Originally posted by valrod33:
Originally posted by Willisfn4life:
Originally posted by dtg_9er:
Young over Montana?
I think it depends on what generation you grew up on. Steve Young was a terrific quarterback, and if that's what you know, it's what you know. People that didn't get to really watch Joe and more or less know him by reputation can't really appreciate what a remarkable talent he was.
watched both. Young all day every day
To me the simplest difference was this:
Young: More dominant regular season QB
Montana: More clutch postseason/big game QB
They were very close to each other adjusted for talent and coaching -- Young in his prime didn't have as many years of dominant D and elite RB like Montana did. And then there's the issue of Dallas and Green Bay maybe being better than the '80s juggernauts. That's how I dismiss the 4 to 1 SB thing as the only argument some people use.
Young's overall clutchness and pure passing might be underrated, while Joe's mobility and pocket awareness were underrated. Young had that great comeback against the Bengals and Colts. Only Steve McNair and Kaepernick have more rushing yards in a Super Bowl than Montana.
Both great guys. I've come to appreciate Young more in later years, but probably feel that Joe was slightly better. His Kansas City resume to me along with that 4 TD in 4th quarter win @Philly in '89 give him that edge.
Building a purely modern team, it's possible peak Young with some zone read sprinkled in could be scary. Young had longer TD runs than Russell Wilson back in the '90s without help from the zone read.
You gotta love these two guys -- Montana a 3rd round pick that the league took for granted in the '79 draft and Young, basically a Kaepernick of the early '80s who probably was just as raw. Turned into the best "mobile" QB of all time.
Also, ten million snaps between them -- and not one of them from shotgun.
[ Edited by JTsBiggestFan on Oct 14, 2016 at 1:30 AM ]