I'm just gonna throw this out there for conversation b/c, personally, I feel there's a trade off involved when a team decides to go this route, and that trade off is in the win column. Besides the knowledge, experience, and leadership we all know veterans provide, there's another aspect that's rarely if ever mentioned, and that deals with maturity, perspective, and priorities. While many of the young players are busy being caught up in living the NFL dream and all the benefits that playing in the league provides, the older players are realizing as their careers are hitting the tail end that there's more to life and that they only have a finite amount of time left to walk away from the game having accomplished something real- a championship. An opportunity to get their finger decorated (and I'm not talking the kind of finger decoration that ends up in your belly that Fin-O is used to when he's in his car and thinks no one is looking).

I feel this is something that's been missing the past 4 years b/c IMHO we sacrificed too much of the present to build for the future.
This year we had 5 starters at 30 years or older... and 11 starters with 3 or less years of experience (going by our opening day roster).
2012 had 3 starters at 30 or older... and 13 with 3 or less years of experience.
2011 had 4 at 30 or older... and 10 with 3 or less years of experience (not including both QBs with less than 3 years of starting experienece).
2010 had 2 at 30 or older... and 12 with 3 or less years of experience.
Conversely, our 2008 playoff team featured 10 starters at 30 or older [including #2 RB Ricky Williams]... and 10 with 3 or less years experience.

There was much better balance in 2008 and I think it showed in the win column.
Until we reach an upper level of QB play that's capable of both instilling confidence in the entire team and providing a focal point for everyone [including the coaching staff] to rally around, I think it would behoove us to seek better veteran balance, as close to what we had in 2008 without drastically sacrificing the future for immediate rewards. Don't confuse this with either an attempt to buy a season or mortgage the future for current wins b/c that's not what I'm talking about.

It would particularly help to take it so far as breaking down each unit or position [including backups]. For instance, we have three offensive positions with zero veteran presence- QB, TE, and RB.... and our 3 "veterans" at WR entered this season each with 4 years of experience which makes them more like veteran lights or teenagers. Defensively, at linebacker our "veteran" was Philip Wheeler with 3.5 years worth of starts, and I think this might've hurt us. On the other hand our defensive line and pass rushers have been the greatest strength of the team since 2008, and to my recollection it's the only unit/position that's seen a nice balance of youth and veteran presence. Similarly, I dont believe it's a coincidence our secondary saw a pleasant jump in production this year with the veteran addition of Grimes, Patterson seeing action, and Clemons entering his 5th season. This was following a 2012 year that saw a starting secondary [including nickel corner] with an average of 2.1 years of experience. It was even worse in 2011 with 3 secondary starters with 2 or less years of experience, and even worse than that in 2010 with 3 starters with 1 year of experience.

Based on our current roster structure I'm not sure what capacity we can incorporate a greater veteran presence but there somehow needs to be a conscious attempt to do so IMO. Incidentally, as many teasing references we make to Madden football, even their creators understand this dynamic. How many times have you played Franchise mode and drafted a killer young team headed by a studly young QB that's built to dominate in the future but you can't escape losing records through the first few seasons? To me that's been us, except we're seeing a greater revolving door of young players rather than reaping the rewards of watching those young players develop into vets. Case in point, in 2009 our secondary took a step back by ignoring the position in free agency which we could've used to inject an immediate and more reliable veteran presence into it and instead we spent 1st & 2nd rounders on cornerbacks who started as rookies. We took the time developing them and endured the woes involved, but what's the point if they're gonna be playing somewhere else by the time they hit their prime? The revolving door of youth happened when we went from Henne to Tannehill and again going from Long to Martin.... and it happened by intentionally getting younger and less experienced at linebacker and running back by ditching Dansby, Burnett, and Bush. Plus, a problem with having so much of the roster allocated for developing young players is not all those players will pan out. Therefore IMO it would better serve us to be more confidently selective with the young players we want to develop so that we can round out the roster with a better veteran presence rather than constantly churning the bottom of the roster by throwing young inexperienced sh-t against the wall to see if anything sticks.

That's the roster approach I'd like to see us take until Tannehill develops into a QB who can carry the team and until our new GM proves that he and his staff can productively draft an abundance of players who are worth developing and who appear good enough to want to keep around beyond their rookie contracts like we're seeing from Seattle and Green Bay. Tis all. Screw the Patriots. Carry on.

 

Do you think it'd be overspending to bring in Alex Mack [and move Pouncey to G where he can better utilize his mobility], Chad Rinehart at RG who has been successful in 2 different schemes [Buffalo & SD] who would get the job done but wouldn't cost as much as the bigger FA names at guard, and Anthony Collins at LT who probably won't break the bank like Albert or Monroe would. I don't think it'd be a greater financial commitment than San Fran is spending on their Oline, even after we extend/re-sign Pouncey. Then fill RT in the draft. That way we'd have the same unit for the next 4-5 years, and we'd kill it in the ground game with guys who can not only move but also situationally blow defenders off the ball in short yardage.

 

I believe Philbin said he was excited about the idea of getting younger at LB but I could be wrong.
Long was coincidental... but it still happened and hurt [even though losing him was probably the best thing for us].
The non-signing of Bush I didn't understand at all. If the leader, hard worker, and consummate professional that Reggie is isn't a Philbin guy then I don't want whatever the hell a Philbin guy is.

 

I think an improved leadership/veteran presence would only help to improve the team's overall focus and direction b/c many of the vets are done with bullsh-tting around and have reached the point in their careers where they wanna win and walk away with some hardware now that they feel their backs against the wall, and as such are less tolerant for those who putz around and thus would be more inclined to take on an active role in attempt to whip the underachievers into shape.
IMO it helps set the tone and mentality for the rest of the team both on and off the field, including the film room and how they prepare for the game.

For some reason Philbin seems to want to hoard this responsibility [after watching him dissolve last year's leadership council], and I have no idea why he's so determined with this considering he's a second year head coach who seems to have no propensity for both rallying the troops and positively infecting the locker room as a viable substitute to a vocal veteran presence.

 

Ironic considering he seems like a sackless head coach who reads from prepared index cards. If Philbin wants everyone else to keep their mouths shut then he better do a damn great job of using his own mouth as a substitute to fire up the troops, get everyone on the same page, and effect the locker room culture. But NOOOO, instead we saw the embarrassment that was Martin-Incognito and the collapse against NY & Buffalo to squash a postseason trip, not to mention prior 4th quarter collapses against Tampa, Carolina, and Buffalo, and second half collapses against New England and Baltimore.

In Seattle you got players who would run through a wall for their head coach. In Miami we have a head coach who jettisons hard workers and leaders b/c they care too much and are outspoken as a result, in turn probably leaving guys in fear of playing for Philbin, as well as being less willing to leave it all on the field for a coach they're not sure even cares about them or has their best interest in mind. I mean, if Philbin could ditch one of the hardest workers that Miami had seen in a while [Reggie Bush], then what message does it send to the rest of the team.

 

Yeah, and if you got a problem with it then tough crap.
It's pretty weak when an NFL head coach resorts to reading from index cards rather than confidently and knowledgeably speaking straight from the hip about things he should already damn well know the answers to or know how to say w/o being disingenuously rehearsed. Doesn't he watch the games from the sidelines? Doesn't he watch the film? Shouldn't he well know his own goddam team and its players? Then why the hell should there be a need for index cards prepared or edited by a damn attorney who for all intents and purposes has nothing to do with the football side of things. Really? Now run along.

 

Makes sense when considering he and a few others wanted to take on a greater leadership role for the greater good of the team but were dismissed by their tyrannical coach as if they're a group of kindergarten kids rather than the professionals they actually are.

 

...and how about the part of them being written or edited by Aponte who basically has nothing to do with the football side of stuff? When the poor run defense is being addressed or asked about, do you really want the team's financial person/attorney speaking through the head coach?

 

yes but you could clearly see Philbin's lack of enthusiasm for the leadership council, to the point it seemed to irritate him.

 

She's not his secretary. I doubt she was sitting in his office with her feet kicked up on the sofa jotting down his words verbatim even though she has her own job to do and he has a perfectly functioning right hand. It was a PR thing. But then again they like to hug each other so who knows.

 

yeah you're right, heaven forbid a head coach's press conference actually involve football. I'm sure it was all legal/financial stuff. :unsure:

 

No, not "in other words". Have you even read anything else myself or others have said? It's clearly not the main or only beef. Cmon now.

 

Jim and I were just pointing out how it could potentially push veteran leaders to want to play elsewhere like Jim mentioned about Long. IMO Philbin's tyrannical stance on the subject is detrimental to the team, or in the very least is counterproductive to achieving optimal success. I don't want a team of players all afraid to step up and lead b/c they're afraid of crunching Philbin's toes and in turn jeopardizing their future employment with the team. Philbin doesn't have the hoorah and personality in him like Rex Ryan to be able to put the entire responsibility on his shoulders. He wants to be the one doing the leading, keeping guys in line, and rallying the troops, but he sucks at it, and the team seems less responsive to him than it would be to a leadership council comprised of respected veterans.

 

Despite Miami making him a #1 pick and already overpaying him $58 million, Long rejected our non-insulting contract offer to instead sign elsewhere, and IIRC either Jake or his wife said it wasn't about the money, that it was about wanting to play for Fisher even though the Rams contract supposedly wasn't the highest offered.

 

That's been disproven many times. If what you're saying is true then every player would let himself hit the open market looking for maximum dollars rather than re-signing with his original team.

I specifically recall Jake's wife angrily correcting fans who said he greedily ditched Miami b/c of the money. We already made him a millionaire, and it's not like Miami offered him the league minimum. Plenty of people understand there's more to life than money, especially when they're already financially secure as Jake is, so why should he make concessions to his life and happiness just b/c of a few extra bucks?