Joe Montana vs. Tom Brady

True, but you can't take away the fact that he lead the team through out the season, playoffs and then put them in position to kick the winning feild goal.

That's why I said that Brady is the only one worth mentioning when debating vs. Joe. that's why he needs to win two more SB's to surpass Joe.

Joe don't lose SB.

Not bashing or down playing Joe's credits. Just wondering how you would feel if Brady wins 2 more SB's.

Originally posted by Crazy9ers:
Not bashing or down playing Joe's credits. Just wondering how you would feel if Brady wins 2 more SB's.

Had he went on to win the SB in that 18-0 season I would have put him ahead of Joe ... as it is, he and his team choked. He's still second to Joe. I've seen Joe get beat up all game long, had looked like we would lose the game for sure. Then some how Joe makes the plays, take what they give him, then make them pay.

Minnesota and Eagles' defenses were pretty rough on us in the 80's too.

NinerGM.

I agree with some of your points. But Eras are different. If we are going to statistically look at the QB's that Joe and Tom played against, then shouldn't we look at the Defenses as well, and how each Joe and Tom's over all team were.

At the end of the day, It's wins and loses that count the most. I think everyone will agree on that. So for the sake of argument, HOW MANY MORE SB'S MUST TOM NEED IN ORDER TO EQUAL OR SURPASS JOE?

Fair question I think.

Originally posted by NinerGM:
Somewhere in this thread or another thread I've posted that it's very difficult to compare QBs of different eras.

Yes, Joe had better teams EXCEPT for that '81 Team. All of Brady's teams were better than Montana's 81 team.

However, Joe played in an era with no salary cap BUT at the same time there were better teams throughout the league and much higher quality QB play because the league was smaller. Brady's main competition is Payton, recently Brees, Eli, Rivers, McNabb, Warner, Roethliberger, Gannon and maybe Palmer or Schaub.

Compare Montana's competiton; Elway, Kelley, Marino, Moon, Sims, Esaison, Cunningham, Humphries, Chandlier, Theisman, Testaverde, Doug Williams, Mark Rypien, Jeff Hostetler, and Jim Everett ...

Nearly all of those QBs are super bowl winning QBs and he just didn't see them once in a while, but often and usually more than one in a key play-off game. The teams these QBs were on as a whole were stronger than current teams in the NFL.

Sure there was no cap, but the competition was a lot stiffer, meaning there were established powers. Add to that there were super defensive teams that always made a game of it - the usual suspects - New York, Pittsburgh, Chicago and New Orleans.

In this era ONE - just ONE turnover could seal the fate of a team of a game. These days, you can keep turning it over and still win - even in the playoffs.

Just wanted to add that Joe also played in an era where the QB could get "killed". Anybody breaths too hard in Brady's direction and it is 15 yards.

Joe has "The Catch"
Brady has "the tuck rule"

Joe played against powerhouses
Brady plays in a watered down league (parity)

No comparison what-so-ever.

Originally posted by Crazy9ers:
NinerGM.

I agree with some of your points. But Eras are different. If we are going to statistically look at the QB's that Joe and Tom played against, then shouldn't we look at the Defenses as well, and how each Joe and Tom's over all team were.

At the end of the day, It's wins and loses that count the most. I think everyone will agree on that. So for the sake of argument, HOW MANY MORE SB'S MUST TOM NEED IN ORDER TO EQUAL OR SURPASS JOE?

Fair question I think.

Fair question, but not an easy question to answer. We'll never know the answer on how much the cheating helped during their super bowl years. I'll always question that in the back of my mind.

Never had to worrry about that with Montana.

Originally posted by Giggiddy:
Joe Montana has never lost a superbowl.

End of conversation.

Exactly, to the best of my knowledge Joe has neither lost a Super Bowl, nor even thrown an interception in one.

He is also 4-0 while Brady id 3-1.

There's no argument here.

Originally posted by NinerGM:
Somewhere in this thread or another thread I've posted that it's very difficult to compare QBs of different eras.

Yes, Joe had better teams EXCEPT for that '81 Team. All of Brady's teams were better than Montana's 81 team.

However, Joe played in an era with no salary cap BUT at the same time there were better teams throughout the league and much higher quality QB play because the league was smaller. Brady's main competition is Payton, recently Brees, Eli, Rivers, McNabb, Warner, Roethliberger, Gannon and maybe Palmer or Schaub.

Compare Montana's competiton; Elway, Kelley, Marino, Moon, Sims, Esaison, Cunningham, Humphries, Chandlier, Theisman, Testaverde, Doug Williams, Mark Rypien, Jeff Hostetler, and Jim Everett ...

Nearly all of those QBs are super bowl winning QBs and he just didn't see them once in a while, but often and usually more than one in a key play-off game. The teams these QBs were on as a whole were stronger than current teams in the NFL.

Sure there was no cap, but the competition was a lot stiffer, meaning there were established powers. Add to that there were super defensive teams that always made a game of it - the usual suspects - New York, Pittsburgh, Chicago and New Orleans.

In this era ONE - just ONE turnover could seal the fate of a team of a game. These days, you can keep turning it over and still win - even in the playoffs.

I was going to reply with something similar to this, but you hit the nail right on the head with this post

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by Crazy9ers:
NinerGM.

I agree with some of your points. But Eras are different. If we are going to statistically look at the QB's that Joe and Tom played against, then shouldn't we look at the Defenses as well, and how each Joe and Tom's over all team were.

At the end of the day, It's wins and loses that count the most. I think everyone will agree on that. So for the sake of argument, HOW MANY MORE SB'S MUST TOM NEED IN ORDER TO EQUAL OR SURPASS JOE?

Fair question I think.

I don't look at raw statistics because they're flawed - because eras are different. Today's NFL - even the RULES are different and encourage scoring. It's like trying to compare playing a video game on "normal" setting to "nightmare" - it's just different. If you can't compare eras, then there's no "number" in my mind that Brady would do to "equal" or "surpass" Joe. The ENTIRE league would need to be different. It's not just the teams they played with, it's there competition.

Brady doesn't face a potential HOF QB with a potential HOF coach until MAYBE the Championship game. Even if you take this season, what HOF QB or even Super Bowl winning or participant does Brady face this season? Brees? Manning? Well .... that's one. Compare this to Montana who not only saw those type of QBs during regular season but certainly during play-offs and regularly in the Super Bowl. I can't even name a solid QB in Brady's division. Sanchez? Please. And it's been this way for a while.

When Montana played, the Rams were a serious contender with Jim Everett, Eric Dickerson and Flipper Anderson. And even getting through the conference was a monumental task - New York, Washington, Chicago, Minnesota were all recent or perennial NFC Championship attendees. There was a reason for what 20 years the NFC Championship game was called "The Real Super Bowl".

Could you be more ignorant when making your point ?

Brady this year has faced....Manning, Roethlisberger, Favre, Rivers and has Rodgers this week.

Picking a random year like 1985 Joe faced Elway, Plunkett, J.McMahon, Jaworski, Krieg.

While Brady has not had another great QB in his division that doesn't take away from his play. They still had to win non divisional games to win the division, to make the playoffs. At times facing that same QB twice in a year (Joe had this as well). Brady has faced great competition just as Joe has, but let's not try and twist something into something it is not. Both QB's have had similar competition that is fact. Joe did not play Elway every year. Or Kelly, or Marino, or Moon or Boomer. In fact they were all in the AFC.

Brady has played other great QB's you failed to mention when they were in their prime or still playing at a high level besides those you have mentioned (Manning, Brees, Rivers, McNabb, Eli, Gannon, McNair, Warner, Bulger, Hasslebeck, Palmer, Delhomme, Culpepper). In Peytom Manning they have faced each other once a year for quite a few years now be it regular season or playoffs and a couple of times IIRC both.

Trying to argue that Joe faced better competition in the manner you did was incredibly biased and ignorant. I agree Joe is better (by a slight margin) but Brady has been beyond great and a treat for any fan to watch, has faced a slew of great opposing QB's himself, just like both have played against some great great defenses.

Originally posted by NinerGM:
Compare Montana's competiton; Elway, Kelley, Marino, Moon, Sims, Esaison, Cunningham, Humphries, Chandlier, Theisman, Testaverde, Doug Williams, Mark Rypien, Jeff Hostetler, and Jim Everett ...

Nearly all of those QBs are super bowl winning QBs

Of the 15 listed only 6 won SB's. That is not nearly all. And some of those guys were past their prime or no longer at the height of their careers. Just further proving you are being biased in trying to make a point. That's EASY to do.

Brady also has faced 6 SB winners (Manning, Manning, Big Ben, Brees, Warner and Favre).

Originally posted by KRS-1:

Originally posted by NinerGM:
Compare Montana's competiton; Elway, Kelley, Marino, Moon, Sims, Esaison, Cunningham, Humphries, Chandlier, Theisman, Testaverde, Doug Williams, Mark Rypien, Jeff Hostetler, and Jim Everett ...

Nearly all of those QBs are super bowl winning QBs

Of the 15 listed only 6 won SB's. That is not nearly all. And some of those guys were past their prime or no longer at the height of their careers. Just further proving you are being biased in trying to make a point. That's EASY to do.

Of those listed, who was past their prime?

Originally posted by OKC49erFan:

Originally posted by KRS-1:

Originally posted by NinerGM:
Compare Montana's competiton; Elway, Kelley, Marino, Moon, Sims, Esaison, Cunningham, Humphries, Chandlier, Theisman, Testaverde, Doug Williams, Mark Rypien, Jeff Hostetler, and Jim Everett ...

Nearly all of those QBs are super bowl winning QBs

Of the 15 listed only 6 won SB's. That is not nearly all. And some of those guys were past their prime or no longer at the height of their careers. Just further proving you are being biased in trying to make a point. That's EASY to do.

Of those listed, who was past their prime?

Come on guys, a chunk of those names were not much cop. Notwithstanding the rest of the argument, there are names on that list that have no right to be in this discussion.

Originally posted by OKC49erFan:

Originally posted by KRS-1:

Originally posted by NinerGM:
Compare Montana's competiton; Elway, Kelley, Marino, Moon, Sims, Esaison, Cunningham, Humphries, Chandlier, Theisman, Testaverde, Doug Williams, Mark Rypien, Jeff Hostetler, and Jim Everett ...

Nearly all of those QBs are super bowl winning QBs

Of the 15 listed only 6 won SB's. That is not nearly all. And some of those guys were past their prime or no longer at the height of their careers. Just further proving you are being biased in trying to make a point. That's EASY to do.

Of those listed, who was past their prime?

Should have been more clear, not past their prime guys but guys that were not all that special.

-Chandler was a journeyman who only became a starter after Montana was gone from SF.

-Stan Humphries, not a starter till the 92.

-Hostetler, not a starter till 91 and was never great.

- Vinny T was a career journeyman. Never terrible but never great.