A Question for you NFL Experts

Greensboro, NC -- In the wake of the New England Patriots fall from grace this season, one legitimate question needs to be asked, "Why is the losing team of the previous Super Bowl awful every year?" This observation has been brought to NFL fans before, but I haven't heard any talk about it yet, maybe since the Patriots are still above 0.500 for the year. Take a look at the following teams' record following their loss in the previous season's Super Bowl:

• New England Patriots, 2008, 3-2
• Chicago Bears, 2007, 7-9
• Seattle Seahawks, 2006, 9-7
• Philadelphia Eagles, 2005, 6-10
• Carolina Panthers, 2004, 7-9
• Oakland Raiders, 2003, 4-12
• St. Louis Rams, 2002, 7-9
• New York Giants, 2001, 7-9

With the exception of the Seahawks in 2002 -- playing in the very weak NFC West -- what else is new with that division -- all of the Super Bowl losers have finished with a losing record. What are the causes of the "Super Bowl hangover?"

Does the losing team believe that they're very close to winning a championship and don't feel the neel to retool?

Is the losing team a victim of bad luck, such as injuries to key players like Tom Brady this season, and Donovan McNabb in 2005?

Is the quarterback the problem? Grossman for the Bears last year was awful. Gannon's arm nearly fell off from all of those side arm slings for the Raiders in 2003. It was the beginning of the demise for Kurt Warner in St. Louis (since his resurgence this year). Ditto Kerry Collins for the G-Men.

Were fans' expectations too high the next year? The mentality of "they were o-so-close this year, we'll win it next year!" doesn't work. Seattle, home of the 12th man; Philly, and their obnoxious fans; ditto the Giants.

My question is, why aren't teams who won the Super Bowl faltering at this pace? If David Tyree doesn't haul in that unbelievable catch during last year's Super Bowl, and the Patriots hang on for the win, we wouldn't be having this blog discussion.