ESPN NFL

» AFC Scenarios: East | West | North | South » NFC: East | West | North | South

Yes, the start of training camps is two months away, but it’s never too early to consider the coming season. A look at the best-case and worst-case scenarios for the Giants in 2012.

Dream scenario (12-4): The last time the the Giants won the Super Bowl, they followed it up with a 12-4 season and claimed the No. 1 seed in the NFC playoffs. It seems a fair bet that, this time, their top wide receiver won't shoot himself in the leg with an unlicensed firearm in a nightclub and severely damage their playoff chances. The Giants remain extremely strong at quarterback, wide receiver and pass-rusher in a pass-heavy NFL era, and for that reason they have reason to believe they can be a much better regular-season team than the one that went 9-7 and made the playoffs on the final day last season. In the Giants' dream scenario, Hakeem Nicks recovers from his broken foot in time to start the season, second-round pick Rueben Randle wins the No. 3 wide receiver spot and someone -- perhaps first-rounder David Wilson -- steps forward to be the running back who can spell Ahmad Bradshaw when he needs a rest. Terrell Thomas comes back healthy and continues along the career path that, this time last year, had him on track to become one of the best cornerbacks in the league. Keith Rivers solidifies the linebacker corps and Jason Pierre-Paul and Victor Cruz build on their breakout seasons as the Giants get back into the playoffs and make a real run at defending their title.

Nightmare scenario (6-10): The Nicks injury is a reminder that the Giants did lose some depth this offseason. And although they are (a) very strong if their front-line starters are healthy, (b) very good at filling needs internally and (c) always at least in contention even when they miss the playoffs, the likelihood of the nightmare scenario is unimportant to this exercise. This is about imagining, and in the Giants' nightmare scenario their key starters -- such as Nicks, Cruz, Pierre-Paul, Justin Tuck and Bradshaw -- struggle either with injury or ineffectiveness. Eli Manning reverts to his interception-happy ways of 2011. Thomas struggles to get back to where he was, Prince Amukamara fails to take the next step forward and they still can't find a reliable middle linebacker from among the crew they bring to camp. The nightmare scenario also sees the offensive line struggle, especially at the left tackle spot, where Will Beatty was a work in progress in 2011 before eye problems ended his season. Should these troubles come to pass, they would have to lean heavily on their rookies, and it's unlikely that Wilson, Randle and Jayron Hosley could all emerge as successful starters in their first year in the NFL. Again, the Giants' nightmare scenario seems unlikely, but if it happens it will have to do with depth issues behind the starters.

» AFC Scenarios: East | West | North | South » NFC: East | West | North | South

Yes, the start of training camps is two months away, but it’s never too early to consider the coming season. A look at the best-case and worst-case scenarios for the Redskins in 2012.

Dream scenario (9-7): This would mean Washington's first winning season since 2007, Joe Gibbs' final year as head coach. What has to happen to make it a reality? Well, lots, frankly. Robert Griffin III will need to be very good right away at taking care of the ball and limiting the kinds of mistakes it's reasonable to expect from rookie quarterbacks. Most important, the Redskins' offense must play very well around him. They'll need health from Tim Hightower and continued development from promising fellow running backs Roy Helu and Evan Royster. They'll need Pierre Garcon to play like the potential No. 1 wideout his free-agent price tag says they believe he can be. They'll need the offensive line to stay healthy and play well, with left tackle Trent Williams as its anchor. The Redskins' dream scenario sees Brian Orakpo and Ryan Kerrigan cementing their place among the league's top pass-rushing duos, DeAngelo Hall harnessing his ability and playing like a top corner, and something emerging from the muddle they take to training camp at safety. The defense looked like a young defense on the rise last year, and if the Redskins are to threaten or possibly exceed .500, it will have to continue that rise.

Nightmare scenario (5-11): And that would mean the same record as last year, and one game worse than the year before, and drop Mike Shanahan's three-year record as the team's head coach to a rather uninspiring 16-32. That would be what's called, in official NFL terms, "not good." In the Redskins' nightmare scenario, Griffin struggles with the transition, the wide receiver group is as uninspiring as Washington's free-agency critics believe it is and the offensive line falls apart due to injury for the second year in a row. In the nightmare scenario, the secondary remains a big-time weakness of the defense and costs the Redskins dearly in division games against the likes of Eli Manning, Tony Romo and Michael Vick. If all of this happens, the Redskins would enter the 2013 offseason with far more to fix than they currently believe they do, and with questions about Shanahan's future as coach. I don't think there's much that can happen to wreck the Griffin honeymoon between now and January, but if the rest of the team plays well around him and he commits too many turnovers, that particular nightmare scenario could make Redskins fans nervous about the new franchise quarterback going into next season.

This is the kind of stuff you hold your breath and hope you don't hear about your team when it takes the field for offseason practices: New York Giants wide receiver Hakeem Nicks fractured the fifth metatarsal of his right foot Thursday morning while running a route during OTA practices, the team announced. Nicks is scheduled to undergo surgery Friday to have a screw inserted into his foot, and the Giants estimate that he'll need about 12 weeks to recover. Assuming no setbacks, that puts his return around the middle of August. But because you can't assume there won't be setbacks, Nicks' availability for the start of the regular season is at least in question.

Real rough break for the Giants, who lost No. 3 wide receiver Mario Manningham in free agency and likely can't afford to have their No. 1 wideout miss significant time. The good news, if there is any, is that it happened now as opposed to a month or two from now, and Nicks will have time to recover. Once he does return, they could be questions about how much he can handle and how soon without re-aggravating the injury, and it's possible he won't be his usual dazzling self right away. Nicks is one of the best wide receivers in the entire league, and he and Victor Cruz form the strength of the Giants' Eli Manning-led passing attack.

This will open up reps in the preseason for receivers like Ramses Barden, Domenik Hixon, Jerrel Jernigan and rookie Rueben Randle, which could help the Giants better figure out which of those guys is the best bet to replace Manningham at that No. 3 receiver spot. That may be a side benefit of the unfortunate news, and last year's Giants obviously were able to succeed in spite of a rash of significant preseason injuries, so they surely believe they have coverage. But there's no one on the roster who brings everything Nicks brings to his position, and they'll surely hope his recovery will be on the short side and they'll have him on the field in plenty of time for their Sept. 5 regular-season opener.

Mort and Suzy discuss the Bears' offseason issues, Max and Marcellus rank the teams in the NFC East, and Herm and Bill Polian show off their dance moves.

Yeah, sorry about the Vokle chat. Sometimes our technology just doesn't do what we want it to do. There are plans in the works to try again. I hope you'll give us another shot if we try next week.

Anyway, back to the blog. As a twist on the usual Power Rankings, we had a panel of ESPN experts put together something called the NFL Future Power Rankings , basically projecting how the Power Rankings will look three years from now. It's Insider, so you have to pay to read it and I can't give it all away to you here. But if you are interested, the piece explaining how they came to their conclusions is available to everyone and is here.

Here's how the NFC East teams fared, and partial explanations for why:

3. New York Giants

Trailing only the Packers and the Patriots, the Giants got a score of 81.13 out of a possible 100, with coaching, front office and quarterback their highest-scoring categories. Here's Trent Dilfer on the quarterback in particular:

He has the baby-brother look, but Eli Manning turns 32 this season, and since his 1-6 record as a rookie, has started all 16 games in seven straight seasons. He has had his INT issues, but is an elite passer when he gets comfortable with his targets. He has many good years ahead.

7. Philadelphia Eagles

Quarterback was the only place where the Eagles didn't score high, as uncertainty about Michael Vick's age (32) and future in Philly pushed them down to a 5.75 in that category. They had an overall score of 74 out of 100, buoyed but very high marks in front office, draft and coaching. Mel Kiper on their drafting:

A remarkably good draft in 2012 could shore up the defense and make the Eagles Super Bowl contenders. If Vick has any health issues, is Nick Foles the next guy in line? You never know what they'll do at that spot. But they have a system, draft very well and, at least based on my board, maintain a really strong sense of value and how to maneuver.

14. Dallas Cowboys

The highest score the Cowboys got was their 7 in quarterback, and their overall score was 62.06 out of 100. Their lowest marks were for draft and front office, and this is Gary Horton on their roster:

Age is a concern. And unless they do a good job in free agency and the draft, the talent level will drop off in the next couple of years. They should remain fairly young at WR and RB, and they seem to be rebuilding their offensive line. Defensively, they are not very young and their best playmaker of the future will be rookie CB Morris Claiborne, but a lot of replacements are needed.

20. Washington Redskins

An overall score of 56.38 out of 100, with the highest mark their 6.75 in coaching. They gave them a 6.25 for quarterback, which is generous since their current starter has never played an NFL game. But the assumption is that he'll fit in well and that he has the talent to be a franchise quarterback. Dragging the Redskins' score down the most is the 4.75 for the current roster. Here's Horton on that:

Obviously, this future will be built around rookie QB Robert Griffin III. The challenge will be to surround him with talent on both sides of the ball with limited high draft picks. Washington doesn't have a lot of young, talented guys at the offensive skill positions. The Redskins tried to upgrade the passing game in free agency and TE Fred Davis is a solid player. On defense, age is a real problem and with the exception of young edge rushers Brian Orakpo and Ryan Kerrigan, upgrades will be needed.

So like I said, Insider if you want to read it all. And remember, no one's saying this is definitely how it'll all turn out -- just the way it looks to those experts' eyes from here.

Kellen Winslow put together another solid stat line for Tampa Bay last season with 75 receptions, the fourth time in six seasons he had hit that mark.


Winslow, acquired by the Seattle Seahawks on Monday, would shatter single-season team records for tight ends if he approached those numbers in 2012.

For some reason, however, Winslow's production last season wasn't as efficient. His quarterback, Josh Freeman, threw five times as many interceptions as touchdowns when targeting Winslow. Freeman threw more touchdowns than interceptions when targeting other players.

The charts come from John McTigue of ESPN Stats & Information.



Winslow and Freeman had a strong rapport previously. It's tough to say what went into the disparate touchdown-to-interception ratio last season. The Bucs suffered through a tough season overall.

The fact that Winslow's knee prevents him from practicing extensively could make it tougher for him to develop a rapport with his new quarterbacks in Seattle. But I've heard some players, including New York Giants quarterback Eli Manning, say it's tough to develop a real rapport outside game situations. Winslow hasn't missed games in recent seasons.

"What happens in a game when things that you prepared for, all of a sudden you get a different technique or something that maybe that hasn't happened before occurs?" Manning said during Super Bowl week. "Can you tell by their body language, by the stem of their route, exactly what they are going to do? You have to scramble or move in the pocket and the timing is a little off, how are they going to react to those situations?"

Let's have a little debate, shall we? With nearly four months still to go before the games start, a good, old-fashioned quarterback debate may be just the thing to wake everybody up and get the blood going.

Now, for the purposes of this particular debate, I don't much care which quarterback you think is "better" than the other. Fact is we can't trust you guys to have an unbiased argument about that anyway. Which is fine. You're fans. You're not supposed to be unbiased. I just feel like we can turn this debate a couple of degrees and ask a different kind of question, namely:

Which quarterback is under more pressure to perform in 2012? Michael Vick or Tony Romo?

Yeah, the poll has all four listed, because that only seemed fair. But Eli Manning's a two-time Super Bowl MVP and Robert Griffin III is a rookie in charge of a rebuilding project, so I don't think either of those guys faces the same kind of pressure as Vick faces in title-starved Philadelphia or Romo faces in perpetually unsatisfied Dallas. Go ahead and vote for one of those guys if you really think he's the right answer, but in the context of 2012 only, with Manning coming off a Super Bowl win and Griffin learning the league, I think the answer to this question is between Vick and Romo.

And if you've been reading regularly, you know my pick is Vick. I don't think any quarterback in the NFL this year will be under more pressure than Vick will be. The Eagles are in a must-win situation after their high 2011 hopes flopped, and they can't afford to flop again. Not that the Cowboys can afford to flop, mind you, but I just think Vick is in a higher-pressure situation.

Vick was far more responsible for his team's 2011 flop than Romo was for his team's. Vick has not demonstrated the same kind of year-in, year-out production that Romo has, so he has less of a track record on which to stand. And fair or not, Vick is always going to be judged against his own brilliant 2010 season. A lot of the Eagles' plans last year were based on the idea that Vick could do many things no other quarterback could do, and that that gave them an edge against the other good teams in the league. He may not have to be as incredible as he was in 2010, but he's going to have to show some of that ability in order to make teams fear him and the Eagles.

Vick is in a fascinating situation. He obviously has to mature as a quarterback and a decision-maker in order for the Eagles to succeed. But he has to do so without sacrificing too much of what sets him apart, athletically, from the others who play his position. It may well be an impossible balance to strike. But Vick is being asked to do it anyway, and I think that puts him under a different kind of pressure than Romo or anyone else faces in 2012.

What do you guys think? Play nice!

The defending Super Bowl champions get back to work this weekend, as the New York Giants hold their rookie minicamp in East Rutherford, N.J. Repeating is hard work, though, and there are good reasons why only one team this century has been able to do it.

You lose players. You lose coaches. You become the No. 1 target for teams that have identified you as the biggest obstacle standing in their way of getting what they want. The people who run the Giants, and many of the people who play for the Giants, were in this position four years ago, and they know all about the challenges that face the defending Super Bowl champs.

But this year's Giants are not your ordinary defending champ. They were, speaking strictly in terms of winning percentage, the weakest Super Bowl champion in history. They didn't even secure their playoff spot until the final game of the regular season. With two weeks to go, they were 7-7 and in real danger of finishing under .500.

All of these things are facts, just as much as the title they won. So as they get back to work this spring and summer, the Giants face the seemingly incongruous dual task of maintaining the magic that brought them their title while also improving a 9-7 team.

They have some things going for them, and I'm not just talking about Eli Manning, Hakeem Nicks, Victor Cruz, Justin Tuck and Jason Pierre-Paul. The Giants run their franchise as one that's perpetually in transition.

Rather than wait for problems to present themselves, or roster holes to open, the Giants constantly churn the middle and the back end of their roster, developing players in their system so they're ready to step in when need arises. There are running backs and wide receivers on the roster who have been waiting for the opportunity created by the free-agent defections of Brandon Jacobs and Mario Manningham, and those players will get the chance to do what Cruz and Pierre-Paul did last year when presented with similar chances. The Giants never allow themselves to get so thin at any one position that they don't at least have options for replacing those who leave or get hurt or decide to sit out training camp.

That said, this Giants team does have holes to fill and problems to solve. They finished 32nd in the league in rushing offense -- a fact that, while mitigated by the improvements the run game showed in December and January -- didn't sit well with their running backs and their offensive linemen. They will need to get better there, and to do so they'll need Ahmad Bradshaw's feet to stay healthy for the first time in years. Plus, they must find someone to replace the 167 touches and eight touchdowns Jacobs contributed to last season's cause.

They'll need to shuffle the offensive line again. While Kareem McKenzie was not what he used to be, he was the starting right tackle on a team that won the Super Bowl, and they did not replace him. They hope that Will Beatty (a) comes back healthy from his eye injury and (b) plays better than he did at left tackle in the first 10 games of last season.

David Diehl isn't around to slide over and bail him out this time. Diehl's got to play right tackle in place of McKenzie. The Giants have some offensive linemen they like for the long-term, but this looks like another transition year on the line. While they have enough good veterans in place to pull it off, that's a tough tightrope act to try too many years in a row.

They have bodies at linebacker, with Keith Rivers brought in as a good veteran reinforcement and some of last year's promising rookies hopefully ready to take a next step, but they have no clear man for the middle. They have bodies at cornerback, but they have question marks there, too.

Corey Webster was awesome in 2011. Can he repeat that performance? Is Terrell Thomas fully recovered from the preseason knee injury that cost him the whole season? Will Prince Amukamara make more of a contribution?

Don't think for a second that GM Jerry Reese isn't concerned. He used each of his first three draft picks on positions at which he lost a player in free agency -- running back (David Wilson for Jacobs), wide receiver (Rueben Randle for Mario Manningham) and cornerback (Jayron Hosley for Aaron Ross). And he's smart to be concerned, because while these Giants rightfully consider themselves a championship team, they're also a team that won one less regular-season game in 2011 than it won in 2010. Had someone in the NFC East won 10 and the Giants missed the playoffs, their offseason narrative would have been that of a team moving in the wrong direction.

Instead, the Giants have a two-front problem to solve. They have a division and a conference and a league full of teams that saw what they did and now consider Super Bowl glory more attainable than ever. And they have an internal mandate to be better this year than 9-7, because they know first-hand that it's not usually good enough to get you the chance to make a Super Bowl run.

They're capable of doing it, and they'll deservedly enter the season among the favorites to win it all again. They have superstars at quarterback, wide receiver and defensive end, and in this day and age that can carry you a long way. But as far as defending Super Bowl champions go, these Giants have more issues than most -- and more work to do.

How to value Alex Smith's performance stood among the most debated subjects on the NFC West blog last season.

Smith ranked ninth in NFL passer rating among a broader group featuring Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Tom Brady, Tony Romo, Matthew Stafford, Matt Schaub, Eli Manning, Matt Ryan, Ben Roethlisberger and Philip Rivers.

The 49ers' coach, Jim Harbaugh, called Smith "elite" and promoted him for the Pro Bowl. But when it came time for the 49ers to pay Smith this offseason, they gave him a three-year deal with an easy out for the team after one season. The contract bore little resemblance to the ones those other quarterbacks have commanded.

Total QBR, the metric ESPN's Analytics Team developed to more fully assess how quarterbacks contributed to winning, supported the 49ers' valuation.

Smith, despite quite a few high single-game QBR scores when playing at home, ranked 22nd among qualifying quarterbacks overall with a 46.4 score out of 100 (50 is average). His share of blame for the sacks he took hurt his team more than the sacks any other qualifying player took, a huge drain on his score.

The weekly in-season "QBR Ranks" posts on this blog provided the basis for discussions on NFC West quarterback play. We had some healthy debates over the usefulness of QBR and how it could be improved. Some of those discussions go on internally, too.

Jeff Bennett, Dean Oliver and the Analytics Team are making a couple tweaks to the formula.

The changes will lessen the blame quarterbacks receive when they fumble during a sack, shifting more of the blame to offensive lines. Also, kneeldowns and spikes will no longer factor; those plays had very little impact on QBR over the season, but they wielded more influence on single-game scores.

Smith fumbled seven times and lost two of them. His fumbles were not particularly costly overall, allowing Smith to rank ninth in fewest expected points lost to fumbles. Brees was first. Tim Tebow was last.

These QBR tweaks were relatively minor. The Analytics Team discussed other possibilities at the most recent Sloan Sports Conference.

"One of the things that does sit a little bit on my mind is that we fundamentally have to do it on a per-play basis because we're going to be looking at how well did they play on third down vs. second down vs. five or more rushers and these are great," Oliver said recently at the conference. "One of the things I wonder about is whether that is the right basis for evaluating a quarterback overall."

The current system assigns greater value to scoring drives requiring fewer plays, all else equal, on the theory that scoring quickly would be more impressive than if finding the end zone took longer.

"We talked about some sort of QBR per drive, because if you go 80 yards in three plays vs. 80 yards in 12 plays, why should the three-play drive be four times better than the 12-play drive?" Oliver said. "In many cases, the 12-play drive is better. I don't know how we do that, but it is something we have talked about.

"For most of the work that we do, that doesn't affect anything, but I think it's a great conceptual question that hopefully we can figure out in the near future."

I found QBR most useful when it diverged significantly from NFL passer rating, as it did notably for Smith. Using the formula to declare one quarterback absolutely better than another made little sense. But if we could find out why QBR diverged from NFL passer rating or our perceptions in general, that could be of value.

For Smith, taking sacks spelled a large part of the discrepancy. Some made the case that Smith's offensive line was disproportionately responsible for many of those sacks. I thought Smith was content taking sacks to avoid interceptions, a tradeoff that helped explain the gap between NFL passer rating, which does not account for sacks, and QBR, which does.

My current take: Offensive lines are more to blame for some sacks, perhaps explaining why a QBR score suffered unexpectedly for a single game. Overall, though, the blame distribution evens out, creating more reliable results for a full season.

This discussion isn't for everyone. Apologies to those who don't care for analytics as they relate to football. My hope is to find more relevant applications.

» NFC draft analysis: East | West | North | South » AFC: East | West | North | South


The only NFC East team that didn't trade up in the first round is the one that just won the Super Bowl. That gives you a sense of how hungry the division's other three teams are to catch the New York Giants and take their shot at the Lombardi Trophy they were holding up in Indianapolis a few months ago.

The Washington Redskins made their trade-up a month early, dealing away three first-round picks and this year's second-rounder in order to secure the man they believe will be their franchise quarterback. The Dallas Cowboys made theirs Thursday night, when they decided it was worth spending their first- and second-round picks this year to secure the best defensive player in the draft. And the Eagles made theirs a short time later, when the defensive tackle they wanted, Fletcher Cox, fell further than they expected him to fall and the price to move up and get him became reasonable.

But after the top half of the first round, the NFC East teams' drafts went very different ways. The Cowboys, in need of 2012 help at various places on the roster, oddly began picking project players and unknown safeties. The Redskins made some head-scratchers in the middle rounds before getting workmanlike about their offensive line late. And the Eagles had one of those drafts where everything seemed to be falling their way. Time will tell, of course, and there's no way right now to know how any of these players will perform. But here are some thoughts on how it looks in the very early post-draft light.

BEST MOVE

Washington's trade to get quarterback Robert Griffin III and Dallas' trade to get Morris Claiborne were the headline-grabbers, and I believe that each team will be happy with its first-round pick. But the four high picks the Redskins gave up and the two high picks the Cowboys gave up keep me from labeling either of these the division's "best move" from this year's draft. Washington doesn't have another first-rounder until 2015. And Dallas, which needed help at multiple positions, spent its first two picks on a position they'd already addressed at great cost in free agency. Not enough value in either deal for it to be called a shrewd move.

So I'm giving this to the Eagles' deal to move up and get Cox. Philadelphia arrived at the draft Thursday convinced Cox was the player they wanted, and they believed they might have to move up to No. 6 or 7 to get him. To do that, they likely would have had to surrender at least one of their second-round picks, and they didn't want to pay either of those or their third. Once Cox fell to No. 12, the Eagles were able to move up by surrendering their first-rounder, a fourth-rounder and a seventh-rounder, securing the player they felt was their top target without giving up the picks they wanted to preserve. So while, yes, of course, I consider Griffin and Claiborne better players, I think the Eagles made the best first-round move of any NFC East team -- getting a player who can make a difference for them in the short-term as well as the long-term without handicapping themselves for the draft's second night.

On Friday, the Eagles converted their two second-round picks into a speedy outside linebacker (Mychal Kendricks) and a pass-rushing defensive end (Vinny Curry) and took the quarterback prospect they wanted (Nick Foles) in the third round. That Day 2 haul, compared with what the Cowboys and Redskins were able to get with their Day 2 picks, is what made the Eagles' trade-up the best overall move of the draft in the NFC East.

RISKIEST MOVE

This is a close contest between the two moves that lost out in the first category. It'd be easy to say Griffin, because he cost so much more. But I'm giving this to the Cowboys' trade-up to get Claiborne. It's a tough call, because I think Claiborne may be the best player any NFC East team got in this draft (barely, if at all, ahead of Griffin) and he cost less than Griffin did. But I'm basing this call on the circumstances specific to each team.

The Redskins are taking a big risk, sure, by picking a kid to be their franchise quarterback and telling him they don't have a first-round pick in either of the next two years with which to build around him. But the Redskins had no choice. Their need for Griffin was overwhelming, and they were right to let it overwhelm their priority list for this draft and the next two. Washington hasn't had a franchise quarterback in 20 years, and once they were convinced Griffin could be one, this was a risk worth taking for them.

I do not think, however, that Dallas' need for Claiborne was nearly as great as Washington's need for Griffin. Yes, the Cowboys' secondary was the obvious weak spot of their team last year -- the main reason they fell one game short of the Giants in the division race. But they'd already spent their big free-agent bucks on Brandon Carr and had Mike Jenkins and Orlando Scandrick at cornerback. Does Claiborne have a good chance to be better than any of them? Yes. Could that happen as early as this year? You betcha. But with needs at safety, linebacker, defensive line and offensive line, the Cowboys should have conserved their picks to address multiple needs. They weren't one great cornerback away from being a championship team in 2012, and by trading their top two picks for Claiborne, and then picking project players and reaches the rest of the way, they decided to operate as though that were the case. It's a big risk, and if lingering weaknesses at those other spots do them in this season, they could regret it.

MOST SURPRISING MOVE

Without a doubt, it was the Redskins' selection of Michigan State quarterback Kirk Cousins with the seventh pick of the fourth round Saturday. It was Washington's third pick of the draft and the second that had been used on a quarterback. Their reasoning is that quarterback is a vitally important position at which it's impossible to be too deep, and as long as they make it clear to the players involved and to their fan base that Griffin is the starter and Cousins is the backup, it can work. They can develop Cousins in the backup role, have a player they like in reserve in case Griffin gets hurt and perhaps eventually trade him for something of great value in a league in which quarterbacks are the most prized commodities.

FILE IT AWAY

Nobody in this division does the draft better than the Giants, and it'll be worth remembering that the wide receiver (LSU's Rueben Randle) they picked at the end of the second round was a player they considered taking at the end of the first. Randle is a dynamic talent who now gets a chance to develop behind brilliant and selfless starting wideouts Hakeem Nicks and Victor Cruz and with the help of quarterback Eli Manning, who has an outstanding record of getting the best out of his receiving targets. Randle could not have been drafted into a better spot for his own development, and he could potentially be an immediate asset for the Giants in the passing game, because he can play the outside spot vacated by free-agent defector Mario Manningham and allow Cruz to stay in the slot position from which he exploded onto the scene in 2011. The Giants managed to combine need picks and value picks at almost every turn in this draft, and their second-rounder may turn out to be their biggest prize.

This one's a value pick, though. The New York Giants were considering LSU wide receiver Rueben Randle with their first-round pick Thursday night. They took running back David Wilson instead, and admitted it was a bit of a need pick after Brandon Jacobs left for San Francisco via free agency. But with Randle still there at the end of the second round Friday night, and with Mario Manningham also having left for San Francisco via free agency, the Giants couldn't pass up the chance to take a guy they'd considered a whole round earlier.

Randle goes into the mix for the No. 3 wide receiver spot in New York behind Hakeem Nicks and Victor Cruz, and with Ramses Barden and Jerel Jernigan as his top competition, he'll have a chance to win it. He didn't have a great scouting combine and he didn't have big-time numbers in college, but LSU didn't have a real quarterback this year, and Giants quarterback Eli Manning has a pretty good record of helping develop and get the best out of his receivers.

So, I say it's a nice move for Randle, who could flourish in three-receiver sets in New York, and not a bad pick for the Giants if they had the guy rated as a first-round talent and they got him in the second. I still don't know what they're going to do about offensive line, but we say this every year with the Giants and they seem to figure it out. They will pick again later tonight, when they have the 32nd pick in the third round.

Thank you, former St. Louis Rams defensive tackle D'Marco Farr, for raising an interesting point regarding drafted wide receivers.

The top three teams in passing yardage last season -- New Orleans, New England and Green Bay -- have combined to invest one first-round draft choice in receivers since 2006.

The implication is clear: Teams can flourish in the passing game without regularly investing early picks in wideouts, a point to consider as mock drafts widely project Justin Blackmon to the Rams with the sixth overall choice. The adage about the NFL as a quarterback-driven league seems to gain momentum.

But the broader context is this: Teams do not regularly draft wide receivers in the first round, regardless of where those teams rank in passing yardage.

Teams have chosen only 11 receivers in first rounds since 2006, the year Farr used as a start point. Teams have drafted 29 defensive linemen, 26 offensive linemen, 24 defensive backs and 14 quarterbacks in first rounds over the same period. Teams have drafted the same number of receivers as linebackers and running backs in these first rounds (allowing for some overlap between defensive ends and outside linebackers).

The chart shows round-by-round receiver selections since 2007 for 11 strong passing teams. I've chosen 2007 as the starting point because it encompasses the past five drafts.

The list includes the teams whose quarterbacks finished among the top 10 in Total QBR last season, plus the New York Giants, who won the Super Bowl thanks largely to Eli Manning's strong play. These teams have drafted fewer receivers than other teams on average, but slightly more of them in the first and third rounds.

None of these teams has drafted a receiver in the fourth round since 2007; teams tend to grab them in the third round, then wait til the last three rounds to fill out their rosters.

Houston, with Andre Johnson to anchor its receiving corps, has drafted only one receiver in any round over the five-year period in question (Trindon Holliday, a sixth-round choice in 2010, was a returner).

The NFL is a passing league. Receivers are important, but drafting one early isn't always a requirement for success. The Saints have drafted only two receivers in any round since 2007, yet they had the most prolific offense in the league, with tight end Jimmy Graham a big part of their success.

How teams use weapons in combination becomes critical, too. A No. 1 receiver becomes more effective with a strong option from the slot taking off pressure. Teams with gifted tight ends have another advantage.

Do the Rams absolutely, positively have to draft a wide receiver sixth overall this year? Of course not. But if they can find the next Calvin Johnson or even the next Hakeem Nicks -- two of the seven first-round wideouts drafted by teams in the chart -- what would be so bad about that?

.

Breakdown: Don't play that lack of respect card this year Who Dey nation. After not making a prime-time appearance last season, the Bengals were rewarded with three after a surprising run to the playoffs. The last time the Bengals had more prime-time games was 2007, when they had four.

Cincinnati opens the season on Monday night at Baltimore, plays a home Sunday night game against Pittsburgh on Oct. 21 and a Thursday night game at Philadelphia on Dec. 13. The most shocking part of the Bengals' schedule is that the return of Carson Palmer to Paul Brown Stadium on Nov. 25 isn't on national television.

The Bengals will find out where they stand in the AFC North early -- four division games are in the first seven weeks of the season. Cincinnati then goes nine weeks without facing an AFC North team until it finishes at Pittsburgh and home against Baltimore.

Complaint department: There really isn't much to complain about. Four of the Bengals' first six games are on the road. But that could also be considered the easy part of the schedule, with only one of those road games against a playoff team from last season. After playing at Baltimore, the Bengals travel to Washington, Jacksonville and Cleveland.

Sellout streak?: It's no secret that the Bengals have had trouble selling tickets. Only two home games last season weren't blacked out (and one was the result of a "buy one, get one free" promotion). But there's no excuse for a lack of sellouts this year. The Bengals have a three-game home stretch in the middle of the season when Ben Roethlisberger, Peyton Manning and Eli Manning come to town. If the Bengals can't pack the stadium for those games, there's a major problem in Cincinnati.

Bengals Regular-Season Schedule (All times Eastern)
Week 1: Monday, Sept. 10, at Baltimore, 7:00 PM
Week 2: Sunday, Sept. 16, Cleveland, 1:00 PM
Week 3: Sunday, Sept. 23, at Washington, 1:00 PM
Week 4: Sunday, Sept. 30, at Jacksonville, 4:05 PM
Week 5: Sunday, Oct. 7, Miami, 1:00 PM
Week 6: Sunday, Oct. 14, at Cleveland, 1:00 PM
Week 7: Sunday, Oct. 21, Pittsburgh, 8:20 PM
Week 8: BYE
Week 9: Sunday, Nov. 4, Denver, 1:00 PM
Week 10: Sunday, Nov. 11, NY Giants, 1:00 PM
Week 11: Sunday, Nov. 18, at Kansas City, 1:00 PM
Week 12: Sunday, Nov. 25, Oakland, 1:00 PM
Week 13: Sunday, Dec. 2, at San Diego, 4:15 PM
Week 14: Sunday, Dec. 9, Dallas, 1:00 PM
Week 15: Thursday, Dec. 13, at Philadelphia, 8:20 PM
Week 16: Sunday, Dec. 23, at Pittsburgh, 1:00 PM
Week 17: Sunday, Dec. 30, Baltimore, 1:00 PM

Breakdown: The Panthers haven’t played a prime-time game since playing Pittsburgh in a dismal 2010 season. But the days of flying under the radar are over. The Panthers will appear in two nationally televised games this season and they’re both good ones. They’ll host the Super Bowl champion New York Giants in a Thursday night game on Sept. 20 and they’ll play a Monday night game at Philadelphia on Nov. 26.

That can be traced to the star power that comes with second-year quarterback Cam Newton. Pitting him against Eli Manning and Michael Vick should attract lots of attention. We already know Newton and the Carolina offense are good. If the Panthers can just play a little defense, that Philadelphia game and the December contests could be very meaningful.

The NFL is giving the Panthers a good opportunity to get off to a fast start. Four of their first six games will be played at Bank of America Stadium.

Complaint department: The Panthers open their season with two NFC South opponents -- on the road at Tampa Bay and at home with New Orleans. They also have a Sept. 30 game at Atlanta, meaning three of their first four games will be against divisional opponents. I don’t mind seeing a divisional game in the first month of the season. But three in the first four weeks? Seems a little excessive. But, hey, at least we’ll find out pretty quickly if the Panthers have any chance to win the NFC South.

Fox’s return: The Nov. 11 game against Denver has lots of storylines. Peyton Manning will be coming to town and the matchup between him and Newton is a good one. But there’s one thing that could overshadow even Manning and Newton that week. That’s the return of Denver coach John Fox. He was the best coach in Carolina history, but his tenure didn’t end well. That will give Fox motivation to have the Broncos ready and the Panthers also will have plenty to motivate them because Fox didn’t part on the best of terms with everyone in the building, including some people in very high places.

Panthers Regular-Season Schedule (All times Eastern)
Week 1: Sunday, Sept. 9, at Tampa Bay, 4:15 PM
Week 2: Sunday, Sept. 16, New Orleans, 1:00 PM
Week 3: Thursday, Sept. 20, N.Y. Giants, 8:20 PM
Week 4: Sunday, Sept. 30, at Atlanta, 1:00 PM
Week 5: Sunday, Oct. 7, Seattle, 4:05 PM
Week 6: BYE
Week 7: Sunday, Oct. 21, Dallas, 1:00 PM
Week 8: Sunday, Oct. 28, at Chicago, 1:00 PM
Week 9: Sunday, Nov. 4, at Washington, 1:00 PM
Week 10: Sunday, Nov. 11, Denver, 1:00 PM
Week 11: Sunday, Nov. 18, Tampa Bay, 1:00 PM
Week 12: Monday, Nov. 26, at Philadelphia, 8:30 PM
Week 13: Sunday, Dec. 2, at Kansas City, 1:00 PM
Week 14: Sunday, Dec. 9, Atlanta, 1:00 PM
Week 15: Sunday, Dec. 16, at San Diego, 4:05 PM
Week 16: Sunday, Dec. 23, Oakland, 1:00 PM
Week 17: Sunday, Dec. 30, at New Orleans, 1:00 PM

During Super Bowl week, I wrote this story about the relationship between New York Giants quarterback Eli Manning and New York Yankees shortstop Derek Jeter. Specifically, it was about the ways in which Jeter's example as a low-key star New York athlete has helped inspire Manning, who has modeled himself after Jeter in some ways. I don't know if you remember it or not, but hey, it's baseball season now, so go ahead and read it again.

Anyway, the reason I thought of this was that I read this post by Art Stapleton of The Record, who spoke with Jeter over the weekend and asked him what advice he'd give Manning for his upcoming (May 5) stint as the host of Saturday Night Live. Jeter hosted the show in 2001, and he had this advice to offer Manning, per Art:

"Enjoy it," Jeter told me in an exclusive interview with The Record Sunday night. "I tried to have fun with it, but I was nervous. It's a tough week. It's a lot to do. You'll gain a lot of respect for those actors and actresses on that show. It's a lot of work that goes into it. I enjoyed myself."

...

"I had fun with it," Jeter said with a smirk. "I dressed up like a woman, man. I had fun and I just went with it."

Obviously, it remains to be seen what kind of fun the show's writers will devise for Manning -- and whether he'll pull it off as well as Jeter did or as well as his brother Peyton Manning did when he hosted the show in 2007. But no matter how the show comes out, Jeter remains an admirer of Manning's:

"Eli's done a great job," Jeter said. "I really like the way he handles himself, especially here in New York. He's done a great job in dealing with everything, and he's had a lot of success. He's going to have a lot more success, too."

In the meantime, though, Manning's going to try his hand at some comedy. I understand the skepticism, but I promise you, those of us who were covering Jeter in 2001 were skeptical about him in the same role. You never really know about a guy...