Jan eighteen, 2019

  • Beak BarnwellESPN Staff Writer

    Close

      Nib Barnwell is a staff writer for ESPN.com.

We are 18 years into the New England Patriots dynasty. A run that started during the 2001 regular season is likely going to stretch into its 3rd decade, which would be unprecedented in most sports and seems downright unfathomable in the modern NFL, where attrition and the salary cap conspire to strike down promising teams before they grow comfortable atop their divisions. There might never exist a team like the Tom Brady-Beak Belichick Patriots again.

Past virtue of that eighteen-yr reign, though, the Patriots have amassed what amounts to a pop folklore. There are stories and arguments most how the Patriots perform and what they do to win games, and while some of them are true, plenty aren't. Some of the ideas might accept been truthful at one time but haven't been the case in years. Others were built upon an insufficient sample, with i play or one game used to tell a broader story without any tests or support.

I wrote most myths for all of last week's eight playoff teams. With the Patriots, I found that a mutual claim held up with regard to New England but isn't accurate. Despite what you might hear during Pats games, there's no prove that the Patriots consistently sport a bend-but-don't-intermission defense force. Belichick doesn't tell his defense to of a sudden effigy things out in the scarlet zone because that doesn't make whatever sense. Dandy defenses are groovy all over the field.

With that one out of the manner, I came up with a whole listing of stories that seem to sprout up about or around the Patriots organization. (Brady on Sunday gave me ane more for the listing.) I went and tested those theories out using the data from New England'due south run over the past eighteen years. Some of them turned out to be total nonsense. Others, surprisingly, are absolutely true.

Jump to the top theories:
The Pats go all the calls | Gronk is done
Brady'south backups | 'Everybody thinks we suck'
Hush-hush weapon: punters? | The 2-for-i

Fact bank check: You can't affect Brady without being flagged

Ane sore spot for fans frustrated by the Patriots has been the treatment supposedly afforded to Brady afterwards Bernard Pollard tore Brady'due south ACL on a low hit in Calendar week one of 2008. Earlier the 2009 season began, the NFL instituted a "Brady Dominion" banning forcible hits below the knees on quarterbacks in the pocket. Frustrated Cincinnati Bengals fans wondered why the league hadn't been equally concerned about depression hits after Kimo von Oelhoffen destroyed Carson Palmer'due south human knee during the 2005 playoffs, and it's fair to say they take a gripe.

Since then, all the same, any roughing the passer phone call on a Patriots opponent has led to complaints that you tin't fifty-fifty exhale on Brady without being flagged for a penalty. This ane seems pretty piece of cake to test. Exercise the Pats become roughing the passer calls at a disproportionately high rate?

Using data from ESPN Stats & Data, I went back through 2009 (when Brady returned and the new rule was enforced) and analyzed how oftentimes each squad benefited from a roughing the passer call. New England's opponents were penalized 28 times, which is the 18th-highest total in football. The Cleveland Browns take picked upwardly more roughing the passer calls on their quarterbacks than the Patriots.

If yous adjust the numbers for the fact that the Patriots have thrown the brawl quite a bit over the past decade, the case gets weaker. The Pats generate a roughing the passer call once every 224.5 dropbacks on offense, which is 20th in the NFL. If nosotros expect merely at snaps in which Brady is nether pressure level from the defense, that number improves to once every 48.viii dropbacks, but that's nonetheless only good for 12th. There's no evidence Brady gets roughing the passer calls at a disproportionate rate.

The squad benefiting from the nigh roughing the passer flags confronting their opponents, coincidentally, is a squad whose fan base might be the almost vocal in complaining about a different set of rules for Brady. The Buffalo Bills and their diverse quarterbacks from 2009 to 2018 lead the league in roughing the passer calls drawn (43, tied with the Chicago Bears), roughing the passer rate (once every 135.5 dropbacks) and roughing the passer rate while under pressure level (one time every 35.3 dropbacks).

The verdict: Faux

Fact check: The Patriots utilise left-footed punters because they create more muffed punts and fumbles

Since taking over as coach of the Patriots for the 2000 season, Belichick has started each season with a left-footed punter. While he has publicly chalked up this fact to "coincidence," the chances that the Patriots would repeatedly stumble onto left-footed punters during Belichick's reign are exceedingly unlikely, even as the league has begun to follow in Belichick'south footsteps. As Sports Illustrated's Jenny Vrentas noted when she looked at this issue last twelvemonth, the league went from v left-footed punters on opening twenty-four hours in 2000 to 10 during the 2017 season.

The relative obscurity of left-footed punters is what makes them valuable to Belichick. When a left-footed specialist fires off a punt, the brawl spins in the opposite direction than it would from the boot of a right-footed punter. Because returners spend most of their time staring up into the sky looking for punts from right-footed punters, the atypical spin of the left-footed punter causes them problem. Returners don't have fourth dimension for problem. Problem leads to fumbles, and Belichick wants opposing render men to fumble.

Has Belichick's predilection for port-sided punters paid off? When Vrentas looked into the upshot, she found that left-sided punters did forcefulness muffed punts more than frequently than right-sided punters. If we go back further and look at the Patriots' records, though, take Belichick's teams actually forced more fumbles on punts than other franchises over that aforementioned fourth dimension frame?

ESPN Stats & Information has play-past-play data going dorsum to 2001, which includes all simply the initial year of Belichick's reign in New England. Since and then, virtually 7.iv percent of NFL punts have resulted in muffs by the returner. Over that time frame, the Pats have run out specialists such as Ken Walter, Josh Miller, Zoltan Mesko and electric current punter Ryan Allen, all of whom are left-footed.

Those legends and the other various New England punters have forced opposing return men into muffed punts on xi percent of their attempts, which is the highest charge per unit in the league. The second-highest charge per unit in the league is in Kansas Metropolis, where the Chiefs have generated muffs on 10.i percent of their punts since 2001. Their punter since 2005 has been Dustin Colquitt, who happens to apply ... his left foot. The evidence suggests Belichick is right on this one!

Has information technology actually made a significant dent for the Patriots? Not really. Bollix recovery rates are random, but almost muffed punts -- almost 68 percent -- are recovered past the team attempting to return the punt as opposed to the punting team. For the Patriots, since 2001, that number has been down at 22.half-dozen pct, which is the third-lowest charge per unit in football. As a result, only 2.5 percentage of Patriots punts over that time frame accept resulted in a turnover dorsum to New England, which is 11th best in the NFL. The Chiefs top the league there at 4.2 percent.

The verdict: True (only not as actually impactful as it might seem)

Fact check: The Patriots get all the calls to go their way

Lament about bad officiating is the lowest-hanging fruit in fandom. Nobody likes the refs. There'due south no golden era of good calls. It's never going to become stock-still. Replay might but take made things worse. And when you have a virtually-xx-year-long dynasty whose showtime notable moment involves a controversial phone call, well, there's going to be plenty of complaints that the calls favor that dynasty.

While it'due south hyperbolic for so-Oakland Raiders correct tackle Lincoln Kennedy to suggest that both Belichick and Brady would not exist future Hall of Famers if the Constrict Rule call hadn't gone the Patriots' style all the style dorsum in January 2002, it's fair to say that Walt Coleman'due south famous conclusion to overturn a Charles Woodson strip sack and return the ball to the Patriots was ane of the determinative plays of this Patriots era. It didn't manus the Patriots the game -- Adam Vinatieri still had to hit two improbable kicks in the snow to win -- but for conspiracy theorists, information technology was the beginning sign that the league was in the pocketbook for the underdog Pats.

As the years went on and the Patriots went from plucky minnows to perennial favorites, the story got harder to believe. Afterward Bill Polian and the Indianapolis Colts complained well-nigh New England's aggressiveness in coverage during the 2003 season, the NFL fabricated illegal contact a point of accent from 2004 on, which seemed to target defence force-minded teams like the Pats. New England and then went on to win the Super Bowl for a third fourth dimension in 2004 before shifting tactics and becoming a pass-happy team around Brady in 2007.

In that location are some elements of officiating that are impossible to judge. I can't wait back and measure whether the Patriots are getting away with fouls where other teams would have been chosen, although I recall it's incredibly unlikely and impossible to explain why the league would adopt the Patriots to get away with illegal moves. (If you're arguing that the league wants the Patriots to win because they're a huge team and keen for ratings, why didn't that aforementioned logic employ during the Tuck Dominion game, when the Raiders had a much bigger fan base and would have been far better for ratings than the Patriots at the fourth dimension?)

What I tin can check, though, is what penalties take meant to New England. Again, going dorsum to 2001, the Patriots accept been penalized 1,949 times, the tertiary-lowest total in football. On a per-snap basis, 5.22 percent of plays from scrimmage in Patriots games have resulted in penalties against Belichick'south team, which is the 2nd lowest in football, behind the Colts. Proof that referees are biased toward the Patriots?

I don't retrieve so, considering the hole in that theory lurks on the other side of the ball. In those same games, New England'south opponents take been called for penalties 5.81 percent of the fourth dimension. More than than the Patriots, true, merely that's the seventh-lowest average in the league over that time frame. In full general, information technology seems like the referees have swallowed their whistles in Pats games on both sides of the ball. The margin between the two figures is 0.59 percentage points, which is the 3rd largest in football, backside the Colts and Atlanta Falcons, of all teams.

If y'all're wondering whether the Patriots become primal calls when it truly matters, well, I'm sorry to disappoint yous. ESPN has win probability data for how each team has benefited from penalties going back to the 2006 season. Over the ensuing 13 seasons, the Patriots have generated ii.27 wins through penalties in their favor, which is the fifth-highest total in the league over that time frame, behind the Colts, Greenish Bay Packers, Falcons and Tennessee Titans. To put that in context, the Patriots have a league-best 6.44 wins generated on punts and punt returns since so, and the difference between them and the second-placed Bears is 2.76 wins. While the Patriots do have one of the league's larger penalization margins, I don't meet a strong case that the Patriots are riding high on muddy play or that referees are habitually biased toward higher-contour teams like New England.

The verdict: Mostly imitation

Fact cheque: Rob Gronkowski has lost a step

There's no question that Gronk's product has declined this flavour, given that the same guy who seemed to alive in the end zone when healthy had simply three touchdown catches in 13 games in 2018. For a histrion who was rightfully regarded equally a freak athlete for virtually of his NFL tenure, the University of Arizona product was shown up when trying to continue Kenyan Drake out of the end zone as what amounted to a deep safety during that famous concluding-second laterals play for the win by the Miami Dolphins in Week 14. I don't think that's a fair measure out of whether Gronkowski is showing the same explosiveness as a tight end, but let's see if we can discover proof of that with advanced data.

The NFL'south Side by side Gen Stats accept made player speed on a snap-by-snap ground available going back to the 2016 season, and that's going to be the best way to judge whether Gronkowski isn't the same. The bad news is that Gronkowski missed most of that 2016 campaign with a hamstring strain and subsequently a dorsum injury that required flavor-catastrophe surgery. Information technology's tough to apply his express season as a reliable sample in comparison with the ii subsequent campaigns.

In terms of absolute tiptop speed as a brawl carrier, Gronkowski hasn't slowed down. (His speed is faster beyond the board with the brawl in his hands than without.) In 2016, Gronkowski'due south max speed on any play every bit a ball carrier was xviii.ane mph. That number fell to 17.4 mph in 2017, before hopping dorsum up to 18.2 mph in 2018. When Gronkowski wants to hit max power in a moment, he can become to the same place he was a couple of years ago.

A better measure out is Gronkowski's 90th percentile speed. ESPN Stats & Information defines that equally the top speed Gronkowski hits on at least ten per centum of his snaps. I'm once more looking strictly at Gronkowski'due south snaps as a ball carrier. In 2016, again with the express sample, Gronkowski'due south 90th percentile speed was 17.9 mph.

In 2017, that mark fell to 15.seven mph, and so a pretty significant drop-off. It was proficient for 11th out of 28 qualifying tight ends. This season, Gronk's 90th percentile speed equally a ball carrier actually has risen to 16.2 mph, but that has placed him only 20th out of 29 qualifying players at his position.

What would I take away from this? Not much, given that the speed of the average tight terminate seems to take increased notably betwixt 2017 and 2018. I wouldn't be surprised if the Gronkowski we're seeing in 2018 is slower than the guy who excelled when healthy between 2011 and 2015, but I don't think there'due south testify of a noticeable drop-off betwixt 2017 and 2018.

The verdict: Non enough evidence to ostend

Fact bank check: The Patriots are the masters of the double score effectually halftime

The double score. The 2-for-1. The double-up. There's no official term for what the Patriots seem to terrorize teams with at the end of halves, only if you lot've watched a Patriots game over the past 15 years, you lot know what I'm talking nearly. If the Patriots win the coin toss, Nib Belichick is known for deferring his choice to the second half. As the game approaches halftime, the Patriots launch into their 2-minute drill and score just before the end of the first half without leaving the opposition a run a risk to drive for a response. Then, as they get the brawl to start the second half, Brady drives the Pats downfield for a second consecutive score. A game that seemed close is suddenly out of reach.

I don't think I need to tell yous that scoring twice at any time during the game is good. To get any further, though, I need to suspension this down into a few other questions. I'll start by defining the double score to be any game where the Patriots score a field goal or touchdown in the terminal minute of the start one-half and so score on offense once again on the opening drive of the third quarter.

Do the Patriots pull off the double-score trick more anybody else?

From what I can tell, the respond to that question is yes, although not every bit much as nosotros might brand information technology out to seem. Since the starting time of the 2001 season, the Patriots have successfully executed the double score 25 times in 288 regular-season games, or about 1.5 times per season. This is the most in football, just it'southward not by a considerable margin; the second-placed Saints and Chargers have done it 22 times, while the Packers and Colts are at 21. The boilerplate NFL squad has pulled off the feat merely under fourteen times in the past 18 seasons.

Interestingly, after the Pats pulled off the double-up three times in 2017, they haven't been able to get a single one down in 2018. Josh McDaniels' offense has taken the ball and scored to start the second one-half only in one case this flavor. Y'all might argue that teams are aware of the Patriots' penchant for double scores and are deferring to deny the Patriots opportunities, just they should have been aware of this years ago and didn't seem to have many issues with it last flavour.

If yous're looking for the vaunted two-touchdown variant of the double score, though, the Chargers are actually king. They take 9 two-touchdown 2-for-1s since 2001, placing them ahead of the Patriots, who accept seven. In the vast bulk of cases, these offenses are settling for ane (if non ii) field goals.

The verdict: True, only information technology's non really as much of a Patriots trademark as you would call up

Practise the Pats kill off opposing teams with the double score?

If you're going to start with the assumption that a team is scoring on two chosen drives, the sample is naturally going to include a lot of victories. Since 2001, non-Pats teams have won more than 71 per centum of the time when they pull off the double score across halftime, which is the equivalent of an 11.three-win team over a 16-game NFL flavor. The 2-for-1 makes an average team look like a Super Bowl contender.

The Patriots? In their 25 regular-season games with a double-upwardly, New England's record is 25-0. That's right. If the Patriots striking you with a two-for-1, you're generally toast. The only exception I can find is actually in Super Bowl XLVI against the Giants. The Patriots actually scored touchdowns on either side of halftime, and despite the fact that teams have won 80 percent of the time when pulling off a rare double-touchdown, Brady & Co. failed to score once more and vicious to the Giants for the second time in a 21-17 upset.

The verdict: True ... if you concord them to a field goal over the rest of the game

Fact check: The Patriots never trade up

This is a misnomer. Of class, if you lot've paid attending over the past sixteen years, you know that the Patriots trade downwardly all the time. When I looked at this topic in Jan 2015, I noted that Belichick has clustered something close to the first, 2nd and 19th overall picks strictly in added draft capital by trading picks for other picks, either by trading down or taking a selection in a subsequent typhoon.

That hasn't changed. In the upcoming 2019 typhoon, Belichick has an extra second-round pick from the Bears and an improved third-circular selection from the Lions. (More on how he got them in a minute.) It'south also off-white to notation, though, that Belichick does occasionally trade up. Fifty-fifty as he fabricated a handful of trades downwardly during the 2018 draft, he moved up vii spots in the second round to catch cornerback Duke Dawson, who was injured for the first half of the season and spent the rest of the twelvemonth as a redshirt. In the past, he has moved up to nab several players, most notably Rob Gronkowski.

By and large, Belichick'southward moves to grab a player are small trips in the range of v to 10 picks ahead. He rarely moves up an entire circular or trades a future choice in a higher round than the present one, as the Lions did by trading the Pats their 2019 third-round pick during the 4th round of the 2018 typhoon. The value Belichick accumulates trading downwards dwarfs the pocket-sized spending he makes trading up.

The verdict: False

Fact check: The Pats accept been a model franchise in drafting and developing young quarterbacks backside Brady

Teams turn to the Patriots for only well-nigh everything, and then information technology's no surprise that other organizations would be in dearest with New England's quarterbacks besides. If you lot can't become Brady, why not get the side by side best matter and go after his backup? The Pats have drafted a serial of quarterbacks behind Brady, most notably Jimmy Garoppolo. Here's the full listing of passers the Pats have drafted since taking Brady in 2000, what it cost to larn them by Chase Stuart'south typhoon chart, and what the Pats have received in render when they've traded those quarterbacks away:

Your eyes don't deceive you lot: That'south new Cardinals motorcoach Kliff Kingsbury, who was a late-circular pick for the Pats in 2003. In terms of typhoon capital, the Patriots have paid more they've gotten in return for their backups via trade. Those trades have included two players: Starting linebacker Mike Vrabel was sent to the Chiefs alongside Cassel for a second-round pick and played 2 seasons before retiring, and the Patriots acquired wideout Phillip Dorsett from the Colts in exchange for Jacoby Brissett. To go on things relatively uncomplicated, I'm going to just cancel those 2 players out for now.

What this nautical chart doesn't practise is include what happened adjacent. In the case of Garoppolo, as a key example, the Pats were able to plow the second-circular pick they got for their promising young passer into much more. Later a series of trade-downs, the Pats ended up netting xviii.7 points of draft capital, including those actress picks in 2019 from the Bears and Lions. That's roughly equivalent to the 12th overall pick on the Stuart nautical chart, a much more impressive catch than the 43rd pick the Pats initially acquired. The Pats also used the 2d-rounder they got from the Chiefs on Patrick Chung, who was a solid correspondent on a rookie contract for iv years before leaving for the Eagles (and and then returning to New England soon thereafter). In that location'south plenty in hither to wipe away the deviation between draft capital spent and returned for me.

There'due south also the value of having a young quarterback lying in wait if Brady got injured, although I'm more skeptical of this claim. The Pats have needed only 19 starts from their backups in the Brady era, 15 of which came when the reigning MVP tore his ACL in Week ane of 2008. They turned to Cassel, who inherited arguably the greatest offense in NFL history from the prior season. Cassel struggled at first, but he eventually managed to helm the league's 7th-ranked offense by DVOA.

Cassel went on to take the Chiefs to the playoffs with 27 TD passes and vii interceptions in 2010, but that was with a nifty defence force, a dominant running game and subpar numbers in other categories. When the Chiefs came up against the Ravens during that yr's postseason, Cassel was 9-of-18 for 50 yards with three picks. He wasn't constructive for whatsoever extended menses of time in any of his other years as a starter. I don't think Cassel was much more a replacement-level quarterback, and information technology's fair to at least wonder whether the Pats would accept made the playoffs in 2008 with a higher-level fill-in backside the injured Brady.

Garoppolo and Brissett played well in 3 of their four starts, with Brissett struggling mightily in the fourth, a 16-0 loss to the Bills. Garoppolo kept his level of play upward during the 2017 season with the 49ers, although the Eastern Illinois product wasn't every bit constructive before tearing his ACL early in the 2018 campaign. Brissett exceeded anybody's expectations with competent play in Andrew Luck's stead during the 2017 flavour and profiles as an upper-echelon backup. The other passers the Pats drafted either never played or showed niggling when they did brand it onto the field.

play

1:38

Fox and Bruschi like the Pats to advance to the Super Bowl.

John Fox and Tedy Bruschi break downward how Chris Jones and Tyreek Hill need to exist contained in order for the Patriots to win.

There'southward also the opportunity toll of using second- and third-round picks on backup quarterbacks who barely played on competitive teams. The Patriots would have been landing spot No. ane for whatever veteran passer trying to hold on for a ring if that had been their strategy, and while those passers would have been more than expensive, they would have been gratuitous to utilise those picks on players who might have made more than of an affect. Belichick used the 49th selection in the 2008 draft on Kevin O'Connell, but in the picks after the quarterback was chosen, other teams took meaningful contributors like Thomas DeCoud, Tyvon Branch and Mario Manningham, who famously caught a dart from Eli Manning during the game-winning drive confronting the Patriots in Indianapolis at the end of the 2011 flavour. As good as Garoppolo was, would the Patriots have been better off going for the player drafted afterward him and bringing Jarvis Landry into the fold?

There'southward no clear answer to this ane. In pure typhoon majuscule, I think the Patriots basically broke even after you consider what they did past trading downwards with the picks they acquired. Had the Patriots managed to go on Garoppolo, this would take been a rousing success, only they didn't do and so. The Pats might have been better off just installing a permanent McCown blood brother as their backup and using their picks on players who could take impacted their bodily week-to-week operations.

The verdict: Too shut to call

Fact bank check: Bill Belichick confused the Seahawks into foolishly calling a laissez passer play on the goal line in Super Bowl XLIX past non calling a timeout

Many of the arguments confronting the Seahawks throwing the ball in that situation are either naive or inaccurate, as I originally wrote when I broke information technology down the day after the game. Marshawn Lynch had non been a lock to score from the 1-one thousand line that season. At that place was a similar gamble of the Seahawks fumbling on the 1-g line equally there was they might throw an interception.

Did Belichick want the Seahawks to throw the ball? Maybe. He had the league's worst run defence in brusk yardage, and throwing the brawl would have likely stopped the clock, which would have either given his defense a breather or left the Patriots a precious few seconds on the clock to try to score. The Patriots did stack the box and cartel the Seahawks to throw, so I don't retrieve Belichick was upset by the conclusion to pass.

The idea that he knew the Seahawks were going to throw the exact screen they ended up calling and that Malcolm Butler was going to pick it off, though, is dizzy. For one, smart offenses mix up their playcalls and evidence one affair earlier countering to another all the time. The Saints, notably, faked a similar screen to Michael Thomas on quaternary-and-goal from the 1-yard line terminal week before instead throwing a touchdown laissez passer to would-exist blocker Keith Kirkwood, who was open up when the Eagles bit on the screen look. There'south a far greater chance that a failed pass in this situation results in an incompletion as opposed to an interception, in which case the Seahawks would have had 2 chances to run the ball from the 1-chiliad line.

Practise yous desire to know how dumb Belichick thought this decision was? Ii years later, the Patriots were in overtime of Super Bowl LI confronting the Falcons in a 28-28 necktie. After a pass interference phone call, the Pats had offset-and-goal on the opening possession of overtime with a chance to seal the game from the two-yard line. The Patriots lined upwards and promptly threw a fade to Martellus Bennett, who was split out in a mismatch against Vic Beasley. The 2016 sack champion tipped a unsafe Brady laissez passer abroad for an incompletion. On the side by side play, James White ran the brawl in for a championship-winning score. Josh McDaniels is the playcaller in New England, just if there was e'er an offensive playcall Belichick would accept made clear before the moment happened, information technology would have been on that first-and-goal against the Falcons.

My suspicion on 2nd down is that Belichick wanted to brand the Seahawks use their final timeout, which would have limited the playcalls available to them and dared them to throw the ball more than once. He didn't get what he wanted, but it ended up working out better than anybody could have possibly imagined for the Patriots, Belichick included.

The verdict: False

Fact check: 'Everybody thinks [the Patriots] suck and tin can't win whatsoever games'

Let's end with a topical ane. After Lord's day'south 41-28 demolition of the Chargers, Brady took to the microphone to express his frustrations with, well, everybody. During the second quarter, with the Patriots dominating the game and leading by multiple touchdowns, ane sportsbook opened betting for the AFC Championship Game and listed the Pats as 3-point underdogs. Information technology's unlikely that Brady was referring to this perceived slight, but during the calendar week, Julian Edelman started to sell a "Bet Against United states" T-shirt in his online store.

It'due south weird that Edelman appears to be offended well-nigh the Patriots' status as underdogs heading into Sunday for a few reasons. To kickoff, the Patriots beat the Chiefs earlier this season in a 43-40 thriller at Foxborough. This game will be played in Kansas Urban center. Home-field advantage is typically worth around three points, so the movement between venues should be worth six points, or the verbal difference betwixt the score from earlier this season and the three-point opening margin for the Chiefs.

What makes the sense of boldness fifty-fifty stranger is that the Patriots have been favored in 52 consecutive games in advance of Lord's day. The last time they were an underdog, according to Pro-Football-Reference.com, was in Jimmy Garoppolo'due south first start, back in Week ane of the 2016 season confronting the Cardinals. Their concluding advent as an underdog with Brady every bit quarterback was in Week 13 of the 2014 campaign, some 77 starts ago, when the Patriots were 3-point underdogs in Green Bay against an viii-iii Packers squad. No T-shirts were made, but the Patriots neither won nor covered in a 26-21 loss.

The Patriots are a very good football squad. They have an entirely reasonable shot of winning confronting the Chiefs on Sunday and advancing to withal another Super Bowl. At 11-5, they just finished with their worst tape since 2009. They're playing a 12-4 Chiefs squad that nearly beat the Patriots in New England before this flavour and topped them in Week one of the 2017 entrada. The quarterback on the other side of the field is probable the NFL MVP. Nobody of any consequence thinks the Patriots suck. It's also entirely reasonable to recollect that the Chiefs should be favored to win at home on Sunday.

The verdict: Extremely faux