Sports Central Message Boards

Sports Central Message Boards (https://www.sports-central.org/community/boards/index.php)
-   National Football League (https://www.sports-central.org/community/boards/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Brady and Montana (https://www.sports-central.org/community/boards/showthread.php?t=9195)

FSUViking 02-02-2004 07:12 PM

Brady and Montana
 
Is everyone buying this?

I dunno....I have so much respect for Brady and what he's doing and done, but i think Joe Cool is the best of all time and am hesitant to put Brady in that conversation yet.

Tom didn't have Roger Craig or Jerry Rice, but Joe is.......well, JOE (to steal a line from Don Cheadle and the NFL Playoff commercials).

I think Brady is well on his way, but I wouldn't put him there quite yet. He's on par with, say, Elway or Marino...possibly (as a Vikings fan, this pains me to say) Favre.

I would still rate Joe and Bradshaw and Aikman ahead of Brady, but he's close to being on that list.

Thoughts? Opinions?

poptart 02-02-2004 07:22 PM

A friggin' six year old could see that Bobby Brady fumbled the F'in' ball.

He's got one SB win without an asterisk next to it.

Nice little QB he is, but Joe Cool he ain't.

franky 02-02-2004 07:38 PM

Yeah, it's a little early to start making such comparisons. I think that the word that comes to mind is Brady is efficient. He manages games so his team can win by being an efficient, but not overpowering offensive passer. Montana was just flat out a great passer and could put up some great offensive numbers and also lead his team when it was crunch time. But, like you said Purplereign, Brady may be on his way to getting to the next level....

MountaineerDave 02-02-2004 08:03 PM

I'm leary of the comparison at this point. I, like you, Purple, regard Joe Cool as one of the greatest QBs of all time, and I think without a doubt, the greatest QB whose career I saw from start (I may not have noticed his year one) to finish.

But, there are significant signs, barring a physical or psychological (drugs) problem, that Brady can surpass a number of those other QBs you note.

I've never been a huge Marino guy. I know it was never his fault that he had no RB or defense, but how much of his huge contracts could have been used to put money toward such if he'd gone to management and suggested that they do something useful with some of his money? No, it's not his responsibility, but if he wanted to win so badly...

I think franky's right on it being too early to talk about Brady in such a light. Favre's ticket to greatness is punched by one Super Bowl and longevity, an MVP award (or two, though I'm not sure)

Brady has yet to take an NFL MVP award. Seems he needs to do that. I think he got dissed this year, btw. To get into Montana comparisons, Brady needs at least one more SB victory, but I don't think he has to be MVP (wouldn't hurt, though), at least one NFL MVP award (if the Pats continue to rely on him in the close ones next year, I think he'll be a bigger vote-getter; somehow, no one noticed the Pats this past season till the playoffs started), and probably get his overall passer rating up. This is debatable, I suppose.

Brad, your turn to tell us what Brady needs to accomplish, if it's at all possible, to be rationally compared to Montana.

Dave

jonnyboone71923 02-02-2004 10:12 PM

I wish we didn't have to compare players. Joe Montana was one of the greatest to play the game. I don't think anyone will argue otherwise. Tom Brady is becoming great. He has not seen the best days of his career yet. He will be one of the greatest to ever play the game. Those two guys played and is playing in different eras. I just don't think it is fair to compare them.

You can compare players of the same era, but I just don't agree with mixing eras.

MountaineerDave 02-02-2004 11:09 PM

Well, johnny, there's never the right answer to "Who was the best ever?" (unless you ask Brad, who generally has strong and well-formulated opinions on such matters) at any position. I think people want to compare players over eras because, ultimately, they want to know where someone belongs in the pantheon of greatness.

Not to say that such suggestions aren't jumping the gun. I don't have trouble comparing Brady to Montana... in ten years, when Brady's career is over. And then... well, maybe the numbers and Brady cool will have by then surpassed what Joe did. Of course, I'll always love Joe more, because he was my first. Hero QB, that is. :)

And, meanwhile the local yahoos are comparing this Pats team with the '72 Dolphins, and arguing that this might be the greatest team ever, I generally have been shaking my head.

I would take this team against the '72 Fish, but I don't think I'd take them against the '70s Steelers, the '80s 49ers, or even the mid '90s Cowboys. Comparing teams across eras is an even trickier feat, because of the differences in gameplay, rules, and athletic prowess, not to mention the money which motivates many a mercenary athlete.

Dave

Pimpbot 02-02-2004 11:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by poptart


He's got one SB win without an asterisk next to it.


Not sure WTF thats suppose to mean?. Asterisk my ass. He has earned both of them.

Brady isnt in Montana's league just yet. Joe still has 2 more Super Bowls and 1 more MVP title to his name plus a whole heap of career stats that make Brady look more like Jim Plunkett. At 26 years old he has time on his side to move into the top QB's ever list.

poptart 02-03-2004 12:12 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Pimpbot
Not sure WTF thats suppose to mean?. Asterisk my ass. He has earned both of them.
Walt Coleman earned the first one.

Thanks for your participation though, 'bot.

:)

Pimpbot 02-03-2004 02:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by poptart
Walt Coleman earned the first one.

Thanks for your participation though, 'bot.

:)

No problem tart.

Walt was just saving the Raiders a super bowl embarassment like last year.

Spikedmace 02-03-2004 06:25 AM

I wouldn't say Brady is Montana, but they do have something in common. They both win. The fact that Brady is "only" 26 years old with 2 SuperBowl Championships and 2 SuperBowl MVP's, I would think he's off to a stellar career. Brady will always have that on his resume when he submits it to the Football Hall of Fame. I would not be surprised if Brady wins at least 2 more SuperBowls as long as Belichick is there. I'm not a Pats fan, but I do give Brady lots of respect as a player.

Brad O. 02-03-2004 07:33 AM

Re: Brady and Montana
 
Quote:

Originally posted by PurpleReign009
I think Brady is well on his way, but I wouldn't put him there quite yet. He's on par with, say, Elway or Marino...possibly (as a Vikings fan, this pains me to say) Favre.

I would still rate Joe and Bradshaw and Aikman ahead of Brady, but he's close to being on that list.

Thoughts? Opinions?

Brady on a par with Elway, Marino, or Favre? He's not even close. And Aikman is the most overrated player in NFL history, but I'll still put him ahead of Brady for now. btw, lest I be accused of bashing Tom, he was my choice for league MVP this year.
Quote:

Originally posted by MountaineerDave
Well, johnny, there's never the right answer to "Who was the best ever?" (unless you ask Brad, who generally has strong and well-formulated opinions on such matters) at any position.
Dave, thanks as always for the compliment. At one time I had a ranking of the top 50 QBs in NFL history, in order, for personal use. What I really pay attention to now is my Top 12, any of whom you could reasonably argue for greatest ever. I don't have a full list any more, but I know Brady wouldn't make the top 30 after three frickin' seasons in the league. Of course, neither did Kurt Warner, so what do I know? :rolleyes:
Quote:

Originally posted by MountaineerDave
I would take this team against the '72 Fish, but I don't think I'd take them against the '70s Steelers, the '80s 49ers, or even the mid '90s Cowboys.
Tough to compare dynasties and single-season teams, IMO. The '70s Steelers, for instance, are an easy choice over the Belichick Patriots, but I think the '03 Pats could give, say, the '74 Steelers a run for their money. Off the top of my head, I'm not inclined to regard this year's Pats as one of the ten best teams of the modern era (1946-pres).
Quote:

Originally posted by Pimpbot
Brady ... Jim Plunkett
Thank you for saving me the comparison, Pimpbot. Brady will be far better when all is said and done, but right now Brady's résumé has about the same highlights as Plunkett's.

Is it premature for Montana comparisons? No. Brady, like Montana, has a gift for elevating his play in clutch situations. He has a great supporting cast, and he wins games. It's easy to see Brady's career being similar to Montana's fifteen years from now.

It is premature to say that Brady is already one of the greatest QBs ever.

And as far as ever being as great as Montana... very doubtful. Brady reminds me a lot more of Terry Bradshaw, Bob Griese, or Aikman than of Elway, Favre, or Roger Staubach.

jonnyboone71923 02-03-2004 10:47 AM

I have stated that I don't care for these comparisons, but here is a question. Down in Houston David Carr has an awful offensive line, and he spends more time sacked than he does playing in the pocket. If Brady had Houston's offensive line, would he still look as good as he does?

Brady is a winning quarterback. I just think that if you are going to compare people, you should be comparing the Pat's O line to the 49er's O line. Neither qb got sacked a whole heck of a lot.

Now both guys have that little something extra when you give them time in the pocket. With the system they have in foxboro, other qbs could be as successful. I am not knocking Brady. He still has to know when to throw, who to throw it to, how to throw it, and when to tuck tail and run. His skills are uncanny. He does things you cannot teach. He has at least three more superbowl to play in maybe more.

In time I won't have a problem calling him the greatest of all time. I am not a Brady fan, but I am a Joe Montana fan. Joe will always have a special place with me no matter what Tom does.

MountaineerDave 02-03-2004 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by jonnyboone71923
With the system they have in foxboro, other qbs could be as successful.
Maybe Gannon. Maybe Fiedler (of all people!). Probably Pennington. Maybe Favre, but maybe not. Maybe Ramsey. Maybe Green, but probably not. Possibly Bulger, but probably not. Possibly B Johnson. McNair and Manning, seems like definitely, but never give Manning too much credit, I always say.

Definitely, without a doubt: Bledsoe CANNOT. Vick likely can't. Nor Carter, Harrington, or Brooks. Garcia, Hasselbeck, McNabb probably couldn't. Delhomme can't. Neither can Brees.

The point is this: Weis's system requires the quarterback to know two things:
1. How to accurately and definitively read defenses.
2. Checking the ego at the door, and going to the checkdown in almost all situations.

That's why Favre's only a maybe. Some QBs have a way they want to play the game. Bledsoe and Favre are guys who want to pick up big chunks of yardage in a single shot. That's fine if that's the game, but the Weis system doesn't rely on that game very often.

More importantly, the Weis system demands that the QB know where everyone is all the time, and to be able to read defenses FROM THE LINE and know nearly instantly where the coverage is weakest, and to zip the ball to that spot as fast as the play demands. Vick sometimes seems to have trouble spotting the safety, nevermind the middle linebacker. Bledsoe can't NOT throw to the deepest receiver every third play. (Mularkey should suit him well, actually...) Favre has trouble not launching the ball downfield when he should toss a checkdown to Green or Henderson. Harrington, Carter, Garcia all have the same deficiency in defense-reading that Vick has, but in varying degrees.

Many of the all-time great QBs could play in Weis's system, such as Montana and Elway. Some all-time greats might struggle in such a situation. I view Marino as very Bledsoe-esque when it comes to passing philosophy. In fact, going into Weis's system with a passing philosophy might be the first indication that a QB isn't suited for the system, and would likely not run it as successfully as Mr Brady.

Dave

Brad O. 02-04-2004 10:44 AM

Dave, you're certainly correct that one reason Brady is so successful is because he's perfect for Weis' system. Not all QBs would flourish in that type of offense. But does that mean they couldn't do well in New England, period? If so, it doesn't say much for Weis. Long before everyone was looking for a quarterback who could run the 'West Coast' Offense, great offensive minds built their systems around the quarterback. Bill Walsh had a downfield offense with Greg Cook in Cincinnati and then changed his system in San Francisco to suit Joe Montana's talents. If Weis is truly worthy of being a head coach somewhere, surely he can work with a quarterback like Favre or Vick.

"System QBs" don't impress me. You seem to be arguing that's what Brady is, so it doesn't win him any points in this corner. I certainly believe Brady is better than David Carr, but he wouldn't have gone to the playoffs this year if he played in Houston.

And if you're going to slight Favre or Marino, you'll lose me. Those guys could have been successful in any offensive system. Marino had fundamentals most of the QBs in the game today could only dream about. Peyton Manning probably compares, and that's about it.
Quote:

Originally posted by jonnyboone71923
He has at least three more superbowl to play in maybe more.

In time I won't have a problem calling him the greatest of all time.

No, Brady does not have "at least three more superbowl to play in". I assure you. And unless he's been hiding something from us so far, he will also never be "the greatest of all time". Brady's been great in the two biggest games of his career, but just above average in the rest. He's not the best QB in the NFL right now (I put him 3rd, behind Manning and McNair), and he wasn't in 2001 or 2002, either. He's never been All-Pro -- the guy's never even been the second-best player at his position and you're talking about him one day being the greatest of all time? He's been voted to one Pro Bowl; Montana made nine. Unless you expect Brady to play 27 years, I think it's WAY too early for anything stronger than, "You know, Tom Brady kinda reminds me of Joe Montana."

Right now, he's a lot more similar to Aikman.
(And this from a guy who likes Brady and loathed Aikman).

I realize I never actually answered Dave's original challenge:
Quote:

Brad, your turn to tell us what Brady needs to accomplish, if it's at all possible, to be rationally compared to Montana.
He needs to be outstanding -- not just good -- in the regular season as well as the postseason, for at least 10 years.

bama4256 02-04-2004 02:53 PM

Joe Montana was one of the best. Brady is getting there, but still has a lot to prove to be as good as Montana.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:27 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.