Rank our SB wins based on Brady’s value to the team:

[Joey007]

There’s really no specific point to this or meaning behind it. Just something to think about.

Rank the Super Bowls based on how much the team Brady was reliant (or not as reliant) on Brady, from least to most reliant:

I’d go:

2001
2018
2004
2003
2014
2016

The toughest ones were in between. On one hand, the 2003 defense was possibly the best of the BB era, however the offensive support was rather lackluster that year. Brady pretty much was the entire offense. While he may have had a better year in 2004 and the D suffered more injuries, Corey Dillon was controlling many games that year. 2018 fell behind these two years because Brady had both elite defense and a pretty efficient ground game. 2014 ranks ahead of those 03-04 years due to the ground game being lackluster and the defense being pretty up and down. (Elite secondary, however Chandler Jones unfortunately seemed to take January’s off)

2001 definitely had to be the at the bottom due to the team really being very balanced and Tom still being pretty raw.

And for 2016, it really speaks for itself. No Gronk and 28-3 is really all I need to say.

 

[Soliel]

It’s a gut punch now but I’ll look at it. Obviously,LI was a case of Superman . I’ll go look and come back

 

[sb1]

I’d put one we lost on or near the top. The Eagles had a really good defense. Pats get blown right out of Minneapolis with bad QB play.

 

[Doctor DDS]

For my analysis I replace Brady with the 10th best QB in the league.

2001 playoffs - team was carried by defense and special teams - Brady was clutch in big moments but plausible they could win without him.

2003 - weakest regular season offense of Super Bowl winners - ranked 17th yards/12th points. Could probably have made SB w/o Brady but no way they beat Panthers w/o his heroics.

2018 - defense won Super Bowl (though like 2001 Brady was clutch when it mattered) No way they beat KC w/o Brady.

2004 - balanced team. Needed Brady to beat Steelers on road. Plus Eagles were extremely talented and Brady was rock solid in that game.

2016 - another balanced team. May have been able to make SB w/o him but no way they beat Falcons.

2014 - Vintage Brady needed to beat Ravens then gut out great comeback against one of best all time defenses in the Seahawks.

I think 2001 is the only year where they had a decent chance to win with a different QB (and even that may be a stretch due to sudden change in teams fortunes once he became QB)

 

[sb1]

For my analysis I replace Brady with the 10th best QB in the league.

2001 playoffs - team was carried by defense and special teams - Brady was clutch in big moments but plausible they could win without him.

2003 - weakest regular season offense of Super Bowl winners - ranked 17th yards/12th points. Could probably have made SB w/o Brady but no way they beat Panthers w/o his heroics.

2018 - defense won Super Bowl (though like 2001 Brady was clutch when it mattered) No way they beat KC w/o Brady.

2004 - balanced team. Needed Brady to beat Steelers on road. Plus Eagles were extremely talented and Brady was rock solid in that game.

2016 - another balanced team. May have been able to make SB w/o him but no way they beat Falcons.

2014 - Vintage Brady needed to beat Ravens then gut out great comeback against one of best all time defenses in the Seahawks.

I think 2001 is the only year where they had a decent chance to win with a different QB (and even that may be a stretch due to sudden change in teams fortunes once he became QB)

So hard to say re 2001. I would not have picked Brady for MVP. But start Bledsoe and maybe he throws a pick and who knows how the game turns on that.

 

[jah]

Depends if you're referring to the entire season or just the Super Bowl games. In the latter case:

2018
2001
2004
2003
2016
2014

I gave 03 the edge over 04 because it was a more offensively paced game. 2018 got the bottom spot instead of 01 because our offense barely did anything, and Brady led a true game winning drive in 01 (you could argue taking a 10 point lead in the 4th quarter was the same in 2018 but I think there was less pressure due to already leading).

Finally, I gave 2014 the edge over 2016 because I consider both the good and bad from 2016 very hard to attribute to any individual performances. Sure, you have Brady/White/Edelman/Flowers/Hightower as the main players in the comeback, but if you can only narrow it down to 5, I dunno. Contrast with 2014 which was pretty much just Brady willing them past a 10 point late deficit by himself.

 

[Pape]

53 - defense all the way
36 - solid team under rated defense
39 - well balanced team
38 - defense better than 03, but they choked vs an inferior Panthers team
49 - great play by all, but Malcolm stood tall
51 - bad first half, good defense 2nd half, Brady and the O caught fire ... Best second half of a super bowl ever

edited, thanks B5

 

[sean10mm]

I think Super Bowl 51 has to be seen as completely separate from everything else. The 28-3 Super Bowl comeback to win in OT has no parallels in league history. It's THE Brady game, the entire comeback was by passing, much of it to the likes of Mitchell, Hogan, White and Amendola - not a single All Pro or Pro Bowl player in the bunch. Nice guys, team heroes, but not superstars who could turn a blind duck-and-chuck into a highlight reel catch like Julio Jones.

Literally nobody else in the entire history of professional gridiron football has a championship game like that on their resume.

Other than that it gets a lot fuzzier to me. The 04 and 14 teams were loaded on both sides of the ball, but the 14 team was less consistent outside of Brady being great from week 4 on. The 03 team was weak on offense but murderous on defense - until the Super Bowl, which required Brady going nuts to win what somehow mutated into a shootout. The 01 team is easy to credit as a "team win" over a "Brady win" except that the exact same team looked busted until he took over.

53 was very much a team win vs. Brady win, outside 2 big drives in the 4th quarter. But not many QBs are winning against the 2018 Chiefs, on the road, in OT. I know I was way more scared of the 2018 Chiefs than I was of the 2018 Rams.

 

[The Brandon Five]

53 - defense all the way
36 - solid team under rated defense
39 - well balanced team
38 - defense better than 03, but they choked vs an inferior Panthers team
51 - great play by all, but Malcolm stood tall
49 - bad first half, good defense 2nd half, Brady and the O caught fire ... Best second half of a super bowl ever

Methinks you have 49 and 51 reversed

 

[The Brandon Five]

I’d put one we lost on or near the top. The Eagles had a really good defense. Pats get blown right out of Minneapolis with bad QB play.

Easily Tom's best performance in a SB. 500 yards of passing in regulation.

 

[Steve102]

I think Super Bowl 51 has to be seen as completely separate from everything else. The 28-3 Super Bowl comeback to win in OT has no parallels in league history. It's THE Brady game, the entire comeback was by passing, much of it to the likes of Mitchell, Hogan, White and Amendola - not a single All Pro or Pro Bowl player in the bunch. Nice guys, team heroes, but not superstars who could turn a blind duck-and-chuck into a highlight reel catch like Julio Jones.

Literally nobody else in the entire history of professional gridiron football has a championship game like that on their resume.

Other than that it gets a lot fuzzier to me. The 04 and 14 teams were loaded on both sides of the ball, but the 14 team was less consistent outside of Brady being great from week 4 on. The 03 team was weak on offense but murderous on defense - until the Super Bowl, which required Brady going nuts to win what somehow mutated into a shootout. The 01 team is easy to credit as a "team win" over a "Brady win" except that the exact same team looked busted until he took over.

53 was very much a team win vs. Brady win, outside 2 big drives in the 4th quarter. But not many QBs are winning against the 2018 Chiefs, on the road, in OT. I know I was way more scared of the 2018 Chiefs than I was of the 2018 Rams.

Agreed.

The Atlanta game is easily Brady's finest moment, in a career of finest moments. The Seattle game and the Chiefs AFCC are the next ones on my list.

 

[Pape]

Methinks you have 49 and 51 reversed

i think you are right. thanks.

 

[PatsWSB47]

Max Kellerman: Patriots would have won all 9 Superbowls with someone other than Brady.

 

[The Brandon Five]

Max Kellerman: Patriots would have won all 9 Superbowls with someone other than Brady.

Robert Parker: Patriots would have won 21 Super Bowls with someone other than Brady.

 

[LuRkeR1978]

I'm ranking them all.

2017 - Lost
2016 - Won
2011 - Lost
2007 - Lost
2014 - Won
2003 - Won
2001 - Won
2004 - Won

 

[sean10mm]

Robert Parker: Patriots would have won 21 Super Bowls with someone other than Brady.

*Counts the rings again*

"Never Not a *****made ****boy: The Rob Parker Story"

 

[Steve102]

Max Kellerman: Patriots would have won all 9 Superbowls with someone other than Brady.

If the news isn't bad enough. Don't quote Cliff. Cheezuz.

 

[libra957]

It's a tough list considering Brady had a 4th quarter drive in all of them. With the exception of that Welker drop, win or lose Brady alway makes play in the 4th quarter.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Likely would have 0 or maybe 1 Super Bowl with Brady replaced by an average QB. Their defense never put together a run like the 2000 Ravens, 2002 Bucs, or 2015 Broncos. No way they are in SB 36 or SB 53 without Brady.