Will the Pats always have an aging D

[R_T26]

Or years especially around draft time we here about the pats aging d and people still say it. Most of the starters are under 30. I really wish people would do some research.

 

[Buchanty]

Sadly it is true that the Pats D is aging, so is the O and ST. But then again even the youngest teams in the NFL are aging as well - unfortunately that's life

I guess it's the expiry dates we should worry about! And with BB's tendency to choose experienced veteran FA's this epithet will always be used during his tenure.

 

[mayoclinic]

I think that it will take time for the media misperception about our D to catch up to reality. But we will always have a mix of veterans and youth. I could see us bringing in Jason Taylor, and Adalius Thomas is over 30. People would focus on them even if the core of the defense was much younger.

There is, however, some truth to the perception that slowing by Bruschi and Harrison hurt us over the past few years since our SB in 2004. I think that is being remedied at last.

 

[Rob0729]

The thing is if you look at a team like the Steelers, their defense is much older with six starters who are 30 or older (Keisel, Harrison, Aaron Smith, Casey Hampton, Farrior, and DeShea Townsend) and two starters will be 29 when the season starts (Foote and Ike Taylor) . Yet, I have never heard them called an aging defense and they are much older than the Pats.

 

[Deus Irae]

The thing is if you look at a team like the Steelers, their defense is much older with six starters who are 30 or older (Keisel, Harrison, Aaron Smith, Casey Hampton, Farrior, and DeShea Townsend) and two starters will be 29 when the season starts (Foote and Ike Taylor) . Yet, I have never heard them called an aging defense and they are much older than the Pats.

The style difference really makes people misunderstand the situations.

 

[Rob0729]

The style difference really makes people misunderstand the situations.

I think it is more reputation. The Pats seem to go after older players in free agency. So they are always perceived as older. Most of the Steelers players who are older are either homegrown talent or signed when they were young players so people don't focus on their age.

The funny thing is there were people who questioned when the Pats signed AD to a contract whether you should give that type of contract to a 30 year old LB (not a lot, but there were some out there), but I didn't hear the same questions about James Harrison who is the same age as AD when he signed with the Pats.

 

[Rob0729]

I think that it will take time for the media misperception about our D to catch up to reality. But we will always have a mix of veterans and youth. I could see us bringing in Jason Taylor, and Adalius Thomas is over 30. People would focus on them even if the core of the defense was much younger.

There is, however, some truth to the perception that slowing by Bruschi and Harrison hurt us over the past few years since our SB in 2004. I think that is being remedied at last.

Should have read your post before I posted my last post. We both said about the same thing.

 

[Deus Irae]

I think it is more reputation. The Pats seem to go after older players in free agency. So they are always perceived as older. Most of the Steelers players who are older are either homegrown talent or signed when they were young players so people don't focus on their age.

The funny thing is there were people who questioned when the Pats signed AD to a contract whether you should give that type of contract to a 30 year old LB (not a lot, but there were some out there), but I didn't hear the same questions about James Harrison who is the same age as AD when he signed with the Pats.

Yes, part of it is reputation. But, part of it is how the linebackers play. In Pittsburgh, the linebackers fly around like a bunch of idiots while just trying to cause havoc (Oddly enough, I don't mean this in a bad way). In New England, the linebackers are much more of a read-and-react group. Part of it is that Bruschi has been limited since the stroke, and hasn't been the punishing, blitzing, insane force that he was prior to it. In this defense, if you don't get blitzing from the ILBs, the team looks a lot slower. That's why they still seemed slow last season, even with Mayo and Guyton on the field. Once Thomas went down and teams could focus on Vrabel, it looked even worse because nobody could step up and pressure the quarterback anymore.

 

[Rob0729]

Yes, part of it is reputation. But, part of it is how the linebackers play. In Pittsburgh, the linebackers fly around like a bunch of idiots while just trying to cause havoc (Oddly enough, I don't mean this in a bad way). In New England, the linebackers are much more of a read-and-react group. Part of it is that Bruschi has been limited since the stroke, and hasn't been the punishing, blitzing, insane force that he was prior to it. In this defense, if you don't get blitzing from the ILBs, the team looks a lot slower. That's why they still seemed slow last season, even with Mayo and Guyton on the field. Once Thomas went down and teams could focus on Vrabel, it looked even worse because nobody could step up and pressure the quarterback anymore.

You see I personally think the Steelers defense would make age more of an issue because they use physical attributes over brains more than the Patriots.

 

[Deus Irae]

You see I personally think the Steelers defense would make age more of an issue because they use physical attributes over brains more than the Patriots.

Quickness is generally lost before straight-line speed.

 

[PATRIOTSFANINPA]

Once Harrison and Bruschi are gone - Which should be either this year or next,I think the aging Pats defense which is media based talk,will slide away.

When you are a 3 time SB champion and you have failed to win another one in a few years,the media grabs ahold of those players still left on the team from the SB glory days and focuses on 'old' players still around.

 

[dhamz]

Bruschi, Harrison, Vrabel, and Seau would probably have been the top 4 responses if you asked fans/media around the country to name one player on the Pats D at the end of either of the past 2 years.

That is why the D is percieved to be older than it really is.

 

[BionicPatriot]

There WERE truths to that, probably around 05-06 more than anything, IMO anyway.

I think we're getting a lot younger, add to the fact Seau is done, vrabel is gone, Harrison's days of being anything close to a starter are over. Youth has come.

 

[Synovia]

Once Harrison and Bruschi are gone - Which should be either this year or next,I think the aging Pats defense which is media based talk,will slide away.

I don't. They're already one of the youngest defences in the NFL. Sports writers have no interest in the truth.

 

[spacecrime]

Quickness is generally lost before straight-line speed.

It is? I think the opposite is true. Straight-line speed is highly fine tuned and the difference between elite and lumbering isn't that great. In the 40, a difference of 2/10ths of second is the difference between having it and losing it.

It doesn't take much to lose a step.

On the other hand, quickness is more intuitive, your body working even before you cognate (if that's a word) what you want your body to do. That's why guys like O.T.I.S.,Law, Harrison, Milloy, etc etc could be so effective even after they lost their straight line speed. They still had their quickness.

 

[AzPatsFan]

The people over thirty on this Defense are Bruschi, a part time player now, AD a starter at 32. Shawn Springs a newcomer and probable starter at 34. And that is one starter, one probable starter, and a part timer, who may not even make the team. If the Pats draft two LBs, there is no room at the Inn. This Defense is young, fast, very big, and only entering its Prime.

Belichick retooled the Offense after 2006, into the Number 1 Offense in 2007, and has bolstered it since. He has re-built the Defense now. It finished in the Top Ten and Top Eight in Points Allowed, the only stat that matters. Now for the finishing touches. Time for Dynasty Version 2.0.

How do you spell Patriots? J-U-G-G-E-R-N-A-U-T.:beatingcoming:

 

[RayClay]

Our defense was always a mix except for the linebackers.

They weren't aging, they were old. We started a rookie last year and gave away Vrabel this year. We need to replace 3 starters, because Thomas will be ready to go by the time we replace the third.

Why does everyone keep trying to calculate young linemen or dbs into an average so they can say "no old linebackers here".

Fact is, letting the linebacker squad get old with no viable replacements cost us some big games on the last few years, as our LB play was sluggish late season.

 

[RayClay]

I loved having an almost 40 year old Seau with his energy, there really is no age limit for someone who can help. Notice we began to transition into a new safety unit a few years ago, so we aren't rolling the dice with rookies if Harrison does retire.

The problem is letting all players at a position get old without bringing up starter quality talent behind them. Hopefully, future LB replacements will be rookies of the year, but that's a pretty risky bet.

George Allen (skins) did very well by acquiring veterans and eschewing young players. It's a risky business, though. Great when you pick up a Vrabel, pretty bad when your plans are built on a Beisel. The draft is the well of talent, but you might need a few years and veteran mentors to develop it, which is why I hope we started the retooling in time.

 

[Synovia]

T It finished in the Top Ten and Top Eight in Points Allowed, the only stat that matters. Now for the finishing touches. Time for Dynasty Version 2.0.

This isn't baseball. Points allowed is as much a function of the offense as it is the defence. Field position matters.

Their defense wasn't great last year, but looked much better at the end of the year. That being said, the idea that they're old is crazy.

 

[shakadave]

Or years especially around draft time we here about the pats aging d and people still say it. Most of the starters are under 30. I really wish people would do some research.

Your point is that we don't have an aging D, but I think your thread title unintentionally raised a profound question: Does the complicated Belichick defense ensure that we will always need an older D to execute it properly?