- Joined
- Oct 20, 2007
- Messages
- 29,794
- Reaction score
- 20,459
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.But thats the point. He is tied in rings and better in every other metric. It can't be a tie, because Brady is tied or better in everything, and better by a good amount in many.
Even that is wrong.Hey I have no problem with what Hasselbeck said. He's basically saying what we all knew and that is how Manning really is the greatest regular season QB of all time. When you want regular season stats and fantasy numbers, Manning is your man.
Especially now that they are tied with 4 Super Bowls a piece, I don't see how losing 2 SBs is a demerit - it's additive to Brady's resume to have 6 conference titles, as AndyJohnson said. Brady has the edge now.
As much as I love Brady, I always contended that Montana is the greatest ever. BUT, there are arguments both ways. Montana had some of greatest offensive weapons ever (Jerry Rice for several years) , he never had to deal with a salary cap, so his team can stay together for many years. Had some very good defenses, and played some mediocre teams in the SB. Brady had some good defenses, and arguably the greatest coach ever. But I will say, Brady had done more with less than any QB ever. And the stats listed above are not arguable. He's the greatest QB EVER. And having been a Pat's fan since 1975, it's shocking to be able to say that.
But thats the point. He is tied in rings and better in every other metric. It can't be a tie, because Brady is tied or better in everything, and better by a good amount in many.
Even that is wrong.
Regular Season
Brady 160-47
Manning 179-77
All Manning has is about 2000 more pass attempts that make him a stat accumulator.
The only remaining case for Montana is one of era, since he played in a less QB-friendly one. At this point I don't think even that's enough for him, though, because whatever disadvantage he gets from that should be offset by having Jerry Rice. Brady's the GOAT.
He also was the 1st qb ever in the innovative WCO with one of the all time genius offensive coaches.The only remaining case for Montana is one of era, since he played in a less QB-friendly one. At this point I don't think even that's enough for him, though, because whatever disadvantage he gets from that should be offset by having Jerry Rice. Brady's the GOAT.
The only remaining case for Montana is one of era, since he played in a less QB-friendly one. At this point I don't think even that's enough for him, though, because whatever disadvantage he gets from that should be offset by having Jerry Rice. Brady's the GOAT.
Especially now that they are tied with 4 Super Bowls a piece, I don't see how losing 2 SBs is a demerit - it's additive to Brady's resume to have 6 conference titles, as AndyJohnson said. Brady has the edge now.
I dont buy that argument. People say that Montana should get credit because the backs were allowed to maul the receivers. So what!!! The 49ers backs were allowed to do it too, so it was even. The difference was that the 49ers were able to keep a stacked team together and they played teams that were not fortunate enough to take advantage of that.
Montana did not play quality opponents in the Super Bowl - 2X against an average Denver Broncos team and 2X against an average Bengals team. Brady beat the greatest show on turf and the legion of boom. Brady also won the super bowl his first season as a starter, it took Montana 3 years.
I can see that point, but cannot see what stats exist to cherry pick.Depends on the agenda. People hate Brady so there will always be people who will cherry pick stats to fit their case. Whatever
I dont either. The Manning argument seems silly.I can see that point, but cannot see what stats exist to cherry pick.
Yeah that 'no SB losses' argument has always made no sense to me. In the years Montana didn't win a SB he either lost in the NFC playoffs or regular season. So in essense they're trying to say it's somehow better to lose in the NFC playoffs or regular season than to lead your team to the SB and lose.