DeMarcus Smith, almost the ex-NFLPA director, wants the elimination of the Rooney Rule.  He would replace it with 12 dicta.  Shalise Manza Young of YahooSports.com:

DeMaurice Smith’s time with the NFL Players Association may be in its final days, but he isn’t quite done fighting with NFL team owners.

On Wednesday, Smith published a nearly 100-page paper he has worked on for roughly two years in which he calls the 20-year-old Rooney Rule a failure and calls for its elimination, instead offering 12 recommendations for the league to create a fair and equal hiring system.

Co-written with Carl Lasker, a Yale Law student and teaching assistant to Smith at the school, Smith offers an insider’s perspective on exactly why the Rooney Rule — here called a “suggestion” — has no chance of succeeding and calls on federal, state and local governments to exercise their lawful oversight to ensure reform.

“The system is broken from the inside out and outside and any effort to affect it that didn’t obligate NFL Owners to adherence or reform was doomed from the start,” Smith told Yahoo Sports via text message.

As executive director of the NFLPA for 14 years, Smith guided players in the molding of two collective-bargaining agreements and multiple other issues, big and small. Coaches were not part of his purview and indeed do not have their own union to bargain on their behalf.

The Rooney Rule has been in place for 20 years, and many have written and commented on its failings. At the time it was enacted there were two Black head coaches. Two decades later that number has barely increased (there are four current Black NFL head coaches), underscoring Smith’s argument.

In acknowledging the Supreme Court’s landmark decision last week striking down affirmative action in private and public colleges, Smith and Lasker wrote, “As a strict legal matter, the Supreme Court’s ruling does not directly impact private businesses. But the reality of its possible impacts beyond the specifics of that case is troubling. The need, therefore, for fair, equitable, and lawful hiring practices in the NFL can never be greater, and the necessity of government investigation and oversight as well as the enforcement of equitable hiring practices has never been more necessary.”

Recommendations include more transparency, stiffer fines

Smith and Lasker propose “a set of bold leadership steps,” 12 recommendations they believe will make for more equitable hiring practices. They include:

Changing the current hiring free-for-all system by requiring that all coaching, senior and executive positions be posted, with specific job descriptions, and held open for at least 30 days. For head coaching and coordinator positions, the league should require that no position be filled until a certain number of days after the Super Bowl, ensuring that every candidate has time to apply for open positions, and preventing teams from ignoring qualified candidates because their teams are in the playoffs

The NFL adopting a consistent and transparent system by which all teams must comply with respect to hiring and retention, abandoning its current system in favor of one “that fairly evaluates talent, constrains team ownership from engaging in unlawful and/or meaningless ‘check the box’ protocols, and enforces a deliberate, professional and accountable system.” Smith and Lasker cite state laws in California and Colorado, both home to NFL teams, and a New York City law, where the league’s headquarters are located, that require transparency in job listings when it comes to salary and compensation

Eliminating “any rule, custom, or practice requiring coaches to seek permission from team owners to apply for jobs with other teams”

The league selecting an outside monitor to periodically audit team hiring processes and publish an annual report on franchise hiring, retention and promotion across all employees

Requiring the NFL’s chief diversity officer to develop league-wide job descriptions, uniform standards for contracts, objective guidelines and lawful interview questions for all senior and executive positions, including head coach and general manager

Adopting strict and significant punishment systems for team and league officials, overseen jointly by the league and outside monitor, that don’t abide by the rules for a fair workplace, with fines starting at $5 million and escalating for individuals and teams who violate the adopted system. In the same way the league uses significant fines to police player conduct on and off the field, Smith and Lasker wrote, “it is ironic that the League has not adopted a similar ‘zero tolerance’ fine structure when it comes to achieving a fair and inclusive workplace”

Developing uniform and consistent evaluation guidelines for all coaching, senior and executive positions. “All NFL coaches should be received annually like NFL referees are, and the results should be shared with senior team and League membership,” the pair wrote

Developing and implementing policies limiting nepotism

The NFL dropping its opposition to coaches unionizing

Annually, have the NFL and outside monitor interview and evaluate coaches who are interested in a position change to evaluate their qualifications, and have teams provide a justifiable basis for hiring decisions. The NFL would publish a de-identified report on whether candidates deemed qualified by the league and outside monitor were interviewed by teams and the reasons for their hiring, promotion or rejection

Further, the authors want to set forth an “aspirational” argument to fans of the league that for as much as they want fairness and equity on the field, those principles should be found in off-field decisions as well.

“There are NFL team owners and senior leadership in the NFL who believe that the hiring systems should change to ensure fairness and the betterment of the NFL,” Smith and Lasker’s paper reads. “The NFL is facing a crossroads; its senior leadership will change in the next five years. The issue of the lack of front office and coaching diversity was inherited by some, and the future offers an opportunity to make major decisions to resolve these longstanding egregious issues.”

Smith and Lasker argue that though the NFL gets many concessions from government, from hundreds of millions in state and local tax dollars for stadiums to federal antitrust exemptions, the league isn’t subject to government oversight or requirements either, facing neither shareholder nor consumer accountability, with no public board of directors or compliance reports. And “Governments seem content to let the NFL operate as an unbridled cartel,” Smith and Lasker wrote. “Empowered by its antitrust exemptions, the NFL has become the wealthiest and most powerful sports league in the country. … NFL owners use the League’s popularity and lack of competition to build a network of financially-reliant media partners and personalities who insulate them from any meaningful critiques.”

Survey shows dim view for minorities in NFL

Last year the NFLPA sent a confidential survey to 65 current and former NFL coaches of color, and received 47 responses. Of those respondents, nearly all (92 percent) said there needs to be more transparency in the hiring process, salaries and benefits for head coaches; 90 percent said they believe race plays a role in all coaching decisions, including head coaches and coordinators; 90 percent said federal statutes prohibiting discrimination are not observed or obeyed in hiring practices; and two-thirds said the NFL league office is not responsive to issues of discrimination, equity, diversity and inclusion at the team level.

In a league where 55 percent of players identify as Black and 70 percent identify as a racial minority, currently three head coaches are Black and one is Hispanic (Miami’s Mike McDaniel identifies as biracial). But by and large, team owners are the decision-makers when it comes to hiring head coaches, and the checks in place in other large businesses don’t exist for members of the NFL ownership class — even the commissioner works for the franchise owners and isn’t empowered to resolve issues of employment discrimination or hand down hiring mandates.

“The NFL’s system is broken,” Smith and Lasker write. “To fix it, owners need to abandon the Rooney Rule and replace their unchecked discretion with comprehensive requirements to eliminate discrimination, ensure fairness, improve diversity, and build an equitable, transparent, and accountable system.

“Mandating transparent processes and protocols with clear goals and implementing an accountability-based system that punishes non-compliance should improve diversity in the NFL, and it will most certainly lead to a system that is fairer than the one that currently exists.”

NFC EAST

NEW YORK GIANTS

Dan Graziano of ESPN.com looks at the contract situation for RB SAQUON BARKLEY (as well as Raiders RB JOSH JACOBS to whom he is linked):

If Josh Jacobs played any position other than the one he plays, he would’ve had a case this offseason to become that position’s highest-paid player in the NFL. He led the league in rushing yards in 2022, a brilliant retort to the Las Vegas Raiders’ decision to decline his (roughly $8 million) 2023 option in May 2022. You’d think a player who performed at that level in a contract year would get his reward.

But Jacobs plays running back, and to this point his only “reward” for his 2022 performance is a $10.09 million franchise tag for 2023.

Jacobs and the New York Giants’ Saquon Barkley are front and center in the NFL news cycle for the next 1½ weeks. July 17 is the deadline for franchise-tagged players to sign long-term deals with their teams. If they don’t sign by then, Jacobs and Barkley can’t discuss long-term extensions with the Raiders and Giants, respectively, until after the 2023 regular season ends. Normally, teams’ negotiations with franchise-tagged players pick up again in the days before that July deadline, and we expect that to happen with Jacobs and Barkley. But restarting talks does not guarantee reaching a deal, and it’s entirely possible Jacobs and Barkley will have to decide whether they’re willing to accept the one-year franchise tender or sit out training camp and regular-season games in protest.

Dallas Cowboys running back Tony Pollard is also franchised, but unlike Jacobs and Barkley, he has signed his franchise tender and seems OK with playing out the season at that number. Pollard is coming off a major season-ending injury and doesn’t have the same track record that Jacobs and Barkley do as their teams’ No. 1 backs. We aren’t lumping him in with the other two here.

The Raiders and Giants can’t fine Jacobs and Barkley for missing camp if they don’t sign their franchise tenders, so if they don’t get new deals by the July 17 deadline, you certainly shouldn’t expect to see them for the start of camp in a few weeks. Sitting out the season is the threat they can make for leverage purposes, but the fact is it wouldn’t do them very much good — they’d simply be back in the same position a year from now.

What happens next? We called around the league to executives and agents to get a sense of what kind of solution there might be to this problem. We came up with several possibilities, ranging from reasonable to nuclear, and we laid them out here to give you some idea of how these situations might (or might not) be resolved. And then we suggested the most likely outcome for each of the talented running backs.

Option 1: A fair market deal

Obviously, this sounds nice and is the path to most likely making everybody happy. The problem is defining “fair market” in the case of the NFL running back.

Again, given Jacobs’ 2022 performance (1,653 rushing yards) and Barkley’s vital role in the Giants’ offense (27.7% of New York’s scrimmage yards), each of these guys could make an in-a-vacuum case to be the highest-paid player at his position. Unfortunately, the top end of the running back market hasn’t moved since the Panthers signed Christian McCaffrey for just over $16 million a year in spring 2020. Later that same year, Alvin Kamara got $15 million per year from the Saints, while Derrick Henry, Joe Mixon and Dalvin Cook all got somewhere between $12 million and $12.5 million annually on their own extensions. All of those deals were four-year contracts.

One year later, Nick Chubb signed a three-year extension with the Browns that averaged $12.2 million per year, and Aaron Jones got a four-year deal from the Packers that averaged $12 million. And the running back market, clearly stagnant even two years ago, has absolutely bottomed out since then. This year’s top free agent backs — Miles Sanders and David Montgomery — got deals that averaged in the neighborhood of $6 million per year, and Jones had to take a pay cut to avoid being released.

You can see the problem. Even if the Raiders and the Giants want to reward Jacobs and Barkley, the market clearly tells them they don’t have to do so. A $10.091 million franchise tag is a pretty good number for a running back, as Giants GM Joe Schoen indicated at the owners meetings in March. In fact, only six backs in the league average more per season than $10.091 million.

Most of the people in our informal survey pointed to the Chubb deal from 2021 as the best road map. Take that three-year structure, add some money to it because it’s two years later and guarantee the first two years against injury. Say the deal is three years, $38 million with something like $24-26 million paid out in the first two years. It might not be the deal of these guys’ dreams, but it would be somewhat face-saving at this point, especially if it comes with a guarantee number that ranks up near the $25.5 million that the Titans gave Henry.

The Raiders and Giants likely won’t want to go overboard on guarantees, given the leaguewide injury rate at the running back position and the sense that RB production is easily replaceable at cheaper cost. (The Chiefs just won the Super Bowl with seventh-round rookie Isiah Pacheco as their lead runner.) Barkley’s injury history justifiably gives the Giants pause, and the Raiders’ new administration wasn’t sold enough on Jacobs last year to pick up his fifth-year option.

But there are factors other than cold economics to consider, and it’s possible one or both of these teams will be willing to stretch a little bit outside of their comfort zones because of the roles Jacobs and Barkley occupy in their respective locker rooms. It’s possible the owners could exert pressure on the front offices to get deals done. If that’s the case, Jacobs and Barkley could end up doing a little bit better than expected on guarantees, or maybe get language in the deal that prohibits the teams from franchising them again when the deal expires. There are a few potential mechanisms that could help get a deal done around that basic Chubb-style structure if the sides can reach some level of agreement on the top-line numbers. But what if they can’t?

Option 2: The two-year solution

In this case, the respective teams would do what one front-office executive described as “buying out” the player’s two franchised seasons. This involves giving the player a two-year deal that’s fully guaranteed and pays a bit more than the player would have made if he had been franchised two years in a row. In the case of Jacobs or Barkley, that probably means something along the lines of $25 million to $26 million over two seasons.

The teams might be loath to do this because, in this market, even two years feels like a lot to commit to a running back. If 2023 goes poorly, you’re on the hook for something like $13 million guaranteed for the player in 2024, and nobody wants that. But again, there’s some value in keeping your best players happy. The Giants are trying to build off a surprisingly successful 2022 season and show they weren’t a fluke. In Las Vegas, Josh McDaniels’ head-coaching career likely can’t afford too many more losing seasons. A two-year commitment could be a small price to pay to get your star running back to camp on time.

Players and agents also don’t tend to like two-year deals because they give the teams the upper hand. If you play well in the first year of the contract, the team has you for Year 2 at a relative bargain price. If you play poorly in the first year of the deal, the team can cut you and move on. But because of the nature of the current running back market, these concerns may not carry as much weight in these cases. Getting the second year guaranteed addresses the second concern. As for the first: What’s the real upside for a running back? The second-year bird in the hand is more appealing than the idea of hitting the open RB market, where right now there’s no windfall awaiting you no matter how well you play in your contract year.

Option 3: Do nothing

This one was extremely popular among the front-office personnel we talked to for this story. More than one executive insisted they would just franchise both guys this year and, if they play well and stay healthy, franchise them again next year.

The collective bargaining agreement requires that a second franchise tag be 120% of the previous year’s salary, so tagging Jacobs or Barkley (or Pollard) again next year would cost $12.11 million. That means you’d be paying them each $22.2 million total over the next two years. (These numbers are the reason that you have to offer a two-year cash flow of at least $24 million or so on a long-term deal if you want the player to even consider it.)

This makes sense from a cold business perspective. But it’s worth noting that none of the executives we spoke to work for the Raiders or Giants, which means it’s easy for them to take the cold business perspective without fear of the consequences that could potentially come with unhappy star players. If Jacobs and Barkley have hope of getting something done with their teams in the next 10 days, it lies in the non-economic calculus. Their teams have to be in the frame of mind that it’s important to make them happy, regardless of a market designed to limit their value.

Option 4: Rescind the tags and sign someone cheaper

This is the aforementioned “nuclear” option, and it’s important to note that neither team appears to even be considering it. Until a franchise player signs his franchise tender (which neither Jacobs nor Barkley has done), the team has the right to rescind the tag, making the player an unrestricted free agent.

It would be a power move by the teams at this stage of the offseason, when money and cap space have dried up and being free agents probably wouldn’t be as lucrative for Jacobs and Barkley as it might have been in March. And with guys such as Cook, Ezekiel Elliott, Kareem Hunt and Leonard Fournette still kicking around in free agency, the Raiders or Giants could probably solve their running back problems with still-productive big-name guys whose contract demands aren’t as high as those of Jacobs and Barkley.

You don’t see this often. The most famous recent case of a rescinded franchise tag was Josh Norman in 2016, when the Panthers rescinded his franchise tag and he signed a long-term deal with Washington. But that happened in April, not July or August.

So yes, this is farfetched. And again, I want to stress that we have no indication that it has even crossed the minds of either the Raiders or Giants. But it is allowed, so it’s worth a little mention. I’ll say this: If it happened — if the Raiders, say, rescinded Jacobs’ franchise tag and signed, say, Cook for less than $10.09 million — that would be the strongest indication yet that the running back market is at its nadir.

What’s going to happen?

As mentioned above, I expect the Raiders to reengage with Jacobs and the Giants to reengage with Barkley prior to the July 17 deadline. (The Cowboys likely will check in with Pollard’s representatives, but I don’t know that I would anticipate any real progress toward a deal there. Again, his situation is different.)

Of the two, I’d rate Barkley the more likely to get a long-term deal done. Team owner John Mara has been clear about his desire for Barkley to be a Giant for his entire career, and the front office knows ownership would like a deal to get done. My very hesitant prediction is that the two sides come together on a contract that looks something like our outlined Option 1 before the deadline passes. The Giants probably will give a little bit on guarantees to a point where Barkley and his agent can claim a “win” on something specific, such as structure or cash flow.

I haven’t heard as much on the Jacobs situation, which could indicate that he’s less likely to get his deal. Obviously, a lot can change, and if one of these guys signs before the deadline, he’ll establish a framework the other one can use. Barkley getting a deal could make it more likely that Jacobs gets one, too. But McDaniels has engaged in a lot of roster turnover since he got to Vegas, indicating that he didn’t love what was in place before he got there. I would not be at all surprised to see the Raiders go with Option 3 on Jacobs and do nothing.

AFC WEST

KANSAS CITY

Cody Benjamin of CBSSports.com says the Chiefs may might be stepping up towards signing WR DeANDRE HOPKINS.

DeAndre Hopkins may be 31, but the former Pro Bowler has no plans to call it a career anytime soon, hinting Thursday that he’s got at least another half-decade of football in the tank. And there’s at least a trio of teams vying for his services. The Patriots and Titans — the two perceived front-runners in this sweepstakes — have had communication with Hopkins this week although no signing is imminent, according to NFL Media. Despite buzz about the wide receiver potentially landing with New England and Tennessee, the Chiefs remain another possibility, according to ESPN, as they remain in talks with the free agent.

“The Chiefs have kept in contact,” Jeremy Fowler reported recently, “and they have, certainly, some interest.”

The issue for K.C. is money, as has been the case since Hopkins initially became available via trade early this offseason. The team has just over $400,000 in current salary cap space — the least in the NFL — and Hopkins is reportedly seeking a deal in the range of the $15 million one-year pact that Odell Beckham Jr. landed with the Ravens. The Chiefs could free up money to pursue Hopkins “more aggressively” by extending star defensive tackle Chris Jones, per Fowler, but that might not happen until late in the summer.

In the meantime, Hopkins has previously visited with the Patriots and Titans earlier this offseason and appear to have the inside track at landing him, though Houston reportedly also hosted the former All-Pro on an unofficial visit after his release from Arizona.

The Chiefs acquired former Giants first-round pick Kadarius Toney via trade during their 2022 Super Bowl season, and they also spent a second-rounder on rookie Rashee Rice. But they lost starting wideout JuJu Smith-Schuster in free agency and could arguably use another veteran to plug in opposite former Packers speedster Marquez Valdes-Scantling.

AFC EAST

NEW YORK JETS

Have the Jets moved to the fore in the pursuit of RB DALVIN COOK?  Billy Riccette of USA TODAY:

Former Minnesota Vikings running back Dalvin Cook is still on the free agent market and the Jets may have a legitimate chance of adding him before training camp.

Mike Florio of Pro Football Talk recently shared some thought on the situation and said the Jets are “gaining momentum” towards potentially signing Cook, adding that “the Jets are a team that I was aware of as a potential destination for Cook weeks before he was actually cut and another additional benefit he said is potentially blocking the Dolphins from landing him.”

The Jets have been keeping an eye on Cook. He would add a strong back behind Aaron Rodgers on offense and would allow the Jets to be more cautious with Breece Hall and his ACL recovery.

The Dolphins, Patriots and perhaps even the Bills are all potentially in the mix as well for Cook. With training camps only about two weeks away, we should get some traction soon on this front. The Jets’ first practice of camp is July 20.

THIS AND THAT

BRADY UPDATE

Tom Brady “lost” $30 million when FTX collapsed and has been seen hanging out, recently, with Kim Kardashian.

First, this from Mike Florio of ProFootballTalk.com:

Tom Brady had well-documented distractions during his final year with the Buccaneers (and, presumably, his final year in football). More details are emerging about one of them — the collapse of crypto trading platform FTX.

Per the New York Times, Brady made an “urgent phone call ” during last November’s collapse to FTX executive Sina Nader, the head of the company’s partnerships. Nader, who was in the middle of a crisis meeting with FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried, didn’t take the call.

“I never would’ve expected to decline a call from Tom Brady,” Nader told the Times.

FTX had paid Brady $30 million, most in stock, to endorse the company. His ex-wife, Gisele Bundchen, had received $18 million in FTX stock. After the company collapsed, the stock became worthless.

Per the report, Brady and Bundchen would have paid taxes on at least some of the stock.

Brady and Bundchen also have been sued by FTX customers who lost money due to alleged fraudcommitted by the company.

They both have a lot more money than $48 million. But, still, $48 million is $48 million. The fact that the collapse of FTX happened in November 2022, not long after Brady and Bundchen divorced, expands the major distractions that he was dealing with last season.

Jenna Lemoncelli of the New York Post on Brady-Kardashian:

The sparks were apparently flying inside Michael Rubin’s star-studded Hamptons bash over the holiday weekend.

Tom Brady and Kim Kardashian “were super flirty with each other” at the Fanatics CEO’s annual white party, a source told the Daily Mail, alleging the duo was “seen during the day on the beach together and again dancing at night.”

An insider claimed the retired NFL quarterback, 45, “is exactly [Kardashian’s] type.”

Brady and Kardashian, 42, have not yet publicly addressed the recent report.

The future Hall of Famer and the SKIMS founder were photographed separately throughout the night as they partied with friends and fellow celebs.

Brady — who confirmed his divorce from Gisele Bündchen in October 2022 — was seen chatting with Patriots owner Robert Kraft, as well as Cowboys linebacker Micah Parsons and Ravens wideout Odell Beckham Jr.

Kardashian, who said on Twitter she took 11 shots at the party, was photographed with Rubin, 50, her good friend La La Anthony and Paris Saint-Germain star Kylian Mbappé.

“MICHAEL RUBIN’S WHITE PARTY What a night! Still recovering!” the “Kardashians” star exclaimed on Instagram.

It’s unclear what exactly went down in the Hamptons as Rubin has a no-media policy at the famous event.

Kardashian, who settled her divorce with Kanye West in November 2022, was said to be shopping for a vacation home in Brady’s exclusive Bahamian neighborhood, Page Six reported in May.

“Kim and Tom are friendly. She phoned him and asked him for his advice on Baker’s Bay,” a source said at the time.

A Brady rep shut down romance speculation, however.

“Kim and Tom have friends and business partners in common, but they are not dating,” a source told Entertainment Tonight.

Brady purchased his vacation home at Baker’s Bay Golf & Ocean Club — an exclusive members-only residential community in the Bahamas where celebrities including Jennifer Lopez, Alex Rodriguez and Michael Jordan own property — with Bündchen years ago.

The now-former couple shares daughter Vivian, 10, and son Benjamin, 13.

Brady also has a 15-year-old son, Jack, with his ex, actress Bridget Moynahan.

She dated comedian Pete Davidson for nine months before calling it quits in August 2022.

Reps for Brady and Kardashian did not immediately return The Post’s request for comment.

WILL BRINSON’S QB TIERS

In all fairness, Mike Sando of The Athletic has been the pioneer and promulgator of preseason NFL QB “Tiers”.  But here is the take of Will Brinson of CBSSports.com:

First, shoutout to my good friend Jason La Canfora who penned these tiers the last two years; I’ve basically kept the same/similar tiers with a few modifications. I didn’t include JLC’s 2022 list because of those changes and to avoid general confusion with the rankings. You can check out the 2022 list here. Second, I have no interest in making you mad, that’s yourself making you mad. Third, I am always prepared to be proven wrong.

Fourth — and maybe most importantly — is how clear some of these tiers have really become in the past year or so. All the elder statesmen stepping away from the game paved the way for a new class of top-tier signal callers, with several right behind them poised (hopefully) to join the best of the best.

As always, the NFL features a giant group of guys with question marks (Tier 3), which is where most people will take their angry stances. And it’s interesting to see how the middle class (Tier 4) has really solidified itself, especially with a few future potential additions.

Send your complaints and angry commentary to me @WillBrinson on Twitter and on Instagram at the same handle.

Tier 1: The Big Three

2023: Patrick Mahomes, Joe Burrow, Josh Allen

We can call them the “Elite of the Elite” or whatever you want, but these guys are simply on a different level as quarterbacks than anyone else right now. This is your top three draft picks if you’re starting a franchise. There’s a reason these guys comprised the top three spots on Pete Prisco’s Top 100 NFL Players list earlier this offseason. They are a cut above everyone else at the position right now.

Mahomes is clearly No. 1 and I wouldn’t even be opposed to giving him his own tier. But I think Burrow and Allen are close enough behind to warrant this designation. If your team has one of these three guys, you believe the Super Bowl is winnable even if things go wrong for your franchise.

Tier 2: Could Join Them Next Year

2023: Justin Herbert, Lamar Jackson, Trevor Lawrence, Jalen Hurts

People are going to get mad at this tier, watch. But consider the quality of quarterbacks above. These guys aren’t lacking talent or even success. These are ELITE players we’re talking about here, but a little something is missing, whether it’s a full resume, longevity, health, etc.

For Jackson, the pedigree is there as a former MVP and being locked in long term helps, as does the addition of Todd Monken as Ravens OC. Injuries are a fair complaint here the last two seasons; it wouldn’t shock me to see a monster year from Lamar and a quick move up. Herbert on the Chiefs probably gets him in the tier above; but the Chargers have a loaded roster and still can’t get over the hump. Lawrence and Hurts each have just one year having taken big leaps forward. Hurts has a loaded roster around him and Lawrence has a pretty choice division to carve apart in the immediate future. 

Tier 3: Intrigue with Question Marks

2023: Aaron Rodgers, Matthew Stafford, Tua Tagovailoa, Justin Fields, Daniel Jones, Deshaun Watson, Russell Wilson

Think of this as a combo of younger rising stars and veterans who have won at the highest level but can’t be totally trusted. There’s something lingering in each of these cases, whether it’s a single year of production, a single year of decline, injuries or the team around them. 

Rodgers won two of the last three MVPs and it would be shocking if he wasn’t good this year, but he is on a new team without a history of much success and wasn’t his best last year. I have no interest in betting against spite, especially if he was hurt all season. Stafford won the Super Bowl two years ago! He was injured all of last year and everything went wrong for the Rams, who Vegas hates this season, along with everyone else. Tua’s got two things that worry me and they remain very much intertwined: his health (specifically concussions) and his offensive line. Fields can do it as a runner but we haven’t seen him do it as a pure passer yet. That’s not all his fault and the Bears did their best to fix things around him this offseason. Jones took a massive leap forward last season with good coaching — I don’t understand the idea he’s going to be worse in a second year with Brian Daboll coaching him up after the poo-poo platter New York gave him before. Browns fans will accuse me of putting Watson here for off-field issues; if you want to yell at me feel free but include the last regular season game he played well in when you do it. Wilson is here because I believe wholeheartedly in Sean Payton as an offensive coach and playcaller — just about anyone else and Wilson would be much lower. If Payton can’t fix Russ, well, buddy we might a whole new category here next year.

Tier 4: You Can Win With Them

2023: Jared Goff, Dak Prescott, Geno Smith, Kirk Cousins, Ryan Tannehill, Derek Carr, Jimmy Garoppolo

The best way to describe these guys? They can get you to the playoffs if everything about them breaks in their favor but you cannot envision a scenario where they take you on a deep playoff run or win you a Super Bowl without a really stout defense/run game combo or the stars simply aligning.

Goff is the guy I felt bad including in this list but it’s technically a move up from JLC’s list last year when he was just a “guy/veteran/placeholder” and he deserves that, with the caveat maybe he’s got a little upside left at age 28 should everything click in Detroit this year. Does Dak? Mike McCarthy wants to “run the damn ball” and blamed Kellen Moore for trying to “light up the scoreboard” (aka score points?!?!), which doesn’t bode well for Dak exploding into a tier above. Eugene Cyril Smith III (put some RESPECT ON HIS NAME) was a top-10 quarterback last year, but his floor/ceiling combo feels fairly narrow, which may be exactly what Pete Carroll wants from his quarterback. The same goes for Tannehill in the past and for what Mike Vrabel wants. Cousins, Carr and Jimmy G are all alternate timeline versions of one another — Jimmy G is evil Kirk and Carr is the emo version you get somewhere in the middle of the two.

Tier 5: Future Potential ‘Can Win With Them’ Guys

2023: Mac Jones, Kenny Pickett, Brock Purdy (?)

Do the Patriots like Mac?? The rumors about Bill Belichick being mad at Jones for seeking outside help with the offense make total sense without making any sense at all. There’s no denying his floor, though, and even if Bill O’Brien isn’t Josh McDaniels he sure as hell ain’t Matt Patricia. Plus the two worked together previously, so we should see a bounce-back if the OL and run game work out. Pickett feels like a possible “take a leap” guy but I’d like to see it before deciding whether he’s a Tier 3 or a Tier 4 guy, certainly the Steelers seem like a safe haven for a young quarterback to develop and blossom, there’s just that pesky “you’re still employing Matt Canada” thing lingering. Purdy’s resume isn’t long enough to warrant a move up … and that’s assuming he’s ready to go in Week 1. If you made a Frankenstein monster out of the Niners’ three quarterbacks I’d be OK with them in Tier 3 but an operation like that feels like it might not be legal.

Tier 6: No Clue, Man

2023: Kyler Murray, Sam Howell, Jordan Love, Baker Mayfield, Desmond Ridder

This is basically a “Good Luck” category but I don’t want to dismiss the possibility/upside for some of these guys. Or, to be more frank, I don’t have a clue how 2023 will go for them.

Kyler could go anywhere on this list and could also be his own tier because I couldn’t possibly begin to guess how MUCH he plays in 2023, much less how WELL he plays this coming season. The Cards might very well sit on him knowing they want to move on next year after a full-fledge tank sesh. I wanted to put Howell and Love higher because I think they both possess upside the public is unnecessarily scoffing at, but there wasn’t a spot above that fit and I certainly wouldn’t bet my life on either being a good or great NFL quarterback. Additionally the style of play — including aggressive use of their legs from the position — creates a ceiling/floor level you don’t see from the Tier 5 guys. If both Howell and Love were in the NFC postseason it wouldn’t be that shocking. “I’m a Baker guy – Brinson” was our Slack slogan for a few months … and I still am, although you wouldn’t know it given where he’s positioned here. Prisco sold me a bit on the Bucs during a recent Pick Six Podcast appearance and if he’s right about Tampa’s offensive line and defense, Baker could thrive there and this will look silly. I’m also high on the Falcons but it’s mostly because the division is weak, the defense will be better and Arthur Smith’s Titans-lite plan will make Ridder a game manager. He could be a future potential winner!

Tier 7: The Rookies

2023: Bryce Young, C.J. Stroud, Anthony Richardson

Take as much time as you want trying to decide where these three guys would go without a “rookies” designation and you’re going to spend a lot of time chasing your tail. They all have upside — hence their draft spot — but there’s so much we don’t know about them yet and all three have first-year coaching staffs (only Carolina features a retread in Frank Reich).

Young’s floor feels so high I would almost feel comfortable putting him in Tier 4 but those guys are mostly capped out potential-wise and no one would say that about the No. 1 overall pick. You could push Richardson as high as Tier 3 because he’s such a freakshow athlete but it would look ridiculous having him above established veterans, several of whom were top 10 quarterbacks last year, if he didn’t even start Week 1 (he will, Jim Irsay is involved). Stroud is my least favorite of the rookie quarterbacks but I actually like his situation with the new Texans coaching staff (Bobby Slowik is especially intriguing as their OC) and several decent offensive linemen.

Tier X: Just in Freaking Case

2023: Tom Brady

Everyone says he’s done! But Sean Connery came back and played James Bond again in 1983 (!) at the age of 52 (!!). Never say never again and whatnot.