How long can Patriots Organization keep this up - New England Patriots Forums

thesoxwin · 01-23-2008, 06:03 AM

How long can Pats keep this "winning" stuff up? We have all seen it before, with San Francisco, The Bears, Dallas. Don't tell me it's not in the back of everyones mind. The Pats have a championship team now, but how long does it last? Our guys are not getting any younger, thats for sure. I say we need to sign BB to a "LIFETIME" contract, so when he's done coaching, he at the very least, moves to the front office. It's not like baseball where we have young talent in the organization, waiting to break through.

It may be a little early to talk like this, because I figure we have about 4-5 good years left, as long as the "Core" players stay healthy and actually remain here. But I figure I'd throw it out there.

RPMCanes · 01-23-2008, 07:16 AM

Make sure that BB and Scott Pioli stay with the Pats for life.

Sivy · 01-23-2008, 07:26 AM

Tom Brady...

naclone · 01-23-2008, 07:37 AM

there's no reason it has to end any time soon. the pats FO is smart with the cap and never mortgage the future for winning now. they are able to attract free agents willing to play for less in order to get a chance to win, yet they don't rely heavily on mercenaries who walk as soon as they get a ring.

the whole organization is fundamentally built around the philosophy of sustaining success year-in and year-out rather than most franchises who try to "cycle" success every 7-10 years.

If they continue to draft well and attract free agents who want to be a part of what they are doing, it can certainly last as long as BB, Pioli and Brady are in the picture. And that realistically could be another 8 years.

#12 will go down as the best ever. of that, there is no doubt. but that doesn't mean the good times have to end when he is gone. and if it does, well, what could we possibly have to complain about? (actually, i'm sure we'll think of something)

Edit: as for the "core" of the team getting older, there is a pretty solid young core in place too. plus, look at what BB did in 2001 - completely blew up the team bringing in 35 free agents or whatever (mostly scrubs and castoffs) and won a super bowl. We may never again see the dominant teams we had this year and in 2004, but i'd like to think we'd always have a chance to compete so long as Belichick is on the sidelines.

***shmessy*** · 01-23-2008, 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thesoxwin

How long can Pats keep this "winning" stuff up? We have all seen it before, with San Francisco, The Bears, Dallas. Don't tell me it's not in the back of everyones mind. The Pats have a championship team now, but how long does it last? Our guys are not getting any younger, thats for sure. I say we need to sign BB to a "LIFETIME" contract, so when he's done coaching, he at the very least, moves to the front office. It's not like baseball where we have young talent in the organization, waiting to break through.

It may be a little early to talk like this, because I figure we have about 4-5 good years left, as long as the "Core" players stay healthy and actually remain here. But I figure I'd throw it out there.

MLB is fundamentally different than the NFL. Three or four teams can outspend evryone else and dominate for decades. It's not really a competition. Add in the preposterously strong players union which still fights tooth and dagger for the right to use sterroids and you have a joke of a league.

There's no mystery why the United States of America doesn't watch baseball on TV anymore.

spacecrime · 01-23-2008, 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thesoxwin

how long does it last? Our guys are not getting any younger, thats for sure.

I figure we have about 4-5 good years left, as long as the "Core" players stay healthy and actually remain here.

Everyone's guys are getting older, but that has no bearing on how long a dominance lasts. Just how many Patriots were in SB XXXVI that will also be in XLII?

I'm guessing less than a ten. Probably closer to 5.

Brady
Light
Brown
Bruschi
Seymour

anyone else?

See, you have it backwards. As long as there are old guys on the team to provide continuity, the "team" continues. When too much new "young" blood is brought in, the team goes south and suddenly is in a re-building year.

BradfordPatsFan · 01-23-2008, 07:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thesoxwin

It's not like baseball where we have young talent in the organization, waiting to break through.

I disagree with that to a point. There is young talent on the at running back and in the defensive backfield. Yes the LB's are getting older but the DL is at its prime age as are the wr's and much of the line is experienced, yet young.

This team will restock through the draft each year as it has done in the past. Each year some of that young talent will take on more important roles than in the previous year. The new picks will bide their time and learn the program, unless they are either can't miss players (Seymour) or in a "need" position as a player such as Matt Light was in 2001. Look at what James Sanders has done over the last few years. He is a young player who played behind Rodney, Geno, and others. He played on special teams and worked his tail off to learn the system. As players got hurt and/or were released, he moved up the depth chart. He is now a starting safety.

thesoxwin · 01-23-2008, 07:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shmessy

There's no mystery why the United States of America doesn't watch baseball on TV anymore.

I can forget the steroid comment...there is steroids in every sport. Baseball is at least "trying" to deal with it. But the USA doesnt watch baseball on tv anymore......c'mon even you don't believe that.

Truck · 01-23-2008, 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by naclone

#12 will go down as the best ever. of that, there is no doubt. but that doesn't mean the good times have to end when he is gone. and if it does, well, what could we possibly have to complain about? (actually, i'm sure we'll think of something)

Edit: as for the "core" of the team getting older, there is a pretty solid young core in place too. plus, look at what BB did in 2001 - completely blew up the team bringing in 35 free agents or whatever (mostly scrubs and castoffs) and won a super bowl. We may never again see the dominant teams we had this year and in 2004, but i'd like to think we'd always have a chance to compete so long as Belichick is on the sidelines.

I agree with all of what you said. when 12 leaves there'll be a hit in terms of offense, but in 2001 & 3 we won with great defense and 'mistake free but not playmaking' offense.
I'm sure BB can find and coach another qb to play at brady 2001 level (although i doubt he'll find someone to play at a brady 2007 level)

Bottom line:
We'll continue to have a team thats always one of the top 3 teams as long as Brady & BB are here.
If one of them is here, we'll probably have a playoff team, with an outside shot at sb.
Once Brady & BB are gone, expect us reverting back to the average (kinda like this team post parcells).

Of course we could get lucky and have Josh Mcdaniels learn everything there is to know from BB and become a great HC for us in 5 years, Scott Pioli stays on forever (as some GMs do in various sports), we draft another probowl qb, and BB & Brady move into part time roles of helping us recruit free agents.

aluminum seats · 01-23-2008, 07:59 AM

My feeling has always been--every time one of those "Belichick and/or Pioli are going to go to X, it's their dream job....." is that the reason that's stupid is that these guys know they're in the ideal situation, building something long-lasting and historic. I think they will stay throughout Brady's career.

When Brady retires, this "era" will end, and I suspect Belichick will want to retire (at least for a couple years) too, and maybe Pioli will look for a new challenge (although perhaps not). My hope is that part of the planning of this team will be the process of grooming a new coach--BB essentially picking and preparing his replacement. And of course you have to have the QB.