Continuity can be a really good thing

Lost in the discussion over whether this team has improved or not is the fact that this team is going to have less turnover than any Patriots squad since probably the last time we won a championship.

Experience in the system & experience with one's fellow teammates is a very underrated thing. Since 2005 and on, the Patriots have lost very key players in every offseason - whether via FA, trade or retirement: Branch, Givens, Willie Mac, Brusch, Harrison, Vinateiri, Asante, Seymour, Vrabel, etc., etc.

And as has been pointed out in other threads, but worth mentioning here, all of the 2nd and 3rd year players will have gotten that much better.

I will say the wide receiver position is currently a frightening mess, but other than that, I think the re-signings of Wilfork, TBC, Faulk & Bodden is more than just bringing back the team we put on the field last year. It's allowing that team to get a lot better by providing something the Patriots roster has not had in a long time - continuity.

Agreed....

Agreed...I'll be disappointed if the defense doesn't make significant strides next year even with a new (none) DC.

I think a big problem for some folks is that we went 11-5 without Brady and then 10-6 with him, but many fail to realize that was with half the defense consisting of new players/starters.

If this were say a young Jaguars team that went 10-6 with a young defense many folks would be talking about them as an up and coming team in 2010, but because it is the Pats they must be taking a step back.

mgcolby said:

I think a big problem for some folks is that we went 11-5 without Brady and then 10-6 with him, but many fail to realize that was with half the defense consisting of new players/starters.

If this were say a young Jaguars team that went 10-6 with a young defense many folks would be talking about them as an up and coming team in 2010, but because it is the Pats they must be taking a step back.

Click to expand...

And now we're Cha-Cha-ing. :singing:

mgcolby said:

I think a big problem for some folks is that we went 11-5 without Brady and then 10-6 with him, but many fail to realize that was with half the defense consisting of new players/starters.

If this were say a young Jaguars team that went 10-6 with a young defense many folks would be talking about them as an up and coming team in 2010, but because it is the Pats they must be taking a step back.

Click to expand...

Not to mention that Brady was coming back from major knee surgery. It has been said that it really takes two years to completely heal from an ACL injury- one for the physical healing, and one more for the mental healing.

And the turnover was pretty substantial, not just in terms of players acquiring the system or learning their roles, but also in the leadership vacuum that occurred, which I believe led to the bad seeds coming out.

It's not that AD all of a sudden turned into a bad seed- he was kept accountable, and in line by "senior" vets, who are now no longer around.

This is why I think awarding Wilfork a big fat contract was the best thing to do. He is now the big dog on the block, and there is no other player I want in that position, because during our up and down season, he was the most consistent performer. Players respect that and will respect his standards.

This is also why I disagree with all the TBD labels for the upcoming season. I guarantee you, we will perform a lot better than 10-6 because we went back to our core and solidified it, and are building from the inside out. We have leadership now, we have long-term players now. That is much, much better than acquiring a sexy FA. You want to go back to that high-level accountability in the locker room that inspire players to take pride in their craft.

I used to hate Kevin McHale because he played with such a sense of entitlement, arrogance, and ****iness, and he ran down the court with this swagger. He just didn't see how he could not win every time he played. It was a fluke every time he lost, and he thought of every missed shot as an aberration.

But now, many years later, in moments of docile reflection, I have come to realize the importance of this "entitlement attitude" that Mchale had, and that Bruschi, Vrable, McGinest, and the others had. You just cannot be a winner without this sort of perspective, without this sort of attitude.

And a FA will not bring that. An FA is an outsider, and unless he is a superstar (which the Patriots rarely ever bring in) he will not foment this kind of attitude change in the locker room.

I think the Pats core is solid, and we brought back the core players that were essential to this team - Wilfork, TBC, Bodden, Faulk, etc. It's a GOOD start. And we do have continuity.

There are still jigsaw puzzles left to fit in, but I have confidence that BB can get it done. Let's not panic just because the Pats didn't gobble up every big name free agent on the market in the first week of free agency.

CONSISTENCY????
at tight end? (zero returnees)
at wide receiver? (Moss, Edelman, Aiken and Stanbcak are back)
in the from seven? (we need to replace Green, Burgess and Thomas) and hope for some
contribution from Crable)
==============================
We need improvements in the front seven.
We need improvements at WR.
We need improvements at TE.
We needs improvements at RB.
===============================
Consistency as these positions is not a goal, unless 9-7 is a goal.

mgteich said:

CONSISTENCY????
at tight end? (zero returnees)
at wide receiver? (Moss, Edelman, Aiken and Stanbcak are back)
in the from seven? (we need to replace Green, Burgess and Thomas) and hope for some
contribution from Crable)
==============================
We need improvements in the front seven.
We need improvements at WR.
We need improvements at TE.
We needs improvements at RB.
===============================
Consistency as these positions is not a goal, unless 9-7 is a goal.

Click to expand...

Do you even read the posts before you blurt out your opinion?

Where do you think consistency starts?

It has to start with core players, then extend outwards.. how do you have consistency without core players?

Bledsoe11 said:

Agreed...I'll be disappointed if the defense doesn't make significant strides next year even with a new (none) DC.

Click to expand...

Don't expect much

This defense hasn't added one impact player yet and even if we draft the next Lawrence Taylor he won't see much action

I understand that it is good not to lose key players. The reason that is that we have fewer of them.

Should I really celibrate that Bruschi and Seymour and Vrabel and Gaffney and Thomas didn't leave the 2009 squad, but instead left the 2008 squad without replacement?

Patspsycho said:

Do you even read the posts before you blurt out your opinion?

Where do you think consistency starts?

It has to start with core players, then extend outwards.. how do you have consistency without core players?

Click to expand...

mgteich said:

I understand that it is good not to lose key players. The reason that is that we have fewer of them.

Should I really celibrate that Bruschi and Seymour and Vrabel and Gaffney and Thomas didn't leave the 2009 squad, but instead left the 2008 squad without replacement?

Click to expand...

The idea is that we create consistency with core players and then hopefully it spreads to the other positions that we need to fill, by creating a solid locker room and inspiring players to play at their best, on a consistent basis.

I would daresay that if we did not have a leadership vacuum last year, AD would not have acted out the way he did. You just aren't a good seed for a few years (even if underperforming) then all of a sudden, in one year, turn into a bad seed.

So my point is that by creating solid consistency with the core players, we are creating a situation where incoming players, whether FA or drafted, will be inspired or coerced indirectly to become consistent performers.

II Jangles II said:

Don't expect much

This defense hasn't added one impact player yet and even if we draft the next Lawrence Taylor he won't see much action

Click to expand...

With the exception of Peppers, who isn't worth $91 million, who should the Pats have gone after for defensive help? KVB is always injured and hasn't been good since 07, and the reason Kampmann was a FA was because he couldn't play in the 3-4. The only guy I want them to look at is Greg Ellis.

With all our contributors brought back, a deep draft class coming up, and Belichick taking the bull by the horns on D, I expect big things in 2010.

mgteich said:

I understand that it is good not to lose key players. The reason that is that we have fewer of them.

Should I really celibrate that Bruschi and Seymour and Vrabel and Gaffney and Thomas didn't leave the 2009 squad, but instead left the 2008 squad without replacement?

Click to expand...

The premise is more or less that the development of young players will outpace the decline or departure of older ones because:

• There are fewer older ones left
• Some of the youngsters are pretty talented

(Ditto for guys who joined as FAs and are still in their prime, except that I can't think of many relevant examples of those.)

On defense that seems pretty reasonable, especiallly at DB and LB. On offense I'm not so sure.

Koppen, Neal, and Kaczur, whether due to injuries and/or having been a bit underpowered in the first place, seem to be aging early as OL go, which is to say normally by the standards of other positions. (Kaczur started out a bit older too.) I'm not as sure as some that Light is declining, but he might be. And Vollmer can only replace one of those guys.

We don't know how well Welker will perform or age after returning from his injury. Otherwise, the receivers as a group are aging, not yet proven to be more than JAGs, or not yet on the roster. Brady and the most capable RBs aren't spring chickens either.

They can get continuity when the draft better. When they draft better, you won't see such a huge turnover of players like we've seen in the past two years. The 2006 and 2008 draft has really bit them in the a**. I could even argue that the 2009 draft was bad, but at least most of them played.

Continuity is a good thing the old core on defense. for most of the SB's was ty law, seymour, teddy b. vrabel, harrison,



the new core is now bodden, wilfork, mayo, TBC. Meriweather, all but TBC are under 30. so they have a good core of guys to build around. for the next few years.

I would certainly add Warren to this list of the core defense. Adding two to the front seven (plus the possible emergerce of Butler) will indeed make the defense a solid defense through 2011 and beyond (the safeties are only here until 2011).

The bottom line is that the tranformation of defense is almost complete. Obviously the kids are still developing, but IMHO 2009 was a pretty reasonable year for the defense.
==============================================

The offensive continuity and leadership is there at QB and on the offensive line.

patsfan-1982 said:

the new core is now bodden, wilfork, mayo, TBC. Meriweather, all but TBC are under 30. so they have a good core of guys to build around. for the next few years.

Click to expand...

mgteich said:

I would certainly add Warren to this list of the core defense. Adding two to the front seven (plus the possible emergerce of Butler) will indeed make the defense a solid defense through 2011 and beyond (the safeties are only here until 2011).

The bottom line is that the tranformation of defense is almost complete. Obviously the kids are still developing, but IMHO 2009 was a pretty reasonable year for the defense.
==============================================

The offensive continuity and leadership is there at QB and on the offensive line.

Click to expand...

i agree there is a lot to work with on both sides of the ball they are not there yet but they are working on it.

I haven't got any complaints yet. I'm saving up my questions for after the draft.

respects,