cincy tanked for Tua and then Burrow came out of nowhere.

#92 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 02, 2023 - 1:24pm

This was also true for the Browns and true for the 76ers, who embarked on the longest and most flagrant tank job in league history.

That's not true. The Clippers tanked for 40 years.

#145 by LionInAZ // May 05, 2023 - 1:20am

Not nearly as hopeless as the Washington Senators were.

#151 by SandyRiver // May 05, 2023 - 9:09am

"First in war, first in peace, and last in the American League."

#48 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 02, 2023 - 9:44am

I don't think defenses can solve the quarterback sneak issue with manpower, but it's interesting to watch teams and players try to address the problem.

The odd part is Dallas was actually decent at stopping it. Granted, that resulted in them completely yielding the edge, so maybe they do need the help.

#49 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 02, 2023 - 9:47am

Lions-for-Super-Bowl early adopters

It's sad that there are any gamblers this degenerate.

In heroin terms, this is the 'shambling skeleton' stage.

#56 by RickD // May 02, 2023 - 10:07am

Lol. You include Jalen Ramsey to inflate the Dolphins' grade and Aaron Rodgers to the Jets grade but give the Pats a 'C-' because they "didn't address their needs."

Because improving the defense isn't a need.

This is beyond ridiculous.

#69 by Mike B. In Va // May 02, 2023 - 10:36am

Well, both of those moves did involve draft picks, so there's at least some relation.

Plus, you're talking about it, which means ad impressions, which means Mike might actually get paid!

#89 by KnotMe // May 02, 2023 - 1:18pm

Well, the Pats are a weird case. They definitnly need WR, but are pretty much totally incapable of drafting an developing them (Belichick has only drafted 2 that could even be called non-busts in his time in NE).

So they didn't address their need, but historically, trying to do that via draft didn't work so...it's hard to say how to grade that. We kinda did this with the Bears too.

#96 by SandyRiver // May 02, 2023 - 2:51pm

Mike routinely has the Pats at/near the bottom of the non-grades. That worked pretty well last year; we'll see about 2023.

#100 by Scott P. // May 02, 2023 - 3:47pm

Did it, though? Whether you look at just top picks or the draft as a whole, the Patriots 2022 draft is top third in terms of production. Looking at the entire draft, they got 24 AV from their class, which is 10th, tied with the Bears and ahead of the Bills, Ravens, Broncos, Eagles, and others that Tanier rated much higher in that article.

#95 by wqd165wdq1 // May 02, 2023 - 2:04pm

Jake Moody should have been depth at receiver or on the interior offensive line, two units the 49ers didn't bother addressing, even with all of their Day 3 picks.

But the team drafted Ronnie Bell in the seventh. There are opportunities to criticize the team, but this is just untrue.

#111 by LionInAZ // May 02, 2023 - 11:06pm

You can make a 7th round draft pick that doesn't address a real need.

True needs are addressed in the early rounds. 7th round picks are for afterthoughts, special teamers, and projects.

#119 by wqd165wdq1 // May 03, 2023 - 11:41am

I am not arguing against you asserting that the team could have/should have invested more in the position than they did - I am just saying that they did make an investment that is not acknowledged in this article.

#146 by LionInAZ // May 05, 2023 - 1:35am

That is minuscule point. Only the 49ers know why they drafted this guy. The rational thinking is that they did not pick him because they expected him to contribute as a go-to receiver right away. That makes him a special teamer, a returner, or a project, which is what I said.

#153 by ImNewAroundThe… // May 05, 2023 - 10:41am

No it's a literal fact. They literally used a day 3 pick on a guy announced as a WR. Project or otherwise, he's a reciever from a round on day 3.

#102 by guest from Europe // May 02, 2023 - 4:07pm

An article by Bryan Knowles on draft busts. Z. Wilson is quite high on the list:

https://underdognetwork.com/football/nfl-draft/nfl-draft-the-25-biggest-busts-of-the-last-25-years-part-ii

#115 by fedetn1 // May 03, 2023 - 8:56am

"Smith is definitely the guy who orders the chicken parm at the four-star Italian bistro."

NFC South
Atlanta Falcons
Improved Roster: B-
Used Resources Well: C-
Met Needs: C
FINAL PPA: C

I'm afraid you're exactly right

Federico from Italy..

#124 by TomC // May 03, 2023 - 1:47pm

Points for nailing the scansion of "Turn, Turn, Turn."

#128 by anotheroldguy // May 03, 2023 - 4:06pm

Hey Mike, I'm a little late with this, but since it's all you get: Thanks for all the unpaid work. I hope the implication that you love what you do is actually the case. I certainly enjoy reading it.

#131 by andrew // May 04, 2023 - 7:15am

Looks like this article will go down as Tanier's swan song with Football Outsiders.

https://twitter.com/MikeTanier/status/1653801231863693312

#132 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 04, 2023 - 8:21am

Looks like twitter isn’t paying its programmers at the moment.

#148 by LionInAZ // May 05, 2023 - 1:42am

No surprise there, either.

#133 by TomC // May 04, 2023 - 10:33am

This is so depressing. As I'm sure is the case for many of you, FO has been my go-to platform for football discussion for almost 20 years (my first post was defending Washington in the Clinton Portis / Champ Bailey trade). I hope very much that something roughly similar rises from the ashes, but right now it feels like losing a friend.

#168 by bravehoptoad // May 06, 2023 - 9:27am

No kidding. I've never before felt honest grief over a website.

Where will we all go now?

#134 by spybloom // May 04, 2023 - 10:53am

Sadly understandable with everything going on. Godspeed, Michael, I'll see you at another site.

#136 by theslothook // May 04, 2023 - 12:53pm

Mike for a long time was my favorite writer at FO. I think, probably due to the overall circumstances, he got overstretched writing way too much content. Mike's always at his best writing about a few major thread points; injecting his charm and humour in a way that would make me jealous as a writer.

I too will miss FO. The quality of the commenters is second to none. Note, most people here aren't the caricature of analytics that some of the nfl media bemoans. In reality, everyone here recognized that metrics serve as a supporting argument, not a mic drop. On top of that, most of the commenters took the game seriously and recognized uncertainty. There were rich debates and rich discussions. I will truly miss FO for that most of all.

#137 by TomC // May 04, 2023 - 4:05pm

Agreed on all counts. DVOA etc. are useful tools, and the (theoretically) paid writers are a clear notch above every other site on the internet, but the real gold here is the other users.

#141 by Romodini // May 04, 2023 - 7:46pm

Has Aaron confirmed that FO will be kaput this year?

#142 by theslothook // May 04, 2023 - 8:40pm

He hasn't said anything, but the labor force is leaving. Unless he plans to write everything himself or use chat GPT to generate the content, it feels like it's only a matter of time.

Archives

Cardinals Cut DeAndre Hopkins

#1 by guest from Europe // May 26, 2023 - 2:45pm

#28 by RickD // May 31, 2023 - 11:26am

#32 by guest from Europe // May 31, 2023 - 2:26pm

#2 by theslothook // May 26, 2023 - 3:02pm

#3 by BroncosGuyAgain // May 26, 2023 - 8:23pm

#4 by theslothook // May 26, 2023 - 9:21pm

#5 by guest from Europe // May 27, 2023 - 2:24am

#7 by BigRichie // May 27, 2023 - 10:24pm

#8 by guest from Europe // May 28, 2023 - 2:52am

#12 by theslothook // May 28, 2023 - 11:58am

#13 by guest from Europe // May 28, 2023 - 3:30pm

#34 by Hoodie_Sleeves // May 31, 2023 - 3:08pm

#36 by guest from Europe // Jun 01, 2023 - 12:10am

#77 by Theo // Jun 28, 2023 - 12:22am

#37 by IlluminatusUIUC // Jun 03, 2023 - 11:19am

#38 by guest from Europe // Jun 04, 2023 - 3:59am

#20 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 30, 2023 - 9:13am

#21 by BigRichie // May 30, 2023 - 11:16am

#22 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 30, 2023 - 11:31am

#25 by BigRichie // May 30, 2023 - 5:10pm

#23 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 30, 2023 - 11:37am

#24 by BigRichie // May 30, 2023 - 4:59pm

#27 by Aaron Brooks G… // May 31, 2023 - 11:25am

#35 by BigRichie // May 31, 2023 - 6:00pm

#26 by guest from Europe // May 31, 2023 - 1:44am

#14 by CV12Hornet // May 29, 2023 - 12:36pm

#17 by guest from Europe // May 29, 2023 - 7:23pm

#9 by GwillyGecko // May 28, 2023 - 5:42am

#29 by RickD // May 31, 2023 - 11:28am

#64 by ImNewAroundThe… // Jun 08, 2023 - 11:37am

#6 by guest from Europe // May 27, 2023 - 4:04am

#10 by GwillyGecko // May 28, 2023 - 5:49am

#11 by guest from Europe // May 28, 2023 - 6:25am

#15 by BroncosGuyAgain // May 29, 2023 - 5:47pm

#16 by guest from Europe // May 29, 2023 - 6:46pm

#30 by RickD // May 31, 2023 - 11:35am

#31 by theslothook // May 31, 2023 - 12:07pm

#33 by guest from Europe // May 31, 2023 - 2:45pm

#18 by BroncosGuyAgain // May 29, 2023 - 7:25pm

#19 by guest from Europe // May 29, 2023 - 7:33pm

#39 by theslothook // Jun 05, 2023 - 11:40am

#40 by RevBackjoy // Jun 05, 2023 - 5:13pm

#41 by guest from Europe // Jun 05, 2023 - 5:36pm

#42 by theslothook // Jun 05, 2023 - 5:54pm

#43 by BJR // Jun 06, 2023 - 4:55am

#47 by theslothook // Jun 06, 2023 - 11:14am

#44 by guest from Europe // Jun 06, 2023 - 5:10am

#46 by Aaron Brooks G… // Jun 06, 2023 - 9:01am

#48 by guest from Europe // Jun 06, 2023 - 11:51am

#45 by Aaron Brooks G… // Jun 06, 2023 - 8:59am

#49 by theslothook // Jun 06, 2023 - 11:55am

#50 by guest from Europe // Jun 06, 2023 - 12:25pm

#51 by theslothook // Jun 06, 2023 - 12:47pm

#52 by guest from Europe // Jun 06, 2023 - 1:37pm

#53 by theslothook // Jun 06, 2023 - 2:18pm

#54 by guest from Europe // Jun 06, 2023 - 3:33pm

#55 by theslothook // Jun 06, 2023 - 7:15pm

#56 by guest from Europe // Jun 07, 2023 - 4:08am

#58 by theslothook // Jun 07, 2023 - 12:45pm

#59 by guest from Europe // Jun 07, 2023 - 1:51pm

#60 by theslothook // Jun 07, 2023 - 3:31pm

#61 by guest from Europe // Jun 07, 2023 - 5:05pm

#62 by BigRichie // Jun 07, 2023 - 6:45pm

#63 by guest from Europe // Jun 08, 2023 - 2:38am

#65 by guest from Europe // Jun 08, 2023 - 2:49pm

#66 by theslothook // Jun 08, 2023 - 3:02pm

#67 by guest from Europe // Jun 08, 2023 - 3:56pm

#81 by theslothook // Jul 18, 2023 - 1:26pm

#82 by guest from Europe // Jul 18, 2023 - 7:04pm

#85 by theslothook // Jul 20, 2023 - 11:10am

#87 by guest from Europe // Jul 20, 2023 - 4:37pm

#88 by theslothook // Jul 20, 2023 - 4:56pm

#90 by guest from Europe // Jul 21, 2023 - 9:56am

#91 by theslothook // Jul 21, 2023 - 12:22pm

#92 by guest from Europe // Jul 21, 2023 - 3:18pm

#93 by theslothook // Jul 21, 2023 - 5:16pm

#94 by guest from Europe // Jul 22, 2023 - 1:49am

#89 by theslothook // Jul 20, 2023 - 5:00pm