No more "replay the down." That shit happened. Deal with it. Also, make intentional grounding 10 yards from the spot of the foul, not the LOS. As it is now, the QB is incentivized to chuck the ball into the atmosphere. Either he saves the sack yardage or the rules leave him in the same position as the sack.
Since everybody (all we analytical types, anyhoo) screamed "Doofus!!"at Duke Tobin for drafting Chase over Penei Sewell, Duke ought to get full credit for drafting Chase over Penei Sewell. How much net credit that amounts to, I've no strong opinion as to. Or any opinion at all, really.
I, too, was Valkyrie. And while my friends and I discovered the game at an arcade, we got the most mileage playing it when it hit the Sega Genesis. (You needed a special four-player converter to add the extra controllers, and we split the cost on that and then forever argued over whose turn it was to keep up with it.)
I will never forget our (health-dwindling) wizard screaming at the elf late one night, "Dammit, Chris, you don't need more food!" only to later be pulled aside by his mother and told, "If your friend is hungry, I can put some more snacks out."
I also always played Valkyrie because she had a sword, which I liked better than the other weapons (as I recall, Warrior had an axe, the elf had a bow, and the wizard had magic, of course).
I think you can make a case that Geno's ascendance to 'reasonable starter' came from his time working as a backup. That said, guys who look unfit for the league who can even appear like an average starter later in their career might just be it's own, even smaller, variety.
Young was a star in the USFL, and then a starter for the Bucs, and in 88 when he came to the 49ers he wasn't a backup strictly speaking, as Walsh was playing a maddening 1A and 1B thing with him and Montana that just made everybody mad. I don't think he counts for this.
A few of the famous ones are square pegs. Young. Staubach out of the Navy. McNair out of Alcorn State.
Vick did sit until the end of his rookie season. Of course, lots of rookies "sit until something bad happens to the veteran," and that sometimes goes late in the season.
It's useful to turn the question around to see my point: look how many 1st round QBs in the 70s-80s played a LOT as rookies. It was rare for a team to have any better development plan than what they have now: "Hey, Brissett will be fine for a month or so."
If I were put in charge of the NFL, the first thing I would do is get rid of illegal contact. It's a completely nebulous rule that could be called on literally every play, so it only seems to ever be called to bail an offense out. It's either interference, or it's holding, or it's not a penalty.
I also have a plan for fixing overtime that I've never heard anyone else suggest: after the opening kickoffs, no more kicks. If the original problem with overtime that all this tinkering was supposed to fix is that the team that got the ball first would just kick a field goal and end the game, just get rid of the field goals. So we go back to a full fifteen minute sudden death period, but now you can't kick a field goal and you can't punt, so you have to go for it on fourth down. I guarantee that would lead to more exciting overtimes then we see now.
Mike, I'm sure Roger Goodell is a subscriber so I expect to see these ideas in place by the fall.
I would love "warnings." Basketball uses the first few off-ball fouls, essentially, as warnings. It helps players adjust to how the game will be officiated. The first illegal contact is a warning. The second is the "bonus"
The whole single digit thing doesn’t make much sense because there aren’t that many single digits. What if they have more than 10 pro bowlers over the course of a few seasons?
This is a great mailbag, Mike, and I really liked your discussion about QB evaluation and how difficult it is for these young guys to succeed when all it takes for them to fail is for the rest of the organization to stay crappy and/or for him to turn out to be merely average.
I also liked how you linked the quality of information available about a prospect to the degree of risk in drafting him. Information, or the lack of it, is why I have throttled back on how much time I spend consuming pre-draft analysis. Most media a) focuses too much on the top-50 players; and b) lacks historical perspective.
I would pay for a service that could place grades of current prospects in some framework so that we could see how, where, and why Caleb Williams compares or contrasts to say, Trevor Lawrence, Andrew Luck, etc. The only guy I know of who is doing this now is Matt Waldman at the RSP. Even there, however, we don't see the data as such, just his conclusions. So I guess my question is: is something like this feasible and worthwhile?
I think we will get better data soon, now that Air Yards and other splits are widely available. That stuff was not available, say, 6 years ago. With better access to data comes better longitudinal comparisons and a better sense of what makes a good statistical indicator.
What I seek, across draft coverage, is better use of objective measures/stats and clearer application of all the subjective elements, from "ooh a swim move" to personality traits. I crave specificity: "he converted 6 third-and-longs with passes past the sticks against Georgia" as opposed to "resets his feet and throws with balance and rhythm on passes between the hashes," or even "Has a QWARBASEVOA of 72.8786%, trust me that's good." I would rather have readers come away with a collage of facts and ideas than a barrage of conclusions.
Yep. I know Philly media will sometimes float Howie for HOF, more to rile up fans (the WIP crowd does not like him, because he is not a tuff guy who drafts linebackerz) than as a serious candidate. I don't want every GM who puts together some strong rosters in the HoF. The further away from the field on Sunday the candidate is, the harder it should be.
I'd really like the Contributors Committee to do again what they did for Bill Nunn's induction and select someone very far at the periphery who had a long-lasting effect. Lloyd Wells, the 60s Chiefs HBCU point man, or Ernie Katal, in effect the first ever full time college scout for the 50s Rams, would fit the bill nicely.
Re: Gauntlet. For my birthday last year, we took the family to the Silverball "museum" at Asbury Park, which allows you - for an hourly fee - to play a hundred plus arcade games and pinball machines. I introduced the kids to Gauntlet. No extra quarters needed... you die, you press continue. If you haven't been, I urge you to go. https://www.silverballmuseum.com/asbury-park/
(Sadly no Afterburner or Spy Hunter when I went there.)
Oooh. I could use an excuse to head up to Springsteenistan for the day.
The Museum of the Moving Picture in Queens had a video game exhibit years ago. You could play 10 Yard Fight, the original game. My family almost lost me.
Sure looks to me like Loomis has 2 choices. Either
a), slap more duct tape on the jalopy in preparation for this year's Circuit. Or
b), be fired.
Are there any reports/indications that the Saints ownership group is suggesting Loomis lead them in a rebuild, and Loomis is telling them "No!" Any at all?
Saints ownership is now Gayle Benson, after a nasty fight with her family, with Dennis Lauscha as president. Lauscha is also the Pelicans president. I don't know how tuned in either of them are. Many NFL owners, including many non-terrible ones (Lurie), would probably fire Loomis for doing precisely what he has done for the last 3 years.
So basically a 'new' owner and indeed a new president?
Hmm. Let's presume they indeed have been relatively tuned out (and that will probably soon change). If I'm Loomis, I don't think I give much thought to going up to them and proposing they give me a 3+ year contract to tear down and lose like the dickens during that time. Given the huge propensity of new folks wanting to bring in or find 'Their GUY!', my best (maybe only) shot is to somehow win right now.
Unless they ask me 'whatcha think about leading us into a rebuild?', don't think I bring it up, either. I don't see much likelihood of their choosing Loomis to lead them in such a new route.
True. From a "professional preservation" standpoint, Loomis may be doing the smart thing. We all have worked for mediocre bosses who focus on making everything look kinda-OK instead of better. But that's precisely what makes him a bad GM! He is prioritizing his job security over what is best for the team!
I'd suggest each and every GM prioritizes his job security over what is best for the team/anyone else. This is on the Saints ownership group. It's their job to align their top employees' goals with that of the organization as a whole.
Granted, this is getting pretty semantical here! :-)
No more "replay the down." That shit happened. Deal with it. Also, make intentional grounding 10 yards from the spot of the foul, not the LOS. As it is now, the QB is incentivized to chuck the ball into the atmosphere. Either he saves the sack yardage or the rules leave him in the same position as the sack.
Thanks for answering my q Mike. "Neither would agree to be VP" I liked.
Since everybody (all we analytical types, anyhoo) screamed "Doofus!!"at Duke Tobin for drafting Chase over Penei Sewell, Duke ought to get full credit for drafting Chase over Penei Sewell. How much net credit that amounts to, I've no strong opinion as to. Or any opinion at all, really.
You'll definitely get a kick out of Helldivers 2
Oh, Gauntlet.
I, too, was Valkyrie. And while my friends and I discovered the game at an arcade, we got the most mileage playing it when it hit the Sega Genesis. (You needed a special four-player converter to add the extra controllers, and we split the cost on that and then forever argued over whose turn it was to keep up with it.)
I will never forget our (health-dwindling) wizard screaming at the elf late one night, "Dammit, Chris, you don't need more food!" only to later be pulled aside by his mother and told, "If your friend is hungry, I can put some more snacks out."
OMG!
Valkyrie had the sword, the second-most powerful melee and the second-best speed. I think I just relate to versatile support characters.
Sega Genesis - Luxury!
ZX Spectrum - C15 magnetic tape (dubious xth generation copy) and NO controllers. Just 4 early-teens crowded round a 10" keyboard.
Being in the actual dungeon would have been healthier
I also always played Valkyrie because she had a sword, which I liked better than the other weapons (as I recall, Warrior had an axe, the elf had a bow, and the wizard had magic, of course).
What, you didn't mention Rodgers sitting behind Favre for three years? Or was that the exception that proves the rule?
That is the example that popped into my head as well. Maybe we just are avoiding talking about Rogers since he has clearly evolved into a nutter. XD
For the record, I'm a cheesehead.
Rodgers and now Love are also among the counter-exceptions. Steve McNair is another. We are up to 8 maybe? Across 50 years or so?
I think you can make a case that Geno's ascendance to 'reasonable starter' came from his time working as a backup. That said, guys who look unfit for the league who can even appear like an average starter later in their career might just be it's own, even smaller, variety.
Didn't Vick sit behind Chris Chandler until Chandler got hurt?
Steve Young?
Young was a star in the USFL, and then a starter for the Bucs, and in 88 when he came to the 49ers he wasn't a backup strictly speaking, as Walsh was playing a maddening 1A and 1B thing with him and Montana that just made everybody mad. I don't think he counts for this.
A few of the famous ones are square pegs. Young. Staubach out of the Navy. McNair out of Alcorn State.
Vick did sit until the end of his rookie season. Of course, lots of rookies "sit until something bad happens to the veteran," and that sometimes goes late in the season.
It's useful to turn the question around to see my point: look how many 1st round QBs in the 70s-80s played a LOT as rookies. It was rare for a team to have any better development plan than what they have now: "Hey, Brissett will be fine for a month or so."
Carson Palmer too
Good one! I forgot and thought he was hurt. We are at 8 or 9 total!
I love mailbags, especially fairly regular mailbags.
May do another one in the dog days of summer.
That's too easy.
You should rank all the NFL mailbags on Substack, describing each as a character from Final Fantasy VII :-)
If I were put in charge of the NFL, the first thing I would do is get rid of illegal contact. It's a completely nebulous rule that could be called on literally every play, so it only seems to ever be called to bail an offense out. It's either interference, or it's holding, or it's not a penalty.
I also have a plan for fixing overtime that I've never heard anyone else suggest: after the opening kickoffs, no more kicks. If the original problem with overtime that all this tinkering was supposed to fix is that the team that got the ball first would just kick a field goal and end the game, just get rid of the field goals. So we go back to a full fifteen minute sudden death period, but now you can't kick a field goal and you can't punt, so you have to go for it on fourth down. I guarantee that would lead to more exciting overtimes then we see now.
Mike, I'm sure Roger Goodell is a subscriber so I expect to see these ideas in place by the fall.
I go blind with fury every time an offense "converts" on 3rd-and-long thanks to illegal contact 40 yards from the ball.
I would love "warnings." Basketball uses the first few off-ball fouls, essentially, as warnings. It helps players adjust to how the game will be officiated. The first illegal contact is a warning. The second is the "bonus"
Most folks I talk to think I am crazy.
Elf Shot the Food!
Question - what if the player is an injury-replacement selection for the Pro Bowl - do they get access to a single digit number?
The whole single digit thing doesn’t make much sense because there aren’t that many single digits. What if they have more than 10 pro bowlers over the course of a few seasons?
The single digit wouldn't be mandatory, the Pro Bowl would just be the criteria to be nominated for one.
Ah, you are right – I did not read it that way but looking at it again, I agree with your interpretation. Thank you.
This is a great mailbag, Mike, and I really liked your discussion about QB evaluation and how difficult it is for these young guys to succeed when all it takes for them to fail is for the rest of the organization to stay crappy and/or for him to turn out to be merely average.
I also liked how you linked the quality of information available about a prospect to the degree of risk in drafting him. Information, or the lack of it, is why I have throttled back on how much time I spend consuming pre-draft analysis. Most media a) focuses too much on the top-50 players; and b) lacks historical perspective.
I would pay for a service that could place grades of current prospects in some framework so that we could see how, where, and why Caleb Williams compares or contrasts to say, Trevor Lawrence, Andrew Luck, etc. The only guy I know of who is doing this now is Matt Waldman at the RSP. Even there, however, we don't see the data as such, just his conclusions. So I guess my question is: is something like this feasible and worthwhile?
I think we will get better data soon, now that Air Yards and other splits are widely available. That stuff was not available, say, 6 years ago. With better access to data comes better longitudinal comparisons and a better sense of what makes a good statistical indicator.
What I seek, across draft coverage, is better use of objective measures/stats and clearer application of all the subjective elements, from "ooh a swim move" to personality traits. I crave specificity: "he converted 6 third-and-longs with passes past the sticks against Georgia" as opposed to "resets his feet and throws with balance and rhythm on passes between the hashes," or even "Has a QWARBASEVOA of 72.8786%, trust me that's good." I would rather have readers come away with a collage of facts and ideas than a barrage of conclusions.
I am not there yet. But maybe next year.
A thought that pops into my head every now and then: Is Howie Roseman a hall of fame general manager? Is he on that path?
the path for a GM is extremely steep and narrow. You basically have to change the DNA of the entire league, not just be successful.
Yep. I know Philly media will sometimes float Howie for HOF, more to rile up fans (the WIP crowd does not like him, because he is not a tuff guy who drafts linebackerz) than as a serious candidate. I don't want every GM who puts together some strong rosters in the HoF. The further away from the field on Sunday the candidate is, the harder it should be.
I'd really like the Contributors Committee to do again what they did for Bill Nunn's induction and select someone very far at the periphery who had a long-lasting effect. Lloyd Wells, the 60s Chiefs HBCU point man, or Ernie Katal, in effect the first ever full time college scout for the 50s Rams, would fit the bill nicely.
"Truly overmatched general managers like Ryan Pace/Mike Mayock don’t last very long"
If only! Bears fans had to endure SIX YEARS of the worst GM in franchise history...
Re: Gauntlet. For my birthday last year, we took the family to the Silverball "museum" at Asbury Park, which allows you - for an hourly fee - to play a hundred plus arcade games and pinball machines. I introduced the kids to Gauntlet. No extra quarters needed... you die, you press continue. If you haven't been, I urge you to go. https://www.silverballmuseum.com/asbury-park/
(Sadly no Afterburner or Spy Hunter when I went there.)
Oooh. I could use an excuse to head up to Springsteenistan for the day.
The Museum of the Moving Picture in Queens had a video game exhibit years ago. You could play 10 Yard Fight, the original game. My family almost lost me.
Imagine a big arcade filled with video games that you can play for as long as you want. Skee ball. Pinball machines. The works. It's Gen X heaven.
The Museum of the Moving Image in Bradford, UK is absolutely that. I completed Manic Miner on ZX Spectrum in there TO A CROWD.
It is literally the only occasion my kids didn't want any more screen time.
You answered my question! My life is complete.
Myself, I don't get it.
Sure looks to me like Loomis has 2 choices. Either
a), slap more duct tape on the jalopy in preparation for this year's Circuit. Or
b), be fired.
Are there any reports/indications that the Saints ownership group is suggesting Loomis lead them in a rebuild, and Loomis is telling them "No!" Any at all?
Saints ownership is now Gayle Benson, after a nasty fight with her family, with Dennis Lauscha as president. Lauscha is also the Pelicans president. I don't know how tuned in either of them are. Many NFL owners, including many non-terrible ones (Lurie), would probably fire Loomis for doing precisely what he has done for the last 3 years.
So basically a 'new' owner and indeed a new president?
Hmm. Let's presume they indeed have been relatively tuned out (and that will probably soon change). If I'm Loomis, I don't think I give much thought to going up to them and proposing they give me a 3+ year contract to tear down and lose like the dickens during that time. Given the huge propensity of new folks wanting to bring in or find 'Their GUY!', my best (maybe only) shot is to somehow win right now.
Unless they ask me 'whatcha think about leading us into a rebuild?', don't think I bring it up, either. I don't see much likelihood of their choosing Loomis to lead them in such a new route.
True. From a "professional preservation" standpoint, Loomis may be doing the smart thing. We all have worked for mediocre bosses who focus on making everything look kinda-OK instead of better. But that's precisely what makes him a bad GM! He is prioritizing his job security over what is best for the team!
I'd suggest each and every GM prioritizes his job security over what is best for the team/anyone else. This is on the Saints ownership group. It's their job to align their top employees' goals with that of the organization as a whole.
Granted, this is getting pretty semantical here! :-)