I could maybe see that an argument could be made that Luck's first three years in the league have been better at the QB position than Brady's first three from certain angles -- stats, downfield passing game, ability to score points quickly. Brady was mostly a game manager for the first few years he was in the league, albeit one who was at his best during crunch time. He definitely benefited from a world-class defense, and at least in '04 a very great running game.
BUT the QB that Brady became somewhere around year 4 is just leaps and bounds better than anything we've seen from Luck. His ability to read defenses, check progressions, and call audibles at the LOS is light years beyond where Luck is right now. There have been years where Brady's WRs basically didn't run pre-established routes, they just read defenses and trusted that Brady would put the ball in the gap. You can't do that without someone who doesn't have absolutely phenomenal downfield awareness. I was young for the Montana years but there is nobody I've seen in the league in my lifetime who's better at being aware of what's happening with a defense than Brady, nobody.
Anyone who thinks Luck now is a better QB than Brady is either very very foolish or very very biased, or both.
Football is like politics, everyone has access to the microphone, even the village idiots. Next.
