New England Patriots: The 6 Biggest Misconceptions in Patriots History

The New England Patriots have a long history of being a down-in-the-dumps franchise before recently establishing themselves as one of the premiere franchises in the NFL.

History gives way to misconceptions as numerical analysis comes to the forefront. Sometimes, the story isn't in the stats, but in the events that transpired over the course of the game or the season. Sometimes, however, a healthy dose of the cold, hard facts (shameless plug) is just what people need to be reminded that things aren't always what they seem.

With that in mind, here are just some of the misconceptions that have plagued the Patriots franchise.

Erik Frenz is the co-host of the PatsPropaganda and Frenz podcast. Follow Erik on Twitter @ErikFrenz.

The Patriots Were Blown out by the Packers in Super Bowl XXXI

A quick scoring strike on the Packers' first possession of the game seemed to set the tone for Super Bowl XXXI. We were eventually treated to the highest-scoring first quarter in Super Bowl history, but it was the Patriots who were leading 14-10 at that point.

By halftime, Green Bay had regained the lead and was up 27-14 over New England.

The Patriots didn't lie down, though, and drew within six points on an 18-yard Curtis Martin touchdown scamper and an Adam Vinatieri extra point.

Who knows what would have happened had the Patriots not been gashed on special teams by eventual Super Bowl XXXI MVP, Desmond Howard? His 99-yard kickoff return for a touchdown sealed the deal, and a two-point conversion put the Packers up by 14 for good.

After that touchdown, not a single point was scored. Were it not for that kick return, who knows how the rest of the game might have played out? In the end, the game was much closer than the final score indicated. This, despite Bledsoe throwing four interceptions and being sacked five times.

The Dominant Defense of the Early 2000s Was Because of Elite Pass-Rushers

It is the opinion of most fans that the Patriots sorely need an elite pass-rusher if they want their third-down defense to improve. While that may be true for strictly their 32nd-ranked third-down defense, it won't be the make-or-break factor for this defense returning to prominence.

This isn't Cold, Hard Football Facts, but forgive me while I go statistical on you for a minute or two.

Here is a look at some sack totals since 2001:

Year	Total sacks	Average NFL sacks	High sack total for one player (name)	Def. rank (scoring)
2001	39	38.6	7 (LE Bobby Hamilton)	6
2002	34	36.7	5.5 (LE Willie McGinest)	17
2003	41	34.1	9.5 (ROLB Mike Vrabel)	1
2004	45	37.4	9.5 (LOLB Willie McGinest)	2
2005	33	36.9	7 (ROLB Rosevelt Colvin)	17
2006	44	36.4	8.5 (LOLB Rosevelt Colvin)	2
2007	46	34.4	12.5 (ROLB Mike Vrabel)	4
2008	30	32.4	8 (RE Richard Seymour)	8
2009	31	34.4	10 (LOLB Tully Banta-Cain)	5
2010	36	35.3	5.5 (RE Mike Wright)	8

The bottom line is, the Patriots have never needed an elite pass-rusher to be one of the better scoring defenses in the league. Also, despite rarely ever being much better than the league average, the defense has continually ranked among the top 10 in scoring (the only defensive stat that really matters).

Without going on too much of a diatribe here, the Patriots' weaknesses on third down weren't solely due to the pass rush. Mike Dussault of Pats Propaganda pointed out in two separate pieces (first half and second half) that the problems against the Jets in the playoffs were a result of being exploited in coverage on 3rd-and-6 or 4. In that sense, the addition of Ras-I Dowling should help.

An improved effort from the entire defensive unit will be needed if the group is to make strides in the right direction in 2011.

Tom Brady Benefitted from an Elite Rushing Attack During the Dynasty

Antowain Smith and Corey Dillon are names of lore among Patriots fans who grew up watching the team win three Super Bowls in four years.

More than simply production, it was the attitude they brought to the offense that helped them make their names. A hard-nosed running style complemented the pass attack perfectly.

Never, though, did the Patriots feature an elite or even dominant rushing attack.

The numbers hold that true. Another chart? Don't mind if I do.

Year	Rush yards	Attempts	Yards/attempt	Rank in yards/attempt
2001	1,793	473	3.8	24
2003	1,607	473	3.4	30
2004	2,134	524	4.1	18

The yards totals are high, but the NFL is all about efficiency, not volume. Truth be told, the Patriots rush attack was never even above average, as they never ranked in the top half of the league in yards per attempt, the real stat that matters.

Adam Vinatieri Was the Real MVP of Super Bowls XXXVI and XXXVIII

Adam Vinatieri is a folk hero in New England, and no amount of time in a Colts uniform will ever change that. No one who saw them will ever forget his pair of kicks in blinding snow that sent the Patriots to the AFC Championship in their win over the Raiders.

Beyond that, it was Vinatieri's clutch kicks that won Super Bowls XXXVI and XXXVIII.

One could make the case for Vinatieri as Super Bowl XXXVI MVP. He made two kicks that day, of 37 and 48 yards. Granted, they were in a dome, but many other kickers might have collapsed under the pressure of a franchise's first Super Bowl win, against a big-time favorite.

What many won't remember about Super Bowl XXXVIII against the Panthers is that he missed a kick and had one blocked. On that day, he was 1-for-3 on field-goal tries.

He made the kick when it mattered, though, and the Patriots defeated the Panthers in Super Bowl XXXVIII.

On that day, Brady completed exactly two-thirds of his passes, with three touchdowns and one interception. His quarterback rating was 100.5. There's no question that the Patriots win in that Super Bowl is thanks to the Vinatieri kick, but to say that he was the real hero of the day is to completely undermine the efficient play of Brady in that Super Bowl.

The 2007 Patriots Might Have Won It All If They Had Lost a Regular-Season Game

I heard radio personalities talking about this concept a few months ago. The argument was that the New England Patriots would have been better off had they not gone 16-0, but instead lost a game midseason (say, against the Ravens).

How would a loss have made them better?

It might have alleviated some of the pressure of the Super Bowl, but this was a veteran team that was used to pressure situations. In fact, the pressure situation of every team playing every week like it was the Super Bowl should have been more than enough preparation.

It might have given Belichick something else to call out his team for in the film room and at practice, but the weaknesses of the Patriots offense had already been exposed. The Giants knew that weakness, but not only that, they had the personnel to execute.

Everyone and their brother knew that the game hinged on the Giants' ability to get after Brady. They did. That's all that matters.

No midseason loss could have saved Tom Brady from the wrath of the Giants defensive line in that game.

The 2010 Patriots Were a Disappointment for Not Winning in the Playoffs

Does anyone remember that most analysts had written the Patriots off from the playoffs during the 2010 preseason? Supposedly, the Jets were going to win the division, and the Patriots might even finish third to the Dolphins.

The fact that the Patriots went 14-2 in a rebuilding season when they traded their biggest offensive playmaker four games in? That's just incredible.

Sure, that playoff loss added to the dismay of Patriots fans who have been waiting since 2004 for a title. The 2010 season gave us so many things to be excited for, that it seems almost ludicrous to wallow in pity over the early playoff exit.

This is a team that will continue to compete for years to come. The proverbial window is still open. That was hardly their last chance at a Super Bowl.