Oldest/Youngest NFL Rosters

perrykemp

Well-Known Member
Messages
11,508
Reaction score
9,280
Interesting data on the oldest/youngest rosters in the NFL based on current rosters:

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/43916/2011-nfl-age-ranks-calling-all-graybeards

Cowboys are squarely in the middle of the pack with the 16th oldest roster -- 14th on offense and 21st on defense.

Tamba Bay has the youngest roster in the NFL -- no surprise.

I am surprised that yet again Green Bay has one of the youngest rosters in the NFL (31st oldest roster) -- seems like every year they have the youngest or one of the youngest rosters -- not sure how they do it and yet maintain all that talent.

I take the Cowboys <relative> youth as a good thing. It seemed to me the past year or two we felt like an older team...
 
perrykemp;4067680 said:
Interesting data on the oldest/youngest rosters in the NFL based on current rosters:

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/43916/2011-nfl-age-ranks-calling-all-graybeards

Cowboys are squarely in the middle of the pack with the 16th oldest roster -- 14th on offense and 21st on defense.

Tamba Bay has the youngest roster in the NFL -- no surprise.

I am surprised that yet again Green Bay has one of the youngest rosters in the NFL (31st oldest roster) -- seems like every year they have the youngest or one of the youngest rosters -- not sure how they do it and yet maintain all that talent.

I take the Cowboys <relative> youth as a good thing. It seemed to me the past year or two we felt like an older team...

They build through the draft, making solid selections year in and year out, and dont chase high-priced free agents.

It's really simple.
 
What does all of this data really mean? Fun to look at but veteran leadership does not always win Super Bowls.
 
Why am I not suprised that Green Bay was used as one of the examples? lol
 
Next year Dallas will be one of the youngest teams in the NFL when Newman, Brooking, Koiser, Coleman and maybe even Guorde gone.
 
Good Lord. You'd think the Commanders would at least be young while being this bad for this long. According to that list they're the 5th oldest team in the league.
 
WoodysGirl;4067880 said:
Why am I not suprised that Green Bay was used as one of the examples? lol

Are you referring to the article because I don't see them mentioned or are you referring to my comment?
 
NextGenBoys;4067686 said:
They build through the draft, making solid selections year in and year out, and dont chase high-priced free agents.

It's really simple.

Next...........
 
That is misleading. Kitna, Brooking by themselves would drop us several slots.
 
burmafrd;4068192 said:
That is misleading. Kitna, Brooking by themselves would drop us several slots.

This. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure they recently discovered some ancient Egyptian heiroglyphs that mention Kitna. :laugh2:
 
yimyammer;4067962 said:
Are you referring to the article because I don't see them mentioned or are you referring to my comment?
Not you. Original post.
 
Yeah, I remember during the playoffs thinking GB has a super legit shot at "dynasty"...particularly when you consider how many injuries they had. I'm really curious to see what Finley does. And Rodgers looks like he's about to blow the roof off...The one old key guy that comes to mind is Woodson.

Its probably not too disimilar to us in 92, weren't we the youngest team?
 
NextGenBoys;4067686 said:
They build through the draft, making solid selections year in and year out, and dont chase high-priced free agents.

It's really simple.

Asomugha! ;)
 
Green Bay was 3-5 on the road last season .. apparently those super awesome smartly drafted players are not so super awesome smartly drafted players outside of Green Bay.

So by that standard, as long as we go 4-4 on the road each year, our middle-aged team must be better, huh?

Green Bay has one big advantage .. they are very tough to beat at home.

Yet another reporter ignoring important factors that would dilute the all important point they are trying to make.

#reality
 
I think these age rankings are kind of silly. A couple of guys like Brooking and Kitna can really skew the numbers. To me it would make more sense to count the number of starters under the age of 25 and 30. Team A and B could have the same number of quality young players except Team A has a 41 year old back up QB and Team B has a 22 year old rookie back up who never took a snap. Team A would appear to be 1 year older on average then Team B, but what does it really mean?
 
Reality;4068406 said:
Green Bay was 3-5 on the road last season .. apparently those super awesome smartly drafted players are not so super awesome smartly drafted players outside of Green Bay.

So by that standard, as long as we go 4-4 on the road each year, our middle-aged team must be better, huh?

Green Bay has one big advantage .. they are very tough to beat at home.

Yet another reporter ignoring important factors that would dilute the all important point they are trying to make.

#reality

Didn't they go 3-0 in the playoffs on the road? Or was their first game at home?

Regardless, they are a good team with a great QB and they seem to be lead by a good coaching staff and GM, so I suspect that as long as Rogers is healthy, they'll be in the conversation year in and out.

Their win last year, youth, talent & intensity reminded me of how the Cowboys won the SB in 92 and many people thought it was a year early
 

Staff online

Forum statistics

Threads
474,003
Messages
14,505,678
Members
24,207
Latest member
TomGiantsfan
Back
Top