Titans too young to succeed in 2005....LIE!!
It's a lie that the titans were too young to succeed in 2004. We had loads of experience at numerous positions especially in key positions on the offensive line and QB.
Fact-even with two rookie corners the entire titans starting defense averaged 3.6 years experience. The opening game starting 11 averaged 4+ years experience with beckham and woolfolk at corner.
Fact- our entire starting offense averaged 5 years experience per man.
Fact- we had 14 starting players who were in their 4th season or beyond!
Fact- we had 7 starting players who were in year 6 or beyond.
Fact- We had 4 players in year 7 or beyond.
Fact- Our offensive line averaged 5 years experience per man and had 3 players with 7 years or more. 4 of our offensive lineman had played together as a unit for 3 years.
Fact-Many key backup players were veterans. Our#2 QB was in his 6th season. Our #2 RB was in his 5th season. Our two top backup corners were in their 3rd and 4th season respectively(woolfolk-beckham). We had a backup linebacker in his 4th season(boiman).
Fact-We had an 11 year veteran at the position that matters most QB.
And this team was too young to succeed? Olson an 8th year player making $9M was too young to block anyone? Our two 4th year safeties were too young to tackle anyone?
Another absolute fallacy is that our 2nd year players were too young to succeed. Fact is almost all our 2nd year players drafted in 2004 had significant playing time that year and had no reason to perform well this year. Especially on defense. Want me to tell you the number of second year players who made pro bowls?
If all that isn't enough the titans were healthier up front this year than they ever have been. The entire offensive line missed one start! Albert hayneswoth a 5 year vet missed just one start this year and most of our D-lineman played in all 16 games!
The titans didn't fail miserably this year because we were too young. We failed because the team had no motivation, no fire, no intensity. No veteran leadership. And that falls on every single one of those veteran players but most of all it falls on our head coach who did a miserable job in 2005!
It's a lie that the titans were too young to succeed in 2004. We had loads of experience at numerous positions especially in key positions on the offensive line and QB.
Fact-even with two rookie corners the entire titans starting defense averaged 3.6 years experience. The opening game starting 11 averaged 4+ years experience with beckham and woolfolk at corner.
Fact- our entire starting offense averaged 5 years experience per man.
Fact- we had 14 starting players who were in their 4th season or beyond!
Fact- we had 7 starting players who were in year 6 or beyond.
Fact- We had 4 players in year 7 or beyond.
Fact- Our offensive line averaged 5 years experience per man and had 3 players with 7 years or more. 4 of our offensive lineman had played together as a unit for 3 years.
Fact-Many key backup players were veterans. Our#2 QB was in his 6th season. Our #2 RB was in his 5th season. Our two top backup corners were in their 3rd and 4th season respectively(woolfolk-beckham). We had a backup linebacker in his 4th season(boiman).
Fact-We had an 11 year veteran at the position that matters most QB.
And this team was too young to succeed? Olson an 8th year player making $9M was too young to block anyone? Our two 4th year safeties were too young to tackle anyone?
Another absolute fallacy is that our 2nd year players were too young to succeed. Fact is almost all our 2nd year players drafted in 2004 had significant playing time that year and had no reason to perform well this year. Especially on defense. Want me to tell you the number of second year players who made pro bowls?
If all that isn't enough the titans were healthier up front this year than they ever have been. The entire offensive line missed one start! Albert hayneswoth a 5 year vet missed just one start this year and most of our D-lineman played in all 16 games!
The titans didn't fail miserably this year because we were too young. We failed because the team had no motivation, no fire, no intensity. No veteran leadership. And that falls on every single one of those veteran players but most of all it falls on our head coach who did a miserable job in 2005!
RCarie is going to jump all over this thread and say that we were still inexperienced and that we shouldn't expect them to succeed. I expect every football player to succeed, if they don't, it falls on one of two things; either they didn't work hard enough and shouldn't be on the field, or they weren't prepared by their coaches and instilled with the drive.
Clearly being too young (and thus inexperienced) was a factor in this year's problems. Not the only cause, but a prominent one. Certainly you aren't suggesting that youth wasn't an important factor at all...
I'd say starting 2 rookie CBs for the majority of the season is definitely not a good thing. How many NFL teams started even 1 rookie CB?
We started 4 rookies for most of the season (Pacman, Hill, Roos, and the rotating WRs). I don't know what that number is for other teams, or how many rookies start for playoff teams, but I'd say we're well above the NFL average.
I'd say starting 2 rookie CBs for the majority of the season is definitely not a good thing. How many NFL teams started even 1 rookie CB?
We started 4 rookies for most of the season (Pacman, Hill, Roos, and the rotating WRs). I don't know what that number is for other teams, or how many rookies start for playoff teams, but I'd say we're well above the NFL average.
You can't really judge a football team by its starters alone. To succeed you need depth (i.e. the patriots who always seem to be decimated by injuries) and our backups were extremely young across the board
28 out of 53 players with two years or less on the roster. thats young.
Starkiller said:
The Patriots are starting a rookie CB, Hobbs. Foxworth is a rookie CB that starts on Denver (two pretty good defenses). Certainly youth is a problem for the Titans but the Titans coaching staff is notoriously poor in getting production out of young players and has been that way for as long as the Titans have been in Nashville. The patriots also two rookies on the OL and have lost their starting LT and Center to injury. Imagine the excuses for a lousy season if that happened to the Titans. We had vets at two of the positions that stunk the most on defense, S and LB. It is obviously a combination of coaching and handling the CAP that made this team stink.
Nice try starkiller...
Reynaldo hill was not forced into a starting role he played because people like woolfolk, beckham and waddell couldn't take that role. They sucked! None of our rookie WRs started until calico stunk it up and bennett got hurt. I'm not saying that being too young at some positions didn't hurt but we were 4-12!
In typical starkiller fashion you want to compare this pile of crap organization to a playoff team. Hell we are not on par with teams like arizona and oakland much less a playoff team. That's the point! If this team was a competitive 7-9 i wouldn't be writing this.
I did notice some 1st and 2nd year players in the pro bowl. Shaun merriman, de angelo hall and nathan vasher. And didn't jason witten and antonio gates make the pro bowl in their 2nd seasons? I remember a 99 titan team going to the super bowl with a 2nd year corner(rolle) and 2 rookie d-lineman. How did that happen?
Playoffs? Playoffs?
Reynaldo hill was not forced into a starting role he played because people like woolfolk, beckham and waddell couldn't take that role. They sucked! None of our rookie WRs started until calico stunk it up and bennett got hurt. I'm not saying that being too young at some positions didn't hurt but we were 4-12!
In typical starkiller fashion you want to compare this pile of crap organization to a playoff team. Hell we are not on par with teams like arizona and oakland much less a playoff team. That's the point! If this team was a competitive 7-9 i wouldn't be writing this.
I did notice some 1st and 2nd year players in the pro bowl. Shaun merriman, de angelo hall and nathan vasher. And didn't jason witten and antonio gates make the pro bowl in their 2nd seasons? I remember a 99 titan team going to the super bowl with a 2nd year corner(rolle) and 2 rookie d-lineman. How did that happen?
Playoffs? Playoffs?
bigtitan53279 said:
You obviously didn't watch him play, because he actually did.
Sure bigtitan.....
Meaningless numbers unless you break them down. Most of those 28 players didn't have a significant role on this team. Most who did have a significant role were 2nd year players not rookies. Your numbers don't take into account the experience level of those players who are not in their first or 2nd season.
The one position that takes the most time to learn is QB. We had an 11 year vet there.
Yes we had a rookie offensive lineman but wouldn't roos lack of experience be off set by the fact we had a 7 year guy, an 8 year guy and a 13 year guy on that same line? Hello? Wasn't the so called youth of odom and la boy off set by having a 5 year veteran at one end, KVB?
Off course you and starkiller's brilliant analysis doesn't take into account the fact that we didn't have to play all of those rookies. Hill and pacman wouldn't have started had woolfolk, beckham, waddell or gardner been worth a damn. They were not.
Meaningless numbers unless you break them down. Most of those 28 players didn't have a significant role on this team. Most who did have a significant role were 2nd year players not rookies. Your numbers don't take into account the experience level of those players who are not in their first or 2nd season.
The one position that takes the most time to learn is QB. We had an 11 year vet there.
Yes we had a rookie offensive lineman but wouldn't roos lack of experience be off set by the fact we had a 7 year guy, an 8 year guy and a 13 year guy on that same line? Hello? Wasn't the so called youth of odom and la boy off set by having a 5 year veteran at one end, KVB?
Off course you and starkiller's brilliant analysis doesn't take into account the fact that we didn't have to play all of those rookies. Hill and pacman wouldn't have started had woolfolk, beckham, waddell or gardner been worth a damn. They were not.
If rookies and second year players were as good as vets there wouldn't have to be a salary cap. They'd just pay new guys every year and coach them to play as well as guys that have been in the league for years. Hell why do they even use veterans? They obviously don't need em'... It's apparently easy to coach any old "Joe Shmoe" to be a pro-bowler. It's an absurd notion to think that experience doesn't matter in the NFL. Of course it makes a difference just like it does in college, high school, all the way to pee-wee league. You don't see many freshman starting in college do you?? Why is that? I wonder... But it makes sense that rookies and second year players (27 all together) should play like vets. This idea obviously comes from people that never played competitive sports.
Now, to say that they played to there potential would be a lie and I think they could have won three or four more games than they did. Even with a well coached all-out effort I didn't expect anything better than .500 this year and neither did many other people on this board. It seemed like all of the polls on the board indicated that most people expected the Titans to have a down year and yet people are still here acting surpised. Experience is always a factor when it comes to winning in sports no matter what level or sport, for that matter, and I think that experience certainly played a huge factor in our success this year. It's common sense.
You were right Jwill1919...
Now, to say that they played to there potential would be a lie and I think they could have won three or four more games than they did. Even with a well coached all-out effort I didn't expect anything better than .500 this year and neither did many other people on this board. It seemed like all of the polls on the board indicated that most people expected the Titans to have a down year and yet people are still here acting surpised. Experience is always a factor when it comes to winning in sports no matter what level or sport, for that matter, and I think that experience certainly played a huge factor in our success this year. It's common sense.
You were right Jwill1919...
rcarie...
What the hell are you talking about? Nobody said that experience doesn't matter. Is that what i said in my post? My point is that the titans HAD a lot of experience at many key positions.
Quit writing as if half our starting 22 players were rookies. That's bullcrap! At the most we had just 6 starting players who were in their first and second year(Roos- bjones-pacmoron-hill-laboy-starks). What about the other 16 starters? The other 70%? They can just suck then? And if you are so high on experience what say you about players with 5, 6, 7 years experience or more? Just pretend they don't play? The giants went to the playoffs this year as eastern division champs with 5 starters in their 1st or 2nd season including the QB. What is our excuse?
You love experience? Then why didn't 7 year guard piller play worth a damn? Why didn't 8 year vet olson block anyone all year? What about 5 year vet haynesworth? Our 2 4th year safeties? Why didn't our 11 year QB make the pro bowl? If experience is so great then ask why our most experienced players played like crap? Ask that question and maybe you will have a clue what i'm talking about.
What the hell are you talking about? Nobody said that experience doesn't matter. Is that what i said in my post? My point is that the titans HAD a lot of experience at many key positions.
Quit writing as if half our starting 22 players were rookies. That's bullcrap! At the most we had just 6 starting players who were in their first and second year(Roos- bjones-pacmoron-hill-laboy-starks). What about the other 16 starters? The other 70%? They can just suck then? And if you are so high on experience what say you about players with 5, 6, 7 years experience or more? Just pretend they don't play? The giants went to the playoffs this year as eastern division champs with 5 starters in their 1st or 2nd season including the QB. What is our excuse?
You love experience? Then why didn't 7 year guard piller play worth a damn? Why didn't 8 year vet olson block anyone all year? What about 5 year vet haynesworth? Our 2 4th year safeties? Why didn't our 11 year QB make the pro bowl? If experience is so great then ask why our most experienced players played like crap? Ask that question and maybe you will have a clue what i'm talking about.
Yeah, because the 4 veterans ahead of him on the depth chart are on IR...Soxcat said:
And Champ Bailey is on the other side.
Thank you. That was my only point.
I'm not convinced that's entirely true. I think that they've generally gotten production from guys who stay healthy and who end up developing into quality NFL players.
Certainly coaching is an issue. And while I don't think cap management has been a problem, certainly having to make a cap purge is the biggest reason we are so bad. But the cap purge goes hand-in-hand with the youth movement, so you can't really blame one and ignore the other. Having a lot of young players is the way that it is...
When did I ever say that he was forced into starting? I said that he started most of the season. And the fact that he was our 2nd best CB, beating out other young Titans CB, doesn't exactly help you claim that youth isn't a problem.RollTide said:
Bennett was the only WR we had who had more than 1 year of actual playing experience. This position, like CB, only puts an exclamation point on the effect of having to rely on too many young players. Not only with the 3 rookies, but also with Calico.
So then you are agreeing with me that youth was a factor. I'm glad you see it my way... :ha:
Yes and no. Yes only in as much as I'm trying to show one of the differences between the Titans and playoff teams. They aren't generally relying on as many rookies as we are, and certainly not where they aren't being forced to by injury.
So? Those are the exceptions to the rule.
What happened to it being stupid to "compare this pile of crap organization to a playoff team"???
That 99 Titans team didn't have to rely on as many rookies, or as many young players in general as the 2005 team did. Our defense last year only started 3 players who had been in the NFL for more than 4 years (Bulluck, Sirmon, and KVB). In 1999, they had 5+ year veterans like Bishop, Robertson, Bowden, Wortham, Robinson, Ford, and Fisk.
That's just from the youth standpoint, and obviously there are other differences (like the obvious difference in talent). But clearly, the abundance of inexperience on this current team is a factor that was less of a problem in 1999.
Except for 2 corner backs, 2 Dlineman, 4 recievers, and almost every defensive and offensive reserve. Other than that we were loaded.RollTide said:
Over half of our roster is in their 1st or 2nd year. In football the starters take breaks quite often leaving young inexperienced players to come in an screw everything up.
And that's not a lot??
Our players stink. We got rid of all of our good starters last year; remember?? It seems pretty simple to me. If you get rid of all your good players and you don't replace them than odds are you aren't going to be a very good team.
As for the rest of your post, your right that several guys played terrible all year and that needs to be addressed in the off season. If you think that we should be winning with the talent that we have on this team your off your rocker. It takes time for talent to develop just like it always has with every other decsent player that has ever played. Sure, there are exceptions but generally it takes a couple of years. Every good team in the league that wins has key Vet leadership. We don't.
I agree with both perspectives. We are definately a young team. Probably the youngest team in the league. At the same time, there is no excuse for four wins with the schedule we played. Inexcusable. We had the talent this year to win 7 or 8 games. It didn't happen. It's definately someone's fault and falling back on excuses like youth doesn't help anyone. This seems like a good time to use one of my favorite quotes: "excuses are for losers". I hope we're not losers.
Someone mentioned mismanagement of the salary cap. I think that is the largest factor on why we have a subpar team right now. Had we cut our loyalties towards aging veterans instead of rewarding them with contract extensions, we could have been plugging in a few young players (ya know, like the dynasties do) per year instead of all at once like we're forced to do now.
RollTide said:
i counted 12 guys who i would consider played a big part of the year.
bironas
clauss
hill
pacman
brandon jones
laboy
odom
roby
roos
scaife
starks
troupe
you could also throw in waddell if you wanted to, because he played the nickle when woolfolk was hurt.
it was impossible. we would have a team of nine guys.Titans2008 said:
It's never impossible. Look at Denver or Pittsburgh. Or what New England is in the process of doing. Especially New England... did they care that Law had been the best player on their defense for the past 5 years ? Nope.. when he lost a step, he was out of town. That's what we should have been doing after our playoff runs. There seems to be a tendancy to overrate players or think that they still have gas left in the tank just because they were a small part of a larger success. The smart front offices look harder at the evaluations and make the tough decisions before they cripple the franchise for years to come.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
