Montana vs Brady

[jcdavey]

montana is never going to be beaten by brady simply because he never lost a sb and never even threw an int in a sb

and peyton will never top brady

 

[LuthierJr]

montana is never going to be beaten by brady simply because he never lost a sb and never even threw an int in a sb

and peyton will never top brady

I get that logic, but if you look at it this way....

If TFB wins another SB he has the same amount of rings as Montana, and more conference championships. Yeah he lost a superbowl, but it's still one more superbowl (in the scenario where he wins another) than Joe ever even made it to.

 

[pherein]

Weren't they using Stickum and all kinds of adhesives up until 1981

And for all the tough guy QBs of the old days, they played 12 games up until 1969 and 14 until 1977 2-4 games is a lot more, regardless of QB protection rules.

Could Bart Star take hit after hit for 16 weeks from some of these "Roid Heads"

they should rename the era before 1977 "the pansy era" jk

Back then they didn't play the game for money, could Brady last 8 games without rules, hitting him every down? play with a mcl? This is the problem with putting guys in different Eras. Brady would not have been as effective in Stars Era, and Star would not in his. If people think that was an easy Era, than why is everyone so mad at how we beat the hell out of Warner and Farve, in the playoffs? Like it was dirty ?
We were kittens compared to that Era.
So its ok if we do the same to Brady, right? I mean, killing the QB is the point, right, and he can take it.
I mean back then Star took many hits, no one cried, or got a foul from.

 

[robbomango]

Back then they didn't play the game for money, could Brady last 8 games without rules, hitting him every down? play with a mcl? This is the problem with putting guys in different Eras. Brady would not have been as effective in Stars Era, and Star would not in his. If people think that was an easy Era, than why is everyone so mad at how we beat the hell out of Warner and Farve, in the playoffs? Like it was dirty ?
We were kittens compared to that Era.
So its ok if we do the same to Brady, right? I mean, killing the QB is the point, right, and he can take it.
I mean back then Star took many hits, no one cried, or got a foul from.

if Bart could get a flag back then i'm sure he'd of cried for one, why not? I think most of the starting QBs today could play 8 games without rules easy, that's just my opinion. I assume most QBs today are playing injured all the time because they don't want to lose a spot to the back-up.

Bledsoe didn't want to come out w internal bleeding and brady didn't want to come out with broken ribs and a messed up leg, hell most of these guys will play with crutches.

I was just clowning a bit with that last post about "the pansy era"lol, but i'm confident a study would show there's as much toughness now as there was back then.

 

[pherein]

if Bart could get a flag back then i'm sure he'd of cried for one, why not? I think most of the starting QBs today could play 8 games without rules easy, that's just my opinion. I assume most QBs today are playing injured all the time because they don't want to lose a spot to the back-up.

Bledsoe didn't want to come out w internal bleeding and brady didn't want to come out with broken ribs and a messed up leg, hell most of these guys will play with crutches.

I was just clowning a bit with that last post about "the pansy era"lol, but i'm confident a study would show there's as much toughness now as there was back then.

Yeah, I just don't believe you could plug Brady in Bart Stars offense in that Era, and he would do better, just opinion, and I see no reason to put down Stars accomplishments

 

[robbomango]

Yeah, I just don't believe you could plug Brady in Bart Stars offense in that Era, and he would do better, just opinion.

Oh i wasn't arguing that point, lol. Your probably right on that one.

 

[pherein]

Oh i wasn't arguing that point, lol. Your probably right on that one.

Cool, but your also right, Brady is amazing and when he wins his 4th SB, knock on wood, He will be called the best ever. I really hope, he takes it to a new level and creams star. Brady's the kind of guy we want to have that all time trophy, he's a good guy, person, and represents what we like to see in our QB's, character. So I hope he does it.
I love Brees ,he's a good guy, but realistically there is no chance, he can do it. Brady has a shot.
No one has that, if Brady steps up, and I think he is,and his team mates help him Brady could be the best that ever played.

 

[tests]

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.

pherein, which part of "Adapt" did you not get (no offense mate)? How do you or i know if a brady/brees/rodgers/manning/ (place another qb) would not adapt to that "tough" era?

 

[tests]

The s*** people come up with to try to denigrate Brady blows my mind. The fact is he's as tough, competitive, and ruthless as any QB who's ever played, but people want to think he's a sissy because he had an admittedly awful haircut.

I mean...really awful.

i doubt it has anything to do with the haircut TBH. Probably because..

A) he is well spoken and comes off as a really nice guy. I.E., he's not the one to give aggressive speeches or talk trash.

B)He is a pretty boy

C) He supposedly has an "infinite" amount of time behind that OL.
:bricks:

 

[tests]

You can't put people in different Era's is what I had always been saying. But, that is what ppl want to do. After Brady wins 4 rings, believe me it will no longer be the Montana discussion, it will be Bart Star. And Im pretty confident Brady will get 4, which is nuts.

I am not sure about that man. I mean... i would have thought brady would have 4 by now. Anythings possible (unfortunately, brady could have a career ending injury). I just want one SB more from brady. Thats all

 

[Hael]

Montana was the best player i've ever seen play. It's not a question of stats or superbowls, or winning percentage. You just see the difference on tape.

Montana had a tendency, during unimportant games, to sleepwalk a little bit for a few quarters. Then the 3rd and 4th quarter would arise, he'd proceed to wake up, and literally shred the D. In his prime, it was just silly how easy he made it look. Every decision was the correct one, every throw was perfect and even when the situation looked impossible he'd find a way. Pretty much best described as magic.

In many ways Brady is more consistent than Joe, but overall I don't think its really close either. Joe was just a bit better.

 

[Bostonian1962]

I usually go less with stats, and more of what I saw/experienced on my own. Montana was just amazing. I could never see the Colts playoff loss, the Giants SB loss, or the last couple of "one and dones" by Brady and Co. happen with a Joe Montana lead team.

That guy just had "it", and was definitely Joe Cool out there.

And if you think about it, many previously held the position that Manning was the best playing at that time, and now many say Rodgers is the best QB right now, so even while he's playing, there's been the argument that Brady was not the best.

When Montana played, he was the best, period.

This is coming from the biggest Patriots fan on the planet, but Joe Montana was the best ever.

 

[PittPatriot]

BB has coached many big games vs. Montana. He has also coached Brady. I wonder what his take would be on this debate?

 

[PatsFanSince74]

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.

That's a fair point. Thanks. Bradshaw for some reason gets consistently "underappreciated" and I was guilty of that, I think.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

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.

Pls see my response just above to Andrewgarrr. You're both right. I am guilty of "underappreciating" Terry Bradshaw, no doubt.

 

[PatsFanSince74]

I get that logic, but if you look at it this way....

If TFB wins another SB he has the same amount of rings as Montana, and more conference championships. Yeah he lost a superbowl, but it's still one more superbowl (in the scenario where he wins another) than Joe ever even made it to.

I think that the GOAT isn't anointed based on an analysis of the nuances of individual or team stats. The stats get you into the discussion. The decision is based more on the intangibles that several posters have already pointed out.

Four NFL Championships is the entry price to be considered. For now, Montana, Bradshaw, Starr and Graham have paid that price. People's "gut" is that Joe was the best of that lot, but I do wonder if that isn't because people like him and watched him play.

If TB gets number four, he'll be in that discussion as well. For now, even though he is by far the greatest of his era, he isn't.

 

[RodThePat]

I usually go less with stats, and more of what I saw/experienced on my own. Montana was just amazing. I could never see the Colts playoff loss, the Giants SB loss, or the last couple of "one and dones" by Brady and Co. happen with a Joe Montana lead team.

That guy just had "it", and was definitely Joe Cool out there.

And if you think about it, many previously held the position that Manning was the best playing at that time, and now many say Rodgers is the best QB right now, so even while he's playing, there's been the argument that Brady was not the best.

When Montana played, he was the best, period.

This is coming from the biggest Patriots fan on the planet, but Joe Montana was the best ever.

Okay, I'll bite. There was never any question that Montana was the best QB of his era? Really? If I recall correctly, there were doubts if he was the best QB on his own team for a while, and certainly people made arguments for Dan Marino or John Elway as best QB of that period.

And you could never see Joe Montana having games like the one Brady had against the Colts or being one and done in the postseason? Well, how about in 1993 when he had the following performance against Buffalo in the AFCCG: 9/23 for 125 yards, 0 TD, 1 INT for a 39.2 rating. Yeah, he was older then, but those Chiefs teams weren't any worse than what Brady had in 2006.

But what about one and dones in the postseason? Well, Montana's 49ers lost to Minnesota in 1987 on their first playoff game. A game in which Joe compiled the following stats: 12/26 for 109 yards, 0 TD, 1 INT for a 42.0 rating.

Yeah, but you'll argue he was never one and done in the postseason twice in a row. And you'd be wrong again. Just one year earlier, in 1986, Montana had an even worse game against the Giants, in the 49ers first playoff game, getting BLASTED 49-3, whilst going 8/15 for 98 yards, 0 TD, 2 INT and a 34.2 rating.

As you can see, Joe Montana had his fair share of postseason debacles. One could even argue that when he lost in the playoffs, he played worse than Brady did on his losses, and was more of a factor in the 49ers premature exit than Brady was on the Patriots'. Hell, he was one and done in the postseason THREE straight times, from 1985 to 1987, so there must certainly have been real doubts in that time frame about whether he had lost his playoff mojo.

I love Joe Montana, and as I have said earlier, also believe he is the greatest QB of all time. He isn't some sort of infallible, clutch machine who never put up stinkers when it mattered, though.

 

[randomk1]

Joe Montana= top 3 ranked defenses(either points or yards allowed) every year he did win the SB,walsh west coast offense and a ****load of talent to play with...one of them being jerry rice obviously.

He was clutch and deserves his place in history but i don't consider the gap that big between him and Brady. One drive goes different and Brady is the best.

 

[Snake Eyes]

BB has coached many big games vs. Montana. He has also coached Brady. I wonder what his take would be on this debate?

Do you think you'd get an honest answer from him? For what it's worth, he said Bert Jones was the best passer he's ever seen.

 

[RDS11]

Do you think you'd get an honest answer from him? For what it's worth, he said Bert Jones was the best passer he's ever seen.

Greg Cook and Bert Jones might have been among the best ever, but because of injuries we'll never know.

Before Montana, Walsh coached Cook in Cincinnati under Paul Brown. Walsh said that Cook might have been the best ever if he had not injured his shoulder....for which Walsh took great responsability since he was the one calling the play that lead the Cook's injury.