You're completely missing my whole point.
I don't give a damn about winning games except the Super Bowl. It's understandable why a team with a futile history like the Saints would take pride in winning a division. Maybe you guys can win a few more because obviously your fanbase still does not what having your team be champion is like. But you know what? Other than the LA Lakers, the Patriots have been the most dominant team in sports for the past decade. Maybe 15 years ago, we cared, but no longer; we want Super Bowls.
We have what some people in the media have deemed as the greatest quarterback who has ever lived. We have what some people in the media have deemed as the greatest coach to ever coach the game. We want and expect Super Bowls; for a team with the success the Patriots have had, we don't want winning seasons.
While I do understand and follow your angle, I think you are overstating and perhaps misunderstanding the current state of the Pats and the NFL.
Basketball teams can dominate year after year because their only five players on the court, and only about eight get any significant playing time over the course of a game. Having one or two of the league's best players makes a team markedly better than any other team; it makes it far easier for that team to dominate and be highly successful for a long period of time.
Baseball has no spending limits - the luxury tax is meaningless - so again it is relatively easy for certain team(s) to dominate year after year.
Football is the ultimate team sport. Having the league's best player guarantees you absolutely nothing, especially in comparison to other team sports. Now add in free agency and the salary cap, and it is extremely difficult for a team to remain on top, even if they do have the league's best coach. In fact with the double-edged sword of free agency and the salary cap, no franchise has any business being as successful as the Patriots have been over the last ten years - or even over the last 'hellish' six, for that matter.
One other difference with those other sports in comparison to football is that NFL playoffs are decided by one game; the others are decided by a four out of seven series. That means in the NFL you are going to have more situations when the 'better' team does not win than in other sports. Sometimes that works in your favor (2001); sometimes it works against you (2007). Bottom line is that it makes a long run of championships by one team more difficult in comparison to other sports.
The difference between a top team and a bottom team in the NFL is much, much closer than final won-loss record would have you believe. The difference between the top six or eight teams is even slimmer. They're all filled with very good players, all giving it their best effort. As good as Brady and Belichick are, it's just not realistic to expect (as opposed to want) them to win championships every year the way the Celtics of the 60's or Yankees of the 50's did.
There are 32 teams in the NFL. That means on average a fan should see his team win a championship in his 16th year of following the team, and then one every 32 years thereafter. That's three championships in 80 years, if you should live that long.
We got a lifetime worth of championships in the space of 36 months. Everything else is gravy. Enjoy the ride. If anything short of a championship is failure, then the reality is you are going to be disappointed 97% of the time. If you know you are going to fail that often, why complain about it every time it happens?
Do I want the Pats to win a championship every year? Of course!
Do I realistically expect them to win a championship every year? No.
