Joe Montana Legacy Secured

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by elguapo:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:
Stop with the loaded teams. They werent all loaded.

Seriously. This guy is annoying posting garbage arguments. It's unbelievable. Montana had loaded teams???? Not in 81 and 84. Think Mcfly. Think. 81 was an average offense with no rb and a few good WRs. No not really. 84 had Craig but that's about it. Dam it's not even close when you are talking sbs.

His argument was nobody's perfect......aaaaaaa. Montana is as close to perfect as they come. Brady was a game manager against the rams and did nothing. He also chocked against the giants twice. He also threw quite a few ints against Seattle. He also threw a huge pick 6 and was a major reason for that 10 to 14 point swing bc New England was already within fg range.

Stop. Just stop. Montana is a better qb. Done. And I got news for you, beating those powerhouses in the 80s were a lot harder then these above average teams Brady had played in the sbs. The rams were the only great team they beat but it was all the defense not Brady. Also they cheated!!! And some more news for you. If Montana went to 7 he would of won all 7. Nothing could stop that guy. Denvers number 1 defense and Montana rolls up 55 (the defense helped on a score) and Brady struggles against the falcons???? What?!!!

Please stop now. There is just too much ammo against Brady.

Lots of stuff in here..... ok 1 by 1

• Your statement that the 84 team had Craig and thats it. I guess Wendell Tyler's 1500 yards from scrimmage that year dont matter? In fact, that 84 team was loaded and one of the best teams the Niners ever had.
• Montana being perfect.. So you just consider Super Bowls or do you not consider his failures 3 straight years in the playoffs from 85-87.
• Those powerhouse teams of the 80s? Cincy was hardly a "powerhouse" team. There only 2 SB appearances ever were against the Niners. Miami had a very good team because of Marino and his historic offense but lets not fool ourselves that they were any good on defense.

I dont know if you were even a fan in the 80s or old enough to have seen Joe play. No, he wasnt perfect. But he was incredible in his 4 SBs.. well at least 3 of them anyway. In a couple of other playoff games (NY Giants and Minnesota) he was awful. In fact, Bill Walsh pulled him out of the game. I promise that never happened to Brady.

The thing I find funny is how so many Niners fans like yourself are such homers. Saying stuff like " Ive got news for you. If Montana had gone to 7 he would have won them all" is just so dumb. Different era. Different opponents. No way to know.

Ive said this before. Joe was my favorite Niner and FB player ever. I never missed a game at the Stick in which he played. He was incredible. BUT.. so is Brady. If you asked most people in the country they would say Brady is the GOAT. In here, I get it.. people will say Joe. The real answer should be... comparing eras is impossible and Joe was the best in the 80s and Brady is the best now. Just like Joe himself says.

Don't even bother man. Good post, but it will fall on deaf ears.

Thanks. It isnt even worth debating someone who laughs at the contributions Tyler made in 84 with his 1500 yards from scrimmage, says Montana "himself was great and didnt need much", and says its dumb to not say Montana would have won all 7 SBS that Brady played in. LMAO. Oh.. and he isnt a homer.

Seriously, I am done in this thread because the posts have gone beyond ridiculous.

The 81 team wasn't loaded. You can't argue that.

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:
The 81 team wasn't loaded. You can't argue that.

Oh, but they will... might not be legit points, but someone will argue L0L #Where'sNateDog?

I'm refreshed from not posting in here ffor 24hrs... I'm due for my daily dose of circle jerk

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by elguapo:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:
Stop with the loaded teams. They werent all loaded.

Seriously. This guy is annoying posting garbage arguments. It's unbelievable. Montana had loaded teams???? Not in 81 and 84. Think Mcfly. Think. 81 was an average offense with no rb and a few good WRs. No not really. 84 had Craig but that's about it. Dam it's not even close when you are talking sbs.

His argument was nobody's perfect......aaaaaaa. Montana is as close to perfect as they come. Brady was a game manager against the rams and did nothing. He also chocked against the giants twice. He also threw quite a few ints against Seattle. He also threw a huge pick 6 and was a major reason for that 10 to 14 point swing bc New England was already within fg range.

Stop. Just stop. Montana is a better qb. Done. And I got news for you, beating those powerhouses in the 80s were a lot harder then these above average teams Brady had played in the sbs. The rams were the only great team they beat but it was all the defense not Brady. Also they cheated!!! And some more news for you. If Montana went to 7 he would of won all 7. Nothing could stop that guy. Denvers number 1 defense and Montana rolls up 55 (the defense helped on a score) and Brady struggles against the falcons???? What?!!!

Please stop now. There is just too much ammo against Brady.

Lots of stuff in here..... ok 1 by 1

• Your statement that the 84 team had Craig and thats it. I guess Wendell Tyler's 1500 yards from scrimmage that year dont matter? In fact, that 84 team was loaded and one of the best teams the Niners ever had.
• Montana being perfect.. So you just consider Super Bowls or do you not consider his failures 3 straight years in the playoffs from 85-87.
• Those powerhouse teams of the 80s? Cincy was hardly a "powerhouse" team. There only 2 SB appearances ever were against the Niners. Miami had a very good team because of Marino and his historic offense but lets not fool ourselves that they were any good on defense.

I dont know if you were even a fan in the 80s or old enough to have seen Joe play. No, he wasnt perfect. But he was incredible in his 4 SBs.. well at least 3 of them anyway. In a couple of other playoff games (NY Giants and Minnesota) he was awful. In fact, Bill Walsh pulled him out of the game. I promise that never happened to Brady.

The thing I find funny is how so many Niners fans like yourself are such homers. Saying stuff like " Ive got news for you. If Montana had gone to 7 he would have won them all" is just so dumb. Different era. Different opponents. No way to know.

Ive said this before. Joe was my favorite Niner and FB player ever. I never missed a game at the Stick in which he played. He was incredible. BUT.. so is Brady. If you asked most people in the country they would say Brady is the GOAT. In here, I get it.. people will say Joe. The real answer should be... comparing eras is impossible and Joe was the best in the 80s and Brady is the best now. Just like Joe himself says.

Don't even bother man. Good post, but it will fall on deaf ears.

Thanks. It isnt even worth debating someone who laughs at the contributions Tyler made in 84 with his 1500 yards from scrimmage, says Montana "himself was great and didnt need much", and says its dumb to not say Montana would have won all 7 SBS that Brady played in. LMAO. Oh.. and he isnt a homer.

Seriously, I am done in this thread because the posts have gone beyond ridiculous.

elguapo is literally the walking definition of cognitive dissonance.

In one breath he will argue that Montana "dominated every Super Bowl", and then in the next breath he will dismiss Montana not winning more of them because the "NFC was way better than the AFC and was loaded with powerhouse teams that the 49ers had to get through". (Recall that the NFC won 14 out of 15 Super Bowls in the 80s/90s.)

He will boast about how Joe Montana eviscerated the "NUMBER ONE" Denver Broncos defense, and then in the next breath excuse Montana for being destroyed by the Giants defense because it was "a really good defense that had the HOF Lawrence Taylor".

He will crap on Brady for throwing a pick 6 to Robert Alford, putting the Patriots behind 21-0, and insist that Montana "never put his team in that position".... and then in the next breath ignore Joe Montana throwing a pick 6 to Najee Mustafaa in the 1987 playoffs to put the 49ers behind 20-3, insisting that it "isn't the same because it didn't happen in the Super Bowl". He will also ignore that Joe Montana was benched in this game. (Imagine if the roles were reversed. We'd hear, "HAHA. Tom Brady is allegedly the GOAT, and yet he was BENCHED in the playoffs. Montana was NEVER benched in the playoffs because he was too good.")

He will praise Joe Montana for his improvisational ability in the 1981 Championship game against the Cowboys during "The Catch"... and then in the next breath he dismiss Russell Wilson's botched-snap-turned-into-35-yard-pass-to-Tyler-Lockett, insisting that "the defenders took poor angles" and "the cornerbacks stopped covering Lockett and left him wide open". (Imagine if the "The Catch" was done by Wilson/Graham. He'd say, "oh well, the defenders were stumbling over themselves and should've sacked him, Wilson just launched up a prayer and got bailed out by Graham as he always does..")

He will say absolutely outrageous things like "cheating is worth 10 points", and then dismiss Brady's accomplishments because of Deflategate, SpyGate, etc... in the next breath, he will ignore the 49ers skirting the cap and paying players under the table, Montana outright admitting to his offensive lineman spraying silicone on their jerseys, Bill Walsh admitting to meddling with headsets, etc.

The dude is literally impossible to argue with. Again, it is textbook cognitive dissonance. The worst part is he constantly beats his chest and thinks his terrible, flimsy arguments are actually compelling. He is absolutely, utterly delusional.

Originally posted by theduke85:
elguapo is literally the walking definition of cognitive dissonance.

In one breath he will argue that Montana "dominated every Super Bowl", and then in the next breath he will dismiss Montana not winning more of them because the "NFC was way better than the AFC and was loaded with powerhouse teams that the 49ers had to get through". (Recall that the NFC won 14 out of 15 Super Bowls in the 80s/90s.)

He will boast about how Joe Montana eviscerated the "NUMBER ONE" Denver Broncos defense, and then in the next breath excuse Montana for being destroyed by the Giants defense because it was "a really good defense that had the HOF Lawrence Taylor".

He will crap on Brady for throwing a pick 6 to Robert Alford, putting the Patriots behind 21-0, and insist that Montana "never put his team in that position".... and then in the next breath ignore Joe Montana throwing a pick 6 to Najee Mustafaa in the 1987 playoffs to put the 49ers behind 20-3, insisting that it "isn't the same because it didn't happen in the Super Bowl". He will also ignore that Joe Montana was benched in this game. (Imagine if the roles were reversed. We'd hear, "HAHA. Tom Brady is allegedly the GOAT, and yet he was BENCHED in the playoffs. Montana was NEVER benched in the playoffs because he was too good.")

He will praise Joe Montana for his improvisational ability in the 1981 Championship game against the Cowboys during "The Catch"... and then in the next breath he dismiss Russell Wilson's botched-snap-turned-into-35-yard-pass-to-Tyler-Lockett, insisting that "the defenders took poor angles" and "the cornerbacks stopped covering Lockett and left him wide open". (Imagine if the "The Catch" was done by Wilson/Graham. He'd say, "oh well, the defenders were stumbling over themselves and should've sacked him, Wilson just launched up a prayer and got bailed out by Graham as he always does..")

He will say absolutely outrageous things like "cheating is worth 10 points", and then dismiss Brady's accomplishments because of Deflategate, SpyGate, etc... in the next breath, he will ignore the 49ers skirting the cap and paying players under the table, Montana outright admitting to his offensive lineman spraying silicone on their jerseys, Bill Walsh admitting to meddling with headsets, etc.

The dude is literally impossible to argue with. Again, it is textbook cognitive dissonance. The worst part is he constantly beats his chest and thinks his terrible, flimsy arguments are actually compelling. He is absolutely, utterly delusional.

Well said.

Originally posted by genus49:

Originally posted by theduke85:
elguapo is literally the walking definition of cognitive dissonance.

In one breath he will argue that Montana "dominated every Super Bowl", and then in the next breath he will dismiss Montana not winning more of them because the "NFC was way better than the AFC and was loaded with powerhouse teams that the 49ers had to get through". (Recall that the NFC won 14 out of 15 Super Bowls in the 80s/90s.)

He will boast about how Joe Montana eviscerated the "NUMBER ONE" Denver Broncos defense, and then in the next breath excuse Montana for being destroyed by the Giants defense because it was "a really good defense that had the HOF Lawrence Taylor".

He will crap on Brady for throwing a pick 6 to Robert Alford, putting the Patriots behind 21-0, and insist that Montana "never put his team in that position".... and then in the next breath ignore Joe Montana throwing a pick 6 to Najee Mustafaa in the 1987 playoffs to put the 49ers behind 20-3, insisting that it "isn't the same because it didn't happen in the Super Bowl". He will also ignore that Joe Montana was benched in this game. (Imagine if the roles were reversed. We'd hear, "HAHA. Tom Brady is allegedly the GOAT, and yet he was BENCHED in the playoffs. Montana was NEVER benched in the playoffs because he was too good.")

He will praise Joe Montana for his improvisational ability in the 1981 Championship game against the Cowboys during "The Catch"... and then in the next breath he dismiss Russell Wilson's botched-snap-turned-into-35-yard-pass-to-Tyler-Lockett, insisting that "the defenders took poor angles" and "the cornerbacks stopped covering Lockett and left him wide open". (Imagine if the "The Catch" was done by Wilson/Graham. He'd say, "oh well, the defenders were stumbling over themselves and should've sacked him, Wilson just launched up a prayer and got bailed out by Graham as he always does..")

He will say absolutely outrageous things like "cheating is worth 10 points", and then dismiss Brady's accomplishments because of Deflategate, SpyGate, etc... in the next breath, he will ignore the 49ers skirting the cap and paying players under the table, Montana outright admitting to his offensive lineman spraying silicone on their jerseys, Bill Walsh admitting to meddling with headsets, etc.

The dude is literally impossible to argue with. Again, it is textbook cognitive dissonance. The worst part is he constantly beats his chest and thinks his terrible, flimsy arguments are actually compelling. He is absolutely, utterly delusional.

Well said.

Can we get back to talking about Joe?

Originally posted by elguapo:

I'll just keep laughing at how Brady
got gifted a sb from his game manager mode and tuck rule
Seattle being injured and the worst call of any sb by not running
Playing jake delhomme and almost losing
Playing against a gimpy Owens and almost losing
Playing atl s**tty defense and horrible game planning on the 21 yard line but hey Brady is the best right? With a pick 6 that cost New England at least a 10 point swing not to mention that horrible pass Brady threw to Edelman towards the end of the game that looked like yet another pick not to mention Brady overthrowing passes all game. Yeah. Too funny to even argue. Brady is my favorite qb in today's game but he is below Montana even in an easier era to pass. Done

got gifted a sb from his game manager mode and tuck rule - the birth of the mystique is more like it. and contrary to popular belief, brady was brilliant in that season. he had few bad outings notably the broncos came where he threw 4ints. outside of that he just shined. he stood out. there's a reason why BB and the entire team stood by brady.

Seattle being injured and the worst call of any sb by not running - pats had a great run D, and lynch was very bad in the goal line situation. and without kearse catch pats wouldn't even be in this position.

Playing jake delhomme and almost losing - there's no such thing as almost losing. SB is SB, no matter how you slice it. Brady threw for 354yards and 3tds. it was a great game and brady was unstoppable in that 2nd half.

Playing against a gimpy Owens and almost losing - there's no such thing as almost losing. i don't remember pats almost losing that game. pats were up by 24-14.

Playing atl s**tty defense and horrible game planning on the 21 yard line but hey Brady is the best right? - this same defense destroyed seahawks and made aaron rodgers ordinary. Brady engineered the greatest comeback in the history of the SB. nothing comes close to this comeback. nothing. 25pts deficit. 19pts down in the 4th qtr. Brady scored on 5 straight drives. this game cemented brady's legacy.

Pats don't have a luxury of salary cap. They can't beat a SB team 55-10. they aren't built that way. almost always it's a chess match. I fail to understand why some of you can't appreciate greatness.

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

Don't even bother man. Good post, but it will fall on deaf ears.

The voice of reason......not

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:

The 81 team wasn't loaded. You can't argue that.

Originally posted by LVJay:

Oh, but they will... might not be legit points, but someone will argue L0L #Where'sNateDog?

I'm refreshed from not posting in here ffor 24hrs... I'm due for my daily dose of circle jerk

You guys are right, some of these people just don't get it or they like getting on their knees for Brady. He's my favorite quarterback right now but he is no Montana.

It's absolutely hilarious how some of these people are so stubborn they cannot understand simple points and differences. Like a quarterback winning 4 Super Bowls and losing zero as opposed to a quarterback winning five Super Bowls and losing 2 WITH cheating going on as well as the tuck rule and other ridiculous scenarios that enabled that quarterback to win. It's denial at the highest level possible.

Not to mention defending a quarterback when he hasn't even dominated one of those Super Bowl opponents. It is so hilarious and that is what is falling on deaf ears nothing else. The excuses are laughable. I like the comment that Marchon Lynch was not good at gold mine carries. Yeah sure that's a new one. He is rarely ever dropped for a lost even with a bad line he is a beast he is the best short yardage running back in the NFL at the time. Stop making excuses Seattle gave that game away. It's fine.

I started laughing uncontrollably when the poster said Brady could not dominate a sb in a non-salary-cap era???? That has got to be one of the most untrue statements ever. He dominates quite a few games and he has dominated throughout most of his career. Saying he cannot dominate during the most important game of the year is very telling and your ignorance to this fact is seriously making any argument you make questionable at best. Making a statement defending Atlanta's defense for shutting down Green Bay or Seattle does not mean that that defense is magically good. It is not. Quite the opposite. Brady for three quarters look like garbage against a bad defense. They may have been scheming OK, but Brady missed some wide open Throws and he made some poor decisions like the pick 6. That is not the sign of the best quarterback of all time. Nobody is saying Montana never made mistakes but in the most important games he is the closest thing to perfect that has ever been. Sorry but that's the truth. You can accept it or you can stay in denial that's totally fine.

Nobody is saying Brady is not great but because of his failures he simply is not as good as Montana. It's very simple to understand. A lot of you that are saying since he won his fifth Super Bowl now he is the best by virtue of his fifth win are so shortsighted it isn't even an argument. What about his two losses? What about the tuck rule when he should've never been to that other game against the Rams? By that right a lot of people would say Terry Bradshaw is in the top three because he has for Super Bowl wins and that is so many more than any other quarterback. That is simply not true. He is not even top 10 all-time but then again, that's what you get debating with people that cannot understand reason.

Not a homer. Watching both quarterbacks play I think almost any unbiased person would say Montana is the better quarterback having watched their game film and especially their Super Bowl's and playoff appearances. I say Brady is better than Steve Young so that just goes to show you. Montana also won his fourth many years before Brady could so that just goes to show you longevity shouldn't be A factor especially when you have the best quarterback of all time. That's like saying Kobe Bryant is better than Michael Jordan or Emmett Smith is better than Jim Brown or Barry Sanders. Not happening.

Originally posted by elguapo:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:
The 81 team wasn't loaded. You can't argue that.

Originally posted by LVJay:
Oh, but they will... might not be legit points, but someone will argue L0L #Where'sNateDog?

I'm refreshed from not posting in here ffor 24hrs... I'm due for my daily dose of circle jerk

You guys are right, some of these people just don't get it or they like getting on their knees for Brady. He's my favorite quarterback right now but he is no Montana.

It's absolutely hilarious how some of these people are so stubborn they cannot understand simple points and differences. Like a quarterback winning 4 Super Bowls and losing zero as opposed to a quarterback winning five Super Bowls and losing 2 WITH cheating going on as well as the tuck rule and other ridiculous scenarios that enabled that quarterback to win. It's denial at the highest level possible.

Not to mention defending a quarterback when he hasn't even dominated one of those Super Bowl opponents. It is so hilarious and that is what is falling on deaf ears nothing else. The excuses are laughable. I like the comment that Marchon Lynch was not good at gold mine carries. Yeah sure that's a new one. He is rarely ever dropped for a lost even with a bad line he is a beast he is the best short yardage running back in the NFL at the time. Stop making excuses Seattle gave that game away. It's fine.

I started laughing uncontrollably when the poster said Brady could not dominate a sb in a non-salary-cap era???? That has got to be one of the most untrue statements ever. He dominates quite a few games and he has dominated throughout most of his career. Saying he cannot dominate during the most important game of the year is very telling and your ignorance to this fact is seriously making any argument you make questionable at best. Making a statement defending Atlanta's defense for shutting down Green Bay or Seattle does not mean that that defense is magically good. It is not. Quite the opposite. Brady for three quarters look like garbage against a bad defense. They may have been scheming OK, but Brady missed some wide open Throws and he made some poor decisions like the pick 6. That is not the sign of the best quarterback of all time. Nobody is saying Montana never made mistakes but in the most important games he is the closest thing to perfect that has ever been. Sorry but that's the truth. You can accept it or you can stay in denial that's totally fine.

Nobody is saying Brady is not great but because of his failures he simply is not as good as Montana. It's very simple to understand. A lot of you that are saying since he won his fifth Super Bowl now he is the best by virtue of his fifth win are so shortsighted it isn't even an argument. What about his two losses? What about the tuck rule when he should've never been to that other game against the Rams? By that right a lot of people would say Terry Bradshaw is in the top three because he has for Super Bowl wins and that is so many more than any other quarterback. That is simply not true. He is not even top 10 all-time but then again, that's what you get debating with people that cannot understand reason.

Not a homer. Watching both quarterbacks play I think almost any unbiased person would say Montana is the better quarterback having watched their game film and especially their Super Bowl's and playoff appearances. I say Brady is better than Steve Young so that just goes to show you. Montana also won his fourth many years before Brady could so that just goes to show you longevity shouldn't be A factor especially when you have the best quarterback of all time. That's like saying Kobe Bryant is better than Michael Jordan or Emmett Smith is better than Jim Brown or Barry Sanders. Not happening.

The bolded statement finally has some truth to it. LOL. You are right. Tom Brady has dominated many games and could do it in an non salary cap era or a salary cap era.

Originally posted by theduke85:

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by TheHYDE49er:

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by elguapo:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:
Stop with the loaded teams. They werent all loaded.

Seriously. This guy is annoying posting garbage arguments. It's unbelievable. Montana had loaded teams???? Not in 81 and 84. Think Mcfly. Think. 81 was an average offense with no rb and a few good WRs. No not really. 84 had Craig but that's about it. Dam it's not even close when you are talking sbs.

His argument was nobody's perfect......aaaaaaa. Montana is as close to perfect as they come. Brady was a game manager against the rams and did nothing. He also chocked against the giants twice. He also threw quite a few ints against Seattle. He also threw a huge pick 6 and was a major reason for that 10 to 14 point swing bc New England was already within fg range.

Stop. Just stop. Montana is a better qb. Done. And I got news for you, beating those powerhouses in the 80s were a lot harder then these above average teams Brady had played in the sbs. The rams were the only great team they beat but it was all the defense not Brady. Also they cheated!!! And some more news for you. If Montana went to 7 he would of won all 7. Nothing could stop that guy. Denvers number 1 defense and Montana rolls up 55 (the defense helped on a score) and Brady struggles against the falcons???? What?!!!

Please stop now. There is just too much ammo against Brady.

Lots of stuff in here..... ok 1 by 1

• Your statement that the 84 team had Craig and thats it. I guess Wendell Tyler's 1500 yards from scrimmage that year dont matter? In fact, that 84 team was loaded and one of the best teams the Niners ever had.
• Montana being perfect.. So you just consider Super Bowls or do you not consider his failures 3 straight years in the playoffs from 85-87.
• Those powerhouse teams of the 80s? Cincy was hardly a "powerhouse" team. There only 2 SB appearances ever were against the Niners. Miami had a very good team because of Marino and his historic offense but lets not fool ourselves that they were any good on defense.

I dont know if you were even a fan in the 80s or old enough to have seen Joe play. No, he wasnt perfect. But he was incredible in his 4 SBs.. well at least 3 of them anyway. In a couple of other playoff games (NY Giants and Minnesota) he was awful. In fact, Bill Walsh pulled him out of the game. I promise that never happened to Brady.

The thing I find funny is how so many Niners fans like yourself are such homers. Saying stuff like " Ive got news for you. If Montana had gone to 7 he would have won them all" is just so dumb. Different era. Different opponents. No way to know.

Ive said this before. Joe was my favorite Niner and FB player ever. I never missed a game at the Stick in which he played. He was incredible. BUT.. so is Brady. If you asked most people in the country they would say Brady is the GOAT. In here, I get it.. people will say Joe. The real answer should be... comparing eras is impossible and Joe was the best in the 80s and Brady is the best now. Just like Joe himself says.

Don't even bother man. Good post, but it will fall on deaf ears.

Thanks. It isnt even worth debating someone who laughs at the contributions Tyler made in 84 with his 1500 yards from scrimmage, says Montana "himself was great and didnt need much", and says its dumb to not say Montana would have won all 7 SBS that Brady played in. LMAO. Oh.. and he isnt a homer.

Seriously, I am done in this thread because the posts have gone beyond ridiculous.

elguapo is literally the walking definition of cognitive dissonance.

In one breath he will argue that Montana "dominated every Super Bowl", and then in the next breath he will dismiss Montana not winning more of them because the "NFC was way better than the AFC and was loaded with powerhouse teams that the 49ers had to get through". (Recall that the NFC won 14 out of 15 Super Bowls in the 80s/90s.)

He will boast about how Joe Montana eviscerated the "NUMBER ONE" Denver Broncos defense, and then in the next breath excuse Montana for being destroyed by the Giants defense because it was "a really good defense that had the HOF Lawrence Taylor".

He will crap on Brady for throwing a pick 6 to Robert Alford, putting the Patriots behind 21-0, and insist that Montana "never put his team in that position".... and then in the next breath ignore Joe Montana throwing a pick 6 to Najee Mustafaa in the 1987 playoffs to put the 49ers behind 20-3, insisting that it "isn't the same because it didn't happen in the Super Bowl". He will also ignore that Joe Montana was benched in this game. (Imagine if the roles were reversed. We'd hear, "HAHA. Tom Brady is allegedly the GOAT, and yet he was BENCHED in the playoffs. Montana was NEVER benched in the playoffs because he was too good.")

He will praise Joe Montana for his improvisational ability in the 1981 Championship game against the Cowboys during "The Catch"... and then in the next breath he dismiss Russell Wilson's botched-snap-turned-into-35-yard-pass-to-Tyler-Lockett, insisting that "the defenders took poor angles" and "the cornerbacks stopped covering Lockett and left him wide open". (Imagine if the "The Catch" was done by Wilson/Graham. He'd say, "oh well, the defenders were stumbling over themselves and should've sacked him, Wilson just launched up a prayer and got bailed out by Graham as he always does..")

He will say absolutely outrageous things like "cheating is worth 10 points", and then dismiss Brady's accomplishments because of Deflategate, SpyGate, etc... in the next breath, he will ignore the 49ers skirting the cap and paying players under the table, Montana outright admitting to his offensive lineman spraying silicone on their jerseys, Bill Walsh admitting to meddling with headsets, etc.

The dude is literally impossible to argue with. Again, it is textbook cognitive dissonance. The worst part is he constantly beats his chest and thinks his terrible, flimsy arguments are actually compelling. He is absolutely, utterly delusional.

his homer opinions are obvious to everybody else, just not to him.

Originally posted by natediaz:

Originally posted by elguapo:

I'll just keep laughing at how Brady
got gifted a sb from his game manager mode and tuck rule
Seattle being injured and the worst call of any sb by not running
Playing jake delhomme and almost losing
Playing against a gimpy Owens and almost losing
Playing atl s**tty defense and horrible game planning on the 21 yard line but hey Brady is the best right? With a pick 6 that cost New England at least a 10 point swing not to mention that horrible pass Brady threw to Edelman towards the end of the game that looked like yet another pick not to mention Brady overthrowing passes all game. Yeah. Too funny to even argue. Brady is my favorite qb in today's game but he is below Montana even in an easier era to pass. Done

got gifted a sb from his game manager mode and tuck rule - the birth of the mystique is more like it. and contrary to popular belief, brady was brilliant in that season. he had few bad outings notably the broncos came where he threw 4ints. outside of that he just shined. he stood out. there's a reason why BB and the entire team stood by brady.

Seattle being injured and the worst call of any sb by not running - pats had a great run D, and lynch was very bad in the goal line situation. and without kearse catch pats wouldn't even be in this position.

Playing jake delhomme and almost losing - there's no such thing as almost losing. SB is SB, no matter how you slice it. Brady threw for 354yards and 3tds. it was a great game and brady was unstoppable in that 2nd half.

Playing against a gimpy Owens and almost losing - there's no such thing as almost losing. i don't remember pats almost losing that game. pats were up by 24-14.

Playing atl s**tty defense and horrible game planning on the 21 yard line but hey Brady is the best right? - this same defense destroyed seahawks and made aaron rodgers ordinary. Brady engineered the greatest comeback in the history of the SB. nothing comes close to this comeback. nothing. 25pts deficit. 19pts down in the 4th qtr. Brady scored on 5 straight drives. this game cemented brady's legacy.

Pats don't have a luxury of salary cap. They can't beat a SB team 55-10. they aren't built that way. almost always it's a chess match. I fail to understand why some of you can't appreciate greatness.

Obviously you are very well acquainted with Brady. probably yoiu are less acquainted with Joe. You watch a lot of tape, but that's not the same as being there and watching the regular season games, the playoffs whenever you can, every season, win or lose the super bowl.

Some posters on this thread have watched all of Joe's career, all of Brady's career, and prefer Brady. But, others prefer Joe. I'm one of those and I think that if you had the opportunity to watch as much of Joe as the older folks, you would be less inclined to favor Brady.

The natural trend in the NFL is live in the now and make superlative headlines in the now. I think beating the drums for Brady is a part of that phenomenon. It's not objective, but it is profitable, and that's what the NFL is about.

When you want to get to the SB, you want a solid chance of getting there. Call the GOAT (Brady)!

When you want a guaranteed win in the SB (in case you face a Manning type or maybe you just don't want to risk it in overtime). Call the SB GOAT (Montana)!!

Guaranteed >>> solid chance...

/Thread #NuffSaid #

Originally posted by elguapo:
You guys are right, some of these people just don't get it or they like getting on their knees for Brady. He's my favorite quarterback right now but he is no Montana.

It's absolutely hilarious how some of these people are so stubborn they cannot understand simple points and differences. Like a quarterback winning 4 Super Bowls and losing zero as opposed to a quarterback winning five Super Bowls and losing 2 WITH cheating going on as well as the tuck rule and other ridiculous scenarios that enabled that quarterback to win. It's denial at the highest level possible.

Not to mention defending a quarterback when he hasn't even dominated one of those Super Bowl opponents. It is so hilarious and that is what is falling on deaf ears nothing else. The excuses are laughable. I like the comment that Marchon Lynch was not good at gold mine carries. Yeah sure that's a new one. He is rarely ever dropped for a lost even with a bad line he is a beast he is the best short yardage running back in the NFL at the time. Stop making excuses Seattle gave that game away. It's fine.

I started laughing uncontrollably when the poster said Brady could not dominate a sb in a non-salary-cap era???? That has got to be one of the most untrue statements ever. He dominates quite a few games and he has dominated throughout most of his career. Saying he cannot dominate during the most important game of the year is very telling and your ignorance to this fact is seriously making any argument you make questionable at best. Making a statement defending Atlanta's defense for shutting down Green Bay or Seattle does not mean that that defense is magically good. It is not. Quite the opposite. Brady for three quarters look like garbage against a bad defense. They may have been scheming OK, but Brady missed some wide open Throws and he made some poor decisions like the pick 6. That is not the sign of the best quarterback of all time. Nobody is saying Montana never made mistakes but in the most important games he is the closest thing to perfect that has ever been. Sorry but that's the truth. You can accept it or you can stay in denial that's totally fine.

Nobody is saying Brady is not great but because of his failures he simply is not as good as Montana. It's very simple to understand. A lot of you that are saying since he won his fifth Super Bowl now he is the best by virtue of his fifth win are so shortsighted it isn't even an argument. What about his two losses? What about the tuck rule when he should've never been to that other game against the Rams? By that right a lot of people would say Terry Bradshaw is in the top three because he has for Super Bowl wins and that is so many more than any other quarterback. That is simply not true. He is not even top 10 all-time but then again, that's what you get debating with people that cannot understand reason.

Not a homer. Watching both quarterbacks play I think almost any unbiased person would say Montana is the better quarterback having watched their game film and especially their Super Bowl's and playoff appearances. I say Brady is better than Steve Young so that just goes to show you. Montana also won his fourth many years before Brady could so that just goes to show you longevity shouldn't be A factor especially when you have the best quarterback of all time. That's like saying Kobe Bryant is better than Michael Jordan or Emmett Smith is better than Jim Brown or Barry Sanders. Not happening.

here's a random poll i've found. as of today with total 94 votes -
http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=585691

brady 58%.
montana 12%
peyton manning 8%

i assume if we do the national poll with 1000+ people would yield same results. if montana had impeccable 23-0 record in the playoffs then your argument has a merit. but he did lose games in the playoffs. and he doesn't have enough sample size in the SB compared to brady anymore. 4-0 isn't 7-0. it's not a fair argument because brady got to the SB more, so he had 3 more chances of failure.