This is my take, as well.
It's a sophomoric, poorly written article. Honestly, my blood slightly boiled realizing this article by a professional writer would've landed me a solid 'C' (maybe a 'B' with any luck) and a lot of editing in most High School English classes, while Bedard is making good money publishing this.
Besides the poor analytical process and lack of good information/evidence, the quality of the writing is poor and reads not like a polished written article, but rather like a podcast riff / monologue transcribed into writing.
There aren't any interesting insights in this article via Bedard himself (which is exactly what a great sportswriter should provide: unique perspective, inside info, a not-yet-known nugget of info/insight ... there is none of that. Just a rehash of already known info, and poorly written at that).
As another poster mentioned, the article does very much read like an AI summary of PatsFans/PatsPulpit/Patriots social media comments generally, from the past 4-6 years; candidly, an AI summary would've been just as informative and likely much better written.