I can’t exactly say that I hope the New England Patriots will run the table and go on to win the Super Bowl. I mean, I’ll root for them against the greater evil of the Cowboys in the unfortunate event the two teams meet up in Arizona next February, and I admire their accomplishments so far, as how can one not? But even putting the Boston factor aside, I can’t claim to be anywhere near their bandwagon. If by some happenstance they lose focus in one of their remaining games, or somehow get upset by Jacksonville or someone in the playoffs, I’ll shed no tears for them.
Having said that, I do endorse what Jim Henley says.
Idiot sports radio personalities – and I apologize for the redundancy – constantly ring variations on The Patriots realize that the real prize isn’t going undefeated, it’s winning the Super Bowl. Nonsense. Somebody wins the Super Bowl every year. The NFL has had 41 of the things and they don’t look like they’re going to stop staging them any time soon. There are plenty of Super Bowl champions. There’s only one post-merger, undefeated champion. Why pass up a chance to make history?
What I suspect and hope is that the Patriot organization thinks the same way. The core members – Kraft; Belichick; Brady; Vrabel et al – have already won a bunch of Super Bowls. They haven’t matched the most annoying achievement in modern NFL history. (In fact, by going 19-0 they’d exceed it.) Don Shula ran his mouth worse than Steeler safety Anthony Smith – you have to figure a vindictive bastard like Belichick will want to rub his nose in it.
Someone pointed out to me the huge risk: If the Patriots go 16-0 and don’t win the championship, people will consider it a great flop. Pundits will second-guess the decision to go for the streak instead of “doing the sensible thing” (like kicking on fourth down?) and resting key players for the playoffs.
I think they’ll like that part best. Get the adrenaline flowing. Introduce some risk into the equation. If the Pats go 14-2 or 15-1 and lose to a 13-3 or 14-2 Colts team in the playoffs, or get beaten in the Super Bowl by Dallas or Green Bay, well, they had a good year but lost. If they go 16-0 and one of those same things happen, observers will paint it as one of the monumental collapses in sports. Tell me these guys aren’t up for that. Tell me these guys don’t need that.
So I have faith that New England won’t pull weenie moves down the stretch like the Colts did a couple times. Unlike the Colts before last year, the Pats don’t have anything else to prove anyway. And if they do bag the last game or two, I hope they get run out in their first playoff game. Spanked like babies. Who dares wins, dudes.
Yep. About the only counterargument I can come up with is that the Pats need another Super Bowl to ensure that they’re included in the Greatest Teams Of All Time debate – you know, the 60s Packers, the 70s Steelers, the 80s Niners, all those teams that won multiple times, and so forth. Of course, by going 19-0 they’d not only be sure of their inclusion in that discussion, they’d be sure of winning it, too. How can you argue against them if they pull it off?
The other thing to mention is the vapidity of the “monumental collapse” meme in the event a 16-0 Patriots team fails to win the Super Bowl. Sportswriters love “character”, and rightly or wrongly, the Patriots’ “character” is open to question by the nattering classes due to the signal-stealing kerfuffle and the team’s penchant for running up the score and generally not doing the things teams are “supposed” to do. They’ll have a field day with a Pats’ loss – it’ll make the gossip rags’ coverage of Britney Spears look like a church bulletin. The simple but uncomfortable (for them) fact is that playoffs and tournaments are always little more than a crapshoot. Being the best team is never a guarantee. Falling short may be a huge disappointment, and may make an otherwise magical season feel like a failure, but it’s not indicative of anything other than one day’s result. Which isn’t to say I won’t enjoy some of the hyenafest that will surely follow a Patriot flameout – I think Bill Belichick is a jerk, too – but I will feel vaguely dirty about it. Such is life.
I agree that the Patriots should try to run the table, but I disagree with the argument stated here. The objective of an athletic organization is to develop a dynasty, which is usually defined as maximizing championships won over an extended period of time. Consequently, every play should be based upon this objective. (I’ve personally only ever rooted for one dynasty, but man was it fun.) The objective in Henley’s argument is to make history. While that is a nice secondary objective, it’s not the fundamental of an athletic organization. (As a Giants fan, hypothetically, I would easily trade every juiced or unjuiced historical Bonds’ homer for a World Series.) However, the only time you should not try to optimize a secondary objective is when it comes in conflict with the primary objective. I honestly can’t construe many reasonable arguments claiming that trying to run the table and maximizing Super Bowl championships are any conflict. After all, they both require a Super Bowl victory this year. Sure, someone could make some claims about resting the first string to prevent injury or playing the kids to prepare for the future. But, these are countered with the notion that resting the first string might make them sluggish in the playoffs. These arguments are generally based on silly conventional wisdom, and no more than mere hunches. The only one policy I can recommend is that Belichick shouldn’t play an injured star who would risk further injury to win a regular season game. Outside of that circumstance, I say go for the secondary objective.
Of course they are going for the whole thing. Why? Exactly what Henley said…they’ll make history. The other reason why? 16-0 and Super Bowl are not mutually exclusive. Not only is the resting players theory not proven to be effective, there is evidence that it may be counter-productive.
I challenge anyone to watch a Bill Bellichick press conference and come to the conclusion that he is gunning for anything less than total anhilation of the entire NFL, whether regular or postseason.
you know, the 60s Packers, the 70s Steelers, the 80s Niners, all those teams that won multiple times
Hey, Kuff, just wanted to point out a slight oversight which I’m sure you’ll correct at your earliest convenience: You left out the 90s Cowboys, a team so awesome even Barry Switzer couldn’t keep from winning a Superbowl.
<ducks>