1. Excellent defenses. Here were their points allowed ranking in 2001, 2003, and 2004: 6, 1, 2. They were not just good at keeping opponents off the score. They were playmakers. Came up with big plays at key times. Physical, punishing defense.
It should be noted that in 2001 and 2003 the Pats D was ranked in the mid 20's in total D. I only mention that for those who think the sky is falling and players should be cut every time some team coverts a 3rd down or scores
BUT what is consistently successful over the entire course of the last 13 years, is that the Pats consistently rank at the top of the league in turnovers, and their scoring D numbers are always much better than their total D stats. Even in the year when the Pats were edged out on the last game of the season for having the statistically worst D in yards given up in league history; their scoring D numbers ranked them in the mid teens.
So while we all keep hoping to see a more aggressive D this season and we all want to scream when we watch teams march down the field as we "bend but don't break"; the fact is that in the MOST important defensive stat there is, BB's philosophy has proven VERY effective.
2. Balanced offense. Those were not the days when Brady threw and threw and threw. He was an excellent quarterback, but they ran the ball a lot and were very effective doing so. When they needed Brady to throw, he could do it. But they weren't so reliant on him to carry the offense.
A great deal of our success last season had to do with our running game, and our running game now is MUCH better than the one we had in the superbowl years. Take it to the bank, that the over the next few years, the Pats are going to have one of the better running games in the league.
3. Terrific leadership. Brady, Vrabel, Bruschi, Wilfork, Harrison, et al. Great group of leaders.
With Brady, McCourty, Mayo, and Mankings, I think the Pats continue to have great leadership from the players
4. They did not have an all-star receiving corps. Guys like Brown, Patten, Givens, Graham, Fauria, Faulk. These were Brady's main weapons. There's no doubt in my mind that the current crop of weapons is every bit as good as those guys.
Frankly I think our receiving corps is much better than the ones we had for the superbowl run, especially at the TE position.
A healthy Rob Gronkowski is the most impactful non-QB, offensive player in the league. I think we've forgotten it because of the injuries he's had the last 2 years. Have some patience and we'll see some great things from our receivers this season. It will be much better than last season, which was good enough to get us to the final 4.
5. Luck. It has to be said. They were very UN-lucky in 2007 and 2011 in those Super Bowl losses, but they were very fortunate in 2001 and 2003 during those Super Bowl winning runs. You have to get the breaks, and NE got them in those SB-winning years, but not in some recent years when they haven't won it. Good health is a factor as well.
I most definitely agree with this. We've watched our team be on the cusp of winning it all for a dozen years now. We've had some good luck and more than our share of bad luck. But even an general observer should be able to see that winning it all requires a 3 or 4 game run against the best teams in the league. There is rarely much of a talent gap in any of those games
As Andy said, almost every game comes down to about one team making plays, and other not. However it also comes down to getting a key call, or not. Getting a key bounce of the ball. Having an opponent make a blunder, penalty or drop at a key time. It wasn't a great Giant D that caused that incompletion to Welker in 2011. Eli is not a legend in 2007 if Assante doesn't drop the pick
If that's what you call "luck", then you have to have it to win a superbowl. Was it a great pass by Flacco in Denver in 2013, or did the S take a bad angle at just the wrong time. The bottom line in all this to me is, that all the stuff we are doing now is to build a team capable of getting to the playoffs. Once you are in, there is no question that you have to have a bit of luck to get through the gauntlet of winning 3-4 games against such stiff competition. Do you get the bounces, the calls, opposing errors, and have the health? None of these things can be determined by what's going on now. As we all know, half the guys fans get so excited about now, are probably not going to be available in January.
So I am all for a return to the days when they had a vicious defense, a balanced offense that can move the ball in the air or on the ground, and get some breaks and good health. That, to me, is a recipe for great success.
The days of the Pats "vicious defense" of the past is pretty much a myth. IIRC both the players you mention so extensively (Vrabel, Willie M) had only one season each where they had double digit sacks in their entire careers, and the Pats never have had what you might consider a "dominant pass rusher" in this entire run.
Plus the game is so much different now. In the superbowl run, MOST of the league played primarily zone defenses, the 6' WR was a rarity, and DB's could hit receivers all over the field right up until the ball was thrown. Back then offenses were less complex. It was an innovation when the Pats starting using 3 and 4 wides as often as they did. The only time you saw a "hurry up" offense was in the last 2 minutes of a game.
So I have no longings for things of the past. Different time, different game. I love our off season so far, but we have a ways to go, and history has loudly reminded us, over and over again, that there will be many unexpected personnel surprises before we get to January again
