Peter King wrote this in his latest MMQB: "1. New England (8-3). Pats have averaged 47.5 points per game the last four weeks. Tom Brady's on pace for 35 touchdowns and four interceptions. Occasionally they show signs of being defensively competent. And Thursday, they won by 30 without their two best offensive linemen, best tight end and best defensive end. How they have three losses, I have no idea." Here's how. L, 20-18 vs. Arizona - The Patriots dominated this game from just about every conceivable angle. Here are the numbers: 1st Downs Ari: 16 NE: 25 Total Yards Ari: 242 NE: 387 Time of Possession Ari: 28:19 NE: 31:41 Turnovers Ari: 2 NE: 1 This game came down to the following plays: (1) The blocked punt that led to the first Arizona TD. (2) The missed 2-point conversion after the Pats got to within 20-18. (3) The holding penalty on Gronk that negated Woodhead's game-winning TD. (4) The missed chip-shot field goal by Gostkowski. That's how the Patriots lost a game they should have won. L, 31-30 at Baltimore - The Pats built a 30-21 lead in the fourth quarter. It really should have been 34-21, as the Pats had first and goal from Baltimore's 4 yard line, but had to settle for a field goal. This game was lost on bad 4th quarter defense and some absolutely horrific officiating. There were so many bad, bad penalties in this one, and the ones that hurt the Pats were at key times. The final straw was the final field goal by Baltimore that was actually no good. We saw a video posted by a fan in the end zone who had a PERFECT angle - the camera, the upright, and the ball were in a straight line, and it was clear that the kick was wide. The Pats never should have let it get to that point, but the reality is that the officiating just killed NE in this game. L, 24-23 at Seattle - This one was inexplicable. The Pats were up 23-10 in this game and let it get away. This game was highlighted (lowlighted?) by the horrible intentional grounding penalty on Brady to end the first half, a penalty that never ever gets called in that situation (40 years of watching football and I've never seen that called there). Cost NE 3 points, which would have won the game for NE. The Seahawks strategy was simply to let Wilson run around in the backfield and then throw the ball deep. They got a lot of completions and penalties that led to huge yardage. The Pats dominated statistically, like they did in the Arizona game: 1st Downs NE: 26 Sea: 17 Total Yards NE: 388 Sea: 283 Time of Possession NE: 34:00 Sea: 26:00 And the turnovers were even. The key plays from a Pats' offensive perspective were the intentional grounding penalty and the Brady tipped pass for an INT when the Pats had 3rd and 1 from Seattle's 6 yard line. No way the Pats lose this game if they play it again. Long story much shorter, the Pats easily could have won all three of these games. I believe the refs cost them one (Baltimore), some really out-of-character things cost them against Seattle, and a play you never really see from NE (giving up a blocked punt) cost them against Arizona. That, Peter King, is how they have three losses by a combined four points.