Call me a d-bag, jerk-weed, contrarian, but I’ve never really bought into the old Bill Parcells’ adage that all you need to do is "make the tournament."

I've always felt October wins matter and that playoff seeding is important. I love first-round byes and automatic home games in the divisional round. I generally feel the bye teams are the ones to be taken seriously; they have to win just two games to make the Super Bowl, after all. It’s always been my opinion that it’s important to set yourself up as one of those teams, and that just waiting to "get hot in January" is not the way to go.

But for as much evidence as I can produce to back up my beliefs (for instance, of the last 20 Super Bowl participants, 14 were No. 1 or No. 2 seeds), I know there are many teams who’ve proven Parcells’ mantra to be accurate. And if you’re a Patriots’ fan, they are now your ray of hope.

Consider two examples: the 2007 New York Giants and 2005 Pittsburgh Steelers, both of whom made the playoffs as No. 6 seeds and swept their way to Super Bowl titles without owning a home playoff game, never mind a bye. Both had underwhelming, up-and-down regular seasons. Both just  “made the tournament” and  “got hot in January.” A closer look:

1. The ’07 Giants. Do you know they didn’t even have a very good December? Or a good November, for that matter? They truly did not start playing championship-caliber football until the playoffs. In the regular season, they were 4-4 after Nov. 1, 3-3 after Thanksgiving and 2-2 in their last four games. They beat only one playoff team all season, and that came in October against a Redskins team that turned around and beat them soundly at the Meadowlands in Week 15. Their most impressive performance was a loss (Week 17 vs. the Pats). But in the playoffs, after beating Tampa in the wild card game, the Giants took out Dallas, who had scored 76 points in two games against them in the regular season, and the Packers, who had blown them out by 22 points in September. And they did it on the road. It turns out Parcells’ former team proved to be the ultimate poster child for his philosophy. But they are hardly the only ones….

2. The ’05 Steelers. Unlike the Giants, Pittsburgh did start playing well in December, but there’s a caveat: they did it against the NFC North. After losing in consecutive weeks to Indianapolis and Cincinnati in late November – two teams they would come back to beat in the playoffs – the Steelers closed out the year with four straight wins, including victories over Chicago, Minnesota and Detroit, as well as a blowout of Cleveland. Most people looked at that level of competition and decided to ignore the Steelers as a viable postseason threat. And can you blame them? The Steelers beat only two playoff teams during the regular season. But they beat four playoff teams when it really counted, including two that had smoked them in Weeks 11 and 12. Go figure.

So there are the precedents, folks. Both the Giants and Steelers played a lot of bad football in the regular season. They did poorly against postseason-bound teams (the Pats currently have just two wins against teams that would be in the playoffs if they began today, the Jets and Broncos). Their fans looked at them the same way most of us currently look at the Patriots – not good enough on defense and not good enough against quality opponents to be taken seriously – and they still went all the way. 

Then again, neither had Deltha O’Neal starting at cornerback.

Anyway, that’s the thought of the day. Let’s reach inside the bag and see what we’ve got….

--

Felger,

You were way too kind to the defensive backs in giving them only a D. They couldn’t cover a fire hydrant with a blanket. It remains a mystery to me why anybody would even bother to run the ball on the Pats. And the linebackers are also part of that problem as they consistently seem to be out of position in pass coverage. And I have to agree with you on Mayo; since his 20 tackle performance he has been MIA.

BTW, thank God that Coach Smarty-Pants hired Dom Capers as defensive backs coach. So how’s that working out for you, Bill? You have to wonder what they were thinking about going into this season with Hobbs as their #1 guy. He stinks and should be a nickel, period. It reminds me of a couple of years ago when they let Givens & Branch go and had poor Brady throwing to Flotsam & Jetsam. I guess we can hope that history will repeat itself and they will get a couple of quality D-backs in here next year.

Between their d-backs not being able to cover anybody and their front seven not putting pressure on the QBs, they were going to have problems this year. Obviously nobody thought this team would win anything after Brady got hurt, but they might still be losing these games with that defense.

Disgruntled in Foxboro,

Jeff Goode

A: 1. On Mayo and the linebackers: they've definitely been part of the problem over the middle. I thought from the first day of training camp that Mayo displayed a good instinct in diagnosing run-pass, a difficult thing for a young player. But at the same time there have been some huge openings in his area, so he's obviously not getting back to the right spot all the time. I disagree with the “MIA” comment, though. He's still been one of the Pats' best defenders. I was really offering more of a warning for December.

2. If Capers has had any tangible benefit, it's hard to see what it is. The secondary has been brutal is all facets, from technique to coverage assignments. And have you noticed any of Capers' patented zone-blitz schemes? I haven't. So if Capers isn't improving the Pats coverage and he’s not impacting the pass rush, what's he doing? When Capers was hired a lot of people felt he was merely Spygate suspension insurance, but we were assured that wasn't the case. Well, nine months later, it's difficult to discern what else he's been good for.

3. Your comparison of the 2006 receiver situation and the 2008 defensive back problem is a good one. Overall, what stuns me most about the current predicament is what looks like the absence of a plan. It’s not as if the Pats had no warning with Samuel. He fought them on money in 2006. He held out in 2007. He only agreed to come in and play if the Pats guaranteed he'd be a free agent in 2008 if he hit certain reachable incentives.

They had two years to ready a replacement. Yet the guy who was ultimately tabbed to take his spot, Deltha O'Neal, was signed the week before the start of the regular season after being released by THE BENGALS. They first tried Fernando Bryant, of course, who had been let go by THE LIONS. That, shockingly, didn't work out. Neither did rookies like second-round pick Terrance Wheatley or fourth-rounder Jonathan Wilhite.

Remember, it didn't used to be this way. Letting go of players who weren’t worth the money has long been a staple of the Pats under Belichick. No one has a problem with that. But in the past they always seemed to have a transition plan in place. Rodney Harrison was in house when Lawyer Milloy was let go in 2003. Dan Koppen had started at center for nearly a full season before the Pats said goodbye to Damien Woody. Logan Mankins was drafted in the first round a few months after Joe Andruzzi signed in Cleveland. Antowain Smith was replaced by Corey Dillon. And so on and so forth.

What was the master plan at cornerback? What was the plan at receiver in 2006? Not paying Deion Branch and David Givens was one thing. Replacing them with Reche Caldwell and Doug Gabriel was another entirely. Samuel may not have been worth $20 million guaranteed, but why did that mean the Pats had to get minimum-level fodder like Bryant and O’Neal to replace him? In both cases, the Pats drafted players in the second round who they hoped would step right in -- Chad Jackson in 2006 and Wheatley this year -- while spending virtually no money in free agency to bring in suitable “bridge” players. The Pats would have been fine if those draft picks were good ones, but Jackson was a joke and Wheatley provided virtually zero value as a rookie. In both cases, the Pats got what they paid for.

Look, Bill Belichick and Scott Pioli have a terrific track record when it comes to personnel. I’ll still take them over anyone in the league. But the secondary has turned into a mess, and they have no one to blame but themselves.

4. What would this team be if Brady had been the quarterback all year? I think they’d be in pretty much the same place, just with a better record. In other words, I believe the secondary and the pass rush would have been exposed whether it was Brady or Cassel quarterbacking the offense. And either way, we’d be sitting here today saying the defense is not championship caliber. Yes, instead of having five losses, the Pats might have just two or three and we’d be looking at a first-round bye. But they wouldn’t have the defense to go all the way.

--

DB,

Thank God the old Felger comes to life. Felgy, what a piss-poor performance all round by the Pats. The one aspect I think gets over looked is the running game. I think they could have run all day over the Steelers – they were gashing them with Faulk and Morris in the first half then I guess Josh McDaniels decided to chuck the ball even though the blitz was coming all day. What happened to the days of making the adjustment? You talk to Christian Fauria all the time; I know he remembers the two-tight end formations when they ran off-tackle and just ate clock and marched at will against opponents. What better in terrible weather than to run block with an offensive line that could use some toughness instead of getting blitzed and destroyed every other play. When your receivers can’t catch a cold and the O-line can't contain Harrison, MAKE THE F-ING ADJUSTMENT!

Go Tanguay,

Peter Pepler

A: The Pats have had good success in the past throwing on this Steelers’ defense, so I don’t have a problem with them putting the ball up. Take away Faulk’s 41-yard gain on a draw play at the end of the second quarter, and the Pats gained 39 yards on nine first-half carries – not exactly over-the-top production. No, the Pats were moving the ball doing what they were doing (they had more yards and first downs than the Steelers in the first half), so I don’t think it was an adjustment issue. I think it was an execution issue. The one play I think the coaches would like to have back came on the opening series of the third quarter, with the Pats facing a second-and-1 at the Steelers’ 31. A short run would have given them a fresh set of downs inside field goal range. Instead, they dropped Cassel back to pass, Dan Koppen got beat by Casey Hampton and the resulting sack took them out of Gostkowski’s range while setting up another unattainable third-and-long….By the way, go Tanguay?

--

Hey Felgy,

I just wanted to commend and congratulate you for not getting arrested on Monday night on Comcast after the Celts game. As if Tanguay isn't a big enough moron all the time, I don't know how you managed to refrain from hurling yourself at him a la Jim “Don't call me Chris” Everett when he claimed that Rondo was the best point guard in the league. I’m a big Rondo fan, but give me a break; what an idiot.

Jim

Boston

A: That’s more like it.

--

Michael,

If you bothered to watch any of the Steelers road games this year you would know this has been there MO all season. Slow starts, terrible on third- and fourth-and-short. Road wins in Cleveland, Jacksonville, Washington and now New England played out the same way. The Steelers find a way to hang in a game until they make a play that usually gets them going. The Pats’ MO has been the same also. When they step up in class they fall flat on their face.

Al

A: I got quite a few emails like this from Steelers fans over the week. I won’t bore you with any more. I forgot how sensitive they were. Almost as bad as Patriots fans.

--

Mike,

After hearing about – and watching -- the performance of the secondary for yet another week, I visited NFL.com and took a look at some defensive statistics through 12 games for the entire league. Here’s where I found the Pats ranked:

Total yards allowed per game: 13th. Better than the Colts, Jets, Bears, and Broncos.

Passing yards allowed per game: 16th. Better than the Cardinals, Jets, Bears, and Broncos.

Interceptions: Tied for 10th. Better than the Colts, Cardinals, Panthers, Cowboys, Jets, and Broncos.

Sacks: Tied for 18th. Better than the Colts, Broncos, and Redskins.

Points allowed: 12th. Better than the Cowboys, Jets, Broncos, Cardinals, and Bears.

I have chosen these teams based on their records or the “love” we feel for teams like the Colts. What this says to me is that  while the Pats defense is not top tier, it’s not a cellar dweller either. It is middle of the pack, and better statistically than the majority of the defenses in the league. I was surprised to learn this. Based on these facts do you think the weekly “bashing” of the Pats defense is truly warranted?

Mike

Putnam, CT

A: Yes, Mr. sensitive chronic, it’s totally warranted. I think your yardage stats are meaningless. The interception ranking is surprising, but the sack total puts them in the bottom half of the league. That’s good? Let me give you two stats that are more important than any you mention, with the exception of points, and where the Pats rank:

Red zone defense: 30th. Better than Arizona and Houston.

Third-down defense: 29th. Better than Cincinnati, Kansas City and….Indianapolis.

Yes, the Colts have the worst third-down defense in the entire NFL. But here’s the rub: They have the third-best red zone defense. So they are truly doing what the Pats used to do – bend but not break. It’s why they’re headed to the playoffs. The Pats are giving up first downs AND touchdowns, which is a recipe for disaster. All that said, by far the most important stat you mention is points allowed. Look at it this way: 12 teams make the playoffs, so using that as your threshold, you could say based on the Pats’ ranking they are a marginal playoff team. Funny, that’s exactly what the standings say they are.

--

Felgy,

I couldn’t agree more:  the Pats are not built for a playoff run, especially with this pass defense. Give Cassel a pass for a “growing pains” game (plus, the Steelers are pretty good). The D-line without Warren just isn’t dominant. And Moss? The `best receiver in the game’ doesn’t let those balls clang off his hands. Barfing as I say this, but give me Owens—he makes plays more often. They have hit the tilt point with injuries where they just can’t put the personnel on the field to dominate anybody, so they’ll win some and lose some based on the day, and coaching. This year, they’re nothing special.

John

Scituate

A: I think the one injury that has killed them and has been beyond their control is the broken forearm to Adalius Thomas. Old friend Bert Breer, now with the Sporting News and a verified Friend of Bill (Belichick) tells us Thomas is close to returning and could play against the Cardinals in three weeks. If true, that would be HUGE.

--

Mike,

The team is just not that good. Personally I don't know what all the recent excitement was about. Sure, they were a nice little story, but look at the record. What teams did they beat, what teams did they lose to? Frankly, I expect a loss against one of these west coast bums teams. Get ready for the flameout! On the plus side we will get another high draft pick this year!

Best wishes,

miniFelger

A: I agree with your point about the Pats’ losing to one of these bad teams down the stretch. In a vacuum, they should beat them all. But do you trust them to put together four straight winning performances, no matter who the opponent? I don’t think I do.

--

Michael,

You are so right on about the Steelers being ripe for the picking on Sunday. That team can't score touchdowns, they're candy-asses on the road, and Roethlisberger is really not that good a passer….The Pats offensive and defensive lines have been getting pushed around for a couple years now. And who are the playmakers on defense? Bruschi was the guy four years ago, Ty Law is long gone and Asante Samuel ain't walking through that door either. One correction in your column -- Kevin Faulk is not Troy Brown. Kevin Faulk is Brian Westbrook. Maybe the game plan should be to give him the ball on every snap

Peter Martin

A: You mention the “playmakers” and stars on the defense, but how about the role players? The Herald’s John Tomase did a good job pointing out something that had escaped me: Jarvis Green doesn’t have a single sack this year. This from a guy who had averaged seven sacks a season over the last two years, many of them well-timed and game-changing in nature. `”It's been pitiful for me individually,'' Green told Tomase. “I'm really down this year. Third down, since I've been here, it's been my forte to go out there and make plays. This year I haven't been making any.” This is another thing you can’t pin on Belichick or Scott Pioli. Some of the players that have put up numbers in the past (see Mike Vrabel) aren’t doing it now. That’s not their fault.

Could Rosevelt Colvin help? I doubt it, mostly because he’s not in football shape, something he admitted on Wednesday. “I’m in great shape to wake up in the morning,” he said. “To do my daughter’s hair, to run up and down the stairs and get their clothes and prep them for school, come back home, enjoy the day with my wife, go to the UPS store, and come home and eat diner. I guess I was in good enough shape that they felt comfortable bringing me on, so we’ll see what happens.”

Colvin was joking. I think.

--

Felger,

For any patriot fan out there, it has become apparent that this year’s team does not have what it takes even if they end up making the playoffs. I do not remember a Patriots team looking so lackluster in so many areas since 2002. If you remember after that 2002 season, and actually after the 2006 season as well, the patriots went on an offseason spending frenzy (to their standards) to fix some of the problems that plagued them throughout the previous season.  So I guess if fans are looking for a silver lining I would expect the patriots will be pretty active this off-season. To me it seems like the '02 and '06 seasons acted as “back to earth” moments for the franchise, and it seems those seasons could pale in comparison to the current campaign in that respect. Am I totally off base to suggest that the franchise has a history of getting a little cocky in regards to their coaching staff and neglecting certain player personal issues? There seems to be a track record developing in the sense that the team has a few aggressive off-seasons followed by some “cheap” off-seasons.

Do you see the issue more as the team deciding that available talent is not worth the price tag, or do you think it has more to do with the decision makers over valuing the coaches’ ability to make chicken salad out of chicken bleep?

Bob

Boston

A: Overconfidence in the system might have been a factor after that third Super Bowl. And you can see why. Belichick had just won another title with guys like Randall Gay, Earthwind Moreland, Dexter Reid, Don Davis and Asante Samuel (before he was A$ante $amuel) seeing significant playing time in his defense. So if he got sucked into feeling at that time that he could just plug anyone in there, you can understand it. But I think the Pats have suffered from an over-reliance on Brady more than anything else. There’s no other way to explain what they did in 2006 with the receivers. `”Just give him anybody, he’ll make it work.” And he nearly did! And maybe in a more indirect way they felt the same thing with the defense in 2008, that Brady and Moss would continue to put up so many points that they’d get away with their problems on the other side of the ball. Again, it almost worked the year before.

--

Hey Mike,

The Pats have seven picks in the upcoming draft, right? Please use them all on cornerbacks. For a team this well coached and so sound in other areas, the way they turnstile defensive backs is baffling. It's 3rd-and-8 and Deltha O'Neill is giving his guy a 15 yard cushion. That's Nate F'ing Washington!

Matthew George

A: They used 6-of-7 picks on defense last year (including Matthew Slater, who played safety and special teams at UCLA before coming to New England and ruining our winter). I wouldn’t be surprised if they do the same thing again in 2009.  

--

Felger,

Not sure you’ll bother with this, as you’ll have to do some research instead of winging it. The Pats are about $3.5M under the cap (Miguel’s Cap page). Can they use that for a contract extension (partial bonus) for big Vince or is it too late this year? If it is could they use it for Cassel’s current contract, as part of negotiations that would  be more cap friendly if he stays and doesn’t play (highly unlikely). But it could be structured with two clauses: One, if you play in X number of games, your base pay would be the average of top 10 QBs (for example). Two, if you are traded, your base pay would increase to the average of top 10 QBs (again, for example). That would enable them to forget about the franchise tag. Wondering if NFLPA rules would allow something like that?  If they do, I bet the numbers could be worked out….BTW, what happened to Barrack Obama will never get elected?

Mike Marquis

A: “Not sure you’ll bother with this, as you’ll have to do some research instead of winging it?” Wow. Pretty harsh for a guy looking for a favor. But to answer your questions. 1. The deadline for signing players to new contracts and having a portion of the signing bonus count on this year’s cap came and went Nov. 3. 2. The clauses you talk about for Cassel are technically okay, but why would he ever agree to that? Why would he accept anything conditional when he’ll be able to sign for starter money elsewhere with no strings attached? Forget it. 3. Thank f-ing God I was wrong about Obama’s chances. For those paying attention, I actually came off my prediction (a black liberal named Hussein will never be elected president) in August when McCain selected Sarah Palin as his running mate. While the neo-cons at the station were wetting their pants with excitement, I was wondering why McCain would take such a chance. I felt then that McCain must have felt he was way behind and had to swing for the fences. It was the first time I felt Obama had a chance.

--

Felger,

I’m telling you, seeing the Pats D-backs dancing in a game they are losing, after they miss 4-of-5 tackles, is getting to be too much. They gave up a long TD to the Jets and were losing, and on the very next series a rap song was played over the PA and Hobbs, O’Neal and Meriweather all started dancing? They were LOSING the game. These clowns are the weakest link on the team but the biggest chest thumpers. It bothers the hell out of me to watch these clowns who just do not get it. The way they are acting is not the Patriots I have watched since `01.

Paul

Whitman

A: I don’t feel the same way as you, Paul. Yes, I get on Ellis Hobbs for the “penis point’’ as much as anyone, but I really don’t care. Gyrate all you want. Make plays. Win games. Those are the things that matter. I agree that you look like a chump if you dance and lose – so Ellis looks like a total chump. That’s his problem, not mine.

--

Felger,

People are pointing to the draft and you really have to look to 2006 and 2007 as years that have put this team behind the 8-all. For me you have to look at the first two rounds because after that it’s a crapshoot, and in those years look at the players drafted after the guy the Pats chose. 2006: Pats first-round pick, Maroney. Who went after him: Santonio Holmes, DeAngelo Williams, Joseph Addai, DeMeco Ryans. Pats second-round pick: Chad Jackson. Who went after him: Greg Jennings, Marcus McNeil. 2007: Pats first-round pick, Meriweather. Who went after him: Jon Beason, Greg Olsen, Paul Posluszny, LaMar Woodley.

George

A: Kind of unfair, George. You can do that with any draft, and I’m not sure all the players you mention are better than the ones the Pats ended up with. Plus, sometimes people just get lucky. The bottom line is that those three picks have hurt the Pats, although Meriweather still has a chance to be something.

--

Mike,

At the start of the fourth quarter against Pittsburgh, after Wes Welker had been assisted off the field and the Steelers had the ball, the TV broadcast showed a picture of Randy Moss and Jabar Gaffney laughing it up on the bench. I wonder what was so funny. Was it the fact that your teammate almost got killed? That you were down by two scores with 15 minutes left? I have come to the conclusion that Randy Moss is nothing more than a punk. This guy isn’t the best receiver in the league; he isn’t even the best receiver on his team! Does Randy always do the TV press conferences after the games? I may be wrong but I thought he only did them after wins. I can only hope that Belichick told him to get out there and answer the questions.

John

New Hampshire

A: I’m happy to criticize Moss for what he does on the field. I think he’s deserved it at times this year (obviously). But I haven’t seen one thing he’s done wrong off it since he got here – not one. And that includes having a laugh on the sidelines last Sunday, providing that’s even what was going on. Who cares? He can juggle cats on the bench for all I care. Get open. Go get the ball. He didn’t do that Sunday – that was the issue. As for his postgame press conferences, that’s the only time he talks all week, and he does it every game, win or lose. Give him credit for that. While guys like Matt Light and Deltha O’Neal ducked out after the game, Randy took the heat.

--

Mike

I understand there is four weeks left in the season, but in reality their fate is sealed with the current state of the defense. Can you give me 12 players who will not be on this team next year? Isn’t Ellis Hobbs really a nickel back? Also, special teams has not been great – isn’t time to invest in someone else besides Larry Izzo?

Joe

A: Answering the last question first, the Pats drafted Slater specifically for his special teams play. How that’s working out for them? Conversely, Kelly Washington was a terrific special team addition last year. This year he’s been hurt. That’s not Belichick’s fault, either. As for your first question, here are 10 guys (12 is too hard) who could be gone next year, listed in order or likelihood. 1. Cassel. 2. O’Neal. 3. LaMont Jordan. 4. Rodney Harrison. 5. Tedy Bruschi. 6. Laurence Maroney. 7. James Sanders (an unrestricted free agent). 8. Chris Hanson. 9. Jabar Gaffney (UFA). 10. Mike Vrabel.

--

Felger,

It was nice of Matt Light to suspend himself for one game after his hair-pull fight last week. There aren't many that are willing to take the extra step anymore.

Keep up the good work,

Sandy

A: Ouch.

--

Mike,

The only thing more embarrassing than Slater's muffed kickoff is your and your fellow “journalists” interview of Slater in front of his locker. It was obvious that Slater felt terrible but the interview needed to go on. When will you learn to show some compassion?

George

Sharon

A: He wasn’t hounded that badly, George. He was asked a few questions and then we all left. And while it was pathetic to see the way he faced into his locker the whole time, at least he faced the music in his own way. The same couldn’t be said for some of his teammates.

--

Felgah,

To all the people who traded away Brady after two great games by Ca$$el: Do you want to trade all those Draft picks back for him now? Don't break up with the wife just because you had a great weekend with the mistress….

That said, we can’t let Ca$$el get away without getting some draft picks. The draft is going to be deep this year and everyone that could possibly be eligible is coming out because of the inevitable rookie cap that's on the way. There are a bunch of pretty good corners and some nasty safeties that are going to be available and we need as many of them as possible. Bill knows what he's seeing out there, so all the people out there who think Bill's going to play nice and just let little Matty walk out of Boston with nothing in return while he keeps getting slayed because the defensive genius has a terrible defense, Foughettaboutit, the Pats have a better chance of stopping someone on 3&15 than that happening.

Dave T

A: Totally agree, Dave. The franchise-and-trade course of action isn’t nearly as hard or as complicated as people are making it out to be. I’m sick of explaining it. See last week’s mailbag for a full breakdown.

--

Michael Felger,

The trip to London is not all a bad thing.  The game would have been played in Tampa, where the Patriots seem to play poorly.  One of their scheduled road games will be in a neutral site.  I think that is a net positive. 

Jim Veneau

A: The only positive thing I’ve heard about the London game yet, Jim. The Pats’ last regular season trip to Tampa was in 1997 (the stage dive game) and they were blown out, 27-7. It seems they’ve been getting killed there ever since, albeit in preseason action. The Pats have lost their last six Tampa exhibitions. They are undefeated in England.

--

Felgy,

If I recall, the G-MEN went to London two years ago, and oh by the way, they won the Super Bowl. So I don't think it is the best situation, but it can easily be neutralized by strong steady play. So don't just say they are in trouble if they go there, WE ALL HAVE NO IDEA. Take it slow Bud

Mike

A: Yet another reason not to give up hope.

--

FELGER,

F-YOU AND ALL THOSE BLOWHARDS AT WEEI. I HOPE YOU AND EVERYONE OVER THERE JUMPS OFF A BRIDGE WHEN THE BC EAGLES WIN THE ACC TITLE GAME THIS SATURDAY.

John

Medford

A: If I had to pick the representative BC fan, this guy would be it. Knuckle-draggers. They make Steelers fans look cool.

--

Felger,

Seriously, I know you are fighting that metrosexual image, but I cannot even describe that photo and haircut (on the web). It’s all high on one side and then you have a bad cowlick on the other. Ask your wife who's got a real gig for a couple of bucks. You won't have to have your hair cut at Barbizon to save some money. Is it somehow mandatory for your picture to be the “I am passing gas and I have a gullet” look to be at WEEI?

Rick McCarthy

A: If I told you what I paid for this sucker you’d spit up your cornflakes. The Wood sends me to her “guy.” I’m serious. It’s pathetic.

--

Felger You DB!

So does anyone not currently dropping acid really believe this Pats team is anything more than a wild card team? This Pittsburgh game reminded me of the Denver playoff debacle from '05 where anything that could go wrong did go wrong, from the turnovers on down.  We even had the obligatory Ben Watson “look at me, I'm not entirely useless” moment as he ran down another long interception return. The difference this year was that in '05 I was disappointed because I felt the Pats were the better of the two teams. Pitt may have been ripe for the picking as your column suggests, but given the state of the Pats’ defense, unless I took Sheppard pills, I can't say that the local squad is better than the Steelers. And this is without taking into account the drops that could have made this into a France vs. Anyone type beat down.

Which gets me to my main point. Do we even want to make the playoffs now? I really can't see this team doing anything of note in the post season. We have too many holes to fill. I think in the long run missing the playoffs and getting the lowest draft slot possible is far more beneficial at this point. We need impact players in the secondary, we may need new blood on the O-line and we need a TE that can fill the role that Dan Graham played here (i.e., not useless and a competent blocker).

Right now we are slotted to pick 18th. I'd like to see us a bit lower if we are going to miss the postseason. Plus, we need to keep rooting for the Norv-alization of the Chargers to continue as we have the Bolts second rounder. Any chance you can shed some light on what compensatory picks the Pats have coming their way in regards to the free agent departures of Asante Buckner, Daunte Stallworthless and Roosevelt Colvin (btw, welcome back). I'm not trying to jump ship like the rest of the humanoids, but I think you have to be realistic when evaluating where your team is and what it needs.  Missing the post season and jumping 5-6 slots in the draft might be the best thing for this team right now.

And speaking of being realistic, can you believe that Sean Avery got suspended for saying Elisha Cuthbert was “sloppy seconds” If I am Gary Bettman, I not do I NOT suspend Avery, but I mandate that he be on the ice every time Dion Phaneuf is (that’s Cuthbert's massive and hopefully borderline homicidal boyfriend). By the end of the first period there will be nothing left of Avery but Zamboni drippings. Problem solved. But more importantly, how can anyone realistically call Elisha Cuthbert sloppy anything?! If she's sloppy seconds sign me up for filthy fifths.

Mike

Attleboro

A: The same league that sponsors “Hanson Brothers” nights all over the country now has a problem with a player saying “sloppy seconds?” Has anyone ever heard of anything so ridiculous? “Hey Hanrahan, Suzanne sucks….” Well, you know the rest. As for compensatory picks, the most any team can get for losing a free agent is a low third. They are usually fourths and fifths. Maybe Cassel gets them a pick at the end of the third (it’s a complicated formula and I don’t feel like going into it), but that would figure to be too high for Buckner…er, Samuel.

And am I wrong to think Cuthbert is overrated? Give me Madonna any day of the week.

That will wrap it, folks. Deltha O’Neal has been flexed out of prime time in Seattle, so enjoy your Sunday afternoon and we’ll talk next week.

Michael Felger can be seen nightly on Comcast Sportsnet and is a regular contributor for WEEI.com. He can be reached at mfelger@weei.com.