If the Patriots win Super Bowl 46, is Tom Brady the G.O.A.T?

[NAHSTE]

Gee I don't know, how many 1000 yard backs have been associated with a non existent running game?

You know it only takes 60 yards a game to accrue 1000 yards in a 16-game season right? Even with Addai contributing those two 1000 yard seasons, the Colts as a team were near the bottom of the league in rushing for a large part of Peyton's career. Here's where they finished in Manning's last 5 years:

'06: 18th
'07: 18th
'08: 32nd
'09: 32nd
'10: 29th

 

[Archer]

Tony Ugoh will be playing Sunday.

My bad then... he was cut then failed to make it with Detroit and then planned to retire but ended up making it onto the Giants roster as an extra offensive tackle.

Well that changes everything.

 

[FirstTimer]

James had a 1200 yard season for a 5-11 Cardinals team, than went for 1150 for the 8-8 squad the year after. Than he did what most 30 year old RB's do that have seven 300 carry seasons in nine years, they break down.

His YPC dropped dramtically. His TD's decreased. Receptions. Everything went down. Its not as though James kind of slid into nothing. He had two more "solid" seasons then was gone and out of the NFL in general. He was retired by 32. Hell, he barely saw the field his final season. Meanwhile Manning was winning MVP's and making it to Super Bowls. Yeah, Mannings really needed James. This is asinine.

Manning had a prime James, Harrison, and Wayne...but before Manning Harrison was a nobody.

After Manning James was a shell and out of the league 4 years later. Hell even when James missed seasons and time with injury Manning still put up number and lead some of the top rated passing offenses in the NFL. Not only that...James leaves and Manning goes on to win a Super Bowl and MVP's over the next 4 seasons with guys like Addai, Brown, and Rhodes. You're really going to pursue this?

Wayne stepped into playing with a prime Manning and this year with no Manning he looked incredibly average. You're grasping at straws and doing it horribly.

 

[shag773]

You know it only takes 60 yards a game to accrue 1000 yards in a 16-game season right? Even with Addai contributing those two 1000 yard seasons, the Colts as a team were near the bottom of the league in rushing. Here's where they finished in Manning's last 5 years:

'06: 18th
'07: 18th
'08: 32nd
'09: 32nd
'10: 29th

Not sure why you listed 06 or 07, last time I checked 18th would be more towards the middle of the league in rushing vs the bottom.

So your point is that he was saddled with a non existent running game, bargain basement OL, and a bad defense for the majority of his career, but you keep giving me stats from the last 3-5 years. You realize he's played 13 seasons right?

 

[FirstTimer]

So your point is that he was saddled with a non existent running game, bargain basement OL, and a bad defense for the majority of his career, but you keep giving me stats from the last 3-5 years. You realize he's played 13 seasons right?

The overall point is that regardless of who Manning has had at any number of positions around he has produced. Immedietly. As a rookie he took the Colts and made them the top or one of the top passing O's in the NFL. James, Harrison, Wayne, Collie, Garcon, Gonzalez, whoever. Manning has always put up numbers. Always. Trying to say Manning should be thankful for other players isn't rooted in reality.

 

[shag773]

His YPC dropped dramtically. His TD's decreased. Receptions. Everything went down. Its not as though James kind of slid into nothing. He had two more "solid" seasons then was gone and out of the NFL in general. He was retired by 32. Hell, he barely saw the field his final season. Meanwhile Manning was winning MVP's and making it to Super Bowls. Yeah, Mannings really needed James. This is asinine.

Manning had a prime James, Harrison, and Wayne...but before Manning Harrison was a nobody.

After Manning James was a shell and out of the league 4 years later. Hell even when James missed seasons and time with injury Manning still put up number and lead some of the top rated passing offenses in the NFL. Not only that...James leaves and Manning goes on to win a Super Bowl and MVP's over the next 4 seasons with guys like Addai, Brown, and Rhodes. You're really going to pursue this?

Wayne stepped into playing with a prime Manning and this year with no Manning he looked incredibly average. You're grasping at straws and doing it horribly.

All I am arguing is Nahste's point that Manning spent the majority of his career with a non existent running game. Manning is still a first ballot HOF and one of the best QBs of all time.

I'm not saying James at any point in his career played HB at a level Manning played QB. But it's hard to look at some of the years Edge at and completely discount his contibutions to the point where somebody is posting that Manning had a "nonexistent" running game for the majority of his career. I'm sorry, thats not true.

The last three years Manning has done a tremendous job keeping that organizations head above water with the deficiancies stated by Nahste. All I'm saying is it wasn't always like that for all 13 years of his career.

 

[FirstTimer]

Def(pts- yds)/Rush(Att-yds)

1998: 29th for both/29th for both
1999: 17th-15th/8th-18th
2000: 15th-21st/16th for both
2001: 31st-29th/17th-7th
2002: 7th-8th/16th-26th
2003: 20th-11th/13th-19th
2004: 19th-29th/20th-15th
2005: 2nd-11th/12th-16th


During the same above stretch I think the Colts were only outside of the top 3 or 4 in passing yardage twice...once was Manning's rookie season and outside of the top 3 or 4 in total offense twice..again..once was as a rookie.

Most seasons Manning's defenses and rushing attack have been bad and average at best respectively.

 

[shag773]

Def(pts- yds)/Rush(Att-yds)

1998: 29th for both/29th for both
1999: 17th-15th/8th-18th
2000: 15th-21st/16th for both
2001: 31st-29th/17th-7th
2002: 7th-8th/16th-26th
2003: 20th-11th/13th-19th
2004: 19th-29th/20th-15th
2005: 2nd-11th/12th-16th


During the same above stretch I think the Colts were only outside of the top 3 or 4 in passing yardage twice...once was Manning's rookie season and outside of the top 3 or 4 in total offense twice..again..once was as a rookie.

Most seasons Manning's defenses and rushing attack have been bad and average at best respectively.

So if you think those numbers actually back up this statement

nonexistent running game, the bargain bin offensive line or the porous defense the Colts were saddled with for a majority of Manning's career.

than I'm not really sure if there is much for me to add.

 

[FirstTimer]

Relative to what Manning was providing and relative to the rest of the NFL, yes

 

[JeremyHight]

Why is Manning even in this discussion? This isn't "What QB would you take for a week 12 game at home against Jacksonville?" this is "Who is the GOAT at the QB position?" Manning isn't in that discussion if you take playoffs into account.

The one thing that really makes me say Montana is the best is that when he was in the playoffs, he got better. It is amazing to see someone actually put up better numbers against better teams and in more pressure packed situations, but Montana did it consistently. The only other guy who even comes close to raising his game as much as Montana did was Kurt Warner, but I don't think anyone could make the case that he was the best ever.

Even if Brady wins on Sunday, he will be among the top 2-3 QBs ever, but he will never pass Montana, who was lights out in the moments that mattered most.

 

[ram29jackson]

Bradshaw had a way better Steelers team. That's the problem.

I would say they were pretty even/high quality teans.

how good the team doesnt matter. The QB still has to make things happen and he obviously did a damn good job.

 

[Tailback U]

Why is Manning even in this discussion? This isn't "What QB would you take for a week 12 game at home against Jacksonville?" this is "Who is the GOAT at the QB position?" Manning isn't in that discussion if you take playoffs into account.

The one thing that really makes me say Montana is the best is that when he was in the playoffs, he got better. It is amazing to see someone actually put up better numbers against better teams and in more pressure packed situations, but Montana did it consistently. The only other guy who even comes close to raising his game as much as Montana did was Kurt Warner, but I don't think anyone could make the case that he was the best ever.

Even if Brady wins on Sunday, he will be among the top 2-3 QBs ever, but he will never pass Montana, who was lights out in the moments that mattered most.

When Brady becomes the only QB to win 5 Super Bowls, I think most will put him as the best QB of all time.

 

[ram29jackson]

When Brady becomes the only QB to win 5 Super Bowls, I think most will put him as the best QB of all time.

...behind Bart Starr....and Montana....


what do mean 5? this is only a possible 4th coming up. And I honestly doubt he will ever get back again.

 

[shag773]

I'll be the guy who says it since Len won't: Brady's fucking better than Montana.

What exactly has Montana done that's better than Brady? Both were in great situations, both were consistently great throughout their careers, both led their team to the Superbowl multiple times. And for all the love that Montana gets, we sure like to forget his big L's in the post-season: A 49-3 beatdown at the hands of the Giants, and getting his ass benched in '88 against the Vikings.

Considering the inflation of stats, I'd say they're about even, or maybe a slight edge to Brady. Brady's third year in the league was just about as good as Montana's best season. And with similar completions and attempts, Brady has more TD's and less INT's.

Brady was also never throwing to the greatest player in the history of the game at any position. Or anyone even remotely relevant for that matter.

34 game-winning drives (more than Montana), 5 Superbowl appearances in 10 years (more than Montana), 124 wins all-time (more than Montana and in less seasons), and 16 post-season wins (the same as Montana).

In another four years, this conversation will be a no-brainer. I think now we're finally starting to see it turn. You don't have to like it, but Tom Brady is probably the greatest quarterback of all time.

Montana's Super Bowl numbers are better than Brady. And not just a little better. Will also have a better SB record.

Montana won 2 SB's without Rice. Rice didn't become the number 1 receiver for the Niners until Montana's 8th year in the league. He actually only played with him for 6 years. Brady did have Moss, Welker, and those TE's the last 5 years...

The Vikings game I will give you. The Giants game he got hurt in the 2nd quarter if I recall correctly. He only threw 15 passes in that game. Jeff Kemp came in for him, which would explain the lopsided victory.

I don't think you are putting as much weight into how today's game inflate's passing stats as you should. It's a way different game now.

I might sound like a crusty old fart, but I think the level of competition Montana saw vs Brady isn't comparable.

I'm biased, I was a Montana fan when I was a kid. I'll say this though. Brady dominates this weekend and wins the game, or orchestrates a game winning drive, than I'll listen. But not yet.

 

[Tailback U]

...behind Bart Starr....and Montana....


what do mean 5? this is only a possible 4th coming up. And I honestly doubt he will ever get back again.

I need to stop posting high. I meant "if" he wins 5, not "when."

Either way, I think he will make it to one more Super Bowl after this one before his career is over. I can easily see Brady playing another 3-5 years.

For the record, I actually think the Patriots will lose to the Giants.

 

[KINGOFOOTBALL]

When Brady becomes the only QB to win 5 Super Bowls, I think most will put him as the best QB of all time.

I need to stop posting high. I meant "if" he wins 5, not "when."

Either way, I think he will make it to one more Super Bowl after this one before his career is over. I can easily see Brady playing another 3-5 years.

For the record, I actually think the Patriots will lose to the Giants.

:michaelscott:

So you think he'll lose this one..then come back and get a two more rings while only winning one more ?

Holy moly. Being high is more fun than it sounds.

 

[Tailback U]

lol... I think he will play in 6 total and win 5 is what I'm trying to say.

If I'm wrong and he wins this one and then wins the next one he makes it to, then he will have 5 rings out of 6 appearances and I think that will be enough for most people to put him at the very top of their lists.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Why is Manning even in this discussion? This isn't "What QB would you take for a week 12 game at home against Jacksonville?" this is "Who is the GOAT at the QB position?" Manning isn't in that discussion if you take playoffs into account.

The one thing that really makes me say Montana is the best is that when he was in the playoffs, he got better. It is amazing to see someone actually put up better numbers against better teams and in more pressure packed situations, but Montana did it consistently. The only other guy who even comes close to raising his game as much as Montana did was Kurt Warner, but I don't think anyone could make the case that he was the best ever.

Even if Brady wins on Sunday, he will be among the top 2-3 QBs ever, but he will never pass Montana, who was lights out in the moments that mattered most.

LIGHTS OUT!

Joe Montana's entire legacy is built on 4-0 in the Super Bowl. There is a myth of his herculean post season performances as a result. Because he went 4-0, nobody remembers the three year stretch of garbo from 85-87 (smack dab in the prime years of the stars of that team) where the 49ers couldnt win a playoff game.

85 vs Giants: 26/47, 0 TD's, 1 INT, 65.6 QB rating
86 vs Giants: 8/15, 0 TD's, 2 INT, 35.2 QB rating, Jim Burt hit him so hard people thought he was dead
87 vs Vikings: 12/26, 0 TD's, 1 INT, 42.0 QB rating

And let's not forget the last high profile stinker of "Joe Cool's" career, the AFC Championship game loss to the Bills in '93: 9/23, 105 yards, 1 INT.

'Joe Cool' wasn't so cool when those great Giants teams of the era were smacking him in the mouth and knocking him out of the playoffs three times.

And then we have this...

<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/GJFOBI1cZaM?version=3&feature=player_detailpage"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/GJFOBI1cZaM?version=3&feature=player_detailpage" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></object>

Lewis Billups dropped this Montana pass, which hit him directly in the chest. James Harrison caught Warner's pass, which hit him directly in the chest. Both players threw awful passes.

The point? If Montana is 3-1 instead of the mythical 4-0, we perceive him in a different way, we focus on the Billups INT, the bad, bad losses to the Giants,
etc. But because he's 4-0, nobody cares or remembers how bad he was in spots. He's Joe Cool!

Stop buying into the NFL Films myths. Montana was bad in plenty of playoff games. He did not "always get better in the playoffs and rise up against the better teams in bigger situations".

He won four SB's against weaker teams than he faced in the NFC, and those are the games your memory remembers.

Montana was a great player, but he was not this infallible post season magician that you and many others like to pretend he was.

If Dwight Clark doesn't catch a ball on his fingertips that Montana was trying to throw away, and Billups holds on to that INT, your opinion is a lot different today. The difference between all of these QB's is razor thin and built on carefully chosen memories, 50/50 plays that may or may not go their way, and glorified SB wins.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

And Kurt Warner had one bad playoff game in his life (and his team won anyway), owns the three most prolific SB passing days in SB history, and has a post season QB rating of 102 while completing 67% of his passes with a 31/14 TD/INT ratio (and two rushing TD's).

But he only "comes close" to the Montana myth, because of 4-0 versus 1-2. Again, over glorifying the SB game. Warner was every bit as good as Montana post season.

 

[KINGOFOOTBALL]

Stop buying into the NFL Films myths. Montana was bad in plenty of playoff games. He did not "always get better in the playoffs and rise up against the better teams in bigger situations".

He won four SB's against weaker teams than he faced in the NFC, and those are the games your memory remembers.

Montana was a great player, but he was not this infallible post season magician that you and many others like to pretend he was.

If Dwight Clark doesn't catch a ball on his fingertips that Montana was trying to throw away, and Billups holds on to that INT, your opinion is a lot different today. The difference between all of these QB's is razor thin and built on carefully chosen memories, 50/50 plays that may or may not go their way, and glorified SB wins.

Noone in the modern era was better period. You can happenstance your way into a SB or be a caretaker surrounded by infinity HOFers and win 4. But Montana is the only guy who was THE guy asked to win and won the SB four times.
Noone said he was infallible but as I said hes as close to it as anyone's gotten in the SB era. No excuses...no FG help...no benefiting from two hand touch rules...no SB losses or choke jobs...just 4 SB wins and 3 SB MVPs.

Woulda coulda shoulda. If the Pats dont drop 3 east McMahon picks or hit any of the 3 open guys with field in front of them the 85 Bears would have been known as the Shitty Shufflers.