Taking the fourth

WEEK 10
Before last night's loss to the Colts, Bill Belichick was the best coach I've ever seen. Today he still is. You might not get a lot of people to agree with that after last night. But it's true. And no, Ron Borges, I'm not drinking the Kool-Aid. I'm not a member of the imaginary "In Bill We Trust" club that you drag out like the old, dusty cliche that it is. I'm a longtime football fan who knows a great coach when he sees one. Great coaches make decisions on and off the field that don't work out sometimes. Some of those decisions that don't work stand out more than others. Like last night's fourth-down call.

So today we've added a new catch phrase to our sports lingo here in New England. "What would you have done on fourth down?" If I heard that question asked once on the radio and television today, I heard it a thousand times. Me? I would punt there 100-out-of-100 times. Doesn't make it the right decision. Just the one I would make.

So why did Belichick make the opposite choice? Oh, of course there are a lot of armchair opinions on what he was thinking. It's amusing how people think they can know what's going on in someone else's head. They can't. But that didn't stop the opinions from pouring out nonstop. I tuned into talk radio at several points today: driving my daughter to school at 7 a.m.; heading out for coffee around 10; running some errands around 1; and returning home around 5. The talk was the same each time. The exact same. I'm guessing it was the same all day. That's the beauty of sports-talk radio. You don't really have to listen to it to know what is being said.

Many offered the opinion that the coach thought his defense was tired so he didn't want to risk putting them back on the field. Others thought he just has no faith in his young D and didn't think they could stop Manning no matter how many yards he had to go. Others (you know who you are) thought it was Belichick's massive ego that got the better of him. He made the biggest call of the season to prove that he's smarter than everyone else? That one I really have a hard time with.

The call looked a lot like the one Belichick made against the Falcons earlier in the season. The Pats faced a 4th-and-1 from their own 24-yard line with just over five minutes to go in the third quarter ahead by six. They went for it and got the first down. The experts saw that as a lack of confidence in the defense. At the time I wrote that it looked more to me like a challenge to his offense, one of the best in the league, to take over the game. Last night's call struck me the same way. When the Pats came up short on third down and Belichick stopped Brady as he was coming off the field a friend texted me "Is he going for it here?" I responded "You know he is." I just figured Belichick thought they could get two yards. It seemed like too big a risk to me and since they lost the game it looks like it was too big a risk. But the call didn't surprise me.

And the reactions today sure don't surprise me. And that includes those of Tedy Bruschi and Rodney Harrison. They think the Pats should have punted. That's their opinion. Doesn't make them right or wrong. And nowhere in there did I hear them say they think it was stupid or a display of ego run wild. As Bruschi said in a part of his quote that was often left out of the sound bites "Bill was doing what he thought gave the team the best chance to win just like he's always done." Exactly.

I was surprised that people didn't focus more on the spot of the ball. I know. Blaming the refs is lame. I agree. If you need two yards throw it five just to be sure. But... Faulk had the first down. And then the side judge came running in making the international signal for "bobbling" and spotted the ball short. Only problem is that Faulk had his back to the side judge. Watching the replay you can tell that there was really no way for him to see the ball and if it was being bobbled or not. His view was blocked. And yet he made the call. X-ray vision maybe? The refs who could see the ball didn't make the bobbling signal. Maybe that's because the replay showed Faulk had pretty good control of the ball right where he caught it. Across the 30-yard line. In the more than 30 years of watching football I have never seen a ref make the bobble call for the spot of the ball. On in bounds plays? Hundreds of times. But never for the spot. I'm sure it's happened but I've never seen it. The Pats needed to get to the 30 and Faulk was over the 30 when he caught it. If they get the spot what are people saying today? I'm saying they were lucky to get out of there with a win but oh what a win.

I briefly listened to Mazz and Felger on the drive home. (Who was the guy who thought putting Mazz and his whining voice on the radio was a good idea? Now that's a decision I really don't agree with.) They were debating how much of a hangover the team will have after this game. Going so far as to speculate that the team will be in a funk all week and could lose to the Jets next Sunday. They might lose to the Jets, but it won't have anything to do with the loss to the Colts. Football doesn't work that way. Never has. Anyone who doesn't get that just isn't paying attention.

The Pats get stomped by the Steelers early in the '03 season. Totally embarrassed. What happens? They lose only one more game. The Pats are discovered to be taping opponent's defensive signals after a game against the Jets. A storm of controversy. What happens? They destroy the Chargers and go on to an undefeated season. A hangover? Doesn't happen. When Belichick or any other coach says "We're moving on to the next game" that's exactly what they are doing. That's the beauty of the sport. Each week is its own entity. Ever hear of "On any given Sunday"? Sure, the loss to the Colts will have ramifications come time to decide playoff seeding. But as for next week's game with the Jets? Not a factor.

The NFL Network's Warren Saap weighed in, playing the Tom Jackson role ("The players hate their coach.") in the aftermath of last night's loss. "Now the ballclub is questioning if the next thing he tells us is correct." I seriously doubt Sapp has talked to anyone in the Pats locker so how he knows what they are thinking is puzzling. Right Mr. Jackson? The team played a great game against the unbeaten Colts on the road and were up 31-14 early in the fourth quarter. So clearly Belichick and his staff had done something right to that point. It's hard to believe that one decision that doesn't work out erases all that. He put the ball in the hands of Tom Brady and his selection of weapons. Hard to say that was stupid. At least for me.

I heard Belichick compared with everyone from Yoda to Bill Buckner to Grady Little. I just can't take that kind of nonsense seriously. Is he supposed to be perfect? You can't screw up every now and then? (Borges knows about that). The Pats, without several key starters, went into Indy and were taking it to them. Then Indy and Manning gave it right back to them. That's what makes this such a great rivalry. No game is ever over.

This game just adds another epic chapter in the rivalry. What a chapter. Even when the Pats went up 31-14 early in the fourth quarter you knew that Manning would lead a charge. "I'm still nervous," my nephew texted me. I texted him back "Because it's Manning." That team is too good. They are never rattled. No different than when the Colts drove to put the first touchdown on the board and the Pats responded with 24 straight points. Two heavyweights going toe-to-toe.

There were so many great moments in the game that it's too bad the ending has dominated all the talk. Starting with Dwight Freeney wearing a Yankees cap in his photo when the Colts D was introduced. That should have drawn a 15-yard penalty for taunting.

The Colts scored first and shot off some indoor fireworks that, ooops, set the artificial turf on fire. "The Colts offense is on fire as well," Al Michaels cracked. Nice one Al. Did Leno write that? The other big question of the night other than why did Belichick go for it on fourth down was why was the dome roof closed? According to weather.com the temperature was 52 degrees and the forecast was for clouds but no rain. And yet the roof was closed. I thought the Colts built the retractable roof to show their team can handle the harsh elements that comes with playoff football. I guess 52 degrees is a little too harsh.

The Brady-Moss connection then took over. Brady to Moss for 55 yards. Brady to Moss for 63 yards. Brady to Moss for a 5-yard touchdown at the start of the fourth and fatal quarter. "I absolutely love what they are doing here," said Chris Collinsworth after the Pats took a 31-14 lead. I loved it too.

The Colts then responded by going 80 yards in two minutes for a touchdown. That was the key moment in the game as I see it. The Pats have gotten younger and quicker on defense for that very moment. The Pats D ran out of gas in the '06 AFC title game and one year later in the Super Bowl. The young guys were supposed to change that. They didn't. That's the thing that's most concerning after the loss. This was the biggest test of the year for Meriweather, Bodden, McGowan, Mayo, and the defense. And they failed. They'll get another test in two weeks against the Saints. They'll need to find a way to stop a team for four quarters, not just three, by then.

The Colts continued to close the gap -- with the help of an outrageous interference call on Darius Butler, there I go blaming the refs again -- and then Belichick made his decision that will be talked about long into the winter if the Pats have to go to Indy in the playoffs and lose.

If only Brady had been able to complete a pass -- say to Kevin Faulk -- for the two yards that the Pats needed. Then they could have run out the clock and taken home a much deserved victory.

Oh, that's right. He did.