sn0mm1s said:
LOL.. yeah. They overachieve because they have a GOAT QB that turns guys like Brown, Branch, Welker, and Edelman into playmakers. C'mon... you just ignore BB's record as a head coach prior to Brady starting. It is ridiculous. We have multiple seasons of BB head coaching into losing records. He all of a sudden becomes a great head coach when Brady takes the reins.
In 19 years with BB as a HC in NE, the Patriots defense has allowed 14% fewer points than the league average.
There best seasons defensively in terms of points allowed . . .
2016 - 31.4% better than league average . . . Won SB
2003 - 28.6% better than league average . . . Won SB
2006 - 28.3% better than league average . . . Lost Conference Championship
2004 - 24.4% better than league average . . . Won SB
2007 - 21.0% better than league average . . . Lost SB
Here were there worst seasons defensively in terms of points allowed . . .
2005 - 2.5% worse than league average . . . Missed playoffs
2000 - 2.1% worse than league average . . . Pre-Brady and sub .500 record
2002 - Exactly league average . . . Missed playoffs
2011 - 3.6% better than league average . . . Lost SB
2012 - 9.1% better than league average . . . Lost Conference Championship
2013 - 9.7% better than league average . . . Lost Conference Championship
It should come as no surprise that the years NE had their best defensive seasons they did some of their best work. 3 titles, a SB loss, and an AFCCG loss. Looking at the 5 seasons with Brady and weaker defensive units, equally unshocking is they did not fare anywhere near as well. A SB loss, 2 AFCCG losses, and 2 times missing the playoffs.
No one is suggesting that Brady isn't a big reason why the Patriots have won. But like most other teams, they won more when they have a top defense. Sure, in a round about way Brady could have had some impact on the defense (playing keep away, playing with the lead, making teams one dimensional), but the defense still had to play well to have good numbers. Put another way, in year's where the defense wasn't as good, Brady would have the same impact on the defense in terms of field position, predictability, etc..
Since you've made it clear that anything BB did as a DC or Asst Coach has to be excluded, the Browns averaged 8-9% better than average overall in points allowed in his 5 years as a head coach there. His best season defensively of any of his years as a head coach was in 1994 with the Browns, as they were 37.1% better than average in fewest points allowed. That yielded 1 of 2 playoff years in 26 years for the Browns.
Clearly Brady has been a huge cog in the Patriots machine. BB drafted him and kept him around before Brady ultimately got a chance. IMO, part of the reasons BB has been a lot more successful in NE than CLE has been due to his ability to have more autonomy in drafting players, bringing in free agents, managing the salary cap, and having the backing of ownership. That's way different than in Cleveland. Belichick started a blend of Bernie Kosar, Vinny Testaverde, Mark Rypien, Mike Tomczak, and Eric Zeier at quarterback with the Brownies. Not exactly top shelf talent.
Which brings us to a different question . . . how would have the Patriots done with a rotation of mediocre QBs and how would things have turned out with another HOF caliber QB. Obviously we will never know, but that would make for another interesting debate.