Joe Montana vs. Tom Brady

I use to think that Brady could be equal to Joe or maybe someday surpass Joe.
However, after thinking about it carefully I don't beleive so.
I think that if Joe had played his prime in todays era, Joe would have played longer because of the rules now. It would have been even a better era to run the West coast offense that Walsh installed.

If you looked at the superbowl games, esspicially the one against the Broncos. When Joe threw that long TD to Rice, you could tell his understanding of the Offense was off the charts. Sure there were struggles but when it counted the most, Joe came through.

The whole thing about having Rice. Well folks, a great WR can make a QB great. But it's also the other way around. You can't have a great WR if your QB sucks. Both players made each other great.

I think Joe would have played longer and maybe could have won one or two more SB's if the same 49er teams that he played in also played in todays games.

Originally posted by Crazy9ers:
I use to think that Brady could be equal to Joe or maybe someday surpass Joe.
However, after thinking about it carefully I don't beleive so.
I think that if Joe had played his prime in todays era, Joe would have played longer because of the rules now. It would have been even a better era to run the West coast offense that Walsh installed.

If you looked at the superbowl games, esspicially the one against the Broncos. When Joe threw that long TD to Rice, you could tell his understanding of the Offense was off the charts. Sure there were struggles but when it counted the most, Joe came through.

The whole thing about having Rice. Well folks, a great WR can make a QB great. But it's also the other way around. You can't have a great WR if your QB sucks. Both players made each other great.

I think Joe would have played longer and maybe could have won one or two more SB's if the same 49er teams that he played in also played in todays games.

PPL are forgetting that Joe won his 1st two superbowls without any HOF talent on offense. The thing that Joe had and Brady dosen't is that Joe rasies everyone else game around him. Coming back form 2 career threaten injurys to play his best football. At his peak against the Broncos was like I've never seen since. Heck that whole playoff run was blow out after blow out. There was no squeeking by and having your kicker win it in the end. Joe is the best hands down no debate.

Montana is the greatest ever period end of conversation... its not just that he won 4 it is how he won the 4 the absolute huge role he played in those four that makes him the best.lets take a look at brady and montana's superbowls for the evidence.

joe had one very average game in 1981 against the bengals his first superbowl... but he managed the game well threw a touchdown and no int which helped him turn in a passer rating of exactly 100 ( the lowest of his super bowls but still good enough to earn him the game mvp)... now if that were the story for all his titles you could compare brady to him but his other three tell the story of why Joe is considered the best.

In 1984 he was pitted against dan marino, one of two quterbacks (the other being elway) in his era that would make a run at being the best qb over joe but joe made him look silly in that superbowl completely dominating with records for passing yards (331) and rushing yards for a qb (59) at that point. He put on a clinic throwing for 3 touchdowns and rushing for one with a passer rating of 127.2. This was the greatest performance by a qb at a superbowl up t this point but joe was not done.

In 1988 joe faced the bengals again and while the niners did not blow them out and this is the only superbowl joe didnt win superbowl mvp joe still had an amazing game breaking his own record for passing yards (357) in a superbowl and threw for 2 td with no ints with a qb rating of 115.2 However this might be his most legendary superbowl because of how he had to lead a game winning drive from the niner 8 yard line with under 4 minutes to play with only a touchdown making it possible to win but montana took them 92 yards for the game winning touchdown adding to his legend as joe cool in the clutch.

In 1989 joe faced the other qb (john elway, who had been to two of the previous three superbowls himself) trying to lay claim to joes crown as the best. However joe wasnt having any of that as he completely dominated the game in every quater. By the end of the game joe had passed for 297 yrds and a then record 5 tds with a qb rating of 147.6 ( the highest ever for a qb with over 25 attepts in the superbowl...it wasnt even close and if the niners had wanted he could of probably added more tds and yards to the total but there was no need in this absolute blowout.

this is why joe was considered the best because of his absolute dominance on the sports biggest stage while winning on all four occasions.

brady has three mediocre superbowl performances in his belt for which he passed for totals of 145 in 2001, 236 in 2004,(which were wins) and 266 in 2007(which was his loss to the giants) with a grand total of 4 tds in those three games. He does have one above avarage superbowl in 2003 where he threw for 354 and 3 tds however in that win he also threw a int something montana never did in his superbowl appearances (although in 1988 the bengals shouldve had one)... win all is said and done montana has three superbowls i would consider to be better than bradys best and that is why this isnt even close.

its not the amount of superbowls u win although that certainly helps but if bradshaw had five i still think montana would be consdiered better because bradshaw had mediocre performances and his team carried him in some of those superbowls. the same goes for brady even if e somehow gets 5 sb wins unless he gives better performances than he has in the past he will never be montanas equal or even in the same leauge.

In closeing montana is the best for 4 simple reasons on the games biggest stage he has the most touchdowns 11 (12 if you include his rushing td), highest overall qb rating (127.8), lowest interception amount for a qb with multiple super bowl apperances (0) and one of the greatest comebacks finishing with a touchdown to prove he really was the best in the clutch. period end of story.

Originally posted by SashRoxx-1:
Thing is this...Everyone seems to say J Montana is the Best QB ever cause he won 4 SBs...Well so did T Bradshaw so does that mean they're tied? I mean hinestly I remember watching terry play and I dont think he's any better than say D Marino...who has ZERO SBs.

Now lets take a look at J Montana's 4 SB wins. If D Clark doesnt make the catch in the championship game Does Montana win his 1st SB that year? Probably not. Does he win a championship if the Niners D doesnt intercept D White late in the game? Alot of people seem to forget the Cowboys after the catch were moving right down the field and it took the Niners Defense intercepting the ball to end the game.
Now in SB 16 do the Niners win if their defense didnt stop the bengals on a 1st and goal at the 1? We wont know but what we know is the defense was just as important that year in winning it all as Montana was.
Next Superbowl against the bengals what happens if J Taylor doesnt catch that final seconds TD from Montana?

What Im getting at is this is a team sport...But everyone seems to think cause Montana has the 4 SB rings he's the Best...Well bradshaw got his 4 SB rings NOT because of him but because of his defense and his 2 WR L Swann & J Stallworth. And they too were given a gift when J Smith for the Cowboys had a potential GW TD and he drops the ball.

Anyway getting back to this SB ring controversy if Brady does get 2 more SB rings somehow not sure that will happen but he'll have the most rings then. So by your own admissions (49er fans) he has the most SB rings so he's got to be the best.

I know this is a debate on whos the better QB and I think about this when Montana won his 1st SB he didnt have a great Offense...Not much of a running game good WRs but they were NOT J Rice and J Taylor...so that was a Huge part that He won without much of a supporting cast...where T Brady has always had an outstanding cast to help him win the SB.

But I will say this T Brady as a QB was definately the BEST 6th round draft pick QB that I can remember. Just as Brady went in the 6th round having other teams shaking their heads saying wow we let this guy go 5 rounds for some teams 6 rounds and never picked him...Same thing with teams wonderring How did we let Montana go to the Niners in the 3rd round why didnt we pick him in the 1st?

- What happens if that Bengals DB intercepts Montana one play before Rice's TD? Maybe Montana only has 2 rings, and an INT, 49ers lost the SB. Then Young might take over as early as 1989. But let's measure reality.

- It is a team sport, no doubt about it. Unlike other sports, the star player(s) don't have control on both ends, offense and defense. It wasn't Brady's fault that his defense couldn't hold down the Giants during that final drive, for instance. But if a superstar has no problem accepting most of the glory for wins, he must also accept most of the blame for losses. Same standards apply to everyone.

- If Marino or Manning had the wins, the same people arguing against Montana would be arguing favorably for Marino/Manning.


- There is a difference between greatest ever and best ever. Montana was a winner, thus at the top of the greatest ever debate. It's not all about championships, but isn't that what they play for? Best ever is more like: wow, Marino was awesome in 1984. Or some of Manning's years statistically. The 1985 Bears, whew. Best ever is like dominance, greatest ever is wins + sustained excellence. Just my take.

"Anyway getting back to this SB ring controversy if Brady does get 2 more SB rings somehow not sure that will happen but he'll have the most rings then. So by your own admissions (49er fans) he has the most SB rings so he's got to be the best."


At the end of the day, I'd have to agree. Objectively, Brady would have 5 trophies on his shelf. At the very least, his Patriots would win the comparison of team achievements. But until that happens, I'll take Joe.

Originally posted by Bob_Lewis_1980:
"Anyway getting back to this SB ring controversy if Brady does get 2 more SB rings somehow not sure that will happen but he'll have the most rings then. So by your own admissions (49er fans) he has the most SB rings so he's got to be the best."


At the end of the day, I'd have to agree. Objectively, Brady would have 5 trophies on his shelf. At the very least, his Patriots would win the comparison of team achievements. But until that happens, I'll take Joe.

You need to consider a players whole body of work. Not saying Brady might not surpass Montana some day but he hasn't yet, and even with more rings I'm not sure he could pass Montana as "Joe Cool." If Montana hadn't started his rep in college I might be open to changing my mind. Naw, I'm totally biased in favor of Montana because he won for my team!

It is definitely a team thing, and can't be based soley on position. Sorry to bring it up, but just look at the 90's cowgirls. In Troy's early years, he threw for more interceptions than TD's. Then J Johnson builds up the offensive line, and suddenly he has time to throw and can now connect with receivers. Also, made an AVERAGE Emmit Smith look like a great runner. Sorry cowgirl fans, anyone could have run behind that line, especially if you inlcude moose johnson as a fullback. Just look at what e smith did in arizona....he SAT THE BENCH. So what I'm saying is, it's a TEAM effort, and if you don't have all of the weapons at your disposal, you won't look as good as an average QB with a strong line and weapons.
Trent Dilfer has a ring, Marino doesn't. So with that logic, can you even entertain the thought that Dilfer was better than Marino?

Originally posted by Hitman49:

Originally posted by Crazy9ers:
I use to think that Brady could be equal to Joe or maybe someday surpass Joe.
However, after thinking about it carefully I don't beleive so.
I think that if Joe had played his prime in todays era, Joe would have played longer because of the rules now. It would have been even a better era to run the West coast offense that Walsh installed.

If you looked at the superbowl games, esspicially the one against the Broncos. When Joe threw that long TD to Rice, you could tell his understanding of the Offense was off the charts. Sure there were struggles but when it counted the most, Joe came through.

The whole thing about having Rice. Well folks, a great WR can make a QB great. But it's also the other way around. You can't have a great WR if your QB sucks. Both players made each other great.

I think Joe would have played longer and maybe could have won one or two more SB's if the same 49er teams that he played in also played in todays games.

PPL are forgetting that Joe won his 1st two superbowls without any HOF talent on offense. The thing that Joe had and Brady dosen't is that Joe rasies everyone else game around him. Coming back form 2 career threaten injurys to play his best football. At his peak against the Broncos was like I've never seen since. Heck that whole playoff run was blow out after blow out. There was no squeeking by and having your kicker win it in the end. Joe is the best hands down no debate.

I was told that you had to have weapons in order to succeed at the QB position.

oh wow, you guys managed to not turn this into an Alex Smith thread.

I'm proud of the webzone today.

Originally posted by SashRoxx-1:
Thing is this...Everyone seems to say J Montana is the Best QB ever cause he won 4 SBs...Well so did T Bradshaw so does that mean they're tied? I mean hinestly I remember watching terry play and I dont think he's any better than say D Marino...who has ZERO SBs.

Now lets take a look at J Montana's 4 SB wins. If D Clark doesnt make the catch in the championship game Does Montana win his 1st SB that year? Probably not. Does he win a championship if the Niners D doesnt intercept D White late in the game? Alot of people seem to forget the Cowboys after the catch were moving right down the field and it took the Niners Defense intercepting the ball to end the game.
Now in SB 16 do the Niners win if their defense didnt stop the bengals on a 1st and goal at the 1? We wont know but what we know is the defense was just as important that year in winning it all as Montana was.
Next Superbowl against the bengals what happens if J Taylor doesnt catch that final seconds TD from Montana?

What Im getting at is this is a team sport...But everyone seems to think cause Montana has the 4 SB rings he's the Best...Well bradshaw got his 4 SB rings NOT because of him but because of his defense and his 2 WR L Swann & J Stallworth. And they too were given a gift when J Smith for the Cowboys had a potential GW TD and he drops the ball.

Anyway getting back to this SB ring controversy if Brady does get 2 more SB rings somehow not sure that will happen but he'll have the most rings then. So by your own admissions (49er fans) he has the most SB rings so he's got to be the best.

I know this is a debate on whos the better QB and I think about this when Montana won his 1st SB he didnt have a great Offense...Not much of a running game good WRs but they were NOT J Rice and J Taylor...so that was a Huge part that He won without much of a supporting cast...where T Brady has always had an outstanding cast to help him win the SB.

But I will say this T Brady as a QB was definately the BEST 6th round draft pick QB that I can remember. Just as Brady went in the 6th round having other teams shaking their heads saying wow we let this guy go 5 rounds for some teams 6 rounds and never picked him...Same thing with teams wonderring How did we let Montana go to the Niners in the 3rd round why didnt we pick him in the 1st?

Does Brady win his first SB if the refs. don't call the tuck rule against the Raiders? Or if Vinatieri misses a 35 yard field goal in a blizzard? Or if Bledsoe doesn't beat Pittsburgh in the AFC Championship Game? Does Brady win his first or second SB if Vinatieri doesn't kick clutch FGs late in the games? One could argue that Brady = Jim Kelly minus Scott Norwood.

Regarding The Catch - Montana delivered a perfect ball in the face of 3 pass rushers. He did what he needed to do to win that game. Clark caught it. End of story.

Yes, it's a team sport and you don't win championships by yourself - see Peyton Manning - but the reason Montana is better than Bradshaw despite the fact that they each had 4 SBs is because Montana and the offense propelled the 49ers for that decade. Pittsburgh was more known for the Steel Curtain and Franco Harris. Not to say Bradshaw wasn't a great QB - he was. But Montana played a larger role, if you will, with the 49ers success than Bradshaw did with Pittsburghs.

And no, if Brady wins another 2 rings that does not necessarily put him above Joe Montana. Bill Russell has 11 rings. Jordan has 6. But the consensus is Jordan is the GOAT. Because Jordan was more instrumental in getting those 6 than Russell was in getting his 11 (that is debatable, but Russell did play with 4 other HOFers on his team, whereas Jordan played with 1).

Montana played with one other HOF player on offense - Rice - and won 2 SBs without him. He won 2 SBs after coming back from a broken back. He won 2 SBs while being pushed by a HOF QB for playing time. He won 4 SBs in an era where the greatest defensive player of all time (Taylor) and, arguably, the greatest team defense of all time (Bears) were also competing year after year for titles. Dude was clutch.

Originally posted by SashRoxx-1:
Thing is this...Everyone seems to say J Montana is the Best QB ever cause he won 4 SBs...Well so did T Bradshaw so does that mean they're tied? I mean hinestly I remember watching terry play and I dont think he's any better than say D Marino...who has ZERO SBs.

Now lets take a look at J Montana's 4 SB wins. If D Clark doesnt make the catch in the championship game Does Montana win his 1st SB that year? Probably not. Does he win a championship if the Niners D doesnt intercept D White late in the game? Alot of people seem to forget the Cowboys after the catch were moving right down the field and it took the Niners Defense intercepting the ball to end the game.
Now in SB 16 do the Niners win if their defense didnt stop the bengals on a 1st and goal at the 1? We wont know but what we know is the defense was just as important that year in winning it all as Montana was.
Next Superbowl against the bengals what happens if J Taylor doesnt catch that final seconds TD from Montana?

What Im getting at is this is a team sport...But everyone seems to think cause Montana has the 4 SB rings he's the Best...Well bradshaw got his 4 SB rings NOT because of him but because of his defense and his 2 WR L Swann & J Stallworth. And they too were given a gift when J Smith for the Cowboys had a potential GW TD and he drops the ball.

Anyway getting back to this SB ring controversy if Brady does get 2 more SB rings somehow not sure that will happen but he'll have the most rings then. So by your own admissions (49er fans) he has the most SB rings so he's got to be the best.

I know this is a debate on whos the better QB and I think about this when Montana won his 1st SB he didnt have a great Offense...Not much of a running game good WRs but they were NOT J Rice and J Taylor...so that was a Huge part that He won without much of a supporting cast...where T Brady has always had an outstanding cast to help him win the SB.

But I will say this T Brady as a QB was definately the BEST 6th round draft pick QB that I can remember. Just as Brady went in the 6th round having other teams shaking their heads saying wow we let this guy go 5 rounds for some teams 6 rounds and never picked him...Same thing with teams wonderring How did we let Montana go to the Niners in the 3rd round why didnt we pick him in the 1st?

Well said.

Originally posted by SashRoxx-1:
Thing is this...Everyone seems to say J Montana is the Best QB ever cause he won 4 SBs...Well so did T Bradshaw so does that mean they're tied? I mean hinestly I remember watching terry play and I dont think he's any better than say D Marino...who has ZERO SBs.

Now lets take a look at J Montana's 4 SB wins. If D Clark doesnt make the catch in the championship game Does Montana win his 1st SB that year? Probably not. Does he win a championship if the Niners D doesnt intercept D White late in the game? Alot of people seem to forget the Cowboys after the catch were moving right down the field and it took the Niners Defense intercepting the ball to end the game.
Now in SB 16 do the Niners win if their defense didnt stop the bengals on a 1st and goal at the 1? We wont know but what we know is the defense was just as important that year in winning it all as Montana was.
Next Superbowl against the bengals what happens if J Taylor doesnt catch that final seconds TD from Montana?

What Im getting at is this is a team sport...But everyone seems to think cause Montana has the 4 SB rings he's the Best...Well bradshaw got his 4 SB rings NOT because of him but because of his defense and his 2 WR L Swann & J Stallworth. And they too were given a gift when J Smith for the Cowboys had a potential GW TD and he drops the ball.

Anyway getting back to this SB ring controversy if Brady does get 2 more SB rings somehow not sure that will happen but he'll have the most rings then. So by your own admissions (49er fans) he has the most SB rings so he's got to be the best.

I know this is a debate on whos the better QB and I think about this when Montana won his 1st SB he didnt have a great Offense...Not much of a running game good WRs but they were NOT J Rice and J Taylor...so that was a Huge part that He won without much of a supporting cast...where T Brady has always had an outstanding cast to help him win the SB.

But I will say this T Brady as a QB was definately the BEST 6th round draft pick QB that I can remember. Just as Brady went in the 6th round having other teams shaking their heads saying wow we let this guy go 5 rounds for some teams 6 rounds and never picked him...Same thing with teams wonderring How did we let Montana go to the Niners in the 3rd round why didnt we pick him in the 1st?

I think the rings are just the icing on the cake which solidifies it. His composure in big games is what makes him so legendary. Many people say Unitas was the best of all time, but only won one, and he lost a SB that he didn't even start in. It goes beyond the super bowls, but it does have alot to do with it.

And everyone knows it was the defense that won it for Pittsburgh, Bradshaw was just along for the ride.

It's the ultimate team sport, so these kinds of arguments are kind of obtuse, but there are a few things to keep in mind. There was no marquee talent on the first Superbowl team except for a hot rookie secondary, a revolutionary edge pass rusher and a young quarterback with a hot hand. In my opinion, the main factor was Walsh's relatively new offensive system. If you remember, NFL prognosticators were still whining about how it wasn't "real NFL football" even after they won. I don't really think NFL defenses caught up with it on a regular basis until the second half of the decade and a lot of it was the tremendous increase in the athleticism of outside edge pass rushers who would simply blow up edge plays. But one of the great things about Walsh was that he adapted. His offense at the end of the decade didn't really look like the one he started with.

Joe Montana never cheated

Oh I thought this thread was comparing Joe Montana vs. Adam Vinatieri(sp?)