GOAT debate related to era Montana vs Brady

[C.Biscuit97]

2 hours ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

Brady did it for so much longer period of time.  Granted the rule changes made it easier for him to last.  I can recall Montana also having some bad games in the playoffs in years they didn't make it to the SB.  There was no free agency back then, Montana won all those years with more of the same roster and star players around him.  Brady won with complete roster turnover though out the years and probably with a handful of exceptions less superstar talent around him .

That is a great point about the rule changes. It has never been easier to be a qb/ receiver.  Bad qbs throw for 4,000 yards and only guys like Marino used to be able to do that.  I think it was the nfc championship game where Montana got absolutely destroyed. If that hit happened on Brady, that player would be kicked out of the league. 
 

And I hate them but what the Pats did in a salary cap era is maybe the most remarkable dynasty in sports history. Those 49ers, cowboys, and Bills teams of the 90s couldn’t stay together the way they did then. 
 

in terms of coolness though, Montana >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Brady

11 hours ago, NoHuddleKelly12 said:

…thanks to the ‘93 Bills. Ergo, Jim Kelly better than Montana. 
 

 

 

(I kid, I kid) 😉 Howeva…none of the great class of ‘83 AFC QB’s of that time ever beat Kelly in the playoffs (Marino, Elway) or for that matter Moon or Montana…but that bum Hostetler wins in the Super Bowl?? (Sigh) 

Kelly by far had the best team. Kelly has a pretty bad playoff resume. You put Marino or Elway on those Bills teams, we win multiple SBs. Elway carried some garbage teams to the SB. 

12 hours ago, GoBills808 said:

re the NBA

 

Very few of those guys from the 80s could have played today. They weren't athletic enough, didn't train enough, and the physical defense everyone likes to reminisce about were just fouls if we're being honest.

I definitely think players are softer now compared to them. But lebron James is 6’8” 260 lbs of pure muscle. In terms of toughest, the older eras win. But the skill and athleticism of players is so much better now. Bob Cousy would dribble once in between his legs and people would lose their minds. Imagine Cousy playing in the nba today? It would be hilarious. 

[Snowbowl]

Montana best of his era. Brady of his. Modern athletes much better than the 80’s. But and this is a big but. In the 80’s QBs weren’t babied like Tommy was. He’s nowhere as tough as Joe and I don’t think he would’ve been great in the 80’s because of that. So it’s comparing apples to oranges. However if you take the athletics out of the pic and just look at big games Joe is my number 1. Undefeated in the the SB. 
 

 

[C.Biscuit97]

13 hours ago, KzooMike said:

If Brady left and handed it off to Steve Young they would still be winning Super Bowls. He can be a great player and so can Montana. That tandem has never really been replicated before. So if that's grounds for diminishing performance, pretty stupid IMO. With that logic any scrub that gets followed by a worse scrub gets elevated. Still a scrub.  

Steve Bono went 5-1 and had 11 tds to 4 ints when he played for the 49ers in 1991.

 

Montana and young are great. But they played on one of the greatest offenses ever, where a lot of guys would have been successful.

[Metal Man]

A lot of what makes Brady a strong argument for GOAT is his longevity.

 

I doubt he lasts nearly as long taking the hits QBs took in the 80s/90s.

 

Brady benefitted from the "Brady rule" greatly.

[GerstAusGosheim]

Dan Marino got rid of the ball lighting fast and lasted 17 years. Brady's quick release would have helped him the same way as long as the offense was set up for that style of play.

[unbillievable]

If you take away the years when he cheated, Brady only had 1 season that wasn't awful.

 

 

[unbillievable]

Instead of comparing him to Joe Montana, we should be asking how Brady measures up to Barry Bonds and Lance Armstrong.

[RangerDave]

1 hour ago, hondo in seattle said:

The hardware argument always bothers me because football is a team sport.  Brady didn't win his rings alone.

I am also always amazed at how "lucky" NE was during many of their Super Bowls.

• Seattle throwing a pick at the goal line instead of running Beast Mode
• Atlanta's historic collapse
• last second field goal win vs the Rams
• last second field goal to beat the Panthers

I believe you make your own luck, but how would people feel about Brady if he had lost more Super Bowls than he won?

[Ya Digg?]

17 minutes ago, RangerDave said:

I am also always amazed at how "lucky" NE was during many of their Super Bowls.

• Seattle throwing a pick at the goal line instead of running Beast Mode
• Atlanta's historic collapse
• last second field goal win vs the Rams
• last second field goal to beat the Panthers

I believe you make your own luck, but how would people feel about Brady if he had lost more Super Bowls than he won?

I’m not a fan of the “luck” argument. You can conceivably say a team got lucky they won in most Super Bowls. You could claim that for both of Mahomes wins, all of the Manning Super Bowl wins, etc. 

[RangerDave]

46 minutes ago, Ya Digg? said:

You could claim that for both of Mahomes wins, all of the Manning Super Bowl wins, etc. 

Maybe I just will do that.  Thanks!  😀

[gotme365]

Montana and the 49ners never cheated. We don’t know the full scope of the Pats cheating and how it aided Brady with his development. Montana is the GOAT 

[thenorthremembers]

16 hours ago, KzooMike said:

Dumbest argument ever, he handed it off to a future hall of famer. Lots of ways to debate this, discussing Steve Young performing well is not close to one of them. 

It is when part of the debate includes the offensive system.  Steve Young was a bum in Tampa Bay.   Part of the argument is that Walsh's system had a part in the success of Montana.   Including Young who had thrown 11 tds to 21 ints, and was sub 55% completion percentage prior to moving on to San Francisco helps to make the guys point.

[Alphadawg7]

My final take.  GOAT by default is going to be Brady.  7 SB wins and playing until age 45 at the level he played at may be achievements never matched again, especially in the free agency era of football.  

 

HOWEVER:  I don't think its really possible to say who was the actual better QB because I can't see Montana doing any worse than Brady if they swapped places and longevity.  At the same time, I am not so sure how Brady would have fared during an era where you could tee off on the QB and be physical with WR's.  Everything about Brady was based on timing, and it had to be because he didn't have the strongest arm.  In Montana's era, DB's could be more physical with WR's and disrupt timing more and defenders didn't have to let up before hitting the QB.  

 

I watched the highest scoring offense in NFL history get held to 14 points in the Super Bowl by an average Giants team just because they were hitting Brady.  I watched that same Giants team do the same thing to another one of the highest scoring offenses in NFL history and rough Brady up again and hold them to 17 points.  The key to Brady's success was that he was not getting hit, but when you did hit Brady and could disrupt his timing he was human.  It was a lot easier to do that when Montana played as the rules and how they called games were different.  

 

Montana almost had to retire from a back injury in 1986, but he came back the next season and threw 31 TD's in just 13 games (a very gaudy number in those days that would even be excellent in the modern era).  In his last year with the 49ers, Montana had to have elbow surgery from a preseason injury and wouldn't return until late in the season where the 49ers stuck with Steve Young who was the leagues MVP that season.  Montana played the last game of the season only, but Niners stuck with the league MVP for the playoffs.  To this day, many believe the 49ers should have won the Super Bowl that year, but they lost in the NFCCG to Dallas and a lot of people still think had Montana not gotten hurt and played that season they would have won it all.  Niners would go on and win the Super Bowl the next season though which was the first year Montana was in KC.  

 

So, if not for the elbow injury, Montana would have 100% started and played the whole season.  Pretty much everyone thinks Young is an all time great HOF QB (and so do I), but no one thinks Young was better than Montana, so not crazy to think they might have won the Super Bowl that year had Joe not got hurt.  Niners would go on and win the SB the next season with Young as the QB and Montana in KC.  

 

Point is...Niners went to NFCCG and SB in those 2 seasons (one with Joe missing all but 1 game and the other with Joe in KC).  Had Joe not had his body fail, he would have led those 2 niners teams and very well could have 2 more SB wins under his belt that would have put him at 6 with 0 losses by the time he was 37.  Brady played until 45 and appeared in 4 Super Bowls between the age of 39 and 45, winning 3.  

 

But if we are comparing them by ages:  At the age Montana retired, he had won 4 Super Bowls (lost none).  When Brady was the same age, he had also won 4 Super Bowls and lost 2 others.  So its not hard to think had Montana's body afforded him the opportunity to play at a high level well into his 40's, he might have equaled or even surpassed Bradys accomplishments.  

 

Since its impossible to do that...Brady is the GOAT, but Montana is #2 without a doubt and even though Brady is the undisputed GOAT, I don't think it's really possible to say who is actually the truly better QB because their bodies did not afford the same longevity of career for a fair comparison.  

 

 

[Aussie Joe]

2 hours ago, unbillievable said:

If you take away the years when he cheated, Brady only had 1 season that wasn't awful.

 

 

You think they pick him for the Hall of Fame?

[Airseven]

Brady is the best QB of all time. This debate has been over for awhile now. We also have him to thank for allowing the Bills to take over the AFCE.

[Mikie2times]

6 hours ago, Einstein said:

 

Brady had won 3 Super Bowl’s before the DB rule change occurred and before the league began to crack down on QB hits.

 

Thats the most impressive part. Brady won SB’s in BOTH era’s.

 

Remember when Nate Clements knocked Brady’s block off? One of the most savage QB hits in memory and Brady won the SB that same year.

Brady never had a year with a passer rating above 87 under the old rules. Mind you he was still very young so hammering that point doesn't really seem to make a lot of sense to me. In broader terms, not dealing with defensive contact for the first 5 yards helped him, along with all QB's, tremendously. It completely changed the game, increasing average rating and completion % by almost 10 points each and making this a passing league which it never was before. 

2 hours ago, thenorthremembers said:

It is when part of the debate includes the offensive system.  Steve Young was a bum in Tampa Bay.   Part of the argument is that Walsh's system had a part in the success of Montana.   Including Young who had thrown 11 tds to 21 ints, and was sub 55% completion percentage prior to moving on to San Francisco helps to make the guys point.

It was Steve Youngs first two seasons in the league on an awful Bucs team. People keep using this time to say, see! Look at how much better he was in with SF. Well, no sh!t, he was a rookie playing on a horrible team. 

1 hour ago, Airseven said:

Brady is the best QB of all time. This debate has been over for awhile now. We also have him to thank for allowing the Bills to take over the AFCE.

The thread was about trying to compare the eras and discussing this debate. Not just deciding who is independent of era. Most people in this thread have lost site of the thread. Who is the best one independent of era has been discussed here and everywhere else to nauseous levels. Clearly Brady has more of just about everything. Would he do that in the 80's? I don't think he would. Would Montana do it in the era Tom played? I don't know either.  

Edited April 12, 2023 by KzooMike

[Saxum]

8 hours ago, May Day 10 said:

 

IMO, both Elway and Marino were better Quarterbacks than Montana.  Manning was a better QB than Brady (but was largely squandered by the Colts).  The new age of QBs are probably better than all of them as they are freaks.  

 

 

Disagree on Marwhino.  He was the model for Br*dy with his whining to the Zebras. 

 

In addition the position is a Quarterback not a thrower and a lot of skills other QBs had he did not like fakes on runs - every time it was a fake I could see it coming before RB got demolished which is why their running game was so terrible.  Consider the best season for him was 1993 for that is when he got his break (pun intended) into commercials and acting.  It did prevent "Dancing Dan" from getting into any dance contests post career.

 

He also had trouble learning new plays late in season.  In playoffs opposition teams saw all of the plays.

[gomper]

Montana never lost a Super Bowl.  He was at his best in the big game. 

[97bills]

I hope one day we’re talking about mahomes and Allen. Of course mahomes has been to 3 Super Bowls already. But it will be a crying shame if Allen doesn’t come close to the success Mahomes will have , at the end of there career… it just sucks Mahomes has Andy Reid , because I really believe talent wise Allen is right there with him. Sorry I turned this into a Allen thing , but I’m 48 and ready for some Super Bowl rings or ring. Lol GO BILLS 

[Billl]

6 hours ago, RangerDave said:

I am also always amazed at how "lucky" NE was during many of their Super Bowls.

• Seattle throwing a pick at the goal line instead of running Beast Mode
• Atlanta's historic collapse
• last second field goal win vs the Rams
• last second field goal to beat the Panthers

I believe you make your own luck, but how would people feel about Brady if he had lost more Super Bowls than he won?

Why don’t you talk about how unlucky he was to lose to the Giants via the helmet catch?

28 minutes ago, gomper said:

Montana never lost a Super Bowl.  He was at his best in the big game. 

Yeah, it’s way more impressive to lose before getting there.  Sure would’ve sucked for Joe if he’d made 6 more Super Bowls and won 3 more championships.