What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Pats D (1 Viewer)

the spanker

Footballguy
Without Tom Brady, where do you think the D will now rank among the other FF defenses out there?

Are they worth trying to trade for now that the obvious good D's are rostered?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would think the loss of Brady would force them to step it up a notch. Whether or not that will happen remains to be seen.

 
I heard the defense on WEEI and they all (They had at least Seymour & Harrison as guests. Possibly a couple others) sounded like they had a new chip on their shoulder due to people thinking that without Brady they can't win.

It reminded me of yet another reason for the team to motivate themselves and it wouldn't surprise me if we see a lot of 20-14 and 21-13 victories during the year. I can see them sticking around the 7-8 spot in terms of FF, maybe up a bit if they can revert to 2003/2004 form and get around 35 turnovers by the end of the season.

 
My feeling is that it's a crapshoot. With Brady out I think the defense will be on the field more which could lead to bigger plays on defense. On the other hand the defense will be on the field more and that will lead to them wearing down and allowing big plays. With the age of that defense I have to think that the latter is what will occur but maybe not in the next two games.

 
As a fantasy defense they've not typically been great historically.

Having said that, they should already be rostered given the schedule 6 matchups with Favre, Pennington, Edwards and a bunch of lame west coast interception throwing quarterbacks.

 
ok, top 3.

edit:

while I'm at it, could we get some clarification on a few things?

first of all, what's the age of this 'aged' defense?

next, all I heard about last year was how easy their schedule supposedly was, and it turned out to be one of the tougher schedules in football.

now, I'm not going to claim they don't have a few good looking weeks on the schedule this year, but they play indy, sd, and pitt again, as well as omg! denver, then add in the superjets and everybody's undefeated superbowl pick, the bills, twice each.

I guess getting the rams AND oakland on your schedule the same year brings down that sos a lot....

 
Last edited by a moderator:
while I'm at it, could we get some clarification on a few things?first of all, what's the age of this 'aged' defense?
Here's the age of most of the starters. I think a lot of fans see Bruschi/Harrison/Vrabel and go, "Oh, they're so old!" but the Pats focus more on veteran leadership given the 'age' rather than thinking higher age = declining skills. I also think many, many fans who don't follow the Patriots intently see the same guys from 2001/2003/2004 and assume the whole team's similar in age when it's far from the truth. If anything, the team is surprisingly young overall.I suck with DOB so here's the rough ages.Ellis Hobbs: 25Terrence Wheatley: 23Jonathan Wilhite: 24Deltha O'Neal: 31Vince Wilfork: 27Ty Warren: 27Richard Seymour: 29Pierre Woods: 26Shawn Crable: 24Jerod Mayo: 22Mike Vrabel: 33Tedy Bruschi: 35Adalius Thomas: 31Brandon Meriweather: 24Rodney Harrison: 36James Sanders: 25
 
Without Tom Brady, where do you think the D will now rank among the other FF defenses out there?Are they worth trying to trade for now that the obvious good D's are rostered?
PAts D is pretty old, and really was only good last year because they forced opponents into a one dimensional offense. I don't see how they will be any good if a team can play them straight for 4 quarters, without being in catch up mode.
 
while I'm at it, could we get some clarification on a few things?

first of all, what's the age of this 'aged' defense?
Here's the age of most of the starters. I think a lot of fans see Bruschi/Harrison/Vrabel and go, "Oh, they're so old!" but the Pats focus more on veteran leadership given the 'age' rather than thinking higher age = declining skills. I also think many, many fans who don't follow the Patriots intently see the same guys from 2001/2003/2004 and assume the whole team's similar in age when it's far from the truth. If anything, the team is surprisingly young overall.I suck with DOB so here's the rough ages.

Ellis Hobbs: 25

Terrence Wheatley: 23

Jonathan Wilhite: 24

Deltha O'Neal: 31

Vince Wilfork: 27

Ty Warren: 27

Richard Seymour: 29

Pierre Woods: 26

Shawn Crable: 24

Jerod Mayo: 22

Mike Vrabel: 33

Tedy Bruschi: 35

Adalius Thomas: 31

Brandon Meriweather: 24

Rodney Harrison: 36

James Sanders: 25
16 "starters" :rolleyes: Outside of Meyo and Hobbs... most of those guys are on the downturn for defensive players

 
while I'm at it, could we get some clarification on a few things?

first of all, what's the age of this 'aged' defense?
Here's the age of most of the starters. I think a lot of fans see Bruschi/Harrison/Vrabel and go, "Oh, they're so old!" but the Pats focus more on veteran leadership given the 'age' rather than thinking higher age = declining skills. I also think many, many fans who don't follow the Patriots intently see the same guys from 2001/2003/2004 and assume the whole team's similar in age when it's far from the truth. If anything, the team is surprisingly young overall.I suck with DOB so here's the rough ages.

Ellis Hobbs: 25

Terrence Wheatley: 23

Jonathan Wilhite: 24

Deltha O'Neal: 31

Vince Wilfork: 27

Ty Warren: 27

Richard Seymour: 29

Pierre Woods: 26

Shawn Crable: 24

Jerod Mayo: 22

Mike Vrabel: 33

Tedy Bruschi: 35

Adalius Thomas: 31

Brandon Meriweather: 24

Rodney Harrison: 36

James Sanders: 25
16 "starters" :P Outside of Meyo and Hobbs... most of those guys are on the downturn for defensive players
Not sure what is so funny about that? Harrison & Bruschi are the only guys who are "old" i.e. past their prime. The next oldest is Mike Vrable at 33 who came off a career year with 12.5 sacks and had 2 sacks week 1. 27-32 years old is "prime" for a BB LB as he likes veteran smarts, so I wouldn't consider Adalius "old" at 31.Anyone else over 30 is a rotating role player. I'd imagine this mix stacks up with most other teams in the league, it's only that Bruschi & Harrison stick out because they are high profile guys that are the face of the D and have seemingly been playing forever.

Outside of those three, anyone

 
while I'm at it, could we get some clarification on a few things?

first of all, what's the age of this 'aged' defense?
Here's the age of most of the starters. I think a lot of fans see Bruschi/Harrison/Vrabel and go, "Oh, they're so old!" but the Pats focus more on veteran leadership given the 'age' rather than thinking higher age = declining skills. I also think many, many fans who don't follow the Patriots intently see the same guys from 2001/2003/2004 and assume the whole team's similar in age when it's far from the truth. If anything, the team is surprisingly young overall.I suck with DOB so here's the rough ages.

Ellis Hobbs: 25

Terrence Wheatley: 23

Jonathan Wilhite: 24

Deltha O'Neal: 31

Vince Wilfork: 27

Ty Warren: 27

Richard Seymour: 29

Pierre Woods: 26

Shawn Crable: 24

Jerod Mayo: 22

Mike Vrabel: 33

Tedy Bruschi: 35

Adalius Thomas: 31

Brandon Meriweather: 24

Rodney Harrison: 36

James Sanders: 25
16 "starters" :thumbup: Outside of Meyo and Hobbs... most of those guys are on the downturn for defensive players
Not sure what is so funny about that?
What was funny was listing 16 players as starters. There are 11 starters, and then role players.
Harrison & Bruschi are the only guys who are "old" i.e. past their prime. The next oldest is Mike Vrable at 33 who came off a career year with 12.5 sacks and had 2 sacks week 1. 27-32 years old is "prime" for a BB LB as he likes veteran smarts, so I wouldn't consider Adalius "old" at 31.

Anyone else over 30 is a rotating role player. I'd imagine this mix stacks up with most other teams in the league, it's only that Bruschi & Harrison stick out because they are high profile guys that are the face of the D and have seemingly been playing forever.
Anyone over 30 is old in the NFL. Their "good" players are all pretty old for the NFL. Their DL is getting old, and their LBs are old. Their secondary doesn't have really strong players, outside of Hobbs. Belichick's schemes are great, and the players are some of the most intelligent defensive players in the NFL. But from a physical standpoint, they can get beaten down, because they aren't young players anymore.
 
while I'm at it, could we get some clarification on a few things?

first of all, what's the age of this 'aged' defense?
Here's the age of most of the starters. I think a lot of fans see Bruschi/Harrison/Vrabel and go, "Oh, they're so old!" but the Pats focus more on veteran leadership given the 'age' rather than thinking higher age = declining skills. I also think many, many fans who don't follow the Patriots intently see the same guys from 2001/2003/2004 and assume the whole team's similar in age when it's far from the truth. If anything, the team is surprisingly young overall.I suck with DOB so here's the rough ages.

Ellis Hobbs: 25

Terrence Wheatley: 23

Jonathan Wilhite: 24

Deltha O'Neal: 31

Vince Wilfork: 27

Ty Warren: 27

Richard Seymour: 29

Pierre Woods: 26

Shawn Crable: 24

Jerod Mayo: 22

Mike Vrabel: 33

Tedy Bruschi: 35

Adalius Thomas: 31

Brandon Meriweather: 24

Rodney Harrison: 36

James Sanders: 25
16 "starters" :thumbup: Outside of Meyo and Hobbs... most of those guys are on the downturn for defensive players
Not sure what is so funny about that?
What was funny was listing 16 players as starters. There are 11 starters, and then role players.
Harrison & Bruschi are the only guys who are "old" i.e. past their prime. The next oldest is Mike Vrable at 33 who came off a career year with 12.5 sacks and had 2 sacks week 1. 27-32 years old is "prime" for a BB LB as he likes veteran smarts, so I wouldn't consider Adalius "old" at 31.

Anyone else over 30 is a rotating role player. I'd imagine this mix stacks up with most other teams in the league, it's only that Bruschi & Harrison stick out because they are high profile guys that are the face of the D and have seemingly been playing forever.
Anyone over 30 is old in the NFL. Their "good" players are all pretty old for the NFL. Their DL is getting old, and their LBs are old. Their secondary doesn't have really strong players, outside of Hobbs. Belichick's schemes are great, and the players are some of the most intelligent defensive players in the NFL. But from a physical standpoint, they can get beaten down, because they aren't young players anymore.
Belichick has always preferred a mix of vets and youth, with it more a 60/40 split favoring vets. That's worked out for him in the past. And the DL players are in their prime. No way you can say they are old, unless you have an agenda. Obviously the LBs are old, but as I said, it's BBs MO, so much so it's a complete shock that Mayo has been starting and played EVERY SINGLE SNAP last week. Hopefully this means BB is finally willing to rely on young LBs ...

 
And the DL players are in their prime. No way you can say they are old, unless you have an agenda.
I may be wrong, but don't most DL have very short NFL lives? It seems to me that a lot of DL come in and within 3-4 years are out of the league or backups, due to the grind they take in every NFL game in the trenches. I know some really stand out and have long careers, but they seem far and few between. I just look at guys like Warren and Wilfork and think they're starting to press time before breaking down.
 
And the DL players are in their prime. No way you can say they are old, unless you have an agenda.
I may be wrong, but don't most DL have very short NFL lives? It seems to me that a lot of DL come in and within 3-4 years are out of the league or backups, due to the grind they take in every NFL game in the trenches. I know some really stand out and have long careers, but they seem far and few between. I just look at guys like Warren and Wilfork and think they're starting to press time before breaking down.
It's an interesting question. I'd be curious the typical lifespan of a DL. For a 4-3 speed guy like Freeney, I'd think age hurts a lot more than the 3-4 DLs who rely more on size & technique than speed & quickness.
 
Combined age of defensive starters:

Bears - 301

Pats - 318

Ravens - 319

IMO, the Pats are getting old argument is more fiction than fact. I suspect that if we went through and compared the Pats to other teams they will not be much older than other teams. They also have several "younger" guys that see time that are not in their 30s:

Mike Wright - 26

Jarvis Green - 28

Pierre Woods - 26

Eric Alexander - 26

Shawn Crable - 23

Terrence Wheatley - 23

Brandon Meriweather - 24

 
Combined age of defensive starters:Bears - 301Pats - 318Ravens - 319IMO, the Pats are getting old argument is more fiction than fact. I suspect that if we went through and compared the Pats to other teams they will not be much older than other teams. They also have several "younger" guys that see time that are not in their 30s:Mike Wright - 26Jarvis Green - 28Pierre Woods - 26Eric Alexander - 26Shawn Crable - 23Terrence Wheatley - 23Brandon Meriweather - 24
Exactly. I'd been contending all offseason that the Pats D is Old & Slow is more myth than reality. They got younger in a lot of key spots. IMO, as stated above, this perception likely stems more from the fact that the two most high profile Face of the Defense players are their two oldest, Harrison & Bruschi who are rotating at this point.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top