Aaron Donald: Good. Commanders: Bad. Ravens ... Confusing. (Mailbag Pt. 1)

There were lots of Mailbag questions about Aaron Donald this week. So let's start with the Once and Future Ram before covering a wide variety of other topics, including the Commanders, Ravens, some general league-wide projections and predictions, and more.

This installment of Mailbag covers your more straightforward questions about the 2026 season. I will publish a second installment covering some of your deeper questions on Friday.

Lots of Aaron Donald Questions

Aaron Donald is a first-ballot Hall of Famer. But are we perhaps making too much about the return of a 35-year-old who hasn't played in two years? I can't think of another situation where giving a player with that profile $20 million would be a cause for celebration. – Tracer Bullet

You mentioned QB atrophy in today's article. I have not seen any talk about Aaron Donald atrophy, but that's gotta be a thing, right? He's 35 and sat out 2 seasons. I still can't see his neck though, so maybe he is still in football shape? – Mike Schobazaford 

There's no chance Aaron Donald's actually going to be good this year, is there? Charles Haley and Reggie White were pretty meh (by their own standards) returning from just one year of retirement, and playing DT's not the same as being a 3rd-and-12-only edge rusher. – Martin Driver

To add to this - why is everyone assuming you’re getting peak Donald, even though he un-retired a week before the season after a couple seasons off? – Kevin Langstaff

To answer Langstaff’s question first: “everyone” is assuming “peak Donald” because he’s the biggest-name player to make positive news entering the first week of the season, and he's joining a team that was already the Super Bowl favorite among both oddsmakers and casual fans. It’s a visions-of-sugarplums situation. You don’t drive engagement with sober conversations about how much a 35-year-old defensive lineman really has left.

Reggie White was 39 when he came out of retirement; more on The Minister in a moment. Haley was only 33, but his career was rather up-and-down even at his peak. Haley went through multiple back surgeries before his first retirement. The sample size of Hall of Fame-caliber defensive linemen who came out of retirement is too small to draw many conclusions from.

According to Approximate Value, White had the greatest age-35 season ever for a defensive lineman: 8.5 sacks, three forced fumbles and an interception for the 1996 Packers. Here’s a full list of all the defensive linemen to record an Approximate Value of 10 or higher at age 35 or 36:

• Reggie White, 1996 Packers. AV of 18. 8.5 sacks
• Cameron Hayward, 2024 Steelers. AV of 16. 8.0 sacks
• Reggie White, 1997 Packers. AV of 15. 11.0 sacks
• Cameron Hayward, 2025 Steelers. AV of 13. 3.5 sacks
• Merlin Olsen, 1975 Rams, AV of 13. 7.5 sacks
• Pat Williams, 2007 Vikings, AV of 12. 2.0 sacks
• Kyle Williams, 2018 Bills. AV of 12. 5.0 sacks
• Chris Doleman, 1997 49ers. AV of 12. 12.0 sacks
• Bruce Smith, 1998 Bills. AV of 12. 10.0 sacks
• Chris Doleman, 1996 49ers. AV of 11. 11.0 sacks
• Jim Marshall, 1973 Vikings. AV of 10. 7.0 sacks
• Alan Page, 1980 Bears. AV of 10. 9.5 sacks
• Bruce Smith, 1999 Bills. AV of 10. 7.0 sacks
• Pat Williams, 2008 Vikings, AV of 10. 1.0 sack

Donald fits into this company rather well. If we assume that edge rushers like White and Smith are likely to age a little more gracefully than defensive tackles, there are still defenders like Heyward and Pat Williams making major contributions to quality defenses on this list.

Olsen’s name popped for me on this list, not just because he was a lifelong Rams interior defender like Donald, but because he played on a 1975 defensive line which also featured Jack Youngblood and Fred Dryer, with stars like Isiah Robertson (a Hall of Fame-caliber defender) and Hacksaw Reynolds at linebacker. Donald could easily notch 7.5 sacks as a rotational defender who mostly plays on passing downs and gobbles up quarterbacks running from Myles Garrett and others.

If Donald were joining the Titans, I would shrug. But he’s joining what looks like the best defensive front and overall roster in the NFL right now. It’s an ideal situation. He looks like a “Win More” addition.

I still believe that backup quarterbacks atrophy on the bench. But they are backups, who don’t have very much marginal skill and talent to lose. Donald’s a Hall of Famer. If he has lost 30% of what made him special, he should still be pretty scary when lined up next to Garrett.

Here's a Donald-adjacent question before we move on:

The Seahawks defense is still pretty good. The Rams defense got some planet-sized upgrades. Will their matchups turn into puntfests and field position battles, and should I be happy as a Seahawks fan that by having the better special teams unit we may end up winning those 6-3 games? – Luis Guilherme Fernandes Pereira

Both the Rams and Seahawks offenses remain very good, so Rams-Seahawks matchups probably won’t devolve into punt fests.

The Seahawks are projected to have the NFL’s second-best special teams in 2026; the Jets are projected higher. The Rams are projected to have the 26th-ranked special teams.

Seahawks fans should need no reminder that last year’s fourth-quarter comeback from a 30-13 deficit for an overtime victory in Week 16 was spurred by a Rashid Shaheed punt return touchdown, a missed Rams field goal, and other special teams plays; and that Rams return man Xavier Smith (who was not replaced) muffed a punt to set up a Seahawks touchdown in the NFC Championship.

So it’s not a matter of hoping the special teams win games by 6-3 final scores, but by 38-37 final scores, or anything in between.

The Rams and Seahawks don't meet until Christmas Day. A lot can happen between now and then. Try not to fast-forward mentally through all of autumn!

Predictions, Projections and Stuff

In almost every season a team goes from worst to first in their division. Does any team that fits this description have a chance at pulling this off besides the Lions - who are arguably the best version of "last year's last place team" as they were 9-8 with a +68 point differential? – Erik T.

Let’s go through all of last year’s last place teams, as well as their current moneylines to win their respective divisions:

New York Jets (+1900). There’s a universe in which the 2026 Bills stink and a universe in which the 2026 Patriots stink. But there is no universe in which both the 2026 Bills and Patriots stink enough for the Jets to sneak away with the AFC East.

Cleveland Browns (+2100). A Browns AFC North title would be final proof that we are living in the dumbest timeline. 

Tennessee Titans (+800). There is nobody in the Titans organization that inspires genuine confidence except Jeffery Simmons, who I am highly confident will enjoy his money.

Las Vegas Raiders (+2000). You could talk me into a Wild Card appearance based on Maxx Crosby, a great running game, baseline quarterback competence, the Chargers offensive line crumbling, all the Chiefs receivers getting arrested, Sean Payton becoming a social media addict, etc. But again: there’s no way the Chargers, Broncos and Chiefs all flatline simultaneously.

New York Giants (+600). This feels very plausible. Jaxson Dart could take a significant step forward, Malik Nabers is probably back, John Harbaugh’s coaching should ensure baseline competence in all three phases, and the Giants defense should notch at least 50 sacks. Plus, both the Eagles and Cowboys have the potential to succumb to their own house blends of stupid.

Detroit Lions (+175). Erik T. disqualified them from consideration!

New Orleans Saints (+255). Ah, the NFC South, where the mediocrity is smeared around generously and evenly. The Saints may have a weaker roster than the Jets, Titans and Cardinals. I feel fairly certain it's weaker than the Raiders roster. But anything is possible in the Crabs-in-a-Bushel Division. 

Arizona Cardinals (+10000). This is gonna take a lot of substations.

If I were to wager on any of these teams except the Lions to win their division, I would take the Giants because of the moneyline, and because there’s a chance that they can win by being good, as opposed to “least bad.”

So often, we're told teams are predicted for regression to the mean, both from the positive or negative ledger. Who are your choices of teams to buck the statistical trend and maintain their excellence/atrociousness this year? – Hitchhiker’s Pie

Despite the NFL's parity and the fact that one or two teams per year go from worst to first or vice versa, the safest bet is to assume that successful teams will remain successful, and unsuccessful teams will remain unsuccessful, unless there's significant evidence to the contrary, like major personnel overhauls or injuries.

The Patriots and Broncos, two teams whom I might have expected to backslide due to strength-of-schedule and other factors, added playmaking veteran wide receivers that should make them substantially better. We’ve already mentioned the Lions as an easy-to-spot bounceback candidate, and the Giants as a team whose young talent could suddenly come together. Most of the NFL’s weakest teams appear to be helplessly mired right now. I would predict the 49ers to bounce back from injuries if so many of their stars weren't currently injured and/or old.

I think “regression” as a concept can be overused or misapplied. Central tendency is real, but so are the strengths of great teams and the weaknesses of bad teams.

"Regression" is best thought of as central tendency dragging some random or unsustainable variable back toward the mean: high or low fumble recovery rates, injury rates, penalty rates, fourth-down conversion rates, opponents’ field goal percentages, schedule differences, etc. There should be some quantifiable reason to expect regression, like a 12-1 record in one-score games (2025 Broncos). Even then, such regression is just one factor among countless others. 

Which "good" team is most likely to start the season 0-4? I'm very nervous that the right answer is "the Patriots," but the Texans, Bills, and Broncos have a case to make as well. – Dave S.

The Patriots start at Seattle, then host the Steelers, then visit the Jaguars and Bills. An 0-4 start is unlikely but possible, given the difficulty of that slate and the current Patriots' lack of track record against top-tier competition.

The Texans host the Bills and Bengals, visit the Colts, then host the Cowboys. It’s interesting that the NFL’s best all-defense/meh-offense team will face the Bengals and Cowboys, two all-offense/meh-defense middleweights.

The Patriots could be the team we think they are and still start off poorly. If the Texans are the team we think they are, they cannot have trouble against all of these opponents.

The Bills host the Lions and Chargers in between the Patriots and Texans. Tough slate. But it would be more characteristic of the Bills to go 3-1 in this stretch, beating one or two of these tough foes by 20 points, then lose to the Jets in Week 10.

The Broncos visit the Chiefs, then host the Jaguars (on a short week) and Rams (on Sunday night), then visit the 49ers. That may be the toughest slate on this list, and the Broncos might be a little more overvalued than the other teams you mentioned. So I will go with the Broncos if forced to choose, though I would bet that none of these teams start 0-4.

Anything major change for you prediction wise from the publication of the Almanac to now, after all the pageantry of training camp, joint practices, preseason and suspensions? This is not a question about Aaron Donald. – Tom Burton

Thanks for not asking about Aaron Donald!

I will answer this question by launching into some other questions. But I just want to note that FTN Almanac DVOA projections are not “my” predictions. If I don’t agree with a projection, Aaron Schatz and I review the statistics, then I write my concerns into the chapter. If I really didn’t like a projection, I would swap assignments with someone who is more comfortable with it. But after 23 years of working with DVOA, I am more likely to adjust my thinking than battle against the method.

Commanders Questions

It feels like Washington may be a sneaky contender for “worst team in the league” this year. We all know the Browns and Dolphins stink; why will Washington be worse? – Kevin Langstaff

Reader Brutus Rugburn chimed in:

Kevin, I agree completely. Looking at their schedule, 3 wins should be the over/under mark. The miracle of 2024 completely screwed up any reasonable, orderly rebuild.

Mike, to add to Kevin’s query, how, if at all, could Washington have responded differently to their winning 2024 season with the clearly deficient roster they had?

The Commanders are projected to win 7.7 games by DVOA. I think they have had a miserable offseason, despite adding Stefon Diggs. The cavalcade of 32-year old acquisitions I have been dunking on all summer leaves me with little faith about the quality of the front office and the lower tiers of the roster. Dire tales from joint practices make me wonder about the reconfigured coaching staff.

So I think the Commanders could be the worst team in the NFL. It’s hard to project them with the worst record, because the Browns quarterback situation is so dire that the team could surrender at the trade deadline, while the Cardinals schedule is so brutal.

Relitigating what the Commanders did after reaching the NFC Championship Game in 2024 is tricky. It's easy to condemn the Laremy Tunsil and Deebo Samuel trades, but those moves made sense at the time. The Commanders got so little besides Jayden Daniels from the 2024 draft that the seeds of decline may have already been sewn.

The Commanders needed to do a better job self-scouting the bottom half of their roster and creating competition among younger players in 2025 and this offseason. They should have stockpiled late-round picks and UDFAs and given the ones they did have better opportunities to win roster spots and roles. One or two come-from-nowhere contributors would make their roster look a lot less like the result of an end-of-free-agency shopping spree.

Is it safe at this point to say that Dan Quinn isn't a very good coach and Shane Steichen might be? – Jonathan Leaf

I am as guilty as anyone of classifying coaches along a good/bad spectrum. There are, of course, great coaches, as well as Nathaniel Hackett-types. But coaches, like players, offer a collection of positive and negative traits/capabilities. 

Quinn and Steichen both appear to be solid scheme designers/installers and shrewd game planners. Neither seems to be too inspired when it comes to St. Crispin's Day speeches, young player development, or helping to find personnel solutions. I can’t give Steichen too much credit for a few months of Daniel Jones when he flubbed the Anthony Richardson situation in so many ways. Quinn may be thumping the table for every 32-year-old on the waiver wire, but Adam Peters is the one with the checkbook.

Many, many NFL coaches are just glorified gym teachers who got their administrative certifications and became vice principals. They succeed or fail based on their players, organizations, assistants and luck.

Which bad team will be the most fun to watch this year? – SD

Not the Commanders! 

The Raiders have two really good running backs, a stout line and Maxx Crosby. Plus, we will get Fernando Mendoza at some point. The Dolphins will have an adorable Bad News Bears vibe. The Browns will be like one of those modern horror films that make you feel icky and scared in a variety of ways. Lots of folks dig that sort of thing.

Ravens Questions

Whether by ambivalence or design, is Lamar Jackson making it so he will be a free agent after the 2026 season? I'm trying to think of examples of MVP/franchise QBs who, when their turn came to become the highest-paid player in the NFL, said, "Nah, I'm good," and jumped ship. – Jake Murray

Jackson is under contract for 2027 at $51 million, with a cap hit of $84 million. So he’s not going anywhere this year or next year.

The Ravens are surely willing to pay a LOT of bonus money right now to clean up that 2027 cap figure. They will still be motivated to do a deal next offseason, but money now is better than money later, and Jackson is wagering on not suffering a major injury in the meantime.

As I always point out when Jackson’s contract comes up, his mother serves as his agent, with occasional help from random associates. With all due respect to Jackson’s mother and the young entrepreneurs in his circle, I would have a crippling anxiety attack if tasked with negotiating nine-figure contracts, and I have a mathematics degree and years of experience analyzing how NFL contracts work. Jackson's allies are amateurs who are more likely to be paralyzed by the enormity of their task than cleverly backing the Ravens into a corner.

I was kind of shocked the Ravens are using a roster spot on [Joe] Fagnano as this season largely feels like it should be Lamar Super Bowl Or Bust to me. Is there a logic to this that I'm not seeing? Worrying about losing a developmental UDFA QB in their spot seems absurd when they are supposed to be Winning It All with their MVP. – Eric

Maybe they think they need a quarterback named Joe F******o on their roster as a good luck charm or something?

I will discuss some of the strange backup quarterback decisions teams made last week in the second installment of Mailbag on Friday.

Are the Ravens getting desperate? They have a well-deserved reputation as a smart organization, but I’m getting worried about the amount of money tied up in aging skill guys, the cumulative effect of trading draft picks, etc. At Lamar’s age/general uncertainty, is this actually the smart approach, or are they setting themselves up for a fall? – Alex Knobel

The Ravens swerved all over the road this offseason. John Harbaugh’s departure signaled a possible regime change, but Jesse Minter is broadly Harbaugh-like, so it’s hard to spot any philosophical shift. The Maxx Crosby/Trey Hendrickson situation was cuckoo. Eric DeCosta misread the market for Tyler Linderbaum’s services, so they now have journeyman Ethan Pocic at center. I cannot see Mark Andrews, Ronnie Stanley, Marlon Humphrey or Derrick Henry getting any better, though I can imagine all of them getting worse. 

The DVOA projections like the Ravens because of Jackson, their infrastructure/track record, and how well they played last year when they were relatively healthy. I worry that the infrastructure has crumbled, and that last year’s intermittent surges were more of a last hurrah than a sign that the Ravens were Super Bowl contenders enduring a hard luck streak. They look like they have a 11-win ceiling right now. As recently as last summer, the sky was the limit.

Questions About A Bunch of Teams and Players

The consensus seems to be that the Chiefs are going to bounce back strong this year, but I'm having a hard time seeing it. I don't see Kenneth Walker moving the needle that much, and key players like Travis Kelce and Chris Jones are getting dangerously old. I suppose Xavier Worthy and Rashee Rice could take steps forward, but we've been waiting for that for years now. Are the Chiefs a playoff team in 206, and if so, why? – Tom Nawrocki

The Chiefs are a playoff team because Patrick Mahomes elevates them to that status, and because Andy Reid and Steve Spagnuolo have proven in the past that they can quickly rebuild the defense around draft picks. They don’t belong on the elite Super Bowl tier where they perched for most of the 2020s because the roster is in a transitional state between the Kelce/Jones Old Guard and a younger nucleus that has not yet really stabilized.

I think of these Chiefs like the Patriots of, say, 2008-09: weaker than their predecessors, flawed in important ways, but more likely to be retooling for another run with Mahomes than collapsing. Reid's late-era Eagles teams or Alex Smith-era Chiefs teams also come to mind: he can coach teams with lumpy rosters to 10 or 11 wins.

Since we mentioned "regression" earlier: teams with stable coaching staffs and veteran cores should produce stable results. When such teams suddenly decline, and there's an easy explanation for the decline like a quarterback injury, the safest bet is to assume at least some "regression" to their usual quality level.  

Will the Panthers mercifully rip the band aid off and admit that Bryce Young is not the answer? – JT

Young ranked 28th in both passing DVOA and DYAR in 2025. Tyler Shough, Michael Penix, Kirk Cousins and Spencer Rattler all ranked ahead of him. (So did Baker Mayfield, but you probably guessed that.) Young added a little rushing value, but so did many of the other NFC South quarterbacks.

I’m surprised Young was ranked that low, but my memories of his 2025 season are colored by many fourth-down miracles against top-notch opponents. He remains an extremely inefficient quarterback on a snap-by-snap basis. He’s getting incrementally better each year, but he’s on pace to not reach league average until about 2029.

Young’s cap figure for 2026 is about $12 million: cheap for a starting quarterback. It makes sense for the Panthers to keep evaluating him. His cap number increases to about $26 million in the last year of his rookie contract in 2027, and Young will expect an extension if he remains the Panthers starter at the end of this season. So decision time is looming.

I can picture the Panthers signing Young to a mid-tier starter’s extension, based on his peskiness and professionalism, if he keeps puttering along in just-good-enough-for-the-NFC-South gear. I don't hate the idea of extending Young for Sam Darnold/Baker Mayfield money ($33 million per year for three years) if the Panthers aren't in position to find someone better. Giving him $275 million would be beyond bananapants.

Is this year's Dolphins roster one of the thinnest, depth-wise, in NFL history? Sure seems thinner than actual paper – Manny

The Dolphins are eating $181 million in dead cap space this year. The top 51 players on their payroll are only earning a total of $108 million against the cap. So yes, the Dolphins roster is indeed comprised of a stunning amount of affordable no-names. I counted 13 rookies on their 53-man roster as of August 31st. There are at least seven second-year players on their roster, including three 2025 fifth-round picks (Jordan Phillips, Dante Trader, Jason Marshall) projected as defensive starters.

It’s hard to measure “depth,” historically. The 1976 Buccaneers, who went 0-14 in their inaugural season, fielded 21 rookies throughout the year, though several only played a game or two. The expansion Bucs also fielded 11 players entering their second NFL season, most of them obscure backups who were exposed to the expansion draft. The Dolphins could come close to matching those figures once they are forced to dip into their practice squad, or onto the waiver wire.

It’s never a good sign when a team’s roster broadly resembles the 1976 Buccaneers.

The Broncos have 2 cornerbacks coming up on unrestricted free agency this year in Ja’Quan McMillian and Riley Moss. With how well they’ve performed in their respective roles, and with some high drafted depth behind them, should the Broncos resign one, both, or neither of them?

For my part, I really want the team to resign Riley Moss. I know people give him a hard time but he’s been a dependable platoon mate to Pat Surtain who provides sticky coverage (admittedly with some deserved and some not-so-deserved flags), and he seems to have the necessary mental fortitude to stay disciplined and confident despite being regularly targeted by QBs who avoid Surtain. I will also admit that I’m not a completely disinterested fan - my college roommate got me a Riley Moss jersey two years ago and it’s the only current Broncos jersey that I own. – Andrew Coyner

The Broncos should prioritize Moss over McMillan.

For all of his flaggable habits, Moss is a tall boundary cornerback who handles tough assignments against outside receivers. McMillian is the tough little slot guy. Tough little slot guys are often as effective as the defense around them. It can be hard to find cornerbacks who can cover speedy WR2’s on vertical routes and not be a persistent liability.

The Broncos cap situation for 2027 is a little thorny, and they must start preparing for a Bo Nix extension if their 2026 season goes as planned. They probably cannot keep both cornerbacks. As you mentioned, they drafted Jahdae Barron in 2025 to take over at one of the corner spots.

Eagles focused question here. Kelee Ringo. The guy is a cornerback prospect that is not working out, but clearly has the minimum height/weight/speed to be a NFL player. Why aren't they trying him at safety, where some of his change of direction problems could be mitigated and he could use his athleticism effectively? – Bobby D.

Ringo is the kind of CB2 you end up with if you let someone like Riley Moss walk in free agency!

Ringo doesn’t play like a potential safety. He’s not a big hitter with read-and-react skills who can play in the box. Safeties need change-of-direction quickness. Ringo could be a roaming free safety, but he’s built to be a lanky cornerback who matches up against taller receivers, particularly along the boundaries. He was a system product at Georgia, which is why he lasted until the fourth round of the 2023 draft, despite an impressive size-speed profile.

The Eagles currently think of Ringo as a core special-teamer and fourth cornerback. That’s his ceiling. He’s about as useful as the average NFL fourth cornerback.

And Finally, Descuzzball Again

Do you have a theory of how Deshaun Watson went from being as good as he was in 2019-2020 to being as bad as he has been since? Do we think QB is a position where being away from the game for a couple of years causes too much atrophying of physical and mental tools? Or did he just re-enter playing rusty and in a bad situation in Cleveland and then have bad injury luck? Or is it a simple "karma is real"? – Neil

My controversial theory is that Watson was never all that good.

Watson ranked 10th in passing DYAR in 2018 and 13th in 2019, two Pro Bowl seasons in which he led the Texans to the playoffs. He had peak DeAndre Hopkins to throw to in both seasons, while J.J. Watt led a very good Texans defense. Watson certainly wasn’t a bad quarterback, but he was a more mobile version of C.J. Stroud, or a Bo Nix with a better go-to receiver, not (say) Drake Maye.

Watson ranked fifth in both DVOA and DYAR in 2020, when he threw for 4,823 yards and 33 touchdowns. The Texans went 4-12 that year. Watson threw 13 fourth-quarter touchdowns but led zero fourth-quarter comebacks. DVOA is very charitable about “garbage time" production, because it is broadly predictive of future success, but fourth-quarter touchdowns in lopsided games can also inflate a quarterback’s reputation.

Watson was an early favorite of the tastemaking cineaste crowd before we discovered that he was a gutter human. When Watson demanded a trade after the 2020 season, before the sexual assault allegations became public, he was hailed by many as a truth-to-power rebel bucking the system. His cred among the cool kids and cause celebre status may have further inflated his reputation.

Looking at things from another angle, both Carson Wentz and Mitch Trubisky had some success as starters – playoff appearances, Pro Bowl selections – at the same time as Watson. Both lost their starting jobs, for prosaic reasons, at about the same time that Watson vanished for the first time. Watson was better than Wentz or Trubisky, but was he so much qualitatively better that we should be shocked that he’s now a stumblebum, especially when injuries, suspensions, and his dubious lifestyle are factored in?

I think two full years off caused Watson’s skills to deteriorate. I have a feeling that he has never been a model of dedication in the film or weight rooms. But I suspect that the late-2010s Watson was just a pretty good quarterback in a very good situation.

COMING LATER IN THE WEEK: More questions! More answers!