QB Position, Brady and Loss Of Identity

The loss of Brady should have a minor impact on the chances of the Patriots to win the title.  And I'm an Eagles fan, so this is not a statement of fan blindness.  What I am is a realist.  IF we assume that Belichick is as good a coach as his record shows, and we assume Brady fit extremely well into a system which was designed for a QB of his rather pedestrian talent level (Brady was NOT a surefire NFL hit coming out of college), then it's likely that his loss is not significant.  However, these are major assumptions and it's important to break down why this is may be a honest assessment.

Many believe that the QB position is the most important in football, and indeed in all of sport.  If the position is viewed as one man's value versus the rest of the team, then yes, it is.  However, if it is viewed as the value of one position versus the rest of the team, then no it is not.  As we all know (or should know), defense wins championships.  So the QB position, by that standard, is not even the primary topic of discussion in football.  QBs, after all, can do alot to win a game, but they cannot prevent the other team from winning.  As a result, from a pure position standpoint, baseball's pitcher is the most valuable single POSITION in all of sports.  A pitcher capable of delivering a WHIP of 1.10 and an ERA of 2.00 or lower allows his team the chance to win every game he pitches.  A QB capable of throwing 270 ypg and completing 65% of his passes cannot say the same.  A team that has a big play QB, but does not control the clock, will not get its defense enough rest.  They may score alot, but they will get scored on.

There are far more cases of a Super Bowl appearance (and win) with mediocre QBs than there are of World Series appearances (and wins) with mediocre pitching.  Pitching is defense, and defense wins games.  Anyone watch last year's Super Bowl?  How about the Ravens win against the Giants?  Tampa Bay?  All of Pittsburgh's wins?  Not all of these events had mediocre QBs (Tampa, Baltimore and NY last year would all rate as mediocre QBs), but all had massively overpowering defenses.

As for Brady and the Patriots, it is true that pre-Brady Belichick's pedigree was lacking.  It SEEMS that Brady's appearance in the position made Belichick.  But did it?  Belichick has long been recognized as having an excellent eye for talent and as a solid X's and O's guy.  His system is designed for a QB who can make good reads and take advantage of mismatches.  MOST QBs can handle this kind of role.  Bledsoe, it became apparent after he left, could not.  No matter where he went his decision making was increasingly suspect.  Brady obviously could.  He doesn't need to be mobile and doesn't need a strong arm.  He just has to hang on to the ball and do his check offs.  Can Matt Cassel do this?  In all likelihood, yes.  If not, it's likely Belichick can find someone who can.  He doesn't ask his QB to do alot, he asks his O Line to do much more.

The difference between Brady and every other QB (stud versus liability?) is good decision making.  Any QB can be a "stud" if he doesn't force the ball into situations where a pass is likely to be low probability.  Brady, and others of his caliber, rarely force the ball into double coverage, or close coverage.  Brady is patient, gets good blocking, and can check off his receivers, looking for a key separation or mismatch.  Belichick's system is designed for Brady to have quite a few options and Brady will wait for his options to become apparent.  This patience is a philosophy that is coached - coming from the confidence that your coach's plans are correct and will work.  QBs that make bad decisions and lose confidence do so because they feel THEY HAVE to do something.  Brady, indeed any great QB, never feels this way, even on a game winning drive.  They just feel like they need to keep making good decisions, and by making these decisions, they will win.

As a result, any QB can look at the NE system and confidently say "I can do that".  Indeed, they can.  IF they have the confidence in their ability to do what is necessary.  Were Brad Johnson, or Trent Dilfer, or even Eli BAD, truly BAD QB's?  NO.  They were/are mediocre...good enough to make good decisions, if given the chance, and able to do the very basic things their coach asked them to do.  These QBs may not post massive Brady-like figures (who knows?  maybe they could) in New England, but they would be successful.  They made good decisions when it counted, and the New England system is one which rewards these traits highly.

So, will Brady's loss impact the Patriots?  Possibly, but it will be psychological more than actual performance related.  If the Patriots believe the QB position is one that can be filled with a backup in a well designed system (can anyone say Hostetler?), then Cassel will do fine as a pseudo-Brady.  Will his loss cost them the chance to reach the Super Bowl?  Unlikely.  This year, there are probably 10 teams with a very good shot at the Super Bowl, Brady or no Brady.  The Giants PROVED Brady's New England team is beatable, so the psychological fear no longer exists - Brady is not unbeatable.  But whether New England was going to be the favorite simply depends on your point of view.  They certainly were A FAVORITE, but not necessarily THE FAVORITE.  Who would that be (now or even 2 days ago)?  I hesitate to prognosticate.  What is clear is that the AFC is no longer a dominant conference, and NFC teams stand as good, if not better, chances to win it all.

Need a single team?  I never pick my own...bad karma.  But that's all I'll say.