RealGM

At this point, with the stats the way they are, super bowl wins, awards, and supporting cast, how can anybody think that Joe Montana is better than Tom Brady?

i just can't think of a legit or plausible argument.

1. montana played at a time where passing game was less inflated and not as big as it is now so stats arent as big then.

2. montana was super clutch late in games not his regular season though and is known for his late playoff drives to win the game.

ninjabelly wrote:1. montana played at a time where passing game was less inflated and not as big as it is now so stats arent as big then.

2. montana was super clutch late in games not his regular season though and is known for his late playoff drives to win the game.

You just described Brady as well

Please stop insulting Joe Montana. Montana is undefeated in the Super Bowl.

Wolfay wrote:Please stop insulting Joe Montana. Montana is undefeated in the Super Bowl.

It depends though would you rather be 4/4 or 4/5 in the SB? Because that just means that Brady got to the big dance one more time than Joe.

lets see brady win a ring without spygate first

Stunnaboy2K11 wrote:

Wolfay wrote:Please stop insulting Joe Montana. Montana is undefeated in the Super Bowl.

It depends though would you rather be 4/4 or 4/5 in the SB? Because that just means that Brady got to the big dance one more time than Joe.

The competition was harder back in the late 80's/early 90's, IMO. The Niners had to get past the Bears and Giants, and eventually, the Cowboys just to get to the superbowl.

xx_skaterdude_xx wrote:

Stunnaboy2K11 wrote:

Wolfay wrote:Please stop insulting Joe Montana. Montana is undefeated in the Super Bowl.

It depends though would you rather be 4/4 or 4/5 in the SB? Because that just means that Brady got to the big dance one more time than Joe.

The competition was harder back in the late 80's/early 90's, IMO. The Niners had to get past the Bears and Giants, and eventually, the Cowboys just to get to the superbowl.

no way, the 80s was such a soft decade for football. when you can put a team together and just have Akman, Irving, and Emit, and win, that just goes to show how weak football was back in the 80s and 90s

The 1985 Bears would like to have a word with you.

Pharmcat wrote:lets see brady win a ring without spygate first

Agree.

baseline33 wrote:no way, the 80s was such a soft decade for football. when you can put a team together and just have Akman, Irving, and Emit, and win, that just goes to show how weak football was back in the 80s and 90s

Just Aikman, Irvin and Smith?

First of all, that was one of the best trios in football history. Secondly, the team was much more than just those three guys.

juio189 wrote:

Pharmcat wrote:lets see brady win a ring without spygate first

Agree.

Do people actually believe this? Or is it just a trolling comment?

I mean, the tapes were confiscated, and since then Brady won 2 MVP's, led an undefeated regular season, and got within minutes of winning a SB if it wasn't for Eli manning coming back and a crazy catch by tyree.

If people think spygate puts a mark on Brady's legacy even though he's gotten MUCH better since it, then I don't know what to say. Might as well just keep on thinking that way, cause nothing is going to change your mind. Like Brady winning a SB this year will change your opinion if you think the tapes played that huge a role. Also werent the Jets were caught doing it earlier this year? I believe someone posted it but no one talks about that.

edit: here we go
viewtopic.php?f=139&t=1133893#p28980659

like icness wrote, plenty of great coaches did it. They just weren't caught. There's a reason why BB hates mangini's guts, it's because he was the guy who tattled on something they all were doing.

Montana had the best football player in NFL history to throw to. Also he had a very great Defense.

Tom Brady for most of his career had Dieon Branch and Troy Brown.

brady is nowhere near as clutch as montana he's a great qb but montana was cold blooded late in games

Celtics_Champs wrote:

juio189 wrote:

Pharmcat wrote:lets see brady win a ring without spygate first

Agree.

Do people actually believe this? Or is it just a trolling comment?

I mean, the tapes were confiscated, and since then Brady won 2 MVP's, led an undefeated regular season, and got within minutes of winning a SB if it wasn't for Eli manning coming back and a crazy catch by tyree.

he still has 0 rings after that scandal and thats the most important #....its a lot harder when you dont know what package the defense is calling

How about we don't compare rings. Brady is 10x the quarterback now that he was in 01, 03, 04, but he hasn't won a ring since then. How about we judge them on how good they were individually?

I think its close. I haven't seen enough of Joe Montana to judge. When I watch Tom Brady play I think hes very very good, but I never get the same feeling I do when I watch Manning or Rodgers, where you can't believe how good they are. Overall I think Brady is a little overrated, but I cant accurately judge Montana.

If records and stats are what matter to you then I would understand saying Brady is the best ever, but for me I just can't say he's better than Montana. I really can't.

Pharmcat wrote:lets see brady win a ring without spygate first

I think this argument is garbage and I don't want to hear it anymore

Pharmcat wrote:

Celtics_Champs wrote:

Pharmcat wrote:lets see brady win a ring without spygate first

Do people actually believe this? Or is it just a trolling comment?

I mean, the tapes were confiscated, and since then Brady won 2 MVP's, led an undefeated regular season, and got within minutes of winning a SB if it wasn't for Eli manning coming back and a crazy catch by tyree.

he still has 0 rings after that scandal and thats the most important #....its a lot harder when you dont know what package the defense is calling

So you're saying 01 Brady was better than 07 Brady all because he got a ring? No way. I guess that means Terry Bradshaw is better than Peyton Manning?

He performed ten times better in the regular season and playoffs, and played better in the 07 super bowl than in 01.

He led his team to a win with under 5 minutes to go before his defense dropped two interceptions and couldn't rip the ball off of tyrees helmet. What more could you have asked from him?

It's clear as day Brady only got better post spygate and the defensive signals did not help. He got Much better. Just because BB and Pioli put up some stinker drafts and got no defense shouldn't be a knock on brady, that he can't win without spygate.

LikeABosh wrote:

Pharmcat wrote:lets see brady win a ring without spygate first

I think this argument is garbage and I don't want to hear it anymore

Thank you, glad someone agrees. I mean I can see someone arguing that it puts a taint on BB, but Brady? Really?

As for him vs montana, I'm just going to enjoy Brady while he's still at the top of his game. I have all the respect in the world for Joe, one of the goat's, so I have no problem reading your guys oppinions on Joe being better. But this spygate crap really gets to me, and the most avoided point is that players, coaches, and analysts have all come out and said that BB is not the only guy to do this. Do they not count for anything?

I think the only people who actually still talk about spygate are angry fans and Ladanian Tomlinson.

/rant

first of all, how old are some of you folks around here? that usually determines who has seen enough football, and those who have seen recent stuff and become "prisoners of the moment"

secondly, ask Tom Brady who his idol was growing up in california . . . joe.

now tom brady is an excellent . . . exellent quarterback. striking similar demeanor with joe. understated. and highly competitive killer instinct. joe has PINPOINT accuracy, and so does tom. all the stuff you want, so its like splittin hairs.

HOWEVER, there is an item that joe has, that tom does NOT have. PINPOINT ACCURACY ON THE RUN. joe was extremely mobile. roll out to the left and put it on a dime. A DIME I SAY!! Teams that prepare to defeat Tom, and this is a known FACT, are the teams that shake the pocket and make Tom uncomfortable and move. Tom has that middle sealed up where he just stands flat footed from the middle, and you are done as a defense. he will stand and stand and stand there and ring up 50pt in a heart beat. but those teams that rattled the pocket and force him to become more mobile . . . take down his patriot teams. not so with joe. he will stand in the pocket and make plays like tom. he will move and even roll out and improvise(ala "the catch"), and make plays. that is where tom falls short and his teams have lost in the past.

Roger Murdock wrote: Overall I think Brady is a little overrated, but I cant accurately judge Montana.

If anyone is overrated, it's Aaron Rodgers.