Julian Edelman was left in an awkward situation during a live TV broadcast when the former New England Patriots wide receiver struggled to work out some simple arithmetic concerning Caleb Williams’ numbers.
On Sunday during Fox’s pregame coverage of the Bills vs. Bears preseason matchup, Edelman – the retired NFL icon who is now a seasoned analyst – struggled to convey what he intended: how frequently Chicago quarterback Williams was sacked in 2024.
Attempting to highlight Williams’s vulnerability behind a shaky offensive line, Edelman stuttered through a basic calculation.
“I’m not a math guy, what’s 2-70?” Edelman asked, clearly lost. His co-host, Curt Menefee, tried to salvage the moment: “I think you mean 70-2?”
Edelman responded with a mixture of confusion and confidence, “Same thing,” before eventually revealing, “That’s 68, Curt. 68 times he was sacked last year. So, I expect Caleb Williams to go out there and get hit less.”
The exchange quickly circulated on social media, capturing the chilly chemistry that unfolded between math and football analysis.
When numbers meet analysis
Edelman’s struggle brings to light a broader challenge facing former athletes transitioning to live television. They’re expected to convert insights into crisp, accurate commentary-often on live broadcast with no safety net.
While Edelman’s overall point was clear-Williams must avoid pressure and sacks if he’s to progress-the math slip added an unintended “highlight” to the segment. Beyond the awkward “2-70” query, the segment underscored just how critical on-air fluency remains.
Despite the hiccup, Edelman recovered quickly and moved the conversation forward. His point remains relevant: Williams, the top draft pick in 2024, must show tangible improvement in pocket awareness-especially given how sacks affected the Bears last season.
Theoretically, Williams being taken down 68 times in his first NFL season illustrates how vital pass protection and decision-making will be heading into 2025.
Edelman shows his human side
In fact, interventions like this moment of levity may humanize the analyst-audience dynamic. Viewers saw a pro struggling with something as simple as subtraction-something relatable-and then pivoting to a clear conclusion. This is part of the live TV charm, and Edelman’s authenticity may even win him goodwill.
Edelman’s brief stumble may be fodder for late-night social placement, but it also serves as a reminder: in live television, the facts must align with the delivery.
For analysts, preparation must include being equipped not just with insights, but also with numerical fluency that translates under pressure.
As for Caleb Williams, he remains in the spotlight-coached and critiqued, measured down to the single sack. If he can reduce that number in 2025, it might just be Edelman who owes him the next math lesson.
Read the full article here
