Re: Montana 4-3 in Champ Game, 4 one and done's; Brady 5-1 in ch game, 2 one and done in playoffs
posted at 1/18/2013 10:47 PM EST
Both are great QBs, I'd probably rank them 1 and 2 all time right now.
But if you're going to debate, you can't just have one sided arguments.
NFC was much stronger than the AFC. Competing to get to the Super Bowl was tougher than it was to actually win the Super Bowl.
FA era does make a difference. But if I'm not mistaken, it helped the Pats in some areas too. Vrabel, Harrison, Colvin, Ted Washington, Phifer, Welker (It was a trade but it all happened because he became a restricted FA), etc. So for every Asante, Green, Milloy, Law,etc they lost...you forget that FA played a large part in the Pats success.
Point is, everyone went through FA. So other teams lost their best players too. Not like the Pats were the only ones to lose great players. Might even be able to argue that FA has helped sustain the Pats success.
Also, statistically, Montana was much better in his championship and Super Bowl games than Brady. Again, can't take this in a vacuum because Brady didn't have much to work with until 2007, but those are still the stats.
Both had 5 multi int games in the playoffs. But if you want to put more importance on when it happens, Montana only has 1 multi int game in conference/Super Bowl games while Brady had 3 in such games.
You got to put aside homerism when discussing all time greatness! Montana is still the man because of the 4 Super Bowls. If Brady wins, then I think you can make the debate. That 07 loss stings, considering how well that team played all season long. I'm not going to hold last seasons super bowl against Brady. I think it should help his argument. That defense had no business making the Super Bowl. That team doesn't get homefield advantage or maybe even the bye without Brady