I don't understand this logic. First of all Brady has already passed him in total rings. Second, it's better to lose a super bowl than not make it there at all. Why is Brady losing to the Giants worse than Montana losing in the second round? Doesn't make any sense. If the argument is "well he always showed up on the biggest stage." Then clearly not because he didn't even show up in the game to get his team to the biggest stage.
...this is going to come off homerish for Montana, I know....but consider where we are.
But my thing with Brady is, the last two he got handed to him ...not by events on the field falling his way...but by coaching calls so stupid, they'll go down in history...like , so bad people will remember the Falcons and the Seahawks being the runner up...because of egregious, unforgivable, coaching gaffs ...THAT BAD.
First, Brady had no business getting the W against Seattle, but they throw it from the shadow of the goal line with Beast mode standing there with his dick in his hand. Tonight, Atlanta is in or really close to the red zone...poised to go up three scores with time CLEARLY on their side...WHY WOULD YOU EVER think of throwing the ball??? They lost ONE yard ont he first play...do it twice more and kick the field goal...and oh by the way, the back was GOUGING the patriots frequently...there was a good chance he'd have goten another first down. By the time that complete coaching equivalent to shitting the bed was over, the Falcons couldn't even try a LONG field goal...Just tragic, idiotic, moronic...you name it.
Yea Brady gets credit for being there...yea he belongs in the conversation...yea he might be the guy with the most rings...and Montana may have been the beneficiary of some on the field good fortune...but I can't recall opposing coaching staffs taking him off life support and handing him the game...not once, but twice.
Somewhere over time Brady will be considered the GOAT... but his last two are a little too fresh in my mind to say it.