02-06-2017, 04:26 PM
(02-06-2017, 03:24 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: You lost me there, because there's several pretty big things Montana did better or was at the very least arguably better.
1. Montana ranked 2 all time in passing efficiency when he retired. Brady currently ranks 3 all time and 3rd among active players. I'd argue that Montana's efficiency was more impressive considering the era. There's no debating that this is the easiest era for passing by a mile.
2. Montana raised his game in the playoffs, while Brady gets worse. Montana had a 92.3 rating in regular season and a 95.6 in the playoffs. Brady has a 97.2 rating in regular season and an 89.3 in the playoffs.
3. Montana saved his best for the SB. He never threw an 82 yard pick six. In fact, he never threw any INTs in a SB period. Overall, he had a 127.8 rating in the SB. Brady has a 95.2 rating with 5 INTs.
You can argue eras until the cows come home. Montana didn't play when teams had a salary cap, where teams could have much more talent that your average team nowadays. Montana led the league in accuracy a few times. Brady takes being the yards and touchdowns leader more times.
Sure, you can argue that Montana is the better/best superbowl or playoff quarterback ever (would you say Sanchez > Brady then? Flacco = Brady?), but the debate is over greatest of all time, regular season and post season. Brady trumps Montana hands down.
I'm fine with people saying that Montana was the best of his era, Brady was the best of his. But there is no argument for saying Montana > Brady anymore, if you're taking eras out of the equation.
