Montana's got company

[NDRock]

This is what Manning did with his extra money.

Or he paid for it with the money he makes shilling for every product under the sun (though I do enjoy most of his commercials). It's easy for Brady to take less when his wife makes more money than him.

 

[NDRock]

Sorry if this has already been discussed, but I was listening to Boston sports radio yesterday and they were talking about how ridiculous it is that Malcolm Butler's play would factor so much into discussing Brady as the GOAT QB or not. Essentially, if the Pats D stops Seattle, Brady is GOAT (or in the running) but if the Seahawks score and win, he's not as good as Montana. He was on the freaking bench for the play!!

Championships are important, but they can't be the deciding factor in all-time QB rankings. It's too much of a team game for the QB to be judged by that.

I also don't like the "GOAT" discussions because it's very, very difficult to judge players from different eras for so many reasons. I'd love to hear who everyone thinks is the best at each position in each decade. Maybe worthy of its own thread if people are interested.

I remember the build up to the 08 Super Bowl when NE was undefeated. All you heard from ESPN was how this was the greatest team ever and Brady was the GOAT. Then the helmet catch happens and suddenly neither of them were that great. There is a lot of luck and circumstance in all of this.

 

[Me2SouthBend]

Brady wins despite being able to throw the deep ball.. Think about that.

He seriously has an issue throwing deep and he's arguably the greatest QB ever..

A real factor here is his lack of deep threat receiver over the years. Moss is the only true great deep threat he's ever had. Gronk, Welker, Edelman, Deion Branch are all his other really successful receivers he's had. None have ever been known to be able to take the top off of a defense.

 

[irishfan]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en"><p>Joe Montana played with 12 offensive Pro Bowlers in his four title years. Brady played with 2.</p>— Around The NFL (@AroundTheNFL) <a href="https://twitter.com/AroundTheNFL/status/562653082996445184">February 3, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[MartyIrish]

A real factor here is his lack of deep threat receiver over the years. Moss is the only true great deep threat he's ever had. Gronk, Welker, Edelman, Deion Branch are all his other really successful receivers he's had. None have ever been known to be able to take the top off of a defense.

Exactly.

And when he had Moss, he killed it and Moss had the best season of his career.


I don't think it's "Brady has an issue throwing the deep ball"..It's Brady has never really had a deep threat

 

[autry_denson]

538 provides the stats to supplement this debate. Interesting that the numbers generally back up many of the most common arguments in this thread. Tom Brady’s (Statistical) Place In The Pantheon Of NFL QBs | FiveThirtyEight

- if you don't care about winning and want to focus purely on who's the best performing qb in the regular season, you're probably going to go with Brady/Manning/Marino in some order

- if you care about performance and winning when it counts, you're probably going to settle on Brady/Montana in that order

- if you care exclusively about the Super Bowl, you're probably going to go with Montana/Brady in that order

 

[connor_in]

Saw the title on this thread and was going to jump into the convo, then realized you guys weren't talking about North Dakota

:frowny face:

 

[philipm31]

I disagree. We are talking about who the best QB is, not the best team. Montana performed flawlessly in all of his Super Bowl victories. Brady has not. Hell, he threw two picks last night and they still gave him the MVP (Mostly because no one else took the game over).

Brady didn't take over the game last night or put the team on his back. They won despite him throwing two costly picks. Montana turned it on in all of his Super Bowls. You are comparing team accomplishments with personal accomplishments. The Patriots put Tom Brady in more Super Bowl appearances and that's what allowed him to match some of Joe's numbers. Give Joe two more appearances and he would have probably won two more rings and another MVP.

Of course Joe also had to play against better competition in the playoffs AND the Super Bowl.

Winning 4 titles when you had to play against the likes of the Bears, Giants and Skins--when the NFC was on the most dominant run ever by conference, with elite coaches (Parcells, Gibbs, and Ditka, among others)--totally outstrips what Brady faced.

Oh, and the hit that Burt put on Joe to sideline for an entire season would have had him suspended for his career, not on Joe's team two years later.

This is just a silly argument, and not because this is an Irish board.

Even Brady says he is not on Joe's level...and he is actually right.


BTW, can you name the WR corps outside of Clark for Montana's first two SB victories?

No, me neither and I have watched them for over 30 years.

The idea that Brady did more with less on offense is a bit offensive when you look at the talent Joe had on his team on offense for the first half of his career. He won mostly with also-rans on offense for most of his career.

 

[philipm31]

538 provides the stats to supplement this debate. Interesting that the numbers generally back up many of the most common arguments in this thread. Tom Brady’s (Statistical) Place In The Pantheon Of NFL QBs | FiveThirtyEight

- if you don't care about winning and want to focus purely on who's the best performing qb in the regular season, you're probably going to go with Brady/Manning/Marino in some order

- if you care about performance and winning when it counts, you're probably going to settle on Brady/Montana in that order

- if you care exclusively about the Super Bowl, you're probably going to go with Montana/Brady in that order

You do know that article that you referenced was from Grantland, run by the biggest Pats homer ever, right?

No way it gets online if he did not rank Brady like that.

Part of the reason Brady was able to win "when it mattered" is because he played against lesser competition than Joe did. The level of competition was not even close.

Also, Matt Cassel, anyone??

Steve Young struggled as a starter in SF while watching Joe. Cassel went 11-5 with the same offensive talent Brady had in 2005 and the following season.

 

[BGIF]

Of course Joe also had to play against better competition in the playoffs AND the Super Bowl.

Winning 4 titles when you had to play against the likes of the Bears, Giants and Skins--when the NFC was on the most dominant run ever by conference, with elite coaches (Parcells, Gibbs, and Ditka, among others)--totally outstrips what Brady faced.

Oh, and the hit that Burt put on Joe to sideline for an entire season would have had him suspended for his career, not on Joe's team two years later.

This is just a silly argument, and not because this is an Irish board.

Even Brady says he is not on Joe's level...and he is actually right.


BTW, can you name the WR corps outside of Clark for Montana's first two SB victories?

No, me neither and I have watched them for over 30 years.

The idea that Brady did more with less on offense is a bit offensive when you look at the talent Joe had on his team on offense for the first half of his career. He won mostly with also-rans on offense for most of his career.

Seems I recall Joe played for a guy named Bill Walsh, a.k.a. "The Genius". He was no "also ran". Walsh made Montana what he became.

 

[vmgsf]

I think Joe Montana was one of the greatest athletes in pro sports ever because he was a WINNER. He won a National Championship at Notre Dame. He played better in the clutch. His teammates had absolute confidence he would get the job done when the game was on the line.

I think Joe Montana, Michael Jordan and Bill Russell are among the greatest pro athletes not because of statistics but because they had a fierce desire to win, they won and they inspired their teams and carried their teams to victory.

If you google "collinsworth montana god" and read you might see what I am getting at.

 

[Grahambo]

Brady plays in an era that has made it much harder to defend and caters more towards offense.

Same way I look at the NBA with the MJ/Bron debate and when Gretzky played in an era that made offense much more difficult.

One way to look at it, would Brady be a HOF QB if he played in Montana's era? You could make an easier argument that Montana could put up ridiculous numbers in today's era.

 

[wizards8507]

Brady plays in an era that has made it much harder to defend and caters more towards offense.

Same way I look at the NBA with the MJ/Bron debate and when Gretzky played in an era that made offense much more difficult.

One way to look at it, would Brady be a HOF QB if he played in Montana's era? You could make an easier argument that Montana could put up ridiculous numbers in today's era.

That only explains statistics, not wins and losses. The rules that have benefited Brady have also hurt his teams' defenses. Opposing QBs are playing by the same rules so it's no easier to win games or championships than it used to be.

That's an embarrassing argument to question whether Brady is only a hall of famer because of the era.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 4 using Tapatalk.

 

[NDRock]

Also, Matt Cassel, anyone??

Steve Young struggled as a starter in SF while watching Joe. Cassel went 11-5 with the same offensive talent Brady had in 2005 and the following season.

I'm a Montana guy all the way but Brady went 16-0 and came within a helmet catch of going 19-0, the next year with Cassel they won five fewer games and missed the playoffs. Look at Belechick's career record without Brady, it isn't pretty.

I do agree with Bill Simmons when he said the two guys you would want down ten, fourth quarter, against the best defense in football are Montana and Brady. I'd personally take Montana first but Brady is the best of his generation.

 

[NDRock]

Brady plays in an era that has made it much harder to defend and caters more towards offense.

Same way I look at the NBA with the MJ/Bron debate and when Gretzky played in an era that made offense much more difficult.

One way to look at it, would Brady be a HOF QB if he played in Montana's era? You could make an easier argument that Montana could put up ridiculous numbers in today's era.

I'm old enough to remember people said the same thing about Montana and the West Coast offense being more QB friendly resulting in better stats. The game was also more geared to the offense in the 80's than it was in the 60's and 70's and has trended that way ever since. If Brady isn't a HOFer than no QB from today is.

 

[Grahambo]

That only explains statistics, not wins and losses. The rules that have benefited Brady have also hurt his teams' defenses. Opposing QBs are playing by the same rules so it's no easier to win games or championships than it used to be.

That's an embarrassing argument to question whether Brady is only a hall of famer because of the era.

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 4 using Tapatalk.

Tell me how you really feel.

 

[Grahambo]

I'm old enough to remember people said the same thing about Montana and the West Coast offense being more QB friendly resulting in better stats. The game was also more geared to the offense in the 80's than it was in the 60's and 70's and has trended that way ever since. If Brady isn't a HOFer than no QB from today is.

I was not lucky enough to watch the game in the 60's and 70's..or even the 80's for that matter. All I know is offenses today, and this is with all sports, have an 'easier' time then they did in years past. Personally, I don't care either way but I do think what guys like Montana accomplished is more impressive then what Brady has accomplished.

 

[yankeeND]

How many Super Bowls did Montana win that absolutely deserve asterisks??

IDK, maybe all of them #stickumgate.

This is really a win win for me. They are my two all-time favorites. There just isn't a wrong answer here. Hell, Marino was pretty damn good too. Manning is arguably the man as well. Even if Brady wins another one, people will still argue against it. It's all subjective.

 

[yankeeND]

I was not lucky enough to watch the game in the 60's and 70's..or even the 80's for that matter. All I know is offenses today, and this is with all sports, have an 'easier' time then they did in years past. Personally, I don't care either way but I do think what guys like Montana accomplished is more impressive then what Brady has accomplished.

You are not wrong here, but you can only play against the competition you have. Nowadays no stone is left unturned to find the best possible players either. Lots of things to consider. Hell even the equipment is better now, yet there are areas that you just cannot hit on your opponent's body.

 

[irishfan]

You do know that article that you referenced was from Grantland, run by the biggest Pats homer ever, right?

No way it gets online if he did not rank Brady like that.

Part of the reason Brady was able to win "when it mattered" is because he played against lesser competition than Joe did. The level of competition was not even close.

Also, Matt Cassel, anyone??

Steve Young struggled as a starter in SF while watching Joe. Cassel went 11-5 with the same offensive talent Brady had in 2005 and the following season.

They must have been super worried about Young's struggles when they traded Montana.

Get your facts straight if you're going to be a hater. Cassel was in 2008. Brady went 16-0 (yes, 18-1) in 2007. Cassel went 11-5 the next season throwing to Moss/Welker. Not exactly a crappy WR corps. Still a drop off of 5 wins, and no division title.

People love to point out Cassel saying that anyone can play QB in this offense. If that were true, they wouldn't be paying Brady 45 million the next 3 years (while he's 38-40 years old), and instead would pay someone like Cassel some cheapo contract. They routinely give Brady 0 talent at the skill position because he simply does not need it. How was Welker before he played with Brady? Average. How was Welker after he played with Brady? Average. How was Moss doing in Oakland before New England? How was Moss after he left New England? How did guys like Branch and Givens do once they left Brady? Anyone seriously think Edelman would be putting up 100 catches with any other QB? Brady makes average WRs look great all the time. Lafell shattered his numbers here in just one season and barely played the first few weeks.

Saying he plays against lesser competition is just laughable. Broke Super Bowl records against the Legion of Boom who everyone was saying was a top-5 defense of all time. Guy has been to 6 Super Bowls and 9 Conference Championships in 13 years as a starter. What he is doing is incredible. I can understand disliking him and the Patriots, but discrediting him is just weak. He threw for 328 yards and 4 TDs at age 37 against the best D in years. Montana had already been traded at that age. Joe was the man, but Brady is better.

<iframe src="//player.vimeo.com/video/120222706" width="500" height="281" frameborder="0" webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen allowfullscreen></iframe> <p><a href="https://vimeo.com/120222706">Tom Brady Super Bowl 49: Final 2 Drives</a> from <a href="https://vimeo.com/user37629267">rsstats</a> on <a href="https://vimeo.com">Vimeo</a>.</p>

 

[autry_denson]

You do know that article that you referenced was from Grantland, run by the biggest Pats homer ever, right?

No way it gets online if he did not rank Brady like that.

Nothing better than when dismissive internet confidence is attached to a statement that is completely incorrect. the article was from 538, not Grantland.

 

[IrishSteelhead]

Montana's got company

A big advantage QBs have now is the protection rules. Guys like Montana could (and did) get wiped into oblivion on any given play, sometimes even after the ball was out/whistle. Quarterbacks can be much more confident dropping back and throwing than they did decades ago. Obviously the big hit is still a worry today, but not anything like yesteryear.

 

[Grahambo]

A big advantage QBs have now is the protection rules. Guys like Montana could (and did) get wiped into oblivion on any given play, sometimes even after the ball was out/whistle. Quarterbacks can be much more confident dropping back and throwing than they did decades ago. Obviously the big hit is still a worry today, but not anything like yesteryear.

Not to say that QBs still don't get clobbered but Montana took some heavy hits, especially against the Giants with Jim Burt and Leonard Marshall nearly decapitating him.

 

[IrishSteelhead]

Montana's got company

Not to say that QBs still don't get clobbered but Montana took some heavy hits, especially against the Giants with Jim Burt and Leonard Marshall nearly decapitating him.

IIRC he received a concussion in an NFC playoff game from LT, or possibly Marshall or Burt.

 

[Grahambo]

IIRC he received a concussion in an NFC playoff game from LT, or possibly Marshall or Burt.

Burt knocked him out of a playoff game in NY. Marshall hit him from behind in a game in SF. He got rocked pretty good by the G-Men.

Who also beat Brady twice.

 

[philipm31]

Nothing better than when dismissive internet confidence is attached to a statement that is completely incorrect. the article was from 538, not Grantland.

538 is a Grantland-sponsored site. The only place you see it is on ESPN via GRANTLAND, which is run by Bill Simmons.

Sorry, but what Montana did was FAR tougher than what Brady did.

It is not even debatable that Montana was a far better QB, played against better competition in the playoffs EVERY year and spent half his career with very much also-rans.

Anyone remember Wendell Tyler, Renaldo Nehemiah, Mike Wilson? The 1981 and 1984 teams were literally not much better on offense than any offense Brady had. The reason the Niners were so damn talented on offense was because Bill Walsh had such an eye for talent it was insane.

He saw Clark catch 11 passes in a drill where he was there to look at the CLEMSON QB, and he drafted Clark instead.

He found Jerry Rice at POWERHOUSE Mississippi Valley State.

Charles Haley was from Div I-AA JAMES MADISON.

Two of them are NFL Hall of Famers. Did anyone else draft them? No. but people complain that Montana played with nothing but All-Pros. Did it occur to anyone that the Niners actually built their team with a LOT of unheralded prospects, outside of Joe, Ronnie and Jerry?

There was an entire article about the way Walsh drafted the core of the Niners and he was a genius at that, but whomever took a shot at my calling the PLAYERS that Montana played with most of his career also-rans should not be including his COACH, you know?

THE GENIUS AT WORK BILL WALSH BUILT THE SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS THROUGH BRILLIANT TRADING AND DRAFTING, AND THE 1986 DRAFT WAS HIS MASTERPIECE - SI.com

 

[philipm31]

Burt knocked him out of a playoff game in NY. Marshall hit him from behind in a game in SF. He got rocked pretty good by the G-Men.

Who also beat Brady twice.

That goes to my point that the Giants of that time were awesome, and they were coached by a coaching legend in the Big Tuna.

Joe Gibbs was coaching in Washington and won 3 SB titles with 3 QBs, so he was quite the head coach himself, as well.

Ditka only won on Super Bowl, but he certainly was quite a coach in CHI. In fact, they lost to the Niners in Chicago in the NFC CG in 84, but went all the way the next year.

The Eighties, as a decade, were just a free-for-all in the middle with the Niners, Skins, Giants and Bears pretty much owning the middle of the decade. For the Niners to win 3 titles in that decade is just mindboggling when you consider the heavy competition that they faced.

Oh, and when they started their run, they only had to face a HOF coach from Dallas and a HOF player-turned-coach, who happened to be coaching the NFL MVP in Cincinnati.

The crucible that was the Eighties is what separates Montana from Brady.

 

[autry_denson]

538 is a Grantland-sponsored site. The only place you see it is on ESPN via GRANTLAND, which is run by Bill Simmons.

haha, holy shit. you realize that this is one of those arguments that can be resolved objectively, right? what you initially said was completely wrong. what you said subsequently was also completely wrong. just spend 15 seconds looking it up before you post.

 

[NDRock]

538 is a Grantland-sponsored site. The only place you see it is on ESPN via GRANTLAND, which is run by Bill Simmons.

Sorry, but what Montana did was FAR tougher than what Brady did.

It is not even debatable that Montana was a far better QB, played against better competition in the playoffs EVERY year and spent half his career with very much also-rans.

Anyone remember Wendell Tyler, Renaldo Nehemiah, Mike Wilson? The 1981 and 1984 teams were literally not much better on offense than any offense Brady had. The reason the Niners were so damn talented on offense was because Bill Walsh had such an eye for talent it was insane.

He saw Clark catch 11 passes in a drill where he was there to look at the CLEMSON QB, and he drafted Clark instead.

He found Jerry Rice at POWERHOUSE Mississippi Valley State.

Charles Haley was from Div I-AA JAMES MADISON.

Two of them are NFL Hall of Famers. Did anyone else draft them? No. but people complain that Montana played with nothing but All-Pros. Did it occur to anyone that the Niners actually built their team with a LOT of unheralded prospects, outside of Joe, Ronnie and Jerry?

There was an entire article about the way Walsh drafted the core of the Niners and he was a genius at that, but whomever took a shot at my calling the PLAYERS that Montana played with most of his career also-rans should not be including his COACH, you know?

THE GENIUS AT WORK BILL WALSH BUILT THE SAN FRANCISCO 49ERS THROUGH BRILLIANT TRADING AND DRAFTING, AND THE 1986 DRAFT WAS HIS MASTERPIECE - SI.com

Not sure what you're getting at. You seem to be making the point that Walsh was the key to the whole thing with his insane eye for talent. Just because all of the Pro Bowlers the 49ers had on the team weren't 1st round picks doesn't take away that they were loaded with talent. I agree that teams were stacked in the 80's but so were the 49ers. It was obviously easier to keep your talent together before free agency. The AFC teams were also less talented and regularly were blown out in the Super Bowl. So although it may have been tougher for NFC teams to make the Super Bowl, once there it was typically a blowout win.

The end of the day if Montana is the comparison for Tom Brady then he's had one hell of a career.

 

[irishfan]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en data-scribe-reduced-action-queue="><p>Source at Gillette Stadium said QB Tom Brady was first player in building at 7 am today for the start of the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Patriots?src=hash">#Patriots</a> offseason program.</p>— Christopher Price (@cpriceNFL) <a href="https://twitter.com/cpriceNFL/status/590156855441289216">April 20, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Gunning for Super Bowl #5 to completely end this argument.