Hindsight is...still 24-17

Patriots keep Rams loss in past

By Michael Smith, Globe Staff, 2/3/2002

EW ORLEANS - Yes, it is quite pointless asking this question in sports and in life. But it is also quite pointless trying to resist the temptation to ponder:

What if?

What if, on the night of Nov. 18, Kevin Faulk hadn't allowed Tom Brady's pass to ricochet off his shoulder pads, or St. Louis's Dexter McCleon had not been on the spot to intercept it at the Patriots 18-yard line, or New England had found a way to prevent Kurt Warner from connecting with Torry Holt three plays later for a 7-0 lead 5:22 into the Patriots' biggest challenge to date?

What if, with 2:22 to go in the first half and New England leading, 10-7, thanks to a 52-yard interception return by Terrell Buckley and a 33-yard field goal by Adam Vinatieri, Antowain Smith had held on to the ball inside the Rams 5, or officials had ruled that Smith's knee was down, or New England had halted St. Louis's ensuing eight-play, 97-yard, no-timeouts-necessary touchdown drive that sent the Rams into intermission ahead, 14-10, instead of trailing, 17-7?

''No matter what happens the rest of the year,'' Rams coach Mike Martz said afterward, ''the turning point for this football team [and, obviously, the game] is when the defense took the ball away on the 3-yard line and we took it 97 yards before the half. I think that's a huge statement about what this team is all about.''

What if, after Larry Izzo recovered Warner's fumble at the St. Louis 45 in the third quarter, Brady had not thrown a pass right between the 5 and the 9 on the chest of linebacker London Fletcher the following play, or the Rams had not converted the short field into another 3 points?

And what if, trailing, 24-17, with 7:37 remaining, the Patriots hadn't let the Rams run 14 plays and each of the remaining seconds off the clock?

Here's what: The universe's space/time continuum would have been altered. New England probably would have finished the season 12-4, with nine straight victories (including its two before the Rams game) instead of six. The Rams probably would have finished 13-3, though perhaps without home-field advantage throughout the conference playoffs. And maybe, just maybe, New England would be just a single-digit underdog in the Super Bowl.

But games aren't won on hypotheticals. The Patriots' theme for today's game, like all those before it, has not been ''What if?'' It's been ''What now?''

''I think the most important thing in this game for us is that our team needs to understand how we have to play,'' Patriots coach Bill Belichick said Friday in his last media briefing before today's finale to the 2001-02 season. ''We can't play St. Louis the way we played them the first time or we're going to have the same result. We have to play better and we have to do some things a little bit differently and we have to do them better.

''That's been my message all week. That's what it's going to continue to be. And I'm going to continue to point out examples of specific things that we need to get taken care of in the game or else we're going to have problems.''

High on the lengthy list of things that need to happen for the Patriots to shake up the world: They have to do a more respectable job defending the pass. Though the Patriots intercepted Warner twice in November, the Pro Bowl quarterback missed his intended target only 10 other times in 42 attempts, threw for 401 yards, and was sacked just once despite facing constant blitzes.

Right below pass defense is the mandate that Brady's bunch contribute more than 10 points to the cause. Against a team that crossed the goal line 62 times this year, New England did so just once in the first meeting, when Brady found David Patten from 10 yards with 7:46 remaining.

''The first thing I told them when we got together Tuesday night is that if the Rams throw for 400 yards and we score 10 points offensively, we're going to be in trouble,'' Belichick said.

In the first meeting, Antowain Smith gained 36 yards on 15 carries and the team 51 on 20, with a long gain a 7-yard scramble by Brady. Those numbers are in direct conflict with the goal of the Patriots' offense this time around: play keepaway, which would bolster the defense's chances of duplicating its effort against Marshall Faulk, who was, ahem, limited to 83 yards on 20 carries, caught seven passes for 70, and scored ''only'' one TD.

''There are three things that we need to do to win this game,'' offensive coordinator Charlie Weis said Thursday. ''We turned the ball over three times the last time we played them. We turned the ball over on the 1-yard line, we turned the ball over on our own 15-yard line that led to a score for them, and we turned the ball over in plus territory again in the second half. If we have any chance of winning this game, we better take care of the football. That's No. 1.

''No. 2, in addition to scoring touchdowns, you want to hold the ball. The best way of keeping their offense from scoring is having them sitting on the sidelines. So that's the second thing we have to do. You want to be able to control the game.

''Last, but not least, you must be able to produce - not only on third down [New England went 5 of 12 in the first meeting, St. Louis 8 of 14], you have to be able to produce both in the red zone and near the goal line and not come away with field goals. If you settle for field goals, they have too much firepower and they could score too quickly and put you out of the game in a hurry.''

And start the what-ifs.