Joe Montana's legacy (1 Viewer)

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

Montana didnt have to deal with a salary cap, but he is the most clutch QB ever no doubt. i thought BigBen was gonna give him a runEven though brady,Peyton n BigBen have all lost a superbowl now will anyone be shocked if they win another?

No, but now I won't be shocked if they lose another either.

 

[Shtaym Syek]

okay, I agree with that as I said in my earlier post- you have to look at that QB's overall performance. Since the OP was referring to Montana though- I assume you were speaking of Montana. Still though- it would be hard for a QB with losses to pass Montana as Montana was 4-0 with great numbers.. So that QB is going to have to go 3-1 with better #'s or 5-1 with same #'s etc... It is a tall mountain to climb if we are talking about QB SuperBowl performances.

Anything will be subjective in the first place, but suppose Brady goes on to win 2 more SBs and ends up 5-1 in the Super Bowl. Let's also say he does not play as well in the post season as Montana but Brady keeps up his sparkling winning percentage in the regular season and wins a couple more MVP trophies.At that point, Brady would have 5 rings (with a SB loss) compared to Montana (who had better post season stats), 4 MVPs, and a better regular season record. Would that trump Montana?How about if Brady only wins one more SB and ends up 4-1 but still wins another MVP or two?People like to point to Montana's 4-0 record in the SB. That's obvious a great accomplishment, but he DIDN'T win the SB in 11 other seasons. He made the playoffs in 7 other seasons and came up short. Does making the playoffs count for anything? Does making the playoffs and losing count for anything? Does NOT making the playoffs caount as a negative?

Again, look at Montana's numbers- overall including the wins and losses-- yes, he didn't win every year, but neither has anyone else- He's one of only two to win 4 times.. So you can say the same above about anyone including Brady.. yes Brady won 3 but what about all those other years that he didn't win? Do they count negatively.. What are the overall #'s in all the playoff games, wins and losses? Montana comes out ahead.Is suppose Brady does have 5 rings, 4 mvps- then it's another discussion-- but that's just fantasy right now. We can only go by actual events.

Why are we going exclusively by wins and losses in a team sport?

 

[fatmnkypants]

People also forget the lull in between 84 and 88. While SFO made the playoffs in 85, 86, and 87, they were one and done each year. Montana's passer ratings in those playoff losses were 65.6, 34.2, and 42.0. In the last two of those games, he only had 98 and 109 passing yards.

To explain the low total yards - one of them he was knocked out by Jim Burt (missed the whole 2nd half), and one of them he was benched for Steve Young halfway through.

I wonder why? Wasn't he All-Universe, the greatest qb ever?

yep, he was, but he had a bad day like every potential greatest ever has.. Rice had games where he ran bad routes or dropped balls left and right, Michael Jordan had games where he clanked his shots left and right.. Federer has matches where he can't hit a line when the day before he couldnt miss.. THEY ARE HUMAN!

 

[massraider]

Montana was the QB on a team which, in each of his 4 SB appearances, was CLEARLY better than their opponent. Only in one of those games, in 1988, was Montana forced to execute a last minute TD drive to win the game- which to his credit, he accomplished. Very few QBs have even been in this situation. Big Ben has been in it twice: 2 years ago, he led his team to a victory. Yesterday he didn't. Who knows whether Montana would have been successful the 2nd time around? Tom Brady has also led his team, in 2 SBs, to last minute victories. Kurt Warner appeared in 3 SBs and each time directed his team to a game winning or game tying score in his final drive, yet he is not given the credit Montana is because he was not the last guy to have the ball in his hands and as a result lost 2 of those 3 Superbowls. I think Brady and Warner (and Steve Young) were all better QBs than Joe Montana. Montana was a fine QB, but also one of the luckiest to ever play. That is his ultimate legacy.

That's pretty much complete nonsense. You set up an arbitrary mark for determining a QBs worth, which is a really silly one. One could argue that if Ben played better, he wouldn't have been in a position to have to lead his team to a final minute drive. Joe gets penalized for blowing people out? Well, that's dumb.Then you talk about his 'ultimate' legacy as one of the luckiest to ever play. His legacy has been written already, and it isn't as the luckiest guy ever. This isn't Robert Horry, for pete's sake.When you wheeze through these windbag posts, do you ever re-read them, and wonder if they make sense?

 

[DiStefano]

People also forget the lull in between 84 and 88. While SFO made the playoffs in 85, 86, and 87, they were one and done each year. Montana's passer ratings in those playoff losses were 65.6, 34.2, and 42.0. In the last two of those games, he only had 98 and 109 passing yards.

To explain the low total yards - one of them he was knocked out by Jim Burt (missed the whole 2nd half), and one of them he was benched for Steve Young halfway through.

I wonder why? Wasn't he All-Universe, the greatest qb ever?

yep, he was, but he had a bad day like every potential greatest ever has.. Rice had games where he ran bad routes or dropped balls left and right, Michael Jordan had games where he clanked his shots left and right.. Federer has matches where he can't hit a line when the day before he couldnt miss.. THEY ARE HUMAN!

Indeed they are. Montana was not only human, HE WAS OVERRATED.

 

[Chest Rockwell]

Some of the posts in this thread are just beyond ludicrous.

How many quarterbacks have had a 6-0 stretch in the postseason (back to back SB's) with a 19/1 TD/INT ratio, 70% comp%, 9.4 ypa, and a 133.6 QB rating.?

You want to make the argument that Montana had the keys to a Ferrari?

Sure. Fine. I understand. I get that. Don't really disagree.

But understand this:

He helped build that Ferrari and he drove it like Michael Schumacher.

 

[fatmnkypants]

okay, I agree with that as I said in my earlier post- you have to look at that QB's overall performance. Since the OP was referring to Montana though- I assume you were speaking of Montana. Still though- it would be hard for a QB with losses to pass Montana as Montana was 4-0 with great numbers.. So that QB is going to have to go 3-1 with better #'s or 5-1 with same #'s etc... It is a tall mountain to climb if we are talking about QB SuperBowl performances.

Anything will be subjective in the first place, but suppose Brady goes on to win 2 more SBs and ends up 5-1 in the Super Bowl. Let's also say he does not play as well in the post season as Montana but Brady keeps up his sparkling winning percentage in the regular season and wins a couple more MVP trophies.At that point, Brady would have 5 rings (with a SB loss) compared to Montana (who had better post season stats), 4 MVPs, and a better regular season record. Would that trump Montana?How about if Brady only wins one more SB and ends up 4-1 but still wins another MVP or two?People like to point to Montana's 4-0 record in the SB. That's obvious a great accomplishment, but he DIDN'T win the SB in 11 other seasons. He made the playoffs in 7 other seasons and came up short. Does making the playoffs count for anything? Does making the playoffs and losing count for anything? Does NOT making the playoffs caount as a negative?

Again, look at Montana's numbers- overall including the wins and losses-- yes, he didn't win every year, but neither has anyone else- He's one of only two to win 4 times.. So you can say the same above about anyone including Brady.. yes Brady won 3 but what about all those other years that he didn't win? Do they count negatively.. What are the overall #'s in all the playoff games, wins and losses? Montana comes out ahead.Is suppose Brady does have 5 rings, 4 mvps- then it's another discussion-- but that's just fantasy right now. We can only go by actual events.

Why are we going exclusively by wins and losses in a team sport?

We;re not, clearly you didn't read my post where I layed out Montana's incredible individual numbers vs. other greats, and above where I said his numbers + wins/losses.. It's all together.. IT's Montana's actualy stats that really tell the story of his incredible post season and Super Bowl play.

 

[fatmnkypants]

People also forget the lull in between 84 and 88. While SFO made the playoffs in 85, 86, and 87, they were one and done each year. Montana's passer ratings in those playoff losses were 65.6, 34.2, and 42.0. In the last two of those games, he only had 98 and 109 passing yards.

To explain the low total yards - one of them he was knocked out by Jim Burt (missed the whole 2nd half), and one of them he was benched for Steve Young halfway through.

I wonder why? Wasn't he All-Universe, the greatest qb ever?

yep, he was, but he had a bad day like every potential greatest ever has.. Rice had games where he ran bad routes or dropped balls left and right, Michael Jordan had games where he clanked his shots left and right.. Federer has matches where he can't hit a line when the day before he couldnt miss.. THEY ARE HUMAN!

Indeed they are. Montana was not only human, HE WAS OVERRATED.

Oh! That's what it is.. sure, I see that now.. Clearly u are speaking from a totally unbiased perspective, so I'll just go with what you say... Yep, Montana was overrated when he was a teenager and was a Pennsylvania legend for leading his highschool to incredible comebacks and a championship, then he was overated as a basic uknown who led Notre Dame to some of the schools greatest comeback victories (so legendary the school made a video of one of his comebacks while he was still in the school and not "the Superbowl winning Montana" that they showed and still do to recruits and the teams before big games.. then overrated when he led Notre Dame to the NAtional Championship... then overrated when within a couple years of going to one of the worst NFL Teams he was leading them to legendary wins and the Superbowl.. Overated as he was consistently one of the best QB's in the league year after year.....overated when he was old and robbed of much of his skills from all the injuries over the years, he led KC to win over Steve Young and the 49ers, outdueled Elway in what is considered the greatest MNF game ever, led them to several miracle playoff wins (including a 4th down last play of the game TD) and their best post season performance in years and one they still haven't matched since. yep,, Joe Montana -- overrated becasue you say so..ur ridiculous.

 

[Johnnymac]

Lots of really ridiculous posts in this thread. Montana was great in big games. Sure, he played on good teams...they were in the SB after all. I doubt there are many QB's that have played in the SB that were not on good teams. Montana, Brady, Warner, Big Ben, Bart Starr...etc got the job done in the clutch.

 

[Reepicheep]

Some of the posts in this thread are just beyond ludicrous. How many quarterbacks have had a 6-0 stretch in the postseason (back to back SB's) with a 19/1 TD/INT ratio, 70% comp%, 9.4 ypa, and a 133.6 QB rating.? You want to make the argument that Montana had the keys to a Ferrari? Sure. Fine. I understand. I get that. Don't really disagree.But understand this: He helped build that Ferrari and he drove it like Michael Schumacher.

Tangentially related . . . if there was a 100% objective way to evaluate the careers of QBs, which everyone agreed on . . . what would football fans fight about on the Internet?

 

[Jason Wood]

I'm sorry, but to suggest that Joe Montana is overrated is to effectively say the entire league, save for maybe Anthony Munoz and Jerry Rice, are also overrated.

 

[DropKick]

You guys realize that every NFL teams has an active roster of 53 players, of whom 45 are on the active roster for a game, yes?Not one quarterback in the history of football has won a Super Bowl by themselves. Even if their team passed on every single play, someone has to block for them, someone has to catch their passes, and someone has to stop the other team from scoring. None of these things are of minor importance.The quarterback might be the most important player on the field, but he is not the team, not even close. It's possible to win a game with horrible QB play, and it's possible to lose one with brilliant QB play. Heck, it's possible to win a Super Bowl getting nothing more than mediocre QB play all year, and it's possible to not even make the playoffs despite brilliant play from a QB all year.Unless you think Trent Dilfer was a better QB than Dan Marino, this conversation is silly. Please, stop the madness.

I don't feel compelled to rank QBs. Brady vs Manning? Who cares? - it's academic. A good QB paired with a good team, can win it all.I also don't feel that current accomplishments diminish or change past feats. Had Brady won 5 SB (not really a stretch), would Montana really have lost some luster? Bradshaw won 4; Aikman 3; Brady 3 - has that changed people's opinion of Montana? I don't think it has.The Dolphins "perfect" season... 17-0.... Maybe long ago I would not want to see the feat repeated, but in '07, it didn't phase me the Patriots were 18-0 and on the verge of 19-0... I actually wanted them to win because of the historical significance. To me, it complemented the Dolphin's achievement... it didn't supplant it!

 

[Carver]

It doesn't matter who is #1 really. fans of teams that are/were lucky enough to have a guy in the conversation should just be appreciative of it.

Especially the NE and Indy fans RIGHT NOW.

 

[Black Box]

People also forget the lull in between 84 and 88. While SFO made the playoffs in 85, 86, and 87, they were one and done each year. Montana's passer ratings in those playoff losses were 65.6, 34.2, and 42.0. In the last two of those games, he only had 98 and 109 passing yards.

To explain the low total yards - one of them he was knocked out by Jim Burt (missed the whole 2nd half), and one of them he was benched for Steve Young halfway through.

I wonder why? Wasn't he All-Universe, the greatest qb ever?

Eventually the second-greatest QB of all time supplants the greatest of all time. It happens to all the greats eventually

 

[Jous]

I wouldn't say Montana's legacy is completely secure, hell, if Brady wins another I'd put him ahead actually. Doesn't matter if Brady lost one, I'd take 4-1 over 4-0 any day. No question. It would be the same number of wins but with one extra appearance that only had a win prevented by a freak helmet catch and dropped INT.

 

[Slevin Kelevra]

Does people realize that Montana threw 11 TD with ZERO picks in 4 SB with 127.8 rating ?

 

[DiStefano]

Does people realize that Montana threw 11 TD with ZERO picks in 4 SB with 127.8 rating ?

Yes, they does. He had a great Superbowl run, but by itself, it doesn't make him the greatest qb.

 

[dgreen]

I haven't read this thread and I'm not saying anyone is saying this, but...

I enjoy whenever I hear someone say something like, "X only has one more Super Bowl than Y." Sometimes, one Super Bowl victory is looked at as being "just" one more victory. It's more than that. Being separated by "just" that one game is a lot of ground to make up.

I a QB does eventually win 5, that may be a record that lasts a long, long, long time.

 

[massraider]

Does people realize that Montana threw 11 TD with ZERO picks in 4 SB with 127.8 rating ?

Yes, they does. He had a great Superbowl run, but by itself, it doesn't make him the greatest qb.

Luckily, no one is saying that one stat DOES make him the greatest.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Montana was the QB on a team which, in each of his 4 SB appearances, was CLEARLY better than their opponent. Only in one of those games, in 1988, was Montana forced to execute a last minute TD drive to win the game- which to his credit, he accomplished. Very few QBs have even been in this situation. Big Ben has been in it twice: 2 years ago, he led his team to a victory. Yesterday he didn't. Who knows whether Montana would have been successful the 2nd time around?

Tom Brady has also led his team, in 2 SBs, to last minute victories. Kurt Warner appeared in 3 SBs and each time directed his team to a game winning or game tying score in his final drive, yet he is not given the credit Montana is because he was not the last guy to have the ball in his hands and as a result lost 2 of those 3 Superbowls.

I think Brady and Warner (and Steve Young) were all better QBs than Joe Montana. Montana was a fine QB, but also one of the luckiest to ever play. That is his ultimate legacy.

How quickly we forget.

The 49ers were demonstrably better than the Broncos in Super Bowl XXIV, no question.

However,

1988 Bengals were 12-4, scored 448 points, allowed 329 points, had the 2nd best differential in the league (7/4 p/g)

1988 49ers were 10-6, scored 369 points, allowed 294 points, had the 6th best differential in the league (4.7 p/g)

1984 Dolphins were 14-2, scored 513 points, allowed 298 points, had the 2nd best differential in the league (13.4 p/g)

1984 49ers were 15-1, scored 475 points, allowed 227 points, had the top differential in the league (15.5 p/g)

1981 Bengals were 12-4, scored 421 points, allowed 304 points, had the 2nd best differential in the league (7.3 p/g)

1981 49ers were 13-3, scored 357 points, allowed 250 points, had the 3rd best differential in the league (6.7 p/g)

Not sure where you get the idea they were CLEARLY better than their opponents in every Super Bowl. In three of the four their opponents were among the top teams in the league, and in both cases the Bengals had better point differentials and in 88 had the better record to boot.

I didn't give a single one of those teams a chance before the game began to beat the 49ers. I'm betting Vegas didn't give much of a chance either.

^ Correct... because those other teams didn't have Joe Montana. And even worse, they had to go against him.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

All I know is, no matter how many regular season games I won in Tecmo Super Bowl, I'd probably lose if I had to play the 49ers in the playoffs. A 100 percent completion rate was the rule, not the exception.

 

[fatmnkypants]

Montana was the QB on a team which, in each of his 4 SB appearances, was CLEARLY better than their opponent. Only in one of those games, in 1988, was Montana forced to execute a last minute TD drive to win the game- which to his credit, he accomplished. Very few QBs have even been in this situation. Big Ben has been in it twice: 2 years ago, he led his team to a victory. Yesterday he didn't. Who knows whether Montana would have been successful the 2nd time around?

Tom Brady has also led his team, in 2 SBs, to last minute victories. Kurt Warner appeared in 3 SBs and each time directed his team to a game winning or game tying score in his final drive, yet he is not given the credit Montana is because he was not the last guy to have the ball in his hands and as a result lost 2 of those 3 Superbowls.

I think Brady and Warner (and Steve Young) were all better QBs than Joe Montana. Montana was a fine QB, but also one of the luckiest to ever play. That is his ultimate legacy.

How quickly we forget.

The 49ers were demonstrably better than the Broncos in Super Bowl XXIV, no question.

However,

1988 Bengals were 12-4, scored 448 points, allowed 329 points, had the 2nd best differential in the league (7/4 p/g)

1988 49ers were 10-6, scored 369 points, allowed 294 points, had the 6th best differential in the league (4.7 p/g)

1984 Dolphins were 14-2, scored 513 points, allowed 298 points, had the 2nd best differential in the league (13.4 p/g)

1984 49ers were 15-1, scored 475 points, allowed 227 points, had the top differential in the league (15.5 p/g)

1981 Bengals were 12-4, scored 421 points, allowed 304 points, had the 2nd best differential in the league (7.3 p/g)

1981 49ers were 13-3, scored 357 points, allowed 250 points, had the 3rd best differential in the league (6.7 p/g)

Not sure where you get the idea they were CLEARLY better than their opponents in every Super Bowl. In three of the four their opponents were among the top teams in the league, and in both cases the Bengals had better point differentials and in 88 had the better record to boot.

I didn't give a single one of those teams a chance before the game began to beat the 49ers. I'm betting Vegas didn't give much of a chance either.

^ Correct... because those other teams didn't have Joe Montana. And even worse, they had to go against him.

lol.. thats right, Montana was the X factor.. It reminds me of the NFL films footage of the Bengels sideline that they show on NFL films sometiems- as Montana was leading the last drive to win the game in the Super Bowl.. They had Wyche miked-- this is the head coach of a team that has the lead in the Superbowl with hardly any time left.. HE is moaning and groaning because they "gave Montana too much time" After every play he is literly screaming "why did we give Montana so mcuh time!?" "Stop him" The guy knew they were toast-- and the Bengals were a good def.. Montana throws the Td, and Wyche is beside himself.. Boomer walks up to him shaking his head and just says "fing Montana" That's the fear and respect that NFL Coaches and players had for Montana.. He wasn't overrated in their eyes.. he was the master.

 

[ninerfanatic492000]

how the F*^k does this thread go this long with not one mention of BILL WALSH???? he is the one absolute advantage the 49ers had over anyone and everyone else in the 80's. HE mixed with Joe's incredible way to focus in big events and moments was just unstoppable.

i will go out on a limb and say if Paul Brown didn't try to blackball Walsh for whatever reason and Bill was rightfully coach when Paul stepped down the Bengals would have been on the winning side in 81 and possibly a few years from then in the rematch.

and yes Joe is the greatest QB. yes after say the 2nd super bowl they were uber talented. But Defense's were still allowed to play u know........defense however. aside from being able to maul WR's hits on QB's now that draw fines/suspensions were totally legal and applauded. some of the hits Joe took in the mid to late 80's were so so ugly. i still luv this game advertisement joe made years later as a chief

 

[Slevin Kelevra]

Does people realize that Montana threw 11 TD with ZERO picks in 4 SB with 127.8 rating ?

Yes, they does. He had a great Superbowl run, but by itself, it doesn't make him the greatest qb.

And who's that ?

 

[Raider Nation]

Glad there was already a thread on Joe Cool... didn't want to start a new thread just for this stupid question.

Well, it began as a stupid question but now it's a mission, since I still can't find the answer after a half hour of Googling. It's starting to drive me crazy. Here is what I want to know.

Joe wore #3 at Notre Dame. Why didn't he wear #3 with the Niners?

Looking at San Francisco's 1979 roster (his rookie season), #3 was available, and the number was not retired. Wearing #3 would have made even more sense, given that he dropped to the 3rd round. He could have used it as inspiration, sort of like why MJD picked #32 (because 32 teams passed on him).

Also, Joe wore #19 in high school, which also was available and not retired. So where did #16 come from? Anyone?

 

[cstu]

It doesn't matter who is #1 really. fans of teams that are/were lucky enough to have a guy in the conversation should just be appreciative of it.

Especially the NE and Indy fans RIGHT NOW.

Andrew Luck.

 

[Treesarepeopletoo]

Joe Montana isn't the best QB ever. He was blessed to be part of one of the greatest franchises of all time. Seems to me when your replacement wins an MVP and Superbowl MVP it takes a little bit away from "your" achievements. GREAT team. I'd take Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, John Elway, and Brett Favre as a quarterback over him. Now do I get Montana and the greatest football player of all-time Jerry Rice as a package deal? I often think about what Elway or Favre would have done with a receiver of his magnitude.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Joe Montana isn't the best QB ever. He was blessed to be part of one of the greatest franchises of all time. Seems to me when your replacement wins an MVP and Superbowl MVP it takes a little bit away from "your" achievements. GREAT team. I'd take Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, John Elway, and Brett Favre as a quarterback over him. Now do I get Montana and the greatest football player of all-time Jerry Rice as a package deal? I often think about what Elway or Favre would have done with a receiver of his magnitude.

 

[Tickle Monster]

Joe Montana isn't the best QB ever. He was blessed to be part of one of the greatest franchises of all time. Seems to me when your replacement wins an MVP and Superbowl MVP it takes a little bit away from "your" achievements. GREAT team. I'd take Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, John Elway, and Brett Favre as a quarterback over him. Now do I get Montana and the greatest football player of all-time Jerry Rice as a package deal? I often think about what Elway or Favre would have done with a receiver of his magnitude.

Someone is drunk, I see....

 

[Treesarepeopletoo]

Joe Montana isn't the best QB ever. He was blessed to be part of one of the greatest franchises of all time. Seems to me when your replacement wins an MVP and Superbowl MVP it takes a little bit away from "your" achievements. GREAT team. I'd take Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, John Elway, and Brett Favre as a quarterback over him. Now do I get Montana and the greatest football player of all-time Jerry Rice as a package deal? I often think about what Elway or Favre would have done with a receiver of his magnitude.

Someone is drunk, I see....

What you just decide that I'm drunk? You can't decide. That decision is mine and God's.

 

[cobalt_27]

Joe Montana isn't the best QB ever. He was blessed to be part of one of the greatest franchises of all time. Seems to me when your replacement wins an MVP and Superbowl MVP it takes a little bit away from "your" achievements. GREAT team. I'd take Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, John Elway, and Brett Favre as a quarterback over him. Now do I get Montana and the greatest football player of all-time Jerry Rice as a package deal? I often think about what Elway or Favre would have done with a receiver of his magnitude.

Someone is drunk, I see....

What you just decide that I'm drunk? You can't decide. That decision is mine and God's.

If not drunk, perhaps you forgot to take your Thorazine. Or should not combine smoking crack and posting at the same time.

 

[Heatman]

Give me Joe Montana in the playoffs over any QB in NFL history and it's not even close.

Hey Look... isn't that John Candy?

 

[dgreen]

Glad there was already a thread on Joe Cool... didn't want to start a new thread just for this stupid question.

Well, it began as a stupid question but now it's a mission, since I still can't find the answer after a half hour of Googling. It's starting to drive me crazy. Here is what I want to know.

Joe wore #3 at Notre Dame. Why didn't he wear #3 with the Niners?

Looking at San Francisco's 1979 roster (his rookie season), #3 was available, and the number was not retired. Wearing #3 would have made even more sense, given that he dropped to the 3rd round. He could have used it as inspiration, sort of like why MJD picked #32 (because 32 teams passed on him).

Also, Joe wore #19 in high school, which also was available and not retired. So where did #16 come from? Anyone?

My guess is 16 came from 19-3. But, that doesn't answer why he didn't just go with 3 or 19.

 

[CalBear]

Joe Montana isn't the best QB ever. He was blessed to be part of one of the greatest franchises of all time. Seems to me when your replacement wins an MVP and Superbowl MVP it takes a little bit away from "your" achievements. GREAT team. I'd take Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, John Elway, and Brett Favre as a quarterback over him. Now do I get Montana and the greatest football player of all-time Jerry Rice as a package deal? I often think about what Elway or Favre would have done with a receiver of his magnitude.

I might point out that Favre's replacement also won an MVP and a Superbowl MVP.I might also point out that Montana won two Super Bowls without Rice. On the 1981 team there was only one offensive skill-position Pro Bowler other than Montana (Dwight Clark, one of two Pro Bowls for him). On the 1984 team there was also only one other, Wendell Tyler (his only Pro Bowl). Ronnie Lott is the only Hall of Famer other than Montana on those teams.So what could Montana do without RIce? A whole lot more than Elway could do without Terrell Davis.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Glad there was already a thread on Joe Cool... didn't want to start a new thread just for this stupid question.

Well, it began as a stupid question but now it's a mission, since I still can't find the answer after a half hour of Googling. It's starting to drive me crazy. Here is what I want to know.

Joe wore #3 at Notre Dame. Why didn't he wear #3 with the Niners?

Looking at San Francisco's 1979 roster (his rookie season), #3 was available, and the number was not retired. Wearing #3 would have made even more sense, given that he dropped to the 3rd round. He could have used it as inspiration, sort of like why MJD picked #32 (because 32 teams passed on him).

Also, Joe wore #19 in high school, which also was available and not retired. So where did #16 come from? Anyone?

He also wore no. 19 with the Chiefs. Apparently he wanted 16 over 19 but it was held by Len Dawson (retired) and then No. 3 over 19 (same thing, Stenerud, retired).

Here's one theory: being a 3rd round pick he may not exactly have had his choice, he may have just taken what was handed to him.

It's funny though supposed franchise QB Jim Plunkett was No. 16 and had been cut just the year before. Before that it was Norm Sneed's number, he was also their starter. So maybe, even with Steve DeBerg there (No. 17), Montana was being treated like the heir apparent.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Glad there was already a thread on Joe Cool... didn't want to start a new thread just for this stupid question.

Well, it began as a stupid question but now it's a mission, since I still can't find the answer after a half hour of Googling. It's starting to drive me crazy. Here is what I want to know.

Joe wore #3 at Notre Dame. Why didn't he wear #3 with the Niners?

Looking at San Francisco's 1979 roster (his rookie season), #3 was available, and the number was not retired. Wearing #3 would have made even more sense, given that he dropped to the 3rd round. He could have used it as inspiration, sort of like why MJD picked #32 (because 32 teams passed on him).

Also, Joe wore #19 in high school, which also was available and not retired. So where did #16 come from? Anyone?

Good question. I don't know the answer.I do know that the 49ers didn't really do the single digit thing. Don Burke wore 6 in '50 and '51, before switching to 32 and then 66 for the rest of his career. Noland Smith was a 5'5 returner for the Chiefs who went to the 49ers in mid-season 1969. He wore 1 in KC and wore 1 for the remain of the year with SF, but never played football again.

Until 1980, those were the only players to ever wear single digits for the 49ers. The ironic part is that was until 1980. Montana was drafted in '79, and in 1980, the 49ers used a third round pick on punter Jim Miller, who would wear #3 for the team. In fact, he was the only player to go with the single digit that year, although more and more players for SF wore single digits throughout the decade.

Maybe it was a SF thing, because QBs wore single digits with some regularity in the decade. Bert Jones wore #7, Roman Gabriel wore #5, Sonny Jurgenson wore #9. Lamonica, a former Golden Domer himself, wore #3. Archie Manning wore 8, and a whole host of players worse 7 and 9 (including Joe Theisman), and Steve Fuller, a first rounder in '79, wore #4 for the Chiefs before wearing the same in Chicago.

 

[Bankerguy]

Kurt Warner is the Ultimate post-season Quarterback.

Incorrect....Troy Aikman.

 

[Sidewinder16]

He also wore no. 19 with the Chiefs. Apparently he wanted 16 over 19 but it was held by Len Dawson (retired) and then No. 3 over 19 (same thing, Stenerud, retired).

IIRC, Dawson "gave his blessing" for Montana to use 16 but Joe opted for 19.

 

[Fullback Fro]

Montana was the QB on a team which, in each of his 4 SB appearances, was CLEARLY better than their opponent. Only in one of those games, in 1988, was Montana forced to execute a last minute TD drive to win the game- which to his credit, he accomplished. Very few QBs have even been in this situation. Big Ben has been in it twice: 2 years ago, he led his team to a victory. Yesterday he didn't. Who knows whether Montana would have been successful the 2nd time around?

Tom Brady has also led his team, in 2 SBs, to last minute victories. Kurt Warner appeared in 3 SBs and each time directed his team to a game winning or game tying score in his final drive, yet he is not given the credit Montana is because he was not the last guy to have the ball in his hands and as a result lost 2 of those 3 Superbowls.

I think Brady and Warner (and Steve Young) were all better QBs than Joe Montana. Montana was a fine QB, but also one of the luckiest to ever play. That is his ultimate legacy.

This is complete and utter BS. You make your own luck. Confidence breeds luck.

 

[geoff8695]

If you were alive and watching football in the 80s then I don't need to tell you that absolutely NO ONE consistently struck more fear in the hearts of opposing players, coaches, and fans than Joe Montana.

Keep in mind that he played in an era when the Bears, NY Giants, and Redskins had some ridiculously talented teams with truly dominating defenses; otherwise, Joe would have probably won 2 or 3 additional Superbowls. Despite those who want to say, "well he had Jerry Rice for half of his Superbowls!", I would actually argue that Joe was limited at times by his own supporting cast and the uber talented quality of competition that he faced. This was NOT an era absent of all-time great caliber teams, or loaded with patsies; it was an era of great teams, great defenses, and worthy competition. Yet more often than not, Montana overcame them all.

No doubt in my mind Joe Montana, over the course of his entire career, was the best QB I've ever had the privilege of watching. And I HATED him for it! There may be other QBs who've had similar stretches, or a season that equalled or surpassed Montana, but NO ONE was more feared and more clutch on the biggest stages or against the stiffest competition than Joe Montana...

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Montana was the QB on a team which, in each of his 4 SB appearances, was CLEARLY better than their opponent. Only in one of those games, in 1988, was Montana forced to execute a last minute TD drive to win the game- which to his credit, he accomplished. Very few QBs have even been in this situation. Big Ben has been in it twice: 2 years ago, he led his team to a victory. Yesterday he didn't. Who knows whether Montana would have been successful the 2nd time around?

Tom Brady has also led his team, in 2 SBs, to last minute victories. Kurt Warner appeared in 3 SBs and each time directed his team to a game winning or game tying score in his final drive, yet he is not given the credit Montana is because he was not the last guy to have the ball in his hands and as a result lost 2 of those 3 Superbowls.

I think Brady and Warner (and Steve Young) were all better QBs than Joe Montana. Montana was a fine QB, but also one of the luckiest to ever play. That is his ultimate legacy.

Unreal. As if you haven't been discredited enough already in the FFA, you post this nonsense.

 

[Chairshot]

Montana was the QB on a team which, in each of his 4 SB appearances, was CLEARLY better than their opponent. Only in one of those games, in 1988, was Montana forced to execute a last minute TD drive to win the game- which to his credit, he accomplished. Very few QBs have even been in this situation. Big Ben has been in it twice: 2 years ago, he led his team to a victory. Yesterday he didn't. Who knows whether Montana would have been successful the 2nd time around?

Tom Brady has also led his team, in 2 SBs, to last minute victories. Kurt Warner appeared in 3 SBs and each time directed his team to a game winning or game tying score in his final drive, yet he is not given the credit Montana is because he was not the last guy to have the ball in his hands and as a result lost 2 of those 3 Superbowls.

I think Brady and Warner (and Steve Young) were all better QBs than Joe Montana. Montana was a fine QB, but also one of the luckiest to ever play. That is his ultimate legacy.

Unreal. As if you haven't been discredited enough already in the FFA, you post this nonsense.

I don't know about Warner and Brady's career isn't over yet, but I think Steve Young is the best QB of all time. One of the few times a HOFer is actually under rated, IMO.

 

[geoff8695]

I don't know about Warner and Brady's career isn't over yet, but I think Steve Young is the best QB of all time. One of the few times a HOFer is actually under rated, IMO.

Agree to a point, and I also would contend that Young is underrated. He picked up where Montana left off and was statistically better in YPA, TD%, INT%, QB rating, a superior runner, Etc.However, Young enjoyed the prime years of Jerry Rice's career, and I would argue he had better surrounding talent on both sides of the ball (for the most part)... Yet Young only has one Super Bowl ring and his 20 career playoff games pale in comparison to the absolute statistical dominance of Montana's 19 career playoff games.Young was awesome, but if you could somehow clone a team (with the only differecne being the starting QB) and have them play each other in a single game to determine which of these two were the greatest QB in 49ers history. Then IMHO Montana would win 9 out of 10 times. There are only a precious few athletes whose insane will to win matches their uncanny talent and leadership ability; who can rise above virtually any circumstance and not only refuse to lose when everything is at stake, but more importantly inspire those around them to the same mindset and get the absolute best out of them. Taking nothing away from Young here, but Montana is in rare territory in this regard. He belongs in the same category as Jordan, Russell, Etc.- while Young does not...

 

[Fensalk]

Beyond the Super Bowl numbers, look at Joe Montana's playoff numbers:

45 TDs passes to 21 INTs.

7.86 yards per attempt.

95.6 QB rating.

Brady:

38 TDs / 20 INTs

6.66 YPA

87.8 QB rating

Roethlisberger:

20 TDS / 17 INTs

7.70 YPA

83.7 QB Rating

Montana dusts them in each of these 3 categories in playoff games. Sick.

Eli Manning:

17 TDs / 8 INTs

7.07 YPA

89.3 QB Rating

Eli Manning has done enough for some to warrant the HOF talk now, and even he is on a lower trajectory than Joe Montana.

HOWEVER, Aaron Rodgers....

15 TDs / 4 INTs

8.10 YPA

105.5 QB Rating

is actually beating all of Joe Montana's marks at this point.

Drew Brees is beating two of Montana's old marks

22 TDs / 4 INTs

7.60 YPA

103.9 QB Rating

When discussing who is better than Joe Montana, all eyes should turn to Drew Drees and Aaron Rodgers, not Brady, Roethlisberger, or Eli Manning.

 

[DawnBTVS]

Montana: 23 playoff games

Brady: 22 playoff games

Eli M: 11 games

Brees: 9 games

Rodgers: 7 games

I'd hold off on Brees, Rodgers, and even Eli until they approach the number of games Montana and Brady have played.

 

[Fensalk]

Montana: 23 playoff gamesBrady: 22 playoff gamesEli M: 11 gamesBrees: 9 gamesRodgers: 7 gamesI'd hold off on Brees, Rodgers, and even Eli until they approach the number of games Montana and Brady have played.

That's what I said. Forget Brady and Roethlisberger. Its too late for them. Its probably too late for Eli as well, really. All eyes should be on Brees and Rodgers now, as they are currently on trajectory to get there.

 

[Tau837]

Montana: 23 playoff gamesBrady: 22 playoff gamesEli M: 11 gamesBrees: 9 gamesRodgers: 7 gamesI'd hold off on Brees, Rodgers, and even Eli until they approach the number of games Montana and Brady have played.

That's what I said. Forget Brady and Roethlisberger. Its too late for them. Its probably too late for Eli as well, really. All eyes should be on Brees and Rodgers now, as they are currently on trajectory to get there.

It's apples and oranges. Different eras, different rules. Brees or Rodgers would have to surpass Montana by a fair amount before they could be considered better IMO.

 

[Fensalk]

Montana: 23 playoff games

Brady: 22 playoff games

Eli M: 11 games

Brees: 9 games

Rodgers: 7 games

I'd hold off on Brees, Rodgers, and even Eli until they approach the number of games Montana and Brady have played.

That's what I said. Forget Brady and Roethlisberger. Its too late for them. Its probably too late for Eli as well, really. All eyes should be on Brees and Rodgers now, as they are currently on trajectory to get there.

It's apples and oranges. Different eras, different rules. Brees or Rodgers would have to surpass Montana by a fair amount before they could be considered better IMO.

Brees is annihilating Joe Montana's playoff TD / INT ratio. 22 TDs to 4 INTs is insane.

 

[DiStefano]

Montana was the QB on a team which, in each of his 4 SB appearances, was CLEARLY better than their opponent. Only in one of those games, in 1988, was Montana forced to execute a last minute TD drive to win the game- which to his credit, he accomplished. Very few QBs have even been in this situation. Big Ben has been in it twice: 2 years ago, he led his team to a victory. Yesterday he didn't. Who knows whether Montana would have been successful the 2nd time around?

Tom Brady has also led his team, in 2 SBs, to last minute victories. Kurt Warner appeared in 3 SBs and each time directed his team to a game winning or game tying score in his final drive, yet he is not given the credit Montana is because he was not the last guy to have the ball in his hands and as a result lost 2 of those 3 Superbowls.

I think Brady and Warner (and Steve Young) were all better QBs than Joe Montana. Montana was a fine QB, but also one of the luckiest to ever play. That is his ultimate legacy.

Unreal. As if you haven't been discredited enough already in the FFA, you post this nonsense.

I don't know about Warner and Brady's career isn't over yet, but I think Steve Young is the best QB of all time. One of the few times a HOFer is actually under rated, IMO.

 

[Tau837]

Montana: 23 playoff games

Brady: 22 playoff games

Eli M: 11 games

Brees: 9 games

Rodgers: 7 games

I'd hold off on Brees, Rodgers, and even Eli until they approach the number of games Montana and Brady have played.

That's what I said. Forget Brady and Roethlisberger. Its too late for them. Its probably too late for Eli as well, really. All eyes should be on Brees and Rodgers now, as they are currently on trajectory to get there.

It's apples and oranges. Different eras, different rules. Brees or Rodgers would have to surpass Montana by a fair amount before they could be considered better IMO.

Brees is annihilating Joe Montana's playoff TD / INT ratio. 22 TDs to 4 INTs is insane.

And if he keeps it up for another 10+ playoff games, he'll be in the conversation. So far he has played in 9 playoff games.