Have the Patriots ever started a D this young? - Page 4 - New England Patriots Forums

tajapandu · 09-04-2010, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KontradictioN

I'm part of this group. I started following them when Parcells first took over. Though I was very young at the time.

why the avatar change? i always enjoyed reading your posts as if Notorious B.I.G was rapping them.

although, i guess this could be equally entertaining....

TheGodInAGreyHoodie · 09-04-2010, 02:39 PM

Use to be that everyone whined out defense was too old and the team went 18-1.

Now everyone is whining the defense is too young.

I agree with Goldilocks...this team is just right.

plk · 09-04-2010, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by betterthanthealternative

Which illustrates why Parcels had to be fired in NE. Kraft was catching on about building a team for the long term, to have year over year shot at a SB win. Oddly, one of his models was the Cowboys.

Parcels was looking out for his legacy and wanted another SB win with another franchise to cement himself as a great coach. This reshaped his personnel philosophy, and he was willing to give up a lot long term for short term gain.

The Cowboys lost the thread on long term, and started going for big-ego, flash in the pan success. Dez Bryant is the latest example. Parcels was all too happy to go there and take a short term shot at success. And both failed then, and continue to fail - no SB win, which is the only measure of success for both.

Meanwhile, the Krafts succeeded wildly.

I am surprised that you did not mention Terry Glenn to bolster your argument of Kraft building for the long term. That pick is certainly a very strong example of your point.

***gomezcat*** · 09-04-2010, 03:17 PM

I'm a big fan of what BB is doing, which is all about long-term thinking. I think this D will be OK this year- not great, but in the top half. However, I think the likes of Cunningham, Spikes, Mayo and the DBs will get better and better. The results of that will be seen, I think, in 2-3 years' time. If there is a missing part to the puzzle for the longer term, it's the need for a DL to replace Seymour and possibly another DL to help collapse the pocket on passing downs.

The short term future of the NFL seems to be more passing, so the D needs to get faster and better at putting pressure on the QB. Having said that, it would be stupid to throw the baby out with the bathwater and neglect run D too much; all the pass rushers in the world don't help if it's 3rd and 2..