FOXBOROUGH, Mass. — I got to see my 18th and 19th teams of the summer Wednesday, and catch up with a bunch of old friends. And, of course, then I got to your questions …
From Nick (@ChubbyChub216): What's the NFL's definition of "expedited"?
Nick, “expedited” is, clearly, a fluid term when it comes to the Deshaun Watson case, but I don’t think any sort of dragging out is happening without good reason.
More than not, judges and arbitrators don’t want to rule on the cases they hear. They’d rather the two parties before them work out their differences, and a deal, on their own. And Sue L. Robinson gave us a vivid picture of that a month ago. After hearing Watson’s case at the end of June, she told everyone involved she planned to rule the first week in August. That essentially gave the NFL and Watson’s camp a five-week window with which to work. And they actually did make progress over that time.
Ken Blaze/USA TODAY Sports
Before that, settlement talks had broken down over the NFL’s insistence that any deal would have Watson sitting out the entirety of the 2022 season. But through negotiations, Watson came off his position some, with the QB willing to take a suspension in the six-to-eight-game range, and the league did, too, offering up a 12-game suspension, so long as it came with a $10 million fine (which would essentially acknowledge his missing the ’21 season as a de facto suspension, since that was his base salary for the year).
Obviously, the league and Watson didn’t get there. But the progress suggested there might be a deal to be done, and my guess is NFL-appointed appeals officer Peter Harvey is leaving the door open for that. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that we’ve seen Watson show public remorse over the last week, talk about taking counseling and also, through an AP report, demonstrate he’d be willing to pay a fine on top of a suspension. The NFL was seeking all three of those elements in a deal: a monetary punishment, contrition and a treatment plan.
That, of course, doesn’t 100% mean a deal will get done. But I think there’s a chance of one.
From Billy Conway (@bonescon): Do you see the league ever imposing any field surface standards? Hard to watch the Zach Wilson injury and listen to Saleh’s comments afterwards and not wonder if the injury would have been avoided on a different field.
From Jeremy Friedrichs (@FriedrichsJk): Hey Albert, every year it seems like there are significant preseason injuries (Z. Wilson) How long do you think before we're down to two games? Or none at all?
From Matt Ramas (@matt_ramas): With the recent report on poor field conditions at Soldier Field, will the league/players union become more involved with team's field quality requirements?
Billy, Jeremy and Matt, those are good questions; let’s start with what happened to Wilson over the weekend. Yes, the surface at Lincoln Financial Field is new. But having touched base with a couple of Jets people since, I didn’t sense they had much of a problem with the Eagles over this—one referred to the new sod as tight and spongy. Which is to say that it was about where it needed to be. That’s also good context to illustrate the fact that injuries aren’t always avoidable.
That said, I would say that the NFL needs to do more to ensure it’s doing everything it can to prevent the preventable ones. The reality is stadiums have gotten more expensive, and owners more ambitious and profit-driven (if that’s possible), which has added up to these palaces being overrun by events over the course of the year, be it concerts, non-NFL football games, other sports or even a swim meet or the rodeo.
That makes it tougher to maintain a good grass surface, prompting some (Panthers, Texans, Jets/Giants, Patriots, etc.) to make the move to FieldTurf, which the players don’t like (and suspect has led to more ACL tears). And so, from there, I think you’ve got two answers if the goal is to have a pristine grass surface. Either have fewer events at the stadium, or spend more on the upkeep—the Packers, for one, have done a great job with their surface, and in a climate that’s about as difficult to maintain as any in the NFL.
I don’t know how much change we’ll see as a result of all this. I’m skeptical it’ll be much at all, because money drives the bus on these things. But it certainly seems like more players are cognizant of it than ever before. Which tells you that, for them, it really is a problem.
From Josh Meredith (@SigmaBetaZed): Are the Colts overhyped or underhyped?
Josh, I feel like the Colts are in that 2011–15 Bengals territory now, where they’ve been hyped as one of the league’s most talented rosters for such an extended period (and rightfully so, they’ve got horses) that some people are in “I’ll believe it when I see it” mode with them (also rightfully so, since they haven’t gotten past the divisional round).
That said, I’ll go ahead and tell you if you take this year in a vacuum, I do feel like the Colts are being undersold a little. You look at the roster, and there’s a solid layer of truly elite players (Quenton Nelson, Shaquille Leonard, Jonathan Taylor, DeForest Buckner), even if most are at nonpremium positions, and then another group of rising stars that could get there (Julian Blackmon, Michael Pittman, Bobby Okereke) and really solid pros (Mo Alie-Cox, Yannick Ngakoue, Ryan Kelly). There’s a lot of logic, quality and balance to the build.
Then, there’s Matt Ryan, whom I feel is being completely undersold. He was in a really difficult (if not impossible) situation for a quarterback the last couple of years. Before that, he’d proven to be really adaptable playing for a number of different coordinators under two defensive-pedigreed head coaches, and was top-shelf when things were right around him while consistently keeping Atlanta in the hunt, even winning an MVP for the 2016 season.
Now, he’s 37 years old, and I won’t ignore that. But that’s not that old for a quarterback in this day and age, and I know Indy’s confident Ryan’s capable of giving them three or four years at the level he’s at now. So I think there’s plenty of reason to be optimistic on Ryan, and on the Colts in general in a year in which their division should be wide open.
From BigNickelGirlDad (@EZDaddy79): Good morning! Isaih Pacheco: any updates, reactions, thoughts?
Big Nickel, I got a good look at Pacheco when I was at Chiefs camp and talked to a bunch of people there about him. They feel like they’ve really found something. To me, maybe most interesting was the process they took to land on him in the first place.
Kansas City’s scouting department looked at the 2022 class and saw a lot of opportunity with the tailbacks. The reason why? The class was stacked with guys who stayed in school who otherwise might not have after the COVID-19 season of ’20, either because their seasons were canceled or truncated to the point where they didn’t get to show enough of themselves. So leading into the draft, the Chiefs had a big surplus of draftable grades on guys who’d fall into Day 3, and that led to a focus on the position for them late in the draft, and then Pacheco.
What they figured they were getting was a 216-pound specimen who could comfortably run in the 4.3s (4.37 at the combine). And what they wound up getting was even better, given the vision and anticipation he’s shown as a runner early on. Now, as they see it, they might have themselves a faster version of Kareem Hunt, which is pretty good for the 30th pick of the seventh round.
I guess that would qualify as … a fantasy alert?
From Ricker81 (@D_Ricker81): What would you consider a successful season for the Giants? What are some realistic expectations?
Ricker, I think the first step has been Brian Daboll and Joe Schoen selling ownership on the idea that this probably won’t be an overnight job. The roster needs significant work, and that John Mara & Co. are on board is implied in their signing off on the sort of ground-up work the Giants put in this offseason, in not overreaching for outside free agents or trade targets, and emphasizing the lines (e.g., drafting Evan Neal, Kayvon Thibodeaux).
So from there, I’d say a couple of things will be important to keep an eye on. First and foremost, they need to get a final answer on Daniel Jones, and the fact they declined his fifth-year option for 2023 tells you which way they’d lean on that if it was truly fish-or-cut-bait time now. Second, the progress of young players already on the roster, both drafted (Neal, Thibodeaux) and inherited (Kadarius Toney, Azeez Ojulari, Andrew Thomas, etc.), is important. And third, it will also be important the team is progressively playing better into January.
If those three things happen, regardless of the record, I’d deem Year 1 a good one for Daboll and Schoen.
Kirby Lee/USA TODAY Sports
From LowCarb Beer Steve (@SteveLamplugh): Should Mond actually get a chance at QB2 for the Vikings? Or is QB2 currently not on their roster?
Steve, I think the tough thing for Kellen Mond going into his second season is pretty simple—the guys who drafted him are gone, and he wasn’t taken high enough (66th) that the new guys, Kevin O’Connell and Kwesi Adofo-Mensah, are going to feel compelled to bend over backward to aid in his development.
That said, I’d have to imagine he’ll make the team, so at the very least he’ll be in the mix to stay over the next couple of years on a contract that’s very affordable by backup quarterback standards, which will buy him time to develop.
In the meantime, Sean Mannion’s presence shouldn’t be ignored, either. Because while he’s 30 and can hardly be considered a prospect anymore, the fact that he played for Sean McVay in 2017 and ’18 gives him good background to be a very solid resource both for the coaching staff and for starter Kirk Cousins. And if you add it up, if things play out as they should, the three guys there have the makings of a pretty good quarterback room—with your starter, your veteran backup and then your young developmental guy.
From Jack Quinn (@jq6008): What camp is in the most obscure location/out of the way? Would love to get your thoughts on favorite/least favorite locations to attend.
Jack, the most obscure camp location … might actually be Oxnard, Calif. And I know that sounds weird to say, but the Cowboys are the only team left that leaves the metropolitan area they work in for camp (sure, Latrobe may only roughly be metro Pittsburgh, and Rochester isn’t really metro Buffalo, but both are within an hour away). Oxnard’s also kind of hard to get to from Los Angeles, and certainly isn’t close to the Rams’ and Chargers’ camps in Orange County (I had to make that drive last week).
That, of course, is a pretty good illustration of the changing face of training camp.
As for my favorites, Latrobe is always great. I miss the Cardinals going to Flagstaff—to me that one was very underrated and quite possibly the best of any camp sites I’ve ever been to. Bills camp at St. John Fisher is really nice, too—the temperature there is usually pretty manageable, nights are nice and the turnout is typically good (the connection between the fan base and the team adds to it as well). And if we’re talking about teams working at their home facility, it’s hard to beat the campus the Vikings built for themselves.
And I won’t get into least favorite, except to say that New Orleans and Houston are challenging places for a guy who grew up in the Northeast.
From Jason Crawford (@bobcat2498): How will the Raiders’ coaches handle their offensive line, especially at right tackle? How will they address that spot specifically? What are your thoughts about trading or signing someone else at RT?
Jason, I think, for right now, they’re going to let the competition play out. Alex Leatherwood has the first-round investment (albeit not one made by the current regime). Jermaine Eluemunor has the background in Josh McDaniels’s scheme. And I wouldn’t count out rookie Thayer Munford, either; he was rock-solid his junior year at Ohio State while playing tackle exclusively, then saw his draft stock plummet as a senior after a switch inside to guard.
To me, those guys have two weeks to prove it and show GM Dave Ziegler and McDaniels there’ll be no need to look for reinforcements during cut-down week.
From Brandon Smith (@besmither): Is the quick success seen from Joe Burrow and Justin Herbert becoming the expectation for highly drafted QBs or is it still the exception? Is last year’s QB class bringing us back to Earth?
Brandon, I think the time line now for a first-round quarterback to prove himself, so long as he’s not a total wreck, is three years. After that third year, the player is eligible for a new deal, and the team has to make a decision on his fully guaranteed fifth-year option. That line in the sand is real, as the Giants displayed in the spring with their decision-making. But before then? History tells us there is leeway.
Between 2011, when a new CBA ushered in the rookie salary scale, and ’20, 32 quarterbacks were picked in the first round. Assuming all the ’20 first-round QBs make their teams this year, only five didn’t get a third season with the team that drafted him. Those five were Brandon Weeden, Johnny Manziel, Paxton Lynch, Josh Rosen and Dwayne Haskins.
So yeah, I think in the court of public opinion, in a world where Patrick Mahomes and Lamar Jackson won MVPs in Year 2, Carson Wentz almost did and Joe Burrow got his team to a Super Bowl that fast, rulings are probably rendered faster on first-round quarterbacks than ever before. But the facts say that if you’re drafted that high, you’re probably going to get a fair amount of rope to make it work.
From Clay Hesketh (@clay_hesketh): With the Chargers seemingly upgraded at RG1, TE1, RB2, CB1, CB2, CB3, NT1, DT1, DE1, EDGE1, and EDGE2/LB2 from the previous squad that had finished 9–8 and defeated 5 eventual playoff teams, where do you see them going if they remain relatively healthy?
Clay, so much of this is going to come down to the competition in their own backyard. The AFC West is loaded, as you well know, and so I think for the four teams on that circuit, you’re going to have to win on the margins. The margins for the Chiefs are how their young defensive players come along. The margins for Denver are how the defense comes together sans Vic Fangio. The margins for the Raiders are up the gut of their defense.
The margins for the Chargers, on the other hand, may be smaller, which is good news. As I see it, they still have to figure out right tackle (and that’s a sizable question, to be sure, with Storm Norton, Trey Pipkins and potentially, down the line, rookie Jamaree Salyer in the mix). And they’re also going to be turning over the interior of their defensive line, with bigger players to fit Brandon Staley’s scheme, which will create some level of adjustment.
But overall, from a roster standpoint, they’re in pretty good shape. So as has often been the case for that franchise, a lot will probably come down to how healthy they can keep the group.
Watch NFL games this season with fuboTV: Start a free trial today.
- Joe Burrow and the New Normal
- Patrick Mahomes Is Preparing for Another Leap
- Pete Carroll Still Going Strong, Setting Seahawks’ Culture
Sports Illustrated may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
