How happy was I when the Pats lost? I was about as happy as one could possibly be the week after their team goes down, but not for the obvious reason. No, it was because that game hit home, and for once, the Pats have to suffer the fate of one-and-done after a bye. The Colts went through it in 2005 and 2007, losing after the bye to an inferior team that they had beaten in the regular season. The Colts had to suffer the humiliation of losing at home on divisional weekend. That is why the 20-3 beating of Baltimore last year felt so good, and so did this game.
The Pats fans always point to the 2005 and 2007 losses when discrediting Manning. "How could you lose at home after a bye?" Well... it is never as easy as it seems. Pats fans finally have to face those same facts. They have had dissappointments in the playoffs before, but never like this. This is worse than losing Super Bowl XLII, a game they went down fighting, when the offense didn't shy away and their defense played well enough to win. That game was a horrible performance, but at least the Pats made it to the Super Bowl. Last year, the Pats did go one-and-done, but they were not a great team, and they were absolutely not winning the Super Bowl last year, even if they beat Baltimore. This was it. This was the year that Brady would add to his legend (something he did by his regular season). This was the year that the new dynasty would start. This was the year the Pats would win the Super Bowl in a "rebuilding year." None of that happened, in the best way possible.
The Pats fans laughed at the plight of the 2006 Chargers, who went 14-2 and flamed out in their first playoff game. Or the 2008 Giants, or 2008 Titans, or 2009 Chargers, or 2007 Colts and Cowboys, or 2005 Colts; all of those teams lost after the bye at home. The Pats never did that. The Pats never rested their starters (didn't again, this year), and never came out flat after the week off. That is all gone.
The Pats from 2001-2004 were something special. 9-0 on the playoffs, three Super Bowl Titles, the Patriots had one of the greatest runs in NFL history. They were flawless in the playoffs, mostly because of their defense, and sometimes due to the mistake-free play of QB Tom Brady (especially in the 2003 Super Bowl which was the real turning point in his career, despite his 5-0 playoff record before that game). The Patriots from 2005-2010 are now 5-5 in the playoffs, which is totally normal. The Pats in 2005-2010 are a normal team, a normal franchise, and it hurts, doesn't it? The Pats have suffered all the type of losses the Colts have. The Pats have had last minute crushing losses in the past six postseasons, just like the Colts did against the Steelers or just last week against the Jets. They have suffered the blowout on the road, just like the Colts did against the Pats. They have suffered an embarrasing loss that ended a season that wasn't all that good alltogether. And now, the Pats have suffered the loss at home after the bye, the worst of them all.
The game was actually similar to the Colts loss to the Steelers for 2.5 quarters. The Steelers were lucky not to be down 10-0 early, and then took off, jumping up 21-3. The Jets did the same thing, going up 14-3, capitalizing on the mistakes and laziness and slopiness of the Pats early. The difference though, is that The Colts fought back with the intensity that only they do, with after being down 21-3 in the fourth quarter, coming within one missed field goal from getting the game to overtime. It wasn't only Manning and the offense coming to life. It was the defense, forcing punts from the Steelers, and getting the fumble. The Pats just don't have that fight. Never had. Tom Brady list of comebacks of more than 10 points is not that big. His largest playoff comeback happened in his first career game. Since then, his largest playoff deficit in a game the Pats have won is..... 11 (down 14-3 against SD in 2006). The largest second half deficit the Pats have faced in a playoff game they won is....... 8 (down 21-13 in that same SD game). Taking the 2006 San Diego game out of the conversation (a game that resembled the 2001-2004 Pats more than the 2005-2010 Pats), the largest deficits become 7 for the first half (down 7-0 and 14-7 against Jacksonville in 2007) and the largest second half deficit is 1. Tom Brady just does not have huge comebacks, and usually, his teams don't come close. Some fault of that is the defense not getting stops either, but that is a big difference between Manning and Brady.
Overall, the Pats 2010 season is a failure. It is a failure to lose in the divisional round at home (the Colts in 2005 were a failure. With the injuries they suffered in 2007, they weren't any better than the Chargers, but they were still a failure). It is more of a failure to lose to a team you had beat 45-3 seven weeks earlier (another similarity to the 2005 Colts, who beat Pittsburgh 26-7 in a game that wasn't that close, holding the Steelers to less than 200 yards). It is more of a failure to lose to a team that you despise and has been talking shit the week PRIOR to the game. This should be the end to any "You should never speak ill of the Pats, since they will kill you for it" statements. No team should be worried to ruffle the feathers of the Pats anymore, and no analyst should pick the Pats because another team slighted them. The Pats are no different than any other franchise in the league, because the Pats from 2001-2004 is not as easy to replicate as it seems.
