Deep thoughts

As a sports fan one of the keys to enjoyment is not taking the losses so seriously that one might think you actually played in the game. Throwing things. Walking around angry for days. (Note: None of this applies to Bruins' fans). Kicking the dog. That's pretty lame. Unless you are fourteen. When the loss is over -- or a player traded -- it's best to just look forward to the next game, next season, next favorite player. It's supposed to be about entertainment. Fun.

MOSS: Happy trails.

Some losses, however, do stick with you longer. Roughing the passer. Fisk. Too many men on the ice (both times). Orr. Mets win! Mets win! Clemens. Tyree makes the catch. Vinatieri. Fourth-and-two. Those are the losses that come up over beers from time to time, discussed with an air of "did that really happen?"

Did the Pats really dump Randy Moss in Week 5 of the season? They did. But I'm not quite ready to let it go.

The stories are coming out that Moss was becoming a big headache. Tedy Bruschi said players were getting sick of Moss's issues. He also said that the two years he played with Moss he was a great teammate. But since guys like Bruschi left the team there was no one to keep him in line. Well, that's a self-serving statement. Moss was good but guys like Bruschi made him grow up. That may be true. But how exactly was Moss acting like a spoiled child? His only real sin was that he wanted to stay with the Patriots so badly that he couldn't keep his mouth shut about it. He picked a bad time to express it, but since I was hoping he and Brady would play three more years together too it didn't really bother me.

I never heard Moss complain about how many catches he got. Never. And if he exploded at the half of the Miami game, well, the offense had scored six points and really did not get much better in the second half. I've got some issues with the offensive play-calling too. And he's not the first player to get in an exchange with the coach at the half. But for him to have been traded you have to think Belichick thought it was only going to get worse unless they gave him a contract and obviously they decided that wasn't part of their plans. I've got some issues with that too.

It's possible that, instead of Belichick dumping a guy he was tired of, that the coach/GM told Moss that the team wasn't going to give him the new contract that he wanted. Maybe Moss heard that and said if you can trade me to a good team then go ahead and do that. Maybe it was done in a good atmosphere. Why does it automatically have to be because Moss was acting like a jerk? Or that Belichick is an egomaniac. Ultimately it doesn't matter why.

Bruschi said that the trade was a sign that the Pats were going back to their old way of winning as a team. He said that the Pats used to win together, not with just one guy. That is correct. But in true Bruschi fashion (which I love about him), he thinks that the Pats invented team football. They didn't. Sorry Tedy. The '70s Steelers, with all their Hall of Famers, were a total team. Same with the Niners of the '80s and Cowboys of the '90s. They had star players -- including some of the best deep threats to play the game -- but they got something from every man on the roster. They had playmakers, role players, star players, young players, clutch guys, tough guys, smart guys. This Pats team is no different. They have stars -- Brady, Moss, Big Vince -- young, promising players -- Mayo, Tate, Chung -- role players -- Woodhead, Sanders, Arrington. The 2010 Pats are as much as team as the 2001 Pats. Just different.

Bruschi sees Monday's game as a total team victory. And it was. All three units did their job when it counted. But it was mostly a special teams victory. The Ravens, coming to Gillette for the next game, are hurting in the secondary and it looked like the best way to win that game was to test them deep. With Randy Moss. Now they'll have to find another way to do it.

They won before Moss got here. They'll win now that he is gone. But I've actually heard some people say the Pats offense will be better -- better -- without Moss. Better? The thinking is that somehow Moss being on the field was preventing Brady from throwing short passes (yet Welker keeps catching 100 balls) or #81s presence was stopping the running game from kicking it into gear. I guess Marvin Harrison was holding back the Colts offense. Lynn  Swann was holding back the Steelers offense. Michael Irvin was holding back the Cowboys offense. Wonder why they didn't dump those guys?

Why? Because there are lots of ways to win a football game. And in the course of a 16-game season the good teams rely on all those ways to get victories. The Pats beat the Dolphins with three huge special teams plays. That doesn't happen too often. If you can get a win or two with special teams scoring and a few wins with the defense scoring then that's the difference between 12 wins and eight or nine. Some games are won with a grind-it-out running game. Some with a short pass attack. And some,  as we have seen, are won by connecting on a few deep bombs. The Pats just removed one of their ways to win a game.

Nostalgia seems to have people believing the Pats won every game 9-7 when they were winning those Super Bowls. Here are some scores from Pats' victories in '01: 44-13. 29-26. 38-17. 34-17. 38-6. Ya. Grind-it-out defensive football. They also won games by scores of 12-9, 17-16, and 20-13. Good teams win games in many ways.

I was listening to DA on 98.5 on the drive home and he said he was actually more excited about watching the Pats now that Moss is gone because he wants to see how the young players on the offense perform. I get that. I'll be interested to see that too. The offense will probably be fine. But more excited? Watch the video below and tell me you are more excited that you won't get to see catches like these again.