Nobody’s talking about the Atlanta Falcons except fans. And maybe a few outliers.
The Falcons are 6-0. Four of those wins have come against the AFC West. The two others against Carolina and Washington.
The critics are saying, “Boo! Bah! Humbug! The Falcons have barely won a few of those games, and they were against rather weak opponents!” What’s the difference between a close win and a blowout win? They are both wins. What, statements? Win the game. That’s all that matter. Close or by 17+. “But they haven’t faced any worthy opponents!” is yet another common phrase. Oh, yeah? Semantics, shablantics — they are undefeated and standing tall. The offense is as crisp, smooth and more well-run than it’s ever been, and their defense is leaps and bounds better than years past.
My biggest concern for the Falcons is the playoffs. If Atlanta find themselves playing Green Bay in the Georgia Dome, goooooood luck! If I remember correctly, the final score of that game from two seasons ago in the divisional playoffs was 48-21 Packers. The Falcons were the number one seed in the NFC that year, and the eventual Super Bowl champions hammered them. While the Falcons’ defensive backs are inordinately better from two years ago, there’s a guy throwing the ball that’s evading them by the name of Aaron Rodgers, a man who thrives playing in domes. I think another Packers/Falcons matchup would be interesting to see — I can imagine the Falcons scoring as much as the Packers, and that could mean a beautiful shootout. Atlanta suffered a big loss during the first game of the season when defensive back Brent Grimes tore his Achilles tendon.
Onto something else: did anybody catch wind of the whole “Tom Brady isn’t clutch!” shtick from SportsCenter’s “Numbers Never Lie” segment presented by Michael Smith last week? I just want to address that really quick, because anybody with a set of eyes and a modicum of common sense understands that Tom Brady — TOM BRADY — is one baaad dude. He’s always been clutch. Ever since the infamous game against the Oakland Raiders nearly 11 years ago… ever since he helped set up Adam Vinatieri in Super Bowl XXXVI. I know firsthand about Mr. Brady.
But this “Numbers Never Lie” BS, concocted by a horde of scrawny, dorky, noodle-armed geeks are coming up with vague numbers that say Tommy B. is no longer clutch in big game moments. Yes, the numbers are vague, because there are always two sides to every story, and I’m going to stop this moronic propagation that Brady isn’t clutch as fast as I possibly can without being too long-winded:
These dorks said that following 2001-2007, Brady hasn’t been as clutch since, that he’s lost it. Did this idiots ever stop to think, numbers aside, that the man’s defense has been progressively worse over the past four seasons (sans 2008/injury) in comparison to the defense the Patriots had during the aforementioned seven seasons? Let’s also remember: in the last two Super Bowls the Patriots have been in, both against the Giants, Tom Brady left the field late in the fourth quarter with a lead. Hear that? A lead. Let’s say it again so it will resonate: Tom Brady had his team up in the game, ready to win. It was time for the defense to do its job. Brady did his part. What, you want Tom Brady to play defense, too? The numbers say Brady is no longer clutch, but that’s simply not true — his defense simply sucks, and that’s the bottom line.