[ad_1]
The Dallas Cowboys leave the comforts of Arlington to face the Buffalo Bills in cold Western New York. Quarterback injuries are mounting. Could a road playoff game be in the Kansas City Chiefs’ future?
The Athletic’s Jeff Howe, Mike Sando and Kalyn Kahler break down the weekend’s best stories and games.
The Cowboys are one the league’s hottest teams heading into cold Orchard Park to face a Bills team coming off a win over the Chiefs. Do the Bills have enough to slow down the MVP hype surrounding Dak Prescott?
Sando: The Bills are favored to win the game, will be playing at home, could benefit from chilly temperatures (40s) and do rank fourth in EPA per pass play allowed. Prescott is playing really well, but he is not going to play really well every week forever. Buffalo saved its season in Kansas City and should be energized.
Howe: I’m not sure either team is in a spot where they can be described in absolutes. Sure, going into this game, the Cowboys are the better team and have secured their credentials as legitimate Super Bowl contenders, but there’s always a place for skepticism given the franchise’s shortcomings in the biggest stages since their last Super Bowl win. And the Bills have been so inconsistent since their 3-1 start that it’s hard to believe one win against the Chiefs means they’ve finally arrived. It certainly could mean they’ve found the formula for a successful stretch run, but they’ve got more to prove, too.
Kahler: I don’t think so. After seeing Dallas crush the Eagles on Sunday night, I’m starting to think differently about this team. Their defense really bothered the Eagles receivers, and their offense is zooming along at a historic level for the team. They’re using more play action, deploying motion, and Prescott is more confident than ever in throwing the deep ball. He’s proved that last year’s turnover-plagued season was an aberration.
GO DEEPER
Cowboys vs. Bills roundtable: Strengths, challenges, WR matchups and league-leading QBs
The Jets are on the road to face the Dolphins. Considering last week’s performance against the Texans, what’s better for Zach Wilson’s future? Sticking with the Jets in 2024 or a fresh start somewhere else?
Sando: Leaving the Jets would probably be best for the future of every offensive player on the Jets, except for Aaron Rodgers, who wields power over the team.
Howe: Wilson needs a fresh start. He’s got the talent, but he hasn’t been set up for success for a myriad of reasons with the Jets. There’s such a clear difference in his play when he’s playing with confidence, which is a result of the circumstances around him. He won’t find a spot with any assurances of a starting job in 2024, assuming there’s a split, but the chance to compete with more offensive stability would be a big help.
Kahler: If we’ve learned anything in the last two seasons of NFL football, it’s that a change of scenery or coaching staff can transform a quarterback. Geno Smith needed Pete Carroll, Tua Tagovailoa needed Mike McDaniel, and Jared Goff needed Dan Campbell and Ben Johnson. I’m not sure if Wilson will ever be a quality starter in this league, but having a coaching staff that truly believes in him and supports him would go a long way to find out.
GO DEEPER
Jets 2024 roster projection: Who’ll be back, who won’t and who’s on the bubble
Many expect a Chiefs bounce-back win over the Patriots this week, and there is still plenty of time for Kansas City to climb up the AFC standings. However, how intrigued would you be to see Patrick Mahomes on the road in January?
Sando: I drew the comparison to Dan Marino in my Monday column. Marino did not play a road game in his first six playoff starts, reaching a Super Bowl during that period. He then played mostly road playoff games later in his career and never got back (Marino finished his career 7-3 at home, 1-6 on the road and 0-1 in neutral-site games). Mahomes has gone 9-2 at home and 2-1 at neutral sites, without any road playoff games. If he starts heading onto the road now, it’ll be because his teams are not as good, in which case every little edge matters more.
Howe: It’d be one of the biggest stories in the league at the start of the playoffs. Mahomes has never played a road game in the postseason, which is an obvious testament to their regular-season success. But the idea of Mahomes being a road underdog — he’s only been a postseason underdog once, in Super Bowl LVII — would add an interesting element of theater. A Chiefs-Ravens game in Baltimore would have an absolutely wild crowd.
Kahler: Mahomes could add to his legend by winning a postseason game on the road. He’s already built up a superhero status by playing through that bad ankle sprain in the Super Bowl last year, and a road dog win would burnish that image.
Which 5-8 team intrigues you the most down the stretch? Bears, Giants or Titans?
Sando: The Bears are most interesting by far because quarterback Justin Fields and coach Matt Eberflus have only partial control of their destinies. Chicago possessing the Panthers’ first-round pick in 2024 forces the organization to consider sweeping changes even if Fields and Eberflus fare well down the stretch. What either of them “deserves” or has “earned” will not necessarily determine what course the Bears take. We might also find out through this process what, if anything, has changed about how this organization does business with Kevin Warren in the picture as team president.
Howe: The Bears are heading in an encouraging direction. Matt Eberflus may be coaching for his job. Justin Fields is playing to retain his job or audition for a new one, pending the Bears’ draft decision. The Bears have won three of four, including back-to-back victories against the Vikings and Lions, and they could be spoilers with a remaining slate that includes the Browns, Falcons and Packers.
Kahler: I’ve recently done a 180 on my feelings about the Bears. I think they could still stand to hire a new offensive coordinator, but I’m coming around to the idea that Eberflus could stay, and I’m fully in support of Chicago shopping that likely No. 1 overall pick to any team desperate enough to offer a king’s ransom. The question is, is there any team that will offer them what the Panthers did last year? If so, then the Bears should keep Fields and commit to building around him with that value like they did last year, rather than enter the unknown again with a rookie quarterback. DJ Moore is great, and Montez Sweat has lifted a lifeless defense. This isn’t the Bears’ year, but the second half of this season has looked a lot more optimistic than the first.
At least 13 teams will start a different QB than their Week 1 starter this week. Should this year change the way teams think about investing behind their starting quarterback?
Sando: Teams can change their thinking all they want, but where are they going to find better backup quarterbacks? This is a supply-and-demand issue. There aren’t enough good starters to go around, let alone enough starters and backups.
Howe: This actually isn’t all that different from recent years. With Easton Stick and Nick Mullens starting this week, that will mark 57 quarterbacks who have started a game this season, with 17 teams starting multiple QBs so far. In 2022, 69 QBs started a game, and 24 teams started a backup. In 2021, 63 QBs started a game, and 21 teams started a backup. There’s just more attention to the situation due to the star power on the shelf. That said, there’s shaping up to be a flood of QB prospects who will be enticing in the second and third rounds, so this might be the time to boost their depth charts. But before this becomes an indictment strictly on the QBs themselves, the organizations shouldn’t be let off the hook for failing to develop the position.
Kahler: Sando and Howe make great points. It’s easy to demand that your team invest in its quarterback room, but it’s now always possible to find an experienced veteran to pay as your QB2. Kansas City has made a habit of it, with Chad Henne and now Blaine Gabbert. I think Josh Dobbs is building himself into that kind of player, a Josh McCown/Ryan Fitzpatrick type who can come in as an emergency option when a starter goes down and win games. And I think that’s what it comes down to — is your team willing to make moves to improve at quarterback when something happens to the starter? And to use Jake Browning as an example, did anyone think he was any good before he got a chance to start? A few weeks ago, I probably would have said that the Bengals weren’t set up to withstand a Joe Burrow injury, but that’s because I’d never seen Browning play a full game. None of us had! But Browning has given them a bit of hope. What I do think will change is how teams value their QB3s.
I recently had a conversation with Buccaneers quarterback coach Thad Lewis about this, and as a former backup himself, he was passionate about having a third quarterback on the roster and thinks more teams are starting to value that again with the emergency QB rule back this season (teams can dress a QB3 who doesn’t count toward the 46 game-day active players but can go into the game if the first two QBs get hurt. He has to be on the active roster and not a practice squad elevation). To keep their QB3 John Wolford in Tampa earlier this season when the Rams and Vikings wanted to sign him off the Bucs practice squad, the team had to sign Wolford to their active roster (which gave him a raise from PS salary) to show him they value him.
Wolford has been dressing for every game since. I think more teams will start to utilize that QB3 and keep him on the active roster, but it’s a delicate balance of subtracting from another position that also needs depth.
(Photos of Micah Parsons, Josh Allen and Travis Kelce: Richard Rodriguez, Kevin Sabitus and David Eulitt / Getty Images)
[ad_2]
Source link
