Tyreek Hill is an end-all.

He was in Week 12.  Kansas City’s 27-24 win over Tampa Bay was a game where the score didn’t tell the story at all.  The Chiefs’ blazing-fast wide receiver cooked Carlton Davis and the Buccaneers’ secondary.  Kansas City led 17-0 after the first quarter, and Hill had 200 yards by that point.  Despite Tampa Bay’s late rally, the Chiefs and Hill gave the Bucs no chance from the very beginning. Hill started and ended the game in an instant.

Tampa Bay gets a second crack at containing Hill on Sunday in Super Bowl 55.  Stopping him is not a possibility.  It just doesn’t happen.  You can only hope to contain him, make him work and make things harder on him.  Once you do that, you just say your prayers from that point on.

The biggest reason for Hill’s show-stopping performance in Week 12 was his ability to score, not necessarily his ability to get open and run.  As mentioned, you’re just not stopping that aspect of his game.

What Tampa Bay can stop though is Hill’s ability to break free and score.  Keeping a safety high and their fastest cornerback on Hill is the best allocation of resources that Bucs’ defensive coordinator Todd Bowles can deploy against him.  As silly as it sounds, letting Patrick Mahomes or literally anyone else on Kansas City’s offense beat them is the best way to go about business for Tampa Bay on Sunday.  A re-creation of Week 12 puts the game away almost immediately.

The thought of letting someone like Travis Kelce not be a priority is scary, but Devin White and the Bucs’ linebacker bunch is extremely skilled in coverage.  White should be matched up man-to-man with Kelce, and that battle is going to be more contested than we may think.  White is elite and can have help from a second safety or linebacker if needed.

Negating the presence of Kelce puts a lot of pressure on Hill to perform like he did in Week 12.  Of course, that is entirely possible – Hill’s inevitability and pure dominance are capable of taking over any defense in any game.  But it’d be quite embarrassing for Tampa Bay to go out like that, and essentially get shredded by the same player twice on the premise of them just not being able to stop him.

Letting Mahomes and others beat you sounds like a recipe for disaster.  But the Bucs have ways of controlling what he and the Chiefs do.  Kansas City is down both starting tackles for this Super Bowl after Eric Fisher tore his Achilles in the AFC Championship Game.  Being weak on the ends is not ideal against Tampa Bay’s pass rush, which is ferocious inside and out.  Pressuring and getting to Mahomes – who has no shortage of in-game ding-ups and trips to the medical tent in his career – is key for the Bucs, not only in hopes of potentially knicking Mahomes up (who was bothered by a toe injury in addition to the head/neck injury suffered against the Browns) but in order to force the quickest throws possible.

Those balls might be going to the likes of Mecole Hardman if the Bucs execute defensively, who is still ridiculously fast like Hill.  But the former Georgia wide receiver has been best used in gimmick, one-trick pony type plays rather than in a featured role throughout his short career thus far.  If the Bucs clamp Hill and Kelce and get pressure on Mahomes, it’s on Hardman to step up and have a Hill-like game off of dump-offs and quick throws.  That seems like a big ask.

Pressure is key for Tampa Bay on Sunday.  The same argument can be made for the Chiefs.

Kansas City has some balancing to do on the defensive end in this game.  On one hand, the age-old philosophy that beats Tom Brady is getting pressure on him, specifically with four or fewer defensive linemen.  The Chiefs can bring more, but they then risk Brady picking them apart effortlessly.  It’s an older Brady though, who may not pick apart a defense like he used to.  Bringing five might not be the death sentence it has been in the past.

The more concerning aspect of bringing pressure is that it opens up the run for the Bucs.  Tampa Bay’s rushing attack isn’t something to necessarily be afraid of, but it can be potent when firing on all cylinders.

The best way – conventionally – to beat the Chiefs is to play defense with your offense.  That doesn’t mean scoring as much as they do, but running the ball and eating as much clock as possible to limit their scoring chances.  Even with their matchup advantages, the Chiefs are still a handful for Tampa Bay’s defense.  The Bucs’ offense has to do its part in helping out the other side.  Running the ball does that most effectively.

But all of this strategy is complacent with the Bucs’ offense actually showing up.  That’s been a bit of a struggle for them throughout the season.  Blame it on the installation of a new quarterback and new system all you want, but these things should have been figured out by the time Tampa Bay’s first playoff game against Washington took place.  In that contest, the Bucs’ offense stalled, and Washington legitimately had a chance to win at the end.  The next week, Tampa Bay redeemed itself – and did so again against Green Bay.  But the inconsistency is concerning, and an offense can’t just not show up against Kansas City.  

Hill’s Week 12 performance still looms extremely large.  What is so different this time around for the Bucs?  Why would Hill not go off again?  Is Davis just permanently moved off of him?

A lockdown of Kelce does not win this game for Tampa Bay.  Hill needs to kept in check, and the pressure has to be on Mahomes.  Both things on top of the objective of Kelce has to happen for the Bucs Sunday.

In addition, their offense has to show up.  That could be the toughest bet of them all.  

Hill is inevitable.  Tampa Bay’s scheming on Hill Week 12 wasn’t the outcome of bad coaching or stupidity.  They were simply out-executed and outran.  

It’s hard to expect things to be much different Sunday, even with a safety looming over the top.  Hill and the Chiefs might just have Tampa Bay’s number.  If that holds true, Brady has a lot of work to do.  It might be the Super Bowl – where the GOAT typically shows up – but there’s a chance we leave Sunday realizing it just wasn’t the Bucs’ year – yet.

Prediction: Chiefs-34 Bucanneers-23

It’s rare when NFL teams admit defeat.

Front offices usually hold onto players they were wrong about too long.  They’re unwilling to concede to the owner or the fans they that messed up – perhaps big time.  They know it can cost them their job.  They know it will at least put them on thin ice.

The Los Angeles Rams didn’t necessarily hold onto quarterback Jared Goff too long.  Sure, the warning signs of his limited ceiling were there during the 2019-20 season, but the team’s overall regression was in full force.  Running back Todd Gurley – arguably the focal point of the Rams system – fell off a cliff.  Sean McVay seemed rattled as a play-caller after Bill Belichick pulled down his pants in Super Bowl 53.  Last year was the classic Super Bowl hangover season for the Rams.  At that point in time, Goff’s performance was okay.

This season changed things.  After a good start, Goff regressed once again.  The Rams were good enough to make up for his deficiencies, but ultimately the former No. 1 overall pick was the cog holding LA back from being great, not just good.

In response – in a move that’s so rarely made by front offices across sports – the Rams not only eliminated their problem but went all in to solve it.  

The acquisition of Matthew Stafford from the Lions in exchange for Goff, two first-round picks and a third-round pick elevates the Rams from that dreaded “good” description to the desired “great.”  No longer does Los Angeles have a quarterback who’s scared to throw the ball deep, will miss wide receivers and turn the ball over.  They have a gunslinger who – with good coaching and good weapons – which the Rams have – can perform at a level that breaches the NFL’s best.  Stafford is the quarterback we’ve lusted to see McVay have, and now he has him.

The price was steep – perhaps ridiculously so.  But it’s likely that it was LA’s fault it was so high – Detroit’s swallowing of Goff’s contract and shakiness on the field drove Stafford’s price up.  If the Lions moved Stafford elsewhere, perhaps their return would have been much lower.

The picks are stunning, especially considering that the two firsts were practically the only ones Los Angeles had left.  But the Rams go from a team that was middling and a QB away to a Super Bowl contender now.  That tradeoff – and likely upgrade – is almost invaluable.  If things don’t work out now, there’s almost nothing left to try.

The Rams’ side of the Stafford deal sets precedent for Houston and Deshaun Watson.  Have a QB that is as good or worse than Goff?  Great, that will be four first-round picks and other stuff for Watson, please and thank you.

Sure, not every QB has the contract Goff does, but not every QB can – even with significant coaching and weapons on top of an elite defense – get to the Super Bowl.

The point is that there’s worse than Goff on the market.  The teams in that situation should and will unequivocally be in on Watson, but to land him they will have to give up literally everything.  Those teams are as follows:

• Carolina
• San Francisco
• Washington
• New York Giants
• New England
• Pittsburgh (if Ben Roethlisberger returns)
• Minnesota
• Detroit (hold this thought)
• New Orleans (if Drew Brees returns)
• Atlanta
• Denver
• Indianapolis
• Las Vegas 

The seven teams that shouldn’t be pursuing Watson in addition to Chicago, Dallas and Philidelphia are left out of this exercise as well.  

The Eagles are left out due to the fact that it’d cost them at least double on the cap to go get Watson, thanks to Carson Wentz’s trade kicker or his cap hit if he were to serve as Watson’s backup.

If the teams above want Watson, their current quarterback and double what the Lions got in picks for Stafford will likely be the starting point for conversations with Houston.  For the teams not listed, the return is probably similar to Stafford or less, depending on who the other quarterback is in the deal (For example, Arizona including Kyler Murray in a Watson deal is worth more than Miami throwing in Tua Tagovailoa).  Watson nets fewer picks than Stafford if a team like Cincinnati decides to move Joe Burrow for him (which is obviously unlikely, but probably needs to be a conversation for both).

The bottom line is this: if you’re one of the teams listed above, the Stafford trade was a kick in the balls in your attempt to make Watson your starting QB.  If Stafford nets what he did, then Watson brings back what could amount to the largest trade package in NFL history.  There’s a good chance he’s worth it, but that is some risky business.

A couple last notes on the potential Watson suitors above.  1) How funny would it be if Detroit leveraged Goff and the picks they received for Stafford on top of likely two more firsts and some other stuff to land Watson?  Detroit might be a sneaky suitor here if they want to be.  With their extra capital, they’re giving up much less than every team would in a Watson.  They’re working with a surplus.  2) New Orleans and Pittsburgh fall right into the Dallas/Chicago conversation if their respective QBs retire.  The Steelers absent Big Ben don’t have a QB nor pick that lands a QB that they can offer back to the Texans for Watson.  Houston should not be interested in either Taysom Hill or Jameis Winston to lead a reboot at the position post Watson in a theoretical deal with New Orleans.  And if either Brees or Roethlisberger are flipped for Watson, both Pittsburgh and New Orleans would be giving up hauls with unimaginable amounts of draft capital thanks to both players’ age and lack of production.

Detroit’s side of this trade is conflicting.  On one end, the haul they reigned in for Stafford was stunning – two firsts and a third for a quarterback that’s not elite and needs significant help is great work.  The picks allow them to be more aggressive in trying to move up for a quarterback in this year’s draft or next’s if they want to.  It can also enable them to pursue Watson if they choose.  Or – and this is the most likely outcome – allows Detroit to draft more good players, unlike they’ve done in the past.

But the Goff side of things is puzzling.  The picks are hard to turn down, but Goff’s contract is one of those that is not easily navigable.  Detroit can’t get out of it for free for two seasons.  After next year, it’s a $15 million dead cap hit to release him.  

The Lions are a teardown.  Evaluating Goff for next season makes sense, just to make sure he’s not salvageable.  But beyond that it’s a tough sell, assuming he’s not the guy for Detroit.  At that point, the Lions need to find their future signal-caller instead of treading water with Goff.  That’s tough though with Goff’s contract situation – moving on is not easy or cheap.

Detroit attaches themselves to Goff with this deal for a little longer than we’d like them to.  At the same time, evaluating Goff next season then cutting him for $15 million wouldn’t exactly hurt the Lions.  If they’re in the market for a quarterback next offseason, they’re not likely to be competitive or wanting to maintain cap room – meaning that Goff’s dead cap isn’t something they should qualm about accepting if it’s just a one-year payment.

It’s more about what else could have been out there for the Lions.  Again, the Rams’ picks were tough to turn down.  But why was Goff the QB Detroit had to receive back in the deal?  Was Denver not willing to move Drew Lock?  Was Jacob Eason in Indianapolis not appealing?  Even Taylor Heinicke from Washington?  Neither of those QBs might be great, but they’re at least young and cheap, and make more sense than Goff does for the Lions.

Regardless, this is about the picks for Detroit.  And why wouldn’t it be?  Two firsts and a third is an almost undeniable offer and certainly makes up for the presence of Goff, whether we like it or not.