People who maintain that the Patriots are playing the kind of football that a good team plays are being either dishonest or delusional in their assessment, aka not an honest observation of reality. I thought that was pretty clear.
If you want to claim that the Patriots are playing well and that flatly stating you're wrong makes me intolerant to different perspectives and perceptions then I guess you're entitled to do that, but I could claim the earth is flat and defend myself from objective truth on the exact same basis so what does that really amount to?
When it comes to evaluating the quality of a football team or player, there really isn't much "objective truth" to be had, especially not when the evaluation is only binary.
You say this is a bad team, or "not a good team", at least. That's a
subjective opinion, and begs the question, "Compared to what?"
You justify your opinion by stating other opinions that you hold about the quality of recent drafts, the "talent" of the current players, etc. What, exactly, is "objective" about that?
FWIW .....
This Pats team has flaws (my opinion).
This Pats team has played very well at times and very poorly at times (my opinion).
Their play has been inconsistent, not only from game-to-game, but from quarter-to-quarter, and from series to series (my opinion)
There isn't team in the league right now that has no flaws (my opinion).
Superbowls have been won by teams with significant flaws (my opinion).
Can the Pats patch over enough of their flaws, even if only temporarily, to beat some of the other flawed teams who they'll end up facing in the playoffs? I honestly don't know, but I'm not willing to rule out the possibility because .... I
don't know, because I
can't know, I am
not blessed with the prescience that so many others seem to take for granted.
You may state flatly that I'm "wrong", but it's still just your opinion, and no more/no less "objective" than mine.
