Originally posted by NinerG94:Yes, there were differences in the eras. No doubt about it.
I'm not hand waving any of Brady's accomplishments but for people to act as if Brady would have those same accomplishments had he played when Montana played is a joke. He's a statue. Brady has had the luxury of playing during an era where all the rukes are skewed toward the offense. You can't touch the QB. Montana took some absolute beatings and was far superior to Brady athletically. Defensive backs were allowed to put their hands on receivers and make them pay for going over the middle. I promise you Julian Edelman would not have been allowed to run 40 shallow crossing routes over the middle in 1989. He would've had hisnhead taken off.
Brady is the best quarterback of the past 25 years but beyond that it's not a comparison that can be made. Today's game is nothing like it was when Montana played. Not even close.
But it goes both ways. Montana played pre-salary cap, and the 49ers were one of the teams that exploited and took advantage of that. They routinely had some of the most loaded teams in the league.
Montana played under one of the most brilliant offense minds in football history, and played in a system that was incredibly innovative at the time.
All of Brady's contemporaries are playing under these same rules. And all of Montana's opponents were getting the crap beat out of them, too.
I agree that comparisons like "look at Brady's passer rating compared to Montana's passer rating" are lopsided, obviously they are going to be tilted towards Brady. But stuff like winning percent is era-agnostic.
[ Edited by theduke85 on Jan 26, 2021 at 5:32 AM ]
damn straight on the last part too
