BobDigital
Pro Bowl Player
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2013
- Messages
- 16,350
- Reaction score
- 15,044
I was thinking about making a thread comparing this years defense to the 03/04 and to a lesser extent 01 defense. Not to say for sure which is better, we would need more games to determine that. But to point out a bit of a philosophical debate.
When you look at the best defenses of all time, historically they were littered with pro bowls and HOFers who make plays consistently. When I look at this defense I don't see that, yet I believe this could be a truly elite defense. It seems to me this leads to a very interesting debate on what's the best way (or perhaps the most cost effective way) to build an elite defense.
When you look at the 03'/04' Patriots D you see a ton of big names. HOFers and pro bowlers. Wilfork/Washington Seymour, Harrison Law/Samuel, McGinest, Vrabel, Bruschi,.. Particularly the first 4 names. However when you look a bit deeper into those defenses there is a pretty decent drop off for the rest of the starters. Hamilton/Warren (as a rookie) Phifer (old) Poole (meh), Wilson (meh) Johnson (role player). Not to mention the depth behind those starters was fairly questionable.
When I look at this current Patriots teams the top headliners are very good players like Gilmore, Collins, Van Noy, Bennett, McCourty, Chung, ect... But to be completely honest the pure ability of our top tier now to their top tier then is lacking.
However the depth for this year is so much better. Our 11th guy on the field (whoever you may consider that to be) is much better than it was back then. Not to mention our depth after them. Yes they had better depth in 04 than 03 with the likes of Green and Phifer now coming off the bench as needed but the drop off was fairly large and the depth was thin at a number of positions.
I think it brings up an interesting debate. Of course you will always need at least some stars on your defense if it is to have any chance to be an elite (Thanks Gilmore!) but how many are really needed provided you have great depth and players with skill sets that fit very well together?
When you look at the best defenses of all time, historically they were littered with pro bowls and HOFers who make plays consistently. When I look at this defense I don't see that, yet I believe this could be a truly elite defense. It seems to me this leads to a very interesting debate on what's the best way (or perhaps the most cost effective way) to build an elite defense.
When you look at the 03'/04' Patriots D you see a ton of big names. HOFers and pro bowlers. Wilfork/Washington Seymour, Harrison Law/Samuel, McGinest, Vrabel, Bruschi,.. Particularly the first 4 names. However when you look a bit deeper into those defenses there is a pretty decent drop off for the rest of the starters. Hamilton/Warren (as a rookie) Phifer (old) Poole (meh), Wilson (meh) Johnson (role player). Not to mention the depth behind those starters was fairly questionable.
When I look at this current Patriots teams the top headliners are very good players like Gilmore, Collins, Van Noy, Bennett, McCourty, Chung, ect... But to be completely honest the pure ability of our top tier now to their top tier then is lacking.
However the depth for this year is so much better. Our 11th guy on the field (whoever you may consider that to be) is much better than it was back then. Not to mention our depth after them. Yes they had better depth in 04 than 03 with the likes of Green and Phifer now coming off the bench as needed but the drop off was fairly large and the depth was thin at a number of positions.
I think it brings up an interesting debate. Of course you will always need at least some stars on your defense if it is to have any chance to be an elite (Thanks Gilmore!) but how many are really needed provided you have great depth and players with skill sets that fit very well together?
Last edited: