The Mysterious Rajon Rondo

Last night didn't exactly go as planned now did it?

The first game of a long NBA season against the villains. Revenge against Ray Allen. Showing off a new and improved Celtics team to the rest of the league as an intimidation factor. It was truly the perfect combination of events to spoil a Miami Heat ring ceremony.

Only the Celtics left their defense somewhere in between Boston and Miami, and we all know that an aging Celtics roster isn't beating the Heat in a track meet.

Perhaps the only player in Boston who could keep up with the blisteringly fast Miami Heat is Celtics guard Rajon Rondo. Rondo needs no introduction to Boston fans.  2012 is supposed to be Rajon Rondo's coming out party. For years, Rondo has always operated within the shadow of an aging Big 3, the kid brother to the three seasoned veterans. Only now its becoming increasingly apparent the team runs through Rajon.

In what might be my first "oh my god I'm getting old" moment, Rajon Rondo is no longer a youngster. He's a 6 year pro, an NBA champion, a three-time All Star. Somewhere between James Posey and Darko Milicic, Rondo transformed from an exasperatingly stubborn role player to the next face of the Boston Celtics.

Rondo is a man of many talents, but also a man of many faces and many moods. What's plagued Rondo is not his body of work on the court. On pace to break John Stockton's 28 game double-digit assist record, Rondo is one of the best point guards in the league. What comes with the territory of greatness is that Rondo is under an excruciatingly wide microscope. When Rondo takes the court, we see the breathtaking greatness, but we also see the inexcusable and inexplicable mistakes. We see a player who fights through gruesome injuries and a player who can sulk, mentally removing himself from the game.

Rajon Rondo entered this year on a high-note. A preseason article by Jackie Macmullan featured Rondo in a light not many have seen before. Quietly, word spread that Rondo overhauled his jump shooting and possessed a shooting consistency he's never had in his professional career. Expectations were high for the newest star in Boston.

But last night was a microcosm of all that is Rajon Rondo.

There was brilliance. Rondo slashed his way to the rim on numerous occasions, dropped 13 assists, chipped in 20 points, even tallied 7 rebounds. Statistically speaking, Rondo did his part. He shot 9 of 14, despite missing both three-pointer attempts and going just 2-4 on free throws. When Rondo got out on the fastbreak, he often made things happen.

But there was also frustrating mistakes. Rondo turned the ball over 4 times, was a -11 in terms of +/-, and frankly didn't play elite defense on Mario Chalmers. But what doesn't show up on the stat sheet is Rondo's demeanor. For most of the game, Rondo had a quizzical, sometimes sulky, look on his face. At one point, Paul Pierce even had to remind Rondo to stop thinking and just play, noting he was taking himself out of the game.

And with under a minute left, the game already well out of reach, Rondo for lack of a better term, pulled a Rondo. A vicious flagrant foul on Dwyane Wade pathetically signaled the end of the game for the Celtics. Already down in the scoreboard, Rondo, the "next face of the franchise," took a swipe at the head of one of the NBA's biggest names out of pure frustration, yet again losing control of his emotions. Was the foul egregious? Maybe not. But Rondo was probably better off fouling Dwyane Wade to send a message when the game was hanging in the balance, not while the Heat were essentially running off the clock.

Unfortunately, this is nothing new. Rondo was already given one technical for arguing with an official. Remember last year? Suspended for a playoff game after making contact with an official following a bad call, Rondo put the Celtics in a tough position.

As Celtics fans, we keep waiting for Rondo to turn that final corner. We keep waiting for Rondo to shake off mistakes and to display the characteristics of a leader that he reportedly possesses.  I don't dispute reports that he is a much improved leader within the locker room. Rondo truly does care, he just has a bizarre way of showing it. There are times when Rondo most certainly needs to maintain his emotions at the expense of the team.

Unfortunately, I don't believe Rondo will ever change. Believe me, he will frustrate you and I again. He will make a bonehead decision, he will go through stretches of play where he looks as if he borrowed an invisibility cloak from Hogwarts.

But the beauty of Rajon Rondo is that for every low, there is an equal high. There will be times when Rondo "puts the team on his back." There will be plays where our jaws will drop in amazement. Rondo is the most talented player on this basketball team, and he also may be the toughest. Lets not forget that Rondo may be the toughest SOB in Boston, fighting through even the most grotesque injuries.

Rondo is 26 years old, and has proven that his only consistency is that he's hellbent on not changing. As fans, we can continue to hope he becomes the prototypical leader that we see strewn across sports. Or, we can accept Rondo for what he is. Mercurial, yet passionate. Often in a bad mood, yet always capable of greatness. This team goes no further than Rajon Rondo. Rondo may be the most misunderstood athlete in Boston, but he also needs to become the most appreciated. He's a cutthroat competitor, a true team player. He's also moody and doesn't particularly enjoy allowing those from the outside take a look at his personal life. Now I've heard these descriptions before in Boston...

Larry Legend anybody?

Is Bill Belichick to Blame for Defensive Struggles?

Yesterday we focused on the inconsistencies of the Patriots offense. And although the consensus is that there's a feeling of doubt following the offense's fourth quarter struggles, there's no denying they are a top 5 offense in the league week to week. Unfortunately, when looking at the Patriots defense, this minuscule sense of panic turns into full fledged uproar.

Let's come right out and say it. This Patriots defense is bad. I mean, really bad.

Statistically speaking, it could be worse. New England is 23rd in the league in yards per game, averaging 376 yards per performance. Jerod Mayo leads the league in tackles. So, uh, yeah. From there, the story gets worse. New England ranks 29th in passing yards allowed, allowing 290 yards a game. Thankfully they only allow 86 yards a game in the run department, good for 9th in the league.

Unfortunately, these statistics are on par with prior seasons. For the last 3 years, New England's defense has consistently rolled out the doormat for below-average to average quarterbacks, turning them into the second coming of Terry Bradshaw. Realistically, the only reason the Patriots aren't dead last in all categories is because the offense possesses the ball for long periods of time.

So what is the reason for the struggle?

Most Patriots fans won't want to hear what I believe the answer is. The answer lies within Bill Belichick. Long regarded as a defensive guru, Belichick has failed to produce a competent defense which can carry the offense at points throughout the season.

Some writers around the region have pointed to Belichick's draft-day failures as a reason the defense is so porous, but I don't quite see it. This defense has talent across the board. Devin McCourty has the physical tools to be successful, and had a great rookie season. Jerod Mayo consistently contends with the league leaders in tackles, and Brandon Spikes is one of the best run stopping linebackers in the league. The Patriots drafted two rookies in Chandler Jones and Donta Hightower who clearly display they have the requisite talent to compete in the NFL. Throw in Vince Wilfork and the emerging Kyle Love, and this team has positional talent.

So why can't they play as a unit?

Simply put, I don't believe the scheme in place allows this team to be successful. Time to delve into the X's and O's for a minute.

When you look at the Patriots defense, they keep things extremely basic. Rarely do you see pressure brought from a blitzing linebacker or safety, and before the snap there isn't much movement. What this means is that the opposing quarterback can read the defense at the line of scrimmage, make his own adjustments based on what is thrown at him, and not have to worry about a disguise from New England. One of the staples of Bill Belichick's defenses during the "Super Bowl Era" was their ability to confuse quarterbacks. There is perhaps no bigger example than Belichick's dominance over Peyton Manning earlier in his career.

Now? The Patriots generally stay in a basic cover-2. Rarely does Belichick allow his cornerbacks to play man to man defense. The linebackers almost always drop deeper into coverage, opening up the flats for running backs and tight ends on release-routes. The idea behind this approach is to make the opposing offense earn it, keeping the ball in front of the defense. This is why the Patriots are much stronger in the red zone, because they have less ground to cover and can come up and play tighter defense.

I'm not sure if many of you noticed, but there were times that Belichick's safeties lined up outside your television picture against the Jets this past weekend. Sometimes Tavon Wilson was as far as 25 yards away from the line of scrimmage. Trying to find New England's safeties in coverage has been similar to playing the NFL version of Where's Waldo? On the snap, the safeties rarely came up to the ball, opening up the middle of the field.

The result? While we didn't see many 50 yard pass plays like in Seattle, we saw Mark Sanchez of all people completing 20 yard strikes over the middle. Belichick's defense essentially asks linebackers such as Jerod Mayo and Brandon Spikes to turn into coverage linebackers on pass plays. Not exactly an endearing title for two guys who are much stronger against the run.

My opinion is that this defensive mentality is setting the Patriots up for failure. If the team doesn't bring more than 4 or 5 rushers each pass play, they're essentially asking Chandler Jones and Rob Ninkovich to single-handedly disrupt the quarterback on every play. There is zero aggressiveness from the defense, zero identity. After all, the whole design of the defense is to take away the big play. The only problem is that New England leads the league in 20 yard pass plays allowed, at 38. 38. In 7 games. It's not working.

Unfortunately, with the defense playing with the schemes and mentalities they are taught, the secondary is set up for failure. It doesn't help that you often ask Patrick Chung to turn into a coverage safety to help out the corners. If you haven't noticed, Patrick Chung gets lost in coverage all the time. In fact, it's more surprising when Chung actually shows up on time for a play.

Moving forward, I believe the ideal set-up is Devin McCourty and Stephen Gregory at safety once he returns from injury, with Alfonzo Dennard and some combination of Kyle Arrington and Ras-I Dowling on the outside. This team is not talented enough to sit back and wait for quarterbacks to throw anymore. If the Patriots want to stop opposing offenses, they'll need to make a decision. Do we get more creative up front? Or do we simply play Russian Roulette on every play, hoping that the quarterback doesn't find one of three to four open receivers.

Time to regain your title as a defensive guru, Bill.

Dissecting the Patriots Offense

As I mentioned last week, the Patriots are in a bit of an identity crisis. And while the problem is two-fold, I've chosen to focus first on the offense. The bread and butter of the New England Patriots is their offensive attack. This is no secret, as New England has survived solely due to their offensive prowess for the better part of the last 5 seasons.

But 2012 has presented fans and critics alike with new firepower. For the first time in what seems like ages, the Patriots don't really know what they are.

Are the Patriots still a prolific passing team? Tom Brady is maintaining stats on-par with his usual performances, but the crispness expected in the offensive performance has eluded the grasp of both Tom Brady and Josh McDaniels, who we'll get to in a bit.

Or are the Patriots better off running the football? Stevan Ridley is 7th in the league with 589 yards, averaging 4.4 yards a carry, and has the most first downs of any running back in the league. The Patriots are the 5th best rushing team in the league, and 3rd in the league in passing.

On the surface, there doesn't seem to be much of a problem. Most fans wouldn't mind a top-5 offense. But in New England, where defensive players come to die, the offense needs to be exceptional at all times. Perhaps that is why the failures have been placed under such a microscope. Due to the defensive ineptitude, New England can't afford miscues on offense.

I also believe that there's been a lot of pressure placed on Tom Brady. Pressure is all relative, but Brady has shown cracks in an armor which used to shake off pressure packed situations as if they were a walk in the park. Look no further than the Patriots 4th quarter production in their last 3 games. New England has scored just 6 points opposed to the 34 their opponents have put up.

It leads me to believe that proclamations of the Patriots demise are far too premature. For the most part, New England's offense has done its part. Double digit leads heading into the 4th quarters of the past two games show an ability to get out in front of opposing defenses.

But what's startling is the focus of the passing offense has shifted dramatically. If 2011 was the year of the tight end, 2012 is the year of Tom Brady's receivers. Wes Welker and Brandon Lloyd lead the team in targets. However, whereas Welker has his usual 54 receptions on 74 targets, getting the ball to Brandon Lloyd has proven to be a significant struggle.

Lloyd has caught just 35 of the 65 passes thrown to him resulting in a 53% completion rate. This is the worst completion rate to any receiver on the team with more than 15 targets. Now let that sink in. The receiver who is the 2nd highest targeted receiver on your roster just so happens to be the most difficult to complete passes to. And while Lloyd does play on the outside, it highlights a bad habit that offensive coordinator Josh McDaniels needs to kick.

Stop forcing the issue.

Lloyd is a microcosm of the bigger problems in New England. McDaniels knows he has a special offense in New England. They run the best hurry up offense in the league and may have the best collection of offensive playmakers in the league. But so far in 2012, McDaniels has attempted to force the ball to Lloyd when the offense could easily go in other directions.

McDaniels also leaves a lot to be desired in terms of 4th quarter game management. To me at least, the Patriots are giving up downs. So many times do we see a first down run followed by the hurry up offense, only to run a stretch run into a stacked line of scrimmage for a yard or two. This creates a 3rd and long situation, which has never been the strong suit. Or Brady will begin to find his rhythm moving the ball on intermediate routes, only to throw two sideline comebacks and then a go-route down the field on another 3rd and long.

When, or maybe if, the Patriots can get back to playing sound offensive football, they'll be in much better shape. Enough with the gimmicky hurry-up to try and out-will your opponent. Not only does this not work against top-10 defenses, but its a style of play which simply isn't consistent in highly contested games. I think the struggles of New England in recent playoff games is enough to prove that.

To answer earlier questions, the Patriots are not a running football team. They're also not a team which operates to the sidelines and down the field. Wes Welker is the best slot receiver on the field, and Brady has two dynamic tight ends to work the middle of the field with. Is Brandon Lloyd a commodity outside the numbers? Yes. But he should be used as just that, a complementary piece to an offense which already knows their strength. Is Stevan Ridley a talented running back? Yes. But not when he's running against fronts that know the run is coming. The Patriots are good enough at running the ball to use it as a change of pace, but nothing more than that.

New England can be a dominant team again. Getting back to what works is a good start, and let the rest follow. They've developed a deep threat in Lloyd and a run game to use in certain situations, which will help out down the road. But that's not what the Patriots are. And it's time to stop acting like it.

It's OK to Get Involved

It's roughly 10:00 on a Sunday night following a Patriots victory over the Jets. So naturally, you would most likely assume that I have far too many words to write lamenting on the pitiful Patriots secondary and inability to win fourth quarters. But instead, I have something else on my mind tonight. After all, I have all week to talk about the Patriots, or better yet, avoid talking about the Patriots.

Instead, I wanted to turn my attention to something that has absolutely nothing to do with sports. Tomorrow night, the third and final Presidential Debate will air live from Lynn University in Florida. For those who follow me on twitter, you are probably aware that I've attempted to offer commentary on the debates, although I try to keep it somewhat lighthearted. If you don't follow me on twitter, you might want to visit @Mark_Chiarelli. After all, I love shameless self-promotion.

Now I'm not someone who will ever try to impose my political views on someone else. I'm an 18 year old freshman at college who's worked two retail jobs and lived a fairly easy life in a Massachusetts suburb. It's not exactly fair for a kid who has extremely limited real-world experience to preach his "beliefs" to others. After all, I've got plenty to learn and plenty time to do that.

One of the beauties of social media is the ability to share opinions and thoughts in a matter of seconds. When  another teenager attempts to impose their political beliefs on others via Facebook or Twitter, I usually laugh it off. But I've also noticed a troubling trend among many people close to the same age as me within the past two weeks. For as many tweets offering an opinion on the debate or the Presidential Election, there's an opposing tweet criticizing kids for offering opinions. So many times I've seen a tweet complaining of political tweets from other students or kids complaining that they simply don't care.

Now I may be missing something, but am I the only person who sees a problem with this?

I understand that it's not enjoyable for others to tell you who to vote for, or arrogantly talk about issues as if they have all the answers in the world. But what's the harm in back and forth debate? Why is there such an issue if you want to offer opinion on what's taking place on your television screen?

For those who feel as if you're somehow going to convince others to stop talking about politics because "you don't want to see it," you're simply out of luck. Trying to restrict the opinions on policies and subject matter which effect our daily life is an immature, narrow viewpoint on "politics." In my opinion, the more discussion, the better. The more kids who try to get involved and educated on the policies offered in this selection the better, because one day these issues will influence us all equally.

Listen, I'm not saying that kids across the globe need to hibernate in a world encyclopedia for the next 24 hours to discuss the election. And maybe I'm totally wrong on this viewpoint, and I need to just stick to tweeting too much for my own good. But if you want to complain about seeing "tweets about politics on your timeline" instead of passive aggressive subtweeting and song lyrics, I'll proverbially show you the door. It's time more people take a proactive look at real life topics, because in four years, especially for college freshman, this could make or break your life moving forward.

Unfortunately, tomorrow night will roll around and we'll all probably see the same tweets from the same offenders. And that's OK, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, however narrow-minded it may be. But if you think you can escape something that affects the entire country, the entire world, by simply telling other people to stop tweeting, you're out of your mind.

The John Farrell Debate

Bobby Valentine, thankfully, has come and gone in Boston. He only lasted a year, which just so happened to be the worst year of Red Sox baseball in my short time on this planet. In his wake, Valentine has left yet another opening at the helm of the Boston Red Sox, the 2nd in as many off-seasons.

Now the idea is that Ben Cherington will have more authority over the managerial hiring process, hopefully finding a manager more suited to the daily needs of the players. The natural candidate to replace Valentine is former pitching coach John Farrell. Farrell, the current Toronto Blue Jays manager, has a strong relationship with Red Sox executives and is touted as the apparent savior to a woefully horrendous Red Sox pitching staff.

Since the season "gracefully" came to an end, reports have circulated around the Red Sox attempting to negotiate compensation for Farrell with the Blue Jays. The Blue Jays have shown resistance, as Farrell is under contract. Most fans who I've spoken to on the issue easily anoint Farrell as the favorite to replace Valentine. The simple connection does indeed exist. Farrell is well respected, knowledgeable on the pitching staff, and capable of handling the Boston media. In other words, he's the anti-Bobby Valentine.

But is Farrell really the best fit in Boston? While on the surface the answer is an easy yes, I simply don't have the same faith in Farrell many others do. In his two seasons in Toronto, the Blue Jays have gone 154-170. Now, being the Blue Jays, this doesn't seem particularly outrageous. But this is a team with considerably more talent than in years past, and has been primed to make that next step since they fired Cito Gaston in 2010.

Instead, the Blue Jays have failed to make the steady strides that division rivals Tampa Bay and Baltimore have, prompting a return to the doorsteps of the cellar of the A.L East. Farrell's most notable strength is his ability to handle and work with pitching staffs. But during Farrell's short tenure in Toronto, Blue Jays pitchers have seen an increase in ERA, up to 4.64 last season.

What's even more concerning is that Blue Jays ace and young pitching star, Ricky Romero, had a Jon Lester-esque 2012 season. Romero completely melted in Toronto, posting a 5.77 ERA in 181 innings, with a WHIP of 1.674. An All-Star just a year ago who pitched to a 2.92 ERA, Romero could not turn around his struggles under Farrell's watchful eye.

You also don't have to remind Red Sox fans of the daily headache which presents itself within the Boston clubhouse. While some of the noise has been traded away, egos remain. Is Farrell the man to manage these egos? We can talk about the respect he warrants from executives, but Farrell did not garner full support in Toronto. Yunel Escobar blatantly painted homophobic slurs on his eyeblack, an event which Farrell did not notice until after the fact. Farrell also had small, but meaningful disagreements with respected veteran Omar Vizquel.

What worries me is the tunnel vision when it comes to Farrell's candidacy. As we read reports of the Red Sox exhausting all options to negotiate compensation with the Blue Jays, I wonder if more focus shouldn't be placed on other potential candidates? Two in particular, Brad Ausmus and Demarlo Hale, deeply intrigue me.

Former catchers turned managers are littered throughout the MLB. Look no further than the 2012 playoffs. All four managers remaining are former catchers, with Mike Matheny having no prior experience and Joe Girardi managing a single year in Florida before landing in New York. Jason Varitek is considered a manager in waiting, and other former catchers include Mike Scioscia and Joe Maddon. Ausmus is a well respected baseball mind who knows how to manage a clubhouse on a daily level, and could offer knowledge on both the pitching staff and how to call a game, one area that Jarrod Saltalamacchia is weak. (OK, he's weak in most areas. Except his hair, the man has nice hair.)

Demarlo Hale should garner attention due to his connection to Terry Francona. While Tito ended on sour terms, there's no denying the success he endured and the experiences which rubbed off on his coaching staff. Hale was the third base coach in Baltimore, and is one of the leaders in the MLB in terms of player respect. Hale also has extensive minor league managing experience, and is perhaps the most qualified for the job.

However, I'm just a blogger with too much time and too many thoughts. It seems as if the Red Sox are intent on trying to make John Farrell work, much to the dismay of some. Simply put, why try to chase what you cannot have when the answer may have already interviewed at Fenway Park, in Ausmus or Hale?

Yankees Fans For Hire

The game of baseball is always changing. Big market teams go through flux, small market teams occasionally make runs at the big guys. But baseball is also a game which relies on history and tradition. The pitcher is still 60' 6 inches away, the pitcher still tries to outsmart the batter, etc etc.

When it comes to October, I can think of no stronger tradition than the New York Yankees and winning. Actually, I really don't even have to think for myself. Ask any Yankee fan about their October prowess and you're sure to get a response along the lines of, "Da Yankees awh da best team in basebawl in Octobah, 27 championships!" (give or take)

Which makes the sudden disappearance of the Evil Empire's fan-base even more perplexing. Winners of the American League East and owners of one of the most prolific offenses in baseball, the Yankees should have been primed for postseason success. And while I know during the regular season, some of the white-collars season ticket holders couldn't always make it to their seats on-time. Ok, well, ever. But this is the post-season, this is where the Yankees season begins. Fans expect regular season success, and faithfully pull for the Yankees in October.

So what's the problem? Or better yet, where are you guys?

New York fans love to tell you how much better they are than the rest of the sports fans. Part of this perceived arrogance is what makes New York such a difficult place to play. But heckling bleacher creatures and "Who's your Daddy" chants of the past are now replaced with, well, nothing. Fans simply aren't showing up for games. And I don't mean a lack of noise. There are legions and legions of empty seats at Yankee Stadium, a troubling sign for anyone who supports the pinstripes.

And believe me, I've seen the excuses. Blame the play all you want, but the Yankees struggled to fill seats in a game 5, do or die scenario. Seats sold for as little as $20 on Stub Hub. In other words, for the price of roughly four Subway sandwiches, you could have watched playoff baseball in one of the greatest baseball cities in the country.

So is New York losing its baseball touch? Since 2009, the last year of the Old Yankee Stadium, the Yankees have struggled to fill seats and generate much buzz inside a lifeless replica. While things may look the same, they clearly are not.

My question essentially is where are the Yankees fans? How can fans of a franchise so proud and a fan base so overwhelmingly loud conduct themselves so embarrassingly in a promising postseason? Fans all across the country are selling out ballparks. San Francisco fans, who are operating up to three hours ahead of time due to national scheduling, have created one of baseball's most electric atmospheres. Baltimore, which was once more commonly known to Red Sox fans as Fenway South, provided a picturesque setting for playoff baseball.

But in the Bronx, Yankees fans are content to stay away from Yankee Stadium. And I'm sure the tickets are too expensive and the play on the field is too poor. But something tells me the deafening silence is creating even more pressure for aging stars such as Alex Rodriguez.

It's your move, Yankees fans. Granted, baseball may not even return to the Bronx. But if New York does potentially host one more ALCS game, will the old ghosts of Yankee past present themselves? Or will these ghosts be replaced with silent navy blue plastic and fans who won't even stand up for the final outs of the late innings. We get it Yankee fans, this team doesn't deserve you in the seats. Everyone slumps.

But something tells me that we may not be seeing vintage Yankee crowds for a long time.

Who Are These Guys?

As the rain fades to darkness in Seattle, Patriots fans across the country are left to pick up the pieces following yet another 4th quarter debacle. Naturally, the underwhelming start to the 2012 season has raised many more questions than answers.

But what we do know is that the Patriots stand at a very pedestrian 3-3. Going into today, they were statistically stronger in the running game than the passing game. Their three losses have been by a combined four points, which is a relatively encouraging sign until you look deeper into how these losses have occurred.

The 2012 New England Patriots are facing a full-blown identity crisis.

As fans of the Patriots, we want to believe Bill Belichick has a plan. We want to believe that Tom Brady simply had an off game, and that "Tom Terrific" will still be there when it counts in the 4th quarter. But it's becoming increasingly apparent that the Patriots are just as confused in late-game situations as we are watching them.

In their second loss of the season against the Ravens, New England led by 9 points as late as the 4th quarter.  Today, they led by 13 points. They also took a lead into the 4th quarter of last year's Super Bowl, which I'm sure you all remember. 4th quarter collapses are becoming an all too apparent trend in New England.

Today's loss was a microcosm of New England's season. For long stretches, there was brilliance. The Patriots flew out of the gate, doing their best to quiet the renowned Seattle crowd. But it seemed like the second half was altogether different story. For whatever reason, New England looked completely out of sorts. While some people will look to the defense coming up short, I firmly believe the loss was at the hands of both Tom Brady and Josh McDaniels.

Look no further than the horrendous flow of offense in the 2nd half of today's game. For what seems like the first time in years, Brady led back to back drives in the 3rd quarter which ended in interceptions. The first, a terrible read on a deep ball to Deion Branch (I know, seriously) left a Richard Sherman-led Seahawks defense re-energized.

We could spend hours dissecting individual plays from today's game, but I'd rather let Belichick and co. do that on Tuesday. What I'd rather focus on is one possession in particular, late in the 4th quarter.

The Patriots, coming off a strong defensive showing which forced an immediate Seattle three-and-out, took control with 3:02 left. By now, Brady and co. were sufficiently rattled, with their high-octane offensive approach coming to a grinding halt. But as great teams are often forced to do, the bread and butter of the New England Patriots was asked to close out a game in enemy territory. Seattle had three timeouts and the two minute warning, forcing New England to chew up yardage and run out the clock.

Instead, New England called two straight stretch plays against a run-heavy Seattle front seven, allowing the top rated run defense in the league to make two quick stops. A poorly thrown ball from Tom Brady to a well-covered Deion Branch on third down resulted in a punt, and New England gave the ball back. 14 seconds later, Seattle had the ball back.

These kind of head scratching play call selections coupled with poor executions have popped up during far too many stretches this season. When asked to close out games, great teams do so in their first try. So far in 2012, New England has failed almost every test. Baltimore and now Seattle have resulted in devastating losses while New England also struggled to close out Peyton Manning and the Denver Broncos.

Is the season over because the Patriots are a .500 team 6 games in to a long season? Of course not. Should we be concerned that they have successfully made inferior quarterbacks like Russell Wilson and Kevin Kolb look like first-ballot hall of famers? Certainly.

As of tonight, there are glaring problems in New England which extend far beyond a struggling secondary and an injury plagued offense. With the hated New York Jets coming to Foxboro and concerns growing, it's finally time for the Patriots to exude some mental toughness. If you want to be considered an elite NFL team, you have to play like it.

Unfortunately, New England is playing like a team that's scared. A team that operates like a machine during the early stages of a game, but cowers in fear when the crowd noise grows and the pressure rises. This is a stigma which has surrounded the Patriots for the last few seasons, and unless both the coaches and players show more awareness late in games, it will continue to grow.

Any questions or comments? Feel free to leave them here or tweet them to me at twitter.com/Mark_Chiarelli