Tom Brady has won more playoff games than Joe Montana qualified for

[shmessy]

There defense was attrocius until 1981. If you cant see that then im sorry

Montana didn't play defense, if you can't see that I'm sorry.

You are comparing his OFFENSIVE stats and accomplishments to Brady's.

Brady had less to work with on offense (outside of Troy Brown, every guy on that Pats 2001 offense was a JAG, and Brady IMMEDIATELY turned that culture into a winner. Montana, didn't for another year with better talent offensive around him and an OFFENSIVE GENIUS as his coach.

 

[shmessy]

Yep, not to mention in 2006, Brady was within an eye lash of going to and winning the Super Bowl with Reche Caldwell and Jabar Gaffney as his main receivers. (Oh thinking of this loss always my blood boil, as that OPI call, changed the entire game). We would have killed the bears IN SB 41. Back to my point, with the surrounding talent Joe Montana had around him, Mickey Mouse could have been a star QB. Imagine Brady having such a supporting cast around him.

What Brady did to get to the Conference Championships in 2006 (no WR corps) and 2015 (only the Ghost of Stephen Jackson as a running game) and ALMOST WINNING those Championship games is something Joe Montana would never be able to approach.

 

[Ring 6]

Not its not irrelevant because people are trying to make it seem like Brady was the savior in 2001. Yeah maybe Bledsoe was a problem. But the talent levels on the team Brady took over and The team montana took over is significant. the 49ers were 2-14 in 1979. And their roster didnt get a whole lot better after 79 going into 80

Brady WAS the savior in 2001
They had gone 5-13 without him and then went 14-3 with him.

 

[fightingirish595]

It is irrelevant. This was your post:



"That team" is the 2001 Patriots, and I responded by noting that the same was true of the 1980 49ers, with Bill Walsh as the head coach. "That team" is not the 1981 49ers, or the 2002 Patriots.

I'm trying to be polite here, but your posts are becoming moronic, and it's getting more difficult to be nice about it.

The 80 49ers were terrible on defense! They stunk! they werent a good team. the 2001 Patriots were a good team.

Montana didn't play defense, if you can't see that I'm sorry.

You are comparing his OFFENSIVE stats and accomplishments to Brady's.

Brady had less to work with on offense (outside of Troy Brown, every guy on that Pats 2001 offense was a JAG, and Brady IMMEDIATELY turned that culture into a winner. Montana, didn't for another year with better talent offensive around him and an OFFENSIVE GENIUS as his coach.

Pats still had a good defense. Again the regular season numbers arent comparable as you said.

 

[pwes]

It is really weird you are fighting so steadfastly for Montana when you weren't even alive to watch him play. Its not a knock on you or your age but its just strange. You talk like you were actually there and witnessed it.

 

[fightingirish595]

What Brady did to get to the Conference Championships in 2006 (no WR corps) and 2015 (only the Ghost of Stephen Jackson as a running game) and ALMOST WINNING those Championship games is something Joe Montana would never be able to approach.

Thats your opinion.

 

[fightingirish595]

It is really weird you are fighting so steadfastly for Montana when you weren't even alive to watch him play. Its not a knock on you or your age but its just strange. You talk like you were actually there and witnessed it.

I love Montana, Hes a top 2 QB of all time. He was ultra clutch. Great player. I think hes gets treated unfairly here.

 

[Ring 6]

The 80 49ers were terrible on defense! They stunk! they werent a good team. the 2001 Patriots were a good team.


Pats still had a good defense. Again the regular season numbers arent comparable as you said.

What point are you trying to make here?
Brady's winning should be diminished compared to Montana because of the supporting teams?
He has 50% more wins and counting.
There really is not a single statistical or success piece of data that can support Montana being better than Brady.
Just accept it and stop with the silly arguments trying to say Montana led a handicapped career.

 

[Ring 6]

I love Montana, Hes a top 2 QB of all time. He was ultra clutch. Great player. I think hes gets treated unfairly here.

Is that correct, you never saw Montana play?

 

[Deus Irae]

The 80 49ers were terrible on defense! They stunk! they werent a good team. the 2001 Patriots were a good team.

The 2001 Patriots were 0-2 before Brady became the starter, so claiming they were a good team is just you attempting to bootstrap your argument by ignoring the elephant in the room (Brady starts v. Bledsoe starts).

The 1980 49ers, on the other hand, had a 4-5 record with DeBerg, and went just 2-5 with Montana.

 

[fightingirish595]

Is that correct, you never saw Montana play?

Not live but Ive watched old games, college and pro. I love nfl history. The point of that other post is to refute the point that Brady took over a bad Pats team in 01. Just not true. The pats were a much better overall team. You cant really hold Montana accountable for not making the playoffs in 1980

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

The 2001 Patriots were a good team.

Not before TB they weren't. They were 0-2 and ranked 31st among 31 teams in the new "power rankings" on the very day that Brady took over.

The head writer at SI, "Dr. Z", who introduced the concept of power rankings the year before, wrote "I don't think that they have the weapons with which to even win a game."

They were expected by the prominent award-winning sportswriter of the era to be the equivalent of Cleveland, 2016, when Drew went down.

 

[PatriotsPimp136]

If i am a wr i would take peanuts for one year to play with the goat.

 

[fightingirish595]

The 2001 Patriots were 0-2 before Brady became the starter, so claiming they were a good team is just you attempting to bootstrap your argument by ignoring the elephant in the room (Brady starts v. Bledsoe starts).

The 1980 49ers, on the other hand, had a 4-5 record with DeBerg, and went just 2-5 with Montana.

And was that because of Montana or because of one of the worst defenses in football or both? One more than the other maybe?

 

[fightingirish595]

Not before TB they weren't. They were 0-2 and ranked 31st among 31 teams in the new "power rankings" on the very day that Brady took over. The head writer at SI, Dr. Z, who introduced the concept of power rankings the year before, said " I don't think that they have the weapons with which to even win a game."

We obviously know they were better off with brady then bledsoe. But lets not act like We did not have a good defense

 

[pwes]

I love Montana, Hes a top 2 QB of all time. He was ultra clutch. Great player. I think hes gets treated unfairly here.

I dont think he does at all. I highly doubt you can find one person on this site who wouldn't objectively have him in their top 3. Obviously as a Pats website 99% of the fans here wouldn't have him higher than 2 but you could find that many wouldn't even put Brady at #1 (in Leiu of Montana) before he won his 4th Superbowl. He gets a great deal of respect here.

Calling him the second Best QB in NFL history isn't what I would consider unfair treatment.

 

[Deus Irae]

And was that because of Montana or because of one of the worst defenses in football or both? One more than the other maybe?

What the hell are you talking about?

Have you been drinking, or something?

 

[Palm Beach Pats Fan]

We obviously know they were better off with brady then bledsoe. But lets not act like We did not have a good defense

24th of 31 in yards allowed, 6th in points allowed.

Very opportunistic, especially when the team suddenly had a QB who didn't turn the ball over, and that developed killer special teams.

 

[fightingirish595]

I dont think he does at all. I highly doubt you can find one person on this site who wouldn't objectively have him in their top 3. Obviously as a Pats website 99% of the fans here wouldn't have him higher than 2 but you could find that many wouldn't even put Brady at #1 (in Leiu of Montana) before he won his 4th Superbowl. He gets a great deal of respect here.

Calling him the second Best QB in NFL history isn't what I would consider unfair treatment.

I got brady 1 Montana 2. I just think people are unfair in terms of the gap, Like that its not close. Which I disagree with, Im not trying to change anyones mind. I didnt want the thread to turn into this. My very first post was that brady had more longevity, which I thought people would agree with considering its a compliment

 

[fightingirish595]

What the hell are you talking about?

Have you been drinking, or something?

Its a pretty straight forward question. Were the 49ers bad because their defense was attrocious? was it their QB play? Or was it a combination of both