There are 145 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Would Brady pass Montana in your mind???

Originally posted by OKC49erFan:
Originally posted by bigmur49:
Man, I figured I would get flamed then locked for starting this thread and it has actually caused a little debate.

Personally, Montana will always be #1 to me but I think it is almost out of mythical legend more than actual skill vs Brady or anyone else. Joe has 4 RIngs, no turnover and along with Walsh set this franchise on a path that is pretty much unparralleled in the NFL.

He wasn't the only great player we had though, and the Niners did suffer some pretty big losses during his time as well.

Regardless of a couple of FG wins, I would say the teams Brady took to and won Superbowls were not nearly as talented as the Niners of the 80's. Also, although Montana went up against some legendary teams and players, the NFL in general is faster, rogher, and more skilled than in Montana's era.

Lastly, again I am not trying to compare Brady today, I am trying to hypothetically compare Brady in 2015 with 5 Rings, with the last couple coming with us. I might still answer Montana out of loyalty, and Brady might never truly feel like a Niner if he only played here 3 or 4 seasons, but I think the majority of non-Niner homers would give it to Brady.

And of course, to bring this back to reality, Brady isn't coming here, he will play hi entire career in New England, and hopefully never get the 4th Ring because Alex Smith will win every Superbowl until he retires. Or Nate Davis.. err Troy Smith, or Mike Vick, or Jake Locker

I would disagree the NFL is rougher today. I think it was MUCH rougher in the past. Today, you can't REALLY hit the QB. You can't REALLY smack the hell out of a receiver if he isn't looking (Ronnie Lott would be fined every game in this league). As far as speed... Darrell Green, Rod Woodson were pretty damn fast, also Dieon Sanders (young). The NFL always had speed. But, back then... it had grit. Players today (generally) just don't have enough of that in my opinion.

I wouldn't be so sure about skill being higher today either. Rules make it easier for QBs, WRs to play. That doesn't really raise the bar requiring higher skill level. Players get paid more also, as we've seen players disappear after a payday.

Teams today are in no way comparable to the dynastic teams of the 70s, 80s, and 90s. They were stacked top to bottom. It was a problem because the lower teams couldn't compete. That is the reason for free agency, salary cap, and rules changes (also for high offensive football).
You make good points:

The players are bigger now but that is only relative. Speed is also relative but I do not think the game is faster now overall.

The biggest change in the game is one that favors Montana as a more effective QB. Back in his day, there was FAR more contact allowed by defenders against receivers coming off the LOS as well as before and after the ball was in the air. Also, once the receiver caught the ball, the contact that was allowed back in the '80s was much greater. The result was that receivers had to have their head on a swivel AND be strong and tough, just to play the game. Today's receivers may as well be playing flag football in comparison. Today if a defender even farts within five yards of a receiver, the receiver starts calling for a flag before the stink even reaches him. The first time Ochostinko came across the middle against Ronnie Lott, the next thing he would remember would be looking for his gold teeth in the grass.

The game HAS changed but Montana's intangibles were the best of any quarterback...EVER.
Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by BobS:
Originally posted by oldman9er:
Not a chance... Tom Brady was developed with remarkable advantages from Belichick's foul, cheating ways. How hard is it for a QB to have success when he knows what a defense is gonna do? He gets no love from me, as he didn't have to endure the same development as quarterbacks do.

Stop it. Belichick just got caught. Like the Reggie Bush deal at USC, everyone does it.

Those two things share no similarities. None.

"everyone does it" is something kids say when arguing with their parents. I am quite sure "everyone" does not cheat, nor needs to to succeed.
Originally posted by djfullshred:
Originally posted by Gavintech:
Originally posted by BobS:
Originally posted by oldman9er:
Not a chance... Tom Brady was developed with remarkable advantages from Belichick's foul, cheating ways. How hard is it for a QB to have success when he knows what a defense is gonna do? He gets no love from me, as he didn't have to endure the same development as quarterbacks do.

Stop it. Belichick just got caught. Like the Reggie Bush deal at USC, everyone does it.

Those two things share no similarities. None.

"everyone does it" is something kids say when arguing with their parents. I am quite sure "everyone" does not cheat, nor needs to to succeed.

How did Reggie Bush cheat?
Montana 4-0 in Super Bowls. Brady will never top that.
Montana > Brady

Walsh >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Belichick
No, Brady lost a Super Bowl. I don't care how many rings the man wins -- Joe never lost one so the conversation is over -- pure and simple.

I'd rather see Alex light it up and succeed beyond our wildest dreams and expectations than see Brady in a Niners uniform. That's because this team would be primed and ready for an eight-to-ten year run as a playoff powerhouse.

With Brady? You might get another year or three of great play. But his best days are probably behind him.
will kobe ever be better than MJ? no hes lost 2 nba finals, same rule applies to brady, i remember jumping up and down when the giants won screaming U AINT NO MONTANA BRADY....and he can never be based on record in the big game
Originally posted by OKC49erFan:
Originally posted by Afrikan:
Originally posted by WINiner:
Originally posted by Afrikan:
bunch of Blind homers here, I swear.

imo, yes Montana is the greatest for what Joe has done as a player.....but to downplay what Brady has done in his career like some are doing in this thread, is just nonsense.

In comparison to Montana it isn't. Adam Vinateri won more SB's than Tom Brady did. Bill Walsh didn't cheat for his QB like Belicheat did. Tom Brady is good, real good, but he's no Montana and that fate is already sealed by history.

OMG THIS IS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT! when I say Blind Homers.... Adam Vinateri won more SB's than Tom Brady?

Vinateri DID NOT KICK A 80 yard field goal in the playoffs and the SuperBowls.... Tom Brady drove his team down the field in crunch time when it counted most.

what ever I'm wasting in this thread....there are Football fans and then there are just blind 9er fans who don't understand football.

You're missing the point.

The question is, would Brady pass Montana in our minds. We have to compare the two based on their play, but also in the type of football in which they played. The game is very different from what it was in Montana's era.

Vinateri did not kick an 80 field goal... but, without Vinateri's kick... would Brady win those Super Bowls? I doubt it.

Montana won Super Bowls; Brady did just enough for his team to squeak out the win (also had controversial help getting there). A subtle distinction... but it makes the world of difference.

The answer for most of us is... No. I suppose your answer is yes?
If it is... ok. Now go take a nap, you're entirely too sensitive.


noooooooo, I think you fellas are missing the point.

read my first post again.... I said, yes Montana is better because of his play in SuperBowls and playoffs....basically his consistent play on the field.

the thing I was taking exception to was 9er fans in here discrediting Brady's credentials because of Vinatieri...or more realistically the situation the Patriots were in toward the end of the game...

against the Bengals, Montana HAD to score a TD....and he did....Brady didn't have to score a TD....he got them in field goal range.....just because Brady didn't score a TD and had to rely on Vinatieri's foot, should not bring out "opinions" that Vinatieri won more SuperBowls than Brady. It doesn't make sense...and it seems that "opinion" was just brought out to discredit Brady in comparison to Montana.

they won SuperBowls together.
Originally posted by billbird2111:
No, Brady lost a Super Bowl. I don't care how many rings the man wins -- Joe never lost one so the conversation is over -- pure and simple.

I'd rather see Alex light it up and succeed beyond our wildest dreams and expectations than see Brady in a Niners uniform. That's because this team would be primed and ready for an eight-to-ten year run as a playoff powerhouse.

With Brady? You might get another year or three of great play. But his best days are probably behind him.

this
Brady is not better than Montana. Id take Manning closer to Montana than Brady If Peyton wins 1 or 2 more than he has a better shot of dethroning Montana cause all of his stats are f**king insane But JOE will ALWAYS BE KING.
Originally posted by Afrikan:
Originally posted by OKC49erFan:
Originally posted by Afrikan:
Originally posted by WINiner:
Originally posted by Afrikan:
bunch of Blind homers here, I swear.

imo, yes Montana is the greatest for what Joe has done as a player.....but to downplay what Brady has done in his career like some are doing in this thread, is just nonsense.

In comparison to Montana it isn't. Adam Vinateri won more SB's than Tom Brady did. Bill Walsh didn't cheat for his QB like Belicheat did. Tom Brady is good, real good, but he's no Montana and that fate is already sealed by history.

OMG THIS IS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT! when I say Blind Homers.... Adam Vinateri won more SB's than Tom Brady?

Vinateri DID NOT KICK A 80 yard field goal in the playoffs and the SuperBowls.... Tom Brady drove his team down the field in crunch time when it counted most.

what ever I'm wasting in this thread....there are Football fans and then there are just blind 9er fans who don't understand football.

You're missing the point.

The question is, would Brady pass Montana in our minds. We have to compare the two based on their play, but also in the type of football in which they played. The game is very different from what it was in Montana's era.

Vinateri did not kick an 80 field goal... but, without Vinateri's kick... would Brady win those Super Bowls? I doubt it.

Montana won Super Bowls; Brady did just enough for his team to squeak out the win (also had controversial help getting there). A subtle distinction... but it makes the world of difference.

The answer for most of us is... No. I suppose your answer is yes?
If it is... ok. Now go take a nap, you're entirely too sensitive.


noooooooo, I think you fellas are missing the point.

read my first post again.... I said, yes Montana is better because of his play in SuperBowls and playoffs....basically his consistent play on the field.

the thing I was taking exception to was 9er fans in here discrediting Brady's credentials because of Vinatieri...or more realistically the situation the Patriots were in toward the end of the game...

against the Bengals, Montana HAD to score a TD....and he did....Brady didn't have to score a TD....he got them in field goal range.....just because Brady didn't score a TD and had to rely on Vinatieri's foot, should not bring out "opinions" that Vinatieri won more SuperBowls than Brady. It doesn't make sense...and it seems that "opinion" was just brought out to discredit Brady in comparison to Montana.

they won SuperBowls together.
Brady HAD to score against the supposed lowly Giants and he Threw a PICK and lost the game unlike joe when he had to score in every super bowl. Joe>Brady plain and simple. Brady is great dont get me wrong just no cool joe.
Originally posted by znk916:
hes already better

Turn in your jersey, burn your hat.... you sir are no fan of this team!









4 reasons.... 0 loss....

- 98
I was looking at the NFL Network ticker earlier today and they were showing that the Patriots are already dealing to give him a new contract so.....


Mods, please lock this biatch up!




Brady pass Montana. What was this guy thinking?.?.?.