Cowboys plan to franchise tag George Pickens + Will Colts get a new deal done with Daniel Jones? (2/24 Hour 1)

Coming up today on PFT Live from Indianapolis, the Cowboys seem to be ready to apply the franchise tag to receiver George Pickens. Will the Colts be able to get a new deal done with quarterback Daniel Jones? And the first look at the PFT Top 100 Free Agent List for 2026, PFT Live, starts now. Good morning. It's Wednesday. Not Wednesday. Look, I screwed up right out of the gates. It's Tuesday. Time is a flat circle here in Indianapolis. It's Groundhog's Day. We're back. It feels like we just left. And look who's with me. We have the very rare three-person show for the full two hours. I don't think we've ever done three for the full two hours. We rarely do three for two minutes. Miles Simmons, Shereen Williams here with me. Chris Sims on his way at some point today from Snowden, Connecticut. So thanks to both of you for getting up early. I know Miles is still adjusting from the whole jet lag thing. But at least it's 7 a.m. It's not 4 a.m. Usually when you do this, it is 4 a.m. on your clock. You can look at your phone. You can look at your computer and see that it is indeed 7 o'clock. So thanks to both of you for being here. Of course. You know what's funny, Mike? I do keep my computer on Eastern time. So it's like you're trying to fool yourself, right, into thinking that everything is really later than it really is. And so today I don't really have to fool myself. It's nice to just, you know, be here and be in God's time on Eastern time and, you know, the United States, and here we go. This will be fun. The one thing that I learn every time I leave the Eastern time zone is the Eastern time is all that matters. And it's so difficult. It's very true. It's so difficult to do the math. And I think if you're only one hour behind, as you are in Dallas, like it's even harder then. And I never get used to it. And then when I finally begin to get used to it, it's time to go back home. But fortunately, and that's the first thing my wife asked when I called her and said, hey, I'm here. She's like, is it the same time? I said, I think it is. Nothing's changed. Nothing's changed on my phone or my computer. So we have still Eastern time zone. It does. Yes. Well, in South Bend, at least this is my understanding, and I hope I get this right. Because in South Bend. I hope you get it wrong. Well, I know. That would be pretty hilarious. It's just outside of South Bend or, like, maybe in South Bend. It changes from Eastern to Central because my best friend is from up there. And so his family was in Eastern time, but his wife's family is in Central. So, like, they have all kinds of confusion on time zones. But wait, did they go to Daylight Savings? I didn't think they went to Daylight Savings. I don't think they do Daylight Savings in Indiana. We're going to have to find that out. All right, we'll find that out. Kids, if you have a snow day, it feels like school. We're not talking about football, but we will be. And you may learn some other things. You may learn some words. I'm going to try to get one of them to swear on the air today. We were taking bets on who it would be. It's going to be Miles. It's going to be Miles. It won't be Shireen. Yeah, it would never be Shireen. Okay. So we're going to be here for the rest of the week. We've got two hours this morning, and there's no one around. And I doubt that anyone will be around for the next two hours. It's just the way it works. They'll start to trickle in. There's podiums everywhere. You can see them in the background. They will be, from time to time, occupied, partially, sometimes fully. There'll be media all over the place. There's a CBS set next to us. There's some TV sets down here. Later in the day, there'll be coaches and general managers trickling through. I'll be interviewing some of them. Tomorrow, we'll start having prospects. That's when it really gets active. They bring the prospects through. And they started doing that, I think, four or five years ago. It's a great addition to the process, and it's good for the kids. It gives them a chance to get to know some people in the media, to be on air, to talk a little bit, and just do something a little different than getting dragged around all these things that may become a little bit much. This should be. I mean, hopefully it's fun for them to come and sit and visit for a little bit. Marvin Harrison Jr. is the only one, and my experience doing this, 1995 is my first. I think Marvin Harrison Jr. is the only one that didn't do the media sessions. Correct, yes. Because it's been, for years, a press conference that they'll do. Right. And some of the guys get podiums, some of them sit at tables, but they started making them available to the shows about four or five years ago. And it's a great way to meet them, to see them, to see how do they conduct themselves, how do they get along, what can we pick up. Some of it's polycured Or polycured, manicured and polished Sims is here, polycured Good lord Good lord, almost as bad He said something yesterday He was trying to say middle of the road and run of the mill And he said middle of the road Mill of the road So see how I deflect I deflect my polycured back onto him Good lord So anyway, we're here for the rest of the week And we'll be making up new words that the kids can learn Whether they're profane or whether they've just never been uttered before That's what we plan to do. So there's plenty going on in the NFL. And this is the week where tampering will be rampant. Plenty of talk about free agency. Who's going to resign? Who's going to get tagged? There's another week to go until the franchise tag deadline arrives. And the Cowboys made it known, sort of, yesterday, that they're likely, they're leaning. I think the magic word from Stephen Jones, the executive VP, was we're leaning toward applying the franchise tag to receiver George Pickens. He had a career year, finally paired with a competent quarterback, 1,429 receiving yards, second team all pro. Sims would say, based on film review, by the end of the year, the defenses were giving him more attention and respect than they were to C.D. Lamb. Jerry Jones after that Raiders Monday night game, on and on about how poetry in motion are words to that effect. And look, he's gotten to the point where he deserves a long-term contract, but the collective bargaining agreement authorizes teams one per year, squad on a free agent with a franchise tag, and it looks like that's what they're going to do. And, you know, there's a lot to unpack here as it relates to what the ramifications will be. But this is the Cowboy way. They're not going to overpay for anyone. And if they can get away with keeping this guy for one year and $28 million, they're going to do it. They traded a third-round draft pick to get him. Great trade, as it turns out. He had a franchise year, as you said, Mike. You can argue he was better than C.D. Lamb. C.D. Lamb was banged up last year. I think C.D. Lamb is the better receiver. They're not going to pay him as much as C.D. Lamb. They're going to try to get him to a long-term deal. They need him to make their offense click. They were a better offense with him on the field. All the numbers suggest, if you look at them, all the analytics, on the field, 7.9 yards per attempt, 68% completion. Off the field, 4.5 yards per attempt, 58% completion. He made Dak Prescott a better quarterback. No question about it. What did that get you? You didn't make the playoffs. You had a losing record. Your defense was historically bad, gave up the most points in franchise history. I don't know how you do it, how you pay him what he wants. That's what they've got to figure out, and I'm glad I don't have that job because they've got to make this defense better if they're going to do anything. I think they can get better quickly. I think they can win that division if they get their defense better. But you've got to go spend the money on the defense. You've got to go spend the two first-round draft picks on your defense. And if you do that, you have a chance to get really good. So what can you afford to pay this guy to keep him to make your offense better, to still have enough money to make your defense better? George Pickens, to me, is the rare player that leaves the Steelers and then somehow gets better, right? I mean, when you think about guys who have left the Steelers when they were under Mike Tomlin, which is now still weird to say that they're not, guys don't usually go and get better. Usually when they leave the Steelers, something weird happens. I mean, think about Antonio Brown, right? All the weirdness that then was apparently being covered up by what was going on with the Steelers. And then he goes elsewhere and it's fine, but it's not like he was ever as productive. I think with Pickens, it's so interesting because he was a head case and he kind of still is. But you can see the production that came when he was with Dak Prescott, especially when you have both of those guys on the field and C.D. Lamb. And so I think you're right, Shereen. And look, they need Pickens to make the offense go as the way that they want to. That's obvious. But then if you're going to improve that defense, then I guess it does come down to, OK, you have these two cost-controlled first-round picks, and that's probably the way you have to use them. Otherwise, I mean, you're not going to get better by taking George Pickens away from that offense. And so is it just for one year that you make this work or is it then a long-term thing? And then also long-term, can you balance having both Pickens and C.D. Lamb? That, to me, especially just knowing what we know about George Pickens' history, that's interesting. This is a thread I want to pull because I've been a George Pickens fan and defender since he got into the league. Because the first time I saw the guy play, I thought he had ridiculous high-end potential. and sometimes I get dragged internally for suggesting that he could be as good as Randy Moss, but he can have that kind of impact on a game if he gets the opportunity to do it. And in Pittsburgh, and it is a weird twist on the idea that a receiver leaves Pittsburgh and gets better because it has been. Guys great in Pittsburgh, goes somewhere else and it falls apart. Free agent, goes somewhere else, falls apart. Teams find out, man, this guy was a pain in the ass. Mike Tomlin did a great job of keeping him together. But you could put, let's just say Randy Moss, you put Randy Moss in Pittsburgh from 2022 through 2024 with Kenny Pickett, with Justin Fields and Russell Wilson, all due respect, and you're going to get the same result. Look, Randy Moss, when he was with bad teams, was a head case. So you got a guy who is open every play, who's open when he's not open, who will catch anything thrown his way, and they never throw it his way. There's going to be a point where it cracks a little bit. And I think that's an important topic here because if he dares to push back on this mechanism that is going to hold him in place for $28 million and leave him with very few options, If he pushes back, there's going to be a backlash against him that dredges up all the stuff in Pittsburgh. This guy has no right to make these demands. He had one good year. He had three bad years with the Steelers. He has one good year. And who does he think he is to want more than $28 million? Well, the market's $40 million. This is the problem now. And I don't know how we got to the point where the franchise tag, which once upon a time guaranteed the player a high rate relative to the market. They've done this mechanism now where the franchise tag calculation lags badly behind where the market is. And it's a no-brainer for the Cowboys. Like, okay, this guy, what's he going to want? He's going to want 40. He's going to want 40 over four or five years with the first two years, maybe plus guaranteed. If we can keep him for 28 and we can tag him next year for a 20% bump over 28, that's easy. We're going to do that every day. And that's the core of the problem. The system allows the Cowboys to squat on him for 28. And he's going to be in a delicate spot because if he pushes back, he's opening the door to a PR problem, Shereen. Yeah. Late to meetings. Didn't know if they'd show up to president. Do we know late to meetings, though? Do we know late to meetings? I'm going to be the George Pickens defender. Do we not late to meet him? Yes. Well, he was late, and they didn't always know if he was going to show up to practice. And there were those type things, just the tardiness. But did he show up to practice? But where is it documented? This is going to get feisty. Where is it documented? Because there was something last week from, I think it was Todd Archer, and he made an observation at the end, and one of the dovebots on Twitter took it and twisted it into something more than it was. And I've been looking like, where is the documented evidence that this guy was late for anything other than the thing in Las Vegas that C.D. Lamb was late for, too? They were out at a casino or something like that, missed a bus, something. All right, well, other than, you know. No, no, no, no. But my point is this. If we're going to say this guy's a chronic. Jerry has said it. Okay. Jerry said, and he joked about it, yeah, I've been late to things, too. Yeah. That was his joke. So Jerry basically confirmed that he's like— Do you believe Jerry? Yes, I believe Jerry. I don't believe Jerry. On that subject, I don't know why we shouldn't believe Jerry. I'm going with the more Jerry expert on this one, Mike. Look, they've got a motivation here to suddenly or otherwise crap on this guy. Sure. We saw what they did with Micah, and they want him to take the $28 million, and they want to win the PR battle. That's the thing that I think is residing at the core of this that is going to flash. If he would stand up and say, I'm not signing for 28. I want to trade. I'm never playing for 28. If he stands up and does that, he's inviting an avalanche of, as I was saying earlier, who do you think you are? You were late all the time. You were a head case in Pittsburgh. And look at what he did last year. And this is where we are. What are we projecting for this guy to do based on what we most recently saw? The guy's got the chance to be a superstar. I voted him first-team All-Pro. He finished second-team All-Pro. And I think his reputation probably kept him from being first-team All-Pro. I think he deserved to be first-team All-Pro because they take three. I see what's coming here, and I don't want to let the Cowboys get away with it. That's why I'm pushing back a little bit. They're going to try to box this guy into a PR corner where he has no choice but to take the $28 million. Okay, let me ask you a question, Mike. The Cowboys had an opportunity after they traded for him to sign him to a long-term deal. Would you have done that at that point after the trade? When, though? When? After the Raiders game, when Jerry was going on and on about how he'd never seen anything like it? It was so over the top. If I'm C.D. Lamb, I'm thinking, damn, he's never said that about me. So that's the problem of getting caught up in the moment, doing 105.3 The Fan in Dallas twice a week, and you say all these great things. David Mulageta, who also represents Michael Parsons and has been down this road with Jerry before, you file that away. If the owner is going to say that kind of thing publicly about your client, yeah, okay, let's go. But the market is still $40,000, and that was before the cap went up another $10, $15 million. dollars. That's the thing. We get, fans get caught up in the numbers as it relates to what the players are making, and they compare it to what they make, and they get resentful. Yeah. 28 million. Oh my god, oh, I hope you can feed your family at 28 million. And I understand why people do that, because we know what the players make, but the reason they make what they make is because of the salary cap, which is funded by half of the money that is coming through the cash register, and the other half is going straight into the pockets of the owners who are floating around on 200-foot super yachts, and nobody ever says boo about that. That's what drives me crazy, and that's what I think the Cowboys are trying to do. They're trying to push George Pickens into this spot where he going to feel like he has no choice but to say yes to million for another year even though he should have a market deal Well and he probably should right I don think that there any dispute about how good and how talented George Pickens is It just a matter of the consistency right Is he going to be able to be on the field each week performing at the high level that we have come to expect from him? But I think, as you're saying, Mike, it reminds me of Tua Tungavailoa when he said the market is the market, right? You know, this is not something that he determined. It's not something that George Pickens determines. But if you are a great wide receiver, you're going to want a salary that is commiserate with the top other flight receivers. And what's interesting always about the Cowboys is they don't get ahead of these things, right? They franchise tag. They do what they feel like they should do. And then eventually it feels like, at least in the case with Dak Prescott, they get held over a barrel, right? I mean, you could say in some ways the same thing about Micah Parsons, not doing a deal earlier. And then you get to the point last year where you're saying, OK, we'll trade him and then we'll get these picks. And then our defense obviously is not going to be better without Micah Parsons. But that is what it is. So I don't necessarily know where they're going to go with it. But certainly the market is the market. George Pickens has put up numbers that make you say to yourself, OK, he deserves something that is relatively, you know, in line with everybody else. that is making a certain amount of money at the receiver position. Well, that was my point to you. They could have signed him right after they traded him a year ago, in the offseason, before he played for them. They could have. That would have been the time to do it. That's what I'm saying. Like the Browns did with Jerry Judy. So now you have CeeDee Lamb, who's making $34 million a year, who is your number one receiver, whether he is or isn't. We can argue that. But you can't pay him more than CeeDee Lamb. CeeDee Lamb's going to say, I deserve more. So they're in a spot here. They're in a pickle, really. They want to keep him, but how are they going to keep him? What if he doesn't play on the franchise tag? You can give him more than the franchise tag, and that may be where it comes in, that they end up, get to July 15th, whatever the date is, and they say we'll give you more to come into training camp. Well, and that's the thing. After July 15th, the only thing you can't do is sign the player to a multi-year contract. You can still give him more money than what the franchise tender calls for. No one's ever done that. There have been terms added. I think with Lance Briggs or Albert Hainsworth, there were terms that if you do certain things, we won't tag you again. What did they do with Josh Jacobs a couple years ago with the Raiders? They did do something where they sprinkled a little bit more, whether it was incentives. They did something to get him to show up. You're right. Good memory there. Bad memory. Bad job by me. Probably a little younger. Now, there was at one point. See, I'm not the oldest one on the desk, so it doesn't bother me today. I'll assume any age-related comments aren't directed at me. So when Pickens first started to emerge last year, I said at one point, you know, they may have to decide between C.D. Lamb and George Pickens at some point. You may not be able to afford both guys. when you have contract that is market level for Dak Prescott. At some point, you're spread too thin. At some point, remember, hey, they had Amari Cooper when they drafted C.D. Lamb. And they'd given up a first-round pick just a couple of years earlier for Amari Cooper. Remember how during the first round of the draft? We watched film of Amari Cooper. But they got him late in his rookie deal. They had to pay him a bunch of money. They had his fifth-year option. They signed him to $20 million a year contract, which was market value at the time. and they eventually move on from Amari Cooper because C.D. Lamb's the future. And you just wonder between C.D. Lamb and George Pickens, do they think they have to make a choice? And I know you made the comment that C.D. Lamb's a better receiver, but I know Sims has said that he saw by the end of the year that defenses were more deferential to Pickens than Lamb and more concerned about Pickens than Lamb. Lamb was banged up too. You have to take that into consideration. The last two years he's been banged up, as a matter of fact. So, yeah, if he's healthy, I think he's the better receiver. But it's debatable. They're both very good receivers. They're both top-flight receivers. They've both been first- or second-team all-pro. They're up there, you know. And talk about the Bengals had the same thing with T. Higgins and Jamar Chase. And they kept both of them, found a way to do it. Now, I think that both of those players are better than T. Higgins. Both the Cowboys receivers are better than T. Higgins. But they found a way to do it. But look what their defense did. I mean, they're sort of in the same boat as what the Bengals went through with T. Higgins and Jamar Chase. Yeah, that's exactly what I was going to bring up. Just the Bengals, right? And their team structure and how everything revolves around Joe Burrow. And it is sort of the same, you know, with Dak Prescott. That's what it should be with the franchise quarterback. But at a certain point, it becomes, all right, what are you doing then with your defense? Can you actually field a competitive defense that helps you stay in games so that your offense can then go put things away? I mean, obviously it didn't happen with either the Bengals or the Cowboys last year. I mean, you got Logan Wilson going from one to the other, and he's still the same linebacker, and the defenses are both still bad. So it's one of those situations where you, I don't, I don't think you really want to be the Bengals where people are saying, hey, what are you going to do to make sure you're maximizing Joe Burrow's prime? I mean, A, they got to keep Burrow healthy, but B, it's can you, can you feel the defense that's competitive? Can you feel the defense that's maybe at least average and not just bad? because that's what we've seen the last few years. It's just been bad, and that's kept the Bengals from being what they were, at least more at the start of that borough era in 21 and 22. Let's hear a little from Executive VP Stephen Jones from his comments here in Indianapolis a day ago on the George Pickens contract situation. You know, we want Pickens here. Thank the world of him. I want him here, love him, and I think he wants to be here, so all that's a plus. You've put guys on the tag before, and they've been to everything. Pollard, Schultz, even Dak D'Law, I think, as well. Yeah, we've had people play under the tag, and then we've made deals with people, you know, that have a tag and can go either way. And we'll just, you know, continue to, you know, really analyze the situation and see what's next. Well, they're in a whole lot of time to analyze the situation. It is moving toward the tag deadline. And the question becomes if they do it. And this really is a chess game. And they've got the move, right? You hit the clock. When you play chess, like you hit a clock and you move and then you hit the clock. I don't know. But it's their move and they're going to put George Pickens in check. And then he's going to have a move to make. And the same CBA that gives them the ability to apply the franchise tag It gives him the ability to stay away from anything and everything until he accepts the tender. And you can skip the entire offseason program. You're not employed by the team. I say this at least once a year. He'll be no more employed by the team than any of us are. So you stay away from the offseason. Stay away from training camp. Stay away from preseason. You can show up literally days before the start of the regular season, accept the tender, and get your full $28 million. Will he do that? guys like Dak Prescott, and this falls into the Kirk Cousins bucket as well, and Cousins kind of got on me a little bit back during Super Bowl week. He was really feisty that week. But if you're the quarterback and you're franchise tagged, there's a belief that you show up and you do everything because you need to have a big year because you need to keep this momentum going. And if you stay away from everything and show up five days before the start of the regular season, you're not going to be ready to go. You need to be all in if you're the quarterback. Pickens, players at other positions can take the position. I don't need all that and I'm going to exert my leverage. But that's going to be what he does next. What will he do? And I try to draw comparisons to Michael Parsons, but it's fundamentally different because after July 15, you can't squeeze Jerry into trading George Pickens because he can't get a long-term deal after July 15 from a new team. Yes. So that's where the potential for another Michael Parsons, You know, I'll show up, I'm injured, I'm injured, or I'm injured, or I'm actually injured, whatever the case may be. I've got some chronic issue because I've been playing football since I was six, and I'm concerned about it. The thing that got under Jerry's skin last year, it doesn't work for Pickens. So the challenge for David Mulugeta and George Pickens is going to be to come up with a strategy that will get sufficiently under Jerry's skin to either spark a trade or a contract. And I don't know what that's going to be, but I think they're going to try something. They're not just going to sit back and take it. Yeah, and I think they should, Mike. And I think he should get a long-term deal. There's no question about that. He's earned that despite it only being one year with Dallas. But he's earned that long-term deal. He's earned a chance to be paid like the top receivers in the NFL. But here's the problem. I'm sorry to interrupt you. the franchise tag, the convention is, and they did this with Des Bryant. You apply the tag. How do we figure out a long-term deal? We take the tag this year, the tag next year. That's fully guaranteed at signing. And we're going to add in some other stuff from there. The problem is if you do that, and I just did the math, it's $30.6 million over two years per year. The market's still $40 million. Yeah. So they'll gladly do a long term deal with the franchise tag as a starting point because the franchise tag is lagging so far behind the market. Sure. Sure. Let's do it. It's not going to be good enough. They're going to have to go above that. They're going to have to get something closer to 40 than 30, I think, to get him to accept the long term deal. That's the problem. They're going to want to do it on their terms. They're not going to want to give him the 40 million per year that Jamar Chase got. they're going to want to do something that is closer in line to what they think the franchise tag would dictate. But that's an antiquated model, right? And if you're Mulugeta, that's basically your counter is like, hey, this is old stuff, man. You're coming at this from the perspective of maybe even three to five years ago, right? It's kind of wild how it's changed in that time, but that's not going to work now if that's the way that the Cowboys want to approach it. It shouldn't work. can't work because, again, as Tua Tungvalu has said, the market is the market. And if that's the way the Cowboys want to play it, I mean, to me, that's non-starter. You can't have that kind of number for this kind of caliber player. That's not going to work. I don't think Tua is the best example for guys that got a market-level deal. I know he said it, but if I'm Tua Tungvalu, I'm not going to carry that around. I know. Well, I mean, but shouldn't you, though? I'll say the market is the market anonymous. Anonymous. Like Michael Scott. But the problem, I almost feel like that is a better argument because Tua Tungabailoa is not the type of top-flight caliber player, and yet look at what he got. And he got it. So, you know what I'm saying? So, like, if that guy can get it, and granted, quarterback's a different position, but if the market's the market and that guy gets it, then the market's the market and I need it. And he got it without even being in the franchise tag posture. He got it with one year left on his rookie deal. In hindsight, the Deshaun Watson trade and contract is the single worst transaction in NFL history. Tua's is close. The only thing that saves the Dolphins is they didn't give up draft picks for the privilege of doing this ridiculous contract. They had no reason to do it. But it proves your point, and it proves Pickens' point. The market is the market. So don't play this franchise tag game with me. I want a contract that reflects what the market currently is. Yeah, and a trade may be the best option for the Cowboys. They improve their defense. They draft a number two receiver, and you can find receivers in the draft. Maybe that's the way they go. Maybe that's the way they should go. And I know Cowboys fans are arguing that they've got to find a way to keep pickings and improve their defense as well, but it's a tough thing to do. That opens a fascinating world, though, because who would want him at this point? Like he was available to the NFL last May for a three. And now after the one year with the Cowboys, it's got to be somebody with a good quarterback. Absolutely. You got to have that because we saw what happened if you don't have somebody who can get the guy the football. But we know the teams that have the great quarterbacks. What could he fetch? And this is the problem. For the Cowboys, it's just a matter of giving them a market-level contract. For a new team, it's market-level contract and draft picks. And I think there's a scale there. The more you give up in draft picks, the less you want to pay. The more you pay, the less you want to give up in draft picks. It's not going to be the easiest thing to do. And I don't know what the trade market would be, but, man, there are some intriguing possibilities out there for George Pickens when you consider the teams that have the great quarterbacks and what he could do. He would be instantly the number one receiver in Buffalo. He'd instantly be the number one receiver in Kansas City. I don't know that it would work in Baltimore, but he'd instantly be the number one receiver there. Zay Flowers would have an argument to be made, but I still think he's better than Zay Flowers right now. And we don't know what that offense is going to look like. I mean, you know, we don't know what's Lamar Jackson's attitude going to be toward this new offense, toward this new regime. We don't really know. That's a good point. I didn't want to – we can always go down that rabbit hole. And Ravens fans love to hear when we go down that path. But you just pick a great quarterback. The Chargers, too. Oh, God. Could you imagine? Well, yeah, with Mike McDaniel calling the plays. Yeah, I mean, that's also an instant upgrade. I mean, no offense to Lab McConkie or Johnston, but, I mean, George Pickens certainly elevates that offense in a way that those two guys just kind of don't right now. Denver. I mean, not that we are 100% sure Bo Nix is going to be a franchise quarterback, but having access to a guy like George Pickens is going to help. Morning honors. I miss you better. Yeah. That could be the reverse of Charles Haley. Yeah. Hey, there are options out there, and teams are going to feel differently about George Pickens than they did a year ago. The Patriots. We didn't mention the Patriots. That could be. Because I think, if nothing else, Mike Vrabel is going to figure out how to get through to Pickens and how to get the most out of Pickens. That's going to be part of the challenge. You need to find ways to keep the guy dialed in and motivated. And there's a lot of that Randy Moss quality. I remember when Moss was playing, like you had to get him the ball early in the game or he shut down. Like you've got to – there's just a certain way you've got to handle a superstar receiver or a guy that's got superstar potential. And I think there's a chance Pickens could be even better than he was last year if he's not in a situation where he's sharing with C.D. Lamb. If he's the guy – remember the old Randy ratio? If he's the guy that's the centerpiece of the offense that is getting the ball on a regular basis, he could be as productive as the most productive receivers in the game. Yeah, agreed. He's that good. I think he showed that this year with a good quarterback. So why not trade C.D. Lamb instead? You might. Well, do you think that C.D. Lamb or George Pickens would command more on the trade market today? That's a great question, and I'm not just saying that to buy time. Lamb is more proven. Yes. lamb doesn't have the knocks that would be used against pickens yes and the problem is if i'm the team that making this investment it one thing for me to say okay i understand why george pickens was the way he was in pittsburgh i understand it plenty of great receivers from the past If they had been in that setting for those three years they would have acted the same way But it happened. And if it goes crazy here, we're going to hear about it from the fans. We're going to hear about it from the media. We knew or we should have known this guy was going to be a problem. It's just that there's a greater risk. And I think there's a risk for the Cowboys, too. You pay this guy a market-level contract, There is a risk that last year was just an aberration. And once he gets paid, it's not going to work like it worked last year. There is a risk to that. And the risk is enhanced if you are a team that's giving him the market level deal and trading assets to get him. So I don't want to completely dismiss the point of, to use your phrase, head case, although I disagree with it. I don't want to dismiss it because it's out there and it's part of the experience. and it becomes part of the narrative going forward. It's part of the risk that the Cowboys will take if they pay him or that a new team would take on if they trade for him. It will be interesting to see if they decide to trade one of them, which one they trade. And I think it'll be George Pickens, but I think they would get more for C.D. Lamb if that's the route you want to go. If you go back to the Amari Cooper, they had the two receivers in Dallas with C.D. Lamb and Amari Cooper. Amari Cooper, as you said, was making $20 million a year, Mike. And they didn't want to pay two receivers that much money. But that's the year that CeeDee Lamb passed Amari Cooper and was the better receiver, had more yards. But everybody was still calling Amari Cooper the number one receiver. He's still your number one receiver. We're in that same situation a little bit now, reversed with CeeDee Lamb now. Really, kind of, he was the number two receiver this year. And again, I think a lot of that had to do with the injuries. I think he's still a number one receiver. I think he's still one of the best receivers in the NFL. But the fact is, George Pickens had the better year this year. Before I drag us too far down the path, I'm doing the math here on the fly. It looks like they deal with a $42.8 million dead cap charge if they traded him before June 1. So I think that ends the possibility for now. For now. For now. Next year, it would be $12.6 million lower to do it pre-June 1. And each passing year, it gets easier. You know, they may be stubborn enough and delusional enough to think that they could tag him twice and then trade CeeDee Lamb and sign him. The problem is, after you tag the guy twice, there's no way to keep him from becoming a free agent because the third tag becomes average of the five highest paid quarterbacks in the NFL cap number. So you can't do it. Or a 44% raise over the second tag. You just can't tag a guy three times without it being exorbitant. But they may be thinking, let's kick the can here a little bit, and maybe next year we pay George Pickens and we trade CeeDee Lamb. They may just want to get through this year and then make the decision between one and the other next year. That would be, from a team-centric perspective, that's absolutely what you would want to do. But, again, is the 28 million? He's not going to go along with it. Is one year 28 million, really, for me? You know, as good as I've been, as good as I just showed you why I was, as essential as I was to the offense, and you want to pay me 28 million for one year? That's it? Come on. No. Like, that is at least the attitude I would take if I were George Pickens' agent or George Pickens himself. And that means then you're not going to have him at the offseason program. He doesn't even need to be at training camp. I mean, you were sort of making the same point earlier. But he's not an employee of the team until he signs something that, you know, puts him under contract for 2026. And so then you're kind of getting into the same situation that C.D. Lamb was in a couple years ago, right, where he missed all of training camp pretty much. And then what he signed a week before the season or like sometime right in, you know, that muddy waters of right before week one. And if you miss all of that time in the offseason, I know they're not going to a new offense, but it affects the start of your year at the very least. Affected C.D. Lamb. Yeah, exactly. So that's where it's, yeah, of course, from a team-centric perspective, sure you want that one-year $28 million and you kick the can down the road, but if you're George Pickens, you've got to be the pebble in the shoe that says, that's not comfortable. That's not comfortable for me. The cap number is an issue, too, because if they tag him and he takes it, he counts for $28 million in cash and cap space. Yes. They're going to have to restructure Dak's deal and C.D. Lamb's deal. Dak currently has a cap number of $74 million, and his salary is $40 million. And it's very easy. You reduce the salary to the minimum. You take the balance. You spread it over five total years. But still, they're going to have a hell of a reckoning with Dak at some point. And the same thing with C.D. Lamb. This is the problem with having one of these market-level deals. You keep pushing the cap numbers into future years. at some point all that money is going to hit. They got $38 million under C.D. Lamb this year with a $25 million salary, so they can do the same thing. And they have the term in there that allows them to automatically restructure. They'll do it. But how many players like that can you have where you've got this massive contract that you're constantly restructuring and you're constantly putting cap dollars into future years? And really, that's the core question. on your entire team how many superstar contracts can you afford to truly have you want to have some superstars here under the rookie contracts that hey sorry we can't give you a new deal until after your third year when you get to veteran deals that are market value you really are tying your your hands behind your back or at least one hand behind your back to try to put a roster together if you've got three on offense whatever three pick three yes offensive lineman quarterback tight end, offensive lineman, running back, receiver, whatever it is, but you're getting three of 11 that you're paying that kind of money to, it becomes hard to operate the rest of your team. And guess what? Tyler Smith's going to want money. And he deserves money. He's played like it. He deserves to be paid more money. So that's coming too on the Cowboys offense. So yeah, and their problems are on defense. and the most effective way to improve and address that problem is to draft and develop because the young players are cheap and you can get a lot of them you can get seven of them a year more if you play your cards right and do some trades and they do have extras from the trades they've done but that's going to be the key that i i think that's the one kind of hidden point in all of this as they try to figure out what they're going to do with george pickens it puts a major emphasis on getting their draft picks right and finding guys who can play, especially on the defensive side of the ball, quickly and who can make a difference quickly because that's going to be what they're relying upon as they make their way through this salary cap minefield with Dak, CeeDee Lamb, and George Pickens. And they've got no second-day picks, by the way. Yeah. Well, I mean, unless they use one of the—at this point, right? And they could use one of those first-round picks, trade back, pick up some more, in theory at least, and get at least more shots at the dartboard. But it always is this interesting roster construction question. Once you get to a certain point with your quarterback, which the Texans are going to come up to it with C.J. Stroud. We'll see what the Panthers do with Bryce Young. But it's always this, okay, now that the quarterback is in line to get paid, how do we then construct the rest of the team around him? It's one of the things, at least, that has been impressive to me about the Chiefs' run. They paid Patrick Mahomes, and they continue to pay Patrick Mahomes, and they give him more cash, and they have the structure of the deal that they can rework all the time. But they've still been able to put a competitive team, for the most part, around Mahomes, right? And they, until this year, had always reached overtime of the AFC championship game. It's kind of the same now. you're looking at what the Bills are doing with Josh Allen. What do the Ravens do with Lamar Jackson? You have to be able to field a competitive team around these guys, and that really does put the emphasis on are you drafting and developing good players? Because if you don't, then that's when you hit that wall, and you can't break through that wall if you don't have the kinds of players around the quarterback, around the franchise QB, that will then elevate the team the rest of the way that it needs to be in order to make it to the Super Bowl. I mean, what's interesting about the Patriots this year, they've got Drake May. They now know that they have a young quarterback that they really and truly can build around. And that's why this year, and it's not necessarily that great of a free agent class, that's where you go for it. Because you've got this year cost control. Next year he's eligible for a deal. And if you are a potential MVP quarterback, there's no way you should be playing without a new deal in year four, in my opinion. Here's the wrinkle that the Cowboys are also going to have to deal with. Their propensity to go straight to the player. Are they going to play that game? They played that game with Javante Williams, I'm told, per sources. Okay. And we know they like to do that. We know Jerry likes to go throw his arm around the player and say how great it is to be a Dallas Cowboy and how you can make all this extra money because you've got the star on your helmet and don't you want to be part of something great and, you know, we can't pay everybody and we really love you and we really want you here. And, you know, they cut out David Mulighetta the last time around. Jerry Jones openly disrespected him. Didn't know his name. Didn't know who he was. Said he didn't know his name. Right. But said it out loud and disrespected him openly. And David Mulighetta did not take the bait. And David Mulighetta ultimately won. That's the thing. This goes both ways. Are there bad feelings from Mulighetta toward Jerry? And is there resentment from Jerry toward Mulugeta because the last time we squared off, I lost. This time around, I have to win. And will that make them even more determined to drive a hard bargain, to hold George Pickens' feet to the fire? If he says, I'm not going to show up for 28, I want to be traded. We're not going to trade you. You're under contract to us. And if they, I mean, they can hold his rights indefinitely. I think that this is the Le'Veon Bell thing. I think that in theory, like there's a point where you can sit out the whole year like Bell did in 2018 and become a free agent and not be tagged the next year. But I just wonder if they'll take a hard line and not give in at any point because of the perception that they gave in and lost on Micah Parsons. Well, here's the thing. Jerry thinks he won. We all know he lost. Well, he says he did, but does he really? Does he really? I mean, he can bullshit everybody else. Can he bullshit himself? No, I really think he does. I think he feels like they got Quentin Williams out of this, that they're going to get another great defensive player out of this, probably an edge rusher is going to come in and be as good as Micah Parsons. I think he truly believes he won this trade. I believe that in his heart he believes he won this trade. And then what constitutes winning with George Pickens, right? Is it then getting him to sign the long-term deal? Is it getting him to play on the franchise tender? I don't necessarily know. I mean, ostensibly, winning would be, hey, we've got this guy, and he's still playing for our team. And he's happy, and he's productive, and he's motivated, and he's here. Yes, yes, yes. All of those things, which is what I was going to say if you hadn't just interrupted me. But that's okay. Sorry. But that's what it has to be, you know? And I don't know what else would constitute winning other than those things. All right, what do we think is going to happen? We've got three different possibilities. Signs a franchise tender, signs a multi-year deal, becomes the highest paid receiver. Let's not go through each one with our scale of 1 to 10. Just tell me, what do you think is going to happen to those three options? I think that he ends up playing on the franchise tender. They'll have to add some money to it, some incentives, something to get him to come in. I think they'll do that. I think he'll play this season on the franchise tender. And I think he will go somewhere else next year, whether it's a trade somewhere else or whether he hits free agency, go somewhere else. But I think he'll play for the Cowboys this season. Yeah, I think he'll play for the Cowboys, too. I don't think he'll sign a multi-year deal. I don't think he will become the highest paid receiver. I don't necessarily see that for him, but I do think that he will play on a deal that's somewhere in between, let's say, $32 million and $37 million. That would make a lot of sense to me. I'm going to make a wild guess here and say that he signs a short-term deal. Let's say a two-year deal that pays him $35 a year. and may or may not have the franchise tag on the back end, that that's the end result of this. That's my wild-ass guess that that's what's going to happen. That seems like a good guess. Yeah, that would be a good compromise, right? Nobody's getting everything they want, but everybody's getting something. So that does strike me as a solid compromise, yeah. And I say two-year deal because they're going to want to figure out a way to push the cap numbers into future years, and there may be some voidable years on the back end so they can spread it out. It's harder to do that with a one-year deal, although I think it's doable. There's all sorts. You know, every year we go through this, oh, this team, oh, they have a cap issue. What are they going to do? And they always figure it out. There's so many tricks and devices under the salary cap to figure out your situation and to find a way out of that maze, and I think that they will do that if it comes to it. The harder problem is making George Pickens happy, making him motivated. I think that's the key. He has to be motivated. And you can't run the risk of tagging the guy and having him pissed off and stay away from everything. And then when he shows up, he's just lollygagging and just collecting his money. And he's not engaged. It hurts him, but it hurts you too. Yes, it does. All right. Let's take a break. When we return, the team that is based right here in Indianapolis is trying to lock up one of its key players before he would hit free agency. That's next on PFT Live. Tuesday edition of PFT Live. I've gotten my days straight. We've gotten the time straight. We're here in Indianapolis. The music on the way. It sounds a little like a knockoff of Jump from Van Halen. I was also thinking that. Yes. Yeah. Yes. Hopefully Eddie Van Halen isn't listening. Wait. It's probably the APM version, you know, royalty free. Is Eddie Van Halen still with us? Oh, boy. It's possible he's not listening. Or he is. I don't. He's gone. Wherever, wherever, wherever he is. Sorry. Sorry. Yeah. Sorry, Eddie. October 6, 2020. So let me say. So, yeah. But that was during the pandemic where, like, we forget everything that happened. That's my excuse there. I it's funny that they're playing that because and I there's a there's a mildly humorous story. I'll tell you off the air about why I've been listening to a lot of Van Halen lately, but I've been listening to a lot of Van Halen lately. So Eddie Van Halen was an incredible, incredible, like virtuoso guitarist, virtuoso, like and then he decided, like, I'm going to learn the piano now, too. And they started to incorporate a lot of the synthesizers and whatnot into the music with the 1984 album. I will say Jump Into Panama is one of the best two sequences on any album ever They got a lot of great songs And one thing I noticed lately on Apple Music I have kind of like yielded to the power of my phone Oh Apple Music instead of Spotify guy Interesting Mike What does that say about you? They do a thing now when you like play all the songs. I don't know what it says about me because I don't know that there's a difference between Spotify and Apple Music. All I know is it's all here and it's all easy and you hit the button and off it goes. But they've done a thing now where it's like the old radio days where as one song's ending, the new song starts. like i had is that a spotify thing that i wasn't aware of no i mean it's it's a digital music thing that apparently you weren't aware of because it was always one song completely ends and then pause and the next song begins what i've noticed now is this thing where the new one starts as the last one's ending your phone changed the setting because they've been doing that for the last like 10 15 years but yeah well i'm glad to finally catch up to the rest of the world, bud. We're old. All right. That's okay. The Colts are faced with a decision as it relates to quarterback Daniel Jones. They signed the one-year $14 million deal last year, lured him away from the Minnesota Vikings, made him believe, and they were telling the truth, that he had a chance to compete with Anthony Richardson and become the starting quarterback. And he did. Was having a great year until he had the Achilles tendon injury, which may have been weakened as a result of the stress fracture he was playing with in the other foot. So the franchise tags available. We were talking about this last night. It's 2023 all over again because they've got Alec Pierce and Daniel Jones, and they would presumably like to, as the Giants wanted to do in 23, tag one guy, sign the other to a long-term deal. And what the Giants wanted to do with Saquon Barkley and Daniel Jones was signed Saquon Barkley to a long-term deal, tagged Daniel Jones and buys some time to see whether or not he was the guy. But they couldn't get the deal done with Barkley, so they tagged him and they signed Jones. Now the Colts, they got Alec Pierce, who underrated and has the potential to be a number one receiver. I really like Alec Pierce, yeah. And they've got Jones, and I think they're trying to figure out, can we tag one, can we sign the other? And would they actually apply the franchise tag to Daniel Jones coming off the Achilles tendon after a $14 million contract last year. Like, you have to be concerned there's going to be another team that's going to swoop in. And I don't know, maybe the Vikings swing back around and say, hey, come on, come do for us what you did for the Colts. But the guy's had multiple serious injuries, and he's coming off a 20-Killes tendon. I don't know. I mean, what are you going to pay him, $40 million? I mean, what are you going to pay Daniel Jones if he's available? That's why I'm surprised by the possibility of the franchise tag, because I don't know if there's going to be a land rush for Daniel Jones. I don't know if there would be a land rush for him, but I think that there would be a market for him. I mean, he's still a quarterback. He's still on the younger side-ish, right, even with the serious leg injuries. It's not like we're talking about somebody who hasn't done anything in a while, right? I mean, I think he was playing at a pretty darn high level, especially before the fracture, and some of that definitely has to do with the way Jonathan Taylor was also playing. But I think if you look at the way he was commanding that offense, the way he came in, he took the job from Anthony Richardson. This is not somebody that you're just going to say, okay, he's a nothing quarterback. I think the Colts would be the best option for him. But if there are other teams on the market, say the Vikings, which would make the most sense otherwise, then it's not like the Colts are just completely bidding against themselves in this kind of race for a Daniel Jones. But consider this, and I'm stunned to see the number because we've been talking about $28 million for George Pickens for the past 45 minutes. The franchise tag for quarterbacks this year is projected to be 47.3. So are you going to pay Daniel Jones 47.3? Is he getting $47.3 on the open market? No. What did Sam Darnold get last year? He got $30. Well, he got $100.5 million on a three-year deal. So it's like $33.5, if my math is correct. And it rarely is. So, I mean, he's not. Daniel Jones. Damaged goods Daniel Jones isn't getting $40 million on the open market. I mean, I'm not saying that's his nickname. He's currently damaged goods because of the torn Achilles tendon. Although, damaged goods Daniel Jones does have a ring to it. He kind of does. I'm just stunned that there's even a possibility to apply the franchise tag to him. I agree. $47 million for the exclusive tag, $40 million for the transition tag if you want to go that way. Well, non-exclusive as well. Yes. I mean, transition tag just gives you a right to match. Correct. But the franchise tag itself, non-exclusive franchise tag is $47. Correct. Correct. So, yeah, I don't know that I want to pay him that. I really don't. And so I think at this point you try to get him signed to a long-term deal. The problem, Mike, is when I did that top 100, you look at the quarterback. There's no quarterbacks. If you don't have a quarterback right now, who are you going to get? There's Daniel Jones. There's Malik Willis. There's Russell Wilson. There's Marcus Mariota. And the draft doesn't look that great either, especially if you don't have a top pick. So who are you getting? Are you going to go trade for Kyler Murray? Are you going to wait for Kirk Cousins to become a – A Mac Jones. Kirk Cousins will be cut March 11 or 12. So he's in the mix. Mike McCartney, his agent, is going to be here talking to people about what his next step is. And maybe you make a trade for Mac Jones. But there's just not that many guys out there if you don't have a starting quarterback right now. That's the problem. Wow, you put Malik Willis at 10. I saw NFL.com had him at number one. We're going to have to maybe find the person that did the NFL Top 100 and have a little debate, maybe a little arm wrestling. Let's see who's right. Let's do it. Depending upon who it is at NFL Network, I maybe put my money on Shireen. I'll take them down. But it is interesting. I mean, when you look at just the quarterbacks that are available, right, as you're saying, Shireen, that's not a particularly impressive list. If you are a team that has a needed quarterback, you don't have a lot of great options. And that is why, you know, you then, okay, price of the brick goes up for a Daniel Jones. I mean, because of the way that the market is right now, it's not favorable. So, like, even if you're, say, the Browns, right, what do you do? Do you go after a trade for a Kyler Murray? Do you try to roll the dice with the shooter Sanders or talk about damaged goods to Sean Watson? Right. I mean, that none of those appear to be particularly great options. And then there also aren't that many great options in the draft. So it's like this is not a great year to need a quarterback, which then is why the Colts are kind of in that position with Daniel Jones, where Daniel Jones is, hey, if you want me, you're going to have to really show it. If Daniel Jones gets tagged, what does that mean for Malik Willis? I mean, if the Colts tell the world we're paying this guy 47-3 to keep him off the market, Malik Willis is one of the most intriguing free agent quarterbacks I can ever remember because he's got a very limited sample size. But every time he's played the last two years, he's been spectacular. Passer rating is over 134. Six touchdown passes, no interceptions. He's got three rushing touchdowns on top. And, again, this is in six games. Completion percentage north of 75. Yards per attempt over 10. He's been unstoppable. He's just played six games. And he got injured during one of the games. So, I think somebody is going to be lurking. and if you get multiple teams involved, there's a big range out there for starting quarterback pay. It was 10.5 last year for Russell Wilson all the way up to 60 if we ignore the new money analysis on the Josh Allen contract, which would actually be close to 80. But let's just say 10 to 60. Where Malik Willis is going to land, I don't know. Where Daniel Jones is going to land, I don't know. But this idea of 47.3 under the franchise tag for Daniel Jones, it's stunning to me that the Colts would even consider it. Yeah, it's the way you can talk about the way the cap goes up every year, too. Right. I mean, what that is relative to what the cap will be in 2026 is is different than what forty seven point three million would be relative to the cap in 2025, let alone in 2024. Right. I mean, so all these things like that's what you have to balance and weigh and, you know, somehow figure out how to build your team. I think you mentioned the transition tag, Shereen. I think that would make sense. If you're going to go that far, I think $40 is enough to scare a team away from an offer sheet. If they're going to have to sign him to an offer sheet that gets him to trade in the $40 million bird in the hand, I think that that works, and it saves you $7 million. And if you don't have Daniel Jones, Mike, who's going to be your quarterback? You have Anthony Richardson and Riley Leonard. Are you going with one of those guys? We've seen, I think, probably enough of Anthony Richardson. I have anyway, to say he's not going to be your quarterback. So then what do you do with the quarterback position if it's not Daniel Jones? I think that's what they're looking at right now. If we don't have Daniel Jones, who's our quarterback, we've still got to go out and find a quarterback. Philip Rivers. Well, and here's the problem. If they do the transition tag with Daniel Jones and somebody comes in and makes him an offer, by the time that all shakes out, all the other guys that you may have pursued are going to be elsewhere. Kirk Cousins is going to have signed. Malik Willis will have signed. They're all going to be gone. You're going to be looking at the second and third tier options, unless you can convince a guy to wait around and see how Daniel Jones plays out. But I think if they would do the transition tag, they're not. I just, there is a huge risk in paying a significant contract to a guy who is coming off of a torn Achilles tendon. Even if he's 100%, it takes, look at Kirk Cousins. That's exactly what I was going to say. Yep. It takes two years. He finally got back to what I think is a high level of performance when he was pressed into service after Michael Penix Jr. suffered the torn ACL. Last year, he wasn't good enough. Last year, he was still recovering from that injury. And you've got the possibility there's going to be more because he's had multiple season-ending injuries. At some point, you just have to accept this is who he is. He's going to be 29 in May. He can play really well when healthy. but he has an issue with staying healthy, just like Tua, just like others. At a certain point, it becomes part of who you are. And I know we talked about this a lot yesterday in the context of Rondell Moore. We need to be more sensitive to what these guys go through when they get injured and the pain and the difficulty of recovery and rehab. It's a real thing. But at the quarterback position, especially where the rules are slanted in the direction of keeping you upright, The great quarterbacks, now I know Patrick Mahomes tore an ACL, and Josh Allen had foot surgery, but the great quarterbacks are there. They're available. They're available. And Daniel Jones has a history, like Tua, like others have not. It just makes it a more delicate question for the Colts to figure out the right spot for Daniel Jones financially. Where do we feel like Anthony Richardson fits in into all this? because, I mean, as you were saying, Shreen, it doesn't seem like Anthony Richardson is going to be the Colts quarterback of the future. I mean, it doesn't. And, you know, you can look at how he's performed. You can say, okay, there are guys that go elsewhere. They improve. And, you know, Ballard talked a lot in the last year about how, you know, they've looked at guys like a Sam Donnelly. You don't want to see that happen with Anthony Richardson somewhere else. But, I mean, I'm not confident that if things don't work out with the Daniel Jones, that Anthony Richardson is the best option potentially for the Colts going into 2026 as, you know, a former top five pick. I can't remember if he was three or four, whatever he was. Four. Four. So he's a number four overall pick just a few years ago. And the fact that he's not thought of as a viable option, that, I mean, it kind of stinks for him, you know. But I don't know where else he could potentially fit in in that ecosystem when it comes to quarterbacks. He's got a $5.385 million compensation package this year fully guaranteed. As quarterbacks go, that's not very expensive. He can continue to be the backup. He was the backup last year until he suffered that freak injury with the band that broke and fractured his orbital bone. And we don't know whether there's going to be any lingering effects of that either. I think he's a candidate to be traded. He would create $5.3 million in cap space and cash savings. I remember a Vikings-Colts game in his second season where there was a long embrace and conversation between Kevin O'Connell and Anthony Richardson. that's always kind of been on the radar screen. Yeah. Could Kevin O'Connell coach him into getting the most out of his abilities? You know, there's been turmoil in Indianapolis. I know it's settled down somewhat with Shane Steichen, but just the quarterback position. Like, they've just been ever since Andrew Luck retired. Yeah. They just can't. They can't. 14 starters. They can't get it settled down, and they finally found a guy in Daniel Jones, And I think that's part of the reason why they're inclined to make sure they keep him. Because we finally found a guy. We can't let him go somewhere else and continue what he was doing here. But I think Richardson, I think that they're going to be inclined to trade him, especially if and when they get Daniel Jones back under contract. And then he becomes the next Malik Willis, perhaps. That would be something. Hey, if Anthony Richardson could ever get the most out of his perceived skills, and he's just not played much, I think the one thing that we learned between Anthony Richardson and guys like Jaden Daniels and Bo Nix, the guys who have the college playing experience are so much better suited to slip right in. Even though it's a different world, you've played. Brock Purdy, too. Yeah, you've played and you've played and you've played. And it allows you to make the transition more easily than a guy who's drafted as a project, who has played some, has flashed great potential, but it's like every level of the sport. It gets faster. The windows get smaller. It's a tougher thing, and you come in with the high expectations of the fourth overall pick in the draft. And it may just be he benefits from a change of scenery. It may just be as simple as that. Maybe they trade Anthony Richardson for J.J. McCarthy. I don't know. Would you do that? No, only because McCarthy's under contract for two more years and you've got one year with Richardson. And if Richardson plays really well this year, you're in a Daniel Jones problem next year. What do you do? Because you're not going to pick up the fifth-year option on Richardson if you would trade for him now. So, yeah, or George Pickens' problem, one year. Look, that's the common thread between the two guys we've talked about so far today. That's true. Guys who come in with one year left on their contract. Jones, it was a one-year deal. Pickens. It was the fourth year of his rookie contract, and it works out well, and now you've got a problem. That's why I always say the only good problem to have is no problem, because these are good problems, but they're still problems. They are still problems. Alright, let's go ahead and take a break. When we return, we have been talking about the guys who are the top two on the PFT list of 100 free agents, as compiled and curated by Shereen Williams. Another player in the top ten looks like he's heading for the franchise tag as well. We'll discuss that next on PFT Live. you