Oh great, a baseball analogy from the 60's...
What do you have against Bob Gibson? Wasn't he goos enought for you? Didn't you think his insight was cogent enough? It may have been the 60's, Mo, but he succeeded brilliantly at his job using that philosophy to guide him.
This is the Vince Lombardi school of thought on offense from the 60's - I can tell 'em what play we're running and it won't matter they can't stop us if we execute. Vince had half a dozen rigidly scripted plays in his playbook, and the best players in the league on his team, but he hasn't coached a game in the league in 4 decades. Old school approach doesn't work in today's NFL. Just ask the 2006 Raiders.
Moreso than in any other sport, the NFL is a coaches league rife with scheme and and deception. That's how you trump FA and parity, something Vince never had to deal with. A split second of indecision on the part of an opponent is all the edge these offensive coordinators are looking for these days. That and the necessary personnel to create mismatches. Welcome to the modern era NFL where it's all about exploiting the oppositions weakness whilst they are determined to take away your strength.
(Or as BB terms it taking what a defense will give you...)
Uhhh, we know, Mo. It's 2007, not 1968. You can relax about that.
When the Greatest Show on Turf lined up against us in XXXVI their plan was to do what they did best. And mano a mano we had no shot. Only our plan was to shut that down not by rushing the passer but by smacking their WR's in the mouth and hitting Marshall Faulk every time he moved. Their genius OC HC and his team were unable to adapt to that strategy, because it threw their vaunted timing off, and they only climbed back in it at the last second when our exhausted defense was too tired to hit them all.
We also played conservative on offense, eschewing the temptation to try to outscore them into submission while they were otherwise occupied and instead be carefully and conservative lest we make a costly mistake and hand them the points our defense was denying their offense. I'm sure NEM was screaming for Charlie's head and Bledsoe's arm at that juncture. Until the last minute of the half when BB adjusted one of Charlie's calls to take advantage of the coverage he was seeing, and at the end of regulation when we bucked form and went for it through the air with a minute twenty left and no time outs pinned at our own end. Who'd a thunk, not the great John Madden or Mike Martz, who were apparently expecting something more conservative like a knee or utterly foolish like a bomb.
It's all about adaptability and executing game plans and deceptive strategy these days - just ask the Colts. Who along the way to an AFCC comeback took a page out of BB's book with a 3rd quarter TD pass to a seldom used LB playing TE uncovered. And he walked in.
NEM always had it in for Weis, it is true, but why would he be screaming for Bledsoe's arm? Bledsoe wasn't his boy. That makes no sense.
(As an aside, why bother invoking NEM at all?)
All you say here about what happened 6 years ago is true (well, at least it wasn't 40 years), but the biggest single thing about that Super Bowl was the way in which Belichick dared Martz to counter the defensive schemes he presented, and Martz, for some unfathomable reason, took the bait! Look at how he abandoned Faulk in that game!
Yes, Mo, we know deception is a part and parcel of today's game. The original point, slotting Moss and putting Welker outside, still stands. Sure, Moss can undoubtedly work from the slot, but I'm still drawing a blank when trying to see Welker fly by Champ Bailey.
My original point stands - just because you
can do something, doesn't mean you
should!
Troy Brown or Bam Childress lining up at Tailback! 
