I just read that article in today's Herald and I tell you what.............
Man he is DEAD ON. Say what you want but if they lose tonight there is no doubt about what he wrote.
Gone are the big plays, the tough physical defense and run game. They simply try and outscore you and HOPE the opposing teams mess up along the way which doesn't seem to happen as much as we all hope for.
I agree with part of what you say.
First, for Borges, this is a reasonably fair article. He doesn't seem to be grinding an ax against the Pats.
Second, he's absolutely right about the Colts. They have been pure clutch, just like the 2003-2004 Pats teams. We moan about all their close calls, but they keep pulling out games in the clutch and finding ways to win, no matter what the situation. We exulted in the Pats' ability to do just that during the SB years.
As far as his 2nd point, that the Pats have become a "finesse" team, I'm not so sure. I worried about this a lot during the preseason, and wanted to see us get more physical and aggressive on both sides of the ball. It seems to me that we've done just that, though we have lapsed back into being a finesse team at times, with disasterous results. But Maroney is running aggressively and with a nasty edge; Vollmer and Mankins are a physical, mean set of OLs unlike anything the Colts have had; and our defense is far from a finesse group, with hard hitting plays coming from the DL, LBs and secondary alike.
The Pats' D is 2nd in the NFL in fewest points allowed. It's possible that they will keep the Saints' juggernaut under 20 points, but even if the game turns into a shootout I don't think it's a referendum on our defense being "soft". We're 3rd in the NFL in turnovers and 2nd in turnover differential. I'm not sure you can fairly say that "Gone are the big plays, the tough physical defense and run game. They simply try and outscore you and HOPE the opposing teams mess up along the way which doesn't seem to happen as much as we all hope for."
I agree about 75% with Borges, and I don't think he's being unfair. The Colts have become the 2003-2004 Pats (except that they haven't been able to win in the postseason yet, which is a huge difference; until they prove that, they don't deserve comparisons with the 2003-2004 Pats). The Pats haven't yet learned that winning edge which they've had in the past, and have had trouble putting opponents away. And at times the Pats DO become a finesse team, which I think is a big mistake. But when this team plays with aggression and physicality on both sides of the ball, it's not at all a finesse team.
I'm not sure about the Pats going soft part but the comparison itself rings a bell. Tedy's interview maybe? 
