The glow of outward success may very well be a lagging indicator of eventual failure, if not the cause. Companies, nation states of years past can also follow this rough pattern.

http://www.historyguide.org/europe/kennan.html

> This phenomenon brings to mind a comparison used by Thomas Mann in his great novel Buddenbrooks. Observing that human institutions often show the greatest outward brilliance at a moment when inner decay is in reality farthest advanced, he compared one of those stars whose light shines most brightly on this world when in reality it has long since ceased to exist.

The England rugby team do a lot of work with the military and other organisations to look at how to develop leadership. After a win they spend a long time analysing how they played and what they, individually and collectively, could have done better. After a loss they have a much shorter washup. It might sound counter-intuitive but it is much easier to get people to say "if I had done this we could have scored even more points" after a win than admitting that they could have won except for something they did wrong.

Or maybe we are just making up narratives to explain regression toward the mean?

The relevant bit was: during the season coach Kerr recognized faults that he found difficult to correct. Not in hindsight. The discussion is about what happens when you are winning. No one is making excuses for losing.

When I think of the bottom falling out on a team this year, I think of the White Sox. But maybe that's because I'm from Chicago.

I think that's just because the Cubs are by some fluke doing so well comparatively. Don't worry, Cubs will still choke :)

Nope, I'm pretty sure it's the players, the manager, and the front office.

It's hard to go from 23-10 to fourth in the division.

Patriots, when they had the undefeated season, come to mind.