Wow! Rod Woodson really made a stupid argument for Montana over Brady - New England Patriots Forums

***Rob0729*** · 02-03-2008, 12:27 PM

He kept on harping on the numbers that Brady isn't as good as Montana. He said that Brady doesn't match up with Montana because this is the first year that Brady had more than 30 TDs and the most he had prior to this is 28.

Does Woodson realize that Montana had only one year where he threw for more than 28 TDs? He had 31 in 1987 and otherwise, he had one year where he had 28, another with 27, and two more with 26. The rest of his career he had under 20 TDs a season.

Does Woodson realize that Brady has better numbers his first seven years as a starter than Montana has for his first eight years as a starter (Montana had a strike year and only started the first half of his firs year as a starter)?

I really wish these so called experts would actually do their homework before speaking. Woodson argued that stats would determin who is better, but that argument points to Brady.

Canada's #1 Pats Fan · 02-03-2008, 12:31 PM

just remember with the media - always consider the source. Rod Woodson. Enough said.

***Rob0729*** · 02-03-2008, 12:31 PM

BTW, I guess I can see why Woodson would think Montana was always getting over 30 TDs every year since his only year in San Fran was the only year Montana got over 30 TDs.

ShrewBeer · 02-03-2008, 12:32 PM

the media is made up of the brightest football minds in the world

Run DMC · 02-03-2008, 12:45 PM

Woodson was a good player, but he is really, really bad with a mic in his hand.
Jeezus!

karran_s · 02-03-2008, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mossed81

Woodson was a good player, but he is really, really bad with a mic in his hand.
Jeezus!

Woodson is a real jerk... He couldn't respond to Deion Sanders when he logically made the argument about the "intangibles" that make a great quarterback, not just records... If that were the case, we would be talking about Brady vs Brett Favre, vs Peyton etc.. It's about winning and doing it under difficult circumstances, at the highest level. It's what Brady does best..

I couldn't have made any better arguments for Brady than Deion Sanders.. hats off to him.. I like him a lot..

stcjones · 02-03-2008, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob0729

He kept on harping on the numbers that Brady isn't as good as Montana. He said that Brady doesn't match up with Montana because this is the first year that Brady had more than 30 TDs and the most he had prior to this is 28.

Does Woodson realize that Montana had only one year where he threw for more than 28 TDs? He had 31 in 1987 and otherwise, he had one year where he had 28, another with 27, and two more with 26. The rest of his career he had under 20 TDs a season.

Does Woodson realize that Brady has better numbers his first seven years as a starter than Montana has for his first eight years as a starter (Montana had a strike year and only started the first half of his firs year as a starter)?

I really wish these so called experts would actually do their homework before speaking. Woodson argued that stats would determin who is better, but that argument points to Brady.

Don't you know by now....Rod Woodson is an ignorant jacka$$??? The fact that Brady has never until this year, had the kind of receiver(s) that Montana had available to him his whole career in SF.......Woodson ought to do his homework before coming out and looking like a sphincter......

Sphincter......got to love that word......

SteelRaptor · 02-03-2008, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rob0729

BTW, I guess I can see why Woodson would think Montana was always getting over 30 TDs every year since his only year in San Fran was the only year Montana got over 30 TDs.

Woodson was drafted by the Steelers in 87'.

In comparison though, Brady only needs that 4th superbowl trophy to cement his place with Montana and Bradshaw as the only QBs to win 4 superbowls, The other comparisons are silly, Brady, in his prime is already a legend, and believe me, that hurts me to say that.