Pats Turn Roster Over in Four Years

[st pete gogolak]

The Pats have something like six players (Brady, Welker, Light, Mankins, Wilfork and Gotkowski - Koppen and Wright are on IR) left from their 2007-2008 Super Bowl team. That's about a 90% turnover in four years. So what is the take-away from this fact?

 

- If you've got a Hall of Fame coach and a Hall of Fame quarterback, the rest is pretty much filler;

- They don't overpay middle of the road veteran players. They let them walk. The holdovers from four years ago are All-Pro caliber or close to it (except for the kicker). That's why they can have a dominate team for a decade and still have a bunch of cap room.

- They're ruthless in getting rid of veterans for draft picks (see above) and trading down on draft day for more picks. It allows faster turnover of roster but still brings in fresh talent.

- For all their high draft picks, their drafts have been really mediocre. They've had some impressive hits (Mayo, Gronkowski, Hernandez) but a huge number of misses. (Check out their attempts to draft a wide receiver over the last ten years). Last year's draft was a joke. On a team needing defense, they draft OL, RB, RB and QB in first three rounds.

- Don't know what league average is but it's probably around 75% for roster turnover in four years. That's why when the Bills or posters to this site talk about a three, four or five year plan, you can't do anything but laugh. Next year is it for Buddy and Chan to show it's going in the right direction.

[HeHateMe]

Couldn't agree more. First things first, you need to get a Franchise QB anyway you can.

 

Even though the Pats haven't drafted too well, they have landed studs like Gronkowski and Hernandez because of the fact that they have so many draft picks each year. The likelihood of hitting on them increases. I think Buffalo is starting to understand this. However, i think you do whatever it takes to get your QB first even if that means giving up picks to land him. After that, stockpile draft picks anyway you can.

 

The last time the Bills were good, they had a Franchise QB. In today's NFL, you can't have a 3-4 year rebuild. A lot of guys you had in that first year of the rebuild will be gone, that is the nature of the NFL today. Injuries, free agency, new rookie scale, salary cap are all reasons why you see teams who are terrible one year, make the playoffs the next. The Bills being the obvious exception.

[Mr. WEO]

If they turn over nearly the entire roster in 4 years and they are in the SB, their drafts can't be all that bad. Guys like McCourty (wasn't he in the Pro Bowl once) and event the kicker (one of the best--and who easily replaced Vinateri) and the punter are solid young picks. Everyone dumps on their defense but in points allowed, they were no worse than GB and NO, who are regarded as very solid drafting teams.

 

But, yeah, a franchise QB and a highly competent HC are required right off the bat.

[ThurmasThoman]

terrible year for the AFC.

 

not saying brady isnt the best qb in the league (he is) or beliceck isnt the best coach in the game (i dont know how to gauge coaches, but its tough to name anyone better,) but this is a team that literally

 

didnt beat anyone with a winning record all season

got to host the broncos, coming off a short week, in the DIVISIONAL round (a team we beat 40-14 a few weeks earlier)

and then had the ravens drop a game winning td and butcher a game tying FG in the last seconds.

 

hell, they may win the super bowl this year... its 50/50. im just not in awe of that organization like so many on this board.

 

they video taped everyone. and i used to be in the "well, i wish the bills would cheat like that" camp... but the league came down HARD on them with penalties. so it's not like the league "didnt think it was a big deal." after they got busted, they never made it back to the big game. pioli left, and their defense is terrible.

 

i know i know i know, im saying all this about a team thats playing in the super bowl, "i wish the bills were that bad," etc. etc. etc. as jim rome would say "MUST BE NICE."

 

BUT

 

terrible year for the afc. honest to god. just a terrible year for our conference.

[BillsVet]

At the risk of being called grammar police, dominant is an adjective. Dominate is a verb.

 

Finding talent is step 1, which the Bills still have not accomplished at the money positions, QB, LT, 43DE/34OLB, WR, and CB. There are some younger players, but nothing proven at any of those positions aside from SJ.

 

Step 2 is deciding whom to retain, which Buffalo isn't quite at yet. Buffalo does have Johnson up for a contract, and then Byrd and Levitre next season followed by Wood.

 

Rosters turnover quickly, but that in and of itself isn't necessarily a good thing. The Bills have done it many times over with the same mediocre result.

[uncle flap]

At the risk of being called grammar police, dominant is an adjective. Dominate is a verb.

 

Finding talent is step 1, which the Bills still have not accomplished at the money positions, QB, LT, 43DE/34OLB, WR, and CB. There are some younger players, but nothing proven at any of those positions aside from SJ.

 

Step 2 is deciding whom to retain, which Buffalo isn't quite at yet. Buffalo does have Johnson up for a contract, and then Byrd and Levitre next season followed by Wood.

 

Rosters turnover quickly, but that in and of itself isn't necessarily a good thing. The Bills have done it many times over with the same mediocre result.

 

the substitution of "dominate" for "dominant" has become one of my biggest pet peeves, thanks to this board. it's up there with "definately."

 

but back to the topic at hand- the OP said it himself: Top tier talent at QB and excellent coaching trump all. i do think the pats*' model is a good one that most teams try to follow, but i'd bet the pats* would still be about the same level competitively regardless of their amount of roster turnover as long as belicheat and brady are still in place.

 

and as far as the bills situation - they are on the right track since nix has been GM, but still need to acquire some additional talent. it's unlikely an all time great qb and coach fall into their lap, but the rest of the pieces are seemingly coming together.

 

the bottom line is that all-pro players make the surrounding cast better. assuming the bills can hit on a couple more draft picks and add decent talent thru FA, we can expect to see improvement not only in those particular positions, but also as a team overall.

[sllib olaffub]

I really appreciate the point of this post. Bills fans these days should not lose sight of this every summer. Somehow the Bills get this pass, their H.C.'s and GM's and Owner are allowed to gradually get better, starting at 4-12, to 6-10, to what next, 8-8? When the needs that were stopping them this past year were only so obvious (OLB's, QB play, O-Line Depth) and nothing was done about it... Our team is allowed to shoot for mediocre. Our team is just not a competitive NFL franchise, and it starts and goes a long way with the Owner. There's no getting around that.

 

Another big part of Buffalo's problem is the QB - I know other posters here have mentioned it. That is why I'm a firm believer in getting a Franchise QB first and foremost, and you stop at nothing to get one. It is far and away crucial enough to trade a whole draft for a good young QB. Most people gawk at talk of trades, and how doing so would set the franchise back years. Not having a Franchise caliber QB has lost us, or at least contributed, to losing the last 15 years plus. None of those drafts made the difference. Or, for those opposed to trading - the team could've sacrificed a few other picks that eventually ended up irrelevant by just taking 3 or 4 QB's in one draft, or UDFA combined. The point: get the Franchise QB. Without one you don't win (about 80 - 90 percent of the time).

 

So, here we are, entering year 3 of Nix and Gailey. We are seeing a return of the 4-3 defense. I'm all for giving Wanny a shot at turning it around - and I hope he can make a Big 4-3 with some of these 3-4 players, because otherwise I'm wondering how much of the last 2 years was wasted on that STUPIDITY? I mean, any of us fans could've told the Bills, Edwards can't coach! It's almost like they're trying to lose! Anyway - they've got a lot of ground to make up and to have them trot out Fitz as the QB again this year, without having someone on the bench who is talented enough to give us hope is something I won't watch. If they don't get some young QB with some potential, I won't commit to another autumn of watching Fitz get our hopes up only to dash them with his inevitable mediocrity.

[Pirate Angel]

The Pats have something like six players (Brady, Welker, Light, Mankins, Wilfork and Gotkowski - Koppen and Wright are on IR) left from their 2007-2008 Super Bowl team. That's about a 90% turnover in four years. So what is the take-away from this fact?

 

- If you've got a Hall of Fame coach and a Hall of Fame quarterback, the rest is pretty much filler;

- They don't overpay middle of the road veteran players. They let them walk. The holdovers from four years ago are All-Pro caliber or close to it (except for the kicker). That's why they can have a dominate team for a decade and still have a bunch of cap room.

- They're ruthless in getting rid of veterans for draft picks (see above) and trading down on draft day for more picks. It allows faster turnover of roster but still brings in fresh talent.

- For all their high draft picks, their drafts have been really mediocre. They've had some impressive hits (Mayo, Gronkowski, Hernandez) but a huge number of misses. (Check out their attempts to draft a wide receiver over the last ten years). Last year's draft was a joke. On a team needing defense, they draft OL, RB, RB and QB in first three rounds.

- Don't know what league average is but it's probably around 75% for roster turnover in four years. That's why when the Bills or posters to this site talk about a three, four or five year plan, you can't do anything but laugh. Next year is it for Buddy and Chan to show it's going in the right direction.

 

Its just the QB....Bill has been riding his coat tails

[NoSaint]

Well, that's also probably part of why they haven't had a ring either (not enough keeper type pieces around the roster). The coach and qb can get you to the playoffs consistently but without any roster consistency, and battle proven players it can be harder to close the deal. Definitely a balance they've done pretty well with. If they hit on one or two more early picks recently they'd have more rings.

Edited February 2, 2012 by NoSaint

[Pirate Angel]

Well, that's also probably part of why they haven't had a ring either (not enough keeper type pieces around the roster). The coach and qb can get you to the playoffs consistently but without any roster consistency, and battle proven players it can be harder to close the deal. Definitely a balance they've done pretty well with. If they hit on one or two more early picks recently they'd have more rings.

 

lets not forget they havent gotten a ring since spygate either.

[NoSaint]

lets not forget they havent gotten a ring since spygate either.

 

I'd suspect that has more to do with not hitting on as many draft picks, especially early. They no longer have the vet leadership you saw with vrabel, bruschi, Seymour, Ty law, etc.... Let's remember they have still been pretty elite, just having more trouble deep in the playoffs when those type players tend to make a big difference. Harrison even. A guy like meriweather should be stepping into that role at this point in his career and he's gone. From 2004 -2009 you have wilfork who's a beast but watsons gone, merriweathers gone, mankind is an interior lineman and has been having some contract battles the last few years (hard spots to lead from), and mayo. Those 5 picks should have had more Heart and soul of your team veteran leadership if you want rings.

Edited February 3, 2012 by NoSaint

[BADOLBILZ]

The Pats have something like six players (Brady, Welker, Light, Mankins, Wilfork and Gotkowski - Koppen and Wright are on IR) left from their 2007-2008 Super Bowl team. That's about a 90% turnover in four years. So what is the take-away from this fact?

 

- If you've got a Hall of Fame coach and a Hall of Fame quarterback, the rest is pretty much filler;

- They don't overpay middle of the road veteran players. They let them walk. The holdovers from four years ago are All-Pro caliber or close to it (except for the kicker). That's why they can have a dominate team for a decade and still have a bunch of cap room.

- They're ruthless in getting rid of veterans for draft picks (see above) and trading down on draft day for more picks. It allows faster turnover of roster but still brings in fresh talent.

- For all their high draft picks, their drafts have been really mediocre. They've had some impressive hits (Mayo, Gronkowski, Hernandez) but a huge number of misses. (Check out their attempts to draft a wide receiver over the last ten years). Last year's draft was a joke. On a team needing defense, they draft OL, RB, RB and QB in first three rounds.

- Don't know what league average is but it's probably around 75% for roster turnover in four years. That's why when the Bills or posters to this site talk about a three, four or five year plan, you can't do anything but laugh. Next year is it for Buddy and Chan to show it's going in the right direction.

 

It is a fact. You can try to plug every position up with decent players but new areas of need will just keep surfacing if you don't get a top QB. Top level QB play covers up a lot of deficiencies.

[NoSaint]

It is a fact. You can try to plug every position up with decent players but new areas of need will just keep surfacing if you don't get a top QB. Top level QB play covers up a lot of deficiencies.

 

I've not been loved for this view but that top 5 qb is probably worth a minimum 5 other probowl player in terms of w-l record on an average/adequate roster

 

Maybe 4 probowl d lineman would be able to take over a game the same way but that's about the closest I can come up with.

[Pirate Angel]

I'd suspect that has more to do with not hitting on as many draft picks, especially early. They no longer have the vet leadership you saw with vrabel, bruschi, Seymour, Ty law, etc.... Let's remember they have still been pretty elite, just having more trouble deep in the playoffs when those type players tend to make a big difference. Harrison even. A guy like meriweather should be stepping into that role at this point in his career and he's gone. From 2004 -2009 you have wilfork who's a beast but watsons gone, merriweathers gone, mankind is an interior lineman and has been having some contract battles the last few years (hard spots to lead from), and mayo. Those 5 picks should have had more Heart and soul of your team veteran leadership if you want rings.

 

Yes the Parcels built Patriots that the great Belicheck inherited and has been credited for, than accidentally stumbling upon Brady who free agents want to come play with and Belicheck is still being credited for all this "Genius" of his

[NoSaint]

Yes the Parcels built Patriots that the great Belicheck inherited and has been credited for, than accidentally stumbling upon Brady who free agents want to come play with and Belicheck is still being credited for all this "Genius" of his

As if they have somehow fallen apart?

[dogbyte]

Yes the Parcels built Patriots that the great Belicheck inherited and has been credited for, than accidentally stumbling upon Brady who free agents want to come play with and Belicheck is still being credited for all this "Genius" of his

 

Sorry Parcells was gone in 1994. Belicheck inherited an 8 - 8 team from Pete Carrol filled with overpriced under achieving players in 2000. He did get Ty Law and Bledsoe but not much more and the team was in cap trouble. One of the first things he did was get rid of many of Carrol left overs. Bruschi, Vabrel, Koppen, Harrison, Brady, Branch, Dillon, Washington and others were drafted or aquired by Belicheck not Parcells. Parcells never won a Superbowl without Belicheck but Belicheck has won 3 without him. By the way since, they were busted they have been back to the big game twice 2007- 2008 and 2011 - 2012

Edited February 3, 2012 by dogbyte

[Thoner7]

I've not been loved for this view but that top 5 qb is probably worth a minimum 5 other probowl player in terms of w-l record on an average/adequate roster

 

A top 5 QB is worth 10+ wins.

 

See: Colts 2002-2012

 

All all this 'is it Brady vs. Is is Bellicheat'.......Its their OL..... Brady sucks without it. I credit Bellicheat for maintaining the OL, and it was their Ds and kicker that won them all the superbowls...not Brady by any stretch. He was a Trent Dilfer on that first winning team.

Edited February 3, 2012 by Thoner7

[Kaenon]

The Pats have something like six players (Brady, Welker, Light, Mankins, Wilfork and Gotkowski - Koppen and Wright are on IR) left from their 2007-2008 Super Bowl team. That's about a 90% turnover in four years. So what is the take-away from this fact?

 

- If you've got a Hall of Fame coach and a Hall of Fame quarterback, the rest is pretty much filler;

- They don't overpay middle of the road veteran players. They let them walk. The holdovers from four years ago are All-Pro caliber or close to it (except for the kicker). That's why they can have a dominate team for a decade and still have a bunch of cap room.

- They're ruthless in getting rid of veterans for draft picks (see above) and trading down on draft day for more picks. It allows faster turnover of roster but still brings in fresh talent.

- For all their high draft picks, their drafts have been really mediocre. They've had some impressive hits (Mayo, Gronkowski, Hernandez) but a huge number of misses. (Check out their attempts to draft a wide receiver over the last ten years). Last year's draft was a joke. On a team needing defense, they draft OL, RB, RB and QB in first three rounds.

- Don't know what league average is but it's probably around 75% for roster turnover in four years. That's why when the Bills or posters to this site talk about a three, four or five year plan, you can't do anything but laugh. Next year is it for Buddy and Chan to show it's going in the right direction.

 

I'd like to say no.

 

If you look at the Giants and the Patriots, its Coach, QB and kicker

[Charles Romes]

This post brings to mind those tv commercials that will have the tram's real qb and a bunch of fake players in the right uniform playing the role of the test of the team. Pretty much the way it is in teal life.

[San Jose Bills Fan]

It was a nice feeling earlier this week when we all coalesced around the idea that if there's one indispensable player on an NFL team, it's the long snapper.

 

So seldom that we can all agree on something.

 

I felt a real connection with you guys.

 

This post brings to mind those tv commercials that will have the team's real qb and a bunch of fake players in the right uniform playing the role of the test of the team. Pretty much the way it is in teal life.

Like Donovan McNabb and his "teammates" having Campbell's Chunky Soup prepared by Donovan's Mom.

[Meark]

the substitution of "dominate" for "dominant" has become one of my biggest pet peeves, thanks to this board. it's up there with "definately."

 

but back to the topic at hand- the OP said it himself: Top tier talent at QB and excellent coaching trump all. i do think the pats*' model is a good one that most teams try to follow, but i'd bet the pats* would still be about the same level competitively regardless of their amount of roster turnover as long as belicheat and brady are still in place.

 

and as far as the bills situation - they are on the right track since nix has been GM, but still need to acquire some additional talent. it's unlikely an all time great qb and coach fall into their lap, but the rest of the pieces are seemingly coming together.

 

the bottom line is that all-pro players make the surrounding cast better. assuming the bills can hit on a couple more draft picks and add decent talent thru FA, we can expect to see improvement not only in those particular positions, but also as a team overall.

 

One of my pet peeves is when people don't use capital letters.

[Dragonborn10]

Having the greatest QB of all time covers up a lot of warts...

[Jim in Anchorage]

The Pats have something like six players (Brady, Welker, Light, Mankins, Wilfork and Gotkowski - Koppen and Wright are on IR) left from their 2007-2008 Super Bowl team. That's about a 90% turnover in four years. So what is the take-away from this fact?

 

- If you've got a Hall of Fame coach and a Hall of Fame quarterback, the rest is pretty much filler;

- They don't overpay middle of the road veteran players. They let them walk. The holdovers from four years ago are All-Pro caliber or close to it (except for the kicker). That's why they can have a dominate team for a decade and still have a bunch of cap room.

- They're ruthless in getting rid of veterans for draft picks (see above) and trading down on draft day for more picks. It allows faster turnover of roster but still brings in fresh talent.

- For all their high draft picks, their drafts have been really mediocre. They've had some impressive hits (Mayo, Gronkowski, Hernandez) but a huge number of misses. (Check out their attempts to draft a wide receiver over the last ten years). Last year's draft was a joke. On a team needing defense, they draft OL, RB, RB and QB in first three rounds.

- Don't know what league average is but it's probably around 75% for roster turnover in four years. That's why when the Bills or posters to this site talk about a three, four or five year plan, you can't do anything but laugh. Next year is it for Buddy and Chan to show it's going in the right direction.

Welker, Wilfork and Gronkowski are "filler?"

[st pete gogolak]

At the risk of being called grammar police, dominant is an adjective. Dominate is a verb.

 

Finding talent is step 1, which the Bills still have not accomplished at the money positions, QB, LT, 43DE/34OLB, WR, and CB. There are some younger players, but nothing proven at any of those positions aside from SJ.

 

Step 2 is deciding whom to retain, which Buffalo isn't quite at yet. Buffalo does have Johnson up for a contract, and then Byrd and Levitre next season followed by Wood.

 

Rosters turnover quickly, but that in and of itself isn't necessarily a good thing. The Bills have done it many times over with the same mediocre result.

 

 

Iknow the difference between "dominant" and "dominate". Just didn't pick up the mistake before hitting send.

[The Big Cat]

A top 5 QB is worth 10+ wins.

 

See: Colts 2002-2012

 

All all this 'is it Brady vs. Is is Bellicheat'.......Its their OL..... Brady sucks without it. I credit Bellicheat for maintaining the OL, and it was their Ds and kicker that won them all the superbowls...not Brady by any stretch. He was a Trent Dilfer on that first winning team.

 

THIS!!!

 

Praise Jesus.

 

Somebody in this thread referred to Brady as the greatest quarterback of all time. NO. NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!!

 

He's made a career playing THE MOST QUARTERBACK FRIENDLY SYSTEM OF ALL TIME. All he has to do is stand there make the throws.

 

Remember who his predecessor was.

[Mr. WEO]

THIS!!!

 

Praise Jesus.

 

Somebody in this thread referred to Brady as the greatest quarterback of all time. NO. NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!!

 

He's made a career playing THE MOST QUARTERBACK FRIENDLY SYSTEM OF ALL TIME. All he has to do is stand there make the throws.

Remember who his predecessor was.

wow.

[Rico]

At the risk of being called grammar police, dominant is an adjective. Dominate is a verb.

 

Finding talent is step 1, which the Bills still have not accomplished at the money positions, QB, LT, 43DE/34OLB, WR, and CB. There are some younger players, but nothing proven at any of those positions aside from SJ.

 

Step 2 is deciding whom to retain, which Buffalo isn't quite at yet. Buffalo does have Johnson up for a contract, and then Byrd and Levitre next season followed by Wood.

 

Rosters turnover quickly, but that in and of itself isn't necessarily a good thing. The Bills have done it many times over with the same mediocre result.

Good points, but step 1 is still having a real owner. Even if the Bills had Belicheck & Brady, Ralph would still find a way to mess things up.