Hobson, let me just say that they are better and worse in different places on the roster, like most teams. Also there's a great deal of variable factors that are unpredictable, such as some players being counted on for certain roles that wont produce and other players that much isn't expected that will produce. The one thing that is certain is the Pats coaching staff will have the best of that team on the field wining and as much as you hate it, you know it's true, it's what they do best, adapt to their strengths and weaknesses. The Patriots do this arguably better than any team in the league year in year out. How many Jets fans where jumping up and down writing the Pats off after last years slow start? SG3 had to change his shorts 6 times a day, I hear he almost changed his name to SG6 slippery. Now as to the question of if they are a better team than last year, that's very subjective concept, they could just as easily have a less talented roster and better team. I tend to think many football fans look at individual player talent in a vacuum and fool themselves into believing that this is a video game and the team with the higher player ratings always win, it isn't and it doesn't.
So they lose Revis. No loss there. Browner, either. Arrington. Wilfork. None of them are losses. Yet when they got those guys, they were big gains.
Pretty obvious how it is in Patsland. Every move they make is great, every move they don't make is great. No matter what, it's great for the Patriots.
It's the same kind of delusion that has an entire fan base whining about being the victims when they get caught for cheating over and over and over again.