Bedard: The Patriots got dominated in Houston again in similar fashion, what does that tell you?

The quarterback really struggled against the Texans. Couldn't make enough big plays.

The playcalling was terrible by the offensive coordinator.

The defense couldn't handle Deshaun Watson. Defensive gameplan was flawed.

Those are some of the comments going around about the Patriots after their 27-20 loss on Sunday to the previously 2-7 Texans, which quickly dashed most of the dreams of a postseason run.

They also happen to be many of the same comments I heard from Patriots fans following LAST YEAR's 28-22 loss in the same place to the same team.

Funny how things change but they really stay the same.

On Dec. 1, 2019, the Patriots trailed 21-3 in the third quarter after Tom Brady was 7 of 19 for 82 yards, an interception and a rating of 28.8 in the first half. You'll remember this as the Tom The Miserable game, as he tossed helmets and screamed and ranted.



This time, a less-talented Texans team dealing with a coaching change led 21-10 at halftime, as Cam Newton was 7 of 13 for 85 yards and 74.2 rating.

Let me put those first halves side by side for you, for effect:

Brady: 7 of 19, 82 yards
Newton: 7 of 13, 85 yards

For giggles, let's do Watson.

2019 (3 quarters): 14 of 21, 192 yards, 3 total TDs
2020: 18 of 23 241 yards, 3 total TDs

Well, isn't that interesting. Two trips to Houston in back to back years. Largely, the same results.

Bill Belichick on Sunday: "Had some opportunities throughout the course of the game and just couldn't do enough with them."

Belichick in 2019: "I thought we had our chances, we’ve just got to make more out of them.”

I think I could probably just change some names around with this and run it again while we're at it:

Bedard’s Breakdown: How much was Tom Brady at fault for passing games woes? Not much

To finish it off: the Texans loss last year started a finish of 4-5. Sunday's Texans loss completed a 4-6 start to this season for the Patriots.

In the words of Yogi Berra, "It's like deja vu all over again."

The question is, what does it mean?

Well, all the coaches are basically the same for the Patriots. I don't think they've gotten dumber, even though apparently that's what I'm supposed to believe with all the Playcalling Experts on Twitter.

I do find it interesting that I didn't hear anyone saying the team should move on from the quarterback last year — but the player himself was already thinking that.

The answer to any and all questions about Sunday's result should be evident with what we eventually learned last season. It should be as clear as day.

The Patriots weren't good enough, especially at the skill positions on offense, a year ago. They are not any better almost one year later.

Stop with all the talk about Josh McDaniels and Steve Belichick (although you have a stronger case against Bill & Son for having zero answers for Watson again). You're missing the point. Or maybe you just are afraid to admit it ... again.

THIS ROSTER IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH. THERE IS NOT ENOUGH TALENT.

Any discussion should start and end there. How else do you explain why the Patriots have stayed in the exact same place, especially offensively, in the span of one year?

Last year's line/this year's:

Wynn/Wynn
Thuney/Thuney
Karras/Andrews
Mason/Mason
Cannon/Onwenu

Largely, it's a draw. Let's keep going...

Harris/Michel
White/White
Burkhead/Burkhead
Harry/Harry
Izzo/LaCosse
Meyers/Meyers
Byrd/Dorsett
Edelman/Byrd
Sanu/Moncrief

Sunday's offensive woes were not about a bad plan, or not running Damien Harris enough. It was having players who are not good enough at what they do and, despite this being Week 11, unable to execute simple plays.

One week ago, the Patriots played their best game of the season against the Ravens. Why? Because they played efficiently on both sides of the ball, especially offensively.

These were the Bizarro Patriots.

The grenade offense was back in full force. Two steps forward, three steps back. I went back and watched the TV copy of the game, and noted the plays with a positive result, and those that were unsuccessful. I think it paints an accurate and obvious portrait.





Everyone probably wants to know why the first series was so successful and the rest largely wasn't. It's fairly elementary:

8 positive plays, 2 negative plays (Side note: 58 of the 84 yards — 69 percent — came via the pass and not Harris).

The other TD drive finished with 4 positive plays out of the final 5. Oh, and also 74 yards through the air. Didn't miss Harris on that drive either.

If you need a sense of why the Patriots struggled, just look at the final two drives. It's like Jeykll and Hyde: 13 positive plays, 14 negative plays.

You can't be a good offense without being efficient, especially when you don't have the talent to cure ills with big plays here and there.

The seventh series completely told the story of this season, and this offense.

Negative run ... Patriots overcome it.
Negative run ... Patriots overcome it.
Newton sack ... Patriots overcome it.
Thuney hold ... Patriots overcome it.
Newton sack ... dam finally breaks, they have to settle for a field goal.

All told: 16 plays, 65 yards, 9:25 off the clock for three measly points.

On the opening drive last year against the Texans, the Patriots drove 54 yards in 14 plays and took 7:01 off the clock for a measly field goal.

Tell me again about the play calling.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result.

If you think Sunday was about the coaches and anything other than the talent level on this team, you're insane.