You're selectively bringing up some of your prior points and not others. You said anyone who watched the '85 AFC championship game would have concluded that New England was the better team and I disagree. You said the Patriots gameplan was brilliant in that game, but it backfired in the Super Bowl. I countered those points. You pull out the name Rod Rust, but didn't know who the Dolphins D coordinator was. What aspect of Rust's game planning was so brilliant? I noticed the Pats DBs covered Duper and Clayton well, but I don't attribute that to game planning. I don't know what the Pats gameplan was against the Bears - there is a play I've seen in an NFL Films video a few times where the whole Pats defense bites on a fake to Payton in that game. Maybe the Pats D keyed on him all game or maybe they were just fooled by that fake, I don't know and my point is it wouldn't have mattered - they were completely over matched. You're comparing apples to oranges by implying Miami's bad game in the AFC championship was comparable to the Patriots SB debacle. Miami split with the Patriots in the regular season. They weren't as good as they were in '84 or maybe their offense simply wasn't as novel after the 49ers laid out a blue print how to beat them, but they had enough to win especially against AFC teams. With a weak defense, giving the other team a short field
multiple times and falling behind was a bad formula. The Pats still had to execute and they did and deserved to win the game, I'm not arguing that. The Bears on the other hand had a great defense that season, they were getting turnovers against everyone. The Super Bowl and AFC Championship aren't comparable in my opinion - I'm arguing that if Miami doesn't uncharacteristically turn the ball over that often, they may give up the same number of rushing yards or even more, but they beat the Pats. That's not the case with the Bears/Patriots - play that game 10 times with 10 different gamelans and the outcome is the same every time. You mentioned the Pats were -4 in turnovers that game, but did they also drop an easy TD pass and still remain within 10 with the ball in the fourth quarter?
Bryan wrote:Your bizarre comment about me "thinking the brilliant Patriots game planning gave the Bears a better Super Bowl than Miami would have" is pure whack-a-doodle nonsense.
You call it bizarre, I call it inference. You said NE was the better team, so I concluded that you must think they would have given the Bears a better game. Should I have concluded that even though you think NE was the better team, you also think Miami would have given the Bears a better Super Bowl? Then what are we even arguing about?
You can call me "wacky" or whatever and add an eye roll emoji and think that wins you the debate, but I disagree on that as well. Since you aren't understanding what I'm saying, I'll say it one more time. Miami was unbalanced on offense, weak against the run on defense, and did nothing to correct either which caught up with them, but they still would have played in two Super Bowls had it not been for an uncharacteristically sloppy game in which turnovers resulted in short fields for the opposition and they seemed to shoot themselves in the foot too often. A dropped TD pass on a drive that resulted in 0 points, a fumbled QB exchange, a fumble on the opening kickoff of the second half by a player who I would have pulled after fumbling an early kickoff, and the odd use of a 2nd/3rd string fumble prone back at the key moment of the game.