The 2026 Free Agency Thread

I was referring to Digg's off field troubles.
We'll go for the simplest metric:

Diggs has 2 Wikipedia subsections about his legal problems. The most recent was dismissed, the other is ongoing it seems.

Tyreek has 6 Wikipedia subsections about his legal problems. Many of them settled with money and pleading guilty. There are also several video and audio recordings of him and his abuse.

It would be awesome to not need to measure the legal problems of what would immediately be the second best WR on the team in 3 years . But after 3 years, that's where they're at.
 
We'll go for the simplest metric:

Diggs has 2 Wikipedia subsections about his legal problems. The most recent was dismissed, the other is ongoing it seems.

Tyreek has 6 Wikipedia subsections about his legal problems. Many of them settled with money and pleading guilty. There are also several video and audio recordings of him and his abuse.

It would be awesome to not need to measure the legal problems of what would immediately be the second best WR on the team in 3 years . But after 3 years, that's where they're at.

I’m going to need a Wikipedia subsection about my legal problems if we don’t bring in a stud WR next offseason
 

I think that type of dream is unrealistic. Because that's literally everybodies dream for every team.

Even fans/GM's/coaches/etc of Super Bowl winners wish for that, because those teams tend to get pilfered in Free Agency. Seahawks lost 4 starters in FA, each of them got $12-20million a year deals. (Edge, CB, Safety, and RB). Their first 3 draft picks were trying to fill those specific holes vacated in Free Agency. Will the rookies be able to bridge that gap immediately? Probably not ready yet.

Like look at the Eagles, favorite to win the division...but they've got real questions. The famous OL coach Stoutland is retired, they have a Guard and Center with major injury questions, and their RT is HoF-bound eventually but is basically ancient and missed a lot of last season. Their old WR2 is now their new WR1 (he might be able to do it), but the rest of the receiving talent features guys who like working over the middle of the field where Jalen Hurts hates throwing to.

So that's the past 2 Super Bowl winners, and they've got question marks about the roster.
 
Thing is, if Connerly was a bust then we have Coleman who probably could step in. Coleman is a good tackle. Flipping sides might be tough on the guy, but I think he is a good tackle. The fact that the team hasn't given Coleman enough reps to make reporters question whether there is a competition tells me that the staff doesn't think Connerly is a bust.
 
Last edited:
Thing is, if Connerly was a bust then we have Coleman who probably could step in. Coleman is a good receiver. Flipping sides might be tough on the guy, but I think he is a good tackle. The fact that the team hasn't given Coleman enough reps to make reporters question whether there is a competition tells me that the staff doesn't think Connerly is a bust.
Plus they can't afford to have the first rounder not be a starter after the 3rd rounder from the prior already proved himself out the outside
 
W
I suspect the national media consider Conerly closer to a bust than someone who could make a leap.

I think we disagree with that, but that about sums it up. Cause their stances on the other four spots generally mirror ours.

I have never seen an instance of anyone anywhere using 'Conerly' and 'bust' in the same sentence before now. Maybe someone out there is making that argument but I haven't heard it and I would view that as an insane take if I did see it.
 
W


I have never seen an instance of anyone anywhere using 'Conerly' and 'bust' in the same sentence before now. Maybe someone out there is making that argument but I haven't heard it and I would view that as an insane take if I did see it.

Personally, I don't think he's a bust at all. I think he's going to be a good player. It was interesting, though, to hear Logan recently say Conerly played below average last season. Logan is usually one of the more positive evaluators and has admitted he doesn't like criticizing players, yet he still came away with that assessment. At the same time, he also believes Conerly will develop into a good player.

Jay Gruden, for what it's worth, is on the opposite end of the spectrum. He's flirted with calling Conerly a bust, has flat-out said at times that he "sucks," and at the very least views him as a major wildcard heading into this season.

I think that's why some national analysts aren't sold on this offensive line. Conerly is being projected more on upside than proven production. Allegretti was a below-average guard and is now moving to center. Coleman, who could win the left guard job, struggled there when he played. So three of the five spots come with legitimate question marks that could go either way. I've seen a couple of national rankings put this unit in the 20s, I am,, guessing for that reason.

That said, I actually think the offensive line is going to be good. I just think some fans have already jumped to calling it a very good unit before it's earned that label. The talent is there, but now they have to prove it on the field.
 
Thanks SiP. I have not heard those *concerns* about Conerly's play. I think any criticism of the young man at this point in his career ignores the most obvious fact - he was a rookie in 2025 playing a very demanding position. That doesn't mean he's a future all-Pro or that his performance in 2025 can't be criticized - I just think it has to be put into context. I really haven't heard a lot of 'he sucks' conversation but I'm not as well read or well listened as some of you all are.
 
It sure would be nice. I'm guessing there will be a couple moves that will help plug the main concerns.

On a good note the roster is younger, faster and more talented than it has been in quite some time.

If you think about some of the heated debates here or woith talk radio, they almost always come down to projecting best-case scenarios. Mid-round receivers or tight ends who haven't produced yet are expected to suddenly become "that guy." Running backs who were No. 3 options elsewhere are expected to thrive here. Good players from other teams are projected to become great players because of the coaching, scheme, or fit. The belief is that another camp, better coaching, and this system will unlock them, and all of our most optimistic projections will come true.

The thing is, every fan base has those same stories. We have Jaylin Lane; the Patriots have Kyle Williams. We think our coaches are special, our scheme is ideal, and our players are perfect fits. Their fans think the exact same thing. Almost every team talks about player development, coaching, culture, fit, and untapped potential. That's why I understood Disco's point in the post I shared. At some point—maybe as so why when national analysts like Sam Monson rank this as one of the five weakest rosters, they're making apples-to-apples comparisons. Is that too harsh? Maybe. But they aren't assuming every optimistic projection is going to hit.

To exaggerate the point, they aren't penciling Chig in as the next Kittle, Rachaad White as prime Ekeler, Croskey-Merritt as a future star, Sinnott as suddenly freed from his borderline-bust label because of a new scheme, or Burks finally becoming the player Tennessee thought it drafted. Those are all possibilities, but they're still projections. I've seen those expectations from both fans here and even some in the local media.

As next year—you want this roster to be viewed as loaded because it has already proven it has difference-makers, not because it's built on a series of "if everything breaks right" scenarios. Every team has upside stories. The best rosters also have established studs where the conversation isn't if they'll be good, but how good they'll be.
 
Thanks SiP. I have not heard those *concerns* about Conerly's play. I think any criticism of the young man at this point in his career ignores the most obvious fact - he was a rookie in 2025 playing a very demanding position. That doesn't mean he's a future all-Pro or that his performance in 2025 can't be criticized - I just think it has to be put into context. I really haven't heard a lot of 'he sucks' conversation but I'm not as well read or well listened as some of you all are.

Yeah, to me Conerly is still a projection to an extent, but he's a projection that warrants plenty of optimism. He improved as the season went on, has first-round pedigree, is still very young, and has elite physical tools. That's the kind of profile where betting on upside makes sense.

When the conversation shifts to McCaffrey, Lane, Burks, and others, I think it's a tougher sell. Either they've already had enough runway that you'd expect to have seen more by now, or their draft pedigree and college production don't justify strong confidence that they're simply destined to break out if you give them more time. They might, don't get me wrong. But it feels a bit wild to bet on it happening. They are wildcards IMO.

Conerly is different. He's a first-round talent with rare upside who showed meaningful growth over the course of his rookie season. I completely understand why people are bullish on him.

That said, if you're looking for the resident Conerly skeptic, it's Jay Gruden. He has not been shy about saying he thinks Conerly has been bad and remains a huge question mark.
 
Thanks SiP. I have not heard those *concerns* about Conerly's play. I think any criticism of the young man at this point in his career ignores the most obvious fact - he was a rookie in 2025 playing a very demanding position. That doesn't mean he's a future all-Pro or that his performance in 2025 can't be criticized - I just think it has to be put into context. I really haven't heard a lot of 'he sucks' conversation but I'm not as well read or well listened as some of you all are.

I agree with this take.

I think as far as the national media goes, there just a tendency to view anyone that isn't at a near pro bowl level as "sucking." This is especially true when it comes to positions like Online that only get attention when giving up a sacks.

I can't name anyone on the Cardinals offensive line... I never pay attention to them, so it's easy for me to just claim "they all suck" based on their record last season. I'd assume any negative Conerly takes are mostly from that perspective.
 
I am ambivalent on Connerly. I hope he turns out fine, I don't know enough about the technical details of an OT to project whether he has great upside or not. The greatest criticism I can give him is that comparing his 1st round pick play last season to Coleman's 3rd round pick at LT the year before at what is supposed to be a more demanding position, I didn't see it moving the needle much aside from more memorable drive-killing penalties. Paired with Coleman being a mostly acceptable OT who was kicked inside and now fighting for his job with a player they were going to let walk in free agency, I can see it feeling like the team lost more overall skill than it gained.

But if Connerly can be a bookend tackle who has the OT spots locked down with Tunsil as well as Samuels and Jansen did back in the day, that will be a relief.
 
Last edited:
I thought Conerly was pretty bad last year... and despite the team trying to say he improved towards the end of the year. I didnt see much of that. Can he take a huge leap this year... sure, i am hoping he does. Is that likely though... i doubt it. The team will give him every opportunity to improve.. because if he gets beat out by Coleman its another black eye for Peters drafting. Other than JD, his drafting is nearing Riverra level incompetence.
 
Connerly won't be beat out by Coleman. The team seems invested in Coleman being a guard and will put all his reps into developing him as one. Coleman will sink or swim as a guard in Washington.
 
Connerly won't be beat out by Coleman. The team seems invested in Coleman being a guard and will put all his reps into developing him as one. Coleman will sink or swim as a guard in Washington.
I think it is more that the team is invested in Conerly as T so Colemans only spot is LG. Both have the qualities you want as a good starter at those positions.
 
One of the problems with Conerly is the same as Sam Cosmi at RT experiment. Conerly has more of a Guard body than Coleman who has a classic Tackle body.

It can still work, but it is a detriment. I wonder how much of this Conerly/Coleman choice was from our awful OL Coach who got fired. And now we're stuck trying to salvage.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 10, Members: 0, Guests: 10)

Help Users

You haven't joined any rooms.

    You haven't joined any rooms.
    Top