bflo83 Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 Shaun Powell is a good writer for Newsday on Long Island. Thought you might like to see his perspective on the Patriots: http://www.newsday.com/sports/columnists/n...orts-columnists I did the cut and paste thing in case the link doesn't work. JACKSONVILLE, Fla. -- First comes the Super Bowl, and then, should the Patriots win, our attention will turn to the Super Roll. That would appropriately describe the run of championships by a team that blows our way more often this time of year than the wind chill. There will be an instantaneous and collective gush by an awestruck football nation to appoint the Patriots as the sports dynasty of the moment. The problem is, upon closer inspection of this so-called dynasty, you will rediscover that it is built on luck. Better yet, tuck. Before Tom Brady became a star and Bill Belichick a genius and the Patriots were breathlessly mentioned in legendary terms, this Super Bowl streak began on a bad call. Yes, three years and countless replays later, the truth remains the truth. Upon further review, Brady fumbled the ball on a snowy field and the Patriots were done, only to be suddenly saved by a rule that sounds sillier than Eagles loudmouth receiver Freddie Mitchell. Tuck rule? You must be kidding. That was Charles Woodson's response when asked to reflect about the play in the divisional playoffs three years ago that gave birth to Patriotism. With the Raiders up three late in the fourth quarter, the cornerback blitzed Brady and jarred the ball loose in snowy Foxboro. The Raiders recovered with 1:43 left and their bench celebrated. "The game was over," Woodson said. Walt Coleman thought otherwise. The referee first signaled Raiders ball, then - after much discussion - he overruled his original call and called it an incomplete pass. Even now, you must wonder what Coleman was thinking. There was no conclusive proof to reverse the call. The only thing obvious was that Brady didn't bring the ball to his body after deciding not to throw. He gave it up after getting clobbered. End of story. Actually, beginning of story. A very fortunate story. Because of that call and a few other blessed moments that followed, please don't classify the Patriots next to the Celtics of the 1960s and the Jordan Bulls and Lance Armstrong and the Yankees from 1998-2000. You want to salute Belichick for knowing something about football? Fine. You want to give Brady props for being clutch? Prop on. You want to hail the Patriots as an example of what happens when egos are sacrificed and team play is emphasized? Yep. You want to point to the bottom line and say that's all that matters? Cool. But to elevate the Patriots among the sacred sports gods who dominated, without the slightest bit of suspicion? Settle down. Resist. And rethink. Only this season, when they won 12 of their first 13 games, did the Patriots show considerable flex during their Super Bowl stretch, and they still didn't finish with the best record in football in 2004. As Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb said: "This team is not invincible. This team can be beat. If we go out and do what we're supposed to do, we can win this game." You might be surprised by what you find after chipping away at the New England mystique. The Belichick Patriots are proof that it's better to be lucky than good. They opened their first Super Bowl season with a loss to the pitiful Bengals. Strange, but despite all the glory Belichick gets for being a defensive expert, the Patriots ranked 24th in total defense that year. They were outplayed on their own field by the Raiders in the playoff game until their rally was, ahem, tucked away. The next week, they needed a pair of special-teams touchdowns to beat Pittsburgh in the AFC Championship Game. Which brings us to the Super Bowl. The Patriots were aggressive and determined in the 2002 game, and yet their victory was hardly artistic. Mike Martz, the dunce who somehow still coaches the Rams, had more to do with the Patriots' win than Belichick. Rather than run Marshall Faulk, who was pumped to play in New Orleans, his hometown, Martz had Kurt Warner throw 44 times. Didn't he read the scouting reports? That year, the Patriots were nothing special against the run, allowing 4.3 yards a carry. Also, in both Super Bowl wins, the Patriots coughed away big leads and found themselves tied in the final moments. They were up 17-3 on the Rams and 21-10 on the Panthers. Lucky for them, and there's that L-word again, Adam Vinatieri, the biggest beneficiary of the tuck rule, came through once again. His first pressure kick, after Brady's "fumble," tied the Raiders game, and he won it with another in overtime. He beat the Rams with a 48-yarder as time expired and then defeated the Panthers with four seconds left. And what do the Patriots think about the roots of this championship run, which began with a tremendous stroke of tuck? "Hey," said Brady, shrugging and smiling, "I got a ring out of it." They don't make dynasties like they used to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan Trapped in Pats Land Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 Sounds like a bitter Jets fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin in Va Beach Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 Sounds like sour grapes. Every team, like a professional poker player, needs some luck now and again to win it all. Nothing wrong with that. The Patsies win Sunday and they are definitely a dynasty. Hell I think they are now whether they win or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like A Mofo Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 Sounds like a bitter Jets fan. 228266[/snapback] Couldnt agree more. Or maybe its Fireman Ed in disguise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gantrules Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 What a pathetic piece of "journalism"... ----------- They were outplayed on their own field by the Raiders in the playoff game until their rally was, ahem, tucked away. The next week, they needed a pair of special-teams touchdowns to beat Pittsburgh in the AFC Championship Game. --------------- If the Raiders would have played better AFTER this "injustice" occured they still would have won. And who the F cares how you score points???? Keep dismissing the Patriots. 3 SB's and still they are questionable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan Trapped in Pats Land Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 Last I checked, Special Teams point count just as much as offensive or defensive. Anyone got a ruling here? Of course if Tony Dungy and the pansy ass Competion Committee have their way it could change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 The Patriettes want to be regarded as a dynasty, so... JUST GIVE IT TO THEM!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gantrules Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 Ok the Pats are a dynasty and all but this is a little far.... www.espn.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 The Patriettes want to be regarded as a dynasty, so...JUST GIVE IT TO THEM!!! 228327[/snapback] These guys have whooped our asses up and down the field for the better part of 5 seasons now and you can't respect em for it? Hell I just wish the Bills were this good, and filled with so many smart, unselfish players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like A Mofo Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 Ok the Pats are a dynasty and all but this is a little far.... www.espn.com 228348[/snapback] Thats to be expected from the Every Second Patriots Network Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 If the Raiders would have played better AFTER this "injustice" occured they still would have won. The same could be said for the "just give it to 'em" game. Or heck, why not say "No Goal" is no big deal because if Hasek made the save (since he wasn't being interfered with), we wouldn't have lost? CW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 Sounds like sour grapes. Every team, like a professional poker player, needs some luck now and again to win it all. Nothing wrong with that. The Patsies win Sunday and they are definitely a dynasty. Hell I think they are now whether they win or not. 228268[/snapback] They absolutely are. I don't think they hold a candle to the best teams of all time, though. It just shows how mediocre the NFL today really is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 Wow, another writer who has a clue. Add him to Skip Bayless who wrote the same thing. But like I said, if the Pats beat the Eagles convincingly AND/OR without the aid of the refs, I'll give them their props. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fartacus Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 Whats the difference whether they win convincingly or whether they win by a narrow margin? They'd still be crowned Champs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorCal Aaron Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 I'll give them their props. 228400[/snapback] I'm sure the Pats will be real grateful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 I could give a rat's ass, and likewise for them I'm sure. But some media members are sure starting to take notice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gantrules Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 They absolutely are. I don't think they hold a candle to the best teams of all time, though. It just shows how mediocre the NFL today really is. 228368[/snapback] Define best teams of all time. I'd put them on the same level as the 90's Cowboys. The 80's/90's 49ers I'd put ahead of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 These guys have whooped our asses up and down the field for the better part of 5 seasons now and you can't respect em for it? Hell I just wish the Bills were this good, and filled with so many smart, unselfish players. 228350[/snapback] Please let's not rehash the "respect vs. like" thread again. Wanna argue "PCs vs. Macs" again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 Wanna argue "PCs vs. Macs" again? 228485[/snapback] Go UNIX! CW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted February 4, 2005 Share Posted February 4, 2005 Please let's not rehash the "respect vs. like" thread again. Wanna argue "PCs vs. Macs" again? 228485[/snapback] Sure, why not? I just love a good round-an-round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts