It really, really isn't.
Basic experimental science revolves around eliminating the variables. Football games are not played in lab conditions. The number of variables that change from week to week, from individual play to injuries to coaching decisions to play environment to random dumb chance, are legion.
There's a saying in statistical scientific analysis, however, that bears repeating: 'An N of 1 doesn't mean a damn thing.' Weird things can happen in any given instance, which is why looking at general trends and data aglomerates is safer and more accurate than looking at one instance and inferring a trend.
TL;DR: You are dead wrong. Balmerfan is right. The Pats defense is horrifically bad, on pace to be historically bad, and any attempt to compare the Ravens outstanding defense with the Pats' inevitably takes so much homery contortions that you probably need to see a chiropractor after every post.
Translation
Blah, blah, blah
However, if you're an idiot, what else can you say? Is anyone dumb enough to believe it?
Here are ACTUAL facts for you and numbnuts to ponder.
PITTSBURGH OFFENSE vs (?) vs (?)
Points 20 23
Effective points 20 16
Total Yards 392 427
Yards Passing 322 329
ThirdDown 7-12 58% 10-16 61%
Sacks 1 5
Turnovers 1 1
(situation) stopped drive set ballup a 8 yardline
easy TD
First downs 20 29
TOP 39:22 20:38
Situational 6 points first half 6 points second half
puked up 10 point allowed 17 1st half
lead 4th qtr points
"ANY ATTEMPT TO COMPARE THE RAVENS OUTSTANDING DEFENSE WITH THE PATS TAKES SO MUCH HOMERY DISTORTIONS.......BECAUSE IF YOU ACTUALLY COMPARED ACTUAL PERFORMANCE AGAINST A COMMON OPPONENT PLAYING THE EXACT SAME PLAYERS UNDER THE SAME CONDITIONS IT WOULD SHOW
Statistically the performaces were very similiar
If the performances were similiar, how can us idiots keep blaming the loss on totally on the defense?
Why exactly did one team win and the other lose? What about the offenses?
PITTSBURGH DEFENSE
POINTS 23 17
TOTAL YARDS 356 213
YARDS PASSING 289 170
SACKS 3 3
TURNOVERS 1 0
THIRD DOWN 14-21 67% 3-10 30%
SACKS 3 3
TOP 33:59 20:38
Gee, there are some differences here. Wonder which team won.
Must be the infinate, contemperal, peripheral, hydrogenated variable instituted permutations confined within the variable comparative work sets.
Great insight there, Einstein