Tom Pelissero: Brock Purdy's Contract Allows The 49ers To Pay Other Guys

This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance. Do you ever think about switching insurance companies to see if you could save some cash? Progressive makes it easy. Just drop in some details about yourself and see if you're eligible to save money when you bundle your home and auto policies. The process only takes minutes, and it could mean hundreds more in your pocket. Visit progressive.com after this episode to see if you could save.

Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and Affiliates. Potential savings will vary. Not available in all states. Summer's here, and Nordstrom has everything you need for your best-dressed season ever. From beach days and weddings to weekend getaways in your everyday wardrobe, discover stylish options under $100 from tons of your favorite brands like Mango, Skims, Princess Polly, and Madewell. It's easy too with free shipping and free returns, in-store order pickup, and more.

Shop today in stores online at Nordstrom.com or download the Nordstrom app. I'm happy we won so I can really enjoy the last couple days. Today's gasps. NFL Network insider Tom Pelissero. Entrepreneur and fitness personality Jake Steinfeld.

Plus, your phone calls, what's more likely, and more. And now, it's Rich Eyes. Our number two of the Rich Eyes show is on the air. How's everybody doing out there? It's not a rhetorical question. I mean, happy to have you call.

You literally want to know? I do. I'm great. Hold on a second. No, no. Stop what you're doing. Stop what you're doing. No, no.

I'm very interested in how everybody is. Absolutely not. You do not get to bogart the how are you doing.

That's my thing that you make fun of every week being like, oh, well, that's five minutes, five seconds. We're never going to get back. Then you just get on with it. Well, actually, these last 20 seconds, I'm not going to get back either. Absolutely not.

You do not get to ask how people are doing. Do you want them back, though? That's the thing.

Yeah, I would like them back. No. No, we have better use of our time. I'm kidding. This is a dream.

I'm keeping my jollies low. By the way, did you see the video of people took of Larry David watching the end of the game one? Yes, sitting next to Susie X-Men. That was one of the few times I could text Larry during a game because I didn't have to assume tape.

I could see him there. Did you text him? I did not. I left him alone.

Left him alone. What if he's going tonight? We'll find out. Friday night in New York.

That's a big ticket, man. Sitting next to David Zaslav, who basically runs the show at Turner. He does, you know, basically. No, no, he's in charge. Right.

So that's where you sit. And Susie X-Men to his left, a full on curb scene. Who was the plus one situation there? Was Larry David's plus one or was Susie Larry's plus one? I kind of think if I had to guess, Larry was David Zaslav's plus one.

And he just happened to be sitting next to Susie X-Men. If I had to guess, isn't she a regular at these games? She's a regular. Yeah. Yeah. Right. And, you know, Larry's either at the game or playing golf and we have to assume tape out here in Los Angeles.

I would guess. And let's not bury the most important question. Where's Chalamet sitting?

He's like Stiller's adopted son at this point. In front of Chalamet. That happened the other night. God country and Chalamet. In front of God country and Chalamet.

Put that on a T-shirt. I cannot believe that Nick's lost that way. I cannot believe it. We're supposed to have turned the page.

Tonight is a page turner. One of the most important Nick games in a long time. In a long time. How do they bounce back from this?

How does one bounce back? I said it yesterday and I'm still genuinely concerned. Are we going to be a week from now or a week and a half from now pointing out it was over then? It was over when that happened. When Ice Cube walked out of the outfield. Well, that was game two. No, that was game two of the World Series last year. But Freddie Freeman's home run ended that World Series. Yankees were up. Aaron Boone decided to go with a guy who hadn't pitched in a month and isn't a reliever in Nestor Cortez instead of having Tim Hill sitting there.

And I'm reliving this moment and I'm getting more and more pissed about it by talking about it. And they could have, you know, if Freddie Freeman had the Halla Bolton in him, he would have run the bases with a choke around. He's like, you just choke this game away. You just choke this game away.

You choked it, you know? And I'm just wondering if the same way when that 88 World Series was over. They were like, yeah, the Gibson home run ended it. You know, the A's had it.

They had the most dominant reliever on the mound in a future Hall of Famer in Dennis Eckersley and the guy who could barely walk one armed one out of the stadium. And it was over. I'm wondering if that's the conversation we're going to be having in a week and a half. And if we don't, it's because of what happens tonight. Because you can't think they're going to be down 0-2 going Indianapolis and think that they're going to be able to do. No, this is the season tonight.

Yeah, I would agree. So can't wait. I will be freaking out. Assume tape. What's the watch situation? Assume tape? So you're going to DVR a little bit and catch up?

I believe I'm going to be Han Solo tonight. What? Like with everybody out of the house. Really? Yeah. Yeah.

It's a bottle of red. That's the way it's looking right now. You want me to roll through? You want some company? Yeah, sure. Okay.

Yeah. Because I gave away my ticket to tonight's Kendrick Lamar SZA concert. To who? To who? To the fam? The fam's going to SZA tonight? Cooper's going. Xander's going with a friend. And I gave my ticket away to the person who trains our kids. Wow. I know that sounds absurd. I know it sounds absurd, but she's like a family friend. How did you end up?

Did someone give you these or you just bought these tickets? What does that matter? Seriously, what is the purpose of this conversation? Can you fill me in on what the purpose of this question is? I speak TJ. He's wondering if you had a ticket hookup, why you didn't offer him the set hookup. Is that what you're saying? First of all, you don't leave your house.

Secondly, that I know of. Okay. Yeah, I'd be out sometimes. But why don't, so I'm supposed to, by osmosis, assume you would like to go to Kendrick Lamar and SZA. I mean, look, I don't mean to be disrespectful. But if you're going to think, who do I know that likes Kendrick Lamar? I think that maybe as the faces float around, you might go, hmm, hmm, TJ probably. Do you want to take my children and Xander's friends and shop alone?

I'm going to watch basketball tonight. TJ's babysitting is a TV show that we need to have. Call it TJ's jollies. You don't trust me with the kids? TJ's jollies.

And Susie's taking Taylor to the Sparks game. Oh, sweet. So you're solo. I am solo. I am Han Solo tonight.

Interesting. The fact that you don't trust me with watching your kids kind of bugs me though. Who would you trust more? Who?

Me or TJ? I trust your kids? Yeah. I have references.

Honestly, Feli, and this is no disrespect, maybe the guy without the arm sleeves. What does tattoos have to do with it? Are you an inkist?

It sounds like it. Personally, I don't trust people with tattoos either. Hold on a second. Are you an inkist? I was just being stereotypical. Sorry, sorry. There you are.

That hurts. Don't judge a man by his ink. He's got tattoos. Don't be an inkist. Don't judge a man by his ink.

We don't have inkists here. I would trust you. Thank you. How are you guys doing?

I love the kids. What the hell? We're off rails today, man. That's what you get for asking how everyone's doing when you don't, you know, that's not your thing.

Stay in your lane. Sean in Cleveland. Sean in Cleveland.

You're on The Rich Heads. What's up, Sean? How's everybody doing?

Sean, great, man. Great to hear you. How are you? How are you doing?

Oh, God. I'm doing great. That's great.

I was going to do that. I told people to call. I'm sorry, Sean.

I need to stay in my lane and not ask people how they are. Only one person. Easily the biggest misanthrope on this set. Sean. Big word alert.

You hate people more than anybody else on this set. You want me to speak in plain English? There it is. Sean, what's up?

Hey, Rich. I wanted to talk about the NTA's new college football playoff format. Okay. So I want to pitch something that I think would be great for college football.

Okay. Honestly, I think this works for every American sport. Get the playoff field. Whatever the heating, do conference winner, division winner, however you're doing it.

Get the field. Then take your top rated team. Let them draft who they want to play. Let them choose their matchup. That's what they earned with the one seed.

Sean, let me ask you this question. So you're saying whoever is the one seed gets to choose their opponent. I mean, is there anything more disrespectful than offering the top seed the choice of choosing their opponent? Wouldn't that be the ultimate bulletin board material for the opponent that they've chosen to the point that the coach would never want to have that opportunity placed in his lap? That it would be viewed by, it would be viewed by the coach as a choice that is just filled with, rife with problems. Sean. So I agree.

One, let's get some storylines going. I think that's a pro, not a con. Yeah. I mean, there's enough bulletin board material, right? I mean, not where the system doesn't create it. You know what I mean?

Yeah. I just think it'd be interesting, you know, like a couple of years ago before the playoff field was this big when Florida State lost their quarterback, I could see somebody saying, hey, I don't care that Florida State's the five seed. Let's pick them. I think it'd be really interesting to get some rivalries going and get some intrigue. I think it'd be pretty exciting. Plus, now you're taking it out of a committee's hand.

Interesting. To decide who wins, the teams get to pick their opponents. Well, Sean, I appreciate you joining us with that, with that extra twist. Sean in Cleveland with that. Mike Hoskins, coordinating producer of the Rich Eisen Show and resident hockey aficionado, just told me the Professional Women's Hockey League does this. That's awesome. Actually, Don Bowie told this to Hoskins, Don Bowie, coordinating producer of Women's Sports Now.

So he would know. They already do it. Take it out of the owner's and coach's hands, right? The one seed gets to pick. Fan vote. You don't want us deciding that sort of stuff.

These people put their lives as their profession. You're going to leave it up to fans to actually decide something that's crucially important. Fans vote for All-Stars and all kinds of stuff. All-Stars is one thing.

But the fans are going to vote with what, you know, we want the easiest team. So how about this? How about us celebrating the people who are the guardians of college football getting something right? Can we can we just at least live in that instead of saying, you know what? We're we're still trying to do something better than than than what's already been done that is better. Let's just do that. And let's just focus on the college football community taking what appeared to be something completely dumbass, bass-awkward, right?

And fixing it. Now, the reason why the seeding was the way it was, where it's the conference winners, best conference winners getting the top four seeds and thus a bye week. As opposed to just the four best teams. Doesn't matter. Doesn't matter.

Doesn't matter. They're going to take the four best teams. Doesn't matter if you've won your conference. We're going to take the four best teams. The reason why they did this is to basically strong arm Notre Dame into joining a conference.

Let's be honest. Hey, Notre Dame, you don't want to join one of our conferences. You want to be part of this realignment palooza and you won't get a bye week.

Tough. Then using the fig leaf of it's more important to win your conference. Listen, some conferences under these realignments aren't as good as other conferences. It's just that simple. And I understand this doesn't track with what I'm saying in the NFL that you need to win your division. To be. Seeded high enough to get a home field game in the wild card round and thus the Minnesota Vikings, too bad you lost your division.

You must now go on the road as opposed to you staying at home. Despite having a better record than a division winner, I understand that doesn't track, but it's a different. Situation, as far as I'm concerned, the NFL is different from college football. The second best team in the Big Ten or the SEC is better than a winner of the Big 12.

On average. And last year, that tracked. And I guess what would Ohio State, which was the choice of a photograph of our crack staff in the back. Because they won the national championship, would they still have. They probably still wouldn't have gotten one of the top four spots last year. They still wouldn't have gotten it at two losses, right? They did.

Probably not. I think you're going to have to be a one loss conference. Runner up. Now, the thing is, you just you should get rid of the conference championship games. They're dumb. They're they're unnecessary. They're unnecessary. I'm sorry, you're going to give a team that's one. It's unnecessary. You want to give a team that's second place a shot at first and and a team that's sitting there in third could improve their situation.

And get one of these spots. Get rid of that one extra game that we're already asking these players in collegiate level to play a pro sports. Length of a season. Honestly, remember last year? It's just, you know, Ohio State didn't make it. And Penn State and Oregon played each other. It actually was the benefit of Ohio State and I make it.

Right? Everyone was complaining that Oregon had to play Ohio State second round as opposed to somebody else. Like you figure out who the top seed is and give them the easiest path in terms of what the seeding is. I'm just I kind of dig what they've done.

They did the right thing. Notre Dame should have a shot at having one of those four four spots and and and let's figure out who the top four are. And that's it. I'm looking at last year's rankings before the playoff. Right. And I'm trying to figure out who would have been the top four seed. So Oregon was 13-0. They would have been the one seed anyway.

Right. But Georgia had two losses. Texas, Penn State all had two losses. Notre Dame was 11-1. So they would have been a top four team. Right. Ohio State and Tennessee were 10-2.

Indiana was 11-1. Were you going to give them a top four spot? Unlikely. Right.

I don't know why that's so unlikely. Everybody thought that's what because they thought they were for Gacy because Indiana has never done it before. But they Boise was 12-1, but they got a three seed anyway. So maybe would they have stuck with that? OK. I think Arizona State is the one that would not have gotten the the the week off.

Yeah. Arizona State got it. They were they were the four seed, but they were 11-2. I mean, Ohio State could have been in the running for it, but Indiana would have gotten it. I think the two teams from Indiana would have gotten it along with Oregon. And Boise State. Unless you're going to sit here and say, what, Ohio State's better?

You're really going to sit there and say, Ohio State is better off of losing to a five loss Michigan team and a walk on backup to the backup quarterback. Probably not. But would they have been eight?

I don't think so. They were 10-2 and were eighth. They'd have been higher.

Georgia was the two seed. I think this is an improvement. And the people who run college sports can't see improvement right in front of their face when it's staring at them. So for them to actually do this. But what they did do is they actually kept the finances the same. If you win your conference, you get a boatload more money than the teams that make the college football playoffs that didn't.

So they kept the finances the same, but they changed the seating. Great. Too solid. Well done. Let's just stick with that. We'll take a break. Tom Pellicero is going to join us and I can see him checking in. No hat and clean teeth. Awesome.

That's next. This is the Rich Eisen Show. Eczema isn't always obvious, but it's real. And so is the relief from Evglis. After an initial dosing phase of 16 weeks, about four in 10 people taking Evglis achieved its relief and clear or almost clear skin. And most of those people maintain skin that's still more clear at one year with monthly dosing. Evglis, librachizumab LBKZ, a 250 milligram per two milliliter injection is a prescription medicine used to treat adults and children 12 years of age and older who weigh at least 88 pounds or 40 kilograms with moderate to severe eczema. Also called atopic dermatitis that is not well controlled with prescription therapies used on the skin or topicals or who cannot use topical therapies. Evglis can be used with or without topical corticosteroids. Don't use if you're allergic to Evglis. Allergic reactions can occur that can be severe. Eye problems can occur. Tell your doctor if you have new or worsening eye problems. You should not receive a live vaccine when treated with Evglis. Before starting Evglis, tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection. Searching for real relief?

Ask your doctor about Evglis and visit evglis.lily.com or call 1-800-Lily-Rx or 1-800-545-5979. Hey there travelers, Kaley Cuoco here. Sorry to interrupt your music, great artists, BT dubs, but wouldn't you rather be there to hear it live? With Priceline, you can get out of your dreams and into your dream concert. They've got millions of travel deals to get you to that festival, gig, rave, sound bath or sonic experience you've been dreaming of. Download the Priceline app today and you can save up to 60% off hotels and up to 50% off flights. So don't just dream about that trip, book it with Priceline.

Go to your happy price, Priceline. This episode is brought to you by Amazon Prime. From streaming to shopping, Prime helps you get more out of your passions. So whether you're a fan of true crime or prefer a nail-biting novel from time to time, with services like Prime Video, Amazon Music and Fast Free Delivery, Prime makes it easy to get more out of whatever you're into or getting into.

Visit amazon.com slash prime to learn more. Back here on the Rich Eyes and Show, let's take a phone call. Jimmy in San Antonio, our friend Jimmy. What's up, Jimmy?

Jimmy in San Antonio. What's going on, Jimmy? What's up? What's up, man? Oh, I'm still celebrating. I taught them hot spurs in the Europa League title their first in 41 years and they beat those wankers from Man U. All right.

Great use of wankers, Jimmy. I thought you'd appreciate it. I do.

Anyway, I'm watching the parade. Yes, the lads have had a few pints and thank God nobody brought up the Knicks in that important game in 99 against San Antonio. That was pretty important. I have a question for you, Rich.

Yeah. There's a reason I haven't addressed TJ because I think it's going to upset him. I asked out Colleen Wolf when the ladies took over on that Friday and I said, when in Texas, I would love to dine with you. Is that classier than saying, hey, do you want to go have dinner?

What's wrong, Jimmy? When you say classier, Jimmy, when you say classier, do you mean less creepy? Is that another way of saying it? Just say, is it less creepy to say I'd like to dine with you and let's go have dinner? Yes.

Yeah, it is less creepy. Okay. That sounds like something Dr. Lecter would say. I don't know. Have a friend for dinner.

What'd you like to dine with? I don't like, I don't like Chianti's. Just don't. Just Jimmy, you're, you're, you're, you're strolling on turf.

You don't want to stroll on. That's basically what I'm picking up from the right corner of this room. So I knew, I knew it was going to be sensitive.

That's why I didn't say hi to TJ. So that's all right. Appropriate beef. I respect it. Guys.

It's all good. He bought her a candle. He bought her a candle.

Did you buy the candle or did you just left your candle? Oh my God. That's the answer. You got silence. I heard silence of the lambs.

Speaking of silence. I tried to be a good host, Jimmy. Jimmy in San Antonio.

Thank you, sir. There he goes. There he goes. Tom Pelosero is back on the Rich Eisen Show. My colleague from the NFL network. Fresh back from, well, he didn't even go anywhere.

It was a home game for him with the NFL owners meeting this week. Good to see you, Tom. How are you, sir?

Doing great, Rich. What up to my boys in the studio? Hey, Tommy P. What up, baby? What up, kid? Now, guys, I'm talking to Tom. No texts. I can't promise that, Rich. Well, I already texted Tom.

I did too. I sent him the video early. See, Tom's focused. So I'm not going to bother you. Look at him.

I love your focus. All right, Tom. The tush push was not banned because why?

You need 24 votes to pass. Oh, I know that. You know what I'm saying. You know what I'm asking.

Why do I get the 24? No, I know. But here's how I would explain it here. Over two-thirds of the league voted to ban it. So you have strong support to ban the play.

But the NFL sets a really high bar, which is 24 out of 32, to pass a rule. And so, you know, listen, the Eagles, as I said to Jeffrey Lurie when I saw him walking in with Jason Kelsey, they brought out the big guns for this meeting. And they had an extended presentation.

Jeffrey Lurie spoke at length. Jason Kelsey spoke, you know, showed some plays, explained his perspective on it. But I haven't talked to anyone who was like, boy, I was going to vote to ban it.

And then after listening to those speeches, you know, I decided that I was going to not vote that direction. I mean, the most prevailing sentiment that I heard from owners and team presidents was, I can't believe we're talking this much about a play that is run this little. It came up not because the Eagles are so good at it. But there were certainly teams that I spoke to that were not going to vote in favor of banning the play because part of the logic was, well, if we come up with a play that's really, really good, we don't want that to get scrutinized. We don't want to set the precedent that a really effective play that's within the rules suddenly must be illegal. I spoke to other people who said, hey, we got a really good offensive line. Remember, the Packers' proposal that they tweaked, they controlled the language, not the competition committee. They broadened it to cover all push plays, which was in essence the rule that was on the books from 1920 through 2005. And I talked to people who said, well, we got a really good offensive line.

When our guy's hustling after the play 25 yards downfield and then pushes the pile forward or knocks him, we don't want to get a 10-yard penalty for that because an official who's trailing the play is going, ah, well, I couldn't tell if he blocked a guy or if he hit the runner, so I'm going to throw the flag, which is part of the reason that the rule got taken off the books in 2006, which was it was hard to officiate down the field. I really didn't talk to people who flipped their votes. I talked to a bunch of people beforehand, and the vote count more or less went the direction that it seemed like it was going to.

But this is rare on a couple of levels here at Rich. One, it's rare that a health and safety-related rule on which there was consensus among the competition committee and the various health and safety committees did not end up passing, but it was also the first health and safety-related rule on which there was no injury data. There was no sign that it was a dangerous play. When Jeffrey Lurie is telling the other owners, hey, this is statistically the safest play that's ever been created, that's probably overdoing it. That's like saying if there were 10 flights into an airport and none of them crashed, hey, it's the safest airport that's ever existed.

Run 10,000 more flights, and you'll see exactly how safe it actually is here. But without that additional data, it was a little bit of a harder sell to some people to buy into that. There definitely were people who looked at this as more of a rugby-style play and they just wanted it gone for that reason. There were a bunch of reasons for people to vote to ban the play. But in terms of the teams that ultimately did not vote for it, there were a bunch of different explanations that I heard, and it ended up coming up two votes short of passage. And we'll see now based on the data they collect, injury and otherwise, through the 2025 season, whether this comes up again next March. Well, I mean, in terms of the data you collect, Tom, you and I both watch a ton of football.

We all do here in this room, and anybody in the sound of our voices or watching us on television marveling at your hair, all of us collectively. I don't recall the last time there was a tush push and play was stopped because somebody needed to be carted off or was taken off the field, or the next play if it was stopped or if it wasn't a touchdown or if it was a first down in the middle of the field, and then we're going that the independent neurologist buzzed down. I just don't remember, which leads me to believe the Lions share, even though the Lions were a team that voted to keep the play, the Lions share figuratively of those who are voting to ban it were doing it because they couldn't stop it. That's just the general sense I have. And I'm wondering how many do you feel were voting to get this play out because they couldn't beat it?

Tom? I didn't get the sense that that was a prevailing sentiment. Now, are some of the coaches going, this is BS, this looks like a rugby play, like it's unfair? Because that was one thing that I heard as well, which was, well, offenses already have all these inherent protections. They already have the forward progress rule where, hey, they're stopped, they blow the play dead. If the defense keeps getting pushed back, then that's allowed to happen. There already was kind of an unfairness aspect to that.

My sense of it, though, was, and you go back to March, Rich, when the room was more split, they gained a half dozen or so votes in the past couple of months here. And a big factor in this, even though you're right, there is no injury down, there's no documented acute injuries that have occurred on this play, but what NFL owners heard was that the mechanism was there for injury. There's all kinds of things that they now can find through various studies and the sensors that they have about the biomechanics of plays, about the posture, about what happens when you have 16, 18 men all ducking their necks down, and the amount of additional force and mass that's involved when you're pushing the runner forward. What was emphasized to the competition committee as well as to the owners was this can become a dangerous play, that this is something that could lead to something down the line. So when you end up in that spot and everybody is telling you, hey, this could become a dangerous play, again, that's the reason, Rich, when we've had votes to change the kickoff, which was not particularly popular at the time, when it was let's change the rules on hits on defenseless players, when Ryan Chazier suffers a career-ending neck injury and there are already rules on the books, but you can't spear, you can't put your head down and drive it into somebody, but what did they do?

They rewrote the rule to ban all problem of the helmet contact, and that rule and language has continued to evolve. Usually when you have the competition committee, the league office, and the health and safety committees all saying, this is dangerous, we've got to get it out, usually owners are going to vote in favor of that. And again, 22 out of 32 teams voted in favor, but without that additional actual injury data, plus some of those other football-related considerations that I mentioned, you just didn't get enough teams to say, we're going to vote to take this play out. Nobody is rooting, including the 22 teams that voted to ban it, nobody is rooting for somebody to get hurt on this play, but certainly whatever injury data, if any, comes out of the 2025 season, as well as, is this play run more often, are there variations of it, are there more dangerous variations of it that we see, are there more dangerous ways that teams come to trying to stop it? You remember the commanders last year, they're diving people over the top of the line, and in addition to that, and our Steve Weitz documented this on The Insiders the other night, the commanders, the other part of their strategy was, run around and grab the waist of the pushers, like basically have a guy come off the edge and bear hug somebody, which also clouds the official's vision, it can play eye tricks on people, I mean there's all kinds of things where it's all the additional ramifications and what potentially could come out of that, that's the stuff that the NFL is going to watch, I don't anticipate that the competition committee or the health and safety committee's opinions are going to change about the play this season, but any number of different factors could influence whether this comes up again in a year. That's my last question for you on this before we move on, is in fact the future, the fact that it got so close, and the people who want it out are two votes away, two elbows to twist away, does that mean this comes up in the 2026 owners meeting?

Is that where we can pretty much make book on that, Tom? Well Rich McKay was asked a question along those lines, he said he can't guarantee that it's going to come up again, but he cited all the same factors I did, which was broad consensus among the various committees that the play should be out, the fact that there was a lot of good discussion in the room, and that there were people very staunchly in favor of banning not just this play, but all push plays. It's been an emphasis for the competition committee in recent years, and McKay said it's going to come up again, which is even on downfield plays, which again was the reason that this rule came off the books 20 years ago, and it took a while, but eventually the Eagles found a way within the rules to exploit it. They still want to make an emphasis this year of when you get those scrums down the field. We've all seen them where, Saquon Barkley being a perfect example, where you're five yards down the field, there's three defenders this way, then the offensive line pushes and the play is not getting blown dead.

We want them blowing the whistle. We want that play stopped because, again, those get to be rugby-style plays that potentially somebody could get their ankle tied up under the pile, you could have somebody getting slammed to the ground awkwardly. All these things, horse collar, I mean I can go down the list, Rich, of all the different types of plays that have been banned through the years, but they all have something that this play did not, which was specific acute injury data. That doesn't necessarily mean that this play is safer, like the Eagles argued, because the sample set, the data set, is so small. You're talking about 120 plays last season out of tens of thousands of plays league-wide. The more information you gather, the more the play is run, the more you're going to know. Again, I'd emphasize, nobody wants to see an injury here, but if somebody were to get hurt on this play, that might be the type of thing that tips this over, two more votes next March and the play is gone.

Tom Poisera here on the Rich Eisen Show. What's the back story from your reporting of Brock Purdy finally landing on the number with the Niners that they landed on? So it was around the start of OTA's Rich, the start of the offseason program, which was mid-April, and it sounded like there were real questions of, is Brock Purdy going to be there for the start of the 49ers' offseason program? Around that same time, the sides kind of had come to an understanding. As much as you can make an intellectual argument that as the top quarterback who is anywhere close to the market, Brock Purdy should be at the Dak Prescott type of number, $60 million per year, that it was realistically not going to get there. And there's a bunch of different factors involved in that in terms of the leverage points in particular. Brock Purdy was only due $5.4 million, I believe it was, in the last year of his rookie contract.

The number was only that high because Purdy had hit a bunch of different escalators. When you're negotiating off a number like that, the 49ers could sit there going, this is a player that's never made money because he was the last pick in the draft. He now could be on the books for $5.4 this year. We can tag him again in 2026, tag him again in 2027.

You can go on that way, and you're never going to get back the money that you're losing short-term by not taking the deal now. Dak Prescott was in a similar type of a situation because he was a fourth-round traffic. He ultimately decided to push it all the way. But he had to play out the last year of his contract. He had to play out a tag and get very close to a second tag that the Cowboys actually ended up applying for purposes of buying time to get the paperwork done. You had to take on a lot of different injury risk there.

There's time value of money involved. It worked out for Dak Prescott. You could argue that it worked out for Lamar Jackson, too. But again, he played for like $2.3 million. Lamar did in the fourth year of his rookie contract at a time that if he had an agent, any agent would have said, Dude, you're losing so much money in the short term. You're not going to gain that back no matter what the numbers are at the end. So the 49ers got to their bottom line type of number.

It was within striking distance of all those other quarterbacks that we've seen in recent years here. Then it was just a matter of working out some of the other details in the contract. It was going to be the guarantee structure. It was going to be the cash flow.

And really, Rich, those are the important things. I think that sometimes we get caught up in the average per year, right? Because Dak Prescott's at 60 and people say Josh Allen is at 55. Josh Allen, if you're doing new money average comparisons, is at 100.

There's no way to apples to apples these because everybody are in different types of positions. With Brock Purdy, because he was only doing 5.4 this year, it's hard to shift enough money up to make the numbers look right. But when I say that it's a cash flow system, it is a cash flow league.

In other words, the sooner you can start the clock to get into your next extension, the better off you are. Lamar Jackson still has multiple years left on his deal. If he had signed going into year four, he'd already have a new deal. He'd already be at the end of the extension that he signed with the Ravens. So it made sense, even though it's not the top, top of market deal, for Brock Purdy to go, okay, we are locking this in, we're removing the injury risk, it's $181 million in total guarantees. It's more money than Jared Goff got over, I believe, the first three new years on the contract here. For the 49ers, they can go, if you include the last year of the rookie deal, it's really a $45 million average over six years at a time that the salary cap is going close to 300. This gives the 49ers cost certainty. They could have played the hard road here with Brock Purdy.

They went the opposite direction. They publicly said, this is our guy, we're going to pay him, he's going to be here long term. Now this allows you to go, on average, over six years here, we got him at $45 million per year. That allows us to budget, pay other guys, pay Fred Warner, they had already paid Kittle, revamp things around Brock Purdy. And for Purdy, it's a $53 million new money average, which is what matters when you're comparing these deals. It's a very fair deal for both sides of this and one that leads to the conclusion that everybody wanted, which is Brock Purdy being the 49ers quarterback for years to come.

Lastly, Tom Pellicero. We talk all the time it's a midnight league that nothing really gets done until it's the last minute. It's even a 12-0-1 league one minute after midnight. What is that for the Steelers in terms of Aaron Rodgers? Is it the mandatory minicamps between June 10th and 12th? Obviously, it's not mandatory for people who are free agents, right? But it is something that I'm sure the Steelers would like to get some show on the road here.

It's not. Is it the beginning of training camp? Is it, in fact, the first preseason game? Could it possibly be week one? When is midnight here for the Steelers, in your mind?

Here's the thing, Rich. We've already gotten to what I believe to be the midnight point several times already with Aaron Rodgers. It was the start of the league meetings when things are moving and the Steelers are making decisions and they're having to answer questions about it. Aaron wasn't ready to commit. I thought the start of draft week would make a lot of sense.

It did not end up happening there. So now we're into this kind of weird offseason area where, yes, ideally you'd like Aaron Rodgers to be in for minicamp. Nothing that I've heard makes me believe that the Steelers don't still expect Aaron Rodgers to be there eventually. He's missed some of the offseason program. He's missing OTAs starting next week. Minicamp would be the next logical checkpoint here. I just don't know at what point Mike Tomlin, who has been in touch with Aaron Rodgers and has been the patient one and being willing to, hey, what did he say at the start of the offseason program?

Like, I'm comfortable being uncomfortable. He just isn't putting any type of a deadline on Aaron Rodgers. Again, if you get past minicamp, then you're into another six weeks or so of questions about who the quarterback's going to be and all the players who are away not knowing what the deal is going to be or who's at the top of the depth chart. I would say, if I were guessing, Rich, that the Steelers would have an answer, whether it's right before minicamp or right after minicamp, ideally they'd certainly like Aaron Rodgers to participate in the minicamp and just get a few days' work and the questions and the speculation and let people know, okay, this guy is here. But this is Aaron Rodgers we're talking about.

He is not on anybody else's schedule. And we'll see. Hypothetically, if he doesn't show up for minicamp, do the Steelers pull the plug then? Or do they go, there's not really anywhere other than Kirk Cousins for us to go at this point. We've waited this long. Let's wait it out a little bit longer here. It's really in Aaron Rodgers' hands.

Again, I would say there's nothing that makes me believe that Aaron Rodgers is not going to be a Pittsburgh Steeler, but he is not committed yet and we just have to wait and see and the Steelers have to wait and see exactly when that answer comes. Tom Pelissero, respect for your information, respect also for your Ghost in the Machine Police vinyl over your right shoulder that I've been noticing this entire time. That is some quality old school music and choice of your format to listen. And also your focus, despite whatever these morons were texting you throughout this entire conversation. Hey, I didn't do anything. Maybe let me alone today. Okay, good. Thank you. Maybe let me alone.

He's the outlier, Tom. I apologize for calling you morons. No, you don't. I do. I don't need that. I'm offended. Brockman, no text today.

No, because I told him it's not best for the show and I appreciate them respecting my wishes. Tom, you be well. We'll chat again soon. I'll get you next week, Tom. There you go.

Tom Pelissero, everybody. Yeah, next week, as always. Very good.

I'll send him a text next week. Okay. You know what?

I have two cents on why the tush-push is being discussed so much for a play that's hardly run, right? I've got two cents on that subject matter. And that's next. The selection varies by location. While supplies last. Discount taken at time of purchase.

See sales associate for details. Offer valid 5.15 through 5.28. Roll ball or Lonzo ball for buzz balls. Ready to go cocktails. Take 12. Buzz balls just dropped their biggest blue ball. Script says biggies blue balls, Lonzo. Take 13. Blue balls just dropped their biggest buzz balls. Ugh.

Let's try a vocal exercise. Buzz balls, biggies, blue balls. Buzz balls, biggies, blue balls. Big balls just dropped. Get blue balls this season with buzz balls.

Please read responsibly. Buzz balls available in spirit, wine, and malt. 50% alcohol by volume. Buzz balls, LLC.

Carrollton, Texas. I used to know you when you didn't have what's going on. I didn't have hair. What's going on? I'm back, Mortimer. You and Earl, now, do you think I should do this?

Do you think I should do this? I do. You do?

I do. Rich, it will bring you back like no other. But where am I now, though? When you say bring me back, where am I right now? Where am I? You're not really happy. What? You're enthusiastic, but you're not really happy. You know what I mean? I'm happy with my head.

Zoom in on it. I'm happy with my head right now. I'm happy with life. My hats have been cutting down. They were up to five days a week.

Now I'm at two days a week now because I'm feeling good about Prime right now. I look at myself on social media. It's taken at least nine years off of my life. Nine years? Yes.

She's looking like a young Prime right now, man. I looked at a picture of me on my profile the other day. I didn't know if it was one of my sons or me.

That's the way I am right now, Rich. You know Suze. You know my wife. She's like seeing you on the air, and she goes, huh. She's like, is that Dionne?

I'm like, yeah, that's Dionne. You know what she's really saying? She's really saying, it's almost like a guy. See, we can't do this. You know if your girl starts to pick up a little weight, you really can't say it. You just, you know, like, hey, you want to work out today, baby?

Not true, but we should work. You can't say it. So she's like, is that Dionne? Yeah. And she's just waiting for you to jump in there. It's like double dutching. You just sitting out there, you know.

And she has the ropes, and she's just doing the ropes, and she just keeps looking on you like, come on, baby. Jump in there. Jump in there. Come on.

Rich, you can do this, man. I know I can, but I mean. See, you got a lot to work with on the outsides. This is your expert opinion having, okay.

Yes. See, you have a lot of donor hair. They call it donor hair. I didn't have as much donor hair as you did. But wouldn't it just be jarring for people to see me?

You don't think it was jarring for you? You just got to just go for it. You're brave, Rich. You don't care what people think. Wouldn't I have to take like two weeks off? No.

Come on. How long, how many days do I have to be out of the chair? You wear a hat. You don't have to be out of the chair. I don't wear a hat. I don't wear a hat on this show. But you can. Del Tofo does. You can, Rich.

Oh, but that's not an example. What if I showed up on the show with like a hat for like, okay. Rich, they know what's going on. You tell them this is what's going on.

I just have a rainy day for like three days, five days, and you're back. You're back, Rich. Should I do it? Do it, Rich. Don't do it. Do it. See, don't do it. Rich, do it. You should do it.

Don't do it. All right. Ah, yes, everybody.

YouTube.com slash Rich Eyes and Show. Jake Steinfeld, the founder of the Don't Quit campaign and Body by Jake. Back in the day, we've got some stills from Body by Jake. Back in the day, I've just been informed one of them has D on it. What? Nice. Oh, yeah. Sure. Wow. Ladies and gentlemen, look at that.

Look at Prime. Prime time. Oh, yeah. So, this is amazing. Let's go. This is going to be a lot of fun. Let's go. Hour number three. Coming up. Coming at you. Coming at you, everybody.

So, all of our archives are available for you to check out at YouTube.com slash Rich Eyes and Show. Put the kendo stick down, man. What do you got it there for?

In case I need it. Isn't that an attack posture? Hey, you've got to stay ready.

You never know. That's great. Jimmy. It's aggressive. It is aggressive. Put the kendo stick away.

You know I mean business when I take my glasses off. Uh-oh. I've been thinking about this. Why are we talking about the tush push so much? Why are we so fascinated by this conversation? Even Tom Palacios was saying that members of the membership that he's been speaking of, owners of teams, coaches of teams, observers around him at the owners meeting this past week where they voted to ban it but didn't get enough, got close, two votes shy of banning it. People were saying, why are we talking about a play that hardly has ever run? And the reason why I think this is such a fascinating conversation is because it runs counter to what the NFL is all about to want to ban it because you don't have the ability to stop it. And I think most of us feel that those teams, those 22 teams that voted to stop it did not do it out of concern for pace of play or it looks ugly or there was the commanders made a farce out of it in the NFC championship game by leaping over the line of scrimmage over and over and over again to the point where Son of Hockley had to warn them if you make me pull this car over one more time I'm going to award a touchdown like I can kiddos.

It's not because of any of that, even though some of them may have that intention. I have been told there are some who are the guardians of the game, have been told by members of the medical community who are associated with the game that when when you're trying to gain leverage, when you're trying to get low, too many heads are our helmets are down. You're asking for trouble, health and safety.

You're asking for it. And because those who are in charge have been so informed, if somebody gets hurt, there's a liability issue and this is a situation the league has been in, they have been sued over the concussion issue and spent a lot of money. Now these are different reasons why they might have been liable on that front. I understand there are some who said it's a pace of play thing. It's a health and safety thing. But the general sense of the public is that that's just a fig leaf for teams that feel we can't stop it, so we need to legislate it out. And so we're talking about it because the thing we love about the NFL, one of the many, is that the playing surface is leveled with the salary cap. Everybody plays by those same rules and the teams that win are the ones who are smarter, the ones who are coached better, the ones who are rostered better, the ones who are draft better, the ones who prepare better, the ones who play better, who execute better and have more heart than you, more want to than you.

That's why we win games in the NFL is because we are gonna lace it up, we're gonna pad up, we're gonna helmet it up and we are gonna get that extra inch because we want it more than you. And the teams that can't stop this play saying, we'll just legislate it out, it's the most anti NFL stance I could think of. We can't beat it, so let's call a lawyer and legislate it out. Let's come up with the language and let's finish it off because we can't stand being finished off by it because we haven't figured out how to run it ourselves as well as they can run it and we can't figure out how to stop it, period.

So let's just run to our parents and say, fix this mommy and daddy. That is not the National Football League. The NFL is like, you run that play, we're gonna stop it. We're the league of we don't want you to celebrate, we'll just keep you out of the end zone. That's our stance in the NFL and those who are trying to just legislate it out, it's very counter to that mantra and that's why we're talking about it and we don't like it.

That's what I'm thinking about. And the Philadelphia Eagles, they might have prevailed for the moment and they've got it one more time. Well, you take a look at the teams on their schedule, what's the number of teams on their schedule that voted to keep it or ban it?

What's the number you just told me in my ear, Mike Hoskins? There's only one that voted to keep it on their schedule, the Lions. Everybody else in their schedule said they want it out. I honestly hope. And so they might use that as a badge.

They might use that. I mean, take a look, everybody on their schedule. I hope week one they run only that play for the whole first quarter.

Against the Cowboys. Yeah, it'd be hilarious. Well, I don't think that's gonna get anybody standing to watch football games, but I understand why you could technically run it over and over and over again and get two or three yards and get first downs that way. I guess. I know what you're saying.

It would be so funny, even just the opening drive. Like the first play of the season, right, is definitely gonna be a tush push, yeah? But everybody in their division voted to get it out.

Yeah. Haters. Everybody in their conference voted to get it out on their schedule, except for the Detroit Lions week 11.

The Packers obviously are on their schedule. They're the ones who were the presenters of the proposal. They were the ones who volunteered for or agreed to be the ones to get them to... And again, I understand if there are some in the league office who want it out because they have been told by those who are in the know medically, who they trust, that you're asking for it.

And if they've been so informed, there's a liability issue. And Tom Pelissero said something along the lines of, there's a mechanism for injury in this play. But can you say that about every snap in the National Football League? It's football.

Yes, every play. That's why I'm saying when it comes down to it, if you are trying to get it out because you can't stop it, it is the most anti NFL stance you can come up with. Because this league is built on a bunch of prideful individuals who are smarter than you.

This sport, it's bronze and brains. We can figure out the cap better than you. We can figure out the draft better than you. We can figure out the game plan better than you. We can install it better than you. And we have more talented people who can execute it better than you and want it more than you because we can coach it better than you.

It's not like we got the better lawyers like before. If you work as a manufacturing facilities engineer, installing a new piece of equipment can be as complex as the machinery itself. From prep work to alignment and testing, it's your team's job to put it all together. That's why it's good to have Grainger on your side with industrial grade products and next day delivery, Grainger helps ensure you have everything you need close at hand through every step of the installation. Call 1-800-GRAINGER, click Grainger.com or just stop by. Grainger, for the ones who get it done.