@erikthredd said:
Whether you want to agree or not Rings count in this debate,as do wins,as do playoff wins. If Brady didn't have those 5 rings this comment section would be all over Joe's knob for going 4-0 in the SB.
Ok then, if rings make that big of a difference to a players ability on the field, was Steve Young a better player the moment the horn sounded and his team had won a super bowl? If your answer is no, then you must concede that winning a game has no effect either way on a players ability. we rank players on their ability, not on how good their teams are.
I completely get what you are saying about Steve’s abilities being the same minutes before and after some arbitrary moment in time.
But in a way, yes, the moment you win a SuperBowl you are generally viewed as a better player. And not having won one is a knock. Marino got there and lost. Kelly, four times. Heck, looking at that list there is Kerry Collins and if he had won a Super Bowl with the Giants over the Ravens, he would likely be looked at in a considerably different light. Is it fair? No it’s not. Warren Moon was incredible, too, but just didn’t win the big game.
And there’s perhaps no better example than Eli Manning. Two losses and it’s a sure fire bet he’s labeled a bust. But with those two wins there’s now a pretty decent shot at Canton*.
(*Coming from a Giant fan, I’d say that’s pretty good considering I think most Giant fans will tell you he is a lock. As always, I try to maintain objectivity when talking sports.)
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
Montana had 4 wins he is no better than Marino with 0 wins I guess
Plus If you can't count Brady's 5 rings towards being the GOAT then you can't hold superbowl losses against him either. Montana having zero SB losses is the same as Brady having three.
Not counting rings is silly . Leading your team to a championship means absolutely nothing now? Making the superbowl and losing is bad ?
Winning the AFC or NFC championship is an accomplishment but 2 weeks later if you don't win the superbowl you are garbage I guess.
All these GOAT discussions in every sport are basically relentless mental masturbation.
Win today . I'm watching today's game today , I saw yesterday's game or last weeks game when it happened , why do I still care about it? Career stats are just data , I don't care about long dead players in games that ended years ago.
Every game that happened before I discovered football has no meaning whatsoever.
@erikthredd said:
Whether you want to agree or not Rings count in this debate,as do wins,as do playoff wins. If Brady didn't have those 5 rings this comment section would be all over Joe's knob for going 4-0 in the SB.
Ok then, if rings make that big of a difference to a players ability on the field, was Steve Young a better player the moment the horn sounded and his team had won a super bowl? If your answer is no, then you must concede that winning a game has no effect either way on a players ability. we rank players on their ability, not on how good their teams are.
Steve Young is in the Hall Of Fame and it wasn't just because he won one Super Bowl.
I've already stated above what I take into consideration when deciding who belongs in this argument and,yes, won/loss records in the playoffs/super bowl counts just as much as where a guy ranks statistically in the regular season.
Its the QB's job to score points and win football games and even though you don't want to admit it,the playoffs & super bowl are still considered football games. The quarterback is doing thew same things he does during the season.
you have missed the point. we rank players based on individual ability. It is great if their team wins the super bowl, but that is the team. Brady had an unbelievable individual game in last years bowl. his team lost. that should not negatively impact how well he played.
you are absolutely correct that steve young is not in the hall of fame because he won one super bowl. he is in because of his elite talent. That is the whole point. we cannot use the team a player plays on as a gauge for how great that player is. it is intellectually dishonest. I find that baseball sabermatricians have arrived at this conclusion already, but many fans of basketball and football are still hung up on ring count. I must admit, I am a baseball fan first, but the same fundamentals apply when it comes to those other sports for choosing greatest players.
Montana had 4 wins he is no better than Marino with 0 wins I guess
Plus If you can't count Brady's 5 rings towards being the GOAT then you can't hold superbowl losses against him either. Montana having zero SB losses is the same as Brady having three.
Not counting rings is silly . Leading your team to a championship means absolutely nothing now? Making the superbowl and losing is bad ?
Winning the AFC or NFC championship is an accomplishment but 2 weeks later if you don't win the superbowl you are garbage I guess.
All these GOAT discussions in every sport are basically relentless mental masturbation.
Win today . I'm watching today's game today , I saw yesterday's game or last weeks game when it happened , why do I still care about it? Career stats are just data , I don't care about long dead players in games that ended years ago.
Every game that happened before I discovered football has no meaning whatsoever.
Your feelings are fine, of course they sort of disqualify you from being in on the discussion though now dont they?
If one Super Bowl win was all it took to get into the Hall of Fame then Doug Williams, Jeff Hostetler,Trent Dilfer & Brad Johnson are all long overdue for a gold jacket.
@erikthredd said:
Whether you want to agree or not Rings count in this debate,as do wins,as do playoff wins. If Brady didn't have those 5 rings this comment section would be all over Joe's knob for going 4-0 in the SB.
Ok then, if rings make that big of a difference to a players ability on the field, was Steve Young a better player the moment the horn sounded and his team had won a super bowl? If your answer is no, then you must concede that winning a game has no effect either way on a players ability. we rank players on their ability, not on how good their teams are.
I completely get what you are saying about Steve’s abilities being the same minutes before and after some arbitrary moment in time.
But in a way, yes, the moment you win a SuperBowl you are generally viewed as a better player. And not having won one is a knock. Marino got there and lost. Kelly, four times. Heck, looking at that list there is Kerry Collins and if he had won a Super Bowl with the Giants over the Ravens, he would likely be looked at in a considerably different light. Is it fair? No it’s not. Warren Moon was incredible, too, but just didn’t win the big game.
And there’s perhaps no better example than Eli Manning. Two losses and it’s a sure fire bet he’s labeled a bust. But with those two wins there’s now a pretty decent shot at Canton*.
(*Coming from a Giant fan, I’d say that’s pretty good considering I think most Giant fans will tell you he is a lock. As always, I try to maintain objectivity when talking sports.)
Peoples perceptions can change after a super bowl, but that does not change the data. a "fan" can view Kerry Collins or Doug Williams or Joe Flacco any way they want after they won the big game, it does nothing to change the stats or how effective that player was.
@erikthredd said:
Whether you want to agree or not Rings count in this debate,as do wins,as do playoff wins. If Brady didn't have those 5 rings this comment section would be all over Joe's knob for going 4-0 in the SB.
Ok then, if rings make that big of a difference to a players ability on the field, was Steve Young a better player the moment the horn sounded and his team had won a super bowl? If your answer is no, then you must concede that winning a game has no effect either way on a players ability. we rank players on their ability, not on how good their teams are.
Steve Young is in the Hall Of Fame and it wasn't just because he won one Super Bowl.
I've already stated above what I take into consideration when deciding who belongs in this argument and,yes, won/loss records in the playoffs/super bowl counts just as much as where a guy ranks statistically in the regular season.
Its the QB's job to score points and win football games and even though you don't want to admit it,the playoffs & super bowl are still considered football games. The quarterback is doing thew same things he does during the season.
you have missed the point. we rank players based on individual ability. It is great if their team wins the super bowl, but that is the team. Brady had an unbelievable individual game in last years bowl. his team lost. that should not negatively impact how well he played.
you are absolutely correct that steve young is not in the hall of fame because he won one super bowl. he is in because of his elite talent. That is the whole point. we cannot use the team a player plays on as a gauge for how great that player is. it is intellectually dishonest. I find that baseball sabermatricians have arrived at this conclusion already, but many fans of basketball and football are still hung up on ring count. I must admit, I am a baseball fan first, but the same fundamentals apply when it comes to those other sports for choosing greatest players.
craig there isn't a right or wrong way to decide who should be GOAT,its just an opinion and everyone's is different. I consider how these players played in the biggest moments, you don't. We disagree so just leave it at that. I'm not going to sit here all day and go back and forth with you when neither opinion will change.
Steve Young was a two time MVP & won a SB MVP and when he retired he had the highest career passer rating and was top two in career completion percentage. You guys are downplaying his career to just a SB win to go along with Flacco,Hostetler,Dilfer & Johnson. The guy had a really good career compared to 80-90% of all QBs to ever play the game.
Should he be considered for GOAT? Probably not but he was no slouch that had one great playoff run.
@craig44 said:
It is the difference between using statistical data and anecdotal evidence. no one is forcing you to discuss, you can check out any time you want.
You do realize this was my thread,einstein? How about you either start another thread or stop replying to my comments.
One thing is for sure, if Montana was a Patriot and Brady never was all these people saying Montana was the better QB would not be saying it now. Again someone please tell me what more Brady has to do to be the best ever? Or is it impossible because he plays in today’s game?
@craig44 said:
It is the difference between using statistical data and anecdotal evidence. no one is forcing you to discuss, you can check out any time you want.
You do realize this was my thread,einstein? How about you either start another thread or stop replying to my comments.
Ok,Tom says Hi!
You know your argument is going well when you resort to name calling. I thought this was a discussion thread about ranking the GOAT QB with statistics. How unfortunate you got all sensitive when your methods got questioned.
The one thing I find amazing about all these stats is almost all of these QB's I believe were drafted in the first round. Except for Tom Brady who was a lowly sixth round draft pick (any team in the nfl could have nabbed him in the fifth round). So talk about a bargain QB. The fact he's won so much in the playoffs and SB just adds to the lore. Plus amazed that he's still doing it in his 40's. Most human QB's starting going downhill after about age 33 or so. Tho lately more exceptions to that old rule (Drew Brees, etc). I am a redskins fan by the way (not patriots). Woe is me being a skins fan, we suck -- and we've sucked for 25 years. I dont know what a great consistent QB looks like up close. Even in our heyday in the 1980's our QB's were our weaker position. The last really nice one I remember is Sonny Jurgensen, and he is nowhere near being on this list.
@craig44 said:
It is the difference between using statistical data and anecdotal evidence. no one is forcing you to discuss, you can check out any time you want.
You do realize this was my thread,einstein? How about you either start another thread or stop replying to my comments.
Ok,Tom says Hi!
You know your argument is going well when you resort to name calling. I thought this was a discussion thread about ranking the GOAT QB with statistics. How unfortunate you got all sensitive when your methods got questioned.
Nah,sensitive is whining about context for this list in three separate comments when it was already stated in a previous comment what & who this list was for.
I tried telling you in a civil manner that I wasn't gonna keep arguing with you but obviously you can't handle civil.
@1951WheatiesPremium said:
Someone will have to explain to me how exactly ‘2nd best QB ever to play the game’ constitutes hating on a guy.
That just doesn’t make sense.
In MY OPINION I feel that it is without question that he is the best, I don’t expect nor care one way or another who agrees or disagrees with me. Ofcourse I am going to counter point anyone who disagrees especially since I truly believe that if the history was switched and Montana was a Patriot and Brady was a 49’er or any other team the people who say Montana was the best would not be saying it. Again just my opinion, I certainly respect Montana and like I said before up until about 3/4 or so into Brady’s career I used to think Montana and Manning for that matter were better.
It has nothing to do with who they played for with respect to my opinion. I have no hate for the Pats; if anything I hated those 49er teams and Montana more than I ever did the Patriots as they often stood in the way of my Giants shot at a SuperBowl- indeed we’ve had to go through them just about every time we’ve won. And we’ve been on the wrong end many, many times.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
@craig44 said:
It is the difference between using statistical data and anecdotal evidence. no one is forcing you to discuss, you can check out any time you want.
You do realize this was my thread,einstein? How about you either start another thread or stop replying to my comments.
Ok,Tom says Hi!
You know your argument is going well when you resort to name calling. I thought this was a discussion thread about ranking the GOAT QB with statistics. How unfortunate you got all sensitive when your methods got questioned.
Nah,sensitive is whining about context for this list in three separate comments when it was already stated in a previous comment what & who this list was for.
I tried telling you in a civil manner that I wasn't gonna keep arguing with you but obviously you can't handle civil.
Without context, your stats are pretty much meaningless. If using context is too nuanced for you, you need to start using adjusted stats that tell more of the story.
@1951WheatiesPremium said:
It has nothing to do with who they played for with respect to my opinion. I have no hate for the Pats; if anything I hated those 49er teams and Montana more than I ever did the Patriots as they often stood in the way of my Giants shot at a SuperBowl- indeed we’ve had to go through them just about every time we’ve won. And we’ve been on the wrong end many, many times.
I’m painting the situation with a big brush, I’m certainly not pointing a finger solely at you
@perkdog said:
In MY OPINION I feel that it is without question that he is the best, I don’t expect nor care one way or another who agrees or disagrees with me, but get really offended and try to trigger others into an argument with name calling every time they don't. Ofcourse I am going to counter point anyone who disagrees especially since I'm a Pats homer.
@craig44 said:
It is the difference between using statistical data and anecdotal evidence. no one is forcing you to discuss, you can check out any time you want.
You do realize this was my thread,einstein? How about you either start another thread or stop replying to my comments.
Ok,Tom says Hi!
You know your argument is going well when you resort to name calling. I thought this was a discussion thread about ranking the GOAT QB with statistics. How unfortunate you got all sensitive when your methods got questioned.
Nah,sensitive is whining about context for this list in three separate comments when it was already stated in a previous comment what & who this list was for.
I tried telling you in a civil manner that I wasn't gonna keep arguing with you but obviously you can't handle civil.
Without context, your stats are pretty much meaningless. If using context is too nuanced for you, you need to start using adjusted stats that tell more of the story.
@craig44 said:
It is the difference between using statistical data and anecdotal evidence. no one is forcing you to discuss, you can check out any time you want.
You do realize this was my thread,einstein? How about you either start another thread or stop replying to my comments.
Ok,Tom says Hi!
You know your argument is going well when you resort to name calling. I thought this was a discussion thread about ranking the GOAT QB with statistics. How unfortunate you got all sensitive when your methods got questioned.
Nah,sensitive is whining about context for this list in three separate comments when it was already stated in a previous comment what & who this list was for.
I tried telling you in a civil manner that I wasn't gonna keep arguing with you but obviously you can't handle civil.
Without context, your stats are pretty much meaningless. If using context is too nuanced for you, you need to start using adjusted stats that tell more of the story.
There was plenty of context but obviously that was too much for Ernest to comprehend.
@perkdog said:
In MY OPINION I feel that it is without question that he is the best, I don’t expect nor care one way or another who agrees or disagrees with me, but get really offended and try to trigger others into an argument with name calling every time they don't. Ofcourse I am going to counter point anyone who disagrees especially since I'm a Pats homer.
Fixed.
So now that I posted a thorough list of regular season stats after you stated "regular season passing stats were the only accurate way to compare QBs of a given era", are you finally gonna tell us who should be GOAT based off your criteria or are you just gonna keep disassembling why it shouldn't be Brady?
@craig44 said:
It is the difference between using statistical data and anecdotal evidence. no one is forcing you to discuss, you can check out any time you want.
You do realize this was my thread,einstein? How about you either start another thread or stop replying to my comments.
Ok,Tom says Hi!
You know your argument is going well when you resort to name calling. I thought this was a discussion thread about ranking the GOAT QB with statistics. How unfortunate you got all sensitive when your methods got questioned.
Nah,sensitive is whining about context for this list in three separate comments when it was already stated in a previous comment what & who this list was for.
I tried telling you in a civil manner that I wasn't gonna keep arguing with you but obviously you can't handle civil.
Without context, your stats are pretty much meaningless. If using context is too nuanced for you, you need to start using adjusted stats that tell more of the story.
@craig44 said:
It is the difference between using statistical data and anecdotal evidence. no one is forcing you to discuss, you can check out any time you want.
You do realize this was my thread,einstein? How about you either start another thread or stop replying to my comments.
Ok,Tom says Hi!
You know your argument is going well when you resort to name calling. I thought this was a discussion thread about ranking the GOAT QB with statistics. How unfortunate you got all sensitive when your methods got questioned.
Nah,sensitive is whining about context for this list in three separate comments when it was already stated in a previous comment what & who this list was for.
I tried telling you in a civil manner that I wasn't gonna keep arguing with you but obviously you can't handle civil.
Without context, your stats are pretty much meaningless. If using context is too nuanced for you, you need to start using adjusted stats that tell more of the story.
There was plenty of context but obviously that was too much for Ernest to comprehend.
I don't think reading comprehension is your strong point.
@craig44 said:
It is the difference between using statistical data and anecdotal evidence. no one is forcing you to discuss, you can check out any time you want.
You do realize this was my thread,einstein? How about you either start another thread or stop replying to my comments.
Ok,Tom says Hi!
You know your argument is going well when you resort to name calling. I thought this was a discussion thread about ranking the GOAT QB with statistics. How unfortunate you got all sensitive when your methods got questioned.
Nah,sensitive is whining about context for this list in three separate comments when it was already stated in a previous comment what & who this list was for.
I tried telling you in a civil manner that I wasn't gonna keep arguing with you but obviously you can't handle civil.
Without context, your stats are pretty much meaningless. If using context is too nuanced for you, you need to start using adjusted stats that tell more of the story.
@craig44 said:
It is the difference between using statistical data and anecdotal evidence. no one is forcing you to discuss, you can check out any time you want.
You do realize this was my thread,einstein? How about you either start another thread or stop replying to my comments.
Ok,Tom says Hi!
You know your argument is going well when you resort to name calling. I thought this was a discussion thread about ranking the GOAT QB with statistics. How unfortunate you got all sensitive when your methods got questioned.
Nah,sensitive is whining about context for this list in three separate comments when it was already stated in a previous comment what & who this list was for.
I tried telling you in a civil manner that I wasn't gonna keep arguing with you but obviously you can't handle civil.
Without context, your stats are pretty much meaningless. If using context is too nuanced for you, you need to start using adjusted stats that tell more of the story.
There was plenty of context but obviously that was too much for Ernest to comprehend.
I don't think reading comprehension is your strong point.
Neither is it your. The these two paragraphs located directly above the list gave you context but you chose to ignore it then start complaining. I told you why i posted the list but forgot to type who it was for which i later did.
With everyone arguing lately which QB should be considered GOAT, I put together a list of all the major passing statistical categories so we can see where each QB ranks all time compared to the other QBs in this debate. I only used the QBs most mentioned in the other thread on this topic,they were Tom Brady,Peyton Manning,Joe Montana,John Elway,Dan Marino,Drew Brees,Johnny Unitas,Dan Fouts & Jim Kelly.
Each QB is listed by where they currently rank in most of the major passing stat categories. I used Pro-Reference for most of this list and I posted a link to any other sites i used.
Obviously Brady & Brees are still active so their current rankings aren't final. In some categories a different QB not mentioned above was ranked #1 so I posted their name & stat total in the 1st spot.
What's that? You want to see Super Bowl Career Passing Stats next? I got you.
SUPER BOWL CAREER PASSING RECORDS
Super Bowl Passes Completed
1. Tom Brady 235
2. Peyton Manning 103
4. Joe Montana 83
5. Jim Kelly 81
6. John Elway 76
Super Bowl Pass Attempts
1. Tom Brady 357
2. Peyton Manning 155
3. John Elway 152
4. Jim Kelly 145
6. Joe Montana 122
Super Bowl Passing Yards
1. Tom Brady 2,576
3. Joe Montana 1,142
4. John Elway 1,128
5. Peyton Manning 1.001
7. Jim Kelly 829
Super Bowl Pass Completion Percentage
2. Joe Montana 68%
3. Peyton Manning 66.5%
5. Tom Brady 65.8%
Super Bowl Passer Rating
1. Joe Montana 127.8
8. Tom Brady 98.0
9. Brett Favre 98.6
Super Bowl Passing Touchdowns
1. Tom Brady 18
2. Joe Montana 11
8. Brett Favre 5
Super Bowl Passes Intercepted
1.John Elway 8
3.Jim Kelly 7
6.Tom Brady 5
8.Peyton Manning 5
@LarkinCollector Stop with your trolling, you have been a member here for a long time. If I’ve called you a name and offended you then I apologize. You annoyed me I admit it, we disagree let’s just leave it at that or let’s try to engage like I’ve been doing with 1951 Wheat ok? Again sorry if I came undone a few times
@craig44 said:
It is the difference between using statistical data and anecdotal evidence. no one is forcing you to discuss, you can check out any time you want.
You do realize this was my thread,einstein? How about you either start another thread or stop replying to my comments.
Ok,Tom says Hi!
You know your argument is going well when you resort to name calling. I thought this was a discussion thread about ranking the GOAT QB with statistics. How unfortunate you got all sensitive when your methods got questioned.
Nah,sensitive is whining about context for this list in three separate comments when it was already stated in a previous comment what & who this list was for.
I tried telling you in a civil manner that I wasn't gonna keep arguing with you but obviously you can't handle civil.
Without context, your stats are pretty much meaningless. If using context is too nuanced for you, you need to start using adjusted stats that tell more of the story.
@craig44 said:
It is the difference between using statistical data and anecdotal evidence. no one is forcing you to discuss, you can check out any time you want.
You do realize this was my thread,einstein? How about you either start another thread or stop replying to my comments.
Ok,Tom says Hi!
You know your argument is going well when you resort to name calling. I thought this was a discussion thread about ranking the GOAT QB with statistics. How unfortunate you got all sensitive when your methods got questioned.
Nah,sensitive is whining about context for this list in three separate comments when it was already stated in a previous comment what & who this list was for.
I tried telling you in a civil manner that I wasn't gonna keep arguing with you but obviously you can't handle civil.
Without context, your stats are pretty much meaningless. If using context is too nuanced for you, you need to start using adjusted stats that tell more of the story.
There was plenty of context but obviously that was too much for Ernest to comprehend.
I don't think reading comprehension is your strong point.
Neither is it your. The these two paragraphs located directly above the list gave you context but you chose to ignore it then start complaining. I told you why i posted the list but forgot to type who it was for which i later did.
With everyone arguing lately which QB should be considered GOAT, I put together a list of all the major passing statistical categories so we can see where each QB ranks all time compared to the other QBs in this debate. I only used the QBs most mentioned in the other thread on this topic,they were Tom Brady,Peyton Manning,Joe Montana,John Elway,Dan Marino,Drew Brees,Johnny Unitas,Dan Fouts & Jim Kelly.
Each QB is listed by where they currently rank in most of the major passing stat categories. I used Pro-Reference for most of this list and I posted a link to any other sites i used.
Obviously Brady & Brees are still active so their current rankings aren't final. In some categories a different QB not mentioned above was ranked #1 so I posted their name & stat total in the 1st spot.
I really don't think you understand the meaning of context. Either that or you are being purposely obtuse. You have listed a whole bunch of raw statistics from quarterbacks who played in different eras under different conditions and different rules. You are trying to compare Apple's with elephants here. To compare across eras you need to be able to account for the differences in those eras. You need to use adjusted stats that can normalize the playing field. Otherwise you can easily come to the conclusion that Carson Palmer or Matt Ryan are better than Johnny unitas.
This is not a difficult process. It is like trying to compare the great dead ball pitchers like johnson and Alexander with Pedro. With raw statistics it is impossible. You have to normalize the playing field and use context or else your peeing in the wind.
I don't think i can describe it any simpler than that.
@stevek said: Super Bowl Passer Rating
Joe Montana 127.8
Turn out the lights, the debate's over.....
Ok so Super Bowl Geek stats only count if it’s in Montana’s favor? LOL ok Steve
Super Bowl Passer Rating
Joe Montana 127.8
Tom Brady 98.0
That difference is more than a "geek stats" difference based on Brady being in eight Super Bowls versus Montana being in four Super Bowls, and Brady simply accumulating more stats because he was in more games.
Montana's difference is an overall performance difference, which i would agree wouldn't be valid for GOAT if it was only one Super Bowl game. But we're talking four Super Bowl games here, all wins for Joe Montana with a superior passer rating of over 30% better than Tom Brady.
For you guys that are using Tom Brady's three Super Bowl losses as an argument against him compared to Montana...you are off base. Montana won four Super Bowls, Brady won Five. Five is greater than four.
Brady lost three Super Bowls...and those are three Super Bowls that Montana was not good enough to even get too, which means Montana lost or 'choked' those THREE in games prior to getting to the Super Bowl. Losing before the Super Bowl is worse than losing in the Super Bowl.
Montana's playoff record was 12-0 in the years they won the Super Bowl.
In the rest of his career, his playoff record was 4-7. Seems he would have been wise to use his 'Super Bowl prowess' in other games to get to MORE Super Bowls . Of course, if there was such thing as Super Bowl or big game ability, he would use that ability in the earlier rounds or the regular season to ensure he got to the Super Bowl more often so he could put his cape on Unless he wass dumb and didn't realize it
Stevek you should have learned about the myth of big game ability with Ryan Howard. You though Howard possessed that trait too. Boy did that blow up in your face.
Also, In the end, Howard didn't even catch Dave Kingman in career home runs and RBI. LMAO
He'd be the 4th QB after Brady,Manning & Favre. The guy that typed that article is wrong.
When did Brady beat the Patriots?
When they traded Jimmy G to SanFran?
You got me there. I remember they made a big deal about finally beating every other team but,no, he did not beat the Patriots.
@Skin2 said:
For you guys that are using Tom Brady's three Super Bowl losses as an argument against him compared to Montana...you are off base. Montana won four Super Bowls, Brady won Five. Five is greater than four.
Brady lost three Super Bowls...and those are three Super Bowls that Montana was not good enough to even get too, which means Montana lost or 'choked' those THREE in games prior to getting to the Super Bowl. Losing before the Super Bowl is worse than losing in the Super Bowl.
Montana's playoff record was 12-0 in the years they won the Super Bowl.
In the rest of his career, his playoff record was 4-7. Seems he would have been wise to use his 'Super Bowl prowess' in other games to get to MORE Super Bowls . Of course, if there was such thing as Super Bowl or big game ability, he would use that ability in the earlier rounds or the regular season to ensure he got to the Super Bowl more often so he could put his cape on Unless he wass dumb and didn't realize it
Stevek you should have learned about the myth of big game ability with Ryan Howard. You though Howard possessed that trait too. Boy did that blow up in your face.
Also, In the end, Howard didn't even catch Dave Kingman in career home runs and RBI. LMAO
@stevek said: Super Bowl Passer Rating
Joe Montana 127.8
Turn out the lights, the debate's over.....
Ok so Super Bowl Geek stats only count if it’s in Montana’s favor? LOL ok Steve
Super Bowl Passer Rating
Joe Montana 127.8
Tom Brady 98.0
That difference is more than a "geek stats" difference based on Brady being in eight Super Bowls versus Montana being in four Super Bowls, and Brady simply accumulating more stats because he was in more games.
Montana's difference is an overall performance difference, which i would agree wouldn't be valid for GOAT if it was only one Super Bowl game. But we're talking four Super Bowl games here, all wins for Joe Montana with a superior passer rating of over 30% better than Tom Brady.
MmmmmmmmmNk so we are counting Super Bowl stats or Regular Season stats or QB rating or QB passing rating or Regular Season Win % or Playoff Win %, which era should count more??? Which one???? You guys have thrown out pretty much every which way against Brady except my question to anyone is “What more does he have to do to be the GOAT”
@Skin2 said:
For you guys that are using Tom Brady's three Super Bowl losses as an argument against him compared to Montana...you are off base. Montana won four Super Bowls, Brady won Five. Five is greater than four.
Brady lost three Super Bowls...and those are three Super Bowls that Montana was not good enough to even get too, which means Montana lost or 'choked' those THREE in games prior to getting to the Super Bowl. Losing before the Super Bowl is worse than losing in the Super Bowl.
Montana's playoff record was 12-0 in the years they won the Super Bowl.
In the rest of his career, his playoff record was 4-7. Seems he would have been wise to use his 'Super Bowl prowess' in other games to get to MORE Super Bowls . Of course, if there was such thing as Super Bowl or big game ability, he would use that ability in the earlier rounds or the regular season to ensure he got to the Super Bowl more often so he could put his cape on Unless he wass dumb and didn't realize it
Stevek you should have learned about the myth of big game ability with Ryan Howard. You though Howard possessed that trait too. Boy did that blow up in your face.
Also, In the end, Howard didn't even catch Dave Kingman in career home runs and RBI. LMAO
<<< Stevek you should have learned about the myth of big game ability with Ryan Howard. You though Howard possessed that trait too. Boy did that blow up in your face. >>>
It did turn out poorly in the long run with Ryan Howard. However mistakes such as that are made by professional sports teams all the time.
The Phillies had no choice but to sign Howard to that contract. If the Phillies didn't do it, then a number of other teams would have...and you know it.
BTW: Your premise that Montana "choked" is simply beyond silly.
In the 1979 NFL Draft, the San Francisco 49ers selected Montana at the end of the third round with the 82nd overall pick.
Also, @Skin2, if I had to come up with a plausible explanation for Joe’s missing Super Bowl appearances?
There was the ‘82 strike when they were defending champs in 1981. The whole season was a bit of a farce. That’s a prime of career season gone for everyone in 1982 - Montana included. I also think it’s fair to say he lost out on a few when he was replaced by a Hall of Famer at QB. Obviously, they’re Steve Young’s SuperBowl’s and rightfully so. But I do think Joe had enough left in the tank (and his time in KC somewhat proved he could still play at a high level) to keep the 49ers championship caliber - maybe getting to and winning more.
It’s possible we say the same about Brady one day. But it seems very unlikely and it would have to have been Matt Cassell (timing wise) to be truly legit.
That’s a great question - What more does Tom Brady have to do to be considered the clear cut GOAT?
I’m not sure I know the answer. If we’re being fair, part of the reason you waited to have Tom Brady pass Joe Montana until 2/3 into Tom’s career is because for the beginning of his career he was more of a game manager than the guy through whom the offense flows. That’s not a knock; he stepped into a fantastic situation and did exactly what he needed to do to help the Patriots win. As his career progressed, his statistics started to support his candidacy further and now he is going to retire the statistical leader in many impressive categories.
My point is that there are too many guys from modern day populating all the statistical leaderboards.
Maybe I am wrong and we are living in the greatest era of quarterbacks ever but my belief is that we are living in the most quarterback friendly era ever. So whereas Tom’s Super Bowl yardage totals are impressive, isn’t the fact that Joe Montana threw for 1/2 the yards in 1/3 of the attempts - as an example - more impressive? Especially since it came at a time where it was harder to complete passes and stay in the pocket as a QB?
Or perhaps better stated, what Marino did to get to 49 was significantly more impressive than and of the guys to eclipse 50 since. And it still is for me.
It bears repeating that getting to a SuperBowl is a function of the team you are on - for all guys being discussed. It’s no coincidence that nearly all were winners, though - the position is that important.
All that said, when I consider the 8 SuperBowls Tom Brady as a whole and the 4 Montana went to, its hard not to be underwhelmed by some of Tom’s games. If we’re going to tout his brilliance against Atlanta (I have, we should) then we should also acknowledge that he was very average in others - wins and losses.
The same can not be said of Joe Montana.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
Montana was average in several games before the Super Bowl...hence his team not getting there.
If you are going to give Montana the credit for Winning a Super Bowl, then he gets the blame for not even getting there. Gets the blame for being one and done in the playoffs a quarter of the time they even got to the playoffs.
Can't have it both ways as much as you would like to.
1985 playoffs one and done. Montana QB rating 65.6
1986 playoffs one and done. Montana QB rating 34.2
1987 playoffs one and done. Montana QB rating 42.
Oh and with KC he threw up a 39.2 game in AFC championship.
He must have forgotten his cape???? With that cast in SF and him being as IMPORTANT to winning as you say...Montana should have won at least seven Super Bowls...but he was only good enough to get to four
Comments
I completely get what you are saying about Steve’s abilities being the same minutes before and after some arbitrary moment in time.
But in a way, yes, the moment you win a SuperBowl you are generally viewed as a better player. And not having won one is a knock. Marino got there and lost. Kelly, four times. Heck, looking at that list there is Kerry Collins and if he had won a Super Bowl with the Giants over the Ravens, he would likely be looked at in a considerably different light. Is it fair? No it’s not. Warren Moon was incredible, too, but just didn’t win the big game.
And there’s perhaps no better example than Eli Manning. Two losses and it’s a sure fire bet he’s labeled a bust. But with those two wins there’s now a pretty decent shot at Canton*.
(*Coming from a Giant fan, I’d say that’s pretty good considering I think most Giant fans will tell you he is a lock. As always, I try to maintain objectivity when talking sports.)
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
Montana had 4 wins he is no better than Marino with 0 wins I guess
Plus If you can't count Brady's 5 rings towards being the GOAT then you can't hold superbowl losses against him either. Montana having zero SB losses is the same as Brady having three.
Not counting rings is silly . Leading your team to a championship means absolutely nothing now? Making the superbowl and losing is bad ?
Winning the AFC or NFC championship is an accomplishment but 2 weeks later if you don't win the superbowl you are garbage I guess.
All these GOAT discussions in every sport are basically relentless mental masturbation.
Win today . I'm watching today's game today , I saw yesterday's game or last weeks game when it happened , why do I still care about it? Career stats are just data , I don't care about long dead players in games that ended years ago.
Every game that happened before I discovered football has no meaning whatsoever.
you have missed the point. we rank players based on individual ability. It is great if their team wins the super bowl, but that is the team. Brady had an unbelievable individual game in last years bowl. his team lost. that should not negatively impact how well he played.
you are absolutely correct that steve young is not in the hall of fame because he won one super bowl. he is in because of his elite talent. That is the whole point. we cannot use the team a player plays on as a gauge for how great that player is. it is intellectually dishonest. I find that baseball sabermatricians have arrived at this conclusion already, but many fans of basketball and football are still hung up on ring count. I must admit, I am a baseball fan first, but the same fundamentals apply when it comes to those other sports for choosing greatest players.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Your feelings are fine, of course they sort of disqualify you from being in on the discussion though now dont they?
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
If one Super Bowl win was all it took to get into the Hall of Fame then Doug Williams, Jeff Hostetler,Trent Dilfer & Brad Johnson are all long overdue for a gold jacket.
Eric
Erikthredd’s MJ Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/publishedset/395035
Erikthredd’s Nike Air Jordan Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/basketball/key-card-sets/nike-poster-cards-michael-jordan-1985-1992/alltimeset/408486
Peoples perceptions can change after a super bowl, but that does not change the data. a "fan" can view Kerry Collins or Doug Williams or Joe Flacco any way they want after they won the big game, it does nothing to change the stats or how effective that player was.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
craig there isn't a right or wrong way to decide who should be GOAT,its just an opinion and everyone's is different. I consider how these players played in the biggest moments, you don't. We disagree so just leave it at that. I'm not going to sit here all day and go back and forth with you when neither opinion will change.
Eric
Erikthredd’s MJ Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/publishedset/395035
Erikthredd’s Nike Air Jordan Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/basketball/key-card-sets/nike-poster-cards-michael-jordan-1985-1992/alltimeset/408486
It is the difference between using statistical data and anecdotal evidence. no one is forcing you to discuss, you can check out any time you want.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Steve Young was a two time MVP & won a SB MVP and when he retired he had the highest career passer rating and was top two in career completion percentage. You guys are downplaying his career to just a SB win to go along with Flacco,Hostetler,Dilfer & Johnson. The guy had a really good career compared to 80-90% of all QBs to ever play the game.
Should he be considered for GOAT? Probably not but he was no slouch that had one great playoff run.
Eric
Erikthredd’s MJ Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/publishedset/395035
Erikthredd’s Nike Air Jordan Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/basketball/key-card-sets/nike-poster-cards-michael-jordan-1985-1992/alltimeset/408486
You do realize this was my thread,einstein? How about you either start another thread or stop replying to my comments.
Ok,Tom says Hi!
Eric
Erikthredd’s MJ Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/publishedset/395035
Erikthredd’s Nike Air Jordan Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/basketball/key-card-sets/nike-poster-cards-michael-jordan-1985-1992/alltimeset/408486
Or...
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
Or.....
Eric
Erikthredd’s MJ Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/publishedset/395035
Erikthredd’s Nike Air Jordan Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/basketball/key-card-sets/nike-poster-cards-michael-jordan-1985-1992/alltimeset/408486
Yours does not illicit giggles, though.
I too have Brady 2 behind Joe.
I don’t consider that an insult.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
This thread is getting a little bit disturbing.
Eric
Erikthredd’s MJ Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/publishedset/395035
Erikthredd’s Nike Air Jordan Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/basketball/key-card-sets/nike-poster-cards-michael-jordan-1985-1992/alltimeset/408486
One thing is for sure, if Montana was a Patriot and Brady never was all these people saying Montana was the better QB would not be saying it now. Again someone please tell me what more Brady has to do to be the best ever? Or is it impossible because he plays in today’s game?
You know your argument is going well when you resort to name calling. I thought this was a discussion thread about ranking the GOAT QB with statistics. How unfortunate you got all sensitive when your methods got questioned.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Someone will have to explain to me how exactly ‘2nd best QB ever to play the game’ constitutes hating on a guy.
That just doesn’t make sense.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
The one thing I find amazing about all these stats is almost all of these QB's I believe were drafted in the first round. Except for Tom Brady who was a lowly sixth round draft pick (any team in the nfl could have nabbed him in the fifth round). So talk about a bargain QB. The fact he's won so much in the playoffs and SB just adds to the lore. Plus amazed that he's still doing it in his 40's. Most human QB's starting going downhill after about age 33 or so. Tho lately more exceptions to that old rule (Drew Brees, etc). I am a redskins fan by the way (not patriots). Woe is me being a skins fan, we suck -- and we've sucked for 25 years. I dont know what a great consistent QB looks like up close. Even in our heyday in the 1980's our QB's were our weaker position. The last really nice one I remember is Sonny Jurgensen, and he is nowhere near being on this list.
My Coin Blog
My Toned Lincoln Registry Set
Mark rypien had a good year as I recall in 91. I think he was one and done though
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Nah,sensitive is whining about context for this list in three separate comments when it was already stated in a previous comment what & who this list was for.
I tried telling you in a civil manner that I wasn't gonna keep arguing with you but obviously you can't handle civil.
Eric
Erikthredd’s MJ Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/publishedset/395035
Erikthredd’s Nike Air Jordan Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/basketball/key-card-sets/nike-poster-cards-michael-jordan-1985-1992/alltimeset/408486
In MY OPINION I feel that it is without question that he is the best, I don’t expect nor care one way or another who agrees or disagrees with me. Ofcourse I am going to counter point anyone who disagrees especially since I truly believe that if the history was switched and Montana was a Patriot and Brady was a 49’er or any other team the people who say Montana was the best would not be saying it. Again just my opinion, I certainly respect Montana and like I said before up until about 3/4 or so into Brady’s career I used to think Montana and Manning for that matter were better.
It has nothing to do with who they played for with respect to my opinion. I have no hate for the Pats; if anything I hated those 49er teams and Montana more than I ever did the Patriots as they often stood in the way of my Giants shot at a SuperBowl- indeed we’ve had to go through them just about every time we’ve won. And we’ve been on the wrong end many, many times.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
Without context, your stats are pretty much meaningless. If using context is too nuanced for you, you need to start using adjusted stats that tell more of the story.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
I’m painting the situation with a big brush, I’m certainly not pointing a finger solely at you
@perkdog
And I take no offense.
I respect you standing up for your guy, man. That’s your guy - how could you not?
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
Fixed.
There was plenty of context but obviously that was too much for Ernest to comprehend.
Eric
Erikthredd’s MJ Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/publishedset/395035
Erikthredd’s Nike Air Jordan Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/basketball/key-card-sets/nike-poster-cards-michael-jordan-1985-1992/alltimeset/408486
So now that I posted a thorough list of regular season stats after you stated "regular season passing stats were the only accurate way to compare QBs of a given era", are you finally gonna tell us who should be GOAT based off your criteria or are you just gonna keep disassembling why it shouldn't be Brady?
Eric
Erikthredd’s MJ Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/publishedset/395035
Erikthredd’s Nike Air Jordan Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/basketball/key-card-sets/nike-poster-cards-michael-jordan-1985-1992/alltimeset/408486
I don't think reading comprehension is your strong point.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Neither is it your. The these two paragraphs located directly above the list gave you context but you chose to ignore it then start complaining. I told you why i posted the list but forgot to type who it was for which i later did.
With everyone arguing lately which QB should be considered GOAT, I put together a list of all the major passing statistical categories so we can see where each QB ranks all time compared to the other QBs in this debate. I only used the QBs most mentioned in the other thread on this topic,they were Tom Brady,Peyton Manning,Joe Montana,John Elway,Dan Marino,Drew Brees,Johnny Unitas,Dan Fouts & Jim Kelly.
Each QB is listed by where they currently rank in most of the major passing stat categories. I used Pro-Reference for most of this list and I posted a link to any other sites i used.
Obviously Brady & Brees are still active so their current rankings aren't final. In some categories a different QB not mentioned above was ranked #1 so I posted their name & stat total in the 1st spot.
Eric
Erikthredd’s MJ Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/publishedset/395035
Erikthredd’s Nike Air Jordan Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/basketball/key-card-sets/nike-poster-cards-michael-jordan-1985-1992/alltimeset/408486
What's that? You want to see Super Bowl Career Passing Stats next? I got you.
SUPER BOWL CAREER PASSING RECORDS
Super Bowl Passes Completed
1. Tom Brady 235
2. Peyton Manning 103
4. Joe Montana 83
5. Jim Kelly 81
6. John Elway 76
Super Bowl Pass Attempts
1. Tom Brady 357
2. Peyton Manning 155
3. John Elway 152
4. Jim Kelly 145
6. Joe Montana 122
Super Bowl Passing Yards
1. Tom Brady 2,576
3. Joe Montana 1,142
4. John Elway 1,128
5. Peyton Manning 1.001
7. Jim Kelly 829
Super Bowl Pass Completion Percentage
2. Joe Montana 68%
3. Peyton Manning 66.5%
5. Tom Brady 65.8%
Super Bowl Passer Rating
1. Joe Montana 127.8
8. Tom Brady 98.0
9. Brett Favre 98.6
Super Bowl Passing Touchdowns
1. Tom Brady 18
2. Joe Montana 11
8. Brett Favre 5
Super Bowl Passes Intercepted
1.John Elway 8
3.Jim Kelly 7
6.Tom Brady 5
8.Peyton Manning 5
Eric
Erikthredd’s MJ Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/publishedset/395035
Erikthredd’s Nike Air Jordan Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/basketball/key-card-sets/nike-poster-cards-michael-jordan-1985-1992/alltimeset/408486
Super Bowl Passer Rating
Joe Montana 127.8
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
@LarkinCollector Stop with your trolling, you have been a member here for a long time. If I’ve called you a name and offended you then I apologize. You annoyed me I admit it, we disagree let’s just leave it at that or let’s try to engage like I’ve been doing with 1951 Wheat ok? Again sorry if I came undone a few times
I really don't think you understand the meaning of context. Either that or you are being purposely obtuse. You have listed a whole bunch of raw statistics from quarterbacks who played in different eras under different conditions and different rules. You are trying to compare Apple's with elephants here. To compare across eras you need to be able to account for the differences in those eras. You need to use adjusted stats that can normalize the playing field. Otherwise you can easily come to the conclusion that Carson Palmer or Matt Ryan are better than Johnny unitas.
This is not a difficult process. It is like trying to compare the great dead ball pitchers like johnson and Alexander with Pedro. With raw statistics it is impossible. You have to normalize the playing field and use context or else your peeing in the wind.
I don't think i can describe it any simpler than that.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
When did Brady beat the Patriots?
Super Bowl Passer Rating
Joe Montana 127.8
Turn out the lights, the debate's over.....
Ok so Super Bowl Geek stats only count if it’s in Montana’s favor? LOL ok Steve
Super Bowl Passer Rating
Joe Montana 127.8
Tom Brady 98.0
That difference is more than a "geek stats" difference based on Brady being in eight Super Bowls versus Montana being in four Super Bowls, and Brady simply accumulating more stats because he was in more games.
Montana's difference is an overall performance difference, which i would agree wouldn't be valid for GOAT if it was only one Super Bowl game. But we're talking four Super Bowl games here, all wins for Joe Montana with a superior passer rating of over 30% better than Tom Brady.
passer rating is a stupid stat
For you guys that are using Tom Brady's three Super Bowl losses as an argument against him compared to Montana...you are off base. Montana won four Super Bowls, Brady won Five. Five is greater than four.
Brady lost three Super Bowls...and those are three Super Bowls that Montana was not good enough to even get too, which means Montana lost or 'choked' those THREE in games prior to getting to the Super Bowl. Losing before the Super Bowl is worse than losing in the Super Bowl.
Montana's playoff record was 12-0 in the years they won the Super Bowl.
. Of course, if there was such thing as Super Bowl or big game ability, he would use that ability in the earlier rounds or the regular season to ensure he got to the Super Bowl more often so he could put his cape on 
Unless he wass dumb and didn't realize it 
In the rest of his career, his playoff record was 4-7. Seems he would have been wise to use his 'Super Bowl prowess' in other games to get to MORE Super Bowls
Stevek you should have learned about the myth of big game ability with Ryan Howard. You though Howard possessed that trait too. Boy did that blow up in your face.
Also, In the end, Howard didn't even catch Dave Kingman in career home runs and RBI. LMAO
When they traded Jimmy G to SanFran?
You got me there. I remember they made a big deal about finally beating every other team but,no, he did not beat the Patriots.
Eric
Erikthredd’s MJ Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/publishedset/395035
Erikthredd’s Nike Air Jordan Collection: https://www.psacard.com/psasetregistry/basketball/key-card-sets/nike-poster-cards-michael-jordan-1985-1992/alltimeset/408486
Awesome post!
MmmmmmmmmNk so we are counting Super Bowl stats or Regular Season stats or QB rating or QB passing rating or Regular Season Win % or Playoff Win %, which era should count more??? Which one???? You guys have thrown out pretty much every which way against Brady except my question to anyone is “What more does he have to do to be the GOAT”
<<< Stevek you should have learned about the myth of big game ability with Ryan Howard. You though Howard possessed that trait too. Boy did that blow up in your face. >>>
It did turn out poorly in the long run with Ryan Howard. However mistakes such as that are made by professional sports teams all the time.
The Phillies had no choice but to sign Howard to that contract. If the Phillies didn't do it, then a number of other teams would have...and you know it.
BTW: Your premise that Montana "choked" is simply beyond silly.
Stevek, he choked. If Montana was that good, then he should have gotten his team to the big game more often.
Also, Brady was 27-10 in the playoffs compared to Montana's 16-7.
Brady also had more regular season wins and better winning percentage.
Brady's first half of his career he had nothing to work with in the skill positions too. His QB rating is lower because of that fact.
Brady's second half of his career he had Gronk and Gronk was hurt often in playoffs.
Montana probably had the most ideal supporting cast in football history, well, maybe second to Terry Bradshaw.
Brady also had better physical abilities...the tangibles.
Funny that Joe was also a later pick, right?
In the 1979 NFL Draft, the San Francisco 49ers selected Montana at the end of the third round with the 82nd overall pick.
Also, @Skin2, if I had to come up with a plausible explanation for Joe’s missing Super Bowl appearances?
There was the ‘82 strike when they were defending champs in 1981. The whole season was a bit of a farce. That’s a prime of career season gone for everyone in 1982 - Montana included. I also think it’s fair to say he lost out on a few when he was replaced by a Hall of Famer at QB. Obviously, they’re Steve Young’s SuperBowl’s and rightfully so. But I do think Joe had enough left in the tank (and his time in KC somewhat proved he could still play at a high level) to keep the 49ers championship caliber - maybe getting to and winning more.
It’s possible we say the same about Brady one day. But it seems very unlikely and it would have to have been Matt Cassell (timing wise) to be truly legit.
@perkdog
That’s a great question - What more does Tom Brady have to do to be considered the clear cut GOAT?
I’m not sure I know the answer. If we’re being fair, part of the reason you waited to have Tom Brady pass Joe Montana until 2/3 into Tom’s career is because for the beginning of his career he was more of a game manager than the guy through whom the offense flows. That’s not a knock; he stepped into a fantastic situation and did exactly what he needed to do to help the Patriots win. As his career progressed, his statistics started to support his candidacy further and now he is going to retire the statistical leader in many impressive categories.
My point is that there are too many guys from modern day populating all the statistical leaderboards.
https://www.pro-foot https://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/pass_td_single_season.htm ball-reference.com/leaders/pass_td_single_season.htm
Maybe I am wrong and we are living in the greatest era of quarterbacks ever but my belief is that we are living in the most quarterback friendly era ever. So whereas Tom’s Super Bowl yardage totals are impressive, isn’t the fact that Joe Montana threw for 1/2 the yards in 1/3 of the attempts - as an example - more impressive? Especially since it came at a time where it was harder to complete passes and stay in the pocket as a QB?
Or perhaps better stated, what Marino did to get to 49 was significantly more impressive than and of the guys to eclipse 50 since. And it still is for me.
It bears repeating that getting to a SuperBowl is a function of the team you are on - for all guys being discussed. It’s no coincidence that nearly all were winners, though - the position is that important.
All that said, when I consider the 8 SuperBowls Tom Brady as a whole and the 4 Montana went to, its hard not to be underwhelmed by some of Tom’s games. If we’re going to tout his brilliance against Atlanta (I have, we should) then we should also acknowledge that he was very average in others - wins and losses.
The same can not be said of Joe Montana.
Curious about the rare, mysterious and beautiful 1951 Wheaties Premium Photos?
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/987963/1951-wheaties-premium-photos-set-registry#latest
Montana was average in several games before the Super Bowl...hence his team not getting there.
If you are going to give Montana the credit for Winning a Super Bowl, then he gets the blame for not even getting there. Gets the blame for being one and done in the playoffs a quarter of the time they even got to the playoffs.
Can't have it both ways as much as you would like to.
For example:
1985 playoffs one and done. Montana QB rating 65.6
1986 playoffs one and done. Montana QB rating 34.2
1987 playoffs one and done. Montana QB rating 42.
Oh and with KC he threw up a 39.2 game in AFC championship.
He must have forgotten his cape???? With that cast in SF and him being as IMPORTANT to winning as you say...Montana should have won at least seven Super Bowls...but he was only good enough to get to four