Joe Montana Legacy Secured

Originally posted by PatrickWillisHOF:
Brady has an equal amount of rings, and he has been to TWO more Super Bowls. That is a lot more. He also has more PLAYOFF WINS than Montana. Joe had more offensive weapons as well. Brady is better. Sorry 9er homers.

The 2 times Brady had great weapons he ended up losing in the super bowl...twice

sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Brady can't win with great talent around him?

Ryan Feldman of ESPN stats and info: "CONCLUSION: Comparing their stats side-by-side, it looks clear that Brady has the upper hand. But by taking a deeper look at how they compared to their peers in their own eras, Montana fares better. Brady can't compare to Montana's perfect 4-0 Super Bowl record and 11-0 touchdown-to-interception ratio. If Super Bowls are your ultimate measuring stick, Montana is your guy."


http://espn.go.com/blog/statsinfo/post/_/id/50217/better-quarterback-brady-or-montana

Now, look at the four post seasons in which both won championships:

Brady:

Attempts: 439
Completions: 283
Yards: 2872
TDs: 21
INTs: 7
Completion percentage: 64.5%
Y/A: 6.54
TD%: 4.78
INT%: 1.59
Passer Rating: 92.3

Montana:

Attempts: 369
Completions: 244
Yards: 3243
TDs: 32
INTs: 10
Completion: 66.1%
Y/A: 8.79
TD%: 8.67
INT%: 2.71
Passer Rating: 111.4

Only in a place like the Web Zone would you see a "Niner fan" calling other Niner fans homers for arguing that Joe Montana was a better quarterback than Tom Brady.

Originally posted by crake49:
Only in a place like the Web Zone would you see a "Niner fan" calling other Niner fans homers for arguing that Joe Montana was a better quarterback than Tom Brady.

Wow, nice touch -- accusing someone of not being a "true fan" because they express an opinion that's unpopular.

Originally posted by crake49:

Ryan Feldman of ESPN stats and info: "CONCLUSION: Comparing their stats side-by-side, it looks clear that Brady has the upper hand. But by taking a deeper look at how they compared to their peers in their own eras, Montana fares better. Brady can't compare to Montana's perfect 4-0 Super Bowl record and 11-0 touchdown-to-interception ratio. If Super Bowls are your ultimate measuring stick, Montana is your guy."


http://espn.go.com/blog/statsinfo/post/_/id/50217/better-quarterback-brady-or-montana

Now, look at the four post seasons in which both won championships:

Brady:

Attempts: 439
Completions: 283
Yards: 2872
TDs: 21
INTs: 7
Completion percentage: 64.5%
Y/A: 6.54
TD%: 4.78
INT%: 1.59
Passer Rating: 92.3

Montana:

Attempts: 369
Completions: 244
Yards: 3243
TDs: 32
INTs: 10
Completion: 66.1%
Y/A: 8.79
TD%: 8.67
INT%: 2.71
Passer Rating: 111.4

Only in a place like the Web Zone would you see a "Niner fan" calling other Niner fans homers for arguing that Joe Montana was a better quarterback than Tom Brady.

Joe Montana's accomplishment don't need to be defended and recognizing him as the best doesn't make you a niner homer. IMO, it just means you actually saw him play and don't base everything on inflated passing numbers. Montana had 500 passing attempts only twice in his career ('83 & '90). You give Montana the 600-650 attempts that are the norm now and he also has multiple 4000-4500 yards season.

Originally posted by theduke85:

Originally posted by crake49:
Only in a place like the Web Zone would you see a "Niner fan" calling other Niner fans homers for arguing that Joe Montana was a better quarterback than Tom Brady.

Wow, nice touch -- accusing someone of not being a "true fan" because they express an opinion that's unpopular.

Whatever. Whine on if that helps.

Pro Football Reference has an index called ANY/A which judges QB's against their competition. For playoff games, their index for the two players is as follows:

Montana ANY/A: 7.8 Brady ANY/A: 6.1

Their playoff rating system: Montana: 95.6 Brady: 89

My point is that you don't have to be a "homer" to argue that Montana is better. ESPN stats people and PFR don't necessarily agree with you Brady nut-huggers.

Oh, and if anyone around here doesn't like being called a "Brady nut-hugger", then maybe you can stop calling people who believe Montana was better "homers."

Originally posted by crake49:
Oh, and if anyone around here doesn't like being called a "Brady nut-hugger", then maybe you can stop calling people who believe Montana was better "homers."

Wow are we really going to start name calling?!

Originally posted by verb1der:

Originally posted by crake49:
Oh, and if anyone around here doesn't like being called a "Brady nut-hugger", then maybe you can stop calling people who believe Montana was better "homers."

Wow are we really going to start name calling?!

You know what? If you're comfortable calling me a homer for arguing that Montana is still the GOAT by the numbers, then I'm comfortable calling you a Brady nut-hugger. That's fair, right?

Originally posted by crake49:

Originally posted by verb1der:

Originally posted by crake49:
Oh, and if anyone around here doesn't like being called a "Brady nut-hugger", then maybe you can stop calling people who believe Montana was better "homers."

Wow are we really going to start name calling?!

You know what? If you're comfortable calling me a homer for arguing that Montana is still the GOAT by the numbers, then I'm comfortable calling you a Brady nut-hugger. That's fair, right?

Hey I didn't call you a homer dude.

Let me break it down...

Homer = "Montana is the GOAT and Brady is a cheat"
Troll = "Brady is wayy better than Montana"
Realist = "Both are great, and this makes for a good debate that can swing either way, depending on your persepctive."


Where do you fit?!

Just comparing numbers it's easy to point to Brady and it may be correct. But in my opinion if you dropped Brady/Belichick or Walsh/Montana into a time machine to play head to head under the same rules & environment, our guys would come out on top more often than not.

That said, Montana is the best of his era. The rest is fodder for forums.

Originally posted by crake49:
Whatever. Whine on if that helps.

Pro Football Reference has an index called ANY/A which judges QB's against their competition. For playoff games, their index for the two players is as follows:

Montana ANY/A: 7.8 Brady ANY/A: 6.1

Their playoff rating system: Montana: 95.6 Brady: 89

My point is that you don't have to be a "homer" to argue that Montana is better. ESPN stats people and PFR don't necessarily agree with you Brady nut-huggers.

When have I ever said that it makes someone a homer to believe that Montana is the best? Please show me. I'd love to see it. I'm waiting. All I said is people need to stop burying their in the sand and pretending that an argument doesn't exist. That's a huge difference, and you know it. (Speaking of "straw man" arguments...)

Originally posted by theduke85:

When have I ever said that it makes someone a homer to believe that Montana is the best? Please show me. I'd love to see it. I'm waiting. All I said is people need to stop burying their in the sand and pretending that an argument doesn't exist. That's a huge difference, and you know it. (Speaking of "straw man" arguments...)

Another poster said, Brady is better based on the extra SB appearances and thinking Joe is the best is being a Niner Homer.

Originally posted by verb1der:

Hey I didn't call you a homer dude.

Let me break it down...

Homer = "Montana is the GOAT and Brady is a cheat"
Troll = "Brady is wayy better than Montana"
Realist = "Both are great, and this makes for a good debate that can swing either way, depending on your persepctive."


Where do you fit?!

Realist - and my opinion is Joe dominated a better era of football and his stats while awesome on their own accord would equal or exceed those of today if he would have had the same amount of attempts that qbs get now.

Whoa this thread got a little heated there. Let's keep it clean, gentlemen.

Originally posted by Niners816:

Originally posted by verb1der:
Hey I didn't call you a homer dude.

Let me break it down...

Homer = "Montana is the GOAT and Brady is a cheat"
Troll = "Brady is wayy better than Montana"
Realist = "Both are great, and this makes for a good debate that can swing either way, depending on your persepctive."


Where do you fit?!

Realist - and my opinion is Joe dominated a better era of football and his stats while awesome on their own accord would equal or exceed those of today if he would have had the same amount of attempts that qbs get now.

That's an interesting take.

Imo, it's a tie.

Brady = Montana, period.

And if you had to start a team you can't go wrong with having either or.