Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The problem with comparing Joe Montana to Tom Brady is that we know that Montana could win on another team and with different coaching staffs. He went through a coaching change in SF and worked with a completely different style of coaching in Kansas City. We don't know how Tom Brady would fare under a different coach who runs different offenses and with different personnel. Montana proved he could pretty much win regardless of who you put on the field with him. Brady's great, and I have no reason to believe he couldn't do it, but I'm just saying...we don't really know.
I guess the example of Troy Aikman comes to mind, and I see a lot of Aikman in Brady. Aikman was exceptionally good when he had pass protection and he was among the most accurate passers in the history of the game. Now the difference between Aikman and Brady is that Aikman had an exceptionally strong running game to take some of the load off, but essentially, they both excelled because they weren't stressed in the pocket. But Aikman was a different quarterback once defensive lineman were able to get to him and knock him around, and honestly, I've seen the same thing with Brady. When the pass protection breaks down, he's an extremely exposed and vulnerable and un-Brady-like quarterback. That's why I don't think he's quite as good as Joe Montana, because Montana could scramble and make throws on the run. I would say that Elway, Steve Young, Brett Favre, and Aaron Rodgers were better at scrambling than Montana, but Montana made up for it comparatively with his overall skill set, and in my mind, he's the best I've ever seen. Not saying he's the best ever - 'cause I haven't been following football since 1920 - but he's the best I've seen since I've been watching the sport on television.
But the argument about who's better should not hinge on championships won. Does anyone seriously think Trent Dilfer is better than Dan Marino?
The problem with that argument is that Tom Brady's Offensive Coordinators are constantly getting poached. How many of them have had success elsewhere? Weiss went to Notre Dame and did nothing of note. McDaniels went to Denver and is now the most hated man in the Rockies. He then went to St Louis and they were one of the worst offenses in football. Now he will be back in New England next year and you can bet their offense will continue to operate smoothly.
Brady might not have the mobility of Montana or others, but he is exceptional at sliding around in the pocket to buy extra time, often causing the defense to fly right past him. Another part of his game that I love are his QB sneaks, there are very few elite QBs who are willing to sneak as much as he does and none who do it as effectively.
Up to this point Ive considered him the greatest since Joe Montana, better than Manning. If however, he loses this SB AND doesnt play well (Both of those variables) I'll still consider him great and a Hall OF fAMER, just not in my mind and discussion possibly the greatest of all time as previously believed
He already lost the Superbowl to the Giants a couple years back.
The problem with comparing Joe Montana to Tom Brady is that we know that Montana could win on another team and with different coaching staffs. He went through a coaching change in SF and worked with a completely different style of coaching in Kansas City. We don't know how Tom Brady would fare under a different coach who runs different offenses and with different personnel. Montana proved he could pretty much win regardless of who you put on the field with him. Brady's great, and I have no reason to believe he couldn't do it, but I'm just saying...we don't really know.
I guess the example of Troy Aikman comes to mind, and I see a lot of Aikman in Brady. Aikman was exceptionally good when he had pass protection and he was among the most accurate passers in the history of the game. Now the difference between Aikman and Brady is that Aikman had an exceptionally strong running game to take some of the load off, but essentially, they both excelled because they weren't stressed in the pocket. But Aikman was a different quarterback once defensive lineman were able to get to him and knock him around, and honestly, I've seen the same thing with Brady. When the pass protection breaks down, he's an extremely exposed and vulnerable and un-Brady-like quarterback. That's why I don't think he's quite as good as Joe Montana, because Montana could scramble and make throws on the run. I would say that Elway, Steve Young, Brett Favre, and Aaron Rodgers were better at scrambling than Montana, but Montana made up for it comparatively with his overall skill set, and in my mind, he's the best I've ever seen. Not saying he's the best ever - 'cause I haven't been following football since 1920 - but he's the best I've seen since I've been watching the sport on television.
But the argument about who's better should not hinge on championships won. Does anyone seriously think Trent Dilfer is better than Dan Marino?
I disagree because Aikman had absolutely no mobility at all. Tom Brady is more mobile than Aikman and a better QB and it's not even a comparison.
The problem with that argument is that Tom Brady's Offensive Coordinators are constantly getting poached. How many of them have had success elsewhere? Weiss went to Notre Dame and did nothing of note. McDaniels went to Denver and is now the most hated man in the Rockies. He then went to St Louis and they were one of the worst offenses in football. Now he will be back in New England next year and you can bet their offense will continue to operate smoothly.
Brady might not have the mobility of Montana or others, but he is exceptional at sliding around in the pocket to buy extra time, often causing the defense to fly right past him. Another part of his game that I love are his QB sneaks, there are very few elite QBs who are willing to sneak as much as he does and none who do it as effectively.
how many New England QB's have had success elsewhere?
we have a 7th rounder (Brady's a 6th rounder man!!!) in Matt Cassel who never even started a game at QB at USC, couldn't beat out Matt Leinart for the job, had to play receiver and special teams to keep playing at USC, and he stepped in and played really well -- went to KC and nothing special.
The problem with that argument is that Tom Brady's Offensive Coordinators are constantly getting poached. How many of them have had success elsewhere? Weiss went to Notre Dame and did nothing of note. McDaniels went to Denver and is now the most hated man in the Rockies. He then went to St Louis and they were one of the worst offenses in football. Now he will be back in New England next year and you can bet their offense will continue to operate smoothly.
Brady might not have the mobility of Montana or others, but he is exceptional at sliding around in the pocket to buy extra time, often causing the defense to fly right past him. Another part of his game that I love are his QB sneaks, there are very few elite QBs who are willing to sneak as much as he does and none who do it as effectively.
There's no question that Brady somehow makes it all work, as all the great quarterbacks do. The coaching staff needs the players to implement their genius, but I also think the quality of the coaching and the stability of the organization benefit Brady tremendously, which is not in any way to diminish what Brady has accomplished. And just so there's no misunderstanding, I would agree that Brady's a better QB than Aikman. I wasn't saying they were the same, just that there are some similarities that I see.
The thing I do like about Brady is exactly what you pointed out: he has a sixth sense, and I think it's more than just being able to elude pass rushers. I think he has field vision that few people have ever had in that position. I think that's what has allowed Brady to be Brady. The ability to see the field in a multidimensional way. He can spot mismatches and blown assignments almost from the second they start to happen. I do think part of that is just the relentlessly effective coaching that starts from Belichick on down, but there's no question that part of this is just Brady alone. In this respect, in terms of his ability to see the field of play and all of the moving pieces in its entirety, he might be the best I've ever seen. I guess some would call it spatial intelligence. Whatever it's called, he's clearly a master of its domain.
But a close second in that regard is/was Joe Montana. I saw the same thing when he played, and whenever I watch the clips of him even now. He ran a timed offense much like Brady does now. He was also a master in terms of finding the blown coverage. I guess if you want to give extra points to Brady it would be that he's had to do essentially the same thing - and done so - with considerably less talent on offense. Brady doesn't have Roger Craig. Brady doesn't have Jerry Rice, although he did have Randy Moss for a year (Rice was still better, though). And Brady didnt' have Brent Jones and John Taylor, both of whom were excellent receivers in their own right. So yeah, it's really hard to say who's better when you break it down.
how many New England QB's have had success elsewhere?
we have a 7th rounder (Brady's a 6th rounder man!!!) in Matt Cassel who never even started a game at QB at USC, couldn't beat out Matt Leinart for the job, had to play receiver and special teams to keep playing at USC, and he stepped in and played really well -- went to KC and nothing special.
put brady on KC and where is he?
see I can play that game again
It's hard to say, but that's a fair point. I still think Brady (younger and healthier) would have had at least a solid career anywhere he went, but he's been able to enjoy a great career in New England because he's played with a coaching staff that has made the best use of his talents. The example of Alex Smith shows just how important coaching is to a quarterback's success; QB's don't just do it all by themselves. Drew Brees is probably another example. A good year with San Diego, but a Hall of Famer with the Saints.
Matt Cassel benefited by being in a system that emphasized team play, and that same system has benefited Brady. Do I think the system made Brady? No, I think he would have been a pro-bowler somewhere else.
Brady is already a better quarterback than Montana.
And I'm a Colts fan.
Montana played in an era with no salary cap and played on teams with Jerry Rice, John Taylor, Ronnie Lott, Roger Craig, Dwight Clark, etc. He had the best receiver of all time to throw to. He also had Bill Walsh.
People make too much of rings. This is a team sport. It's not tennis or golf. It's not even basketball where there are only fives guys on the floor at a time and they play both offense and defense.
Football is the ultimate team game, and winning or not winning Super Bowls is not a great way to judge a player. Terry Bradshaw and Troy Aikman were not better than Dan Marino, yet they have seven rings between the two of them and Marino has zero.
Brady is already a better quarterback than Montana.
And I'm a Colts fan.
Montana played in an era with no salary cap and played on teams with Jerry Rice, John Taylor, Ronnie Lott, Roger Craig, Dwight Clark, etc. He had the best receiver of all time to throw to. He also had Bill Walsh.
People make too much of rings. This is a team sport. It's not tennis or golf. It's not even basketball where there are only fives guys on the floor at a time and they play both offense and defense.
Football is the ultimate team game, and winning or not winning Super Bowls is not a great way to judge a player. Terry Bradshaw and Troy Aikman were not better than Dan Marino, yet they have seven rings between the two of them and Marino has zero.
Brady is better than Montana and 3 of Montana's SB wins were blowouts? Brady's 3 SB wins all were close and 2 of them were won by a FG.
Brady is better than Montana and 3 of Montana's SB wins were blowouts? Brady's 3 SB wins all were close and 2 of them were won by a FG.
So?
Different eras.
One was an era with no salary cap and dynasties. A few haves and mostly have-nots. The other was an era with a salary cap that has seen teams go from worst to first in divisions and has seen no NFC champion repeat (except for the Giants) in the last decade.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
