Joe Montana: Niners should've taken Mac Jones

[Pats1971]

I will give you Luck. But Newton is an asterick because there will be a class of QBs from this generation that will likely have shorter than normal careers like Newton. The QBs that rely on their superior physical attributes over the mental part of the game are likely to peter out in their early to mid 30s, but that is for the most part because their skills will decline faster than pocket passers with age.

But even if he is wrong. He didn't mean it as a swipe to Brady. He wasn't questioning whether Brady is the greatest of all time because he wasn't getting hit as much. He is just saying the rules helps his longevity. Brady was the GOAT before he 40. So if he played in the 1990s, he still would likely be the GOAT.

If it helped Brady's longevirty, why didnt it help anyone else? yeah its a swipe or more so an excuse that is not backed up by anything. I mean if Someone was saying how good Montana was and a player said, well yeah but look at those weapons and he had no cap, you think montana would think that was a swipe? Yep and so would his fans.

 

[rochrist]

It has to be brutal for him with Brady reducing his career to a footnote in NFL history.

This is a stupid remark. There is room for more than one great player in the history of the NFL and Montana played in a different era.

 

[Wozzy]

And yes, the 49ers should have taken Mac Jones... at least if they wanted to play him immediately and win.

BB is smart.

 

[rochrist]

Some Brady fans are upset that Montana said that Brady could play to he is 60 because you cannot touch the QB these days? That isn't even a hot take. It is a fact that QBs are more protected than they were back in the 90s.

All Montana was saying that the rules today to protect QBs mean that QBs are more likely to have longer careers. That is the fact. I didn't take it as sour grapes other than maybe he is jealous that QBs like Brady are protected today while Montana's body was wrecked during an era where the QBs had far fewer protections.

I know these Brady fans took it as Montana taking a swipe at Brady and trying to downplay his accomplishments, but there nothing in his comments that remotely suggest that.

Brady said exactly the same thing.

 

[Pats1971]

And yes, the 49ers should have taken Mac Jones... at least if they wanted to play him immediately and win.

BB is smart.

BB took the last of the QB's that fell to him. lol it was not like he picked Mac out of all the QB's that were cosnidered high picks.

 

[rochrist]

The actual stats don't bear this out at all which I am posting below from Ice on another thread. That is why it was a stupid take and a slight against Brady. The only outlier in terms of longevity+high level performance is Brady from Montana's era until now.


Moon played to 44
Krieg played to 40
Montana played to 38
Elway played to 38
Marino played to 38
Young played to 38
Simms played to 38
Cunningham played to 38
Kelly played to 36
Fouts played to 36

Brees played to 41
Favre played to 41
P. Manning played to 39
Rivers played to 39
Roethlisberger probably done at 39
Warner played to 38
E. Manning played to 38
Palmer played to 38
Romo played to 36
McNabb played to 35

So Brady is wrong when he said the same thing?

 

[Pats1971]

Brady said exactly the same thing.

brady is not going to say anything to reduce Montana. When you are the best, you do not have to run around telling people you are the best. You let others do that. As I said, if I said well yeah Montana won a lot, look at his team and no cap, thats a swipe.

 

[Rob0729]

If it helped Brady's longevirty, why didnt it help anyone else? yeah its a swipe or more so an excuse that is not backed up by anything. I mean if Someone was saying how good Montana was and a player said, well yeah but look at those weapons and he had no cap, you think montana would think that was a swipe? Yep and so would his fans.

Well, first of all, I would argue it probably helped a lot of players. Drew Brees was still playing at a high level at 40. And considering the abuse Roethlisberger took over his career, it would have only been worse in the 1990s and might not have made it to 35.

And second of all, most of the QBs who are benefitting from these rules haven't hit hit their late 30s yet and are still playing. The last rule change was 2009.

But Brady is an outlier. Even if they had the same rules as the 1990s, he would likely last longer than any QB thus far. But it might be that he only lasted a year or two less than he will in this era.

 

[amfootball]

I will give you Luck. But Newton is an asterick because there will be a class of QBs from this generation that will likely have shorter than normal careers like Newton. The QBs that rely on their superior physical attributes over the mental part of the game are likely to peter out in their early to mid 30s, but that is for the most part because their skills will decline faster than pocket passers with age.

I just wrote a post exactly on this point. The notion that players will reach Brady's longevity will be difficult given that the QB position has changed to be more mobile/dual threat.

 

[Pats1971]

Well, first of all, I would argue it probably helped a lot of players. Drew Brees was still playing at a high level at 40. And considering the abuse Roethlisberger took over his career, it would have only been worse in the 1990s and might not have made it to 35.

And second of all, most of the QBs who are benefitting from these rules haven't hit hit their late 30s yet and are still playing. The last rule change was 2009.

But Brady is an outlier. Even if they had the same rules as the 1990s, he would likely last longer than any QB thus far. But it might be that he only lasted a year or two less than he will in this era.

Drew Brees is not playing. lol Ben has been a shell for the past 5 years. I mean is 2 the amount you were able to come up with that played long that was drafted around the time Brady was? Again, there is nothing to compare this to. Nobody has done it, Montana cannot say that the rules are what is keeping Brady playing, because nobody else is. If there were like 10 QB's that are 44 playing at a high level right now then maybe he has a point, but then again, why even say that? Do you think if Brady said, well Montana didnt have to deal with a cap so he got to keep his receivers and players every year, I didnt, that would not be looked at as a swipe?

 

[Sicilian]

Man, people are sensitive when it comes to Brady. I don't think Tom needs your help convincing people he's great.

 

[Wozzy]

BB took the last of the QB's that fell to him. lol it was not like he picked Mac out of all the QB's that were cosnidered high picks.

He stood pat because the majority of teams in front of him weren't taking QB's or had already shown their hand on who they were going to take.

Mike Lombardi said before the season began that if Mac wasn't there at 15 BB would have taken someone else and taken Davis Mills later. Currently Davis Mills is playing really well on a terrible roster so I suspect this team would have their starting QB either way.

BB got lucky taking Brady in the 6th, now he got lucky taking Mac in the 1st... boy this guy sure gets lucky a lot.

 

[Pats1971]

He stood pat because the majority of teams in front of him weren't taking QB's or had already shown their hand on who they were going to take.

Mike Lombardi said before the season began that if Mac wasn't there at 15 BB would have taken someone else and taken Davis Mills later. Currently Davis Mills is playing great on a terrible roster so I suspect this team would have their starting QB either way.

BB got lucky taking Brady in the 6th, now he got lucky taking Mac in the 1st... boy this guy sure gets lucky a lot.

All the top tier QB's were gone. Again Bill took the Qb that was there. I didnt say he was lucky, I am just saying it was not like Mac was considered a 5th rounder and Bill took him in the first. He literally did nothing and Mac was available at that spot. It was not like there were 3 or 4 available that he had to choose from. But yeah if Mac was gone, then he takes Mills maybe, does that mean it would not have been genius anymore becuase he didnt take Mac? I didnt say anything about Luck, although Brady was lucky because frankly he didnt even want to take a QB in 2000, but Bill took the guy that was there. All the QB's were gone, any of them could have easily taken Mac, would that mean Bill was no longer smart anymore because Mac was taken?

 

[Rob0729]

Drew Brees is not playing. lol Ben has been a shell for the past 5 years. I mean is 2 the amount you were able to come up with that played long that was drafted around the time Brady was? Again, there is nothing to compare this to. Nobody has done it, Montana cannot say that the rules are what is keeping Brady playing, because nobody else is. If there were like 10 QB's that are 44 playing at a high level right now then maybe he has a point, but then again, why even say that? Do you think if Brady said, well Montana didnt have to deal with a cap so he got to keep his receivers and players every year, I didnt, that would not be looked at as a swipe?

Again, I said Brady would likely have a far longer career than most QB or players no matter the rules. I am just pointing out that other players benefited from the rules changes and so did Brady.

And Montana just said he could play to 50 because IN PART they protect the QBs. I don't get the controversy. I don't know if Brady would be playing right now if defenders could still go low or high on QBs or horse collar tackle them. With him playing two decades, the odds are decent he would have had one or two more season ending injuries over his career. That isn't really controversial.

 

[Pats1971]

Again, I said Brady would likely have a far longer career than most QB or players no matter the rules. I am just pointing out that other players benefited from the rules changes and so did Brady.

And Montana just said he could play to 50 because IN PART they protect the QBs. I don't get the controversy. I don't know if Brady would be playing right now if defenders could still go low or high on QBs. That isn't really controversial.

If Brady was asked about Montana and how great he was and Brady said. Well they didnt have a cap, hell I would have 20 superbowls if I played then. Would you consider that a swipe? Montana has no freaking idea how long he would have played today. By the way, defenders still do go high and low on QB's. Rules do not stop something from happening. thats why Brady has had 7 surgeries

 

[amfootball]

And Montana just said he could play to 50 because IN PART they protect the QBs. I don't get the controversy. I don't know if Brady would be playing right now if defenders could still go low or high on QBs or horse collar tackle them. With him playing two decades, the odds are decent he would have had one or two more season ending injuries over his career. That isn't really controversial.

That isn't what Montana said though. He did not qualify his comment as you just did, he did not credit Brady's style of play, football IQ, or his physical regime at all. He only talked about the rules and he did that intentionally to minimize Brady if only slightly. That is why people were rightfully irked.

 

[Rob0729]

If Brady was asked about Montana and how great he was and Brady said. Well they didnt have a cap, hell I would have 20 superbowls if I played then. Would you consider that a swipe? Montana has no freaking idea how long he would have played today. By the way, defenders still do go high and low on QB's. Rules do not stop something from happening. thats why Brady has had 7 surgeries

It would depend on his answer. But the question he answered had nothing to with his greatest. It his longevity. Montana never even hinted that Brady was only as great he is because defenders couldn't hit him. Brady's GOAT is already set whether he retired two years ago when he left the Patriots or he plays until he is 60. And I think Montana realizes that too.

 

[Pats1971]

That isn't what Montana said though. He did not qualify his comment as you just did, he did not credit Brady's style of play, football IQ, or his physical regime at all. He only talked about the rules and he did that intentionally to minimize Brady if only slightly. That is why people were rightfully irked.

For sure, I mean why else would he even say that unless it was to diminish the accomplishment. If someone asks most players, hey how about that TD record so and so got, they are not going to say, well yeah but he throws a lot and throws a lot of TD's down inside the 5. I mean who does that? As I said, if someone asked brady about Joe's accomplishments, he is not going to say, yeah well, Joe didnt play in a cap era so it was a bit easier. If he did do that, he would be trashed.

 

[Rob0729]

That isn't what Montana said though. He did not qualify his comment as you just did, he did not credit Brady's style of play, football IQ, or his physical regime at all. He only talked about the rules and he did that intentionally to minimize Brady if only slightly. That is why people were rightfully irked.

But he also didn't say anything about Brady's quality of play. It was all about his longevity.

 

[Pats1971]

It would depend on his answer. But the question he answered had nothing to with his greatest. It his longevity. Montana never even hinted that Brady was only as great he is because defenders couldn't hit him. Brady's GOAT is already set whether he retired two years ago when he left the Patriots or he plays until he is 60. And I think Montana realizes that too.

Again when someone says wow Brady has played better and longer than anyone and Joe's response is, yeah well the rules....why do the rules not affect anyone but Brady and why would you say that? It is for sure diminishing Brady by making an excuse for what he is doing.