ShareThis Page
Inside job |

Inside job

| Wednesday, September 21, 2005 12:00 a.m

Let’s explode a couple of myths about the New England Patriots.

The first is fairly benign. It claims the Patriots don’t ham it up or shoot their mouths like other teams. Mike Ditka perpetuated this one on the radio the other day, praising the Pats for their old-fashioned values (you know, like those well-behaved ’85 Bears).

He couldn’t have been more wrong.

Go back and watch Mike Vrabel mocking Terrell Owens’ “dirty bird” celebration after Vrabel’s touchdown in last year’s Super Bowl. Or see Deion Branch in the AFC title game, taunting the Steelers defensive backs by holding the ball out to them on his way to the end zone.

Just watch Rodney Harrison over the course of an afternoon.

The myth that really needs to be blown up, though, is the one that says the Patriots’ dynasty is more about “the system” than the players.

It describes this ruthlessly efficient team as a corporation, directed by a brilliant but ice-cold CEO named Bill Belichick. In his system, any employee can be replaced without hurting the bottom line.

There is some truth there.

The Patriots won their first Super Bowl after their starting quarterback (Drew Bledsoe) was injured. They won their second one without any semblance of a running game, their third after a Pro Bowl cornerback (Ty Law) and a stellar defensive end (Richard Seymour) were injured.

Obviously, Belichick has a keen eye for talent. He also has the willingness and acumen to radically tailor his approach to a particular opponent.

He’s a great coach. But guess what• As sound as the system might be, you don’t win championships without serious star power – and the Patriots have always had it.

This year, they have a core of players who are among the best at their positions: quarterback Tom Brady, tailback Corey Dillon, Seymour and Harrison.

That doesn’t include a few other first-round picks on the defensive line, plus Branch, Vrabel and linebacker Willie McGinest, all of whom could play for anybody (except the Steelers, apparently, in Vrabel’s case).

Yes, the Patriots have thrived without key players, but this year is different. This year, they will try to overcome losing the heart of their defense — inside linebackers Tedy Bruschi (recovering from a stroke) and Ted Johnson (retired).

I refuse to believe those guys were easily replaceable parts. Bill Cowher was asked Tuesday if he thinks the Patriots’ defense will suffer without them.

“I think it’s too early to assess that,” he said, accurately.

We’ll find out come playoff time how much the Patriots miss Johnson and Bruschi, who somehow was pegged an overachiever even though he came into the league having racked up more college sacks than anyone but the late Derrick Thomas and proceeded to become about as good a big-game linebacker as the game has ever seen.

Last year’s Super Bowl performance was typical. Bruschi had a sack, an interception and seven tackles.

Johnson’s stellar career could be distilled into one play – his jarring tackle of Jerome Bettis on third-and-goal in last year’s AFC title game.

You’re telling me the system is so fool-proof that Chad Brown and Monty Beisel will step into those spots and not miss a beat as the Patriots roll to another Super Bowl?

I don’t think so.

I don’t think the system’s that good .

Categories: News
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.