State of Patriots Union

Yesterday afternoon, Bill Belichick held his annual State of the Patriots post season press conference. . . via conference call. After losing the Super Bowl two days ago, he didn't even have the courtesy to address the media in person, not that it would have mattered. His address to the media lasted 13 minutes and, in my opinion, was one of the poorest excuses for anyone to call themselves a member of the media.

Here's a sampling of some of the hard-ball questions that were asked of Belichick, two days removed from being completely outcoached in the Super Bowl:

1. Have you watched film of the Super Bowl yet?

2. What are your plans for the offseason?

3. Is it difficult to find the positives in a team that finished 18-1?

4. Do you expect the same coaching staff back for next year?

5. Are Junior Seau and Tedy Bruschi retiring?

You'll have to excuse me for being offended at that line of questioning. Are people actually getting paid to ask him those questions? Do you feel good about calling yourself a journalist when you ask those in-depth questions? When you were just outcoached and your team outplayed in the Super Bowl, I'd like to know a little bit more than if you think you'll have the same coaching staff next year or about your offseason plans.

I was actually shocked to hear Belichick answer (sort of) two questions:

On if he considered challenging the play where Pierre Woods appeared to recover a fumble. “The officials ruled that there wasn’t any clear-cut possession and Mike Carey was standing right there in front of it. I can’t imagine that he would have ruled it any differently than the way he did when he’s standing right on top of the play. So I really didn’t give it much thought.” Well, I sure am glad that the head coach of a Super Bowl team didn't give a potentially controversial call much thought because it looked like Woods initially had possession and could have been ruled down by contact before losing the ball in the pile. Is it so hard for Belichick to believe that an official would miss a call?

On why he left the field, and his team, with one second remaining on the clock. “Basically, on that last play I wasn't really sure of the time. Everybody started on to the field and then I got over there and I wanted to congratulate Tom. There really wasn't much left at that point.” Sorry but I don't buy that explanation. The referee clearly told you that the Giants had to make one more play to officially end the game and you ignored him.

And that's pretty much it. There were no follow up questions that could have given more insight into the game and his coaching, such as if the referee told him to go back to the sideline. No one even brought up the decision to go for it on fourth and 13 instead of kicking a 48 yard field goal or about his lack of adjustments to the Giants constantly putting pressure on Tom Brady. How about the play call selection on their last possession. Was it really necessary to throw three deep bombs when you only needed a field goal to tie the game and had all of your timeouts?

And no one even had the backbone to ask any questions relating to the ongoing spying scandal, which looks like it's not going away any time soon with Congress now getting involved and rumors of the Patriots taping games and workouts dating back to 2001.

Luckily, we did get this insightful gem from the hooded genius, "It's pretty much over. Time to move on. I'm not going to sit here and dwell on anything good or bad. It's over," said Belichick. "It is what it is. We played our last game of the '07 season."

Gee, thanks for clarifying that the season is over. Now I'd like some real answers to some real questions.