GOAT debate related to era Montana vs Brady

[C.Biscuit97]

2 hours ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

Brady did it for so much longer period of time.  Granted the rule changes made it easier for him to last.  I can recall Montana also having some bad games in the playoffs in years they didn't make it to the SB.  There was no free agency back then, Montana won all those years with more of the same roster and star players around him.  Brady won with complete roster turnover though out the years and probably with a handful of exceptions less superstar talent around him .

That is a great point about the rule changes. It has never been easier to be a qb/ receiver.  Bad qbs throw for 4,000 yards and only guys like Marino used to be able to do that.  I think it was the nfc championship game where Montana got absolutely destroyed. If that hit happened on Brady, that player would be kicked out of the league. 
 

And I hate them but what the Pats did in a salary cap era is maybe the most remarkable dynasty in sports history. Those 49ers, cowboys, and Bills teams of the 90s couldn’t stay together the way they did then. 
 

in terms of coolness though, Montana >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Brady

11 hours ago, NoHuddleKelly12 said:

…thanks to the ‘93 Bills. Ergo, Jim Kelly better than Montana. 
 

 

 

(I kid, I kid) 😉 Howeva…none of the great class of ‘83 AFC QB’s of that time ever beat Kelly in the playoffs (Marino, Elway) or for that matter Moon or Montana…but that bum Hostetler wins in the Super Bowl?? (Sigh) 

Kelly by far had the best team. Kelly has a pretty bad playoff resume. You put Marino or Elway on those Bills teams, we win multiple SBs. Elway carried some garbage teams to the SB. 

12 hours ago, GoBills808 said:

re the NBA

 

Very few of those guys from the 80s could have played today. They weren't athletic enough, didn't train enough, and the physical defense everyone likes to reminisce about were just fouls if we're being honest.

I definitely think players are softer now compared to them. But lebron James is 6’8” 260 lbs of pure muscle. In terms of toughest, the older eras win. But the skill and athleticism of players is so much better now. Bob Cousy would dribble once in between his legs and people would lose their minds. Imagine Cousy playing in the nba today? It would be hilarious. 

[Snowbowl]

Montana best of his era. Brady of his. Modern athletes much better than the 80’s. But and this is a big but. In the 80’s QBs weren’t babied like Tommy was. He’s nowhere as tough as Joe and I don’t think he would’ve been great in the 80’s because of that. So it’s comparing apples to oranges. However if you take the athletics out of the pic and just look at big games Joe is my number 1. Undefeated in the the SB. 
 

 

[C.Biscuit97]

13 hours ago, KzooMike said:

If Brady left and handed it off to Steve Young they would still be winning Super Bowls. He can be a great player and so can Montana. That tandem has never really been replicated before. So if that's grounds for diminishing performance, pretty stupid IMO. With that logic any scrub that gets followed by a worse scrub gets elevated. Still a scrub.  

Steve Bono went 5-1 and had 11 tds to 4 ints when he played for the 49ers in 1991.

 

Montana and young are great. But they played on one of the greatest offenses ever, where a lot of guys would have been successful.

[Metal Man]

A lot of what makes Brady a strong argument for GOAT is his longevity.

 

I doubt he lasts nearly as long taking the hits QBs took in the 80s/90s.

 

Brady benefitted from the "Brady rule" greatly.

[GerstAusGosheim]

Dan Marino got rid of the ball lighting fast and lasted 17 years. Brady's quick release would have helped him the same way as long as the offense was set up for that style of play.

[unbillievable]

If you take away the years when he cheated, Brady only had 1 season that wasn't awful.

 

 

[unbillievable]

Instead of comparing him to Joe Montana, we should be asking how Brady measures up to Barry Bonds and Lance Armstrong.

[RangerDave]

1 hour ago, hondo in seattle said:

The hardware argument always bothers me because football is a team sport.  Brady didn't win his rings alone.

I am also always amazed at how "lucky" NE was during many of their Super Bowls.

• Seattle throwing a pick at the goal line instead of running Beast Mode
• Atlanta's historic collapse
• last second field goal win vs the Rams
• last second field goal to beat the Panthers

I believe you make your own luck, but how would people feel about Brady if he had lost more Super Bowls than he won?

[Ya Digg?]

17 minutes ago, RangerDave said:

I am also always amazed at how "lucky" NE was during many of their Super Bowls.

• Seattle throwing a pick at the goal line instead of running Beast Mode
• Atlanta's historic collapse
• last second field goal win vs the Rams
• last second field goal to beat the Panthers

I believe you make your own luck, but how would people feel about Brady if he had lost more Super Bowls than he won?

I’m not a fan of the “luck” argument. You can conceivably say a team got lucky they won in most Super Bowls. You could claim that for both of Mahomes wins, all of the Manning Super Bowl wins, etc. 

[RangerDave]

46 minutes ago, Ya Digg? said:

You could claim that for both of Mahomes wins, all of the Manning Super Bowl wins, etc. 

Maybe I just will do that.  Thanks!  😀

[gotme365]

Montana and the 49ners never cheated. We don’t know the full scope of the Pats cheating and how it aided Brady with his development. Montana is the GOAT 

[thenorthremembers]

16 hours ago, KzooMike said:

Dumbest argument ever, he handed it off to a future hall of famer. Lots of ways to debate this, discussing Steve Young performing well is not close to one of them. 

It is when part of the debate includes the offensive system.  Steve Young was a bum in Tampa Bay.   Part of the argument is that Walsh's system had a part in the success of Montana.   Including Young who had thrown 11 tds to 21 ints, and was sub 55% completion percentage prior to moving on to San Francisco helps to make the guys point.

[Alphadawg7]

My final take.  GOAT by default is going to be Brady.  7 SB wins and playing until age 45 at the level he played at may be achievements never matched again, especially in the free agency era of football.  

 

HOWEVER:  I don't think its really possible to say who was the actual better QB because I can't see Montana doing any worse than Brady if they swapped places and longevity.  At the same time, I am not so sure how Brady would have fared during an era where you could tee off on the QB and be physical with WR's.  Everything about Brady was based on timing, and it had to be because he didn't have the strongest arm.  In Montana's era, DB's could be more physical with WR's and disrupt timing more and defenders didn't have to let up before hitting the QB.  

 

I watched the highest scoring offense in NFL history get held to 14 points in the Super Bowl by an average Giants team just because they were hitting Brady.  I watched that same Giants team do the same thing to another one of the highest scoring offenses in NFL history and rough Brady up again and hold them to 17 points.  The key to Brady's success was that he was not getting hit, but when you did hit Brady and could disrupt his timing he was human.  It was a lot easier to do that when Montana played as the rules and how they called games were different.  

 

Montana almost had to retire from a back injury in 1986, but he came back the next season and threw 31 TD's in just 13 games (a very gaudy number in those days that would even be excellent in the modern era).  In his last year with the 49ers, Montana had to have elbow surgery from a preseason injury and wouldn't return until late in the season where the 49ers stuck with Steve Young who was the leagues MVP that season.  Montana played the last game of the season only, but Niners stuck with the league MVP for the playoffs.  To this day, many believe the 49ers should have won the Super Bowl that year, but they lost in the NFCCG to Dallas and a lot of people still think had Montana not gotten hurt and played that season they would have won it all.  Niners would go on and win the Super Bowl the next season though which was the first year Montana was in KC.  

 

So, if not for the elbow injury, Montana would have 100% started and played the whole season.  Pretty much everyone thinks Young is an all time great HOF QB (and so do I), but no one thinks Young was better than Montana, so not crazy to think they might have won the Super Bowl that year had Joe not got hurt.  Niners would go on and win the SB the next season with Young as the QB and Montana in KC.  

 

Point is...Niners went to NFCCG and SB in those 2 seasons (one with Joe missing all but 1 game and the other with Joe in KC).  Had Joe not had his body fail, he would have led those 2 niners teams and very well could have 2 more SB wins under his belt that would have put him at 6 with 0 losses by the time he was 37.  Brady played until 45 and appeared in 4 Super Bowls between the age of 39 and 45, winning 3.  

 

But if we are comparing them by ages:  At the age Montana retired, he had won 4 Super Bowls (lost none).  When Brady was the same age, he had also won 4 Super Bowls and lost 2 others.  So its not hard to think had Montana's body afforded him the opportunity to play at a high level well into his 40's, he might have equaled or even surpassed Bradys accomplishments.  

 

Since its impossible to do that...Brady is the GOAT, but Montana is #2 without a doubt and even though Brady is the undisputed GOAT, I don't think it's really possible to say who is actually the truly better QB because their bodies did not afford the same longevity of career for a fair comparison.  

 

 

[Aussie Joe]

2 hours ago, unbillievable said:

If you take away the years when he cheated, Brady only had 1 season that wasn't awful.

 

 

You think they pick him for the Hall of Fame?

[Airseven]

Brady is the best QB of all time. This debate has been over for awhile now. We also have him to thank for allowing the Bills to take over the AFCE.

[Mikie2times]

6 hours ago, Einstein said:

 

Brady had won 3 Super Bowl’s before the DB rule change occurred and before the league began to crack down on QB hits.

 

Thats the most impressive part. Brady won SB’s in BOTH era’s.

 

Remember when Nate Clements knocked Brady’s block off? One of the most savage QB hits in memory and Brady won the SB that same year.

Brady never had a year with a passer rating above 87 under the old rules. Mind you he was still very young so hammering that point doesn't really seem to make a lot of sense to me. In broader terms, not dealing with defensive contact for the first 5 yards helped him, along with all QB's, tremendously. It completely changed the game, increasing average rating and completion % by almost 10 points each and making this a passing league which it never was before. 

2 hours ago, thenorthremembers said:

It is when part of the debate includes the offensive system.  Steve Young was a bum in Tampa Bay.   Part of the argument is that Walsh's system had a part in the success of Montana.   Including Young who had thrown 11 tds to 21 ints, and was sub 55% completion percentage prior to moving on to San Francisco helps to make the guys point.

It was Steve Youngs first two seasons in the league on an awful Bucs team. People keep using this time to say, see! Look at how much better he was in with SF. Well, no sh!t, he was a rookie playing on a horrible team. 

1 hour ago, Airseven said:

Brady is the best QB of all time. This debate has been over for awhile now. We also have him to thank for allowing the Bills to take over the AFCE.

The thread was about trying to compare the eras and discussing this debate. Not just deciding who is independent of era. Most people in this thread have lost site of the thread. Who is the best one independent of era has been discussed here and everywhere else to nauseous levels. Clearly Brady has more of just about everything. Would he do that in the 80's? I don't think he would. Would Montana do it in the era Tom played? I don't know either.  

Edited April 12, 2023 by KzooMike

[Punching Bag]

8 hours ago, May Day 10 said:

 

IMO, both Elway and Marino were better Quarterbacks than Montana.  Manning was a better QB than Brady (but was largely squandered by the Colts).  The new age of QBs are probably better than all of them as they are freaks.  

 

 

Disagree on Marwhino.  He was the model for Br*dy with his whining to the Zebras. 

 

In addition the position is a Quarterback not a thrower and a lot of skills other QBs had he did not like fakes on runs - every time it was a fake I could see it coming before RB got demolished which is why their running game was so terrible.  Consider the best season for him was 1993 for that is when he got his break (pun intended) into commercials and acting.  It did prevent "Dancing Dan" from getting into any dance contests post career.

 

He also had trouble learning new plays late in season.  In playoffs opposition teams saw all of the plays.

[gomper]

Montana never lost a Super Bowl.  He was at his best in the big game. 

[97bills]

I hope one day we’re talking about mahomes and Allen. Of course mahomes has been to 3 Super Bowls already. But it will be a crying shame if Allen doesn’t come close to the success Mahomes will have , at the end of there career… it just sucks Mahomes has Andy Reid , because I really believe talent wise Allen is right there with him. Sorry I turned this into a Allen thing , but I’m 48 and ready for some Super Bowl rings or ring. Lol GO BILLS 

[Billl]

6 hours ago, RangerDave said:

I am also always amazed at how "lucky" NE was during many of their Super Bowls.

• Seattle throwing a pick at the goal line instead of running Beast Mode
• Atlanta's historic collapse
• last second field goal win vs the Rams
• last second field goal to beat the Panthers

I believe you make your own luck, but how would people feel about Brady if he had lost more Super Bowls than he won?

Why don’t you talk about how unlucky he was to lose to the Giants via the helmet catch?

28 minutes ago, gomper said:

Montana never lost a Super Bowl.  He was at his best in the big game. 

Yeah, it’s way more impressive to lose before getting there.  Sure would’ve sucked for Joe if he’d made 6 more Super Bowls and won 3 more championships.

[RangerDave]

57 minutes ago, Billl said:

Why don’t you talk about how unlucky he was to lose to the Giants via the helmet catch?

That was certainly a lucky win for the Giants, no doubt about it.

[Paup 1995MVP]

On 4/11/2023 at 11:28 PM, GoBills808 said:

We're talking about simplified defenses stocked w smaller slower less athletic players, Brady would have won 15 SBs playing in those days imo

Wow, I just had to interject when I read your post.  Did you even watch football back in the 80's and 90's bro?  It was a totally different game.  Sure Brady would have been good in any era.  But would he have dominated like he did in the 2000's?  Absolutely not.  No QB would have dominated in that era like they do now.  The game was way more violent then.  Defensive players could absolutely destroy QB's on every play.  And rarely was a penalty called for roughing the passer.  Go watch the hit that Jim Burt from the Giants put on Montana in the playoff game in 1986 I believe in the Meadowlands.  Burt hit Montana with his helmet under the chin running at full speed while Joe was about to throw.  No flag was even called.  And receivers were fair game all over the field by head hunting safeties.  That was football.  It was played like that at every level.  It was supposed to be a violent game.  Montana was amazing.  So was Brady.  But the game Montana played in was way more destructive then what is called pro football today.  

 

Its the same with the NHL.  I was talking w a big hockey fan recently.  He said the guys today are way more talented then in Gretzky's era.  I disagree.  But even if they are, are they constantly looking over their shoulder worried about getting splattered from behind head first into the boards by psychos like Ben Wilson and Scott Steven?  No comparison between today's NHL and the 70's, 80's and 90's.  It was roller derby with sticks.  What Gretzky accomplished in that era is the greatest accomplishment of any athlete of all time.  Period.  

 

To finish go watch the hit Bruce Smith put on Boomer Esiason playing for the Jets on the frozen Rich Stadium turf in the late 80's or early 90's.  Then tell me how Brady would have done taking shots like that every week.

13 hours ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

That is a great point about the rule changes. It has never been easier to be a qb/ receiver.  Bad qbs throw for 4,000 yards and only guys like Marino used to be able to do that.  I think it was the nfc championship game where Montana got absolutely destroyed. If that hit happened on Brady, that player would be kicked out of the league. 
 

And I hate them but what the Pats did in a salary cap era is maybe the most remarkable dynasty in sports history. Those 49ers, cowboys, and Bills teams of the 90s couldn’t stay together the way they did then. 
 

in terms of coolness though, Montana >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Brady

Kelly by far had the best team. Kelly has a pretty bad playoff resume. You put Marino or Elway on those Bills teams, we win multiple SBs. Elway carried some garbage teams to the SB. 

I definitely think players are softer now compared to them. But lebron James is 6’8” 260 lbs of pure muscle. In terms of toughest, the older eras win. But the skill and athleticism of players is so much better now. Bob Cousy would dribble once in between his legs and people would lose their minds. Imagine Cousy playing in the nba today? It would be hilarious. 

I mentioned the hit on Montana by Jim Burt.  He didn't even get a penalty.  

 

As for Lebron.  He is a whiny B word.  I will take MIchael every day and twice on Sunday.  Guys just stand around the 3 pt arc and launch long range jumpers.  How is that athletic?

[jlgarsh]

On 4/11/2023 at 9:34 PM, C.Biscuit97 said:

I loved Montana growing up but he got to throw to Jerry Rice, maybe the greatest football player ever. Steve Young, when healthy, was arguably better than Montana in that system. They also were loaded teams because there was no cap. Look at the scrubs Brady was throwing go besides Gronk.  Winning the amount of SBs they did in a salary cap makes Brady blow Montana away. 

Of course if does. It’s like the current 49ers now. If you blindly look at Jimmy G’s stats and “wins,” he looks great. However, the fact that almost any qb can step in and be successful shows there is nothing special about him. If there was any drop off between Montana and Young, it makes Montana look better. But Young was ever better than him. 

Montana won 2 Super Bowls without Rice and they only played like 65 games together. He went 4-0 in Super Bowls with 11 TDS and 0 picks. 3 SB MVPs. If I needed to win 1 game, there’s a pretty good argument to be made for Montana. Brady’s longevity and overall durability are major pluses for him. 

[Paup 1995MVP]

9 hours ago, Alphadawg7 said:

My final take.  GOAT by default is going to be Brady.  7 SB wins and playing until age 45 at the level he played at may be achievements never matched again, especially in the free agency era of football.  

 

HOWEVER:  I don't think its really possible to say who was the actual better QB because I can't see Montana doing any worse than Brady if they swapped places and longevity.  At the same time, I am not so sure how Brady would have fared during an era where you could tee off on the QB and be physical with WR's.  Everything about Brady was based on timing, and it had to be because he didn't have the strongest arm.  In Montana's era, DB's could be more physical with WR's and disrupt timing more and defenders didn't have to let up before hitting the QB.  

 

I watched the highest scoring offense in NFL history get held to 14 points in the Super Bowl by an average Giants team just because they were hitting Brady.  I watched that same Giants team do the same thing to another one of the highest scoring offenses in NFL history and rough Brady up again and hold them to 17 points.  The key to Brady's success was that he was not getting hit, but when you did hit Brady and could disrupt his timing he was human.  It was a lot easier to do that when Montana played as the rules and how they called games were different.  

 

Montana almost had to retire from a back injury in 1986, but he came back the next season and threw 31 TD's in just 13 games (a very gaudy number in those days that would even be excellent in the modern era).  In his last year with the 49ers, Montana had to have elbow surgery from a preseason injury and wouldn't return until late in the season where the 49ers stuck with Steve Young who was the leagues MVP that season.  Montana played the last game of the season only, but Niners stuck with the league MVP for the playoffs.  To this day, many believe the 49ers should have won the Super Bowl that year, but they lost in the NFCCG to Dallas and a lot of people still think had Montana not gotten hurt and played that season they would have won it all.  Niners would go on and win the Super Bowl the next season though which was the first year Montana was in KC.  

 

So, if not for the elbow injury, Montana would have 100% started and played the whole season.  Pretty much everyone thinks Young is an all time great HOF QB (and so do I), but no one thinks Young was better than Montana, so not crazy to think they might have won the Super Bowl that year had Joe not got hurt.  Niners would go on and win the SB the next season with Young as the QB and Montana in KC.  

 

Point is...Niners went to NFCCG and SB in those 2 seasons (one with Joe missing all but 1 game and the other with Joe in KC).  Had Joe not had his body fail, he would have led those 2 niners teams and very well could have 2 more SB wins under his belt that would have put him at 6 with 0 losses by the time he was 37.  Brady played until 45 and appeared in 4 Super Bowls between the age of 39 and 45, winning 3.  

 

But if we are comparing them by ages:  At the age Montana retired, he had won 4 Super Bowls (lost none).  When Brady was the same age, he had also won 4 Super Bowls and lost 2 others.  So its not hard to think had Montana's body afforded him the opportunity to play at a high level well into his 40's, he might have equaled or even surpassed Bradys accomplishments.  

 

Since its impossible to do that...Brady is the GOAT, but Montana is #2 without a doubt and even though Brady is the undisputed GOAT, I don't think it's really possible to say who is actually the truly better QB because their bodies did not afford the same longevity of career for a fair comparison.  

 

 

Good analysis Alpha.  But what two QB's did you enjoy watching the most in your NFL story?

 

Has there ever been anyone more exciting to watch then Brett Favre?

 

Josh Allen is heading in that direction.  Lets go!  

[GoBills808]

1 hour ago, Paup 1995MVP said:

Wow, I just had to interject when I read your post.  Did you even watch football back in the 80's and 90's bro?  It was a totally different game.  Sure Brady would have been good in any era.  But would he have dominated like he did in the 2000's?  Absolutely not.  No QB would have dominated in that era like they do now.  The game was way more violent then.  Defensive players could absolutely destroy QB's on every play.  And rarely was a penalty called for roughing the passer.  Go watch the hit that Jim Burt from the Giants put on Montana in the playoff game in 1986 I believe in the Meadowlands.  Burt hit Montana with his helmet under the chin running at full speed while Joe was about to throw.  No flag was even called.  And receivers were fair game all over the field by head hunting safeties.  That was football.  It was played like that at every level.  It was supposed to be a violent game.  Montana was amazing.  So was Brady.  But the game Montana played in was way more destructive then what is called pro football today.  

 

Its the same with the NHL.  I was talking w a big hockey fan recently.  He said the guys today are way more talented then in Gretzky's era.  I disagree.  But even if they are, are they constantly looking over their shoulder worried about getting splattered from behind head first into the boards by psychos like Ben Wilson and Scott Steven?  No comparison between today's NHL and the 70's, 80's and 90's.  It was roller derby with sticks.  What Gretzky accomplished in that era is the greatest accomplishment of any athlete of all time.  Period.  

 

To finish go watch the hit Bruce Smith put on Boomer Esiason playing for the Jets on the frozen Rich Stadium turf in the late 80's or early 90's.  Then tell me how Brady would have done taking shots like that every week.

I mentioned the hit on Montana by Jim Burt.  He didn't even get a penalty.  

 

As for Lebron.  He is a whiny B word.  I will take MIchael every day and twice on Sunday.  Guys just stand around the 3 pt arc and launch long range jumpers.  How is that athletic?

Tldr Montana got knocked out by a 260lb NT

[Alphadawg7]

1 hour ago, Paup 1995MVP said:

Good analysis Alpha.  But what two QB's did you enjoy watching the most in your NFL story?

 

Has there ever been anyone more exciting to watch then Brett Favre?

 

Josh Allen is heading in that direction.  Lets go!  

I love football, so there have been several QBs I’ve enjoyed watching play for things like greatness, excitement, etc…and Montana and Brady are 2 of them.  
 

But I can honestly say that Josh Allen is already my all time favorite player to watch play. 

[condor1]

Jonny Unitas

[Manther]

My participation in this thread is this.  No more comments other than Brady is a wussy who points the fingers, not the thumbs guy.  Top 10 QB ever.  Takes the praise, gives the blame.  Goodell and America wanted the success and drove it.

 

It is like Barry Bonds, you would have possibly and probably have been the best ever without steroids.  Why did you do it, ego!

 

Brady could have been the best ever, why cheat over and over again and scream at people for calling you out.  Lance Armstrong anyone?!

 

Brady is a clown, who could have been GOAT, but, I don't consider him in the conversation since there are too many asterisks, like Bonds and Armstrong.  I wish Brady nothing good.

[BringMetheHeadofLeonLett]

On 4/11/2023 at 5:50 PM, thenorthremembers said:

Brady made his coach look better than he was.   Montana's coach made Montana look better than he was.    In my lifetime I've found the easiest way to the truth is to choose the answer with the least amount of what ifs or variables.  Brady is the GOAT and to me it's not close.  Personally, I think the larger debate here is whether Montana was better than Peyton Manning.   Hell, Mahomes should already be mentioned in the conversation for 2nd best ever.  But just like with Jordan in Basketball, there is no real discussion about who is the GOAT.

Yeah, if you didn't have any way to compare, 'what I've seen before my own eyes,' to ANYTHING else, then yeah, Tom Brady and Michael Jordan are what your dumb-asses refer to as, The GOATS'.  
 

I'll counter with, Michael Jordan and Tom Brady never beat anybody good, ever.  Definitely nobody who was great while they weee in their prime.  Lucky timing to be the greatest of all time...

[BringMetheHeadofLeonLett]

This isn't a question, Tom Brady would have never survived as a quatrerback in the 70's, 80's, or 90's. 

And Jordan was about the best basketball athlete to play basketball, Magic Johnson was the best basketball player I will probably ever see.  

[BringMetheHeadofLeonLett]

Yeah hahaha.  Now tell me who exactly your 'greatest of all times' have beat, and let us have a discussion.  

[BringMetheHeadofLeonLett]

I watched Michael Jordan continuously get his ass handed to himself while the Celtics were playing the Lakers in the Finals. 
 

After that, I watched Michael Jordan continuously get his ass handed to him while the Pistons took on the Lakers in the Finals.  
 

Spectator Trophy for The Greatest of All Time, I suppose. 
 

And if you want me to get into the actual stats, I can do that. 
 

[Stank_Nasty]

 there’s always THAT guy. ☝️☝️☝️☝️☝️☝️

[Paup 1995MVP]

On 4/13/2023 at 2:03 AM, Alphadawg7 said:

I love football, so there have been several QBs I’ve enjoyed watching play for things like greatness, excitement, etc…and Montana and Brady are 2 of them.  
 

But I can honestly say that Josh Allen is already my all time favorite player to watch play. 

Josh Allen is amazing to watch play.  His running and passing ability combined with his competitive fire is unmatched.  I think we should win every time he steps on the field.  We HAVE to give him a better O line.  It is imperative if we are going to contend for a Super Bowl.  

 

I read your earlier post again about Montana vs Brady and Steve Young from the early 90's 49ers.  Your memory of those teams and what they did 30 years ago is pretty dam impressive.  The Niners teams under Bill Walsh and George Seifert were tremendous.  (I thought Seifert was a great coach too.)  Steve Young was a HOF QB also.  I just never liked him as much as Joe for some reason.  

 

For physical ability to throw a football, I don't think anyone could throw it like Dan Marino.  It was ridiculous.  I was not a big fan because he played for our arch rivals.  But dam could he hum it.  And lets not forget Elway and my guy Brett Favre.  (just always connected w his persona)  And of course our boy #12 Jimbo.  Was there a tougher QB to ever play the game?!

 

So many great QB's over the years.  With the rule changes, its just a lot easier to be very good to great at QB then in past eras.  I watch the draft analysis on all the QB's on ESPN, etc.  And a lot of these kids can chuck the ball.  But noone talks about toughness and hardnosed anymore.  Its all about athleticism and he is a nice kid whose Mom and Dad are real supportive.  Good god its football.  I remember Jim Kelly's mom walked around w an oxygen tank at her home and an oxygen mask on.  And she still smoked cigarettes.  My how the world has changed.  But I guess that is what the world has become in the 2020's.

 

Its just good to hear football analysis from other people like yourself who have soaked it in for decades like myself.  Thank you.

[Alphadawg7]

1 hour ago, Paup 1995MVP said:

Josh Allen is amazing to watch play.  His running and passing ability combined with his competitive fire is unmatched.  I think we should win every time he steps on the field.  We HAVE to give him a better O line.  It is imperative if we are going to contend for a Super Bowl.  

 

Honestly, there are just players that you have to watch no matter because at any given moment they can do something that no one else is really capable of doing.  Guys like Barry Sanders for example, where regardless of it being an insignificant down, critical down, etc he can make an eye popping play that you just don't feel like anyone else can do.  Even in the NBA there are guys that were just must watch because they reguarly did things that left you in awe...from all time legends like Jordan, Kobe, etc...to human highlight reels like Vince Carter and Jason "White Chocloate" Willams.  

 

For me, Allen is already at that level and entered that category when he went into Minnesota and upset them his rookie year.  

 

1 hour ago, Paup 1995MVP said:

 

I read your earlier post again about Montana vs Brady and Steve Young from the early 90's 49ers.  Your memory of those teams and what they did 30 years ago is pretty dam impressive.  The Niners teams under Bill Walsh and George Seifert were tremendous.  (I thought Seifert was a great coach too.)  Steve Young was a HOF QB also.  I just never liked him as much as Joe for some reason.  

 

Yeah I grew up an hour out of SF and my dad was a die hard fan, watched every game they ever played.  My dad was obsessed with 2 things...the 49ers, and the TV Show "Dallas", especially JR Ewing.  So his only rule was that when either the Niners were on or the show Dallas was on, no one could ask him questions or anything unless it was a commercial and they had to be questions that could be answered with "yes" or "no" 😂

 

1 hour ago, Paup 1995MVP said:

 

For physical ability to throw a football, I don't think anyone could throw it like Dan Marino.  It was ridiculous.  I was not a big fan because he played for our arch rivals.  But dam could he hum it.  And lets not forget Elway and my guy Brett Favre.  (just always connected w his persona)  And of course our boy #12 Jimbo.  Was there a tougher QB to ever play the game?!

 

So many great QB's over the years.  With the rule changes, its just a lot easier to be very good to great at QB then in past eras.  I watch the draft analysis on all the QB's on ESPN, etc.  And a lot of these kids can chuck the ball.  But noone talks about toughness and hardnosed anymore.  Its all about athleticism and he is a nice kid whose Mom and Dad are real supportive.  Good god its football.  I remember Jim Kelly's mom walked around w an oxygen tank at her home and an oxygen mask on.  And she still smoked cigarettes.  My how the world has changed.  But I guess that is what the world has become in the 2020's.

 

Agreed with the Marino and those guys.  But this bolded part is key too.  It is without a doubt easier to be a better QB in this era compared to when those guys played.  And its not just about not being able to touch the QB, it also has a lot to do with how much less physical DB's can be with receivers.  When the QB is getting hit less and receivers are getting releases easier, it just makes things easier.  And that was intentional, offense sells tickets, and the NFL wanted higher scoring.  

 

1 hour ago, Paup 1995MVP said:

 

Its just good to hear football analysis from other people like yourself who have soaked it in for decades like myself.  Thank you.

 

Thanks, I feel the same bud!  

[mjd1001]

I give the nod to Peyton Manning as a better QB than Brady.  I can't take away the cheating from Brady (without the cheating, would any of those 1 score superbowls have gone the other way, or would they have not even made some/most of them?)  Not to mention I have heard and read quite a few players talk about playing them at the peak fo their careers, and say something like "when you played the Patriots, you were afraid of the entire team, when you played the Colts, you were afraid of Manning" or "You know Brady was good, but he didn't keep a Defensive player up at night like Manning did".

 

But mostly, I give Manning the nod because of the cheating by the Pats.

 

As far as Marino, as much as I HATED him as a player, I wonder what kind of numbers he would have put up had he played 20 years later.  I don't consider him the 'greatest ever', but I cannot really tell someone they are totally wrong if they thought he was.

[Ghost_002!]

Couple things to add to this debate. Although there are those who like to bring up Montana and other players playing in rougher era. It's not true The rule changes as we know of today happening  AFTER Brady's 18-1 season. Brady had already won multiple championships by then and you could still beat the f out of the QB back then....(remember bountygate and what the saints did to manning) 

 

 

And i know anyone with any sense is not really using the "cheating" thing as a point..but before you think the 9ers were clean...Montana, and even Jerry Rice already admit Rice and Montana's lineman used "stickem" during their SB runs...

 

 

And really people gotta stop bring up different eras...although the athletes are more advance now, cause naturally humans have evolved. All these players were still special no matter what era they were in. No regular joe could of played in any era. The athletes were superior in both mind and body....so my point, Brady would of been completely fine had they not changed the rules..because he would of adjusted. Just like Montana or a "mean joe" green would of been fine in this era. 

Edited April 14, 2023 by Ghost_002!

[Mikie2times]

1 hour ago, Alphadawg7 said:

 

Honestly, there are just players that you have to watch no matter because at any given moment they can do something that no one else is really capable of doing.  Guys like Barry Sanders for example, where regardless of it being an insignificant down, critical down, etc he can make an eye popping play that you just don't feel like anyone else can do.  Even in the NBA there are guys that were just must watch because they reguarly did things that left you in awe...from all time legends like Jordan, Kobe, etc...to human highlight reels like Vince Carter and Jason "White Chocloate" Willams.  

 

For me, Allen is already at that level and entered that category when he went into Minnesota and upset them his rookie year.  

 

 

Yeah I grew up an hour out of SF and my dad was a die hard fan, watched every game they ever played.  My dad was obsessed with 2 things...the 49ers, and the TV Show "Dallas", especially JR Ewing.  So his only rule was that when either the Niners were on or the show Dallas was on, no one could ask him questions or anything unless it was a commercial and they had to be questions that could be answered with "yes" or "no" 😂

 

 

Agreed with the Marino and those guys.  But this bolded part is key too.  It is without a doubt easier to be a better QB in this era compared to when those guys played.  And its not just about not being able to touch the QB, it also has a lot to do with how much less physical DB's can be with receivers.  When the QB is getting hit less and receivers are getting releases easier, it just makes things easier.  And that was intentional, offense sells tickets, and the NFL wanted higher scoring.  

 

 

Thanks, I feel the same bud!  

You have had some great contributions in this thread and this is how I feel the most about this topic. I'm 40, but I enjoy the history of the game and really have since before my teens. I did feel that Brady, and what he has done in this era, is better than anybody else has ever done it. If you compare him to QB's of his era, he has done far more than any of them and by a larger margin than any QB in history. Certainly when you factor in the length of his career he has to get the nod as GOAT and I'm ok with that.

 

What inspired this thread was the thought that he just couldn't have did what he did if he was in Montana's era. It's just wouldn't be possible. The style of play, the nutrition, the rules, the medical advances we have made. It isn't that much different than what Lebron is doing either so we see it in multiple leagues. I mean just thinking about how our average passer rating in the league is now in the 90's. That was barely possible in that era with the defensive contact rules. Then you look at what Montana did and to me it does make for a interesting discussion. It isn't as black and white as the stats seem.

 

Then I always love when other guys like Marino and Peyton get brought up because both were better pure passers than either QB. The release for both QB's was instant, the accuracy was perfect, the arm strength nearly unmatched. Yet in both Brady's and Montana's case they performed at very high levels in the postseason where Marino and Peyton never did. Thanks again for the great contributions. It's awesome hearing some of the things you saw first hand for those of us that were a little after that time.   

Edited April 14, 2023 by KzooMike

[QLBillsFan]

Brady by a wide margin. Can’t stand anything about the guy. Leaves Pats they implode. Steve Young follows Montana and SB’s. Brady wins in TB. Montana can’t overcome the Marv’s. That is all and I hate to admit it. Brady ughhh… 

[Alphadawg7]

2 hours ago, KzooMike said:

You have had some great contributions in this thread and this is how I feel the most about this topic. I'm 40, but I enjoy the history of the game and really have since before my teens. I did feel that Brady, and what he has done in this era, is better than anybody else has ever done it. If you compare him to QB's of his era, he has done far more than any of them and by a larger margin than any QB in history. Certainly when you factor in the length of his career he has to get the nod as GOAT and I'm ok with that.

 

What inspired this thread was the thought that he just couldn't have did what he did if he was in Montana's era. It's just wouldn't be possible. The style of play, the nutrition, the rules, the medical advances we have made. It isn't that much different than what Lebron is doing either so we see it in multiple leagues. I mean just thinking about how our average passer rating in the league is now in the 90's. That was barely possible in that era with the defensive contact rules. Then you look at what Montana did and to me it does make for a interesting discussion. It isn't as black and white as the stats seem.

 

Then I always love when other guys like Marino and Peyton get brought up because both were better pure passers than either QB. The release for both QB's was instant, the accuracy was perfect, the arm strength nearly unmatched. Yet in both Brady's and Montana's case they performed at very high levels in the postseason where Marino and Peyton never did. Thanks again for the great contributions. It's awesome hearing some of the things you saw first hand for those of us that were a little after that time.   

 

Thanks bud  I also enjoy and love the game of football, its history, its other great players, etc and always have.  

 

Manning is a weird one for me...easily one of the greatest REGULAR season QB's of all time, but I am less enamored with his playoff resume.  I can never get past his NFL record of 9 one and dones in Indy.  Then there is the year he and the Broncos broke all the NFL passing and scoring records and he went on to get blown out by Russel Wilson and Seahawks 43-8 in the Super Bowl.  

 

So for me, if I had to pick between say someone like Kurt Warner or Peyton Manning in the playoffs, or even just the Super Bowl, I would not hesitate to take Kurt Warner every time.

 

Manning is without a doubt top 10 all time, but I can never personally get him into my top 5.