Re: Tanier seems to have glossed over 2004
- Damn! I was really enjoying the Tanier piece, in which he promised to recall the last FOUR Patriots teams that went to the Super Bowl before this one. I wasn't scared when the second entry involved the "2003-2004" Patriots, because the season extends into January and sometimes February if you are blessed with a Super Bowl team. But then: he covers the 2003Patriots, introduces Vrabel as a receiver, and says the Troy Brown to defense experiment came later. My conclusion: he never said a word about the 2004 Patriots.I skipped over his 2007 stuff to write this, but for me, the Favored Template is 2001 (-2002*), because I believe we are the underdogs for the first time since 2001. Even so, our Sterling Moore/Julian Edelman/Phillip Adams* stopgap secondary is very reminiscent of the Hank Poteat/Troy Brown/Earthwind Moreland/Omare Lowe finger in the dike secondary from 2004 (-2005*).The Giants were outscored this year, and neither team in this Super Bowl is superior to the teams they had to beat a week ago for the right to move on. Unlike the 2001 Rams or 2007 Patriots or the 2009 Colts, no team goes to the Super Bowl to be coronated this time; two teams go to play a game to earn a championship. I'll take that, but can the nation please acknowledge the Pats' underdog status? It's our right!
From: Rich Carreiro <rlcarr@...>
To: patriots@...; Zip Patriots List <email@example.com>
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2012 9:11 PM
Subject: [patriots] Some nostalgia
Rich Carreiro rlcarr@...
patriots mailing list