There's a problem with cause/effect relationship here. What if those were Fed's peak years

**because Big3 were not around?**

Well, we can look at win percentage excluding the Big 3 for every year and see if there is any big difference when the Big 3 are erased from the competition

2004: 74-6 becomes 74-5, which is 93%

2005: 81-4 becomes 81-3, which is 96%

2006: 92-5 becomes 88-1, which is 98% (!!!)

2007: 68-9 becomes 63-6, which is 91%

2008: 66-15 becomes 64-10, which is 86%

2009: 61-12 becomes 58-8, which is 87%

2010: 65-13 becomes 61-11, which is 84%

2011: 64-12 becomes 62-5, which is 89% (not bad)

2012: 71-12 becomes 68-8, which is 89%

2013: 45-17 becomes 45-11, which is 80%

2014: 73-12 becomes 70-9, which is 88%

2015: 63-11 becomes 59-6, which is 90% (hey, it's your favorite year!)

2016: 21-7 becomes 21-6, which is 77%

2017: 54-5 becomes 50-5, which is 90%

2018: 50-10 becomes 50-8, which is 86%

2019: 53-10 becomes 51-8, which is 87%

Only two seasons since 2007 have cracked 90% and 2004-2007 are still Fed's best seasons in terms of win percentage even without the Big 3. What is particularly interesting is that 2009 and 2010 have lower percentages than I would have guessed. He was wildly inconsistent in those years so I guess it makes sense.