No it wasn't. Nobody carried the torch, but it wasn't obvious that Blake and Roddick wouldn't be able to. Andy Roddick won Canada, Cinci, and USO in '03 and he was ranked number 1 in the world. It wasn't obvious that he wouldn't be as good as the players that you named.
It was obvious to guys who followed the Mac, Connors, Sampras, Agassi, Courier days.. That Roddick, Blake etc.. Just didn't have the talent to dominate tennis and achieve what these guys did. Roddick even from the BEGINNING back in 2001-2002 you could see didnt have the speed, net game, talent, baseline game etc.. That his predecessors had.
Roddick and the rest just didn't have the standard foundation to carry on that domination of America.. Roddick didn't have the talent of those guys.. Gimme a damm break.. It was obvious from the start.. He had more holes in his game then a fucking pin cushion.
And really,... Roddick even winning his sole slam at the USO in 2003 was an utter joke.. He should have lost to Nalbandian if not for those ridiculous horrible calls at the end.
For sure, he would have won a few slams if not for Fed, but he wasn't as good as the americans that came before him