Cha ching! What comes around goes around, I'll tell you why…

I knew right from the beginning… that they would end up winning… I knew right from the start… aw who the fuck am I kidding? There's been a lot of talk about how the Saints "didn't have any business winning that game." And that's true. I'm not sure how anybody could argue that the Saints didn't get damn lucky to escape FedEx Field at 12-0. (Excuse me for a second, I just want to type that a few more times… 12-0. 12-0. Twelve and zero, bitches!) Here's my question though: So they got lucky, who gives a shit?

I mean, it's not like you couldn't find a game or two from every Super Bowl winner from the last 20 years or so that could be described as a "lucky win." Luck is a factor, and a legitimate one, for just about every team every year. And I don't know about you, but I see no reason to apologize for it or be ashamed of it when the ball bounces your way.

For one thing, you have to put yourself in a position to be able to take advantage of a fortunate turn of events in the first place. Suisham's missed chip shot doesn't mean jack shit if the offense can't score that final touchdown to tie it up.

It doesn't matter whether or not Kareem Moore was down after his interception if Meachem doesn't subsequently make the play he did. And Moore never gets the opportunity to make the INT, and get owned by Meachem, if Drew doesn't wiggle out of a sure sack in the first place. And throw perhaps the most fortuitous INT in NFL history.

(Incidentally, I have no idea who to credit for this, but it's come to my attention that someone has suggested that history remember the play by the name "The Meacharound" and I'd like to take this opportunity to give that suggestion my full endorsement. Gold, Jerry!)

The replay official never gets the opportunity to overturn the call on the field and rule that Mike Sellers fumbled in overtime if Chris McAlister doesn't jar the ball loose in the first place.

So there's obvious merit to the position that the Saints did a whole lot of "making their own luck" as well. But that doesn't mean that the Saints didn't get lucky. Really fuckin' lucky.

Sorry, but the Saints didn't have a damn thing to do with a guy shanking a glorified extra point for the first time in his career. And, while in my opinion the replay official made the correct call on both Moore's interception and Sellers' fumble, you know as well as I do that it's pretty much always 50/50 whether those calls go for you or against you, and there's not a damn thing you can do about it one way or the other.

Regardless of whether they're "good" calls or "bad" calls, and regardless of how obvious it might seem to you what the call "should" be, ultimately, we all know that you might as well just flip a coin any time a call goes to the booth for review. And because of that, I think it's perfectly reasonable to call it "luck" when one of those calls goes your way, let alone two, regardless of how obvious it might seem that the call "should" have gone your way. As a practical matter, "should" just doesn't count when it comes to booth reviews.

On the other hand, there's another aspect of the whole "making your own luck" thing, and the Saints have been doing their part in this way too. I firmly believe in the notion that the superstars (good teams, what have you) get the benefit of the doubt. Michael Jordan always got the foul. Greg Maddux always got the called third strike. He got the expanded strike zone when he needed it precisely because most of the time, he didn't need it. Examples abound in all sports.

I'm not saying it's a conscious thing, there's no conspiracy or anything like that. All I'm saying is that when you're clearly the Alpha Dog, officials are far more likely to err on your side, simply because they subconsciously realize that the call is more likely to turn out to be "correct" when they do. When you're good, the natural assumption when in doubt is that you made a play.

But to secure the Alpha Dog's benefit of the doubt, you have to earn it. And clearly the Saints have. Especially given the fact that this "luck" happened on the road. When you get all the calls in the opponent's stadium, you know you've arrived. Don't believe me? Ask the Patriots. Or Brett Favre. Or Payton Manning. And on and on.

So to whatever extent luck played a part in the Saints avoiding their first loss of the season, I'm sorry, but I just don't give a shit. Actually, that's not quite right. The fact is that I'm thankful for it, and not the least bit ashamed of it. I'm thankful that the 2009 Saints have put themselves in a position to get the benefit of the doubt on close calls in the first place, and that they're able to make whatever good fortune they get actually matter. God knows how rarely those things have been true in the past.

Still, there's no denying that the Saints got their asses kicked for most of the game. Hey, it happens. Sorry, but I'm still of the opinion that this team isn't going 16-0 and never were gonna go 16-0. Oh sure, no harm in making the occasional homeriffic reference to it. Especially now, given the Saints' current situation and looking at the remaining schedule. I mean, hey, if you can't dream big at this point, you're just incapable of dreaming big to begin with.

Unfortunately, no amount of big dreaming is gonna increase the infinitesimal odds of such a thing actually coming to pass. It should be perfectly clear by now that the Saints are most certainly beatable. There are big problems on all three levels of the defense. The rushing offense can be shut down for large stretches (55 yards rushing vs. Washington.) Reggie Bush still fucking sucks, and Sean Payton is well aware of it. Hell, at this point, he's only making a half-assed effort to even hide it.

Again, I'm not sure who to credit for this observation, but someone somewhere observed that the Saints of the last four games are a radically different team than the one from the first eight. And this team, through little (but some) fault of their own, is far closer to the 2008 team than was the team who kicked the living shit out of all comers in the first half of the season. Again, hey, it happens. Attrition happens to every team every year.

There's no shame in being beatable. It doesn't necessarily mean that the Saints aren't the best team in the whole fuckin' league any more than 12-0 necessarily means that they are. Any given Sunday and all. Being beatable is just a matter of course in the NFL. Don't believe me? Just ask the 2007 Patriots. Or, for that matter, ask Mercury Morris about the Vikings, Bills and Jets games back in '72. Then ask him about all three playoff games, including the Super Bowl.

Then tell him that Grandmaster Wang thinks he's a huge douche. 'Preciate it.

But for as big a douche as Morris is, he's 100% right on about one thing, and it just happens to be the most important thing. The only thing that matters is the zero. Everything else is just window dressing. And for however long it lasts, the Saints still have the zero. The hows and whys don't mean jack shit.

Actually, that's not quite right either. The hows and whys do matter to us, to Saints fans who are witnessing the craziest, most bizarre, most mindbogglingly awesome team and season we've ever seen, and are not likely to ever see again. That this particular group of men are doing it this way, which is to say "all the best ways you could possibly imagine, with each successive example of unfathomable greatness exceeding the previous example." For us, that should matter. A lot.

Which isn't to say that I wouldn't have danced a jig if Jim Haslett, Aaron Brooks, Joe Horn, Albert Connell, Dale Carter, Jonathan Sullivan and that whole cabal of assholes would have brought home a championship. Because I would have.

But these guys? These guys deserve it so much more than those guys. These guys really deserve it. These guys, to the extent that it can be earned through three quarters of the regular season, have earned it.

And to the extent that luck plays a role in it, well, they've earned that too.