"Actually, this is just another slight to heap on the pile built by ESPN and other analysts. It's the "diss du jour", so to speak. The Patriots' schedule was the softest road to the Super Bowl ever was one. They can't possibly stop the Seahawks offense, and the Patriots' offense can't score against the great Seahawks defense, etc. As in 2001, when the Patriots had no chance whatsoever to beat the "Greatest Show on Turf," the then-St. Louis Rams, the Seahawks are indomitable."
"Pundits' tomfoolery is just more motivation for the Patriots While no team needs any additional motivation once they climb Mount Everett in the NFL and reach just beneath the summit to play in the Super Bowl, it's always a nice additional touch when so-called "analysts" by the bushel full tell the Patriots they can't possibly win. In this case, in a survey of 11 ESPN staff, all 11 chose the Seahawks to win."
""Ben Solak, NFL analyst: Seahawks. The Patriots' run against elite defenses ends with the true best unit of the season. With two weeks to plan, Macdonald will have too many tools to fluster and disrupt Maye. Jeremy Fowler, national NFL reporter: Seahawks. Most complete team in the league. They can win in several different styles. Darnold's confidence is renewed. Dan Orlovsky, NFL analyst: Seahawks. The Patriots' offense isn't good enough to beat this Seattle defense.""
ESPN and other analysts repeatedly criticize the New England Patriots despite a Super Bowl appearance, labeling the team's schedule as the softest path and doubting their ability to stop the Seattle Seahawks. Pundits portray the Seahawks as dominant on both sides of the ball and unanimously favored in an 11-staff ESPN survey. Analysts cited Seattle's elite defense, versatility and recent form as decisive factors while questioning the Patriots' offense. The consistent negatives serve as added motivation for the Patriots, who historically have overcome similar dismissals.
Read at Musket Fire
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]