Joe Montana Legacy Secured

Originally posted by LifelongNiner:

Originally posted by midrdan:

Originally posted by Ninerjohn:

Originally posted by McClusky:

Originally posted by midrdan:
Brady is a great QB but I wouldn't choose him over Montana in a do or die situation. And to me the stats are meaningless if you're not clutch.

There are a lot of good arguments for Montana over Brady, but a notion that clutch is the deciding factor is not a good one. Brady has 3 4th quarter game winning drives in SB's to his credit, and currently sits 2nd all time in game winning drives and 4th quarter comebacks.

I think it's reasonable to take Joe in a do or die situation, but it's not Joe is clutch and Brady isn't.

I concur. Some in here want to make the claim that Joe is better because he finished off a SB with a game winning TD instead of game winning fgs. Well, first of all it was only in ONE SB. There were no other clutch 4th quarter moments in the others. Secondly, Brady did have 3 4th quarter comebacks in SBs where he just needed FGs in the end. Two of those needed drives with barely over a minute on the clock. So, clutch is not a fair or sensible argument at all.

It's not just SBs man. The Catch. 28 points down in the 4th quarter on the road in Philly after having been sacked six times. Coming back from back surgery to win two rings. Fending off a HOFer pining to the media every week to replace him.

Everything about Joe was "come back kid" - the guy frigging led a SB winning drive having a panic attack.

What will Brady be remembered for? The rings and the records are impressive but nothing signature stands out to me, really. I mean other than losing a perfect season in the SB.

HOFers ... how many did Montana play with? Rice Lott and Dean? Brady played with Vinatieri, Moss and Bruschi. Roger Craig? Corey Dillon. John Taylor? Wes Walker. Brent Jones? Gronk. Lott? Harrison. Turner? Bruschi.

You guys loving Brady act like it would be easier to win consistently before the salary cap era. It wasn't. Teams were loaded. You act like playing the Bills now twice a year is somehow harder for the Pats than it was when the Bills could keep Kelly and Thomas and Reed and those guys. I mean that team has more HOFers than the 49ers did and they didn't win one SB.

niners had bunch of pro bowl level players. wes welker? i hope you are joking. welker before brady didn't do anything in his career. gronk is always hurt. in 2011 gronk played injured in the SB and cost brady a SB. and now brady is playing without him. gronk is a great player, but you can't count on a guy who gets injured all the time.

did you just compare ronnie lott to harrison? i thought this was niners forum. lol rodney harrison who mysteriously didn't try to knock the ball off tyree's hands and cost brady a 4th SB and 19-0 season? and harrison was a great player, but he's no HOFer. bruschi? come on man. he is a hall of very good. he will never sniff HOF.

niners were loaded from the top to the bottom in many of montana's years. and life is very easy when you have the greatest WR of all time. imagine brady had rice instead of welker. he would've won the SB against the giants. remember welker drop? yes, the ball was thrown behind, but rice catches that with eyes closed. hell how about 2007 SB? remember that almost TD to randy moss at the end? the 75 yard bomb brady threw(which montana can never do)? maybe jerry rice c

Originally posted by exile:
I only catch two or three Patriots games every year. Each time, I try to see what makes Brady stand out. It's impossible to deny that his stats are great, and he's done a lot of winning, It's hard to evaluate him when he's got 5 hours behind that OL to make throws. It's also hard to evaluate him when many of his yards are not passing, but YAC: the Pats do an excellent job of getting blockers out front of their receivers. I can't recall many situations where he's had to improvise the way I see Rodgers or Brees do every time I see them play. Montana, too. It's hard to say.

If you could put all the HOF or HOF-worthy QBs in a simulator where all their team advantages were identical, I am skeptical that Brady would be the clear best. Behind an average or worse OL I'd rather have Rodgers or Wilson (LOL). Not that this matters, really.

maybe you should think about why brady always have a good protection. as long as brady has competent OL. he makes them better. he had a brutal oline last year. but still made it to AFCC. and this year dudes gotten better. most of them are young. also brady knows where the pressure is coming from! it's called a presnap. you should look into it. brady's circles around any players in the past in this department. so when you already know what they are doing then it's easy to assign your protection.

also brady gets rid of the ball fast. always top 5 in this department. no wonder he gets sacked less. oh by the way matt cassel played in a same line with same players but got sacked 47times. 26 more than brady in 2007.

Originally posted by natediaz:
yes. brady can play in any league because he is the smartest QB. there's something called 'presnap' apparently niners fan never heard of. brady's greatest strength is knowing where the pressure comes from. he deciphers the defense presnap. and then he doesn't try to extend the play by his feet because he knows that's the his greatest strength. brady will only take what the defense gives him.

that's why he can play 15-20 years in any era. it's a joke argument saying brady won't last in this or that era.

But you're also so sure that a guy from an older generation (Montana for instance) wouldn't benefit from bigger, faster offensive line men (i'm pretty sure Joe's guys were all under 280)... you talk about bigger LBs / Dlinemen? Well, guess how they block those type of guys these days (with bigger, faster OLINEMEN, that's how).

In Joe's era, the rules on attacking the QB was much more advantageous for the defense than this era (that's a fact, no denying that)... so, with the precious rules of protecting the QB these days, Montana wouldn't thrive in this era?!!

Do you know how mentally strong you'd have to be, constantly psyche yourself out for every snap knowing that defenders are going after knees / head to injure something and not just collect a sack (players like Reggie White, Lawrence Taylor, etc.). Defenders always have that in the back of their minds these days before sacking a QB (due to heavy fines / suspensions, which defenders back in Joe's days hardly gave much thought about).

Not to mention, DBs (back then) were allowed to do worse than what Seattle DBs have gotten away with these days. A lot worse! That definitely helps pass rushers get to the QB, WRs had a harder time getting open due to the fact that DBs were draping all over them.

There's a lot more to this debate... I haven't done any research or went back to some damn old stats and what not, but I'm sure there's a lot of good pointers that support both eras / QBs. But let's not make an argument for one case, then not make a case (when there's one to be made) for the other QB just to trump one or the other...

Both QBs, in my opinion, would do just fine no matter the era. They both have the IT factor, legendary HC who helped them and the smarts that only a few had.

But don't forget, and this is one argument that can't be trumped (no INTs in SB and 4-0 = Guaranteed >>> Solid Chance)

Originally posted by LVJay:

Originally posted by natediaz:
yes. brady can play in any league because he is the smartest QB. there's something called 'presnap' apparently niners fan never heard of. brady's greatest strength is knowing where the pressure comes from. he deciphers the defense presnap. and then he doesn't try to extend the play by his feet because he knows that's the his greatest strength. brady will only take what the defense gives him.

that's why he can play 15-20 years in any era. it's a joke argument saying brady won't last in this or that era.

But you're also so sure that a guy from an older generation (Montana for instance) wouldn't benefit from bigger, faster offensive line men (i'm pretty sure Joe's guys were all under 280)... you talk about bigger LBs / Dlinemen? Well, guess how they block those type of guys these days (with bigger, faster OLINEMEN, that's how).

In Joe's era, the rules on attacking the QB was much more advantageous for the defense than this era (that's a fact, no denying that)... so, with the precious rules of protecting the QB these days, Montana wouldn't thrive in this era?!!

Do you know how mentally strong you'd have to be, constantly psyche yourself out for every snap knowing that defenders are going after knees / head to injure something and not just collect a sack (players like Reggie White, Lawrence Taylor, etc.). Defenders always have that in the back of their minds these days before sacking a QB (due to heavy fines / suspensions, which defenders back in Joe's days hardly gave much thought about).

Not to mention, DBs (back then) were allowed to do worse than what Seattle DBs have gotten away with these days. A lot worse! That definitely helps pass rushers get to the QB, WRs had a harder time getting open due to the fact that DBs were draping all over them.

There's a lot more to this debate... I haven't done any research or went back to some damn old stats and what not, but I'm sure there's a lot of good pointers that support both eras / QBs. But let's not make an argument for one case, then not make a case (when there's one to be made) for the other QB just to trump one or the other...

Both QBs, in my opinion, would do just fine no matter the era. They both have the IT factor, legendary HC who helped them and the smarts that only a few had.

But don't forget, and this is one argument that can't be trumped (no INTs in SB and 4-0 = Guaranteed >>> Solid Chance)

again montana is 200lb. name me a QB who weighs 200lb right now. you can't. and i don't know how montana would play if he was 225lb. maybe he won't move around as much which should be better off for him. but again, montana was 200lb. he would be the smallest guy in today's nfl. SMALLEST. he would be smaller than johnny football!

i'm certain montana will be fine in today's league. but he would have to bulk up for sure. and he would have to adjust to the speed of the defense which is faster than ever before. i'm sure he will be an elite and win SBs. he is one of the all time great. i have at top 3 of all time.


and brady did play in the pre rule change era and won 3 rings. brady is a smart QB who avoids pressure by getting rid of the ball. he won't run around like big ben or aaron rodgers to make plays. same goes to peyton manning.

rule changes gives QBs better stats that's about it. but it doesn't mean the game is any easier. you still play in a tougher league with better talents overall.

Originally posted by LVJay:

Do you know how mentally strong you'd have to be, constantly psyche yourself out for every snap knowing that defenders are going after knees / head to injure something and not just collect a sack (players like Reggie White, Lawrence Taylor, etc.). Defenders always have that in the back of their minds these days before sacking a QB (due to heavy fines / suspensions, which defenders back in Joe's days hardly gave much thought about).

tackle is tackle. only difference are there were more head hunting back then because today we try to protect players from concussion.

one of the brady's greatest strength is to avoid the outside rush by stepping up in the pocket and deliver an accurate pass. contrary to popular belief, brady is alot more dan marino than joe montana in terms of pocket passing wizardry. brady doesn't have a quick feet, but he such a great awareness, so he can avoid the rush.

and brady broke his knee before. t's the same knee injuries many ex QBs have suffered in the past. hey, injuries do happen. obviously it was a freak accident.

bottom line, let's all try to be logical. brady being bigger and stronger than montana tells me that brady would take the hit better than smaller montana in any era. it's a simple math. and montana did run around whole lot more than brady did. after all size isn't the only thing that matters. it's the style of your play. Big ben is huge and he's always banged up because of his style. brady never takes that kind of jacked up hit. that's a skill set. peyton manning was master at it too.

Originally posted by SunDevilNiner79:

Originally posted by RonMexico:
someone could come in and play for 10 years, win 10 superbowls for another team and niner fans would still say joe is the greatest

half of em never seent him play

True, unless you are 45 or older, I have a hard time believing you can actually fairly assess Joe's career. If you are born in 1970, you were 9-10 when his career started. Really you probably gotta be 55 or older to be old enough when Joe started out to really have a full measure of him.

i guess most of people in this forum are 70+. we have something called internet. you can easily watch old tapes. montana's career is well documented. i watched football religiously since mid 80's. my old man still have VHS games he recorded. and espn classic games are still my favorite.

i'm so tired of old people saying 'you don't know crap because you are too young!' comment. i'm a student of the game.

only guys i can't really comment on are pre 1970's. i watched some of the early 60's games. it's pretty unwatchable because game was so rudimentary. those guys won't even be competitive against nick saban's alabama.

Originally posted by Pillbusta:

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:
why are we going through all this again? first of all Brady isn't even the best quarterback today. That goes to Aaron Rodgers. stop talking about stacked teams. New England has had plenty of stacked teams and Joe has won Super Bowls without Jerry Rice - 2 in fact.

only people who have actually seen Brady and Montana play should be allowed to post on this thread.

Walsh would've picked Rodgers over Brady. Rodgers has greater athletic instincts by far

walsh would've easily picked rodgers over montana as well. aaron rodgers is the top 3 all time talent.

Originally posted by NinerGM:

Originally posted by PatrickWillisHOF:
Tom Brady playoff records
Most wins
Most touchdowns
Most passing yards
Most completions
Most conference championships

He has as many rings as Montana. Brady is the best ever.

Many more interceptions.

brady
regular season
456tds - 152ints

playoffs
61tds 30ints

SBs
13-4

career regular season wins
183-54

playoff wins
24-9

montana
regular season
273tds-139ints

playoffs
45-21ints

SBs
11-0

career regular season wins
127-65

playoff wins
16-7






it's really not comparable anymore. if brady retired 4-5 years ago then yeah. but brady at 39 is not slowing down. if brady does win the SB again this year then i think he plays at least 3-4 more years with the pats. that's 3-4 years of serious stat padding. brady might surpass every records there is.

Originally posted by natediaz:

niners had bunch of pro bowl level players. wes welker? i hope you are joking. welker before brady didn't do anything in his career. gronk is always hurt. in 2011 gronk played injured in the SB and cost brady a SB. and now brady is playing without him. gronk is a great player, but you can't count on a guy who gets injured all the time.

did you just compare ronnie lott to harrison? i thought this was niners forum. lol rodney harrison who mysteriously didn't try to knock the ball off tyree's hands and cost brady a 4th SB and 19-0 season? and harrison was a great player, but he's no HOFer. bruschi? come on man. he is a hall of very good. he will never sniff HOF.

niners were loaded from the top to the bottom in many of montana's years. and life is very easy when you have the greatest WR of all time. imagine brady had rice instead of welker. he would've won the SB against the giants. remember welker drop? yes, the ball was thrown behind, but rice catches that with eyes closed. hell how about 2007 SB? remember that almost TD to randy moss at the end? the 75 yard bomb brady threw(which montana can never do)? maybe jerry rice c

Put down the pipe man. Please dont talk down welker. And Gronk!!!! That dude is getting carried into the hof on pillows even if he doesn't play another single down in the nfl. Most evil matchup in NFL history -- over winslow casper ditka kwalick gonzales anyone. what you talkin.

Stop with the Brady bullsht. brady is a great qb with limits. no mobility. no improv. Leadrhip? too much yelling at rookies on national tv. cmon. he has longevity. he can run mcd system. but he cant beat you with inspiration improvisation or athletic ability like other qbs in this discussion including joe. give brady his due but no more.

Originally posted by brodiebluebanaszak:
Put down the pipe man. Please dont talk down welker. And Gronk!!!! That dude is getting carried into the hof on pillows even if he doesn't play another single down in the nfl. Most evil matchup in NFL history -- over winslow casper ditka kwalick gonzales anyone. what you talkin.

Stop with the Brady bullsht. bardy is a great qb/ no mobility. no improv. Leadrship? too much yelling at rookies. cmon. he has longevity. he can run mcd system. but he cant beat you with inspiration or athletic ability like other qbs in this discussion including joe. give him his due but no more.

and joe won when he played with nobodys at ol rb mediocre front seven on d. he ran the fresh bw system to titletown. give him props.

Lolz Diaz is all over the map now. First he says the players of the 80's have nothing on today's players now he says Welker and Gronk have no business being compared to Taylor and Jones.

Wtf? Harrison made a s**t TON of plays in their early super bowl runs during the playoffs to help secure those 3 rings.

Originally posted by natediaz:

Originally posted by fortyninerglory:
Basically as many have already alluded to if the game is on the line and your life depends on it and you have a 2 minute drill as your only chance and you need a TD...You summon Montana to lead the team to victory.

but but but brady have more game winning drives than montana. 2 min left to go and who do i have? rice or bunch of small white dudes? that's a big factor.

Anybody you want. But who's your QB.

Originally posted by SunDevilNiner79:
I grew up in the 90s so I remember a fading Montana, Steve Young with a loaded team finally getting it done, wishing Aikman would die, and facing Favre the 49er killer.

Truthfully, I can only rate QBs from the late 90's forward. Its kind of silly to say that as a 10 year old or something you can judge QBs. For me, only considering guys that played into the 2000s and beyond, my top 10:

1. Tom Brady
2. Aaron Rodgers
3. Peyton Manning
4. Drew Brees
5. Kurt Warner
6. Brett Favre
7. Ben Roethlisberger
8. Michael Vick
9. Russell Wilson
10. Cam Newton

If Matt Ryan is able to pull off a SB win, I'd probably bump him on the list over Cam.

J. Garcia was better then M. Vick

Physical attributes aside though imagine Joe Montana (who could dunk a basketball with two hands) growing up in today's game with access to all of the tangibles today's players enjoy...the ability to throw a football with your arm and your brain doesn't magically evolve over the course of 10-30 years. If you have it you have it.

You can't underestimate the effect of the injury in the playoff game against the Giants. After that, Montana didn't play for a couple years, was than traded to the Chiefs, and was a much physically older player when he came back than Brady appears to be. Without that injury there would have been an almost certain Super Bowl win, and the following two or three years would have been totally different. Montana was going for a three-peat. What if he had won 4 or 5 Super Bowls in a row, which I think was likely.