Ok, so I can agree with the notion that Imperial designs on Poland-Lithuania will be implausible, but at the very least they would be allies. Combined with a possible successful counter reformation efforts in all of Scandinavia, the British Isles might become the last bastion of Protestantism, thanks to the arrival of Continental European Protestant exiles. Would France remain Catholic too?
The real question in this case would be, how and where would England build their colonies if the Imperials grabbed most of North America?
I'm not sure that the POD would prompt a successful counter-reformation in Scandinavia. Alternaively, there might be closer Anglo-Scandinavian ties, binding together this firmly Protestant "fringe" around the Catholic(-ruled) heart of Europe. They might form an alliance to stay strong in their unity.
A successful "New Netherlands" (if it's still called that) would be considerably largers, but I don't think it would encompass most of North America. On its South-Western end, I think the Imperial colony could gain control of the Delaware Bay and thus
the Delaware River and its watershed-- but
the Susquehanna's watershed would almost certainly remain in English hands. Due to the latter's size and shape, this would rather hem in the Imperials.
Conversely, New England (already truncated) may very well be screwed. Between the Imperials and the French, we may see the area conquered, leading (in a bit of historical irony) to the "expulsion of the English". The Imperials would presumably be getting the better end of this affair, due to favourable geography. By which I mean: they'd push out to Boston and possibly even Portsmouth, while the French would mostly get, well... Maine.
(Or course, the nature of this division of the region leaves both the Imperials and the English unable to easily challenge New France, so the Ohio Country and the region surrounding the Great Lakes in what is OTL New York State will remain under French control for the time being.)
The English, therefore, would be confined to a region East of the Appalachians, stretching from the Susquehanna watershed, to... well, that's the question, right? Without having to fight the Dutch for eight decades, is Spain better off? And therefore able to consolidate its claims in what's OTL Georgia? Quite possible! At minimum, though, I do think that England gets the Carolinas. So all in all, it's not like they have
no colonies. And neither are the Imperials somehow the new big boys of the block. But they're a regional player, and their presence hurst England and helps France. (Mostly inadventently, I'm sure!)
Previously, I mentioned Dutch Brazil because that was a thing in OTL, but upon consideration, the altered circumstances might prompt the Imperials to instead carry out their land-grab in a less-contested area. (Note that the good "slave country" was seen as the valuable, highly-contested land, whereas the temparate regions that we'dview as far superior settler lands were seen as more peripheral.) Specifically, I'm thinking of the fact that the Rio de la Plata area was not only late to be meaninfully colonised, but this excellent natural harbour was in fact harshly nerfed by Spanish colonial policies. I could see the Imperials taking over the joint, ultimately establishing a colony that fills up OTL Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay and Southern Brazil with Dutch/German settlers.
(After all, we have to do our bit to live up to the "Germans in Argentina!" meme, do we not?)