richie021501
On the Roster
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2017
- Messages
- 66
- Reaction score
- 90
I'm sure threads have been made on this before but, hey, I'm new here and have never seen this discussed personally.
Whenever the whole Brady vs Montana thing comes up, Montana supporters always bring up the fact that he was undefeated in Super Bowls. I, for the life of me, have never understood this argument. I think Brady is the GOAT but there is certainly an argument for Montana. If someone wants to bring up the fact that he never threw an int in the super bowl then fine, that's a valid argument. But this whole undefeated in super bowls argument makes no sense. Why is losing a super bowl a knock against you? No player wins the super bowl every year, there should be no shame in finishing in 2nd a couple of years as opposed to 3rd, 4th, or worse, which Montana did 7 times in his career.
People who bring that up are basically saying that it would have been better for Brady to lose in the AFC title game those 2 years he lost to the Giants. That is ludicrous to me and makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Why should we hold it against brady that he lost the super bowl twice but not hold against Montana all the times he lost in the earlier rounds? I'd take a 4-2 record over a 4-10 record any day. Hell, I'd take a 4-100 record, over a 4-0 record any day.
Whenever the whole Brady vs Montana thing comes up, Montana supporters always bring up the fact that he was undefeated in Super Bowls. I, for the life of me, have never understood this argument. I think Brady is the GOAT but there is certainly an argument for Montana. If someone wants to bring up the fact that he never threw an int in the super bowl then fine, that's a valid argument. But this whole undefeated in super bowls argument makes no sense. Why is losing a super bowl a knock against you? No player wins the super bowl every year, there should be no shame in finishing in 2nd a couple of years as opposed to 3rd, 4th, or worse, which Montana did 7 times in his career.
People who bring that up are basically saying that it would have been better for Brady to lose in the AFC title game those 2 years he lost to the Giants. That is ludicrous to me and makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Why should we hold it against brady that he lost the super bowl twice but not hold against Montana all the times he lost in the earlier rounds? I'd take a 4-2 record over a 4-10 record any day. Hell, I'd take a 4-100 record, over a 4-0 record any day.