Not sure how thoroughly this has been discussed and not sure if it's WAY to early to talk about. Just thought I'd bring a new flavor of Kool-Aid (or not) to the party.
You know the QB story of course this is most obvious. Unheralded kid leading a screen/spread oriented offense. New coach in second year of regime. A 2001 team that was solid on all 3 levels. You had the a point to yardage discrepancy on both offense and defense, as the 2001 Pats ranked in the teens in yards/yars allowed, but 6th in points for and 6th in points allowed. The point to yard statistical analysis has been discussed here as a point of emphasis for the BB disciple.
A team that improved dramatically as the season went along.
The offensive personnel is very similar. A trio of backs with diverse skill-sets and a FB that was part of the short yardage feature attack. (Edge Broncos). A group of undersized receivers that could run routes out of z,x,y. A number one over hyped receiver that was a left-over from the previous regime (edge Broncos)
Two well-above average offensive lines (even).
Two defenses built (and loaded) from the back-up. Pats played a more physical brand on the back-end, we have the better set of athletes. (even) Pats front 7 went on to distinguish themselves, perhaps a better core of talent for that team in '01.
We don't have an Adam Vinatieri.
A team maximizing all of it's parts and a MSM that couldn't figure out how they won games.
The is a much better conference now then it was then, but we've got the talent edge offensively to make it a comparison.