I don’t think they necessarily contradict one another, but I’m by no means saying Brady only wins there because the team was stacked, but I will say that the team didn’t need the QB to be setting the world on fire they “just” needed someone reliable and steady.
I’ll also add that him being him, he adds more then what he does on the field.
I think it does though. If you’re saying Tampa were rubbish because they had a bad QB, you’re indirectly saying the QB can, alone, be the difference between a losing team which Tampa were, to a Superbowl winner which Tampa became. If you’re then also saying that even a QB who didn’t set the world alight would also make that impact, then you’re saying a QB who would set it alight would have an even bigger impact. You’re at this point saying a QB can cause a significant swing on performance.
That then links back to this wider debate on coach vs QB on impact. Surely this line of reasoning would suggest a QB has significant impact - beyond the coach - if it was he who converted a team to winning vs losing when nothing else, inc. coach, changed?
Then you get people now coming out saying how the way we are doing this year proves how amazing BB is and therefore why it wasn’t Brady why they won / or Brady had little impact. But if someone mentions last year, there were lots of reasons why we did crap last year. Well there’s also lots of reasons why we’ve done good this year too but they often get ignored.
And on and on.
Worth stating though that the argument that Brady did it all and not Bill is also utter garbage. The win at Tampa doesn’t show that. What it does show is that Brady is worth more than his QB skills. He can change the entire mentality of a ball club. But without BB, I wonder if he ever develops to that level. I don’t think so. BB managed a guy like Brady perfectly over his career. And made the big decisions which kept the players around Brady motivated and eager, even if not always the best in their positions.
Just to clarify when I say you I say you generically. This post isn’t aimed at any one individual, just trying to weed out what is clearly sometimes contradictory statements people get themselves stuck in to when downplaying Brady’s role. As I said, I have no bias in this one. And I honestly think Brady wins SBs at other teams in his career if he didn’t join the Pats, and BB would have won a Super Bowl with another QB if Brady didn’t join the Pats. Neither of them would have come anywhere close to 6 though. It was a perfect partnership (even if not a perfect relationship), combing a genius coach with a genius leader.