2019-2020 NFL Offseason

Yes, it seems early to start an offseason thread, but what the heck. I want wanted to comment on a recent discussion about the QB carousel on <i>The Ringer</i> (with Robert Mays and Mina Kimes)–specifically, surprising and off-the-wall comments about one QB in particular, and that QB is

Matt Stafford. Their opinion of him seems rather low, or at least they seemed uncertain if Stafford is a legitimate franchise QB. I haven’t been a believer in Stafford’s career, but I think he, with the help of Caldwell, turned himself into a legitimate franchise QB. The Lions moving on from Stafford would suggest a return to being the Cleveland Browns of the NFC.

So what about the other QBs that could possibly move. Mays and Kimes also mentioned Andy Dalton, Case Keenum, Foles, Bridgewater, Manning, and Tannehill. They also mentioned Carr, Mariota, and Winston. Dalton and Tannehill are interesting ones. If my team didn’t have a QB I wouldn’t be too thrilled about getting, either. I think if you surround them with a good team, especially a strong defense and run game, I think they can have success, but I’m less certain if they can win a Super Bowl. At this point, I’d be wary of taking Mariota as well. Of the names, mentioned I would prefer taking a chance on Carr.

I’m surprised they didn’t mention Flacco. I wanted him to go to the Jaguars, but I don’t know if he’d be a good fit with DeFilippo. They mentioned Foles going there. I’m not that enthused, but it might work.

For teams that need a QB–like the Dolphins (if they’re moving on from Tannehill) and Redskins–who do you get? Also, I really don’t like the Trubisky situation with the Bears.

31 thoughts on “2019-2020 NFL Offseason

  1. In lieu of possible trade of Antonio Brown, where would be a good landing spot for him and LeVeon Bell? The first team that came to mind is the Colts. Brown, plus TY Hilton would be a deadly combination. (I think the Colts should upgrade their RB, but they don’t have to spend a lot for that.)

    My understanding is that they have a lot of cap space. If the Colts have a lot of cap space, going out and getting Earl Thomas might be something they should consider (although given Earl’s age and injury, I’d be hesitant).

    Which team would be justified in getting (and paying for) Bell? I would think it has to be a run first team, and they’d have to have the cap space. The first team that came to mind is the Panthers, although I think the Panthers should get a stout, hammering type of back, a workhorse that can run in between the tackles or off tackle. Besides the Panthers, I thought of the Jets and Texans, although they’re not run first teams. I could see Bell being a very productive player on those teams–ditto the Chiefs. I suspect those teams are going to be more pass-first, spread offenses, and I feel like it’s not worth paying a lot for a RB on those teams. If I’m going to consider the Jets, Texans, and Chiefs, I would add the Colts to the list as well. Oh, the Raiders might be another one, but I doubt they’ll be run first. (I love watching Bell run, but I prefer RBs bruising power.)

  2. I believe that Brown is still under contract, so if another team would want him, they would have to trade for him. Based on what I know from Reid, he values draft picks. Should a team be willing to give a one this year and a two next year? I guess that depends on the team as well, because we already know the draft order, so a higher draft pick may be all the Steelers want, or maybe a higher draft pick this year with a third or fourth next year may be all they would want.

    Wasn’t the rumor that the Steelers would use a transition tag on Bell and then trade him? Is that risky? But if that happens I would think a team would have to give up at least a second round pick for him.

    But if you are talking fantasy and they could go anywhere, I like Brown to Indy. That would be a great move for them and possibly him. Although the talk was he lost a step, and it could be as he didn’t have the numbers he had previously. Bell and Lamar Jackson was linked, and that would be cool if the Ravens could get him. But if the Steelers are going to trade Bell, that would be highly unlikely that they would trade him in the division, and it doesn’t seem like the Ravens can sign him as a free agent, so probably not.

    1. If I’m the Steelers, I’m thinking of the rapidly closing Roethlisberger window, which means not draft picks, but missing pieces who could get into the post season again. Juju Smith-Schuster is a nice receiver, but he’s not the number one Brown is. Can he be a good number one if there’s an equally good number two? What about Alshon Jeffery and an Eagles DB? Jeffery doesn’t get thrown to when Wentz is in the backfield anyway. I don’t know what the cap implications would be, but personnel wise it could work.

      1. Man you are pretty high on Jeffery. I think he’s too slow for an outside receiver, and too big for an inside guy. But with Juju on the outside that might actually work. I think if I was the Steelers and I took Jeffery they would have to throw in a Fletcher Cox. If that was the case the Steelers could throw in a fifth round pick? That would sound about right to me.

        1. He can dominate, but he is inconsistent. He was great with Brandon Marshall on the other side, which is why I think it could work with Juju.

    2. I thought about this question without really thinking about what would have to be given up to get AB (or Bell). Adding draft picks as a part of trade makes the proposition less appealing to me–at least for the team giving up the picks, unless the team wouldn’t have to give up much. I don’t like giving up a lot for a WR, and if I did, I’d prefer the bigger WRs that excel who can out muscle their defender. On a related note, I’m with Mitchell with regard to Jeffery. I really like him and WRs like him. With someone like Jeffery (and for a time I thought Kelvin Benjamin was like this, too), they may not put up big numbers, but if they can make a handful of catches in crucial situations–e.g., 3rd or isolation in the end zone or one one or two bombs–they are really valuable and worth more than people might think. I’d rather have a WR like than a great slot WR who catches a lot of balls.

      Bell and Lamar Jackson was linked, and that would be cool if the Ravens could get him.

      The main reason I didn’t mention the Ravens is that I think the RBs they have are good enough. I suspect Bell would make them better, although he’s not a bruiser in the way that Gus Edwards seems to be. Having said that, I’m concerned that defenses may figure out a way to defend the Ravens offense with Jackson, and in that case, they may need a better RB.

  3. Actually looking at the draft order, I can see San Fran offering their number two this year and a low pick next year for Brown. If they wanted him of course.

  4. I’m hearing Flacco to the Broncos, which makes sense if Elway is sticking with the defense and strong run game formula. I still think this is a situation where Flacco can be and is the most effective (to the point where he can lead them to a Super Bowl.)

    I’m disappointed that he didn’t go to the Jaguars, but the Jags hiring DeFilippo suggests that they’re going to be more pass-oriented, so that probably wasn’t a good fit. If they’re going to be a run first team, they should consider Keenum.

    Which team would make a good fit for Keenum? The first team that popped into my mind: the Bears. If the Bears could get him as a backup that would be great for them, although I think Keenum would likely steal the starting job from Trubisky.

    Probably a better and more realistic fit would be the Redskins.

    If a team can get Keenum as a backup that would be great for that team.

    (If the Jaguars are going to be run-based offense, I’d go for Keenum.)

    1. I get why you think Keenum would be good in a run first offense, as in limit his throws and protect him from having to pass too much. Yet I picture him as an aggressive down-the-field thrower, who can get hot or into a “zone” or rhythm the more he throws. I think that’s part of the reason he struggled in Denver. Don’t get me wrong, I’m hardly saying Keenum is that good. He’s serviceable, and I would have him as a viable starter though (maybe top 20 if not just outside of that).

      1. I get why you think Keenum would be good in a run first offense, as in limit his throws and protect him from having to pass too much.

        That, and the fact that I don’t think he can be consistently good enough to build an offense around him (the definition of a back up). With a real strong run game and defense, you’d only need him to make a handful of key throws. What’s good about Keenum is that he’s better at creating something out of nothing than people think–and that’s what you need to win the Super Bowl.

        If the Jags defense is dominant, and their run game is top three, with Keenum, I think they’d have a good shot of winning the Super Bowl. (But given their OC and head coach, I’m guessing they’re going to be more pass oriented. Foles would make more sense in that situation, I guess.)

        By the way, if Miami moves on from Tannehill, who would be a good replacement? I’m not a huge fan or believer in Tannehill, but if I were a fan, I wouldn’t be thrilled if Bridgewater, Foles, Dalton, or Keenum was the replacement.

      2. One other thing I forgot to say: To me, the problem in Denver last year and the problem in Minnesota wasn’t the QBs–the problem was the OL and run games. The Broncos could be productive, but I don’t think they were consistent or good enough. That is, for Keenum to be effective, you better have one of the better run games in the league, and I wouldn’t say the Broncos qualified. Same with the Vikings.

        By the way, Flacco is in the same situation. It’s not about him–it’s about the OL and run game. If both are good and the defense is also really good, they can win it all. (If Kubiak was their OC, I’d like their chances.)

        1. In Keenum’s one good year (of his entire NFL career) at Minnesota, he didn’t have a good run game. He was gun-slinging it. Hence my take on him.

          1. Fluke implies it couldn’t happen again or that it is highly unlikely. I think it’s possible if he has the receiver talent that he had in Minnesota and if that team had to throw as much as Minnesota did. I tend to agree with you in that average QBs should be placed in situations where they don’t have to make too many plays. I would put Dak in that category as well. But I was just pointing out the other side for Keenum and that he seem to like to push the ball down the field. I wished Dak would be more aggressive down the field as well, but if he did it a lot it would be hard for Dallas to be a great ball control team.

      1. So I’m thinking they’re going to draft a QB, and just get the best, cheapest QB available. I wonder if Bradford is available for cheap. Another guy: Fitzpatrick.

        Tannehill would be a good backup, if he can’t find a team where he could start. I’d be happy with him in Seattle. I’d love Keenum in Seattle. Same with the Raiders.

  5. Of this list, John Brown stands out, especially if a team can get him for a good deal. Run-based teams should consider this, especially if they don’t have a vertical threat (or is Brown not as good a vertical threat as I’m thinking). Panthers, Cowboys, and Broncos would be good. I like the pairing with Amari or Emmanuel Sanders. (Ravens should probably consider keeping him, too, if they don’t have to spend a lot.)

    He would also be a really good #3 addition to a lot of teams–Lions, Bucs (reuniting with Arians)–the list is long.

    I heard the Cowboys might move on from Beasley. If so, they should consider Humphries.

    1. Humphries is awesome… But I’m not 100% sure how much he will costs and I’m not sure they will want to pay for someone that high. Realistically he and Golden Tate could cost around the same is my guess.

      1. I don’t share your opinion of Humphries. In fact, my impression is that he’s a poor man’s version of Beasley (and I wouldn’t say Beasley is awesome. He’s a solid-to-good slot WR in my opinion.)

        1. I only saw him play a couple times and he was doing good, but you are probably right. On PFF top free agents, Golden Tate was top twenty, Beasley top fifty, and Humphries not listed. So if he is pretty cheap, I would definitely be happy if the Cowboys got him.

  6. You know Beasley has to be considered by the Patriots.

    You shouldn’t be so shy about giving up draft picks. If you’re targeting a first-round WR, you’d be silly not to give up a pick for AB. I might not want to give up a second-round pick (where all the value supposedly is) but a first and two thirds for AB? If your team is already playoff good or nearly playoff good?

    As much as I like Alshon, I have to disagree about a slot guy. You’d rather have Jeffrey than Edelmann? The case can be made but I think I’ll take Edelmann every time if I have Brady (or someone Brady-like) for a QB.

    1. You know Beasley has to be considered by the Patriots.

      Yeah, but moreso if they lose Edelman.

      If you’re targeting a first-round WR, you’d be silly not to give up a pick for AB.

      Well, it depends. I don’t like using a top 10 pick on a WR. The WR better be a Julio Jones, Megatron type of WR. Also, if you draft a WR they’re not going to cost as much as an established player like AB.

      As much as I like Alshon, I have to disagree about a slot guy. You’d rather have Jeffrey than Edelmann?

      Yeah, I think so. I think you have to take Edelman out of the context of the Patriots. If the team in question didn’t have Belichick, would you want Edelman or Jeffery? I’d take Jeffery. I think it’s hard to build an offense around a slot WR; it’s easier to build it around someone like Jeffery. and I think if you put Jeffery in a good run-based offense, I’d prefer Jeffery.

      1. I heard someone on the radio say the Patriots this season have been referring to third downs as “Third and Jules.”

        “What down is it?”
        “Third and Jules.”
        🙂

      2. I think we had this discussion before, but AB is a slot guy. I would think teams would want to build around him. There are slot guys that cannot take their guy deep ala Edelman, but guys like AB and Doug Baldwin can make plays deep.

        1. Right, but did we figure out if he only played the slot? That’s not the impression I have. By the way, while I love Baldwin, I don’t get the sense that you can really build a team around him. That is, he, by himself, isn’t going to elevate the WRs around him. I could be wrong about that, though.

          1. I’m pretty sure AB plays the slot more than 50% of the time, probably more (but I could be wrong). I see Mike Evans in the slot, but that doesn’t mean he cannot be classified as an outside guy. That goes for Dez as well.

  7. I’m pretty sure AB plays the slot more than 50% of the time, probably more (but I could be wrong).

    Maybe this is a better way to frame the question: Is he primarily or only effective in the slot? If he’s only or primarily good in the slot, I wouldn’t want to build around him.

    1. I skimmed the list. I’m not sure how they do the rankings. I’d probably have a hard time after #30. Off the top of my head, I’d guess that there might be a bias or higher bar for RBs to make the list. If a RB doesn’t catch a lot of balls, their rushing stats would have to be really good for them to make this list–or that’s what I’m guessing. I didn’t see if Chris Carson made the list, but I think you could have made a case for him.

  8. Don,

    Fluke implies it couldn’t happen again or that it is highly unlikely. I think it’s possible if he has the receiver talent that he had in Minnesota and if that team had to throw as much as Minnesota did.

    It’s possible, but how likely, is it? I think it’s pretty unlikely that Keenum would replicate that performance, under similar conditions. I like Keenum, too, and I’ve liked him before that performance, but he was playing out of his mind that year. “Fluke” really seems like the appropriate word.

    But I was just pointing out the other side for Keenum and that he seem to like to push the ball down the field.

    Not just pushing the ball down the field, but he’s flashed in other positive ways as well. To me, he’s a perfect example of a good backup–a QB that can play like a starter in relatively short stretches. In 2017, he played like a good starting QB for an entire season, but I do tend to think that was a one off. Cinderella turning back into a pumpkin, if you know what I mean.

    I wished Dak would be more aggressive down the field as well, but if he did it a lot it would be hard for Dallas to be a great ball control team.

    How aggressive do you mean? I think throwing 2-4 deep passes a game is an important part of a good run-based offense. The Seahawks deep passing game came alive this year, and I think that had to do with a run game. The vertical passing game is a perfect complement for a good run game. Indeed, I tend to think that without it, the run game can’t be as good. (At the same time, the vertical passing game can’t be as good with a really good run game as well.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *