Is the "Aging Defense" Narrative Overblown

[Scorpion05]

I've been watching a lot of sports talk shows, and between that and some of the comments I see here a lot of people keep saying our defense is "Aging." Is this more a case of trying to fit a narrative?


Richard Sherman - 29 years old
Kam Chancellor - 29 years old
Earl Thomas - 28 years old
Bobby Wagner - 27 years old
KJ Wright - 28 years old
Michael Bennett - 32 years old


When all have been healthy, we've been number 1 or near number 1 in the league. Their drawback is that they're getting expensive, but unless you're (rarely) hitting aces in the draft, it's hard to replace that kind of production

In comparison looking around the league, here are some other top defensive players

1) Terrell Suggs - 35 years old
2) Von Miller - 28 years old
3) JJ Watt - 28 years old
4) Calais Campbell - 31 years old
5) Cameron Jordan - 28 years old
6) Sean Lee - 31 years old

I would also add that we have HOF level talent on defense, and those kinds of players tend to play great until their mid-30s. I think if we infuse our veterans with some more young players on defense, we could once again have something really special. I think we're in for a rude awakening if we scrap a lot of players and realize it's hard to replace them. Then we'll be calling for Schneider's head, and then everything will fall apart. Our main issue is coaching, and we need a overhaul of that staff

I know others will argue that you follow the "Belichick way" and release players sooner rather than later, but we're not the Patriots. And no one in the league has effectively copied what they do over a sustained period of time. Not to mention, the Patriots have been in a weaker division for over a decade, and have never had a Rams/49ers threat like what we're gonna face. The Patriots also have a great system with great coaches that can get results with average talent. We can't imitate that, no matter who we fire

So my main point is, stay the course with much of our roster. Cut who we can if it means signing a veteran Guard and Right tackle, and revamp our RB/WR situation. But I would like to see most of our defense back. They give us top 5 results and that shouldn't be taken for granted. What do you guys think?

 

[hawknation2017]

Those guys have played a lot of games over the last few years. Getting some rest could benefit Thomas, Sherman, and Chancellor next year.

I kind of like the idea of resting Wagner and Bennett for this next road game.

 

[IrishNW]

its the biggest false narrative surrounding this team. 28-29 years isn't even old for a running back.

 

[Coug_Hawk08]

Including playoffs, they have more wear than their age directly suggests. You also said ‘when healthy’, which, with all the wear and tear from extra games is not at all a given. Every single one of those players is currently injured or coming off a recent injury. They are going to cost more and more money, and are very likely to keep missing games. 3rd contracts rarely work out, players fall off quick.

You are handing picking top players from other teams, it’s not really a great comp because our dilemma is we have a lot of players in the same boat. Too many players in the same age range, similar money demands. We need to be extremely selective from that list going forward.

 

[Grahamhawker]

I've been watching a lot of sports talk shows, and between that and some of the comments I see here a lot of people keep saying our defense is "Aging." Is this more a case of trying to fit a narrative?


Richard Sherman - 29 years old
Kam Chancellor - 29 years old
Earl Thomas - 28 years old
Bobby Wagner - 27 years old
KJ Wright - 28 years old
Michael Bennett - 32 years old


When all have been healthy, we've been number 1 or near number 1 in the league. Their drawback is that they're getting expensive, but unless you're (rarely) hitting aces in the draft, it's hard to replace that kind of production

In comparison looking around the league, here are some other top defensive players

1) Terrell Suggs - 35 years old
2) Von Miller - 28 years old
3) JJ Watt - 28 years old
4) Calais Campbell - 31 years old
5) Cameron Jordan - 28 years old
6) Sean Lee - 31 years old

I would also add that we have HOF level talent on defense, and those kinds of players tend to play great until their mid-30s. I think if we infuse our veterans with some more young players on defense, we could once again have something really special. I think we're in for a rude awakening if we scrap a lot of players and realize it's hard to replace them. Then we'll be calling for Schneider's head, and then everything will fall apart. Our main issue is coaching, and we need a overhaul of that staff

I know others will argue that you follow the "Belichick way" and release players sooner rather than later, but we're not the Patriots. And no one in the league has effectively copied what they do over a sustained period of time. Not to mention, the Patriots have been in a weaker division for over a decade, and have never had a Rams/49ers threat like what we're gonna face. The Patriots also have a great system with great coaches that can get results with average talent. We can't imitate that, no matter who we fire

So my main point is, stay the course with much of our roster. Cut who we can if it means signing a veteran Guard and Right tackle, and revamp our RB/WR situation. But I would like to see most of our defense back. They give us top 5 results and that shouldn't be taken for granted. What do you guys think?

And there is the rub (highlighted section).

Every situation is different. This team did not evolve like the Patriots and you can't apply all of Belichick's formulas and make them work here. Hindsight is 20/20, but how do you NOT resign critical components of a generation secondary and defense in general? The Hawks' situation is made more difficult because all of those parts came of age at the same time, needed new contracts in the same window, etc. I just don't think this situation happens often quite the way it did in Seattle.

Going back to hindsight, mistakes have been made, injuries have happened, attitudes have changed. I see the evolution as very interesting- but it has created a situation now where very difficult financial and personnel decisions must be made if this team is to stay competitive.

I think if you successfully add a few parts, and we get luckier with injuries, the D can still be top 5. But, boy...we better hit on some of these decisions or the next few years could be rough.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

1) Terrell Suggs - 35 years old
2) Von Miller - 28 years old
3) JJ Watt - 28 years old
4) Calais Campbell - 31 years old
5) Cameron Jordan - 28 years old
6) Sean Lee - 31 years old

Who are these players surrounded by? Most on this list are surrounded by younger defensive starters.

Our problem is not having 1-2 vets, it's that we now have almost our entire defensive core on the decline.

So yes, you can have older vets playing well and contributing like you've listed above, but it's hard to win with 75% older vets. Especially for a team that has dedicated the majority of their cap on the defensive side of the ball.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Great OP from start to finish.

Earl? Top 5 at his position, Pro Bowler.

Sherman? Same thing.

Wagner? DPOY candidate.

Bennett? 7.5 sacks. Closer to not being worth his antics, but still, 7.5 sacks is hard to get rid of.

K.J. Wright? Most underrated LB in the league and everyone on this defense has said so. You saw the imapct of his absence last week.

The DL consists almost entirely of young, fresh players aside from Sheldon Richardson.

Our starting right CB is a rookie.

Seriously, if you whittle it down by process of elimination, the entire old/broken down/overpaid narrative seems to be stemming almost entirely from Kam Chancellor. He's been injured and in decline more than anyone else, but I'd argue he's still Top 10 at his position.

It just goes to show how interesting fan perception can be.

 

[hawknation2017]

Defense next year could return to being great. The question is how do they make the offense great.

 

[Scorpion05]

Good points made by everyone so far

To clarify, I am aware that some of those players I selected from other teams are either surrounded by some young talent, or that we have a lot of players in the same age range.

My main point was, I think we're uniquely different in that we have quality HOF talent. Players that will likely be really good to great for at least 3-5 more years before they fall off a cliff. Players that even at their age will give us a top 5 defense, top 6 at worse. Even if they lose a step. I'm not saying to keep every single player, but I think we shouldn't let go of too many of them. I'm most open to letting Kam go, as I think a more versatile safety can help us. But I don't think you let go of a talent like Sherm or Earl for example

We're not the 85 Bears, but those guys mostly stayed together as a unit in a much more physical era for a longer period of time. But of course the league has changed drastically since then

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Seriously, if you whittle it down by process of elimination, the entire old/broken down/overpaid narrative seems to be stemming almost entirely from Kam Chancellor. He's been injured and in decline more than anyone else, but I'd argue he's still Top 10 at his position.

My old narrative stems from the fact that all the players you listed are injured or in Earl's case were injured.

All these guys CAN still play at a high level, but not at the consistently high level needed to win a SB. Some bad luck, but in most cases, they're just old now and are going to be injured.................a LOT.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Seriously, if you whittle it down by process of elimination, the entire old/broken down/overpaid narrative seems to be stemming almost entirely from Kam Chancellor. He's been injured and in decline more than anyone else, but I'd argue he's still Top 10 at his position.

My old narrative stems from the fact that all the players you listed are injured or in Earl's case were injured.

All these guys CAN still play at a high level, but not at the consistently high level needed to win a SB. Some bad luck, but in most cases, they're just old now and are going to be injured.................a LOT.

Yeah, I just don't make the automatic connection between age and injury as strongly as you do, especially not when the intent is obviously just to blame the coaching staff. You're not going to have an easy time replacing every single damn Pro Bowler. At some point, you keep some guys.

 

[hawknation2017]

Good points made by everyone so far

To clarify, I am aware that some of those players I selected from other teams are either surrounded by some young talent, or that we have a lot of players in the same age range.

My main point was, I think we're uniquely different in that we have quality HOF talent. Players that will likely be really good to great for at least 3-5 more years before they fall off a cliff. Players that even at their age will give us a top 5 defense, top 6 at worse. Even if they lose a step. I'm not saying to keep every single player, but I think we shouldn't let go of too many of them. I'm most open to letting Kam go, as I think a more versatile safety can help us. But I don't think you let go of a talent like Sherm or Earl for example

We're not the 85 Bears, but those guys mostly stayed together as a unit in a much more physical era for a longer period of time. But of course the league has changed drastically since then

On the other hand, Kam Chancellor was playing some great football and was one of the top rated strong safeties in the league before the "stringer."

 

[Coug_Hawk08]

On the other hand, Kam Chancellor was playing some great football and was one of the top rated strong safeties in the league before the "stringer."

Kam was playing well, no doubt. But you can’t help the club from the tub, and paying someone 12/m a year to play half seasons takes its toll. If he were making like 5-6m, I don’t think anyone would be talking about moving on, because the value would be appropriate or worth his associated injury risk.

Maybe my larger point is, all of this players want to be paid for what they have done, and that warrants top dollar. However, they all have increased risk vs rewards nowadays. Injury and subsequent cap and roster construction implications loom large on those decisions.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Seriously, if you whittle it down by process of elimination, the entire old/broken down/overpaid narrative seems to be stemming almost entirely from Kam Chancellor. He's been injured and in decline more than anyone else, but I'd argue he's still Top 10 at his position.

My old narrative stems from the fact that all the players you listed are injured or in Earl's case were injured.

All these guys CAN still play at a high level, but not at the consistently high level needed to win a SB. Some bad luck, but in most cases, they're just old now and are going to be injured.................a LOT.

Yeah, I just don't make the automatic connection between age and injury as strongly as you do, especially not when the intent is obviously just to blame the coaching staff. You're not going to have an easy time replacing every single damn Pro Bowler. At some point, you keep some guys.

I never said replace every pro bowler. Before this year, or even last I would have kept Earl and Wagner, and traded Sherman, Cliff and Bennett...........and not resigned Kam.

Instead we kept them all and even gave Kam a fat new contract that's now hamstrung us into next year because of a huge dead cap hit.

THOSE are the hard decisions I'm taking about. Would we be better now? Idk, but if you trust John and Pete to re-load with that much available cap space AND 4-5 more draft picks? Then the answer is yes.

Problem is I think Pete and John both know they don't want to go through another rebuild, so they're mortgaged the future for this year, and failed miserably.

 

[FidelisHawk]

1) Terrell Suggs - 35 years old
2) Von Miller - 28 years old
3) JJ Watt - 28 years old
4) Calais Campbell - 31 years old
5) Cameron Jordan - 28 years old
6) Sean Lee - 31 years old

Who are these players surrounded by? Most on this list are surrounded by younger defensive starters.

Our problem is not having 1-2 vets, it's that we now have almost our entire defensive core on the decline.

So yes, you can have older vets playing well and contributing like you've listed above, but it's hard to win with 75% older vets. Especially for a team that has dedicated the majority of their cap on the defensive side of the ball.

I see your point, but what more should they do, a side from just “picking probowl players” in the draft? Since 2012 they’ve drafted 9 DTs, 4 DEs, 8 DBs, they’ve brought in cheap FAs, expansive FAs, UDFAs and made trades. All to get younger and improve on an already pretty good defensive.

Because they haven’t been able to find these young aggressive cheap players doesn’t mean they are not trying to do exactly what you’re suggesting.

And let’s not even get started on the offensive side...

 

[johnnyfever]

Retain:
Sherman- the guy takes away half the field and has been extremely consistent AND healthy. This is very difficult to find, and nearly impossible to replace easily.

Thomas-again, durable, fast, tough and smart. Must keep

Wagner-see above. The guy is a beast and incredibly consistent.

Bennett --install say what you will, but he is a team leader. Believe whatever you want about his politics, but he is and has been solid. Needs to watch for the ball being snapped though.

The above vets are in my opinion the "core" of the defense. They are paid as such. Some of the rookies look good and are developing well, and some of the hired one year mercs are helping to fill the void. Mcdougald seems to be doing a good job and could become one of the core, but that will depend on money.

Rest of the positions are a draft/udfa if we want to spend more on the offense.

 

[Sgt. Largent]

1) Terrell Suggs - 35 years old
2) Von Miller - 28 years old
3) JJ Watt - 28 years old
4) Calais Campbell - 31 years old
5) Cameron Jordan - 28 years old
6) Sean Lee - 31 years old

Who are these players surrounded by? Most on this list are surrounded by younger defensive starters.

Our problem is not having 1-2 vets, it's that we now have almost our entire defensive core on the decline.

So yes, you can have older vets playing well and contributing like you've listed above, but it's hard to win with 75% older vets. Especially for a team that has dedicated the majority of their cap on the defensive side of the ball.

I see your point, but what more should they do, a side from just “picking probowl players” in the draft? Since 2012 they’ve drafted 9 DTs, 4 DEs, 8 DBs, they’ve brought in cheap FAs, expansive FAs, UDFAs and made trades. All to get younger and improve on an already pretty good defensive.

Because they haven’t been able to find these young aggressive cheap players doesn’t mean they are not trying to do exactly what you’re suggesting.

And let’s not even get started on the offensive side...

You keep your core of Wagner, Earl, Reed, Clark, Jones, Griffin, etc and then use the freed up cap space to go after younger talent.............AND draft.

It's not a perfect science by any means, and it's easy for me to nitpick in hind sight.

But IMO John and Pete are guilty of doing the cardinal sin of managing a roster...............rewarding players for past performance, and allowing their loyalty to get in the way of making some tough decisions.

 

[RussB]

Its not just there age, its how much they have played in a physical style. Also defensive backs in general start to decline at about age 30 anyway. You look at Kam for example he plays in a very physical style that breaks his body down, in his prime a few years back he still didnt have that much wear and tear but at this point he cant play a full season anymore and is likely to retire anyway, hes not the same after all the injuries and will probably get more if he keeps playing hes past his best. Sherman also was slowly declining as a cover corner, he is still elite but hes not the same shutdown guy anymore he was 2013-14. I read an article about corners they fall off after they hit 30 years old. The achilles tear wont help him either.

Then guys like bennett and cliff also have played alot and are declining and suffering more injuries, you look at all that and its exactly why everyone is saying they are done. Because they are, they arent the same players they were in their prime and wont get better from now on. The LOB is not the feared defnse it was anymore when every guy was playing at their best.

 

[Scorpion05]

Seriously, if you whittle it down by process of elimination, the entire old/broken down/overpaid narrative seems to be stemming almost entirely from Kam Chancellor. He's been injured and in decline more than anyone else, but I'd argue he's still Top 10 at his position.

My old narrative stems from the fact that all the players you listed are injured or in Earl's case were injured.

All these guys CAN still play at a high level, but not at the consistently high level needed to win a SB. Some bad luck, but in most cases, they're just old now and are going to be injured.................a LOT.

Yeah, I just don't make the automatic connection between age and injury as strongly as you do, especially not when the intent is obviously just to blame the coaching staff. You're not going to have an easy time replacing every single damn Pro Bowler. At some point, you keep some guys.

I see your point Sgt. but I kind of agree with Montana. Our biggest, most glaring flaw to me is Cable and Bevell. If we have a competent offense, I don't see why we can't win a SB. I just don't think being 2013 great on defense is necessary. Our next Super Bowl can be won with a solid defense and a competent, consistent offense

 

[oldhawkfan]

I've been thinking about this for awhile. Everyone ages so essentially every team has an aging defense. If a majority of the stars on this defense were over 30, then I would definitely say yes. To me its more like this defense is really in the prime of their careers. Maybe as individuals some of them have bodies that are aging faster and are more prone to injuries, but I don't think you can really classify them as "aging". In 2-3 years with the same core players as now, then absolutely, yes, they are an aging defense.

I'm not even sure where this aging defense narrative came from. Avril and Bennett are really the only 2 that fit into this category. The seemingly somewhat appearance of the demise of this defense comes down to two things to me.
1. An overly abundant case of injuries. The amount of all pros missing games and out for the year has been staggering.
2. An inept DC. Much has been said about the lack of a pass rush. Going into this season and with the acquisition of Sheldon Richardson, the narrative was that this was going to be a punishing D-line that few would handle. Even before the injuries started to decimate the defense, they weren't getting to the QB like they should. I seriously don't think Richard knows how to dial up a blitz or he his afraid of them. With this D-line they should be up there in sacks with Jacksonville.