Drake Maye Would Be the Top Pick in 2024 If Not for Caleb Williams
Last mailbag before we shut it down for a few weeks …
From David Kromelow (@dkrom59): You mentioned how much the NFL LOVES Caleb Williams … and rightfully so. What is the early opinion around the league about Drake Maye?
David, I’d say Drake Maye would be the first pick in a bunch of draft classes and is seen as very worthy of going in that spot. So as of right now, if you were a team in dire need of a franchise quarterback and were at the bottom of the standings five months from now, you’d probably be a little disappointed winding up with the second pick instead of the first pick. But the real drop-off in value would be going from 1 or 2 to 3.
Maye has a chance to be really, really good, but he has to prove it again this year, and his traits aren’t off the charts like Caleb Williams. My sense, just in asking around, is he’ll project as a very complete prospect and one that’s very good in a lot of areas, but maybe not great in any one of those.
Maye would be the top pick in a lot of NFL drafts.
Brett Davis/USA TODAY Sports
And while we’re here, what I’m saying is there’s a huge drop-off from Maye to the rest of the class in general, because you have what could be truly elite prospects at receiver (Ohio State’s Marvin Harrison Jr.), edge rusher (Alabama’s Dallas Turner), left tackle (Penn State’s Olu Fashanu) and tight end (Georgia’s Brock Bowers). But at this early juncture, someone else in the draft class would have to break through in the fall for there not to be a big drop-off among the quarterbacks after Williams and Maye are off the board.
From Joshua Gray (@BumpinFresh): Will the “Commanders” be the “Commanders” when the 2024 season starts?
Joshua, I do think so, although the ownership change does create a little wiggle room on it.
NFL rules dictate that once a team changes its logo-uniforms, it can’t change them again for another five years—it’s why the Browns had to wait until 2020 to shed the new-age uniforms they went to in ’15 and go back to their classic look. That means the Commanders would have to wait until ’27 to undergo another rebrand. And by then, there’s the chance that name and uniforms grow on everyone (like “Titans” once did).
Again, the wild card would be new owner Josh Harris. He’s an area native, which means he might have strong feelings on the subject, and maybe the NFL would grant him leniency with the rules in allowing for a post–Dan Snyder rebrand to try to invigorate the fan base going into a new era. I just wouldn’t count on it.
Watch the NFL with fuboTV. Start your free trial today.
From dancmc (@dancmc): What would it take for the NFL to interject and change rules about tanking (or even implement a lottery)?
Dan, I think tanking would have to be a glaring problem for the league to consider it, and the truth is it really hasn’t been. This year should be a great litmus test. With two high-level quarterbacks available, and one potentially being on the Andrew Luck–Trevor Lawrence level, the impact could be felt as early as the trade deadline, and lead to some, uh, creative roster management down the stretch.
So maybe that makes the league think.
I just know that league officials and teams don’t think the current system is broken, and would worry it could lead to more, not less, tanking in Weeks 17 and 18, with solid, nonplayoff teams trying to position themselves to move up in the draft order. And going to a lottery would also mean acknowledging a problem in this area, something I don’t think the league would really want to do.
(That said, the content a draft lottery would provide the NFL, not to mention the hype it’d build for the draft itself, I think, would be pretty enticing for folks in certain corners of the league office.)
From Matt (@colonelzeitel1): You never answer me this one, but would like you to answer if you ever think the Super Bowl could be played on a Saturday. Thanks!
Matt, it’s your lucky week. I’m answering it.
And the answer to your question is no—mostly because the networks, and therefore the league, wouldn’t want to put it on a Saturday. That, of course, is for ratings reasons.
You, the avid fan, would love to have it on Saturday, because that’d give you a full day you don’t have now to recover from all the festivities before going back to work. The problem is the NFL has you. You’ll watch that game Sunday, Tuesday, Friday … they could put it on at midnight Monday, and you and I would be there, and they know it. So they’re not worried about how you can consume it, because they know you’ll be there, regardless.
For all games, but especially the Super Bowl, they’re looking to draw in the fringe fan, the person who could take it or leave it. That person is far more likely to watch if the game’s on a Sunday night rather than a Saturday night, based on decades and decades of data on viewership trends—Sunday’s a much better ratings night than Saturday in general for obvious reasons (mostly that people are more likely to stay in Sunday night).
Sorry, Matt. Probably not the answer you were waiting for.
From ASB1216 (@ASB1216): The NFL is a copycat league as you know. In talking to folks around the league, are there schematic trends you anticipate teams trying to implement on either side of the ball whether it’s something we’ve seen in the NFL, college or even USFL or XFL?
Well, the first one that jumps to mind are the kickoff rules in the USFL and XFL. Special teams coaches like the kickoff rule in the USFL in particular—which is counterintuitive as a safety measure, in that it moves the kick back to the 25-yard line, and makes touchbacks, at least on paper, a little less likely (which means more returns). Early signs are that by stretching out the field, and creating space, and allowing return teams more space to set up blocks, and cover teams more space to plot pursuit, it’s making high-end collisions less frequent.
Early data is promising, but I’m not sure there’s anything close to conclusive quite yet on the impact the rule has had. At the very least, the NFL is studying that one.
On offense, it feels like even more air-raid concepts are taking hold in college—Tennessee is one program that thrived on that last year—and many of those are built to stretch defenses horizontally, which doesn’t apply as much in the pros with NFL hash marks much tighter than college. On defense, I do think we’re seeing more so-called “position-less” players, in the safety-linebacker hybrids, the safety-nickel hybrids and the linebacker-edge hybrids, which has been, and will be, fun to watch in how it impacts the pros.
Daboll had the Giants in the playoffs in his first season, while Saleh appears to have the Jets headed in that direction with the addition of Rodgers.
Danielle Parhizkaran/NorthJersey.com/USA TODAY
From GGA (@ChilangoJet): Albert, as a Jets fan, I’m a big fan of RS. However, my mind keeps going to what could’ve happened if we had hired Brian Daboll instead (was in the mix as well). Offensive-minded coaches seem the way to go and maaaaybe Zach Wilson develops in a better way? Love the show!
Thanks, GGA. I understand your point, and get that Brian Daboll is the King of New York right now and deservedly so—Giants fans have all kinds of reasons to be optimistic. It’s also fair to have the nature-nurture argument on Zach Wilson in trying to understand better why the second pick in the 2021 draft has failed so spectacularly over the past two years.
But I think there’s another side to this that some people have ignored with Robert Saleh, and that’s he and Joe Douglas generated a situation over the past two years that was good enough to attract Aaron Rodgers to New York. There’s a layer of really good players—Garrett Wilson, Ali Vera-Tucker, Breece Hall, Quinnen Williams and Sauce Gardner among them—that have been developed to get Rodgers to New York.
That doesn’t erase that it didn’t work out with Wilson. But I do think that, plus the fact that the core of players got out to a 7–4 start last year, despite the aforementioned play at quarterback, should give Saleh and Douglas some benefit of the doubt. Now, if it doesn’t work with Rodgers? We’re talking about something else entirely.
From Matthew Lownes (@LownesMatthew): When’s the Rodgers contract going to be re-done?
Matthew, I wouldn’t worry about that. The Jets have plenty of cap space for 2023 to take on however much, or little, of the $58.3 million he was owed this year, and pushed to ’24 to facilitate the trade (and take cap burden off the Packers) back in April. And I’m not sure exactly what the holdup is on that.
One thing I could speculate on here is that they’d like to get some extensions done, such as the monster deal that Williams has coming, first, and then rebuild Aaron Rodgers’s contract around that. But that would just be a guess by me. What I know is you have nothing to worry about. Most of this really is just bookkeeping, although what the deal ends up looking like in the end could give us some clues on whether Rodgers plans to follow through with his plan to play at least two years with the Jets.
Prescott still has two years left on his deal, so an extension isn't a priority for the Cowboys.
Godofredo A. Vásquez/AP
From Donald Shinn (@DonaldShinn): Things have been quiet on the Dak Prescott extension. Are the Cowboys really going to carry his $59+ million cap hit in 2024?
Donald, I feel comfortable saying that, no, they won’t carry that number into 2024.
Like I said with the Jets, my guess would be that the Cowboys will focus on getting current-year business—Tony Pollard’s situation is still lingering—done before diving into a Dak Prescott extension. Remember, he still has two years left on his deal, and will turn 30 in July, meaning he’ll be 32 in the first new year of his next contract, one that could be the last one he does with the Cowboys.
So there’s no need to rush it. There’d be benefits to doing it early, for sure, for both the player and team (Prescott would get security and more cash now, the Cowboys would protect themselves against inflation, and have an extra year to manage the numbers over the life of the deal). But if it’s not done before early next year, that wouldn’t be the end of the world, either.
From Dan Hertig (@danthemanalways): What happens with Danielle Hunter?
Dan, I think Danielle Hunter winds up reporting to training camp, and I think the Vikings see where he’s at, and where the team’s at. And I think they listen to offers along the way.
Hunter is going into his ninth NFL season and is somehow still just 28 years old (he’ll be 29 in October). Last year, he posted his fourth double-digit sack season and played 17 games after injuries tore apart his 2020 and ’21 seasons. He’s also, finally, at the end of a five-year extension that was team friendly when he signed it, became more team friendly over time and, as such, has grown into a pretty constant point of contention between him and the team.
So what the Vikings might be able to get for him is a little complicated. You have a 20-something pass rusher with a great track record of success, and also one with injury history and an expiring contract. In a reset year, if the Vikings were offered a first-round pick for Hunter, I think they’d have trouble turning that down. Is that offer coming? I don’t know.
From JF (@j_md15): From what you’re hearing, is Sam Howell a legitimate starting QB in the league? Or is Washington looking to kick the can and try for one of the big rookies in this next draft class?
JF, not sure about Sam Howell, but one thing that’s pretty clear coming out of OTAs is Washington thinks it has a lot more than a fifth-round talent in the second-year quarterback. He flashed a plus arm in the spring and was clearly the team’s best at the position in May and June, and so Ron Rivera & Co. do feel justified in giving him the chance to be the guy.
And, obviously, Rivera and execs Martin Mayhew and Marty Hurney have a lot riding on the kid, which brings us to the second part of your question. Those guys can’t afford to kick the can down the road, because they do that, with a new owner coming in, and it’ll probably be some other folks getting to work with the new quarterback coming in.
Jack Jones was arrested Friday at Logan Airport in Boston for multiple gun-related charges.
Brian Fluharty/USA TODAY Sports
From Cam Gravina (@cgrav05): What happens at the CB position if Jack Jones gets cut? How do you think that plays out?
Cam, the Patriots won’t be as good, but I don’t think the situation would be dire. I’ve heard Christian Gonzalez was the team’s best corner during OTAs and minicamp. If he’s starting on the left side, I think you can kick Jonathan Jones back outside, and have second-year dynamo Marcus Jones play the nickel position he was drafted to play. And Jalen Mills can come back down from an outside spot if that doesn’t work.
It's not ideal, of course, because Jack Jones did show a lot of potential on the outside, and depth would be a problem without him. But with a little luck injury-wise, I think they could still be O.K. at a pretty important spot, especially if Gonzalez delivers.
From Ricker81 (@D_Ricker81): How’s it gonna end up with Barkley? Play on the tag or a deal gets done?
Ricker, I think they get a deal done, and for good reason. For the team, it’d be a signal to the locker room that guys who persevere, produce and consistently do the right thing will get rewarded. And Saquon Barkley’s got to take the money, even if it’s just guaranteeing him this year’s money and next, because of the circumstance he’s in—as a tailback going into his sixth year with a long injury history.
Let’s say the Giants are willing to lock in Barkley at $26 million over the next two years. Yes, Barkley could make the argument his worth to the team exceeds that. But … he’s making $10.1 million this year. What are the chances he earns that, then is able to find the remaining $15.9 million to play somewhere in 2024? Based on where the running back market’s been in free agency the past couple of years? Not good.
So, yeah, the Giants should do something fair, and Barkley should just take whatever that is.
