Chemistry lessons

The Patriots are 7-5 after losing three of their last four games. That hasn't happened around here for quite a while. But it was really only a matter of time. You can't have a guy get knocked out and fall out of bounds unconscious so that his fumble doesn't count every year. We all know that, right?

Is the dynasty over? When the Pats aren't a playoff contender then the dynasty is officially over. As long as the Pats have Belichick and Brady and win 10+ games in a season then they still have a shot at a title. Just two seasons ago the team was, and this we all do know, 16-0. Even Joe Montana's 49ers sprinkled in several 10-6 seasons among all the Super Bowls. The Pats can still go 11-5 and host a playoff game. Sorry, that's not a failure. Lose to the Panthers this week and that's a different story. As long as Brady is healthy enough to play I can't see that happening. But if you listen to all the team chemistry experts this week you'd think the Pats had lost 10 in a row and players were taking swings at each other on the sideline.

Sure. Belichick had to send Moss, Thomas, and two others home for coming late to a meeting due to the snowstorm. That's not a good sign. But that doesn't mean the team is coming unglued. It hasn't reached that point yet but why wait till it does when you can write or talk as if it has? More fun that way, right? Nope. Why follow a team if you expect them to fall apart and lose to the Panthers or Bills in the next two weeks? What's the fun in expecting the Pats to let the division get away? They've lost some tough games the past month and that has a way of making a team look less than happy. Less than together. But team chemistry is overrated. Win a few games and the chemistry couldn't be better. Lose a few -- especially close ones -- and the chemistry can go south quickly.

It's the sports equivalent of the chicken-and-the-egg. What comes first? Good team chemistry or winning? Winning breeds good team chemistry but can you win unless you have it in the first place? Amateur psychologists (and ex-Pats greats) Ted Johnson and Richard Seymour weighed in on that subject in the wake of the Pats last-second loss to Miami. They questioned the chemistry and leadership on defense. I wrote early in the season after the win over the Ravens that "They have lost a ton of experience with the departures of Bruschi, Harrison, Vrabel, and Seymour. That may catch up to them when the stakes get bigger later in the year." Is it catching up to them? They had to get younger and faster. But did they get too young too fast? In the last-second losses this year would Vrabel or Seymour (the two players the Pats chose to remove) have made a difference? You never know. But they were on the teams that let some big wins slip away in the playoffs the last few seasons.

The young defense might look lost and dispirited right now but it looked darn good after the first Miami game. Or the Atlanta game. And certainly after the Ravens game. They could have lost any of those. Just like they could have won any of the losses except the Saints game. It's often a very thin line between wins and losses in the NFL. What puts a team on the right side of that line? Chemistry. Experience. Talent. Smarts. They are all a factor. But in the NFL the games are mostly decided by one simple factor -- who makes the most big plays in all three phases of the game. Make the plays when they are there to be made and even a group of players that are at each other's throats look like they love each other. (Right T.O.?)

Seymour says he could have provided the kind of leadership that can make a difference in close games. He might be right. But it's not like his presence assures you of tranquility and confidence. The team chemistry of the '02 Pats -- with Seymour and Johnson as starters -- sure didn't look all that great as they stumbled in the middle of the season and missed the playoffs. That looked like a team with a serious leadership problem. They won the next two Super Bowls. So you just never know.

As Brady said after the Miami game: "We've had a lot of fourth down opportunities this year and we're just not making the plays" It's the second part of that sentence that says it all. They are not making the plays. But the plays are there to be made. Even the most fervent "The season is over and the dynasty is dead" believer has to admit that if this team can start putting together a string of 60-minute games to build some momentum going into the playoffs then they are still a very dangerous team.

Like in '02 after the first Super Bowl, maybe it's one of those years where they just don't put it all together. I'm not even close to being convinced of that yet.