ESPN - "Tom Brady is the Best Player in Super Bowl History"

[fair catch fryar]

Montana and Brady, in either order, need to be 1-2.

The zero losses and interceptions thing is pretty big. And in terms of rate stats, Montana was better. But Brady got there two more times (maybe more in the future), and his cumulative totals are better.

Overall, the battle between Brady and Montana for best SB player of all time is very, very close.

It is close, but it's apparent who was better because their resume and experience is greater. IMO, one way you can't dispute it is by looking at the win-loss record and the ability to get there.
PLAYOFF COMPARISON
TB12 Joe
31 games > 23 games
22-9 > 16-7
4 SB rings = 4 SB rings
6 SB appearances > 4 SB appearances
10 AFCC appearances(6-4) > 6 NFCC appearances(4-2)
3 SB MVP = 3 SB MVP
__________________________________
TB12 > Joe

 

[fair catch fryar]

In terms of better overall player 4-2 beats 4-0. However in terms of who is the better Super Bowl player 4-0 beats 4-2.

I'm not sure how losing a Super Bowl makes you a better Super Bowl player.

Are you saying that Joe Montana would be 6-0 if he went to 6 SB's?

 

[1960Pats]

Speaking of the HOF, can someone please explain to me how on earth Warren Moon, Dan Fouts and Joe Namath made it in?

Player / RS Win% / P Win% / Playoff Yrs / Titles
Moon / .614 / .300 / 9 out of 15 / 0 (never won more than 1 playoff game)
Fouts / .506 / .429 / 4 out of 14 / 0
Namath / .496 / .667 / 2 out of 12 / 1

 

[mosey threetupu]

That Cowboys o-line should be on there (I know not one player).