adam Posted September 6, 2015 Report Share Posted September 6, 2015 So based on the latest 53-man roster, we have only added 4 players 30 yrs or older this offseason, yet we have removed 14 players from the 2014 53-man roster that would be 30+ this year. With one of our gains being Gafford (Long Snapper), we really only have 3 new positional players added over 30 (or 10 less compared to last year). That is a pretty big turnover coupled with the 25 new players on the 53-man roster. We will basically see a complete roster turnover in 2 offseasons, which is pretty remarkable. Looking to next year, we will also have some money to spend (and lock up Long/Alshon) with Allen/Forte coming off the books. 2015 53-man gains (30+ age) Gafford - 32 Montgomery - 32 Rolle - 32 Ball - 30 2014 53-man losses (29+ age last year) Garza - 35 Briggs - 34 Cain - 34 Tillman - 33 Williams - 32 Jennings - 31 Spurlock - 31 Scott - 30 Holmes - 30 Marshall - 30 Rosario - 30 Morgan - 29 Mulligan - 29 De la puente - 29 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted September 6, 2015 Report Share Posted September 6, 2015 We were way old to be that crappy. You usually see a little "old dog" fight left in guys like that. Good riddance to those that under perform. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears4Ever_34 Posted September 7, 2015 Report Share Posted September 7, 2015 I like the fact that we will have money to spend, but part of me wants to see us refrain from using most of it to fill vacancies that should be filled by players that Ryan Pace drafts. Aka-- the Packer model. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASHKUM BEAR Posted September 7, 2015 Report Share Posted September 7, 2015 I like the fact that we will have money to spend, but part of me wants to see us refrain from using most of it to fill vacancies that should be filled by players that Ryan Pace drafts. Aka-- the Packer model. I think they will have around 60 million. Cam Chancellor anyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted September 7, 2015 Report Share Posted September 7, 2015 I think they will have around 60 million. Cam Chancellor anyone? Sadly unless he gets cut, he won't be a free agent, and I don't think we should trade for him. Marshall Yanda might be out there. Wouldn't mind seeing him added to the line making it Bushrod-Yanda-Grasu-Slausson-Long. Should be able to do anything you want behind that line.t Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted September 8, 2015 Report Share Posted September 8, 2015 I like the fact that we will have money to spend, but part of me wants to see us refrain from using most of it to fill vacancies that should be filled by players that Ryan Pace drafts. Aka-- the Packer model. Really this is the model every NFL franchise is operating under. I'm not sure why everyone is so enamored with Green Bay's drafting when other clubs like Seattle have done far better in recent years. For sure they have found some talent in the draft at times but they've also missed on a few high picks. Julius Peppers has a $12mil cap hit for them this year and they had to do that in FA because they failed at drafting DE/OLB for several years. Anchor any team with a future Hall of Fame QB in this modern-rules league and you are almost a lock to make the playoffs each year. That makes all those other issues fade into the background. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chitownhustla Posted September 8, 2015 Report Share Posted September 8, 2015 Really this is the model every NFL franchise is operating under. I'm not sure why everyone is so enamored with Green Bay's drafting when other clubs like Seattle have done far better in recent years. For sure they have found some talent in the draft at times but they've also missed on a few high picks. Julius Peppers has a $12mil cap hit for them this year and they had to do that in FA because they failed at drafting DE/OLB for several years. Anchor any team with a future Hall of Fame QB in this modern-rules league and you are almost a lock to make the playoffs each year. That makes all those other issues fade into the background. The big thing with GB is the percentage of players on their 53 man roster that were drafted by GB is very high. At the end of the without Rodgers GB would be mediocre so you are right. But GB did draft Rodgers when everyone else passed on him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chitownhustla Posted September 8, 2015 Report Share Posted September 8, 2015 So based on the latest 53-man roster, we have only added 4 players 30 yrs or older this offseason, yet we have removed 14 players from the 2014 53-man roster that would be 30+ this year. With one of our gains being Gafford (Long Snapper), we really only have 3 new positional players added over 30 (or 10 less compared to last year). That is a pretty big turnover coupled with the 25 new players on the 53-man roster. We will basically see a complete roster turnover in 2 offseasons, which is pretty remarkable. Looking to next year, we will also have some money to spend (and lock up Long/Alshon) with Allen/Forte coming off the books. 2015 53-man gains (30+ age) Gafford - 32 Montgomery - 32 Rolle - 32 Ball - 30 2014 53-man losses (29+ age last year) Garza - 35 Briggs - 34 Cain - 34 Tillman - 33 Williams - 32 Jennings - 31 Spurlock - 31 Scott - 30 Holmes - 30 Marshall - 30 Rosario - 30 Morgan - 29 Mulligan - 29 De la puente - 29 Does anyone remember what the Bears average age was last year??? If my math is correct this years 53 man roster has an average age of 26.09. Edit.....one site has it 26.40. not a huge difference. I would like to take a look at the starters and the average age of both years to see is there is a big difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pixote Posted September 8, 2015 Report Share Posted September 8, 2015 Does anyone remember what the Bears average age was last year??? If my math is correct this years 53 man roster has an average age of 26.09. Edit.....one site has it 26.40. not a huge difference. I would like to take a look at the starters and the average age of both years to see is there is a big difference. I do not know if this is accurate, but seems like a legit breakdown of the last 3 years for each team average age at time of 53 cut down dates Average age of teams for last 3 years, 2014, 2013 & 2012. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted September 8, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 8, 2015 Does anyone remember what the Bears average age was last year??? If my math is correct this years 53 man roster has an average age of 26.09. Edit.....one site has it 26.40. not a huge difference. I would like to take a look at the starters and the average age of both years to see is there is a big difference. Biggs published this article a few hours after my post (I think he is trolling me): http://my.chicagotribune.com/#section/-1/a...e/p2p-84372323/ The average age last year was 27.08 (according to Biggs). There are slight variations based on when they sampled the 53-man roster (due to injury, suspension, and last minute cuts). Check this link out: http://www.phillyvoice.com/ranking-nfl-teams-age/ They have compiled a list of every team's age at cut down day (which is a pretty fair way to do it). The Bears were 30th last year, 29th in 2013, 28th in 2012, and are currently 19th this year. Only the Titans, 49ers, and Raiders got (more) younger between 2014 and 2015 than the Bears. Colts are the oldest team in the league, and the Rams are the youngest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted September 8, 2015 Report Share Posted September 8, 2015 Does anyone remember what the Bears average age was last year??? If my math is correct this years 53 man roster has an average age of 26.09. Edit.....one site has it 26.40. not a huge difference. I would like to take a look at the starters and the average age of both years to see is there is a big difference. I saw an article that listed the average age of our 2014 roster as 27.0x but I can't find the link. Reportedly we are now around 26 as you calculate. The average is not a big difference, standard deviation or median would provide more insight because we have rid ourselves of most of the players over 30. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.