2004 Patriots/Eagles vs 2017 Patriots/Eagles - better teams?

'04 both. I might've said the '17 Patriots in August.

If they each played themselves in conference title games, I think both '04 teams would win by 2 scores at least. The Eagles remember were in a bit of a winning swoon back then, & the Patriots' D was still dangerous.

The '04 Eagles on paper were better than this year's Eagles, but '07 is a better team and better coached than '04.

Pats secondary was beyond banged up in 04.  Remember Troy Brown was playing DB!  You'd have to say the 2017 offense has superior options.  No Dillon but much more versatile in the backfield.  I still love Branch but wouldn't you take Amendola over him?  And I haven't even mentioned Gronk yet.  How do we compare young Brady to old Brady?  It's a tough call but I guess I'd go '04, their defensive front was much better than this team (though the '17 squad has almost inexplicably been coming on strong of late).

This is a good time to mention the Pats lost their 1A receiver in the preseason, their defensive centerpiece Hightower earlier this year, and had the worst defense in the league (literally) in September.  And here they are in the Super Bowl again.      

That's an incredibly tough question.  I don't remember Romeo's D having the struggles this defense has had; that being said, what Patricia has done with this defense after the way the season started, and the injuries they've had, is nothing short of miraculous.  I used to think Charlie was a genius but the stuff Josh comes up with is amazing.  Look at the gadget plays over the years in big moments, and he's revolutionized the RB position as far as I'm concerned; at least the way they're used in the passing game now.  Maybe a lot of it is Brady's decision making but when the offense is clicking on all cylinders it's near impossible to stop.  

Gun to my head, I'd say McDaniels is my O coordinator and Crennel is my D.

This leads me to another observation I made the other day.  Belichick, great as he is, has changed his style just a bit over the years.  I feel like he knows how to read his team and what buttons to push.  He understands the difference between being the hunter and the hunted and motivates accordingly.  There are legendary stories about BB using quotes, proposed parade routes by other teams, anything as motivation to fire his guys up.  I could list a bunch of them but it would get boring if you aren't a Pats fan and you get the idea of 'bulletin board material' anyway.  These days he doesn't bother with that shit.  It's all 'Do Your Job,' block out the noise, don't pay attention to what anyone says and just focus.  

I think the early dynasty years had the type of guys who responded to that old school stuff, and despite being a force in the NFL they still felt like underdogs because the press couldn't stop jerking off Peyton Manning (remember him?).  Nowadays the Pats are the gold standard in the NFL and the whole underdogs thing just isn't going to fly.  It's about building on your own success, trusting the system.  Focus on the details.  That bogus ESPN article about how the organization was coming apart at the seams from like two weeks ago is already ancient effing history because this team ignored it and just played football.  It's a testament not only to BB's genius as a coach, but his ability to adjust his style, if ever so slightly, over time.     

Hopefully he learned a lot from his first HC stint in Denver, which started off great but ended as a disaster.  I read some article by a bitter sports writer from Indy bitching about the potential McDaniels hire, it was amusing.  In terms of game planning he'll be fine, it's the interpersonal relationships that were a mess apparently.  McDaniels had attitude problems.  Belichick went through the same thing in Cleveland as a HC and he figured it out the second time around (well, until he started winning titles, then he turned into an a-hole again because he could afford to be one, heh).    

You can go back farther and find me ripping Patricia and/or Belichick, so no.  It probably goes back to SB 42.  But hey, that's how it goes on the board.  I say something negative, everyone thinks I'm crazy.  I say something positive, it gets used against me in an argument 3 years later.  Either way it's hard to argue their defense was inexplicably bad in Super Bowl 52, and not for the first time.    

I think Belichick had a great feel for his players in the early dynasty days.  Those guys responded to that stuff I mentioned.  The core players I mentioned in another thread where we were debating this topic, he got through to those guys in ways someone like Pete Carroll never could.  But somewhere he lost his touch.  He openly talks about it in the doc on the NFL network following the team in 2009 I think it was. 

As I've said in the past, he saw the shift from defense to offense in the league and he let Brady loose.  That was a shrewd move.  Other than that, I don't see how his game planning meant as much to the team as Brady's performance, and there are entire seasons worth of evidence to back that up.  But hey, I'll take billychuck over Anthony Lynn every single time.