Brady vs. Montana - who is greater all-time? (1 Viewer)

[Ghost Rider]

Let's make this its own thread now, with a poll question and everything.

Note: this is not asking if either is the greatest QB of all-time; it is merely asking who is the greater of the two.

Someone else can post all of the relevant numbers and stats if they want, but having watched both, it is a tough call. Both are in the GOAT conversation, and strong arguments can be made for either. Before last week I would have said Montana, but Brady's performance against Seattle's all-time great D, even though they were badly dinged up in the secondary, might give him the edge for me now. It's still oh so close.

 

[12punch]

wat

 

[ShamrockPride]

Draw until/if Brady wins a fifth.

Brady homers gonna trash Joe and pump up Brady. Joe homers gonna trash Brady and pump up Joe. Stats will be manipulated and left out to support arguments. Stupid, fruitless conversations will ensue. Tis the way of it.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

Draw until/if Brady wins a fifth.

Brady homers gonna trash Joe and pump up Brady. Joe homers gonna trash Brady and pump up Joe. Stats will be manipulated and left out to support arguments. Stupid, fruitless conversations will ensue. Tis the way of it.

Yea, this exact conversation has already been going on in the. "Is Brady the best all time?" thread.

 

[Bayhawks]

Brady is great, & with his career still ongoing, he could pass Montana, but as of right now, it's gotta be Montana.

their numbers are fairly similar (obviously, Brady has the edge in attempts, yards, and TDs; he has played in more games and in an era friendlier to the passing game), but Montana's 4-0 SB record, and 0 INT in those SBs is the deciding factor for me.

If Brady were to win a 5th SuperBowl, I think the vote would have to go the other way, though.

 

[12punch]

4-0 > 4-2

Nuff said

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

Starr

 

[Bayhawks]

4-0 > 4-2

Nuff said

So Brady is penalized for getting to 2 more SBs ?

penalized? Credit is given to Montana for leading his team to victory EVERY TIME he played in a championship game.

Both QBs won 4 SuperBowls, both have 3 SB MVPs, both have been NFL MVP twice, Montana was a 3-time All-Pro, Brady has been All-Pro 2 times, Brady is a 10-time Pro-Bowler, Montana was an 8 time Pro-Bowler, Montana was on the 1980s "All-Decade" team, Brady was on the 2000s "All-Decade" team. They are pretty equal, as far as QBs go, so if one has 4 wins, with no losses in championship games, and the other has 4 wins, but also lost twice, credit should be given to the guy who got the job done, EVERY TIME.

 

[Run It Up]

4-0 > 4-2

Nuff said

So Brady is penalized for getting to 2 more SBs ?

penalized? Credit is given to Montana for leading his team to victory EVERY TIME he played in a championship game.

Both QBs won 4 SuperBowls, both have 3 SB MVPs, both have been NFL MVP twice, Montana was a 3-time All-Pro, Brady has been All-Pro 2 times, Brady is a 10-time Pro-Bowler, Montana was an 8 time Pro-Bowler, Montana was on the 1980s "All-Decade" team, Brady was on the 2000s "All-Decade" team. They are pretty equal, as far as QBs go, so if one has 4 wins, with no losses in championship games, and the other has 4 wins, but also lost twice, credit should be given to the guy who got the job done, EVERY TIME.

Except the every time he didn't get there.

 

[zed2283]

I know it's hard to pull the shoulda/coulda/woulda card, but the 80's was a decade of dominant NFC teams, very unlike the game played today. If not for the '85 Bears, '86 Giants, and a costly fumble by Roger Craig in the '90 NFC Championship Game, Joe Montana woulda/shoulda/coulda won 7 Super Bowls

 

[IHEARTFF]

Montana might be better, but the argument that his team didn't lose 2 super bowls is horrific. To say nothing of ranking players by team w-l stats, giving a player credit for not making it to the SB is bad.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I know it's hard to pull the shoulda/coulda/woulda card, but the 80's was a decade of dominant NFC teams, very unlike the game played today. If not for the '85 Bears, '86 Giants, and a costly fumble by Roger Craig in the '90 NFC Championship Game, Joe Montana woulda/shoulda/coulda won 7 Super Bowls

Okay, but you can play that game with Brady, too. He was thisclose to having two more rings, and if not for his defense collapsing in the '06 AFCCG, they go to the Super Bowl and probably beat the Bears, like the Colts did, and he could then also have 7. See what I mean?

Also, if that Bengal doesn't drop that INT in the one Super Bowl, Montana loses that Super Bowl to drop to 2-1 in Super Bowls and doesn't have the "he never threw an INT in the Super Bowl" credit to his name either. Imagine how different the narrative would be if that INT wasn't dropped.

So many "what if"s.

 

[ghostguy123]

4-0 > 4-2

Nuff said

So Brady is penalized for getting to 2 more SBs ?

penalized? Credit is given to Montana for leading his team to victory EVERY TIME he played in a championship game. Both QBs won 4 SuperBowls, both have 3 SB MVPs, both have been NFL MVP twice, Montana was a 3-time All-Pro, Brady has been All-Pro 2 times, Brady is a 10-time Pro-Bowler, Montana was an 8 time Pro-Bowler, Montana was on the 1980s "All-Decade" team, Brady was on the 2000s "All-Decade" team. They are pretty equal, as far as QBs go, so if one has 4 wins, with no losses in championship games, and the other has 4 wins, but also lost twice, credit should be given to the guy who got the job done, EVERY TIME.

Such horrific logic.

I think montana was better, but arguments like this give us montana people such a bad name.

 

[12punch]

This Gives Me An Idea Fod A Spinoff Thtead

Montana Vs Brady - who's Greater All Time?

 

[zed2283]

I know it's hard to pull the shoulda/coulda/woulda card, but the 80's was a decade of dominant NFC teams, very unlike the game played today. If not for the '85 Bears, '86 Giants, and a costly fumble by Roger Craig in the '90 NFC Championship Game, Joe Montana woulda/shoulda/coulda won 7 Super Bowls

Okay, but you can play that game with Brady, too. He was thisclose to having two more rings, and if not for his defense collapsing in the '06 AFCCG, they go to the Super Bowl and probably beat the Bears, like the Colts did, and he could then also have 7. See what I mean?

Also, if that Bengal doesn't drop that INT in the one Super Bowl, Montana loses that Super Bowl to drop to 2-1 in Super Bowls and doesn't have the "he never threw an INT in the Super Bowl" credit to his name either. Imagine how different the narrative would be if that INT wasn't dropped.

So many "what if"s.

That's true about the '06 AFCCG, so I'm willing to give Brady one more. But he had his shot against the Giants twice and lost those games in reality. If Montana would have played the '85 Pats or '90 Bills, the 49'ers would have won. And they actually did beat Cincinnati. So I still have to give Montana the edge 7-5.

I guess my coulda/shoulda/woulda logic only applies to games before the Super Bowl...

ETA: Come to think of it, if not for that incredible loss to the Vikings in the playoffs in 1987, the 14-2 49'ers woulda won the Super Bowl. Maybe I should give Montana 8.

 

[12punch]

What If Brady doesn't Get Hurt In 2008?

champioooonshiiiiiiip

 

[Run It Up]

What If Brady doesn't Get Hurt In 2008?

champioooonshiiiiiiip

19-0 obviously

 

[Bayhawks]

4-0 > 4-2

Nuff said

So Brady is penalized for getting to 2 more SBs ?

penalized? Credit is given to Montana for leading his team to victory EVERY TIME he played in a championship game. Both QBs won 4 SuperBowls, both have 3 SB MVPs, both have been NFL MVP twice, Montana was a 3-time All-Pro, Brady has been All-Pro 2 times, Brady is a 10-time Pro-Bowler, Montana was an 8 time Pro-Bowler, Montana was on the 1980s "All-Decade" team, Brady was on the 2000s "All-Decade" team. They are pretty equal, as far as QBs go, so if one has 4 wins, with no losses in championship games, and the other has 4 wins, but also lost twice, credit should be given to the guy who got the job done, EVERY TIME.

Such horrific logic.

I think montana was better, but arguments like this give us montana people such a bad name.

Horrific logic? The 2 are pretty similar, so I give the edge to the guy who has a 1.000 winning % in SuperBowls over the guy who has a .667 winning %. Please elaborate on the "horror" of my logic.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Eli is 2-0 in Super Bowls.

Elway is 2-3 in Super Bowls.

So therefore, Eli > Elway, right?

 

[IHEARTFF]

Please elaborate on the "horror" of my logic.

Making the Super Bowl is better than not making the Super Bowl. Hope that helps.

 

[thriftyrocker]

What If Brady doesn't Get Hurt In 2008?

champioooonshiiiiiiip

What if Montana didn't get hurt in the 1990 NFC Championship game.

 

[BaBastage]

As mentioned, it's a rhetorical debate since they played in different eras.

SF loyalty makes me take Montana by a nudge. Montana played in a less pass-friendly age, but Brady has had to deal with rotating wr's because of free agency.

Brady's SB record could be 6-0 on the same margin it could have been 2-4.. all have been some really close games. Joe could just have easily lost against Cincinatti... we're splitting hairs here.

But If Brady wins #5, I'll have to swing my vote without doubt. I think he's got a pretty good shot at it.

 

[Riversco]

Aaron Rodgers must be in this conversation. He very rarely has a bad game in BIG games. Its his defense that let's him down. I'll exclude the NFC championship game vs the Seahawks because it was wet and windy and QBs tend to play worse in those conditions.

 

[Run It Up]

Aaron Rodgers must be in this conversation. He very rarely has a bad game in BIG games. Its his defense that let's him down. I'll exclude the NFC championship game vs the Seahawks because it was wet and windy and QBs tend to play worse in those conditions.

I feel like Felipe Rivers is ahead of Rodgers in this conversation.

The man has accomplished so much for someone who never learned to throw a football properly.

 

[12punch]

Ok, Ima Have To Rethink This Now

Let Me Go Subtract Out brady's Wet And Windy Losses And recalculate

 

[Riversco]

Aaron Rodgers must be in this conversation. He very rarely has a bad game in BIG games. Its his defense that let's him down. I'll exclude the NFC championship game vs the Seahawks because it was wet and windy and QBs tend to play worse in those conditions.

I feel like Felipe Rivers is ahead of Rodgers in this conversation.

The man has accomplished so much for someone who never learned to throw a football properly.

Rivers is a very good QB but not in the top tier in the league.

 

[kutta]

4-0 > 4-2

Nuff said

So Brady is penalized for getting to 2 more SBs ?

penalized? Credit is given to Montana for leading his team to victory EVERY TIME he played in a championship game. Both QBs won 4 SuperBowls, both have 3 SB MVPs, both have been NFL MVP twice, Montana was a 3-time All-Pro, Brady has been All-Pro 2 times, Brady is a 10-time Pro-Bowler, Montana was an 8 time Pro-Bowler, Montana was on the 1980s "All-Decade" team, Brady was on the 2000s "All-Decade" team. They are pretty equal, as far as QBs go, so if one has 4 wins, with no losses in championship games, and the other has 4 wins, but also lost twice, credit should be given to the guy who got the job done, EVERY TIME.

Such horrific logic.I think montana was better, but arguments like this give us montana people such a bad name.

Horrific logic? The 2 are pretty similar, so I give the edge to the guy who has a 1.000 winning % in SuperBowls over the guy who has a .667 winning %. Please elaborate on the "horror" of my logic.

It's horrible logic. So if Brady didn't even make the playoffs the two times he lost the Super Bowl, you would say that helps his case?

 

[Run It Up]

Aaron Rodgers must be in this conversation. He very rarely has a bad game in BIG games. Its his defense that let's him down. I'll exclude the NFC championship game vs the Seahawks because it was wet and windy and QBs tend to play worse in those conditions.

I feel like Felipe Rivers is ahead of Rodgers in this conversation.

The man has accomplished so much for someone who never learned to throw a football properly.

Rivers is a very good QB but not in the top tier in the league.

Well I disagree with that.

 

[Bayhawks]

Eli is 2-0 in Super Bowls.

Elway is 2-3 in Super Bowls.

So therefore, Eli > Elway, right?

Yes, because that's exactly what I posted. I didn't post anything about the very similar numbers with regards to SB MVPs, NFL MVPs, All-Pro seasons, Pro-Bowl seasons, or any other stats. I just posted about their SB record.

OR maybe I said they are pretty equal in many ways, and the perfect record in the SB for Montana was my tie-breaker. AND maybe I also posted that if Brady were to win another SB, my vote would swing back the other way; that's how I closely I would rank them.

 

[Bayhawks]

Please elaborate on the "horror" of my logic.

Making the Super Bowl is better than not making the Super Bowl. Hope that helps.

And, if we're being perfectly frank, neither of these QBs made a single SB (their teams did), and neither of these QBs won a SB on their own. But, if you look at their performances in the SB, Montana's were better, and his teams never lost a SB. So, that's my tie-breaker. All else being equal (and, for these 2 QBs, they are pretty equal), I choose the QB with the better winning % in the SB.

 

[Bayhawks]

Aaron Rodgers must be in this conversation. He very rarely has a bad game in BIG games. Its his defense that let's him down. I'll exclude the NFC championship game vs the Seahawks because it was wet and windy and QBs tend to play worse in those conditions.

Why must Rodgers be in a conversation about how is greater: Brady or Montana? It's not who is the greatest QB of all time, it's about these 2 QBs.

 

[Bayhawks]

4-0 > 4-2

Nuff said

So Brady is penalized for getting to 2 more SBs ?

penalized? Credit is given to Montana for leading his team to victory EVERY TIME he played in a championship game. Both QBs won 4 SuperBowls, both have 3 SB MVPs, both have been NFL MVP twice, Montana was a 3-time All-Pro, Brady has been All-Pro 2 times, Brady is a 10-time Pro-Bowler, Montana was an 8 time Pro-Bowler, Montana was on the 1980s "All-Decade" team, Brady was on the 2000s "All-Decade" team. They are pretty equal, as far as QBs go, so if one has 4 wins, with no losses in championship games, and the other has 4 wins, but also lost twice, credit should be given to the guy who got the job done, EVERY TIME.

Such horrific logic.I think montana was better, but arguments like this give us montana people such a bad name.

Horrific logic? The 2 are pretty similar, so I give the edge to the guy who has a 1.000 winning % in SuperBowls over the guy who has a .667 winning %. Please elaborate on the "horror" of my logic.

It's horrible logic. So if Brady didn't even make the playoffs the two times he lost the Super Bowl, you would say that helps his case?

If Brady had a 1.000 winning percentage in the SB (with 4 wins to his credit); yes, I'd say that would help his cause, with regards to this discussion.

 

[Run It Up]

4-0 > 4-2

Nuff said

So Brady is penalized for getting to 2 more SBs ?

penalized? Credit is given to Montana for leading his team to victory EVERY TIME he played in a championship game. Both QBs won 4 SuperBowls, both have 3 SB MVPs, both have been NFL MVP twice, Montana was a 3-time All-Pro, Brady has been All-Pro 2 times, Brady is a 10-time Pro-Bowler, Montana was an 8 time Pro-Bowler, Montana was on the 1980s "All-Decade" team, Brady was on the 2000s "All-Decade" team. They are pretty equal, as far as QBs go, so if one has 4 wins, with no losses in championship games, and the other has 4 wins, but also lost twice, credit should be given to the guy who got the job done, EVERY TIME.

Such horrific logic.I think montana was better, but arguments like this give us montana people such a bad name.

Horrific logic? The 2 are pretty similar, so I give the edge to the guy who has a 1.000 winning % in SuperBowls over the guy who has a .667 winning %. Please elaborate on the "horror" of my logic.

It's horrible logic. So if Brady didn't even make the playoffs the two times he lost the Super Bowl, you would say that helps his case?

If Brady had a 1.000 winning percentage in the SB (with 4 wins to his credit); yes, I'd say that would help his cause, with regards to this discussion.

Well I'm glad we got that figured out.

Its okay guys we can all go home now, nothing to see here.

Everyone has an opinion, they are not all equal.

 

[tombonneau]

4-0 > 4-2

Nuff said

So Brady is penalized for getting to 2 more SBs ?

penalized? Credit is given to Montana for leading his team to victory EVERY TIME he played in a championship game. Both QBs won 4 SuperBowls, both have 3 SB MVPs, both have been NFL MVP twice, Montana was a 3-time All-Pro, Brady has been All-Pro 2 times, Brady is a 10-time Pro-Bowler, Montana was an 8 time Pro-Bowler, Montana was on the 1980s "All-Decade" team, Brady was on the 2000s "All-Decade" team. They are pretty equal, as far as QBs go, so if one has 4 wins, with no losses in championship games, and the other has 4 wins, but also lost twice, credit should be given to the guy who got the job done, EVERY TIME.

Such horrific logic.I think montana was better, but arguments like this give us montana people such a bad name.

Horrific logic? The 2 are pretty similar, so I give the edge to the guy who has a 1.000 winning % in SuperBowls over the guy who has a .667 winning %. Please elaborate on the "horror" of my logic.

Because you are essentially giving Montana more credit for losing to the Giants 49-3 in the first round of the playoffs than you are for Brady losing to the Giants in the SB when dude catches a ball with his helmet.

 

[ShamrockPride]

When we're here discussing 4x SB winning QBs, why the f### is anyone focusing on anything but titles or numbers? Resumes aren't looked at by order of elimination. You 4-2>4-0 guys knock Montana for this all the time but likewise I don't give Brady more credit for being the 2nd or 3rd best team more times than Joe. Who cares?? If you aren't first, you're last. Each year there is one winner and 31 losers, the rest are moral victories. As far as I can see, they were both first 4 times (with Brady a chance at 5).

 

[Slider]

Montana has no asterisk and they played D and hit QB's back then. This isn't close unless you're a patsie fan.

 

[grateful zed]

his kid played for the griz, so ... Montana

 

[kutta]

Montana has no asterisk and they played D and hit QB's back then. This isn't close unless you're a patsie fan.

Well, there are a lot of other factors. It was easy to keep a team together back then, and Montana had Rice. Tough to say it's not close.

 

[ShamrockPride]

Montana has no asterisk and they played D and hit QB's back then. This isn't close unless you're a patsie fan.

Well, there are a lot of other factors. It was easy to keep a team together back then, and Montana had Rice. Tough to say it's not close.

I don't think anybody's saying it's NOT close except for the hardest homers in here. Like I've said, unless Brady wins another, they'll forever be debated as the only two legitimate contenders for GOAT QB.

 

[SproutDaddy]

4-0 > 4-2

Nuff said

He's a Pats fan. He's being sarcastic.

 

[Insein]

20 pages on the other threads wasn't enough?

Brady. And when you look at all the stats even adjusted for era, its not even close.

 

[ghostguy123]

Please elaborate on the "horror" of my logic.

Making the Super Bowl is better than not making the Super Bowl. Hope that helps.

If someone needs it explained to them, they are either just trolling or are incapable of getting it.

 

[Insein]

4-0 > 4-2

Nuff said

So Brady is penalized for getting to 2 more SBs ?

penalized? Credit is given to Montana for leading his team to victory EVERY TIME he played in a championship game. Both QBs won 4 SuperBowls, both have 3 SB MVPs, both have been NFL MVP twice, Montana was a 3-time All-Pro, Brady has been All-Pro 2 times, Brady is a 10-time Pro-Bowler, Montana was an 8 time Pro-Bowler, Montana was on the 1980s "All-Decade" team, Brady was on the 2000s "All-Decade" team. They are pretty equal, as far as QBs go, so if one has 4 wins, with no losses in championship games, and the other has 4 wins, but also lost twice, credit should be given to the guy who got the job done, EVERY TIME.

Such horrific logic.I think montana was better, but arguments like this give us montana people such a bad name.

Horrific logic? The 2 are pretty similar, so I give the edge to the guy who has a 1.000 winning % in SuperBowls over the guy who has a .667 winning %. Please elaborate on the "horror" of my logic.

It's horrible logic. So if Brady didn't even make the playoffs the two times he lost the Super Bowl, you would say that helps his case?

If Brady had a 1.000 winning percentage in the SB (with 4 wins to his credit); yes, I'd say that would help his cause, with regards to this discussion.

Well I'm glad we got that figured out.Its okay guys we can all go home now, nothing to see here.

Everyone has an opinion, they are not all equal.

Except the Bradshaw v Montana argument rages on.

 

[ghostguy123]

When we're here discussing 4x SB winning QBs, why the f### is anyone focusing on anything but titles or numbers? Resumes aren't looked at by order of elimination. You 4-2>4-0 guys knock Montana for this all the time but likewise I don't give Brady more credit for being the 2nd or 3rd best team more times than Joe. Who cares?? If you aren't first, you're last. Each year there is one winner and 31 losers, the rest are moral victories. As far as I can see, they were both first 4 times (with Brady a chance at 5).

Unfortunately for you, that isnt how careers are viewed for individual players.

you do know there are guys in the hall of fame who never won a super bowl right? Right???

 

[Road Warriors]

4-0 > 4-2

Nuff said

So Brady is penalized for getting to 2 more SBs ?

penalized? Credit is given to Montana for leading his team to victory EVERY TIME he played in a championship game.

Both QBs won 4 SuperBowls, both have 3 SB MVPs, both have been NFL MVP twice, Montana was a 3-time All-Pro, Brady has been All-Pro 2 times, Brady is a 10-time Pro-Bowler, Montana was an 8 time Pro-Bowler, Montana was on the 1980s "All-Decade" team, Brady was on the 2000s "All-Decade" team. They are pretty equal, as far as QBs go, so if one has 4 wins, with no losses in championship games, and the other has 4 wins, but also lost twice, credit should be given to the guy who got the job done, EVERY TIME.

So 4-3 in Conf championship games is > 6-3?

 

[Tau837]

4-0 > 4-2

Nuff said

So Brady is penalized for getting to 2 more SBs ?

penalized? Credit is given to Montana for leading his team to victory EVERY TIME he played in a championship game. Both QBs won 4 SuperBowls, both have 3 SB MVPs, both have been NFL MVP twice, Montana was a 3-time All-Pro, Brady has been All-Pro 2 times, Brady is a 10-time Pro-Bowler, Montana was an 8 time Pro-Bowler, Montana was on the 1980s "All-Decade" team, Brady was on the 2000s "All-Decade" team. They are pretty equal, as far as QBs go, so if one has 4 wins, with no losses in championship games, and the other has 4 wins, but also lost twice, credit should be given to the guy who got the job done, EVERY TIME.

Except the every time he didn't get there.

With the same number of wins, credit goes to getting there more often.

Brady has also helped his team to 9 AFC championship games in 14 seasons. Montana can't match that.

 

[BigDave]

4-0 > 4-2

Nuff said

So Brady is penalized for getting to 2 more SBs ?

penalized? Credit is given to Montana for leading his team to victory EVERY TIME he played in a championship game. Both QBs won 4 SuperBowls, both have 3 SB MVPs, both have been NFL MVP twice, Montana was a 3-time All-Pro, Brady has been All-Pro 2 times, Brady is a 10-time Pro-Bowler, Montana was an 8 time Pro-Bowler, Montana was on the 1980s "All-Decade" team, Brady was on the 2000s "All-Decade" team. They are pretty equal, as far as QBs go, so if one has 4 wins, with no losses in championship games, and the other has 4 wins, but also lost twice, credit should be given to the guy who got the job done, EVERY TIME.

Except the every time he didn't get there.

With the same number of wins, credit goes to getting there more often.

Brady has also helped his team to 9 AFC championship games in 14 seasons. Montana can't match that.

Brady helped win more divisional championships. How can he be penalized for getting to the SB more often? Stupid argument.

 

[ShamrockPride]

When we're here discussing 4x SB winning QBs, why the f### is anyone focusing on anything but titles or numbers? Resumes aren't looked at by order of elimination. You 4-2>4-0 guys knock Montana for this all the time but likewise I don't give Brady more credit for being the 2nd or 3rd best team more times than Joe. Who cares?? If you aren't first, you're last. Each year there is one winner and 31 losers, the rest are moral victories. As far as I can see, they were both first 4 times (with Brady a chance at 5).

Unfortunately for you, that isnt how careers are viewed for individual players.you do know there are guys in the hall of fame who never won a super bowl right? Right???

You're right, excuse me. That's how careers are viewed for quarterbacks.

 

[ShamrockPride]

When we're here discussing 4x SB winning QBs, why the f### is anyone focusing on anything but titles or numbers? Resumes aren't looked at by order of elimination. You 4-2>4-0 guys knock Montana for this all the time but likewise I don't give Brady more credit for being the 2nd or 3rd best team more times than Joe. Who cares?? If you aren't first, you're last. Each year there is one winner and 31 losers, the rest are moral victories. As far as I can see, they were both first 4 times (with Brady a chance at 5).

Unfortunately for you, that isnt how careers are viewed for individual players.you do know there are guys in the hall of fame who never won a super bowl right? Right???

You're right, excuse me. That's how careers are viewed for quarterbacks.

 

[Bayhawks]

4-0 > 4-2

Nuff said

So Brady is penalized for getting to 2 more SBs ?

penalized? Credit is given to Montana for leading his team to victory EVERY TIME he played in a championship game. Both QBs won 4 SuperBowls, both have 3 SB MVPs, both have been NFL MVP twice, Montana was a 3-time All-Pro, Brady has been All-Pro 2 times, Brady is a 10-time Pro-Bowler, Montana was an 8 time Pro-Bowler, Montana was on the 1980s "All-Decade" team, Brady was on the 2000s "All-Decade" team. They are pretty equal, as far as QBs go, so if one has 4 wins, with no losses in championship games, and the other has 4 wins, but also lost twice, credit should be given to the guy who got the job done, EVERY TIME.

Such horrific logic.I think montana was better, but arguments like this give us montana people such a bad name.

Horrific logic? The 2 are pretty similar, so I give the edge to the guy who has a 1.000 winning % in SuperBowls over the guy who has a .667 winning %. Please elaborate on the "horror" of my logic.

Because you are essentially giving Montana more credit for losing to the Giants 49-3 in the first round of the playoffs than you are for Brady losing to the Giants in the SB when dude catches a ball with his helmet.

Seriously? Because Brady never got bounced in 1 game? I'm guessing I imagined the 33-14 ###-kicking in 2009 where he threw 3 picks?

IMO, not much separates these 2. If Brady had 1 more SuperBowl win, I'd have him ahead of Montana. But since I have them essentially equal, the tie-breaker to me (as I've stated numerous times) is the fact that Montana's winning % in the SB is better.