Joe Montana Legacy Secured

Originally posted by fortyninerglory:

And..

Rodney Harrison
Richar Seymour
Tedy Bruschi
Logan Mankins
Rob Gronkowski
Randy Moss
Wes Welker
Vince Wilfork
Brandon Meriweather
Mike Vrabel
Jerod Mayo
Sebastian Vollmer
Asante Samuel
Devin McCourty
Aqib Talib
Jamie Collins
Donta Hightower
Malcolm Butler

LMAO you make it sound like these guys are overrated and Brady singlehandedly carried his team all those years whereas all the other 49ers who didn't make "All-Pro" shoudl have. John Taylor NEVER made All-Pro as a WR -- only on special teams as a KR/PR.

Boom!!!!! He tries to dismiss this argument and he contradicts himself. He is saying it is so hard to keep a team great in the salary cap era yet the patriots consistently have the most all pro players. That is why they are the best team in the AFC. They have so many all pros to work with so even if they lose all pro members to the salary cap constraints which He is trying to base his whole argument off of. The patriots simply get another all pro to replace them. This is hilarious.

Originally posted by LVJay:

The defense stymied Peyton / Broncos' offense. I doubt your offense was anything special that day against a mediocre Bronco defense. Note, that was against a lousy defense. Whereas, Montana had to battle a dominant defense... got 5 TDs and the MVP vs the number one defense.

Not to mention, Manning chokes in SBs just like Brady choked twice to the Giants / Peyton's little brother, Eli.

Brady / Patriots should be thankful your team CHOKED in the SB in the end / final seconds.

Montana never choked in a SB, that's what separates him from other elite QBs. He may not be the overall GOAT, but no one can touch his SB records. He was flawless and only knew how to win. That's a huge part of his legacy that no one can touch. NO ONE! NOT EVER...

This is getting too easy to argue against these Brady homers. All great points and they cannot argue against it.

Originally posted by LVJay:

1) "Just don't add the "he only knew how to win" part when Brady has more wins than him."

Why not?! I'm talking SBs here (in the game) i never mentioned anything about quantity (you brought that up). I'm talking quality. Montana only knew how to win once he got there, game over. He won (4-0, no INTs) and didn't need overtime to get the job done. Plus, if it was so easy to win 4 in one decade, then I don't see why Brady / BB couldn't do it. Ask Terry Bradshaw, it's rare to win 4 in ONE decade.

Hmmmm, I wonder what Montana / Walsh would've done if they also had 14 + years together...

2) "And Brady didn't "choke". He stood on the sidelines in both games as his defense lost the lead"

So I guess McNabb, Delhomme and Warner just stood on the sidelines and watched special teams lose the game for them

3) Since you brought up the "if" scenarios AGAIN... "if" Roger Craig doesn't fumble, we're talking about a 3peat for Montana ... I don't believe Brady / BB has ever came close to a 3peat (I'm guessing).

BTW, remember that first SB Brady won (the Spy Gate one), the one against the Greatest Show On Turf? Well, I'm pretty sure those Patriots teams had quite a few HOF (or future HOF). You can't stop the Greatest Show On Turf with just scheme and solid players.

Also, those choke jobs against Eli / Giants... those Giants teams weren't great (wildcard teams both times), 10-6 the first time they met and lucky to sneak into the playoffs (9-7) the second time they beat Patriots. Patriots were favorites to win both times (Undefeated / 13-3 in regular seasons). Those Giants' defenses often gave up 27 or more points... those weren't dominant defenses. Brady just choked both times by not putting up more points and throwing a costly pick.

The Patriots defenses only gave up 17 / 21 points in those SBs... maybe Brady would've helped more if he put up more points than 14 / 17 and by not throwing an INT .... You mentioned that "Montana should've won"... yeah.... Brady should've won too against that lucky Giants team that snuck in as a WILDCARD at 9-7.

It's not like the Giants had their number, in 2007 Patriots beat them 38-35 the last game of the regular season to go undefeated. However, he choked in those SBs...

When it's all said and done (just give it more time), we'll all come to find out that the Patriots had a lot of HOF talent on a lot of those teams Brady played with...

Excellent just excellent. This guy has no argument whatsoever. He is saying that it wasn't Brady's fault because Brady was watching from the sidelines? Dude seriously get some logic in your posts and don't post again until you develop common sense in your responses. Brady should've scored a lot more points against that Giants defense. Plane and f**king simple. admit that please! He only scored 14 and 17 points? Is that a joke? Wow I can't believe you are actually arguing after Brady couldn't do s**t in those Super Bowls. And with moss and Welker in one of them? Trying to blame it on the patriots defense? You were talking about how Montana never had a bad defense? Well Brady never had a bad defense as well. The difference is Montana with massacre teams Brady cannot and he has lost two average teams. Wow. Just wow. It's over dude, game over man game over.

Brady did choke plain and simple on the very biggest stage and biggest game. if you can't score more than 14 and 17 points against that mediocre Giants team that back to their way into the playoffs twice you have problems. Especially with those receivers. Just admit it. It's not that hard.

Originally posted by fortyninerglory:
Your logic: "Tom Brady played with 2 All-Pro safeties. Joe Montana only had 1 All-Pro safety. Tom had more help."
The reality: "Montana had 7 seasons of All-Pro safety help. Brady had 4 seasons of All-Pro safety help."

I never said that. You assumed it. So Brady had 5 seasons of All-Pro Linebacker help, Montana had 1. Does that even it out for you? I was just pointing out the tons of talent Brady had around him with peeps thinking he played with sorry ass players (John Taylor is a stud and Wes Welker and Julian Edelman weren't? lolz). and carried everyone on his back all these years while Montana was surrounded by the best of the best. Total nonsense.

Maybe the next round of stats should be someone coming up with the # of pro bowlers and all-pros each QB played against over the years.

You're taking what I said too literally. I know you didn't argue the safety thing exactly -- it was just an example for illustration -- I'm just pointing out that saying "Brady played with 26 All-Pro teammates, Joe Montana only played with 13" is really flawed way of comparing an era with high roster turnover to an era with low roster turnover.

Maybe Joe should have been better in the playoffs and he'd actually be challenged in the Super Bowl to the point where they could of loss.

Tom has a better playoff record then him and that's why he ended up with more rings. People need to stop acting like Super Bowl losses carry more weight than a wild card loss. Nobody in their right mind has ever said I'd rather come in 7th than 2nd.

Originally posted by theduke85:

You're taking what I said too literally. I know you didn't argue the safety thing exactly -- it was just an example for illustration -- I'm just pointing out that saying "Brady played with 26 All-Pro teammates, Joe Montana only played with 13" is really flawed way of comparing an era with high roster turnover to an era with low roster turnover.

What is an era of high roster turnover? How do you define turnover? Are you counting ir? What does this mean?

There's no such thing as a perfect QB. if montana was perfect he should've won 23 playoff games. not 16. and since football is an ultimate team game, no 1 player should get all the glory or all the blame.

you have to look at the overall body of work.

when you look at everything it's impossible to argue against brady. it's done deal. brady is the GOAT. just look around and listen to what others say.
shannon sharpe who doesn't even like brady says he's the greatest football player ever.
http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/gallery/undisputed-shannon-sharpe-tom-brady-greatest-player-ever-020617

if brady finishes strong in next few years he really might be considered the greatest athlete of all time. he would have to do what he's doing for next 3-4 years. needs to win 1 more ring. it's possible brady may end up becoming the greatest athlete we've ever seen. and by then, nobody would ever say montana > brady except few of you guys.

Brady had one of the greatest teams during the regular season and wasn't good enough to win the SB that same year. That itself is a big blemish to me. He should have won that SB because his team was so good that year and couldn't get it done. That offense shattered so many records.

Originally posted by dwy621:
Brady had one of the greatest teams during the regular season and wasn't good enough to win the SB that same year. That itself is a big blemish to me. He should have won that SB because his team was so good that year and couldn't get it done. That offense shattered so many records.

That defense was massively overrated. I live in New England, my wife and her family are all Pats fans. I was telling them way before they went 16-0 that the defense was going to come back to bite them in the ass.

Granted it's hard to blame that loss all on the defense given the final score but Brady despite getting killed all game long got them the would be go ahead TD. The defense allowed Eli Manning to drive down the field to take the lead with seconds left. That's not a blemish on Brady when for him to lose it requires a once in a lifetime play.

i'd argue that team wasn't nearly as talented as our 89 roster. Brady and the offense made them that much better and the Giants(funny how the Giants were a problem for both guys) found the perfect way to tame that offense. Pats were one dimensional all year long but teams couldn't get to Brady in time to hurt the offense. Giants got to Brady the whole game and totally threw off the passing game and Pats had no running game to fall back on.

if that's why you think he's not the greatest then I don't even know what to say. Considering virtually the same roster on offense and a better defense the following season all took a dive without him at QB...and before people start throwing out 11-5...that's a 5 game swing. 12-4 team losing 5 more games the following year goes 7-9.

Originally posted by fortyninerglory:
And..

Rodney Harrison
Richar Seymour
Tedy Bruschi
Logan Mankins
Rob Gronkowski
Randy Moss
Wes Welker
Vince Wilfork
Brandon Meriweather
Mike Vrabel
Jerod Mayo
Sebastian Vollmer
Asante Samuel
Devin McCourty
Aqib Talib
Jamie Collins
Donta Hightower
Malcolm Butler

LMAO you make it sound like these guys are overrated and Brady singlehandedly carried his team all those years whereas all the other 49ers who didn't make "All-Pro" shoudl have. John Taylor NEVER made All-Pro as a WR -- only on special teams as a KR/PR.

No those guys aren't overrated and Brady certainly never did anything on his own but neither did Joe.

The guys I pointed out were barely with Brady in the grand scheme of things so throwing out numbers like you did is stupid which was my point all along. it's stupid for a couple of reasons.

1. The fact that not all those guys were around long enough to lump them together

2. Not all All Pros are created equal. i think we can agree Brandon Merriweather isn't up there with Ronnie Lott

3. Who says talent is defined by all pro votes?

Not to mention when did Collins, Hightower and Butler get all pro nods? When did Talib? Or are you counting guys winning all pros with other teams as helping Brady now?

Highlighted are the offensive players. While having a good defense certainly helps someone win we're not exactly talking about Tim Tebow here as someone totally carried by the rest of his squad. The defensive players are great but if we're talking about defensive talent the 49ers have Brady and the Pats beat. Maybe not by the amount of all pros but by the play of the unit.

You also forgot Matt Light if I'm being fair. That's 3 offensive linemen with Light and Mankins being the guys to help Brady the most and longest on offense. Welker who was a nobody undrafted free agent before playing with Brady and Moss who had his best season with Tom but only played with him for like 2.5 seasons. And of course Gronk who Brady proved he can win without this year.

So once again who in their right mind would try and pretend the Pats were more talented than the 49ers? If anything all those "all pros" prove that if the Pats didn't have a salary cap to worry about they'd be winning even more since many of those guys left as cap casualties.

Originally posted by fortyninerglory:

Do you guys f**king read? Devin McCourty was an "All-Pro" 3 times. I didn't say Pro-Bowler, I said "All-Pro". He was only a 2x Pro Bowler.

Why the hell are you saying he isn't? Are you assuming I was thinking "Pro Bowler".

And what is this nonsense?

Your logic: "Tom Brady played with 2 All-Pro safeties. Joe Montana only had 1 All-Pro safety. Tom had more help."
The reality: "Montana had 7 seasons of All-Pro safety help. Brady had 4 seasons of All-Pro safety help."

I never said that. You assumed it. So Brady had 5 seasons of All-Pro Linebacker help, Montana had 1. Does that even it out for you? I was just pointing out the tons of talent Brady had around him with peeps thinking he played with sorry ass players (John Taylor is a stud and Wes Welker and Julian Edelman weren't? lolz). and carried everyone on his back all these years while Montana was surrounded by the best of the best. Total nonsense.

Maybe the next round of stats should be someone coming up with the # of pro bowlers and all-pros each QB played against over the years.

Yes we read, what I don't read is your uninformed posts. Devin McCourty has been a pro bowler twice, his rookie year (as a CB) and this year. He has NEVER,EVER.....let me repeat that..NEVER, EVER been an All Pro. That last sentence is fact so don't argue it. Just because you post it doesn't mean it's true. Ronnie Lott has been an All Pro 6 times and considered by many as the best safety ever. The rest of your pro bowl all pro stats are also wrong, stop reading Wikipedia go to PRO FOOTBALL REFERENCE.

Originally posted by Vegasodds101:
Yes we read, what I don't read is your uninformed posts. Devin McCourty has been a pro bowler twice, his rookie year (as a CB) and this year. He has NEVER,EVER.....let me repeat that..NEVER, EVER been an All Pro

McCourty was second-team All-Pro. You are splitting hairs. Don't be so pedantic.

http://nesn.com/2014/01/aqib-talib-devin-mccourty-being-named-to-all-pro-team-shows-that-patriots-secondary-has-become-top-tier-unit/

The truth is Brady is a tad better in literally every category. Montana really only has one game over Brady, their 4th Super Bowls. Their first three SB's were almost identical. The fourth game Montana blew doors Brady, although he had 100 an rating and had a great clutch 4th quarter drive, didn't have a good game. Montana couldn't get to any more SB's. Brady has made it to three more winning two, who knows how many more to come? I just can't look at one game and use that as evidence of one player being better vs another for a career.

If Brady won his 5 in a row without a loss would there have been a debate? Doubt it. So Brady would be downgraded if he made two more after that and lost? You guys see where I'm coming from? This is rare case where 5-2 is better than 4-0. Actually the object is to win SB every year so it's 5-4 in favor of Brady. I don't punish Brady for losing later in playoffs than Montana. I don't credit Montana for going one and done twice vs Giants and discredit Brady for twice losing to Giants in SB.

Originally posted by theduke85:

McCourty was second-team All-Pro. You are splitting hairs. Don't be so pedantic.

http://nesn.com/2014/01/aqib-talib-devin-mccourty-being-named-to-all-pro-team-shows-that-patriots-secondary-has-become-top-tier-unit/

2nd team has never been All Pro it's runner up. Brady this year was second team but Ryan was the all Pro. Ryan gets the plus(+) next to his name Brady doesn't. McCourty wasnt even a pro bowler voted on by players in 2014.

So bottom line, it's a bad argument as to prove who had the better team. Only SF backers for Montana as GOAT would degrade their own team to make their point.

Originally posted by tjd808185:
Maybe Joe should have been better in the playoffs and he'd actually be challenged in the Super Bowl to the point where they could of loss.

Tom has a better playoff record then him and that's why he ended up with more rings. People need to stop acting like Super Bowl losses carry more weight than a wild card loss. Nobody in their right mind has ever said I'd rather come in 7th than 2nd.

OH MY F***ING GOODNESS... next you'll be trying to convince us that Bitcoins are better than straight cash