Lot of interesting point there. First off let me clear the air in case i offended you.
I'm not at all offended. No worries.
I think that is kind of like you saying "the only fair way to look at it is the way I am and everything else is BS". That is not a very open minded thing to do on your part IMO. I understand all your points and I think it is a fair way to examine the evidence. To say it is the only way (which is how it is coming off at least to me) is not the best idea in the world.
When you're comparing careers, you're comparing careers. You're not comparing one guy's first 3 years with another guy's 13 years, unless that's the entirety of the careers. What you're trying to do is argue careers by using just one misleading span of Montana's career.
I didn't mean cherry picking in a dishonest way. I was simply trying to illustrate depending how you look at you can change things. I think your way of looking at it is fine. I think the way i illustrated of looking at it is fine too. I did not think it was not fair the way you were kind of alluding to the years which they were starters and gave Montana full credit for a year he really was not the start. Or at least perhaps some back round should have been shown there.
Wait... It's not fair to point out that Montana was a starter in a year that he was a starter for 7 games? Talk about not being fair.
In your next comment you kind of mention a different argument all together. Should we penalize Montana for taking 2 years to become a full time start over Brady's one? Maybe we should.I think that might be fair. If you want to go that way then your argument should change to though to include all years in the league if healthy. Not just years starting. That is perfectly fine.
Both players became starters in year two. Both players missed, basically, a full season due to an injury. What you're essentially trying to do is ignore Montana's lesser second year in order to make his "10 year window" look more impressive than it was. I hate the word "fair", because it calls for a subjective, rather than actually objective, position, but it's certainly not "fair" to ignore that second season if you're going to be arguing number of seasons as a time frame parameter.
In your next comment you kind of making the same point again and double down on it. Again i feel like with your last comment that is kind of like having your cake and eating it too. Should Montana be penalized for 1980 and called not a starter or should he get credit for it? Also I would like you to at least acknowledge Montana did win his 4 faster than Brady so perhaps more dominate in a shorter window. Also yes, Brady has 6 SB appearances. That is a wonderful accomplishment. He is clearly ahead of every QB there and is a good argument to way he is the best.
There's no cake/eat situation here, at all. There's just me not buying into your choice of ignoring 1980. And, again, the "shorter window" argument is a weak one that's clearly cherry picked. Brady (and Aikman) won 3 titles in 4 years, and Bradshaw won 4 titles in 6 years. Those "shorter windows" are more impressive than the 10 year Montana window, since you're clearly using a fraction argument (4/10 > 4/13).
Montana had some bad playoff games no question. He should be criticized for those performances. Does not change the fact while he was winning he won at a quicker pace than Brady. Like you said he was held to 3 points 2 times though.
But Montana wasn't winning at a quicker pace than Brady, unless you cherry pick the window.
Montana: 4 in 10
Brady: 3 in 4
What Brady did has never been bested by any other QB, before or since, although Aikman matched it. What Montana did was bested by Bradshaw.
Okay this comment is not going to be as cordial. It seems to me you are calling my points dishonest in some way. Like the way I am showing points is entirely unfair. You call the window i used "cherry picking". I think that is not at all accurate.
Well, cherry picking, by definition, is taking a small slice out of the larger pie in order to get a preferred result. It's not necessarily dishonest, but it is often misleading. And it is certainly accurate to say that you are cherry picking when you bring up that window, as I demonstrated by using the smaller (4 year) cherry picked window.
