How much better—or worse—is each NFC team after the first wave of free agency?

Summary of How much better—or worse—is each NFC team after the first wave of free agency?

by The Athletic

1h 18m•March 17, 2026
Listen to Episode

Overview of How much better—or worse—is each NFC team after the first wave of free agency?

This episode of The Athletic Football Show (hosts Robert Mays, Derek, Dave) runs through all 16 NFC rosters after the first wave of free agency and judges—purely from a roster standpoint—whether each team is meaningfully better, worse, or essentially the same than they were 10 days earlier. The hosts weigh major signings, departures, draft capital, age, and roster construction while repeatedly noting that quarterback and young-player development remain huge wildcards that this exercise does not (and cannot) bake in.

Method & caveats

  • The question is restricted to roster construction as of early free agency (i.e., March), not projected quarterback/talent development or future draft outcomes.
  • Teams were discussed in order of money spent (most to least).
  • Focus on guaranteed money and clear positional impacts (edge, OL, CB, WR, QB depth, etc.).
  • Many verdicts are nuanced — “better” often means marginally or in specific phases (e.g., defense), not a clear jump to contender status.

Team-by-team summary

Washington Commanders — Verdict: Better (defense clearly improved; offense still shaky)

  • Key moves: Large defensive spending (Odafe Oweh), additions at pass rush and LB (Nick Cross, Amik Robertson), minimal offensive upgrades (tight end Chico Conqua).
  • Impact: Defense younger, more athletic, better pressure potential; offense still thin at WR (McLaurin, Traylon Burks, Luke McCaffrey as top three).
  • Takeaway: Roster is measurably better, but Washington arguably should have used cap to land a high-impact receiver.

Carolina Panthers — Verdict: Better (not dramatically higher ceiling; defense much improved)

  • Key moves: Jalen Phillips, Devin Lloyd (LB), Rasheed Walker, Luke Fortner.
  • Impact: Defense upgraded at two major needs; offensive line depth improved. Overall looks more well-rounded; Bryce Young’s development still limits ceiling.
  • Takeaway: Clear defensive upgrade; team moves from roller‑coaster to more consistent/competitive.

New Orleans Saints — Verdict: Slightly better / normalcy regained

  • Key moves: David Edwards (OL), Travis Etienne? (discussion focused on Edwards/Caden Ellis signings and losses like Demario Davis/Alante Taylor).
  • Impact: OL upside could be high (Edwards), DB room young and promising; losses on defense (veteran LB/CB) but compensated by youth and draft capital.
  • Takeaway: They feel like a “normal” NFL franchise again with sensible signings and draft capital to address remaining holes.

New York Giants — Verdict: Neutral→Slightly worse (short-term); long-term foundation laid

  • Key moves: Wondell Robinson left, replaced with Darnell Mooney/Calvin Austin; Tremaine Edmunds addition; Greg Newsome at CB; Isaiah Likely (TE).
  • Impact: On-paper depth/price moves may be small downgrades (WR/CB), but many are cheap stopgaps and culture/coach-driven foundational pieces.
  • Takeaway: Possibly worse in the immediate term, but roster-building choices align with a longer-term John Harbaugh plan and more draft capital to come.

Chicago Bears — Verdict: Slightly worse / neutral

  • Key moves: Garrett Bradbury at center (replacement for retired Drew Dalman), Jedrick Wills, retained Braxton Jones, added Kobe Bryant in secondary.
  • Impact: Net roster change small; solved a scrambling OL situation reasonably. Offseason felt like good contingency management.
  • Takeaway: Small decline from end of season, but still well positioned with draft capital.

Los Angeles Rams — Verdict: Significantly better

  • Key moves: Trent McDuffie (trade), Jalen Watson, Cam Curl re-signed.
  • Impact: Secondary fixed; spent big to turn a glaring weakness into a strength.
  • Takeaway: Clear, meaningful improvement — immediate title-aspirational roster moves.

Arizona Cardinals — Verdict: Significantly worse (intentional rebuild)

  • Key moves: Cut ties with Kyler Murray era; Gardner Minshew, Isaac Seumalo, Kendrick Bourne add depth/competition.
  • Impact: Roster farther from contending; accumulating draft capital and resets foundation for rebuild.
  • Takeaway: Tank/rebuild mode—worse now but positioned to collect top picks.

Seattle Seahawks — Verdict: Slightly worse (by design/attrition; prudently managed)

  • Key moves: Let Kenneth Walker, Boye Mafe et al. walk; re-signed Rashid Shaheed; signed Emmanuel Wilson.
  • Impact: Lost key contributors but kept cap flexibility. Only four draft picks this year — need to restock via other means.
  • Takeaway: Natural post-championship attrition; worse on paper but not disastrous if they leverage cap/picks later.

Tampa Bay Buccaneers — Verdict: Slightly worse / muddled strategy

  • Key moves: Lost Mike Evans; added Alex Anzalone, Akeem Robinson, Al‑Qudaim Muhammad; kept a draft-and-develop posture.
  • Impact: Offensive weaponry reduced (Evans gone), defense added depth but not big difference-makers. Organizational approach feels “tread water.”
  • Takeaway: Unclear long-term plan; looks like a club prioritizing in-house development over aggressive short-term upgrades.

Dallas Cowboys — Verdict: Better (defense improved; offense largely steady)

  • Key moves: Jalen Thompson, Kobe Durant, Rashan Gary; traded Osa Odighizuwa away.
  • Impact: Added secondary/edge help — important given historically poor defense. Offense unchanged (and already high-caliber).
  • Takeaway: Better, but still a few defensive pieces short of full turnaround; draft could finish the job.

San Francisco 49ers — Verdict: Way better on paper

  • Key moves: Traded for Osa Odighizuwa, added Mike Evans, re-signed core vets (Dre Greenlaw, Dre Tonjes, etc.), Christian Kirk later (one-year).
  • Impact: Replenishing a defense and adding veteran WR depth; returning injured stars (Warner, Bosa, Williams) boosts expectations.
  • Takeaway: Major paper upgrade — health and how the older veteran one-year deals age will determine final outcome.

Atlanta Falcons — Verdict: Not better; holding pattern for 2027

  • Key moves: Limited upgrades; noticeable cap planning for 2027.
  • Impact: Team appears content to tread water and preserve massive 2027 cap space. Year seen as evaluation season.
  • Takeaway: Intentional non-aggression; not a better roster but aligns with longer-term financial/draft plan.

Detroit Lions — Verdict: Slightly worse

  • Key moves: Lost Taylor Decker (cut), David Montgomery departed; added Cade Mays (OL), Roger McCreary, Christian Izzard.
  • Impact: Lost run-game starter and veteran OL; some secondary help but overall depth gaps (edge) remain.
  • Takeaway: Roster thinner in key spots; injuries/question marks to Brian Branch and Kirby Joseph amplify concerns.

Minnesota Vikings — Verdict: Better (chiefly because they added a veteran QB)

  • Key moves: Acquired JJ McCarthy? (discussion implies they added a playable veteran QB or fixed QB situation; context: trading for a better QB than去年).
  • Impact: Upgrading quarterback is a big lift even amid notable departures (Jonathan Allen, Ryan Kelly, others).
  • Takeaway: Despite attrition, stabilizing the QB spot is a meaningful net improvement.

Green Bay Packers — Verdict: Slightly worse (but weatherable)

  • Key moves: Lost Quay Walker, Rashan Gary, Romeo Doubs, Nate Hobbs; added Zaire Franklin, drafted Matthew Golden; retained some depth pieces.
  • Impact: Big-name losses but many have plausible internal/draft replacements; Micah Parsons / Tucker Kraft health/status remains the bigger swing factor (hosts used other marquee recovery examples).
  • Takeaway: Roster weaker on paper but not catastrophically so; a couple healths/rookie ascents could swing perception.

Philadelphia Eagles — Verdict: Slightly worse but manageable

  • Key moves: Lost Jalen Phillips, N’Kobe Dean; added Tariq Woolen, Jalen Reagor? (or similar depth) and youth-steep reinforcements like Jihad Campbell, Andrew Makuba.
  • Impact: Lost a higher-tier edge but added flexible depth and retained draft compensations; Eagles’ depth/drafting means they can replace/upkeep talent.
  • Takeaway: Small roster decline but an organizational ability to fix holes quickly makes it non-threatening.

Notable quotes & succinct takeaways

  • “They are a better team defensively, but the offense still terrifies me.” — On Washington.
  • “The Rams are significantly better. They actually have a secondary now.” — On Los Angeles.
  • “Arizona: you started building a house and realized the foundation was screwed — gut it and rebuild.” — On the Cardinals.
  • “The Saints just feel normal now. That alone is worth celebrating.” — On New Orleans.

Cross-cutting trends observed

  • Many successful teams accepted marginal roster decline (one-year deals, letting veterans walk) to preserve cap flexibility and draft capital.
  • Draft-and-develop organizations (Bucs, Falcons, Packers, Cowboys to some degree) often favoured cheaper stopgaps over splashy signings.
  • Health and quarterback performance remain the primary wildcards: a young QB’s step forward or a veteran’s recovery could change these March assessments dramatically.
  • One-year veteran additions are common — teams are balancing short-term wins with maintaining future flexibility.

What to watch next (action items / indicators that will change these evaluations)

  • Draft outcomes: How teams use top-10 and mid-first-round picks (receiver, edge, OL priorities) will materially shift roster grades.
  • Health updates: QBs (Jackson Dart, Jaden Daniels), injured playmakers, and veteran return-to-play timelines.
  • Any late free-agent splashes or trades (edge rushers and starting receivers were repeatedly cited as game-changing additions).
  • How one-year veteran signings age and whether teams flip them for draft assets at the deadline.

Summary: After the first wave of free agency the NFC is littered with incremental moves: a handful of teams look clearly improved (Rams, 49ers, Panthers defensively, Commanders defensively), several are marginally worse or neutral (Bears, Giants, Seahawks, Bucs, Packers, Eagles), and a few have intentionally reset (Cardinals, Falcons). Much remains draft-dependent and health-dependent, so these March roster grades are a snapshot rather than destiny.