Do you buy into the narrative of Joe Montana's "unblemished Super Bowl record" vs. Brady?

[Soul_Survivor88]

Given that Tom Brady has the highest winning percentage AND the highest total career wins of any QB in NFL history, I wonder how you feel about Joe Montana's Super Bowl record. Would you consider Montana's Super Bowl record superior to Brady's? If so, is that enough to make Joe Cool the GOAT?

The narrative says that Montanna was simply perfect when it came to the biggest games of his career. Not simply because of him never losing a Super Bowl, but also.....never committing a turnover or interception! In fact, Joe Montana has the highest career passer rating of any NFL quarterback starting in the Super Bowl.

In his four Super Bowl starts, Joe Montana went 4-0 and completed 83 of 122 passes for 1,142 yards and 11 touchdowns with no interceptions, earning him passer rating of 127.8

If you buy into the notion of perfection or having an unblemished record, than I suppose it'd be hard to argue against this. However, I think you have to take into account how ccompetetive those Super Bowl wins were.

It's a lot easier to avoid interceptions when your blowing out your opponent. But for Brady, nearly all of his Super Bowl appearances have been close, tight affairs going into the fourth quarter. I wonder if Montana advocate are making too much of this stat line. What do you think?

 

[BelichicksBlackEye]

its a stupid argument. People fail to realize Montana could not make it to the super bowl 6 times. Case closed

 

[SEA_Pat]

...despite having no salary cap and a loaded team in a league without parity.

 

[dannydyn]

Montana's record is a direct result of the no-cap era. Put Montana in today's rosters, and he would have made *maybe* 1 SB.

 

[Bruins29]

...despite having no salary cap and a loaded team in a league without parity.

And a WR that cheated

 

[Mack Herron]

Absolutely. Montana is the man. And Trent Dilfer. And Jeff Hostetler. And Jim McMahon. Never lost a championship. For multiple appearances, I go with the immortal Eli Manning and Jim Plunkett. They rule.

 

[Froob]

Not sure why interceptions are in this...it's idiotic to say it's better to lose in the playoffs earlier or miss it all together than to lose the big game.

 

[sb1]

Brady at least waited till the Super Bowl to lose to the Giants. Montana is 1-3 against the NYG in the playoffs including 2 one and dones.

 

[Soul_Survivor88]

Not sure why interceptions are in this...it's idiotic to say it's better to lose in the playoffs earlier or miss it all together than to lose the big game.

Montana's career Super Bowl stat line is pretty damn impressive...I don't think anyone will ever be able to replicate his level of execution over so many Super Bowls.

I think it's a byproduct of a few factors:
1) Not having to deal with a Salary Cap
2) Playing against weaker AFC opponents in less competetive Super Bowl games (and therefore, not needing to take as many risks with the ball)
3) Playing in fewer Super Bowls overall, and therefore minimizing his turnovers and likelihood of losing period

 

[Joey007]

its a stupid argument. People fail to realize Montana could not make it to the super bowl 6 times. Case closed

And who was the reason for that?

In multiple cases, the Giants.

 

[RobertWeathers]

If we are measuring perfection, it's Montana.

If we are measuring degree of difficulty, going to 6 Super Bowls in 16 years is more impressive than going to 4 in 15.

 

[aluminum seats]

Montana was terrific, pretty silly to argue otherwise, and his Super Bowl track record even more so. But 1) Brady's not done yet; and 2) even at this point it's hard to argue against Brady for the reasons already cited--salary cap era, etc., and he got there 50% more times, and counting.

But for those who want to argue against Brady, they'll be able to in a legalistic sense. Both 4 Super Bowls, one of them is undefeated.

If Brady gets to 5, of course....there's no way to say anyone else has as many.

 

[Bruins29]

Sticky Joe *

 

[RobertWeathers]

Montana's career Super Bowl stat line is pretty damn impressive...I don't think anyone will ever be able to replicate his level of execution over so many Super Bowls.

I think it's a byproduct of a few factors:
1) Not having to deal with a Salary Cap
2) Playing against weaker AFC opponents in less competetive Super Bowl games (and therefore, not needing to take as many risks with the ball)
3) Playing in fewer Super Bowls overall, and therefore minimizing his turnovers and likelihood of losing period

Regardless of the cap, weaker AFC opponent and few SBs, Joe Cool's SB performances are for the ages.

To play in THAT big of a game and perform like THAT is obscene.

 

[JMC00]

I've come to learn the only time 4 is greater than 6 is when people try to make the case that Montana is better because he went to 4 SB and Brady went to 6 SB

Apparently to them it's better to not make the playoffs or lose in the playoffs than make it to the SB and lose.

 

[Deus Irae]

The "4-0 in the Super Bowls!" argument is just a subset of the "Big game" argument. My problem with it is that it conveniently ignores the big games that you have to win in order to get there. A great example, IMO, is applying it to Peyton's playoff career. He goes from a choking dog, who was the master of the one-and-done, to a guy who went 2-2 in Super Bowls.

 

[Soul_Survivor88]

Regardless of the cap, weaker AFC opponent and few SBs, Joe Cool's SB performances are for the ages.

To play in THAT big of a game and perform like THAT is obscene.

No doubt

 

[JMC00]

And who was the reason for that?

In multiple cases, the Giants.

Well Bill Belichick's defense.

 

[chasa]

here's the thing.

Montana made it to the playoffs 11 times, he played in 4 superbowls.

Brady has made it 13 times, hes played in 6 superbowls.

Obviously if your not first your last. But at least Brady has put his team in the position to be first more often(46% to 36%)

What would you rather have 10% more chances at winning a superbowl, or less chances at a superbowl but never losing them?

imo it's better to make it to the big game and lose, then to lose early and never even have a chance.

Want an even mroe telling stat?

Montanta went 1 and done just as often as he went to the superbowl(4 times), brady has only done it twice(15%)

so the two important statlines imo

Player 1: 11 trips to the post season 4 superbowl wins, 4 first game eliminations, 3 additional season where they dont make the superbowl

Player 2: 13 trips to the post season, 6 super bowl appearances, 4 superbowl wins, 2 first game eliminations , 5 additional seasons where you win at least one post season game.

 

[sb1]

Obviously I am biased but I think there is one solid argument to be made to balance out the stat comparison in Super Bowls for Montana and Brady.

There was no parity in the NFL and the AFC was the decidedly inferior conference back then and therefore there wasn't a whole lot of competition for Joe Cool in the big game. I think that puts Joe's Super Bowl stat line into a little perspective.

Brady on the other hand played at least 5 really great NFC opponents in the SB. 6 if you count the 2011 Giants as a great team. Forget the noise that they only won their Super Bowls by 3 or 4 points... that's because Brady had to beat one of if not THE best team in the league in the Super Bowl.