Montana vs Brady

[patsfan13]

One could argue having an unblemished Super Bowl record puts Montana ahead. His postseason stats are also better than Brady's by a fair margin. Just playing devil's advocate here.

Is winning the conference championship and losing a SB worse than losing a conference championship and not even making it to the SB?

I think not.

I would also point out that Brady has a higher winning % in the playoffs.

Montana has a .696 winning % Brady a .737, so advantage Brady clearly a lot depends on how the rest of Brady's career unfolds.

 

[chris_in_sunnyvale]

It's close. Real close. Both won back-to-back SBs. Both came very close to achieving something nobody else did (49ers with the 3-peat in '90*, Pats with 19-0 in '07). Both have had very close calls to making an additional SB (49ers in '83, Pats in '06...both with very questionable reffing). Both have also shown they are not superhuman with their successive one-and-dones in the postseason (49ers in '85 to '87, Pats the last two years). While Montana has the edge in titles, he also has the edge in getting benched in a playoff game ('87) when his team was the heavy favorite to win it all.

I know all of the above can be said about their teams as well as the themselves, but let's face it: Both played *the* key role in their teams' success.

Regards,
Chris

* Yes, I know the 49ers would have still needed to play the Bills, but I believe they would have beaten them.

 

[RodThePat]

Wow, really appreciate the work, nice, but how do you account for the kill the QB of Stars Era, to effect his %'s and Bradys comfortable pocket Era of today?
I think you make a great point, but back them Star and other OL,players,etc.. played with MCL sprains, etc.. they had no idea, they were completely free to waste Star,, um and did. Just a thought, because if I was a hurt QB, Id run more. Its why I don't think Eras, mesh

Yeah, but every single QB in Starr's era played under those same conditions, and the numbers I posted show the correlation between his performance and the league average. His stats aren't as above average in that 'kill the QB" era, as Brady's are in today's "nice pocket" era. Those stats on my previous post adjust exactly for the impact the rules and general player conditioning/behavior have on a QB's performance. Even balancing that out, Brady comes out on top statistically.

But I'll agree it was a completely different game.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

In the Modern Era, as defined by the HOF, Otto Graham won seven NFL championships (and took his teams to ten) and Starr won five. To my mind, there can be no discussion of GOAT that doesn't include both of them.

Joe won four, but he also never lost when he took his team to the big game, which is remarkable (Graham lost three, Starr one). Based on his overall performance and the role of the QB in the offense at the time, I give Montana the edge over Graham and Starr.

Until Brady wins his fourth, Joe is GOAT. We can complain about the Velcro helmet catch all we want, but that's football, just like getting the Tuck call was football. We can't dis the one and take the other. Winning four titles is a remarkable accomplishment and it's so remarkable that it's been done by only four QB's.

If Brady wins a fourth, then he joins Graham and Montana and Starr in the discussion. I'm biased, but I'd give TB the edge in that discussion because he has played in the Cap and FA era.

Bradshaw isn't in the same kind of discussion because those Steelers' teams weren't built around him and while important to their success, he wasn't the guts of those teams, IMO at least.

 

[robbomango]

True but I think its impossible to stick players in different era's. How long do you think Brady would have lasted in Bart Stars Era, before he was carted out on a stretcher ? lol

I think Star deserves his spot. Brady would not have survived in Stars Era either. Took a way tougher person to play in those days.

I wouldn't question Brady's toughness, just because he doesn't advertise injuries like favre.

people dog on him because he's always asking for a flag or say he's whining. That has nothing to do w toughness or being hurt, that has to do with intelligence. drawing a Flag=advantage on any given series.

I think QB's were built like tight ends back then, lol. If thats your point i get it

 

[andrewgarrr]

Bradshaw isn't in the same kind of discussion because those Steelers' teams weren't built around him.

You'd be lying to yourself if you thought the Patriots in 2001 were build around Brady. This is a bad argument, even for Montana's case.

Bradshaw isn't in the discussion because he wasn't a QB that could consistently win a game with the team on his back. Brady, Montana, and Starr have all shown they can do this when it counts. Especially Montana.

 

[patsfan13]

Starr won five NFL championships and, to my mind, there can be no discussion of GOAT that doesn't include him.

Joe won four, but he also never lost when he took his team to the big game, which is remarkable. Based on his overall performance and excellence, I give him the edge over Starr and Tommy. We can complain about the Velcro helmet catch all we want, but that's football, just like getting the Tuck call was football. We can't dis the one and take the other. Winning four titles is a remarkable accomplishment

Until Brady wins his fourth, Joe is GOAT. If Brady wins a fourth, then he joins Joe and Starr in the discussion. I'm biased, but I'd give TB the edge in that discussion because he has played in the Cap and FA era.

Bradshaw isn't in the same kind of discussion because those Steelers' teams weren't built around him.

To be fair the Packer teams weren't built around Starr either they were built around Paul Hornung and Jim Taylor and a great (for their era) offensive line. Starr saw the same 4-3 front every week with a limited number of blitz's teams tried to stop the Packer run and weren't focused on the pass really.

 

[tests]

Montana is the greatest QB of all time. He is actually better than both Brady and Manning statistically if you adjust for the period he played in. His career rating was 21% better than league average, compared to Brady's 19% and Manning's 18%. He also had a better INT%. Basically, Joe Montana is the best game manager the game will ever see. That term shouldn't be used in derogatory fashion. Joe was deadly efficient and didn't allow teams back into games by making very few mistakes. Oh, his superb play in the clutch helps too.

Even if Brady wins a fourth ring, Montana will absolutely be in the discussion for best QB ever.

why is manning brought into this? We aren't even talking about manning..

 

[RodThePat]

why is manning brought into this? We aren't even talking about manning..

Because people often use him as a statistical benchmark, so I thought it would add to the discussion to show that Montana was even more efficient than, not only Brady, but also the guy the general populace seems to consider some kind of statistical juggernaut, bound to break every record known to man. But I'm glad you decided to overlook my general point and focus on that tiny little detail, while completely missing why I included it in the first place.

 

[pherein]

I wouldn't question Brady's toughness, just because he doesn't advertise injuries like favre.

people dog on him because he's always asking for a flag or say he's whining. That has nothing to do w toughness or being hurt, that has to do with intelligence. drawing a Flag=advantage on any given series.

I think QB's were built like tight ends back then, lol. If thats your point i get it

Yeah, I think Brady's tough. Farve just sets me off, the performance he put on for sympathy in our game was Hamlet.in 2009. I realize Brady is trying to get the edge and yardage, and thats a smart move.
What I'm saying is in Stars Era they didn't give a damn, get your butt up after the DL sack fractured your throwing arm, and hike the ball before you get a play clock penalty. No one cared.

LOL, your right I think roethlisberger might only survive that Era

 

[tests]

Because people often use him as a statistical benchmark, so I thought it would add to the discussion to show that Montana was even more efficient than, not only Brady, but also the guy the general populace seems to consider some kind of statistical juggernaut, bound to break every record known to man. But I'm glad you decided to overlook my general point and focus on that tiny little detail, while completely missing why I included it in the first place.

fair points. No need to get on my case.

 

[tests]

I would like to add, according to some football fans, football was much more "difficult" or "tougher" of a sport in the 60s... 70s... 80s.. 90s... compared to the 2010's. Does football (or any sport for that matter) not evolve?? I highly doubt it is regressing.. The same argument at times is used for basketball.

Just want your guys opinions on this

 

[tests]

Yeah, I think Brady's tough. Farve just sets me off, the performance he put on for sympathy in our game was Hamlet.in 2009. I realize Brady is trying to get the edge and yardage, and thats a smart move.
What I'm saying is in Stars Era they didn't give a damn, get your butt up after the DL sack fractured your throwing arm, and hike the ball before you get a play clock penalty. No one cared.

LOL, your right I think roethlisberger might only survive that Era

I doubt that. I mean come on now, we are acting as if the GREATS of this era (or the 90s) would not adapt to star's era.. i am pretty sure these guys (Who are athletic freaks now by the way) could adapt to the 60 or 70s...

 

[robbomango]

I would like to add, according to some football fans, football was much more "difficult" or "tougher" of a sport in the 60s... 70s... 80s.. 90s... compared to the 2010's. Does football (or any sport for that matter) not evolve?? I highly doubt it is regressing.. The same argument at times is used for basketball.

Just want your guys opinions on this

people will always tout how there generation was tougher more rugged and smarter, they fought grizzly bears without pads to practice for the upcoming team etc.. and how each new successive generation is weak and ******ed.

This goes for sports and any other area, I'm not buying it. Players these days are roided up and hit like freight trains.

I think it's tougher, players still make those knee breaking hits regardless of the new rules.

 

[pherein]

I doubt that. I mean come on now, we are acting as if the GREATS of this era (or the 90s) would not adapt to star's era.. i am pretty sure these guys (Who are athletic freaks now by the way) could adapt to the 60 or 70s...

No rules? No Protection?, No sympathy? you so sure?
I really do not think so, back then it was endurance, dealing with pain, because you were going to play wether you were able or not. Today its 3 weeks off so the your not permanently hurt.
Brady would not be as successful as Star, in his Era, I don't think, and Im a huge Brees homer, but he would be killed.

 

[Fixit]

True but I think its impossible to stick players in different era's. How long do you think Brady would have lasted in Bart Stars Era, before he was carted out on a stretcher ? lol

I think Star deserves his spot. Brady would not have survived in Stars Era either. Took a way tougher person to play in those days.

He only played for six weeks with a sports hernia, played for I can't remember how long with an elbow swollen up like a cantaloupe, played for about two years with a separated shoulder, and played all of 2009 with three broken ribs.

The big pansy.

 

[Froob]

He only played for six weeks with a sports hernia, played for I can't remember how long with an elbow swollen up like a cantaloupe, played for about two years with a separated shoulder, and played all of 2009 with three broken ribs.

The big pansy.

And he's played for like 6 years with a sore right shoulder.

 

[RodThePat]

No rules? No Protection?, No sympathy? you so sure?
I really do not think so, back then it was endurance, dealing with pain, because you were going to play wether you were able or not. Today its 3 weeks off so the your not permanently hurt.
Brady would not be as successful as Star, in his Era, I don't think, and Im a huge Brees homer, but he would be killed.

Bart Starr was 6'1, 197. He could handle the punishment, I don't see how Brady and Brees would just wilt under the pressure as you're saying.

 

[robbomango]

He only played for six weeks with a sports hernia, played for I can't remember how long with an elbow swollen up like a cantaloupe, played for about two years with a separated shoulder, and played all of 2009 with three broken ribs.

The big pansy.

Brady just needs Brett Favres PR department instead of justin beibers!!

 

[goheels22002]

Montana is the greatest QB of all time. He is actually better than both Brady and Manning statistically if you adjust for the period he played in. His career rating was 21% better than league average, compared to Brady's 19% and Manning's 18%. He also had a better INT%. Basically, Joe Montana is the best game manager the game will ever see. That term shouldn't be used in derogatory fashion. Joe was deadly efficient and didn't allow teams back into games by making very few mistakes. Oh, his superb play in the clutch helps too.

Even if Brady wins a fourth ring, Montana will absolutely be in the discussion for best QB ever.

Somewhat premature to anoint Montana best ever. Brady's got a few more years to add to his legacy.

The 21% vs 19% better career rating than the average is a debatable stat given the rules changes favoring the passing game and protecting the QB between Montana's time and now. QB ratings overall are up tremendously - especially yardage, completion percentage and passing TDs. I'm not discarding it, but it doesn't seem entirely valid.

Brady's every bit the clutch performer Montana was. The big losses in the Brady era we all remember had more to do with the offensive line and backs handling pressure than Brady making poor decisions or throws.

We must remember that Brady drove the offense 80 yards down the field on a 5-plus minute drive to take the lead against the Giants 14-10 with 2:42 left. The defense couldn't stop Eli Manning and the Giants on the most bizarre series of plays we've ever seen. Brady was left with 29 seconds after the Giants' TD by Burress. He was clutch that day.