Reading material

It's the final installment of reading material. If only all the stories I've read since last Sunday were about a historic fourth Pats' Super Bowl title, and the team winning it for Myra, and a parade -- instead of another last-second defeat. If only.

Despite the subject matter, there were several good columns. Some advised that I stop looking back at the car wreck. Others advised that I start looking ahead. Both good advice.

• ESPNBoston's Jackie MacMullan (still sounds weird) wrote a great piece asking for a big "calm down." I sometimes forget just how great a writer MacMullan is. 
• The Herald's Ron Borges (that still sounds fitting) is someone I make myself read every now and then. It's like taking medicine. Sometimes you have to fill that little cup and drink that vile red liquid no matter how much you don't want to. Borges is a great writer, as knowledgeable about football as any sportswriter .. it's just that his take on the Pats is so often slanted to the "I told you they wouldn't win again" angle that it's just not worth it. But it's worth reading a post-mortem from the Borges's persective.
• The Globe's Greg Bedard has the same view of the fateful Brady-to-Welker pass that I do. It was way more a bad pass than it was a missed catch.
• But that's enough about THAT game... On ESPN.com, Mel "The Hair" Kiper has updated his mock draft for the second of what will be 183 times. His 2.0 version has the Pats using both their first-round picks (I'll believe it when I see it) and taking outside linebacker Vinny Curry from Marshall and D lineman Kendell Reyes from UConn. I love the Curry pick. He is a versatile athlete who can get after the quarterback from anywhere on the field. With that second pick I'm hoping cornerback Janoris Jenkins slips down to them. If not him, then maybe safety Harrison Smith from Notre Dame. Secondary help is primary.
• On NFL.com, there are several mock drafts up already. Charlie Casserly -- who Belichick hates -- takes two shots at the GM for always trading out of the first round while projecting that the Pats might take Alabama safety Mark Barron and Alabama linebacker Dont'a Hightower (great name). Two Tide players courtesy of Nick Saban? Sounds good to me. Two of the other "experts" have the Pats taking LSU defensive tackle Michael Brockers. He's 6-6, 300 pounds. He would look good next to Big Vince.

The draft begins with first-round picks on April 26, a Thursday night. The Patriots -- at the moment -- hold the 27th and 31st selections. The rich get richer. I may not be a card-carrying member of the one percent, but I enjoy rooting for a football team that is.

Fresh start

NEW YEAR, SAME RESULT: 1-0 in 2012.

WEEK 17
Patriots 49, Bills 21 (1/1/'12): Some highlights from another entertaining victory on a 45 degree sunny New Year's Day at Gillette...

Chili and sausages. A cooler full of cold beer. Sweatshirts and hoodies instead of parkas and wool caps. Chung and Spikes back in uniform. A scoreboard update of the Miami D picking off Sanchez. A couple of refreshing margaritas. Another update of the Miami D picking off Sanchez. The Bills breaking out to a 21-0 lead in the first quarter. Bill O'Brien screaming at his entire offense this time.

OK, those last two certainly weren't highlights. But everything that happened in the next three quarters after that was. The Pats scored 49 straight points as the offense that struggled in the first quarter kicked into high gear and the defense that looked lost -- again -- seemed to find itself thanks to the return of #25 and #55. The Pats D is never going to fill one with confidence, but the return of leaders Chung and Spikes sure helps. Too bad Andre Carter isn't still on the field.

The next two weeks the Blabosphere will be buzzing with warnings about how the 13-3 Patriots are not a serious Super Bowl contender because of their slow starts on offense and false starts on defense. Many will predict another one-and-done playoff run. Or a two-and-done. But done before they even get started. Predictions are tough to get right. Just ask Rex Ryan ... again.

Mo, Larry, and  Curly (a.k.a. Borges, Felger, and Shaughnessy) will be leading the chorus I'm sure. They will acknowledge that the Pats have the best offense in the AFC, but they will tell you that's all they have. They will tell you the defense will bring it all crashing down in the playoffs. They may be right. The Pats will either win or lose so it's a 50-50 shot.

But the Patriots will show up in two weeks to face either Cincy, Denver, or Pittsburgh. If they win they are hosting the AFC title game. Tom Brady and Bill Belichick have lost their last three playoffs games dating back to the '07 Super Bowl. Brady has not been the reason they lost those games but he was far from his best. He's due to be at his best. If Brady and the offense can be at their best -- very best -- for the next three games, the Pats will raise that fourth Lombardi that they should have had a few years ago.

Now the fun begins.

Show of emotion

Highlights of yesterday's very entertaining victory in D.C.:

• Gronk catches two more TDs to set the record for tight ends.
• Brady throws for 357 yards and three touchdowns.
• McCourty and Ihedigbo play the entire game with basically one arm and still come up with some big plays.
• Andre Carter is once again a force on the D line. And Big Vince wasn't too shabby.
• Wes Welker continues his amazing season.
• The defense adds to its turnover total.

The thing that dismissed Globe writer Ron Borges decides to write his column about? Well if you read Borges you know he wrote about the epic Brady-O'Brien shouting match. What else?

Borges offers that the fight is a result of the fact that the Pats keep playing in tight games and that has increased the pressure-cooker level on the offense. Classic Borges.

He ignores the fact that Brady was the same way in '07 when the team was winning games 45-10. He ignores the fact the Charlie Weis did a lot of yelling at his quarterback when the team was winning Super Bowls. He ignores the fact that if Brady hits an open Welker for a TD on the play before the pick the game is over and everyone can relax. He ignores the fact that any win on the road in the NFL is a good win. Instead he compares the moment with the old Bronx Zoo of the Yanks. Classic Borges.

In Borges's thinking the Pats should win every game 20-3 so that there's no stress on the offense. That way Brady can put up a few touchdowns then sit back on the bench and relax with a cup of Gatorade in the second half as the defense stuffs the other team. Anything other than that is a team that isn't good enough. Problem is that the other teams have offensive players who can make plays. Like the Redskins. Even the soon-to-be-perfect Packers have played in a lot of close games (till yesterday). That's the NFL. The Saints barely won yesterday. The Niners were upset by Arizona. The Ravens -- with their great D -- lost to Seattle. What the Pats did in '07 was a freak of football nature. Even the best of teams spend most of their times winning close games. That's what makes them the best teams. They can handle the pressure and win those games.

There's a moment in one of the "America's Game" video highlights from one of the Super Bowl years where offensive coordinator Weis is ripping the offensive players for sloppy play. He goes on a profanity-laced rant for about 15 seconds and then at the end looks at Brady who is standing off to the side and barks "You included!" It's a great moment. (You can watch it in the video below. Start around the 22:30 mark). As someone who has had a great view of the team's bench for many years I can say that's one of the best parts about watching the Patriots. The intensity. Doesn't matter if the score is 30-0 or 30-30. Belichick, his coaches, and his players are all focused on the next play. There's not a lot of celebrating and relaxing going on like you see, say, on the Cowboys bench.

Bill O'Brien fits right into that approach. It's great to see that a young offensive coordinator isn't afraid to get in the Hall of Fame QBs face. O'Brien -- like Weis and McDaniels before him -- knows that Brady can take it. In fact he thrives on it. And he will give it right back. The Pats don't always win (two home playoff loses proves that) but they are always prepared and focused. Too much pressure? On Brady and the hated Patriots? Please.

Borges says everyone will just brush the incident off as "it happens all the time" but don't you be fooled. Borges knows better. He always has. Belichick was a bad hire. Seymour was a wasted first-round pick. Cutting Lawyer would destroy the team. Moss was washed up. Oh, and of course Bledsoe was better than Brady.

Borges always knows better.

 

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.

The sky is falling

I knew that the loss to the Jets would stir up many questions about the team. As I said in a previous entry ("Swamp thing"), there would be three trains of thought on the game -- in particular Brady.

1. Brady was gun shy after the knee blow-out, 2. He was rusty, 3. It was just one of those games. What I didn't realize is there's a fourth possibility.

4. The Pats are on the decline and the days of Belichick/Brady being perennial Super Bowl contenders are over. I really hadn't thought of that one. Because, oh, it's absurd.

But it's not absurd to Michael Rosenberg of SI in his column titled "Tom Brady ... What If He Never Gets It Back?" Two weeks into the season and he writes that Brady may never win another Super Bowl. Good point. But he will win a lot more games. Super Bowls? Who knows. It's Week 2. Rosenberg compares him to Troy Aikman even though he then admits Aikman's situation was completely different. Oh well. Good point?

And it's not absurd to Ron Borges (big surprise) who wrote that the Patriots decline is a direct result of poor drafting since the last Super Bowl and that the man to blame for the drafting is (again, surprise!) Bill Belichick. Yes, the Pats have missed over the past few years. Every team does. But when you go 16-0 just one season ago are there really a lot of spots for young guys? Chad Jackson. Ouch. Jerod Mayo. Hell of a pick. Borges says Belichick is to blame for the mess he's in... mess? You want a mess? Try 1-15. Belichick makes mistakes. Doesn't like to stand there while the media asks their mostly lame and obvious questions after the game. But really? At 1-1 you are going to start writing the obit? OK, but be prepared to add the column alongside the ones that said Bledsoe should get his job back and that Seymour (or most any other pick) was a mistake.

But it's ESPN's Bill Simmons who seems to have really jumped the shark. Not because he disses "Funny People" (most likely movie of 2009 to be a hit on DVD), but because he writes "Watching a documentary about the 2003-04 Pats recently, I couldn't shake one thought: Most of these dudes are long gone. The only remaining 2004 cogs are Brady, Dan Koppen, Kevin Faulk, Ty Warren and Vince Wilfork. That's it. When someone casually throws out the whole, "It's the Patriots, they'll be fine" line, they're banking on the great coach/owner/GM trifecta and assuming that an overhaul of 90 percent of the roster since 2005 went splendidly. Not really."

I watched that "America's Game" DVD recently. Maybe he has the three Super Bowls on one DVD that I just bought. I love it. When I watched it I thought "What a great team. What a great season. That was so fun. I want to watch that again." But he's right. Most of the '03-'04 Pats are gone. That was five seasons ago. In the NFL that's a hell of a long time. And yet two short years ago this team, without many of those players, went 18-1. One of the greatest seasons in NFL history. Last year Brady goes down, the team battles to 11-5 with Matt ("Cut him! Oh, never mind") Cassel as QB. Other than the Steelers and Giants I don't think there is a team in the league who wouldn't take those last two seasons. But after a Week 2 loss to the Jets, the run could be over.

It seems that being a columnist in the 24/7 sports news world is a competition to be the first to say something is great -- or something sucks. "Hey, it's Week 2 and the Pats didn't look that good. Oh, and they didn't make the playoffs last year! They are done!" If you write the "Team X or Player X Is Done" story enough, eventually you will be right. But writing it about the Patriots after the loss to the Jets?

P-e-r-s-p-e-c-t-i-v-e.

Please.

The Simmons column is a great. Loaded with stats. Loaded with humor. That's what makes him the best. He doesn't just write a "I'm Worried The Pats Are On The Way Down" story like most newspaper columnists and then go have dinner and watch "Dexter." He puts in facts. He looks shit up. Like the record of teams who have eight-straight nine or more win seasons and what happened to them the next year. Like I said, it's a great column. And if he had written it in Week 10 when the Pats were 4-6 (I think that will happen in 2016) then I would have quoted from it in every water cooler chat about the Pats. But Week 2? Just one season removed from 18-1?

Come on. Don't go there. Because if the Pats go out and beat the 2-0 Falcons you are going to look silly. And you will.

The part that really disappointed me was when Simmons said about Belichick: "Total armchair analysis, but he seems to me like someone who made a ton of money, earned a whole hand of Super Bowl rings, feels pretty secure about his place in history, and continues to love coaching football ... only maybe it's not quite life or death anymore."

Total armchair analysis is right. If you are at the game and watching the Pats' bench you know it's still life or death. It may seem tempered by the confidence and accomplishment of three titles, but it's not. The man coaches every second of every game. He's not high-fiving after a TD or a pick, he's not giving the team the old pep talk when they are behind. Nope. He's coaching. Come to a game and watch. One of the other team's guys on punt coverage goes out of bounds and then comes in and downs the ball. Belichick sees it and alerts the ref. Flag. The offense comes off the field after a good drive, but one that ended in a field goal. Belichick takes Brady and Moss aside and shows them something on his clipboard. Then talks to the QB coach. Then checks in with the offensive line down the end of the bench. Simmons makes a big deal that Belichick is 57 and guys like Landry, Parcells, Shula began to fade in their 50s. So Belichick must be fading. Come watch a game. He's not fading. He really is the best coach the game has ever seen. He's Red Auerbach without the stogie. He will do anything to win and can win with almost any kind of team. Red had Russell. Belichick has Brady. If this was the NBA of the '50s and '60s the Pats would be working on their seventh straight title. No doubt about it.

But it's not. It's the NFL of 2009. And just competing for a title year in and year out is a hell of an accomplishment. If anyone has doubts about Brady and the Pats this year... come to a game. In fact, come to the Atlanta game. You'll see what you are missing.