Originally posted by FILTHpigskin:Originally posted by Jakemall:Originally posted by FILTHpigskin:Originally posted by Jakemall:Originally posted by FILTHpigskin:Originally posted by TX9R:Originally posted by Jakemall:Originally posted by TX9R:
Lame arguments. SF had the #1 defense in the league for most of 95 and Hearst was a pro bowl back for most of his time in SF. The teams in the 90s had far more talent than Joe's 81-85 teams. Does anyone think that if Steve went to KC and Joe stayed the results would have been any different in 94? They would have been for KC, but not SF.
yeah, cuz KC sucked with players like Marcus Allen at HB..with fresh legs cuz he sat on the bench with the Raiders...and if I remember correctly one of the better defenses in the league. Not saying Young would have done better...but KC didn't suck..they just needed a qb..and they got one with Joe.
Their WRs were garbage. I was in Houston when Joe came to town against Buddy Ryan's defense that beat Joe up the whole game. then Joe Joe'd em and went to the next round. I have serious doubts Steve would have come out ahead in that situation. Joe made everyone he played with better, Steve needed all the help he could get. I'm not hating on Steve, but he was nowhere near Joe in the clutch.
I think more people would agree if they actually watched the playoff games and saw both of them play... that's the only real way to determine who was the best.
Watch every minute of every playoff game both played. Then you may agree that Steve Young choked for the most part while Joe played masterfully for the most part. The proof is in the pudding!
Um...I did see both of them play. Steve Choked? REALLY? I'm not arguing that Steve is as good as Montana except in terms of atheletic ability...where he is better...but seriously?
Seriously. The quarterback leads the team. He led the team to many playoff losses against the Cowboys and Packers among others. It wasn't pretty.
For example: after Steve finally won against the Packers in the playoffs (barely) in 1998, he choked against the Falcons. ONE touchdown, THREE interceptions with a rating of 61.7 in that game.
I think your neglecting to add into the equation that Hearst was hurt that game so the Falcons got to sit back and focus on the passing game and dare them to run with the ball. Stats are a wonderful thing...but they don't account for or tell a whole story.
I know stats don't tell the whole story. I'm going off the complete body of work of both QB's and Steve's disappointing playoff loss after disappointing playoff loss stands out in my mind. Just as it did back then.
Sure, for one year, when he clearly had the best team in the league, Steve led the 49ers to a lopsided Super Bowl win. Other than that, his postseason record is fairly unspectacular to me.
You must be about my age because I agree 100%. When you grew up watching Joe consistently perform and make it look so easy, it was hard watching Steve, especially for me growing up in Texas and watching him play like s**t against Dallas all those years. I'm not 100% convinced that he would have ever beaten Dallas if JJ hasn't stepped down as he could get in Steve's head. Beyond that, post 1995 when Dallas wasn't a factor any more, the team was good enough to gotten at least one more SB with the quality of defense, Rice and Oline, that would have been enough for Joe IMO.