Montana the 🐐

Originally posted by 9moon:
Biggest Games = Montana hands down

Career Stats = Brady and who can argue

Argument:

Montana can play at this era and will put up same stats while The Big Five (Brady - Manning - Brees - Ben - Rogers) could have never put up their best stats during the 80s and the 90s when Defenses were allowed to play.

Yeah, tough to argue with what Brady has accomplished. One thing I'll say is that his longevity and consistency in his career is extraordinary. To be competing for championships year-in and year-out, and actually winning 5 of them--I don't know if we'll lever see anything like that in football again.

But I'll say this in defense of Montana though... What could he have done in today's era that favored the passing game, and all the rules/protections afforded to quarterbacks? If you recall, his later years with the 49ers were riddled with injuries and it was a much more violent league back then, The passer rating numbers for him and Steve Young are amazing, when you consider that almost all of the top 25 passer rating leaders started their career after 2000. Plus, he was a pretty good athlete. People forget about that because Steve Young showed up, but he was a pretty mobile quarterback.

People have been going back and forth on Brady vs Montana for awhile now... I think a more interesting discussion piece would be to analyze just how dominant they were in their respective eras. Without actually looking at the numbers, I'm pretty sure that Montana's passing efficiency relative to his counterparts in the 80s is significantly better... But then again, I'm pretty sure that Brady's WIn/Loss ratio and post-season appearances relative to his counterparts is going to be off the charts as well...

All in all though, players are meant to surpass the previous generation. It's evolution in sports. Brady learned from watching Montana and sports science is just getting better and better, year-in and year-out. Eventually, there's going to be a prodigy of an NFL Quarterback who has the clutch play and poise of Montana, the work ethic of Brady, the brains of Manning, the improvisation of Brett Favre, the arm of Dan Marino, the speed of Michael Vick, etc. etc.

This football unicorn is eventually going to come and surpass everyone else. We shouldn't be surprised when it happens.

Originally posted by fropwns:
We won another Super Bowl with Steve. Montana got to the AFC Championship game against the Bills and got laid out. Look, I love the guy, I really do, but Steve Young gave us everything he had to still deny him today is just foolish.

in my opinion. young could get us to the nfc title game but as jimmy johnson said and was right.. young was not mentally tough enough to get us over the hump. joe had the tremendous will to win. we had to buy young a defense in order for him to win a super bowl. you trade young for derick thomas like the rumor was.. you fix the defense that let us down vs the cowboys. you can keep haley cuz he respected joe more than steve.. joe still had it

Originally posted by cciowa:

Originally posted by fropwns:

We won another Super Bowl with Steve. Montana got to the AFC Championship game against the Bills and got laid out. Look, I love the guy, I really do, but Steve Young gave us everything he had to still deny him today is just foolish.

in my opinion. young could get us to the nfc title game but as jimmy johnson said and was right.. young was not mentally tough enough to get us over the hump. joe had the tremendous will to win. we had to buy young a defense in order for him to win a super bowl. you trade young for derick thomas like the rumor was.. you fix the defense that let us down vs the cowboys. you can keep haley cuz he respected joe more than steve.. joe still had it

Can you imagine Charles Haley and Derrick Thomas on the same team?

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:
People who think Tom Brady is a better player than Joe Montana are probably the same people that think Lebron James is the best basketball player of all time.

That's real talk right there. Brady is great in this era as LeBron is but there really is no comparison in my eyes, at least,having been lucky enough to have seen Joe and Michael.

Originally posted by Ronnie49Lott:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

People who think Tom Brady is a better player than Joe Montana are probably the same people that think Lebron James is the best basketball player of all time.

That's real talk right there. Brady is great in this era as LeBron is but there really is no comparison in my eyes, at least,having been lucky enough to have seen Joe and Michael.

These might be the truest statements in all of sports.

Originally posted by Ronnie49Lott:

Originally posted by SteveWallacesHelmet:

People who think Tom Brady is a better player than Joe Montana are probably the same people that think Lebron James is the best basketball player of all time.

That's real talk right there. Brady is great in this era as LeBron is but there really is no comparison in my eyes, at least,having been lucky enough to have seen Joe and Michael.

This

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by cciowa:

Originally posted by fropwns:
We won another Super Bowl with Steve. Montana got to the AFC Championship game against the Bills and got laid out. Look, I love the guy, I really do, but Steve Young gave us everything he had to still deny him today is just foolish.

in my opinion. young could get us to the nfc title game but as jimmy johnson said and was right.. young was not mentally tough enough to get us over the hump. joe had the tremendous will to win. we had to buy young a defense in order for him to win a super bowl. you trade young for derick thomas like the rumor was.. you fix the defense that let us down vs the cowboys. you can keep haley cuz he respected joe more than steve.. joe still had it

Can you imagine Charles Haley and Derrick Thomas on the same team?

i have ever since the rumor ran around in 91 or 92 that we were going to do that trade. hell i used to bemoan that tim harris and haley never got along. can you imagine those two on the same team

Originally posted by cciowa:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by cciowa:

Originally posted by fropwns:

We won another Super Bowl with Steve. Montana got to the AFC Championship game against the Bills and got laid out. Look, I love the guy, I really do, but Steve Young gave us everything he had to still deny him today is just foolish.

in my opinion. young could get us to the nfc title game but as jimmy johnson said and was right.. young was not mentally tough enough to get us over the hump. joe had the tremendous will to win. we had to buy young a defense in order for him to win a super bowl. you trade young for derick thomas like the rumor was.. you fix the defense that let us down vs the cowboys. you can keep haley cuz he respected joe more than steve.. joe still had it

Can you imagine Charles Haley and Derrick Thomas on the same team?

i have ever since the rumor ran around in 91 or 92 that we were going to do that trade. hell i used to bemoan that tim harris and haley never got along. can you imagine those two on the same team

It was '92. And it would have happened if Montana hadn't still been recovering from his back injury.

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by cciowa:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by cciowa:

Originally posted by fropwns:
We won another Super Bowl with Steve. Montana got to the AFC Championship game against the Bills and got laid out. Look, I love the guy, I really do, but Steve Young gave us everything he had to still deny him today is just foolish.

in my opinion. young could get us to the nfc title game but as jimmy johnson said and was right.. young was not mentally tough enough to get us over the hump. joe had the tremendous will to win. we had to buy young a defense in order for him to win a super bowl. you trade young for derick thomas like the rumor was.. you fix the defense that let us down vs the cowboys. you can keep haley cuz he respected joe more than steve.. joe still had it

Can you imagine Charles Haley and Derrick Thomas on the same team?

i have ever since the rumor ran around in 91 or 92 that we were going to do that trade. hell i used to bemoan that tim harris and haley never got along. can you imagine those two on the same team

It was '92. And it would have happened if Montana hadn't still been recovering from his back injury.

it sure is nice to converse with someone who actually remembers those days and how the young for thomas thing was not something whack cc made up .by keeping young. the team also ignored the run game after ricky left.. i think had joe stayed. it would have forced us to address the run sooner than we did in 97 when we got terry kirby. by getting thomas and keeping hailey we never would have had to go nuts and buy young a defense in 94 so he could win a super bowl which of course all led to salary cap hell. one thing always leads to another in my world

Originally posted by cciowa:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by cciowa:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Originally posted by cciowa:

Originally posted by fropwns:

We won another Super Bowl with Steve. Montana got to the AFC Championship game against the Bills and got laid out. Look, I love the guy, I really do, but Steve Young gave us everything he had to still deny him today is just foolish.

in my opinion. young could get us to the nfc title game but as jimmy johnson said and was right.. young was not mentally tough enough to get us over the hump. joe had the tremendous will to win. we had to buy young a defense in order for him to win a super bowl. you trade young for derick thomas like the rumor was.. you fix the defense that let us down vs the cowboys. you can keep haley cuz he respected joe more than steve.. joe still had it

Can you imagine Charles Haley and Derrick Thomas on the same team?

i have ever since the rumor ran around in 91 or 92 that we were going to do that trade. hell i used to bemoan that tim harris and haley never got along. can you imagine those two on the same team

It was '92. And it would have happened if Montana hadn't still been recovering from his back injury.

it sure is nice to converse with someone who actually remembers those days and how the young for thomas thing was not something whack cc made up .by keeping young. the team also ignored the run game after ricky left.. i think had joe stayed. it would have forced us to address the run sooner than we did in 97 when we got terry kirby. by getting thomas and keeping hailey we never would have had to go nuts and buy young a defense in 94 so he could win a super bowl which of course all led to salary cap hell. one thing always leads to another in my world

Bro if we kept Montana and traded for Thomas we'd have won 3-4 more championships. I love Young but he choked bad in the playoffs.

And why would anyone doubt that trade was on the table? Google is their friend lol. Here's a pretty cool article about the Montana to Chiefs trade, and it explains why the Chiefs GM was salty towards the Niners because of the failed Young/Thomas trade.

https://www.nytimes.com/1993/04/20/sports/pro-football-for-now-montana-is-kansas-city-49er.html

Originally posted by Furlow:
Bro if we kept Montana and traded for Thomas we'd have won 3-4 more championships. I love Young but he choked bad in the playoffs.

And why would anyone doubt that trade was on the table? Google is their friend lol. Here's a pretty cool article about the Montana to Chiefs trade, and it explains why the Chiefs GM was salty towards the Niners because of the failed Young/Thomas trade.

https://www.nytimes.com/1993/04/20/sports/pro-football-for-now-montana-is-kansas-city-49er.html

thank you. great job.. i agree ten fold with you about young. jimmy johnson said as much before one of those games and he was right.. i am convinced that had craig not fumbled and we go to the super bowl.. had joe not been able to play. the game would have been to big for young. we would have either lost or won ugly with our defense. and of course had we done the trade.. thomas never would have died

Originally posted by cciowa:

Originally posted by Furlow:

Bro if we kept Montana and traded for Thomas we'd have won 3-4 more championships. I love Young but he choked bad in the playoffs.

And why would anyone doubt that trade was on the table? Google is their friend lol. Here's a pretty cool article about the Montana to Chiefs trade, and it explains why the Chiefs GM was salty towards the Niners because of the failed Young/Thomas trade.

https://www.nytimes.com/1993/04/20/sports/pro-football-for-now-montana-is-kansas-city-49er.html

thank you. great job.. i agree ten fold with you about young. jimmy johnson said as much before one of those games and he was right.. i am convinced that had craig not fumbled and we go to the super bowl.. had joe not been able to play. the game would have been to big for young. we would have either lost or won ugly with our defense. and of course had we done the trade.. thomas never would have died

I thought about that last night after responding to your post about that failed trade. That had it gone through, it probably would have saved Thomas's life. Still can't believe how he died, so tragic and unnecessary. All of the "what ifs" led me to this article that I found very interesting. It's Chiefs favored, but still a good read.

https://www.arrowheadpride.com/2015/11/10/9705320/the-8th-sack-that-might-have-changed-everything

Originally posted by CatchMaster80:

Originally posted by genus49:
It's harder to win SBs in this era so your analogy isn't very good. The old timers played in leagues with few teams so getting to the big dance isn't difficult. Also comparing sports where you have series in the playoffs is a poor analogy. And any Yankee being brought up automatically nullifies your point when talking about greatness

Brady also happens to be top 3 in most key passing categories and will likely finish his career 1/2 in most of them unless he completely falls off next season.

I disagree that it's harder to win SB's in this era. Because you didn't have a salary cap and free agency for much of Montana's career made it easier to stockpile talent. But the Niners weren't the only ones. The Giants, Cowboys, Redskins, Packers and Bears all had some great teams back then and would very likely beat the Patriots of today. The talent is spread thinner and there is more balance today but no real super teams. Don't be fooled by stats of today . Everything is geared toward the offense so many of today's QB's have better stats than Montana or his peers. Are you going to tell me that Matt Stafford is better than Montana. Just because Brady has been to more SB's doesn't make him greater. It means his team plays in a weak division and the weaker conference so it is actually easier to get there.

Okay, so let's think about this for a second:

The talent is spread thinner. There's more balance. "More balance" means "more teams actually have a shot at winning".

Now let's contrast this to the 80's. The 80's had Super Teams. Did non-Super Teams stand a chance versus Super Teams? No, of course not. Now instead of having lots of teams having a shot at winning, only a handful of teams have a legitimate shot of winning.

The problem with your argument is that the 49ers were one of the Super Teams. You're making it sound like they were at a disadvantage. No, they weren't. The 49ers were one of the fortunate teams with an advantage. The other Super Teams were their equals. The 49ers talent dwarfed over tons of lesser teams. T

The NFC won 15 out of 16 Super Bowls from the 80's through the 90's. Nothing about that screams "balance" or "harder to win". Personally, I think the fact that the AFC only managed to win 1 out of 16 Super Bowls kind of puts an asterisk on Montana's impeccable Super Bowl accolades.

I do agree that you have to take totals passing numbers with a grain of salt. A 100 rating today is much easier than a 100 rating back then. But championships are championships. Those don't need to be adjusted for era. Everyone from a given era is playing by the same rules. Montana faced tougher defenses, but so did his opposing quarterbacks.

Originally posted by TonyStarks:

Joe didn't have to deflate footballs,drone other teams' practices,send fake undercover "reporters" to other teams practices,steal playbooks,rely majorly on his kicker,rely on a Pete Carroll brainfart etc.

Ding ding ding. Also don't forget he had a very bad Super Bowl performance this year, the very first one he was a game manager, and you could argue that he threw too many interceptions as well as lost three of them. I know it's a team game however when you turn the ball over like against Philly....well, there you go.

Are we forgetting he shouldn't of even had one extra win with the tuck rule? The pats shouldn't of even made it to that Super Bowl. Winning by three points is not a dominant quarterback. He has had some dominant performances. He is a great QB, I would take him second to Montana.

It's funny how people disregard the fact that Montana won 4 Super Bowl's before Brady not to mention Montana never lost one let alone 3. Brady still lost when he had moss in his prime and Welker and Gronk???? Come on man!! I think people should take that into consideration but they don't. Brady lost three.

I do love how fiery Brady gets on the sidelines

You know what I miss most, Joe coming out of the huddle and surveying the defense before he put his hands under center. Watching that was as Big Time as it gets.