Originally posted by genus49:
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...
1, It's rare to win 4 in one decade but not as rare as winning 5 and going to 7. Bradshaw and Montana got it done with pretty much the same teams or even better teams because they could keep all their best guys. Pats had to constantly change around their roster as guys would win rings and want to get paid. You think Steelers or 49ers in the 80s could keep those rosters as talented as they were if there was a salary cap involved?
Stop making excuses. This is another one of those excuses that leads to "what ifs" ... I don't want to have to compare eras with you. We all know defenses got away with murder back in the day and this era is catered for the QB / passing league (what if what if what if). If you deny that, please don't reply anymore, I'll just think of you as someone who doesn't really pay attention to football and all you really want to do is glorify Brady / Patriots irrationally.
You can't have it both ways. Why did Joe lose more NFC Championship games if all he knew was how to win? Are you saying he only turned on the "All he knows is how to win" mode if he actually got to the SB but before that it was "Sometimes I win sometimes I don't we'll see how today goes"?
Why do you keep bringing up playoffs? I never brought that up. You're just finding ways to justify your opinions. Yes, all Montana knew how to do was win ONCE HE ARRIVED to the SB (that is my point, that's what I've been stating all this time). It's a fact. Don't say anything else or we'll have to take away Brady's first SB because that defense basically stymied the Greatest Show On Turf and Brady wasn't spectacular in that win (managed the game and didn't screw it up, but he wasn't amazing even tho he got the MVP. That defense was amazing!).
I wonder as well but we'll never know because Montana couldn't stay healthy and Walsh got tired . I wonder what Brady would've done if the Pats didn't have to worry about the salary cap.
We can keep wondering all we want, but the biggest trump of all these wonders is / what ifs, I wonder what would happen if Craig didn't fumble vs the Giants and Montana gets the 3peat...
2. I certainly don't blame Delhomme for losing that SB or him choking in that game. Not sure how McNabb and Warner are related since McNabb was literally choking on the field and threw 3 picks.
Obviously, Patriots defense helped out Brady / the offense a lot by getting those turnovers. That was a 3 point victory. That Eagles defense wasn't spectacular. Why couldn't Brady muster up more points from McNabbs help / 3 INTs? I guess that win was all on Brady?!
Warner threw 2 including a pick 6. If guys want to turn the ball over they need to dig deep to pick things up after. It's how it goes. Those guys lost.
Another 3 point loss. Thankfully, Patriots defense was awesome (HOF / future HOF talent from that group, book it). That defense stopped the Greatest Show On Turf. Yes, Brady got the MVP, but that defense was amazing. But I won't take anything away from Brady or make any excuses like you guys like to do with Montana / 49ers defense
Brady didn't turn the ball over and was getting his ass kicked and still managed to get the lead at the end then watched that drive happen. You going to say he choked after that play happens? Seriously?
When you go undefeated in the regular season, then go on to face a wildcard team in the SB, you're suppose to put on your best performance and not put up 14 points after kicking everyone's ass prior to the big dance. AND yes, your defense was very good otherwise Brady couldn't have gone undefeated all by himself. Yes, Brady did turn the ball over (I only mentioned one pick out of both SBs in my other post)... the second time around, the Giants snuck in AGAIN (9-7) as a wildcard to hand Brady his 2nd lost / 2nd choke job. Math don't lie... http://www.espn.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=320205017
3. I'm bringing up what ifs because that's the game you guys are playing. You're making assumptions like if Joe makes it to more SBs he wins automatically. No facts there..straight up hypotheticals.
Find ANY of my posts that aren't in direct reply to Nate, you or someone else making his case about Brady (what ifs), can you? Whenever I do the hypotheticals / what ifs, it's in relation to you guys. Keep it up, I got your back... you guys want to play, I can play all day. As soon as you want to stop justifying and stop with the what ifs / hypotheticals, I'll immediately stop playing your games as well.
And you're right the Pats may have some future HOFers from that 2001 team but there are no Ronnie Lotts on that squad. Richard Seymour might make, Ty Law might make it...not many others. But do you recall who Brady had to throw to? I can assure you NONE of those guys are going to the HOF outside of Brady.
I guess the only reason Moss isn't going to the HOF is because of his attitude, but his stats blows away a lot of guys who are already in (we'll ignore that tho just to justify Brady / Glorify Brady). Gronk not going?! Please GTFO already if your answer is no to Gronk. I'll LMAO if Julian Edelman gets in (I think he will), he already has SB wins, very good stats and still ticking (much younger than Brady). Like I said, just give it more time. Hernandez, Ocho Cinco, Welker, etc... may not go to HOF, but their talents are far from average. They were very good (more than just role players)... please stop. Please. Just stop 
Regarding the Giants not being great, guess never before has a wildcard team won? Or a team with a lesser record won in the NFL playoffs where the any given sunday rule applies? The Giants in 2007 lost a close game to the Pats to drop them to 10-6 for the season. They then went on the road 3 times in the NFC playoffs beating some very good teams including the 13-3 Packers. They were not some team that fell into the playoffs and magically got lucky in their first game. Some teams get hot at the right time and that was definitely the case for them. The fact that they had a miracle play happen like it did just shows sometimes it's better to be lucky than good. Pats probably win that game 99 times out of 100. That was the one time. But saying Brady choked in that game is ridiculous. Then again so is your whole breakdown. Costly pick in 2011? You mean when he threw it to the 8 yard line on a deep pass when they were on the 43? Guess it was costly because they couldn't punt closer? It didn't cost them anything but time and they were leading pretty much the whole game and would've closed it out if Welker caught the ball thrown right to his hands.
Again, what ifs... if he did this / caught that... justifying the Giants just to excuse Brady's lackluster of a game / make Brady look good. He wasn't good. And no, if they played 99 times, he'd probably choke more times than not. It wasn't a hoax, the Giants proved twice that they can prevent him from going off like he did against most teams. They made him play the way he did. They forced him to only put up 14 / 17 points. The only thing they didn't have total control over was [getting inside his head]. Brady let them in his head, hence he choked.
Not to mention I guess you forgot who else lost to that Giants wild card team right? Or the fact that the Pats had the 31st defense in the league that year. How many times has Montana even gotten to the playoffs, let alone the SB with a defense that bad? AGAIN, you're talking about playoffs...
I'm talking about SUPER BOWLS. That's what my posts was about when you decided to debate with me ... No one ever wants to go to the SUPER BOWL to lose. That's the biggest stage. You put everything on the line. It isn't the runner up game. It's the FINAL GAME. Montana is 4-0 in those. My point was / is he never loss in the biggest game because he only knew how to win in the BIG DANCE. That was his mentality. Good defenses might have contained him / forced him to play a certain way, but they didn't get in his head, he got in theirs. He won. And never threw a pick. His record was flawless. That's what I'm saying. Flawless record (In SUPER BOWLS). Don't get it twisted, that's what my post was all about. I'm talking about once he arrived, I don't give a damn about the runner up games... you can always lose in those NFCC / AFCC games and get over it, but can't you find me one player who will tell you that he'd rather lose in the SUPER BOWL than in one of those runner up games.
I never argued about Brady not being the GOAT. Don't confuse me with other posters. I even admitted it before they won their 5th. All I'm saying is, Montana is the SB GOAT due to the fact that he never loss, got to his 4th one much sooner, never threw a pick and much more (there is much more when it comes to SB performances).
Yes Brady has 1 more than Montana. He's the SB king and God of all Gods (for all I care), but it doesn't take away the fact that Montana has a flawless record and considered (IN MY BOOK) the SB GOAT.
You can say all that you want. But the fact is, in the same amount of time, around ten years (the length of time is a true measure of success and has to be thrown into the mix if we're going to be fair), Montana accomplished much more than Brady. It is unfortunate for him that his career didn't last as long as Brady. It is [fortunate for Brady that he lasted this long to CATCH UP to Montana so we can all have these debates]... let's not forget that part.
