They fault Marty for going for it on fourth and eleven, but it wasn't a terrible call. After all, in most situations, the worst that would have happened is the Pats would have gotten the ball at the 30 yard line. But the Pats risked all to sack Rivers and picked up an extra few yards of field position. That was smart playing by the Pats. They said that if the Chargers used Tomlinson more they would have won. The Pats couldn't stop Tomlinson. But look at his runs: 11, 3, 3, 0, 15, 6, 14, 0, 5, 4, 3, 11, 2, 2, 6, 0, 2, 9, 13, 3, 1, 5 (not inluding TD runs of 2 and 3). Sure, he had some good runs, but when faced with 3rd and 7, 10, 11, 4, 7, 8, 17, 5, and 6 (with just a minute left), it's certainly reasonable not to use Tomlinson in most of those cases. The Pats were ready for him. They said that the Chargers played carelessly, making bad decisions, but was Colvin's interception anything other than a great heads up play? They said that McCree blew the game by intercepting the Pats on 4th down, but what CB would not have intercepted? There were 6-1/2 minutes left! If McCree had held onto the ball, the Pats would have certainly gotten maybe even two more tries. And was it bad playing by McCree or great playing by Brown that forced the fumble? Look at the Chargers field position: Pats 26, 50, 35, 47, 48, 41, 23, 34, 32, 40, 17, 32, 29, 25. The Chargers had multiple opportunities to make something happen, but they failed time and again. It wasn't the Chargers fault. The Patriots stopped them whether they ran or passed. (And Brady didn't have a bad game, the Chargers pressured him. When QBs play against good Ds, their ratings drop. Duh!) Throughout the week, they said the Chargers weakness was their secondary, so what do the Pats do? Go after their secondary. That's not a case of the Chargers having a bad day or bad play calling; it's a case of the Pats finding a way to exploit the Chargers weakness. They said the Chargers handled the last minute of the game very badly, but is that a case of them having a bad day or having a young QB who wasn't as good as time management as Brady? Would the Chargers have moved faster on other days? I doubt it. The Pats beat the Chargers because the Pats were the superior team. They played smarter football because they are smarter. They put tremendous emphasis into protecting Brady and finding a way to beat the Chargers through the air. The Pats succeeded. The Chargers didn't have a bad day. It wasn't Marty's fault. Simply put, the better team won, and the pundits are simply too embarrassed by their six years of underestimating the Pats to admit their mistake.