Welcome to Part Two of the Kizzle Khronicles, boys and girls! This article will be related to, but much shorter than, my first article.
One of the reoccurring themes of the ongoing debate surrounding Cam Newton is Cam Newton's play with "scrubs" in relation to other top QBs when surrounded by "scrubs". "Scrubs", an obviously subjective pejorative, in this sense means "guys that aren't that good on their own who are made better by their QB and coaching scheme"....at least, that is how I'm choosing to define it in my article so deal with it.
The extent to which QBs make their players look better is something that we can debate for another five years and not even get close to a resolution, so that isn't the point of this article. However, one of the most common names that is thrown around is 3x Super Bowl Champion and future first ballot Hall of Fame QB Tom Brady in the pre-Randy Moss era. Basically, the 2001-2006 seasons.
As much as I am loathe to say it, Tom Brady is one of the greatest QBs to play the game....arguably the greatest, though Montana might have something to say about that. Anyway, I wanted to do a similar analysis of Brady's offensive supporting cast from 2001-2006 and compare it to Cam Newton's 2014 offensive supporting cast, which is what was discussed in my last article.
Many fans argue that Brady took a lackluster offensive supporting cast full of "scrubs" and won three Super Bowls with them, as opposed to QBs like Peyton Manning who has been surrounded by studs for his entire career (the latter of which is true, IMO). I wanted to see what Football Outsiders numbers looked like for those select years. I won't do too much personal analysis in this one, I'm pretty much just going to post the charts and let you come to your own conclusions.
One thing to keep in mind is that over the last 5-7 years the NFL has changed quite a bit...it is much easier to throw the ball now with the new flag-happy refs in today's NFL. This fact won't be reflected in the charts below, but it is something that you should keep in mind while looking at them.
Wide Receivers
Year | QB | WR Name | WR Rank | WR Name | WR Rank | WR Rank Average |
2005 | Tom Brady | D.Branch | 11 | T.Brown | 29 | 20 |
2001 | Tom Brady | T.Brown | 12 | D.Patten | 29 | 20.5 |
2004 | Tom Brady | D.Patten | 28 | D.Givens | 30 | 29 |
2003 | Tom Brady | D.Givens | 27 | D.Branch | 41 | 34 |
2006 | Tom Brady | R.Caldwell | 24 | D.Gabriel | 50 | 37 |
2014 | Cam Newton | J.Cotchery | 40 | K.Benjamin | 46 | 43 |
2002 | Tom Brady | D.Patten | 40 | D.Branch | 59 | 49.5 |
Tight Ends
Year | QB | TE Name | TE Rank | TE Rank Weighted |
2002 | Tom Brady | C.Fauria | 7 | 14 |
2004 | Tom Brady | D.Graham | 8 | 16 |
2014 | Cam Newton | G. Olsen | 9 | 18 |
2005 | Tom Brady | B.Watson | 12 | 24 |
2003 | Tom Brady | D.Graham | 15 | 30 |
2006 | Tom Brady | B.Watson | 24 | 48 |
2001 | Tom Brady | J.Wiggins | 38 | 76 |
Running Backs
Year | QB | RB Name | RB Rank | RB Rank Weighted |
2004 | Tom Brady | C.Dillon | 2 | 4 |
2005 | Tom Brady | C.Dillon | 15 | 30 |
2001 | Tom Brady | A.Smith | 17 | 34 |
2006 | Tom Brady | C.Dillon | 17 | 34 |
2002 | Tom Brady | A.Smith | 21 | 42 |
2003 | Tom Brady | A.Smith | 34 | 68 |
2014 | Cam Newton | J.Stewart | 42 | 84 |
Offensive Line
Year | QB | Oline Run Blocking Rank | Oline Pass Blocking Rank | Oline Rank Average | Oline Rank Weighted |
2004 | Tom Brady | 5 | 5 | 5 | 10 |
2002 | Tom Brady | 9 | 7 | 8 | 16 |
2006 | Tom Brady | 12 | 8 | 10 | 20 |
2005 | Tom Brady | 27 | 6 | 16.5 | 33 |
2001 | Tom Brady | 10 | 26 | 18 | 36 |
2003 | Tom Brady | 23 | 13 | 18 | 36 |
2014 | Cam Newton | 31 | 22 | 26.5 | 53 |
Offense Total
Year | QB | Offense Rank Total | Defensive Rank | QB Rating | Result |
2004 | Tom Brady | 15 | 7 | 92.6 | Won Super Bowl |
2005 | Tom Brady | 27 | 27 | 92.3 | |
2002 | Tom Brady | 30 | 14 | 85.7 | |
2006 | Tom Brady | 35 | 7 | 87.9 | |
2001 | Tom Brady | 42 | 13 | 86.5 | Won Super Bowl |
2003 | Tom Brady | 42 | 2 | 85.9 | Won Super Bowl |
2014 | Cam Newton | 50 | 24 | 81.4 | PANIC |
So there you go. I used the same criteria and sources from the first article. Thanks again for reading!