Let me first answer that question initially with, I have no idea. BUT here are 3 concise, level headed suggestions.

#1: Buy a South African Wildlife Safari- No I’m not talking about a cute trip with the family to Jo-Berg for a quick look at the big five, I’m talking about owning that elephant and Water buffalo and the land on which they roam. Am I the only one who finds the prospect of Haloti vs. Hippo to be both flesh ripping vicious and adorable?

#2: Who doesn’t need a Star Wars looking battle tank?- As if the product landscape on Amazon wasn’t bizarre enough, there is THIS gem. Whether you’re a Tusken Raider (The more George Lucas acceptable term for sand people) or a star defensive lineman this plush carpeted, steel plated machine is great for any Sunday stroll through the salt flats. Unfortunately it is not currently in stock but I’m sure the awkward top heavy small tank factory will pump a new shipment out soon.

#3: Have Haloti Ngata Sponsored youth sports programs. There is nothing more important than building your personal brand and what better place to start than our youth? And while we’re focusing on impressionable markets why not focus on China, where allegedly 1.3 billion people live. I’ve never seen it so I have my reservations, but even Marlbro has stepped up to support these kids across the Pacific pond in what is apparently a school for future Jeff Gordon Pit Crew members, not at all weird.

In truth, Clady’s performance has declined. As a first-round rookie in 2008, he instantly proved to be football’s most athletic left tackle, if not football’s best left tackle. His 2009 season was equally impressive. In the spring of 2010, however, Clady tore his patellar tendon in a pickup basketball game. He didn’t miss any regular season action, but he clearly didn’t have the same explosiveness as before. Last season, Clady regained much of his original form, but he was also mistake prone.

This is where the flawed evidence comes in. ESPN.com recently got statistical to highlight Clady’s 2011 woes. In 16 starts, according to STATS Inc., Clady allowed a career-high nine sacks and was penalized 12 times. Since allowing just a half-sack as a rookie, Clady has given up 24.5 sacks over the past three years.

Here’s the problem: “sacks allowed” is a respectable statistic, but only if taken with a grain of salt. The people at STATS Inc. who track and grade game action are required to record the result of a play, not what actually happened on a play. In Clady’s case, many of his allowed sacks were a consequence of Tim Tebow running around to buy time. Sure, the man Clady blocked may have gotten the sack, but Clady successfully blocked for an entire seven-step drop; Tebow just turned it into a 13-step drop.

Another caveat: a “sacks allowed” stat can show that a talented left tackle got beat by a talented edge-rusher one or two times, but it can’t show that that talented left tackle singlehandedly kept the talented edge-rusher at bay on the other 30-something dropbacks. Sometimes what’s more important than what a player did on a play was what a player was asked to do. The Broncos last season were often able to ask their left tackle to face the opposing team’s top pass-rusher with no tight end help or even a chip block.

This is not meant to be a defense of Ryan Clady. Though Clady did improve as a run-blocker in 2011, his overall play has indeed dipped a bit from his first two years . Twelve penalties are far too many and so are nine sacks when considering that Denver ranked 32^nd in pass attempts. But there needs to be more emphasis on the grain of salt here. Watch the film and you’ll see, quite clearly, that Clady is a good football player. He just is. The numbers suggest he’s a bottom-feeder; the film shows he’s a top-feeder.

To judge Clady, or any offensive lineman, solely on his “sacks allowed” is akin to judging quarterbacks on interceptions. Fewer negative plays does not equal better performance. Alex Smith threw five interceptions last season; Tom Brady threw 12. But because quarterbacks can be portrayed through multiple statistical categories, no one in their right mind would argue that Smith was a better quarterback than Brady. Smith threw for 3,144 yards; Brady threw for 5,235. Smith had 17 touchdowns; Brady had 39.

Unfortunately, offensive linemen have no other stats. Sure, there are the little-known rushing stats by field lane (the Broncos when running left last season had 67 power runs, 22 runs of 10-plus yards and 19 negative plays, which are solid all-around numbers), but those are vague and often misleading. For example, a lot of runs to the left are set up by a right guard’s pull-block. How is that depicted in the stats?

Ninety nine percent of football statistics are circumstantial and/or influenced by a multitude of factors. What’s important is to trust how a player – especially an offensive lineman – looks on film and make that the backbone of evaluation. Because this is what quality front offices do, don’t be surprised if Denver’s “mistake-prone” left tackle soon becomes one of the highest paid players at his position.

Really, in early May, if players aren’t getting arrested or fighting for more collective bargaining rights, the only remotely interesting news pertains to who’s actually not making news. In other words, since nothing is going on right now, maybe this is a good time to ask if anyone has heard from Plaxico Burress.

You may not have noticed, but the once-talked-about, once-polarizing red zone receiving extraordinaire is still unsigned. It’s actually remarkable that this is the case. Randy Moss was quickly snatched up by the 49ers and drew sniffs from other teams upon announcing that he was returning to the NFL after a one-year layoff. Moss’s one-year layoff only came about because he, like Burress now (apparently), was unwanted. Moss has certainly had a better career than Burress, but he wasn’t better in 2010 than Burress was in 2011. So why did Moss draw more interest on the open market?

Burress’s first post-incarceration campaign as a Jet last season was not a raving success, but it was by no means an epic failure. The 34-year-old caught 45 passes and eight touchdowns; his numbers would have been better if Mark Sanchez’s play had been at least close to “average”. Burress did look rusty at times, mainly in route running and with other nuances. But he was effective in the red zone (which is primarily what the Jets signed him for) and he got quicker as the season progressed.

The point of this article isn’t to make a case for some team to sign Burress. All 32 teams are fully aware that the 6’5” possession target is available; their indifference isn’t one giant collective oversight. Clearly there’s something about Burress that’s scaring clubs away. Perhaps we’re just learning now that the only team that wasn’t actually leery of Burress drama last year was New York. Or, perhaps Burress wants too much money. Or maybe there’s an off-field issue that the public doesn’t know about. No need to speculate (that’s what message boards are for), but there has to be something. Burress is by no means great, but he hasn’t completely washed up. The film never revealed him to be awful last season, and now that he’s had some time out of prison, it’s not unrealistic to think he could be even better in 2012. He’s certainly worth signing to a one-year contract.

More interesting than the utter disinterest in Burress is everyone else’s disinterest in the disinterest. Burress’s name rarely flashes across Twitter. No fans are floating the idea of their team signing him. When free agency first started there were whispers about Burress joining the Eagles or returning to the Steelers, but those whispers quickly died. The reason is Burress wouldn’t be more than a No. 4 or No. 5 receiver for either of those teams.

But Burress could contribute on a lesser team. Jacksonville, for example. Buffalo needs receiving depth. Miami needs a replacement for Brandon Marshall. Baltimore (not a “lesser team”) is surprisingly thin outside – especially considering last year’s fourth-round pick, Tandon Doss, caught zero pass in the six games in which he was active. Cincinnati needs receiving help. So does Minnesota and Carolina.

Of course, as mentioned earlier, if those teams needed Burress, they’d be pursuing him. So maybe he is washed up. Who knows? It’s May, nothing’s going on….if Burress can’t generate any attention right now, he never will. Just thought it was maybe worth mentioning….

Follow @Andy_Benoit

email andy.benoit@nfltouchdown.com

Quarterback

Virtually the entire league agrees: in order to compete for a Super Bowl, you have to have a superstar quarterback. The last game-managing quarterback to win a title was Brad Johnson in 2002. Since Johnson, the list of quarterbacks who have hoisted a Lombardi Trophy reads like a roll call for future Hall of Fame inductees: Tom Brady (2), Ben Roethlisberger (2), Peyton Manning, Eli Manning (2), Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers. Front offices around the league have taken note. Next Thursday, after the Colts draft Andrew Luck and the Redskins draft Robert Griffin III, 28 of the 32 starting NFL quarterbacks entering 2012 will have either been drafted in the first round or will be playing under a contract worth at least $20 million guaranteed. The only teams who won’t have first-round or $20 million signal-callers are the Dolphins (unless they draft Ryan Tannehill, which many expect they will), Bengals (they took rising star Andy Dalton early in the second round last year), Browns (who seem anxious to replace Colt McCoy) and Seahawks (who just signed free agent Matt Flynn to a contract worth $10 guaranteed).

Of course, just because 28 teams have made star-level investments in their quarterbacks doesn’t mean the league has 28 star quarterbacks. Many quarterbacks are overrated entering the league or wind up underachieving. But the results aren’t the focus here – the intentions are. Twenty eight teams have committed heavily to building primarily around their quarterback. The next time someone tells you that a team can win a title with a great defense and Trent Dilfer-esque signal-caller, tell them that seven out of eight NFL franchises think that’s nonsense.

Obviously, having a middle-tier quarterback does not instantly render you noncompetitive. The 49ers technically have a first-round quarterback in Alex Smith (the No. 1 overall pick in 2005), but the modest three-year, $24 million contract they just gave him affirms what Jim Harbaugh’s play-calling already revealed: the team considers Smith a puzzle piece, not a building block. But Smith and the Niners are the exception, not the rule. And even the Niners know that it’s difficult to sustain success while hiding your quarterback. That’s why they went after Peyton Manning this offseason.

So we agree that you need a great quarterback in today’s NFL. But what defines a great quarterback these days? Raw tools – such as size, arm strength and accuracy – are important (no matter what the Tebowites say). So is the ability to read a defense. Or, more precisely, manipulate a defense. Because the game has gotten so complex and the athletes are so much better, it’s no longer enough for a great quarterback to drop back and simply know what he’s looking at. A great quarterback now must figure out what he’s looking at before the snap. This is for two reasons: 1. with more quality pass-rushers, faster blitzes and increased complexity of defensive schemes, a quarterback doesn’t have enough time after the snap to process everything he’s seeing; 2. much of today’s offensive strategies center around making defenders guess wrong; a quarterback can’t influence a defender’s guesswork if he doesn’t begin the play with at least some idea of what the defender is first going to be guessing on his own.

The proliferation of presnap quarterbacking is one of the main reasons why completion percentages have gone up. (The creation of more anti-defensive rules and improved passer training at football’s amateur levels are probably the two other biggest reasons.) Great quarterbacks do most of their work before the snap. The really great ones can make drastic adjustments to their teammate’s assignments because of it (hence all the pointing and audibling you see from guys like Brady, Brees, Rodgers or the Manning Brothers).

Another reason presnap recognition has become vital is that in spread-oriented systems – which most quality offenses run a version of these days – the ball often comes out on a three-or five-step drop. With more action taking place earlier in the down, more of the mental legwork has to be handled before the down. More and more passes these days are quicker, shorter and more horizontal. This, of course, is another factor helping completion percentage, though in this style of offense, a catchable ball is not enough. Quarterbacks must throw a catch-and-runnable ball. You can’t just put it on the receiver, you have to put it out in front, chest-high and with the perfect amount of touch so that he can snag it without breaking stride (Rodgers with the Packers receivers or Brady with Wes Welker and Aaron Hernandez are two great examples). Precision-accuracy has always been important – especially since the rise of Bill Walsh’s West Coast Offense. But in a lot of offenses nowadays, it’s mandatory.

When you think about it, all the attributes that have defined great quarterbacking over the years are still the same – the significance of those attributes has just been magnified. Greatness by NFL standards is a lot to ask of any quarterback. There are plenty of quarterbacks who can simply be “good”. The problem with having a “good” quarterback is, in order to succeed, your team has to be good at every other spot, and probably great in the run game and on defense. With the salary cap system and heightened competitiveness of the league, it’s nearly impossible to be good at 21 other positions, let alone great. A team with a great quarterback, on the other hand, can mask weaknesses (see the Patriots defense, the Packers and their so-so running backs, the Saints offensive tackles or the Manningless Colts and their “everything else” last year). Keep this in mind as we analyze the evolution of all the other positions.

Wide Receivers

As we examined early in free agency, no longer do teams have a No. 1, 2 and 3 wide receiver pecking order. Sure, there are still prototypical roles for receivers (Wes Welker is a consummate slot weapon, Plaxico Burress is a quintessential outside red zone target), but with elite teams being able to put so much more on their quarterback’s plates these days, offenses have become more complex in ways that has receivers lining up all over the field. Passing games have become about creating one-on-one mismatches through various formations and receiver distribution (“receiver distribution” refers to the where and who for how receivers line up).

If you have a true No. 1 receiver, things can be easy. Calvin Johnson is a one-on-one mismatch against anyone. Because of this, he almost never faces single coverage, but that means one of his teammates does. And chances are, that teammate creates a one-on-one mismatch because, as an offensive player facing a defender, he has the advantage of knowing where the next step is going.

The problem is, most teams don’t have a Calvin Johnson. In fact, only the Texans (with Andre Johnson) and Cardinals (with Larry Fitzgerald) do. Yes, there are other NFL star receivers, but they’re not megastars. Most players – and heck, even the megastars, since it doesn’t hurt – need the occasional benefit of drawing a formation-created mismatch.

Some of the best examples of formation-created mismatches: the Packers 3 x 1 receiver sets, the Saints putting Marques Colston or Jimmy Graham in the slot or tight splits, or just anything the Patriots do with their tight ends (who are often used as de facto wide receivers). These league-wide trends create value in receivers who have niche talents (mainly slot guys) and shifts some of the emphasis from a receiver’s physical talents to his coachability and fundamentals. In a vacuum, not a single wide receiver from the Packers, Saints, Giants, Patriots or Chargers is a surefire top-five talent at his position. But a lot of the wideouts on those teams have thrived because their specific abilities fit perfectly in their team’s evolving offensive structure.

Offensive Line

Everyone keeps talking about the declining value of the running back position. As we’ll examine soon, the running back position is not losing importance – it’s just changing. What is losing importance is the almighty left tackle position. After Michael Lewis’ bestselling book The Blind Side came out in 2006, and again after the book was made into a Hollywood blockbuster, it became chic for people to trumpet the importance of the left tackle. After all, the quarterback is the most important player on the field and the left tackle protects the quarterback’s blind side, right? Therefore, the left tackle must be the second most important player on the field.

Whether this notion was ever even true is one discussion. (It’d be interesting to see how many games starting quarterbacks have missed in recent years due to a nasty hit or even just pass-rushing pressure from their blind side; in all likelihood, it’s probably no more than they’ve missed from taking hits while scrambling or getting blitzed cleanly up the middle.) What’s not a discussion is that this notion is not true now. With so much of the passing game now predicated on quick strikes, multiple spread patterns and the shotgun, a star left tackle is not vital. Look at the last four Super Bowl winning left tackles. You have the Giant’s Dave Diehl, a natural guard who only plays outside because of personnel necessity; you have Chad Clifton of the Packers, a good-but-not-great aging veteran; then there’s Jermon Bushrod, an athletic enough player but, at the time of the Saints’ Super Bowl, arguably the poorest, shakiest pass-blocking technician in the league; before him was the mammoth but wildly inconsistent Max Starks of the Steelers.

What’s more, look at the teams that have had the top left tackles over the past five years: Cleveland Browns (Joe Thomas), Miami Dolphins (Jake Long), Denver Broncos (Ryan Clady), Tennessee Titans (Michael Roos) and Philadelphia Eagles/Buffalo Bills (Jason Peters). Any powerhouses on that list? The reality is left tackles are nice, but they don’t correlate with winning and losing.

If left tackles these days are less important, then so are right tackles. Right tackles’ value has probably declined even more considering that the proliferation of spread offenses has taken away from the traditional running game.

While edge blockers are on the down, interior blockers are on the up. With quarterbacks having so many presnap responsibilities, it doesn’t hurt if your center can help with some of the protection calls. Having quality guards is important because many teams have taken their blitzes from the outside to the inside, as that’s the fastest route to the quarterback and also creates visual congestion, which can disrupt the timing of the quick-passing game. Thus, it’s more important than ever for a guard to be consistent and smart.

Just because great quarterbacks can mask a limited offensive line, and just because fullbacks and traditional running plays are trending down, doesn’t mean offensive linemen are headed for irrelevance. In fact, they may soon be more significant than ever because, as we’ll examine next, rushing attacks are going to take on a whole new, space-oriented dimension. With more run plays destined to occur out of passing formations, offensive linemen will have to be more mobile than ever. That’s convenient because, in the meantime, the sophistication and speed of defensive blitzes has increased the athletic demands on pass-blockers.

Running backs and tight ends

Despite what you here, the running back position is not going anywhere. Rather, it’s just changing. In the near future, fewer and fewer running backs will look like Jerome Bettis or Adrian Peterson, while more and more will look like Jahvid Best or C.J. Spiller. The running back-by-committee trend is probably here to stay, not because running backs can’t take a physical beating like they used to but because running backs are gradually transforming into quasi-wide receivers. Instead of running between the tackles or behind blockers, running backs are doing all sorts of different things all over the field. Evolution usually leads to more versatility. Because of this, expect the value of running backs, not tight ends, to surge the most over the next 10 years.

Tight ends are experiencing a meteoric rise right now – and understandably so. The Saints offense, which ranked first in scoring last season, ran through third-year wonder Jimmy Graham. The Patriots offense, ranked second in scoring, ran through Rob Gronkowski and Aaron Hernandez. The league’s No. 3 scoring offense, Green Bay, boasted super athlete Jermichael Finley; the No. 5 offense, Detroit, had former first-round pick Brandon Pettigrew; the No. 6 offense was San Diego, with the possibly Canton-bound Antonio Gates; the No. 7 ranked Panthers offense ran a two tight end system featuring former first-rounders Greg Olsen and Jeremy Shockey.

But look closer at some of the minute but important evidence involving these top offenses and you’ll realize that a lot more is going on than tight ends simply dominating. When the Saints played the Giants on Monday night last November, the Giants willingly accepted the mismatch of having nickel linebacker Jacquian Williams match up with Jimmy Graham. They did this so that that paean safety Antrel Rolle could match up with running back Darren Sproles. This wasn’t by accident – this was the game plan New York came up with after diligent preparation. The plan didn’t happen to work, but that’s not the point. The point is that the Giants deemed Sproles a greater threat than Graham.

If you take a step back, it’s easy to see why. A tight end has much less field to work with the running back. He lines up on one distinct side of the formation, which often limits the scope of ground he can cover. What’s more, depending on the receiver distribution, often a defense can logically surmise before the snap whether a tight end’s route is going to take him left or right. On top of a limited field, a tight end is at the mercy of another player, as he can only touch the ball if a quarterback gets it to him.

A running back is also at the mercy of the quarterback, but the delivery of the ball is much simpler. Obviously, a handoff is easy to complete. And because a running back aligns in the backfield, most passes that he catches are shorter and easier, as there’s much more natural space between a running back and defender before the snap. So it’s easier to get the ball to a running back. This point was proven when the Patriots revealed their new surprise tactic last postseason: lining up tight end Aaron Hernandez in the backfield. The Patriots didn’t do that to be cute or make a runner out of Hernandez (though he did prove effective on traditional carries), they did it because they wanted to find new easy ways to get their most versatile playmaker the ball.

This is where the evolution rises up: in the creative ways teams get the ball to the running back (or whichever playmaker aligns in the backfield – expect 99 percent of them to still be running backs since guys like Hernandez don’t exactly grow on trees). Players like Jahvid Best and C.J. Spiller and Maurice Jones-Drew, among others, are good enough athletes and pass-catchers to split out wide or in the slot. That’s critical because not only are they a weapon there, but they also provide formation versatility. In other words, when a defensive coordinator sees a running back and three wide receivers in the huddle, he calls a defense that he thinks will work against a three-receiver set. But if the running back splits out wide, now his three-receiver defense is facing a four-receiver offense. For the offense, this is called “creating a mismatch.”

Just because teams are spreading the field and throwing more doesn’t mean running plays will go away. Rather, it just means teams will call running plays from more passing formations. We’re seeing this already, in fact. In 2011, teams ran the ball a record 5,164 times out of three-plus receiver sets (that averages out to 10 times per game for each team). The previous record, set in ’08, had been 4,767 runs.

Running backs are taking more handoffs from shotgun formations, they’re running more draws and a lot of their would-be handoffs are being delivered in the form of a screen or swing pass. If offenses keep spreading out (and they should because of good quarterbacking and the fact that the wider you spread, the easier it is to recognize complex disguise and attacks from a defense), running out of passing formations is a trend that will only grow until it becomes the norm. It makes all the sense in the world to run out of spread sets. After all, by their very nature, they force the defense to widen. This creates wider running lanes. At the end of the day, the running backs are still running the ball, only now, instead of needing power to ram through a tight inside hole, they need more initial quickness and agility to stop-and-start and change directions in space.

As for tight ends (the sexiest offensive position in football right now), teams will surely keep looking for the next Gronkowski, Graham or Gates. Those guys are athletic freaks who can excel at anything. But really, for most intents and purposes, they’re wide receivers who occasionally block. That’s hard for defenses to match up to right now, but that will change because, as we’ll cover next, teams are going to soon adjust the way they evaluate linebackers and safeties. But in the grander scheme of things, offensive evolution will occur through the increased versatility, and thus resurrection of, one of the sport’s hallmark positions: running back.

Defense

The future of defense is dictated by the evolution of offense. Teams have to figure out how to combat the growing number of three-and four-receiver sets. It’s not realistic to find a bunch of quality cornerbacks and just line up and play. Very few corners are good enough to handle NFL wideouts man-to-man on an everydown basis (if they were, guys like Darrelle Revis wouldn’t make around a million bucks a game). And man-to-man cornerbacks can’t always combat things like presnap motion or intertwined route combinations – offensive tactics that are growing in union with the expanding variety of three-plus receiver formations. What’s more, as we just covered in the running back/tight end evolution analysis, defenses are going to have to find a way to stop the run out of nickel personnel anyway. The third corner has already replaced the third linebacker as a de facto starter, as a majority of NFL snaps now involve three or more wide receivers.

The easiest – and therefore most plausible – counter to the offensive evolution is to find more versatile defensive players inside. Someone has to be able to run with super athletic tight ends, handle the quickness of diminutive slot receivers and stay with a running back no matter where that running back goes. As it stands, safeties generally cover tight ends, nickel corners cover slot receivers and linebackers take responsibility for running backs. Problem is, offenses now mix things up in ways that compromise this formula. A linebacker isn’t athletic enough to provide elite pass coverage, but against a player like Darren Sproles, elite pass coverage is what’s required. So, the defense puts a safety on Sproles. Problem here is, the safety isn’t as physical as the linebacker and so he’s not as effective stopping Sproles’ runs between the tackles. And we know Sproles will run between the tackles because the Saints, like all teams, are starting to run more out of passing formations.

Again, the simple solution is to find better athletes on defense. That’s actually about as easy done as said. The reason offenses have evolved the way they have the past 10 years is because defenders kept getting more and more athletic. Unable to out-athlete the opponent, offenses had to find ways to outsmart them. Hence a new emphasis on presnap strategy and complex spread designs. Football’s evolution is like a teeter-totter. Defenses got better so offenses got trickier. Now, defenses have to get better again. It’s happened many times before. Defense requires slightly more raw athleticism than offense, so throughout history, finding defensive talent has not been an issue. It’s just a matter of how that talent is recruited and coached. A defender’s simple brute strength and speed carry less weight now; his flexibility and agility (i.e. versatility) carry more weight.

What’s most likely to happen is the linebacker and safety positions will blend into one. Linebackers will always play closer to the line of scrimmage, but with improved blitzes and certain offensive matchup scenarios, they’ll wind up playing just as much coverage as the safeties play. As important as the Giants’ pass-rush was down the stretch last season, perhaps the biggest reason why that defense got hot was safety Antrel Rolle moved to nickel corner/dime linebacker on passing downs. Rolle, a former Cardinal, was drafted high in the first round as a cornerback. He also happens to be an adept tackler. In short, he’s a safety who can truly cover man-to-man and truly play the run. That kind of versatility not only eliminated many of the matchup problems that New York’s opponents tried to create, it also allowed New York to better disguise and execute its own defensive concepts. Rolle is not a superstar but his versatile skill set gives the Giants incredible elasticity. The more elastic defensive personnel can be, the easier it is for the coaching staff to highlight the strengths of all its players.

On a similar note, the 49ers defense rose to dominance last season because both inside linebackers – Navorro Bowman and Patrick Willis – were sensational against the run and the pass. There was nothing those two couldn’t do. Consequently, there was nothing opponents could do to create serious matchup problems for the Niners.

Another reason that finding versatile linebackers and safeties is vital for defensive progress is that the proliferation of shrewd presnap reads and quick passes from quarterbacks puts a hard ceiling on the impact of a pass-rush. Not even Lawrence Taylor could make a dent on a play where the quarterback throws a perfect strike 1.5 seconds after the snap. The only solution for a defense is to find open-space athletes who are good enough to combat an offense’s quick-striking advantages inside. And keep in mind, with passing games getting better, wide receivers across the board are getting better. So most cornerbacks need more help. The only players who can help them are the guys already lining up in space.

Throughout this examination of the NFL’s current evolution, it keeps being said that certain positions are just changing, not vanishing (the running back is the best example). Well, there is one position that might be vanishing: the traditional two-gap nose tackle. That may sound absurd considering more and more teams are running 3-4 schemes these days. And perhaps it is absurd considering that virtually all the film shows that nose tackles, when on the field, are still dominant forces.

The “yeah but” here is that nose tackles today aren’t on the field. With so many offenses lining up in passing formations, true nose tackles are playing fewer snaps. And most of those 3-4 schemes are actually just 4-3 schemes in disguise. No matter what the defensive front looks like, most of the execution involves one-gap attacks –a classic 4-3 principle. Very few teams still consistently run a traditional two-gap 3-4. In fact, a lot of teams run a 2-4-5, which is a response to the rise of passing formations. A 2-4-5 creates more standup players, which creates more sources of versatility and disguise. A great example is what Dom Capers has done as the defensive coordinator in Green Bay.

In short, gridiron battles are taking place less in the trenches and more in open space. That’s just the way the sport has evolved. Keep this in the back of your mind when critiquing the draft this weekend.

Follow @Andy_Benoit

email andy.benoit@nfltouchdown.com

Over the years, you’ve heard myriad explanations for baseball’s declining ratings: cable and satellite TV have give viewers a panoply of different channels to tune in to; much of media has migrated to the World Wide Web; the increasing sophistication of video game consoles has created a more appealing form of home entertainment. All are valid explanations. But they haven’t seemed to detract from America’s new favorite pastime, pro football.

The rating for this year’s first Saturday afternoon MLB on FOX was 2.3. That’s about 10 percent of the audience that FOX’s Sunday afternoon NFL Week 1 telecast attracted. Obviously, a regular season MLB game and a regular season NFL game do not make an apples-to-apples comparison (there are 10 times the number of regular season MLB games as NFL games). But if they were apples, one would be rotten and the other perfectly ripe. Another example of lopsided numbers: the TV audience for Game 7 of the Cardinals-Rangers series drew 2 million fewer viewers than the NFL’s Packers-Saints Thursday night opener last fall. So, essentially, baseball’s Super Bowl equals football’s season opener.

Fifty years ago, no one would have predicted that football would trump baseball in a popularity (non)contest. But they probably should have. Baseball’s declining allure has nothing to do with performance-enhancing drug scandals, big and small market inequality or even the natural ebb and flow of popular entertainment. It has to do with the sport itself. There’s no room for progressive change in baseball. Literally. There’s not enough space.

Including end zones, a football field is 120 yards long and 53 yards wide, giving it a playing-surface area of 8,242,560 square inches. Eight million-plus square inches is a lot of space in which to mobilize participants. Thus, as players become more athletic and skilled, and as schemes become more creative and intricate, there is room to accommodate the advancements.

Baseball, on the other hand, has a playing-surface area of 217 square inches. That’s the area of home plate. Yes, baseball fields are about the same overall size as football fields, but the field doesn’t become relevant until someone hits one of the pitches thrown to home plate. The entire sport hinges on what takes place near those 217 square inches. There are only so many things an athletes can do when confined to such tight parameters. Or, as we’ve found out, really there are only four things: throw a strike or throw a ball, and swing a bat or not swing a bat.

Granted, this is an oversimplification of a long-lived sport. But it’s a clear explanation for why baseball has always been married to the past. By its very nature, baseball’s past is its present. You can’t centralize a sport around 217 square inches and expect it to ever significantly change. Consequently baseball players today can’t really show off the fact that they’re faster and stronger than those of yesterday. Even when they get past those 217 square inches by putting the ball in play, the batter still has to run to the exact same place that the players from yesterday ran to. There’s just no chance for innovative strategy or new displays of physical ability.

This is largely why there’s so much monotony and downtime in baseball, and why so much emphasis has been placed on peripheral nonsense known as “unwritten rules”. In baseball, if a guy hits a monster home run and stares at it for an extra second and a half, he’s committed a blatant violation of etiquette and could be subject to a beanball next time at the plate. A pitcher yelling at a batter who’s jogging to first base? Such disrespect can be grounds for a bench-clearing brawl. Or, as Dallas Braden reminded everyone two years ago, a base runner jogging back to the dugout after a third out had damn well better not cut across the mound and step on the rubber. If he does, he’s showing up the pitcher. Or the home team. Or the grounds crew. Or whoever it was that simply decided such short cuts aren’t cool.

Can you imagine anyone in the NFL even batting an eye (let alone fighting) at such inconsequential stuff? Of course not – everyone in football is too busy trying to figure out new strategies to take advantage of all that luscious field space.

Another, and more recognized, reason for baseball and football’s widening popularity gap is that baseball is really an individual sport that happens to be played by teams. The battle in that 217-square-inch area involves only a pitcher and batter (sorry Johnny Bench fans, but at the end of the day, a catcher can only be as effective as the pitcher he’s catching for). One-on-one sports don’t have a lot of inherent room for natural growth (see the rise and fall of boxing; or America’s perpetual indifference to tennis, a sport in which the signature domestic event – the U.S. Open – has, over the last 20 years, has attracted a television audience of just 2-3 million).

Is baseball dying? The ratings, the sport’s own natural evolutionary limitations and history of similar sports say, Yes. It’s just a matter of how quickly. The rate of baseball’s demise can easily turn into something of a mathematic argument based on presumption and perspective (two things that don’t mix well with numbers). Baseball itself has been around since the late 1790s. Major League Baseball came about in the 1870s. The sport’s golden age – its teenage years, if you will – was the 1920s-1960s. So perhaps baseball hasn’t even reached its midlife crisis yet.

The problem with this timing and perspective is it doesn’t consider that society’s taste for entertainment evolves much faster now than it did in the 1790s, 1870s or even 1960s. A sport could once thrive or just survive by mastering the art of not evolving, but inevitably there comes an era where you pay the bill for that. There’s enough pageantry at an MLB park to convince even non-sports fans to attend games, so filling 50,000-seat stadiums shouldn’t become a problem anytime soon. But the real sports money comes from mass viewership. Right now, mass viewership occurs primarily via TV; down the road it may be via tablets, mobile devices or some other form of technology that’s yet to be invented. It doesn’t matter; whatever the viewing platform, baseball will still be boring in comparison to other sports that have the physical space and healthy number of live-action participants necessary to evolve.

There’s no one to blame for this. Bud Selig, or whoever the next commission will be, can alter baseball’s rules or business model, but because he has only 217 square inches to work with, he can’t significantly alter the sport itself. In comparison, football, if evolution ever dictated, could change to the point that tackling no longer existed. Some might argue that it would then no longer be football. That’s irrelevant; the point is the National Football League would still exist. Football is malleable enough to ultimately become whatever its audience wants it to become. This is why the NFL is here to stay. Baseball isn’t malleable. The only way Major League Baseball would ever have a chance at catching up to the National Football League is if Major League Baseball were Major League Something Else.

Baseball might be back in full swing, but in the big scheme of things, fewer people are watching. Meanwhile, the NFL Draft is just a little over a week away and new ratings record will probably be set. Evolution at work.

Follow @Andy_Benoit

email andy.benoit@nfltouchdown.com

Also on the table is a rule change that would mandate automatic replay for all turnovers. Last year the NFL instituted automatic reviews for all scoring plays. Those reviews were often efficient and unobtrusive because…they took place strictly up in the booth! (Though they became annoyingly long whenever the booth ruled that the head official needed to go under the hood for a closer inspection.)

Finding a quick, painless way to review all turnovers is a good idea, but here’s a better one: just make all plays automatically reviewable from up in the booth, and give the booth official the power to override any on-field call. This is the direction the NFL is naturally going in anyway.

The concern with this sort of system is whether it could prolong the game in a bad way. One of some thousand-plus reasons why college football is vastly inferior to the pro game is its out-of-control replay setup. (In college, every play is subject to booth review and each team has one challenge.) But the NFL could privately instruct replay officials to be judicious with their powers. They could publicly trumpet their strive for officiating perfection while privately telling the booth lords that it’s better to have a minor missed call or two and maintain the flow of a game than to nitpick for 3 hours and 45 minutes.

When you really think about it, red challenge flags are dramatic and fun, but it’s senseless to have a system that saddles a head coach with the responsibility of monitoring his team and the officiating crew. Why should arguing calls be a built-in element of strategy? In every sport, the goal with officials is to make them unrecognizable. Having replays quickly take place automatically and in a booth rather than deliberately and dramatically on the field is the best way to do that.

With the turnovers review rule change likely to receive the 75 percent of votes needed to pass, just about every significant on-field scenario will now be subject to automatic review. By still leaving teams with a pair of challenges (and a third if the first two are successful), the NFL is just inviting coaches to be more aggressive with their red flags. It would suddenly be less harmful to, say for example, challenge a three-yard catch near the sideline.

Referees are plenty prominent as it is; in a heavily-flagged game, they get as much full screen airtime as the coaches and quarterbacks (which is why most football fans now know who Ed Hochuli is). This needs to change. That can happen with one final all-encompassing correction to the system: the automatic reviews of all plays from the booth.
Follow: @Andy_Benoit

email andy.benoit@nfltouchdown.com

Plenty will continue to be written about how Tebow will fit in with what’s been the most decadent team in football the past few years. In the meantime, let’s shed light on a more pressing issue: the ongoing Tebow debate. This trade should end that relentless imbroglio. We say “should” because we all know that no matter what, the true Tebow zealots – of which there are many – will almost certainly not pipe down. But clearly, it’s time they do.

All along, the Tebowites have subscribed to the belief that John Elway and the Broncos organization had it out for the guy. Tebow is an unconventional quarterback, the belief went, and Elway is just unwilling to give him any well-earned respect. This theory, of course, was ridiculous. Elway doesn’t draw his core values about quarterbacking from thin air. He doesn’t oversimplify a complex sport by weighing only whether a quarterback has “It” or is “A Winner”. And, believe it or not, Elway does care just as much as Denver fans care about what’s best for the Broncos organization. And, believe it or not, Elway does know just a little more about quarterbacking than even the shrewdest of Broncos fans.

Still, Elway was the bad cop for Tebowites to blame. Now, there are 31 other bad cops. For Wednesday’s trade forces the Tebowites to subscribe to the belief that Elway and the Broncos, as well as the league’s 31 other general managers and organizations, have it out for Tebow. All of them – the entire NFL has it out for Tebow. Because going by what the Jets gave up to get Tebow – a fourth-round pick and a swap of Denver’s seventh-round pick for New York’s sixth-round pick – it’s been confirmed that no decision-maker in the NFL believes the 24-year-old quarterback is worth anything more than a last day draft pick. Not one.

Most telling, perhaps, is New England’s disinterest. The Patriots employ Josh McDaniels, the man who traded up to draft Tebow in the first round. They tend to value good football ability over measurables and flash. Character and coachability are at the top of their list. Their head coach (and de facto general manager) is unconventional. He’s a guy who has cut and replaced first-round defensive backs with undrafted wide receivers. He’s a guy who, 10 years ago, dumped a strong-armed, prototypical pocket passing quarterback (and face of the franchise) in favor of a sixth-round quarterback with a plus-5.0 forty time. Bill Belichick was willing to pass on Tebow even when hearing rumors that the Patriots’ arch-rival Jets had interest in him. And again, every front office went through this same process and drew the same conclusion as Belichick.

The Tebow zealots can keep proselytizing if they want. They just need to know that the experts on TV are no longer the only ones saying Tebow can’t be a quality pro quarterback. The experts behind the scenes – i.e. all of the individuals who make up pro football – just said it, as well.

Follow @Andy_Benoit

email andy.benoit@nfltouchdown.com

1. Manning slow decision: trickle down effect

We expected the most decorated free agent in NFL history to have selected a new team by now. We’re still waiting, and the fate of three franchises – the Titans, Broncos and 49ers – hangs in the air. The longer the wait, the more devastating the failed Manning pursuit will be for two of those franchises – at least in terms of team morale. The Titans risk little by chasing Manning. Having made it clear after the season that they’re entering 2012 with a quarterback competition between Matt Hasselbeck and Jake Locker, the confidence and credibility of their next signal-caller had already been a bit compromised. Pursuing Manning makes little dent in that situation.

The Broncos are a different story. They have an “icon” at quarterback and a rabid fan base behind him. From their perspective, a starting quarterback’s credibility can only be compromised if said credibility actually exists in the first place. There are no official guidelines for what makes up a quarterback’s credibility, though football experts have long agreed that “the capacity to throw” is, like a drummer having arms, an implicit prerequisite. In short, the Broncos aren’t worried about what their Manning pursuit will do to Tim Tebow’s “credibility”.

Tebow, despite his 46.5 completion percentage, might have somehow “earned the right to be the starting quarterback going into training camp” (John Elway’s words), but any zealot who tries to argue that he would have the right to play ahead of a four-time MVP would be burning all the “benefit of the doubt” that their hero’s occasional 2011 magic earned them.

Predictably, the Manning-to-Mile High rumors have incited rumblings that Tebow may now be headed out of Denver. Some have suggested that even if Manning spurns Denver, Elway at this point may still pursue another quarterback. Perhaps Alex Smith. The Niners veteran is in a similar spot as Tebow. He recently recorded a postseason victory with a team that is built around defense and running (i.e. hiding the quarterback’s limitations). But Matt Barrow of the Sacramento Bee writes, “Smith almost assuredly would leave the 49ers if they were to sign (Manning)… there is a growing sense that Smith may not be back even if Manning goes elsewhere. Smith, according to sources, is upset at the 49ers, perhaps not because the monetary offer they made him – reportedly $24 million over three years – but because of the job security it provides. Smith felt the 49ers made a commitment to him as their future starter that was not reflected in the contract offer.”

Smith visited the Dolphins over the weekend and would likely sign there if Manning became a Niner. If Manning became a Bronco, Smith would likely go back to San Francisco, bury the hatchet with Jim Harbaugh & Co. (if there is a hatchet) and try to defend the NFC West title.

2. Matt Flynn & the still-lonely Dolphins

First things first: signing Flynn is a smart gamble for the Seahawks. They got him for a good price ($26 million over three years, just $10 million guaranteed). Their offensive coordinator, Darrell Bevell, runs a West Coast system that’s somewhat similar to the one Flynn learned in Green Bay. There are five years of Vikings film and another year of Seahawks film that say you can’t muster sustainable success with Tarvaris Jackson as your quarterback. So for Seattle, a change – any change – is worth trying.

There’s a grain of salt, however: It’s possible Flynn isn’t that good. When the Seattle news broke, everyone took to Twitter and ripped Miami for not getting the ex-Packer. But when free agency first began, recall that everyone – everyone – had asserted that a lot of the Flynn mystery would be revealed by how hard his ex-coordinator/new Dolphins head coach Joe Philbin pursued him. Well, Philbin’s Dolphins looked at Flynn and chose not to offer anything near top dollar. Does that not, like we originally agreed, tell us something about Flynn?

Apparently, it’s just more fun for people to discard their original analysis and mock Dolphins owner Stephen Ross instead. True, it has been a tough offseason for Ross. He didn’t get his first choice at head coach and, despite even a fan-funded billboard – aka a rich man’s homemade bumper sticker – he didn’t get Peyton to come to South Beach.

And so the Dolphins remain quarterbackless. Some have suggested that Ross could land Tebow if Manning lands in Denver. That’d be great for jersey sales in May-August, but it’d be bad for games in September-December. Tebow fits Philbin’s system like a glove fits a foot.

3. The Other QB’s

Isn’t it surprising how many possible starters have quickly settled for backup jobs? In the first week of free agency, Kyle Orton agreed to be the No. 2 behind Tony Romo. Jason Campbell agreed to become Jay Cutler’s backup (that means another new system for Campbell, by the way). Less surprising but still worthy for this discussion was Rex Grossman returning to Washington (a Pro Football Talk reader brilliantly nicknamed Grossman “RG-3-And-Out”) and former first-round pick Brady Quinn signed in Kansas City (where he’ll need some luck just to have a chance at competing for Matt Cassel’s starting job).

In the past, these guys would have hung around the market a little longer in hopes of at least finding a quarterback competition. But players (and their agents) are wizening up. They’re realizing that a dose of humility up front – i.e. the admittance that they’re not likely to keep getting chances to start in the NFL anyway – means more money. Campbell got $3.5 million for a one-year deal. Orton got $10.5 million over three years (practically a lifetime contract in the world of backup quarterbacking). If they’d waited, their price tag would have dwindled as it became more and more apparent that no one badly wanted them.

4. Bills relevant, but realism needed

(from March 16)

O.K., so maybe we didn’t foresee the Buffalo Toronto Bills making the biggest splash in free agency this off-season. As the esteemed Bills writer Mark Gaughan pointed out in The Buffalo News, “In the 20 years the NFL has used an unrestricted free-agent system, the biggest Buffalo signing was a $7 million-a-year deal given to guard Derrick Dockery in 2007.” Williams’s annual salary is more than double that. In all, he’s reeling in $50 million in guarantees.

Consider that the 27-year-old Williams is coming off a season-ending torn pectoral muscle and that he made nearly $60 million off his rookie contract in Houston. Williams, our No. 1-rated defensive lineman in free agency, must be – unofficially – the first N.F.L. player to make over $100 million primarily on potential. The Texans didn’t know for sure what they were getting when they signed him to a mega deal. And now, neither do the Bills.

What the Bills hope they’re getting is a top-five defensive end. Or do they view Williams as a top-five outside linebacker? Williams played the stand-up position for five games in Houston last season, and in recent years Buffalo’s D has changed back and forth from 4-3 to 3-4 the way some people change back and forth from dress shoes to tennis shoes. Whatever scheme the Bills settle on, Williams will be a one-gap player. It’s up to recently promoted defensive coordinator Dave Wannstedt to devise attacks that put the pricey pickup in one-on-one situations (Williams’s previous coordinator, Wade Phillips, was excellent at that).

Easy as it is to get swept up in the hype, let’s acknowledge that the addition of Williams does not suddenly make the Bills’ defense elite. They still have a middling linebacking corps (Kirk Morrison at the Mike? Really?). And even with Williams, their pass rush is closer to mediocre than mesmerizing. No player had more than 5.5 sacks for them last season. Not counting 2011 or his ’06 rookie campaign, Williams has averaged 11 sacks a year in his career. Very good, yes. Great? No.

Though not a consummate edge rusher, Williams is a superb all-around run defender, which is probably why the Bills felt they could justify overspending to make him the highest-paid defensive player in N.F.L history. Helping owner Ralph Wilson Jr. and General Manager Buddy Nix was the knowledge that, in a few years, the league’s new television contracts will rain money on all 32 franchises, no matter how small the market. That’s the beauty of the N.F.L. – a team like the Bills can make itself suddenly relevant with one swipe of the pen.

5. Patriots sign Brandon Lloyd (and become borderline unstoppable now)

This news made few waves because it was inevitable. Brandon Lloyd follows Josh McDaniels the way Andy Richter follows Conan O’Brien. Lloyd probably started researching the Quincy real estate market when McDaniels snuck back onto the Patriots staff in January.

But this news’ inevitability doesn’t make it any less significant. Stop and realize that the Patriots got a really, really good wide receiver here. Lloyd has always produced in McDaniels’ system. He’s a sharp route runner, acrobatic elevator and ball-plucker and, most importantly, adequate field-stretcher. Whatever weaknesses were in the Patriots’ passing game no longer exist. Lloyd won’t catch as many balls as Wes Welker, but it’s not impossible that, by season’s end, he’ll be considered New England’s most valuable wide receiver.

This signing, as well as New England’s signing of former Colts first-round pick Anthony Gonzalez, likely means the end for Chad Ochocinco in Foxboro. It was a disappointing one-year stint, highlighted by Ochocinco’s declining change-of-direction-quickness (which had been the crux of his brilliance) and inability to grasp the nuances of the scheme. To Ocho’s credit, he ate his humble pie quietly. The smart move from here is for him to accept his athletic decline and commit fulltime to being a celebrity. No shame in bowing out now – 11,059 yards in 11 years is an excellent career.

6. Wide Receivers Ruling Free Agency

(From March 16)

If the first three days of free agency told us anything, it’s that the wide receiver position is considered more valuable than ever. Six of our top 10 free-agent receivers are already signed, while several others have been picked up or given new contracts. Traditional thinking has long been that a good offense needs a playmaking star at No. 1 receiver, a reliable possession target at No. 2 and a darting third-down maestro in the slot at No. 3. But look closer at the transactions this week and you’ll see that these roles are becoming less relevant.

It’s still ideal to have a No. 1 playmaking receiver. Hence, Calvin Johnson’s monstrous new contract, the Bucs’ signing of Vincent Jackson ($26 million guaranteed) and the Bears’ trade of Brandon Marshall (a pair of third-rounders given up). But when you examine these deals from both directions, you see the full scope of today’s evolving N.F.L. And that scope reveals that the true No. 1 receiver class is incredibly small – too small to include Marshall and Jackson.

The Bears acquired Marshall because they felt they needed an aerial playmaker once and for all. But why did the Dolphins give him up (and for below market value, no less)? Marshall’s off-field problems were seemingly the final straw, but they most likely wouldn’t have been if not for new head coach Joe Philbin’s system. In Green Bay, Philbin’s system did not center on a No. 1-2-3 receiver pecking order; it centered on creating mismatches out of various formations.

Most of those formations involved three wide receivers and an athletically gifted tight end (Jermichael Finley). Whichever player drew the most favorable matchup became the No. 1 receiver. That’s why Green Bay’s best receiver, Greg Jennings, averaged 73.0 yards per game while Jordy Nelson – a No. 3 receiver in the “old days” – averaged 78.9 yards per game. Jennings was targeted 7.7 times per game, Nelson was targeted 6 times per game and Finley 5.8. There isn’t a “No. 1 receiver” in that group – there are simply three very good targets.

Philbin’s democratic passing offense puts a premium on catch-and-run quick strikes. That’s not a perfect setup for the more methodical Marshall. Thus, when Philbin was hired, the troubled No. 1 receiver suddenly became just a troubled receiver, making him very tradable in the eyes of the Dolphins.

A similar line of thinking showed up in the Vincent Jackson move. The Bucs got a good player and a much-needed jolt to their passing offense, but more revealing is that the Chargers were content to replace Jackson with Robert Meachem. The Chargers know that Jackson is a better player than Meachem (even if Norv Turner is trying to convince the masses that the 27-year-old ex-Saint is a “No. 1”). But in San Diego’s system, Jackson is not $12 million-better than Meachem ($12 million being the difference in total guaranteed money the two players got). Turner’s offense is predicated on generating big plays through five-and seven-step drop passes. As someone who has averaged 16.1 yards per catch in his career, Meachem fits in. That’s all he needs to do – the Chargers know that their system is good enough that their wide receivers simply have to fit in. (This was verified in 2010 when the Chargers, without Jackson for 11 games, without Malcom Floyd for five games and without Antonio Gates for six games, still managed to rank first in total yardage and second in scoring).

Occasionally, the system and the player go hand in hand. With Sean Payton’s system, the Saints need a big-bodied seam-runner in the slot. Thus, they re-signed Marques Colston. Because he fills a niche (and plays with a similar-styled talent in Jimmy Graham), Colston is more valuable as a Saint than he’d be on any other team. The same logic applies to Wes Welker and the Patriots. Both are more valuable to each other than anyone or anywhere else.

The common thread among all these “system teams” is a top quarterback. Miami doesn’t have one, but Philbin’s system derived from Aaron Rodgers’s work in Green Bay. In San Diego, Meachem will catch balls from Philip Rivers. Colston catches balls from Drew Brees; Welker from Tom Brady. This is what the experts are really talking about when they say that the N.F.L. is now a quarterback-driven league. It’s not just about having a star quarterback who can make great plays – it’s about having a star quarterback whom you can build your entire scheme around. When you truly have one of those quarterbacks, your evaluation of wide receivers changes.

These quarterback-driven “system teams” also feature predominantly three-and-four-receiver offenses. As it so happens, they do this out of what’s technically base personnel (two receivers, one tight end). But when the tight ends are guys like Jimmy Graham, Jermichael Finley, Aaron Hernandez, Rob Gronkowski and Antonio Gates, the effect is the same as three-wide receiver personnel: an offense revolving around creating alignment-based mismatches with three viable targets. The Steelers are another example. They don’t have an elite receiving tight end, but they have an elite quarterback and three very, very good young receivers in Antonio Brown, Mike Wallace and Emmanuel Sanders.

When you don’t have a star quarterback, you’re stuck in the past, evaluating wideouts in the No. 1-2-3 mold. Teams in this spot are really rolling the dice when investing in receivers. Take the Jaguars and Laurent Robinson. Giving a breakout star like Robinson $14 million guaranteed was probably wise given that a paucity of receiving talent completely neutered the Jaguar offense last season. But there is absolutely no evidence suggesting that Robinson is dynamic enough to create mismatches simply by being on the field. Same goes for Pierre Garcon, who got $20.5 million guaranteed from the Redskins – a team apparently so desperate for receiver help that they’re willing to pay guys nearly double what they’re actually worth. Garcon is an up-and-coming player, but he’s also a product of the Peyton Manning system.

The Jaguars and the Redskins, both of whose offenses are built around traditional two-wideout packages, are banking on their new receivers being good enough to build a passing system around. But we see it no longer works like that. As the elite teams have shown, the N.F.L. is now about creating mismatches with three-and four-receiver formations. If you want to build a truly successful offense around the outdated No. 1-2-3 formula, your No. 1 receiver needs to be insanely talented. As the film shows and the market verifies, only three receivers currently fit this bill: Andre Johnson, who became football’s highest-paid receiver in 2010; Larry Fitzgerald, who became football’s highest-paid receiver in 2011; and Calvin Johnson, who became football’s highest-paid receiver earlier this week.

Johnson is the exception to this off-season’s rule. The Lions have a three-receiver offense, but schematically and logistically, it’s an offense built around Megatron. That’s fine. When a player is as gifted as Calvin Johnson, you build around him. What good teams understand (and bad teams don’t) is that Calvin Johnson can play the role of Calvin Johnson, but a merely productive Pro Bowler can’t – even if you give him big bucks. The Calvin Johnsons come around only once every three or four years. Systems are nourished and replenished every year.

7. Cowboys make noise (cap punishment be damned)

What hasn’t been emphasized about the Cowboys and Redskins salary cap punishments is that even if there is some sort of an appeal and Jerry Jones and Dan Snyder win out, irrevocable damage has already been done. Because the NFL waited until the last minute to notify everyone of these punishments, the ‘Boys and ‘Skins had no choice but to alter their 2012 free agency plans. If it turns out the league overstepped its bounds here, there’s presumably no way to right their wrong without dealing some sort of disadvantage to the other 30 teams later.

The Redskins, docked $26 million over two years, may pursue a fight. The Cowboys, on the other hand, don’t seem to have been too tripped up by their two-year, $10 million total cap hit. They’ve signed starting safety Brodney Poole (an ex-Brown and Jet familiar with Rob Ryan’s scheme), linebacker Dan Connor (a solid between-the-tackles thumper who should get plenty of first and second down snaps next to former Penn State teammate Sean Lee), a top quality starting fullback in veteran Lawrence Vickers, a top quality backup quarterback in Kyle Orton, two younger, affordable guards in Nate Livings and Mackenzy Bernadeau (neither is great but one should be able to fill the shoes of released Kyle Kosier) and, most importantly, free agency’s No. 1 rated defensive back in corner Brandon Carr who, as an expensive but significant upgrade over released veteran Terence Newman, can provide the physical press duties that Ryan’s system demands.

8. Chiefs sign the best right tackle in football

The Texans surprised everyone by releasing Eric Winston, the premier right tackle in football early last week. The rest of the NFL surprised no one by showing interest in Winston. The Chiefs ultimately came away with him, thanks to a four-year contract worth over $22 million. Winston is an effective movement-oriented run-blocker who can land clean contact in space and at the second level. He makes Kansas City’s addition of running back Peyton Hillis more valuable. In pass protection, Winston is not the most consistent force, but unlike a lot of right tackles, he doesn’t require constant help.

9. The Vince Young Watch

Just kidding. There’s no Vince Young watch. He remains unsigned.

10. BountyGate (Vilma angle)

The NFL is expected sometime this week to start announcing the punishments for those who participated in the Saints bounties. Some believe that possible punishment for players could come at a later date. The most vulnerable player for a fine and/or suspension is linebacker Jonathan Vilma.

This isn’t great timing for the soon-to-be 30-year-old. Coming off knee surgery and due to make $5.5 million in 2012, Vilma is ripe for release. The Saints, in fact, hosted free agent linebackers David Hawthorne, Joe Mays (since re-signed with Denver) and Curtis Lofton this week. Hawthorne can play outside but Mays and Lofton are classic ‘mike backers. If Vilma is cut, his looming suspension would be even costlier than the league intended, given that it would impact his market value.

Some have said it’s possible the Saints could retain Vilma. He would make a decent weakside linebacker, though new defensive coordinator Steve Spagnuolo’s scheme favors big, physical ‘backers. Part of the reason the undersized Vilma has thrived in New Orleans is because he’s erudite and well-suited in Gregg Williams’ scheme. That’s no longer relevant.

Follow @Andy_Benoit

email andy.benoit@nfltouchdown.com

It’s still ideal to have a No. 1 playmaking receiver. Hence, Calvin Johnson’s monstrous new contract, the Bucs signing Vincent Jackson ($26 million guaranteed) and the Bears trading for Brandon Marshall (a pair of third-rounders given up). But when you examine these deals from both directions, you see the full scope of today’s evolving NFL. And that scope reveals that the true No. 1 receiver class is incredibly small – too small to include Marshall and Jackson.

The Bears acquired Marshall because they felt they needed an aerial playmaker once and for all. But why did the Dolphins give him up (and for below market value, no less)? Marshall’s off-field problems were seemingly the final straw, but they likely wouldn’t have been if not for new head coach Joe Philbin’s system. In Green Bay, Philbin’s system did not center around a No. 1-2-3 receiver pecking order, it centered around creating mismatches out of various formations.

Most of those formations involved three wide receivers and a freakish tight end (Jermichael Finley). Whichever player drew the most favorable matchup became the No. 1 receiver. That’s why Green Bay’s best receiver, Greg Jennings, averaged 73.0 yards per game while Jordy Nelson – a No. 3 receiver in the “old days” – averaged 78.9 yards per game. Jennings was targeted 7.7 times per game; Nelson was targeted 6 times per game, Finley 5.8. There isn’t a “No. 1 receiver” in that group – there are simply three very good targets.

Philbin’s democratic passing offense puts a premium on catch-and-run quick strikes. That’s not a perfect setup for the more methodical Marshall. Thus, when Philbin was hired, the troubled No. 1 receiver suddenly became just a troubled receiver, making him very tradable in the eyes of the Dolphins.

A similar line of thinking showed up in the Vincent Jackson move. The Bucs got a good player and a much-needed jolt to their passing offense, but more revealing is that the Chargers were content to replace Jackson with what amounts to his ersatz, Robert Meachem. The Chargers know that Jackson is a better player than Meachem (even if Norv Turner is trying to convince the masses that the 27-year-old ex-Saint is a “No. 1”). But in San Diego’s system, Jackson is not $12 million-better than Meachem ($12 million being the difference in total guaranteed money the two players got). Turner’s offense is predicated on generating big plays through five-and seven-step drop passes. As someone who has averaged 16.1 yards per catch in his career, Meachem fits in. That’s all he needs to do – the Chargers know that their system is good enough that their wide receivers simply have to fit in. (This was verified in 2010 when the Chargers, without Jackson for 11 games, without Malcom Floyd for five games and without Antonio Gates for six games, still managed to rank first in total yardage and second in scoring).

Occasionally, the system and the player go hand in hand. With Sean Payton’s system, the Saints need a big-bodied seam-runner in the slot. Thus, they re-signed Marques Colston. Because he fills a niche (and plays with a similar-styled talent in Jimmy Graham), Colston is more valuable as a Saint than he’d be on any other team. The same logic applies to Wes Welker and the Patriots. Both are more valuable to each other than anyone or anywhere else.

The common thread amongst all these “system teams” is a big-time quarterback. Miami doesn’t have one, but Philbin’s system derived from Aaron Rodgers’ work in Green Bay. In San Diego, Meachem will catch balls from Philip Rivers. Colston catches balls from Drew Brees; Welker from Tom Brady. This is what the experts are really talking about when they say that the NFL is now a quarterback-driven league. It’s not just about having a star quarterback who can make great plays – it’s about having a star quarterback whom you can build your entire scheme around. When you truly have one of those quarterbacks, your evaluation of wide receivers changes.

These quarterback-driven “system teams” also feature predominant three-and-four receiver offenses. As it so happens, they do this out of what’s technically base personnel (two receivers, one tight end). But when the tight ends are guys like Jimmy Graham, Jermichael Finley, Aaron Hernandez, Rob Gronkowski and Antonio Gates, the effect is the same as three-wide receiver personnel: an offense centered around creating alignment-based mismatches with three viable targets. The Steelers are another example. They don’t have an elite receiving tight end, but they have an elite quarterback and three very, very good young receivers in Antonio Brown, Mike Wallace and Emmanuel Sanders.

When you don’t have a star quarterback, you’re stuck in the past, evaluating wideouts in the No. 1-2-3 mold. Teams in this spot are really rolling the dice when investing in receivers. Take the Jaguars and Laurent Robinson, for example. Giving a breakout star like Robinson $14 million guaranteed was probably wise given that a paucity of receiving talent completely neutered the Jaguars offense last season. But there is absolutely no evidence suggesting that Robinson is dynamic enough to create mismatches simply by being on the field. Same goes for Pierre Garcon, who got $20.5 million guaranteed from the Redskins – a team apparently so desperate for receiver help that they’re willing to pay guys nearly double what they’re actually worth. Garcon is an up-and-coming player, but he’s also a product of the Peyton Manning system.

Really the Jaguars and Redskins, both of whose offenses are built around traditional two-wideout packages, are banking on their new receivers being good enough to build a passing system around. But we see it no longer works like that. As the elite teams have shown, the NFL is now about creating mismatches with three-and four-receiver formations. If you want to build a truly successful offense around the outdated No. 1-2-3 formula, your No. 1 receiver needs to be insanely talented. As the film shows and the market verifies, only three receivers currently fit this bill: Andre Johnson, who became football’s highest-paid receiver in 2010, Larry Fitzgerald, who became football’s highest-paid receiver in 2011 and Calvin Johnson, who became football’s highest-paid receiver earlier this week.

Johnson is the exception to this offseason’s rule. The Lions are a three-receiver offense, but schematically and logistically, it’s an offense built around Megatron. That’s fine. When a player is as gifted as Calvin Johnson, you build around him. What good teams understand (and bad teams don’t) is that Calvin Johnson can play the role of Calvin Johnson, but a merely productive Pro Bowler can’t – even if you give him big bucks. The Calvin Johnsons come around only once every three or four years. Systems are nourished and replenished every year.

Follow @Andy_Benoit

email andy.benoit[at]nfltouchdown.com

Disclaimer: Remember, roughly 90 percent of free agents are only free agents because they’re last team did not want them.

FIRST CLASS ELITE

none

PRO BOWL CALIBER

1. Mario Williams, DE (last team HOU, 27 years old)

Missed the final 11 games last season with a torn pec muscle, which is an injury that is prone to recurrence (just ask D’Qwell Jackson). But if healthy, he’s an outstanding, if not elite, all-around 4-3 end. Can be used as a pure pass-rusher in a 3-4 alignment, as well.

STARTER

2. Paul Soliai, NT (MIA, 28)

A big reason why the Dolphins defense ranked in the top four in fewest yards allowed per rushing attempt each of the past two seasons. Tenacious clear through the whistle, and you rarely see him get moved.

3. John Abraham, DE (ATL, 34)

Yeah, yeah, he’s old and has a history of bothersome injuries. So what? Speed-rushers are the one defensive weapon that gives all offensive coordinators fits. If you have a chance to get a 10-sack guy, you take it – even if it means running the risk of paying for a wash-up later.

4. Israel Idonije, DE/DT (CHI, 31)

His 13 sacks over the last two seasons were not just a product of playing with Julius Peppers. Idonije is one of the best stunt-rushers in the league, and he can be effective from anywhere along a defensive front.

5. Red Bryant, DE/DT (SEA, 28)

An absolute monster against the run. Also blocks field goals the way China blocks Google.

6. Jeremy Mincey, DE (JAX, 28)

His eight sacks in ’11 will be talked about, but more impressive was the authority he exerted as a run-defender. Mincey’s agent, Christina Phillips, will have to go heavy on the hardcore football vernacular during negotiations, as she must emphasize that her client is even better than the stats indicate.

7. Jason Jones, DT/DE (TEN, 26)

Lanky one-gap attacker who is excellent when part of an energetic defensive line rotation. Good, quick movement skills have made him productive both inside and out.

8. Cory Redding, DE/DT (BAL, 31)

Tireless veteran who can make plays as a 4-3 DT or 3-4 DE. Plays with consistent leverage, which is good because he doesn’t have scintillating raw ability.

ROLE PLAYER

9. Sione Pouha, NT (NYJ, 33)

Age is a definite concern, but plenty of nose tackles have remained stout in their later years (Pat Williams, Sam Adams, Ted Washington, to name a few). Pouha has never quite been in the top nose tackle class, but he demands a double-team on every play.

10. Marcus Thomas, DT (DEN, 26)

Included on the list simply because he is something of a dark horse breakout player. His history suggests it probably won’t happen. But playing next to Broderick Bunkley last season, Thomas was a relatively consistent ground-holding clogger who also got penetration from time to time. A smart team will sign him for a cheap, short-term contract and hope he’s motivated for a payday in 2013 or 2014.

OTHER FAMILIAR NAMES

Andre Carter, DE, NE – 33 and coming off a torn quad suffered late last season.

Aubrayo Franklin, NT, NO – Surprisingly, there was no interest in him during free agency last season. His one-year stint in New Orleans was unspectacular.

Antonio Garay, NT, SD – Has improved consistently over the course of his career. He’s now ready to get paid. Problem is, he’s now 32.

Luis Castillo, DE, SD – Injury magnet.

Albert Haynesworth, DT, TB – Gutless clown.

TOP 10 FREE AGENT LINEBACKERS

Disclaimer: Remember, roughly 90 percent of free agents are only free agents because they’re last team did not want them.

FIRST CLASS ELITE

none

PRO BOWL CALIBER

none

STARTER

1. Jarrett Johnson, OLB (last team: BAL, 31 years old)

Every person in every NFL circle loves this guy. One of the best playside run-defenders in the league and versatile enough to rush the passer or even drop back and cover the flats.

2. London Fletcher, MLB (WAS, 37)

Ancient by NFL standards, but has shown little to no sign of slowing down. There are plenty of younger long-term free agent options for teams to go with, but none of them are guys you’d build your defense around. Free agency is often about short-term fixes anyway; if you want to get good middle linebacking in 2012, sign London Fletcher.

3. Curtis Lofton, MLB (ATL, 26)

Has overachieved simply by being a three-down player. But the tight hips that he had coming out of college have indeed been a little problematic for him in coverage. Plays fundamentally sound sideline-to-sideline football on first and second down but is clearly a puzzle piece, not a building block.

4. David Hawthorne, ILB (SEA, 27)

Phenomenal when playing strictly downhill, but doesn’t quite do that enough to classify as upper echelon. Still, the epitome of a solid inside/4-3 linebacker.

5. Stephen Tulloch, MLB (DET, 27)

Effective in a Cover 2 where he can use his speed to hunt down ballcarriers. Capable of handling nickel linebacker duties on passing downs. His best bet for continued success is to re-sign in Detroit.

6. E.J. Henderson, MLB (MIN, 32)

People just assumed that he’d never be the same after his horrific leg injury a few years ago. Watch the film, though, and you’ll still see a ferocious downhill player. True, he gets exposed in coverage at times, and he’s obviously not getting any younger (no one on the face of the Earth is, either). But he can be had at a good price; whatever team gets him will have an aggressive, instinctive middle linebacker for presumably the next 2-3 years.

ROLE PLAYER

7. Joe Mays, MLB (DEN, 27)

Curtis Lofton, only without the ability to play at all on third down.

8. Manny Lawson, OLB (CIN, 28)

Agile player who is physically built to rush the passer but is hardly effective in doing so. Covers well and astutely diagnoses run play designs, but isn’t dynamic in the facets that command big bucks.

9. Dan Connor, MLB (CAR, 26)

Stout and steady inside, not fast enough to make plays sideline to sideline. But flanked by a quality outside linebacker or two, he can be an effectual starter.

10. Phillip Wheeler, OLB (IND, 27)

Has just enough speed to be an adequate outside ‘backer in a zone-based scheme.

OTHER FAMILIAR NAMES

Bradie James, ILB, DAL – Slowed down considerably in all phases last season (and played like he knew it).

Erik Walden, OLB, GB – Started on a Super Bowl defense but too often made little to no impact.

Chase Blackburn, ILB, NYG – Let’s just all enjoy his “feel good story” from last year’s Super Bowl run by agreeing to take it at face value.

Leroy Hill, OLB, SEA – Physical player but keeps getting busted for marijuana.

TOP 10 FREE AGENT DEFENSIVE BACKS

Disclaimer: Remember, roughly 90 percent of free agents are only free agents because they’re last team did not want them.

FIRST CLASS ELITE

none

PRO BOWL CALIBER

1. Brandon Carr, CB (KC, 26)

Not the flashiest name on the market, but at 26 and capable of playing physical press-man with no help, he offers the best big-picture value. Chiefs may come to regret signing the less-expensive Stanford Routt to replace him.

2. Cortland Finnegan, CB (TEN, 28)

Feistiness makes him unlikeable, but he’s an adroit man and zone corner who also defends the run. That said, don’t pay him true No. 1 corner type money.

3.Carlos Rogers, CB (SF, 31)

Niners probably won’t let him get away. Can cover the slot on third downs, which makes him very valuable given the proliferation of slot receivers.

STARTER

4. Tracy Porter, CB (NO, 26)

Playmaker who doesn’t have to always rely on safety help. The “yeah but” is he tends to give up some plays, too.

5. Richard Marshall, CB (ARI, 27)

Cardinals would like to bring him back because of his versatility and work ethic. Might have trouble earning his full value in next contract, as he’s really only impactful as a slot corner, not a true outside starter.

6. LaRon Landry, SS (WAS, 27)

Misguidedly perceived as a star, but he gives up more big plays than he makes. Only covers well when there’s a blitz in front of him; if he’s forced to read and react in space, his lack of discipline gets revealed.

7. Terrell Thomas, CB (NYG, 29)

Was regarded by many as New York’s best cover artist before tearing his ACL last August. The surgically repaired knee means he can be had at a bargain rate. At 29, he must decide whether to take what he can get or sign a short-term deal and try to prove himself before hitting free agency in his thirties.

8. Reggie Nelson, FS (CIN, 28)

Has never lived up to his first-round billing, but seemed to find his identity as a starting centerfielder/slot-blitzing dime back in Cincinnati.

ROLE PLAYER

9. Aaron Ross, CB (NYG, 29)

Has experience playing inside in sub packages, but really is best suited for the outside, where he can use his length and the sideline to mask some of his change-of-direction limitations.

10. Tim Jennings, CB (CHI, 28)

Got benched down the stretch last season but was impressive at times before that. A very good run-supporter, which can be critical for a Cover 2 corner.

OTHER FAMILIAR NAMES

William Gay, CB, PIT – A liability but not a disaster. .Showed some improvement in 2011.

Perrish Cox, CB, DEN – Only 25 and not untalented, but his recent sexual assault acquittal did little to help his reputation (at least with those who read the details of the case).

Jason Allen CB/S, HOU – Not the stingiest tackler on the field but can turn some heads when used correctly in a sub package.