Patriots have the second oldest offensive line in the NFL

[spacecrime]

With all the talk that we should have taken Dez and that he will be a star for Dallas will mean that Dallas's old OL better give Romo time to find him or it won't matter how much talent he has.

Did you even read the article you linked? You are acting like an old oline cannot block as well as a young oline.

Read the article as see what good it does to get younger at Oline.

Here are the five youngest Olines in the league in order of age according the the article you linked:

1. 49ers
2 Broncos
3. Rams
4. Panthers
5 Texans

How many of those young olines were in the playoffs?

Becasue when I look at the oldest Olines, I see teams like the Cowboys, Patriots, Packers, Giants, Saints and Vikings. Yeah, the Lions are in there too, but those other teams are all powerhouses. Who ever wrote that article is an idiot. His own data disputes his conclusion.

 

[bucky]

Age and the OL - Why the 2010 Cowboys could be all sizzle, no steak - Bleeding Green Nation

Without doing mathematics,I think Vollmer who is all but penciled in as a starter this season is probably what keeps NE from having the oldest OL over Dallas,but the age between oldest OL and mid pack is only a matter of a year or less in most cases.

You said it yourself right there. Take out Neal and replace him with a 23 year old, and the entire OL gets 2 years younger - which puts us right in the middle of the pack. So this is really a non-issue. Age-wise, Light, Kaczur, and Koppen have at least 2 years left. Skill-wise, is an entirely different topic.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

i say we use next year's pick from the raiders on a OL.

 

[supafly]

However, we aren't the best at what we could be at RB.

I will respectfully disagree here. We've had back to back years of top 10 rushing attacks with a RB by committee system. Last year I believe we were 9th, and in 2008 I think we were actually 5th. (you may want to double check, I haven't verified and am going off the top of my head)

It may not be that exciting of a position to watch, but I don't think having an early rd pick would've made that much of a difference.

I'm not sure BB cares whether or not we have 1 main RB, or a RBBC system, especially if we're putting up good numbers like the past 2 seasons. IIRC, wasn't 2008 one of our franchise's best running attacks? That's pretty good considering there's been 50 yrs of comparisons.

I'm sure next yr we'll take a top 3 rd RB + maybe add another solid vet at the position, but as far as actual need, you can't fault a system that allows fresh players to rotate at a good cost/value. Not only that, but come playoff time, you're guaranteed a solid and fresh back for a stretch run.

As long as you're getting approx. 4 yds/ave per carry, I don't really care if they're young/old, well known/no name, etc. Plus it's good for injury concerns and gives us obvious depth.

 

[spacecrime]

I will respectfully disagree here. We've had back to back years of top 10 rushing attacks with a RB by committee system. Last year I believe we were 9th, and in 2008 I think we were actually 5th. (you may want to double check, I haven't verified and am going off the top of my head)

It may not be that exciting of a position to watch, but I don't think having an early rd pick would've made that much of a difference.

I'm not sure BB cares whether or not we have 1 main RB, or a RBBC system, especially if we're putting up good numbers like the past 2 seasons. IIRC, wasn't 2008 one of our franchise's best running attacks? That's pretty good considering there's been 50 yrs of comparisons.

I'm sure next yr we'll take a top 3 rd RB + maybe add another solid vet at the position, but as far as actual need, you can't fault a system that allows fresh players to rotate at a good cost/value. Not only that, but come playoff time, you're guaranteed a solid and fresh back for a stretch run.

As long as you're getting approx. 4 yds/ave per carry, I don't really care if they're young/old, well known/no name, etc. Plus it's good for injury concerns and gives us obvious depth.

The above is meaningless. Everybody knows Maroney sucks and the Pats can't run the ball. Why do you insist on continually posting facts when emotional over-reaction is obviously what is called for.

 

[livinginthe past]

The above is meaningless. Everybody knows Maroney sucks and the Pats can't run the ball. Why do you insist on continually posting facts when emotional over-reaction is obviously what is called for.

Agreed.

I think its reasonable to conclude that any RB in the NFL would do a better job.

 

[Box_O_Rocks]

That's why I said it was a nitpick. This year, he doesn't look to be penciled in as a starter at RT and I don't expect him to be. The fact that he was pulled at the end of the season last year in favor of an extremely raw rookie who, a lot of times, required help from a TE speaks volumes about what BB and Dante thought of Kaczur. Neal leaving the line-up exposed his weaknesses just as much as they exposed Connolly's. The only difference is that Connolly was supposed to be a back-up (and we knew as much) while Kaczur was supposed to be a starter. I also find it funny that the only defense that anybody can come up with for him is that he signed an extension. WOW, what an Earth shattering defense! IMO, getting pulled from the starting line-up in favor of said rookie says more than signing an extension. Me? I sincerely hope that Kaczur is not the starter at RT in 2011. I like him as a back-up, though...

Please check the injury reports for those games, you are using erroneous data to reach your conclusion.

 

[SanAngeloState]

There are two problems, one is Koppen getting blown up, not able to hold his block for more than a millisecond. The other is speed rushers turnstiling light and kaczur.

A related problem is play calling so obvious that the defense can literally call the play, the audible, and the hole it's going to.

 

[Bostonian1962]

Age and the OL - Why the 2010 Cowboys could be all sizzle, no steak - Bleeding Green Nation

Interesting notes here is that only Jeff Saturday of the Colts is the only projected OL starter in the league over 34 years old.

As we look into 2011,the RBs on the Pats aren't the only area that needs to get addressed for younger players.

Without doing mathematics,I think Vollmer who is all but penciled in as a starter this season is probably what keeps NE from having the oldest OL over Dallas,but the age between oldest OL and mid pack is only a matter of a year or less in most cases.

I think Larsen (if he makes the team) will be a start to next season of getting younger at the position as we go into 2011.

No biggie! They have two of the best young talents there (Mankins and Sea Bass), who will be joined by draft picks at center/guard, and tackle. I love the mix of youth and experience, to be honest.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

Interesting stats. Not sure what they mean since, as other posters have noted, there is a lot of noise in the data for every team.

If you look at the 12 teams that made the playoffs last year, five are in the top quartile (top eight) of oldest OL's, including the eventual champion Saints.

Only two teams that made the Playoffs were in the bottom (youngest) quartile: Chargers and Ravens. So, experience seems to count for something.

Interestingly enough, the Colts are almost square in the middle at #14.

In the glass half/full half/empty department, the Jets at 18 are either too young or will just keep getting better.

 

[Kontradiction]

Please check the injury reports for those games, you are using erroneous data to reach your conclusion.

He had full participation in every practice all week against the Texans and was listed as probable on Friday's injury report. I realize he was injured, but I would have to think that if he fully participated in practice then he would have started in the place of a raw rookie whose presence in the games helped to take the tight ends out of the receiving equation. However, this is just a guess by me. I've had shoulder injuries myself and it was difficult enough for Kaczur to hold his own against defensive linemen even when he was healthy, much less injured. The starting rotation on the O-Line to start the season (in which I believe Vollmer will start at RG) should settle this debate.

 

[patsinthesnow]

I will respectfully disagree here. We've had back to back years of top 10 rushing attacks with a RB by committee system. Last year I believe we were 9th, and in 2008 I think we were actually 5th. (you may want to double check, I haven't verified and am going off the top of my head)

It may not be that exciting of a position to watch, but I don't think having an early rd pick would've made that much of a difference.

I'm not sure BB cares whether or not we have 1 main RB, or a RBBC system, especially if we're putting up good numbers like the past 2 seasons. IIRC, wasn't 2008 one of our franchise's best running attacks? That's pretty good considering there's been 50 yrs of comparisons.

I'm sure next yr we'll take a top 3 rd RB + maybe add another solid vet at the position, but as far as actual need, you can't fault a system that allows fresh players
to rotate at a good cost/value. Not only that, but come playoff time, you're guaranteed a solid and fresh back for a stretch run.

As long as you're getting approx. 4 yds/ave per carry, I don't really care if they're young/old, well known/no name, etc. Plus it's good for injury concerns and gives us obvious depth.

I just wanted another young kid in the runningback core. I think it's not good having the TWO oldest Rbs in the league (Taylor and Faulk) on the same team, with Morris not far behind. Faulk is an exception, but I think Morris and Taylor will have no gas left and they don't offer anything good.

Maroney is the X factor, if he can perform well, we can have the cardiac arrest we have behind him.

BJGE better be ready though. These RBs are old/fragile and I wouldn't be shocked if we have the 08 situation at back all over again. (everyone injured except faulk).

 

[supafly]

I just wanted another young kid in the runningback core. I think it's not good having the TWO oldest Rbs in the league (Taylor and Faulk) on the same team, with Morris not far behind. Faulk is an exception, but I think Morris and Taylor will have no gas left and they don't offer anything good.

Maroney is the X factor, if he can perform well, we can have the cardiac arrest we have behind him.

BJGE better be ready though. These RBs are old/fragile and I wouldn't be shocked if we have the 08 situation at back all over again. (everyone injured except faulk).

I understand what you're getting at, and you certainly aren't the only person to feel this way, I am simply giving you another angle to see the situation from. Most of our RBBC crew are still decently good at what they do, or at least good enough to get the job done while addressing other bigger 'need' areas of the team.

Although it's not an extremely "exciting" position to watch from a numbers' standpoint, it seems to be more effective than people first realize.

I think a lot of us would like to see another Dillion-esque 1500-1600 yd season, but for now our coach likes to use a RBBC approach. I realize they're older, but they're also experiencing less wear and tear than an average RB their age, due to the rotation.

Personally, I don't care if we're using Adrian Peterson or BJGE to run the ball, as long as they're doing their job.

 

[5 Rings for Brady!!]

No biggie! They have two of the best young talents there (Mankins and Sea Bass), who will be joined by draft picks at center/guard, and tackle. I love the mix of youth and experience, to be honest.

I agree that our OL is not exactly a weak position right now regardless of the age of last year's starters.

There were a couple years that the OL got Brady killed often but they have done a pretty good job since 2007 and we do have some young players who I like, for instance, LeVoir, who has good size. Further, we have a guy like Kaczur as a solid back up, assuming Sea Bass wins the job. Only a couple stars, but overall pretty consistent players.

If BB can upgrade each position a little as the players age, then the line should actually get even better. I do think we can upgrade Koppen at some point, and it would not surprise me if Neal loses his starting job to somebody with fresh legs. Kaczur certainly faces stiff competition.

I doubt this year's starting line up will be amoung the oldest anymore.