Most of those who predict (or hope) for a Pats win count on a low-scoring game. They hope, I think, for a replay of game one, in which a combination of a solid running game and a strong defense kept the more offensively-talented adversary at bay. This assumes two things: first that SF will show something like the same level of incompetence Cincinnati did, and second that Purdy's success to this point in his career has been a fluke and that the Pats' defense will "show him for the noodle-armed incompetent he really is." I doubt, injuries notwithstanding, that SF will play that lousy a game, and I think the dismissive evaluation of Purdy is sheer delusion. We should be so lucky as to have - perhaps in Maye - a QB so good.
Is it possible Purdy will falter, that our D will relearn the art of tackling, that the team as a whole will choose this game not to mail it in, and that Rhamondre will choose to hold onto the damned ball? Sure. Is it at all likely the stars will all so align? Nope.
The Pats are rebuilding from a very low point and are simply not yet ready to win against a solid, well-coached team. I'm looking for progress this season, for confirmation that we have drafted the right QB, that the roster as a whole is improving, and that the team under an inexperienced HC, is developing a winning attitude/culture. I saw virtually none of that last week. If I see some of that this week - in a loss - I'll be content. I think it somewhat more likely than not that I will, but I can't count in it, given last week's dismal effort.