Speaker 1: Welcome to Buccaneers in satur Live presented by Miller like
Speaker 1: Casey Phillips and Scott Smith here and this is where
Speaker 1: we take all of your questions. So go ahead and
Speaker 1: watch on the Facebook page if you're not already, They're
Speaker 1: going to the comments section and you can leave all
Speaker 1: of your thoughts, comments, questions leading up to a lot
Speaker 1: of things that could be happening over the course of
Speaker 1: the next week. We were finally in that period where
Speaker 1: we have been guessing at things and hypothetical things, and
Speaker 1: we are finally going to know something, hopefully, but unfortunately
Speaker 1: not quite as soon as we thought we would, just
Speaker 1: when we thought we were so close. Uh So, in
Speaker 1: case people haven't heard all the news, what has happened
Speaker 1: in terms of the timing of everything, you know of
Speaker 1: the franchise tag, the CBA voting and how all these
Speaker 1: affect each Other's a very fluid situation and usually this
Speaker 1: you don't see this very often in the NFL. Generally
Speaker 1: you have specific dates and they don't ever change, so
Speaker 1: you know exactly what your deadlines are going to be.
Speaker 1: But it's a different landscape right now because deciding upon
Speaker 1: whether or not to reach agreement on the c b
Speaker 1: A obviously is the most important thing then that's going
Speaker 1: to affect the next decade of this league, so you
Speaker 1: just kind of have to wait. Uh, they pushed the
Speaker 1: the NFL p A pushed their deadline for players to
Speaker 1: get their votes in back to Saturday. So subsequently, the
Speaker 1: NFL pushed the deadline for putting franchise or transition tags
Speaker 1: to Monday, which makes sense because the way it was
Speaker 1: laid out before where you had to get the transition
Speaker 1: that you had to have those tags in by four
Speaker 1: o'clock on Thursday, but players were still voting till Thursday,
Speaker 1: didn't really make a lot of sense. It was. It
Speaker 1: was kind of a messed up timeline because if the
Speaker 1: new c b A and everybody, I think most people
Speaker 1: already know this, but if there's a new cb A,
Speaker 1: it will likely change the rules for this season on
Speaker 1: how you can use tags. This is sort of an
Speaker 1: unusual season in that the last year of the c
Speaker 1: b A, by rule, you can use both the franchise
Speaker 1: and transition tags in the same year. So there's there's
Speaker 1: not a lot of teams that would need to do
Speaker 1: that anyway, but there's a couple that are probably considering it.
Speaker 1: We could possibly be one of them, and you know,
Speaker 1: maybe Dallas like that. So the timeline is different, but
Speaker 1: the decisions are still the same. We're trying to give
Speaker 1: you the chance to make the decisions with all the
Speaker 1: available information rather than guessing. Which is good and helpful.
Speaker 1: It makes sense, it does. It kills us because we've
Speaker 1: been dying to know things. But there's another deadline coming
Speaker 1: because the eighteen, which is a week from today, I
Speaker 1: believe for is the start free agency. So you know,
Speaker 1: we better know by then. We got to know things
Speaker 1: by that point. Um and I saw another piece of
Speaker 1: news that came out. We had a question already about
Speaker 1: a Gilbert asked, what does the compensatory pick mean for us? Well,
Speaker 1: it means we get another pick. We got a fourth
Speaker 1: round pick, number one thirty nine overall, which is the
Speaker 1: highest compensatory pick we have gotten since two thousand and three.
Speaker 1: I believe that one didn't really work out. We picked now.
Speaker 1: While I applaud the Buccaneers anytime they pick a player
Speaker 1: from Northwestern, Northwestern Center, Austin King didn't work didn't really
Speaker 1: work out for us, But a fourth round pick is
Speaker 1: pretty valuable. I mean what's a recent fourth round pick?
Speaker 1: Jordan whit Kwan Alexander Right, Yeah, starters. So, um, it
Speaker 1: can be very valuable, not only for the fact that
Speaker 1: you might grab another valuable player, but it also since
Speaker 1: two thousand seventeen, you can trade those picks. Before you
Speaker 1: were not allowed to, but now gives Jason had a
Speaker 1: little more ammunition for moving up and down around around
Speaker 1: the board if he wants to. But uh, it's good.
Speaker 1: It's it's the highest pick we've had in a long time.
Speaker 1: Generally when we've gotten them, they've been seventh rounders, and
Speaker 1: and no offense to the seventh rounders we've taken, but
Speaker 1: not many of them really pan out. So this is
Speaker 1: a much more significant one. And the most significant player
Speaker 1: we've ever taken with a compensory pick compensatory pick was
Speaker 1: a linebacker Al Shremand Singleton. He ended up being a
Speaker 1: starter on the Super Bowl team, So it can happen. Uh.
Speaker 1: It also finalizes the draft order, so we know where
Speaker 1: all our picks are exactly like one seen in the
Speaker 1: fourth round and so on. So I got a story
Speaker 1: about that up on Buccaneers here on Bucaneers dot com
Speaker 1: or on buckaneers dot com. If you want to go
Speaker 1: check it out. Okay, perfect, I thought this question was funny.
Speaker 1: David said, how many people do you think we'll ask
Speaker 1: about Teddy Bridgewater and Tom Brady today? Well at least
Speaker 1: one already. So yeah, basically, why don't we just talk
Speaker 1: about overall, uh, those two guys, what you know, what
Speaker 1: we've kind of heard in general, how they might fit
Speaker 1: um within this system or the likelihood and just you know,
Speaker 1: we know that this is this is what everyone's talking about,
Speaker 1: not just for the Buccaneers but around the league, that
Speaker 1: the quarterback carousel is the story right now. By the way,
Speaker 1: I think in previous years when we've been confronted with
Speaker 1: questions such as this before the start of fredency, we
Speaker 1: usually declined because we were afraid that we'd be violating
Speaker 1: tampering policy as NFL employees. But we have since learned
Speaker 1: that it's okay for us to do it right. Yes,
Speaker 1: because I think they finally realized we actually have no authority,
Speaker 1: no power, no influence whatsoever. And I think that it
Speaker 1: was probably too big of a compliment that they thought
Speaker 1: that us saying something on this show would probably have
Speaker 1: an effect. So Teddy Bridgewater and Tom Brady. Um. I
Speaker 1: don't think you really look at Tom Brady and go, wow,
Speaker 1: is he a fit for this offense? You look on
Speaker 1: and go, he's maybe the greatest quarterback of all time,
Speaker 1: still playing at a high level. So um, if that's
Speaker 1: an option, it's hard to feel bad about that, right.
Speaker 1: Teddy Bridgewater obviously less of a body of work, but
Speaker 1: really played well last year for New Orleans. And I
Speaker 1: know there's a lot of people out there to say
Speaker 1: Teddy Bridgewater isn't a perfect fit proce Arians for Bruce
Speaker 1: Arians his offense, And they apply the same logic to
Speaker 1: any quarterback, like say a quarterback in the draft, like
Speaker 1: Jacob Eeson who has a big, strong arm, Like, well,
Speaker 1: there's there's a Bruce Arians quarterback. Teddy Bridgewater maybe not
Speaker 1: as powerful of an arm quarterback, so therefore not a fit.
Speaker 1: But I think that's a little bit overblown. I think
Speaker 1: Teddy Bridgewater could easily command uh Bruce Arianss offense. Uh. Certainly,
Speaker 1: what you'd have is an accurate passer and one who
Speaker 1: has done a real good job throughout his career and
Speaker 1: last year of keeping the interception right down. And that's
Speaker 1: obviously would be a big change from what we've been experiencing. Right, Um,
Speaker 1: and back to the c b A a a little bit
Speaker 1: to Kwan had asked, what are the rules of cb
Speaker 1: A voting? Is it a majority rule? Yeah, it's just
Speaker 1: a simple majority of whoever votes. And I know that's
Speaker 1: a big deal. It's like a microcosm of you know,
Speaker 1: the country when we're having these elections. The big deal
Speaker 1: for a lot of people is just trying to urge
Speaker 1: as many people as possible to actually exercise the right
Speaker 1: to vote. So I know there's people, there's players in
Speaker 1: the like on the executive committee or or more involved
Speaker 1: in the union who, um are really involved in this
Speaker 1: and know all the ins and outs of the proposal.
Speaker 1: But what they really want is for as many of
Speaker 1: the players in the rank and file to actually look
Speaker 1: at it and to vote, because not everybody's going to vote,
Speaker 1: but they like to get as many as possible to
Speaker 1: do so. Um And so yeah, once they do, it'll
Speaker 1: be a simple majority of that vote. Yeah. And they
Speaker 1: have made the rule that guys can't change their vote,
Speaker 1: which I don't know if I feel good about that. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I have. I have mixed reviews, but I mean, I
Speaker 1: guess if you think about it. You don't get to
Speaker 1: change your presidential vote. You know, just most times, once
Speaker 1: you vote, you vote. That's just typically how it works.
Speaker 1: Now they do it. Seems like with technology that wouldn't
Speaker 1: be that hard. But yeah, I mean I get what
Speaker 1: they said, where if you voted, that meant you felt
Speaker 1: like you had enough information to do the vote. Yeah,
Speaker 1: So procedurally I understand, and it's hard to argue with.
Speaker 1: But if you're a person who's rooting for the CBIA
Speaker 1: to pass, and you know, I don't, I'm not picking
Speaker 1: a side here between owners and players, but I want
Speaker 1: a new CBA in place. Person. Yeah whatever, we're not
Speaker 1: going to say anything about what's in it. We have
Speaker 1: no you know, dog in that type, but just we
Speaker 1: there to be well. I hope the players get what
Speaker 1: they want and the teams get what they want. Um.
Speaker 1: You know, it's obviously you have to meet in the
Speaker 1: middle somewhere. And the classic line is if neither side
Speaker 1: is happy, then it's probably a good deal. But the
Speaker 1: back to the changing the votes, I understand procedurally why
Speaker 1: they would say no, and I get it, but if
Speaker 1: your person rooting for this to pass, you kind of
Speaker 1: probably wish they would because from what what I understand,
Speaker 1: the thought is that the majority of the players who
Speaker 1: want to change their votes want to change from a
Speaker 1: no to a yes because it's more of your rank
Speaker 1: and file type, the ones who are not going to
Speaker 1: command the biggest salaries, and um, maybe some of them
Speaker 1: were lad to believe. Uh, we're convinced by some of
Speaker 1: the more star power players, the ones with the who
Speaker 1: are going to get the huge contracts, that this was
Speaker 1: not a good deal for them, and now they're starting
Speaker 1: to feel with more information, hey, this is a good
Speaker 1: deal for me. Maybe I should have voted yes. Interesting, Yeah,
Speaker 1: that'll be interesting to see. Um. Garrett asked, do you
Speaker 1: see Sue stain Um and just in general as far
Speaker 1: as the front seven goes, He said, we could use
Speaker 1: that again this season. Number one run defense. Absolutely, we
Speaker 1: want that. I know you could. Every time they talk
Speaker 1: about it Bruce arians and Jason Light, which they did
Speaker 1: most recently at the Combine, there's no hesitation in what
Speaker 1: they want. They want to bring all of those guys back,
Speaker 1: and Bruce or Jason was asked specifically about the three
Speaker 1: of Shack Barrett and Dominican Sioux and Jason Pierre Paul
Speaker 1: and that's why I'm I'm telling you he was asked
Speaker 1: that specifically, because I don't want to act like I'm
Speaker 1: ignoring like Karl Massum or somebody like that. But he
Speaker 1: was specifically asked, can you keep all three of those?
Speaker 1: And he said, I hope so, I think so. So
Speaker 1: they want to and we all want to because it
Speaker 1: was the thing that worked the best on defense from
Speaker 1: beginning to end, you know, the secondary kind of turning
Speaker 1: things around. Devin White kind of developed, went through some injuries,
Speaker 1: but from the beginning of the league the year to
Speaker 1: the end, the defensive front was really good. And and
Speaker 1: Bruce arians has said, we need to keep that intact
Speaker 1: and it won't matter who we have a quarterback if
Speaker 1: we can't keep that defense. So um Patrick asked, what
Speaker 1: is the front office looking to handle in free agency
Speaker 1: and raft positions? First? So I guess essentially the top
Speaker 1: priorities and is it the same in both or or
Speaker 1: maybe different. Well, what we were just talking about, I
Speaker 1: think would be their priority priority and free agency and
Speaker 1: um at the combine again, they were talking about this
Speaker 1: and they said, yes, there's some there's some really good
Speaker 1: prospects that could be available. Some big guys on the
Speaker 1: interior line and some pass rushers at pick number fourteen,
Speaker 1: and if you look at mock drafts, you'll see a
Speaker 1: lot of them. Give us guys like Calevan Chason an
Speaker 1: edge rusher or Javon kin law Uh, you know, an
Speaker 1: interior lineman who can put on some pressure, and those
Speaker 1: would be good picks in those areas. But Bruce said,
Speaker 1: you know, let's or maybe it's Jason Cameron, which one.
Speaker 1: Those are good prospects and that that's an option for us,
Speaker 1: but let's see what we can get back first and
Speaker 1: then see what we have to fill in. So I
Speaker 1: think free agency in terms of the defensive front is
Speaker 1: the priority when it comes to things like maybe you
Speaker 1: need another safety, that might be another thing you address,
Speaker 1: and free agency, Um, when it comes to something like
Speaker 1: offensive line, that seems like something you probably try to
Speaker 1: do in the draft, you know, because you already have
Speaker 1: three really highly paid starters on your offensive line and
Speaker 1: it's kind of hard to imagine putting another big contract
Speaker 1: on a free agent on that unit, whereas if you
Speaker 1: draft a guy, you get a pretty cost controlled asset. Right, Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's a good point. Um, This is an initesting question.
Speaker 1: We haven't actually had it at we've we've been asked
Speaker 1: about Jamis. I thought every which way possible. I think
Speaker 1: we finally have a new way, So I figured I'd
Speaker 1: use this one. Carlos said, since Winston has had LASIX
Speaker 1: fixed his knee and his thumb, would that make you
Speaker 1: give him more likely to give him another chance? So
Speaker 1: does that change things now that you know that those
Speaker 1: things have been to me? No, Um, the knee and
Speaker 1: the thumb things, those were obviously going to be done.
Speaker 1: You were and it was it was impressive that he
Speaker 1: played through those things. Let's for that. His toughness has
Speaker 1: never been never been a question. And um, and he's
Speaker 1: still there were too many picks obviously in the last month,
Speaker 1: but he still also was putting up some big numbers,
Speaker 1: you know, in terms of yards and touchdowns and and
Speaker 1: to do all that with the two injuries, that was impressive.
Speaker 1: But there was never any doubt that those things are
Speaker 1: going to be fixed. And they weren't injuries. There weren't
Speaker 1: procedures that were going to be long term deals. Like
Speaker 1: it wasn't like a replacement of a N A. C. L.
Speaker 1: It's just I think it was a meniscus, the lasing thing.
Speaker 1: I'm glad for him as a human that he got.
Speaker 1: You know, somebody who's um, let's see was near set
Speaker 1: right the as you trouble seeing farce, So we had
Speaker 1: trouble reading the boards. It would squint. Um. We knew
Speaker 1: this already. I mean, Bruce has answered a question about
Speaker 1: it at his last press conference at the end of
Speaker 1: the season. He says, yeah, he has to squint to
Speaker 1: see the board, but doesn't have any problem seeing his receivers.
Speaker 1: So it's if it could possibly help him play quarterback.
Speaker 1: But I don't think it necessarily will and I don't
Speaker 1: think it was holding him back, you see what I'm saying.
Speaker 1: So I don't think you took Jamison. You made him
Speaker 1: a much better quarterback by getting lace. I think it's
Speaker 1: good that he got it for him, and I'm glad
Speaker 1: for him. And if he thinks that will help him
Speaker 1: play football, he would know better than I know. To me,
Speaker 1: that doesn't really change the price tame. Okay. And then
Speaker 1: we were talking about also the new potential rules being
Speaker 1: put forward that the owners meetings are in a couple
Speaker 1: of weeks, and that's always something that they debate there
Speaker 1: every year if they want to implement any of these
Speaker 1: new rules. So what are some of the ones that
Speaker 1: if people haven't heard yet, that um, you find interesting
Speaker 1: or that could really impact the games. So like, in
Speaker 1: addition to the Competition Committee being able to come up
Speaker 1: with ideas to put out for a vote, teams can
Speaker 1: submit ideas and teams, various teams I think Philadelphia was
Speaker 1: involved in four of them have put together seven rule
Speaker 1: proposals that will now be discussed at the league meetings.
Speaker 1: And I think the couple that I find most interesting
Speaker 1: are one they want to have another option for on
Speaker 1: site kicks, and this is one that's been discussed before,
Speaker 1: so it's not a new idea. But as you know,
Speaker 1: UM kicks have dropped in percentage of how many are successful.
Speaker 1: I mean it's seven points last year, I think. But um,
Speaker 1: that's because they have the rules where you can only
Speaker 1: have so many guys on each side of the kicker.
Speaker 1: And that's good because it was it was just another
Speaker 1: safety thing and so pretty much when you pass safety rules,
Speaker 1: you don't go backwards. So I don't think they're going
Speaker 1: to change that. So the onsite kick is not a
Speaker 1: high percentage play at all. And I guess teams want
Speaker 1: to have an option where hey, it doesn't feel like
Speaker 1: we're just going through the motions. It's never gonna work right.
Speaker 1: When you see an honest like kick nowadays, you you
Speaker 1: don't think it's gonna work right. So I think it
Speaker 1: was Philadelphia proposed that one that's been bandied about the
Speaker 1: last couple of years of you, after you score, if
Speaker 1: you want this option for an onside kick, you get
Speaker 1: the ball your own twenty five facing fourth and fifteen
Speaker 1: and if you can convert that and then you keep it.
Speaker 1: If not, the obviously you're giving the ball in your territory.
Speaker 1: So it's kind of the same two possible outcomes a
Speaker 1: little more punitive in this case because you're giving them
Speaker 1: ball you're five or thirty or something like that. Um,
Speaker 1: but it's the same idea. You get it's a tough play,
Speaker 1: but if you get it, you get possession. If not,
Speaker 1: then you're getting the ball in in your own territory.
Speaker 1: So it's an interesting idea. And then the other one
Speaker 1: that I thought was significant was a proposal to move
Speaker 1: over time back from timids to fifteen, which I don't
Speaker 1: think will asked because again it's another player's safety. But
Speaker 1: I thought that rule of changing to ten was dumb.
Speaker 1: I don't think it's had good consequences, and I wish
Speaker 1: they would change it back to fifteen. The ten minute period.
Speaker 1: If one team has a relatively lengthy drive but doesn't
Speaker 1: score or scores a field goal, you know, then the
Speaker 1: other team gets shot. There's often not a whole lot
Speaker 1: of time left. Yeah, I wish they would change that back,
Speaker 1: but I doubt it will happen. All right, Well, that's
Speaker 1: gonna do it for us on this edition of Buccaneers
Speaker 1: Insider Live, presented by Miller Lyte. Thinks, as always to
Speaker 1: everyone who's submitted questions, will be back here next week,
Speaker 1: hopefully with some answers, and if not, it's at least
Speaker 1: the beginning of what tampering periods by the yes, we will.
Speaker 1: All right, Well, thanks again and we'll see you next week.