Let's give it another couple of years before we crown him king. Because if you recall, when he wasn't surrounded by excellent teams he failed to make the Super Bowl.
I don't know how there is space for you AND Trauma1 in Brady's jock strap.
:twisted:
Just jokes Trauma, you know I love ya.
He's defintely the best of his era. IMO, the best ever would be Joe Montana. Brady's career isn't over yet so it's hard to say he's the best ever at this point. Montana has done things Brady hasn't done YET, Brady might be it whe it's all said and done but it's premature right now.
The NFL was more competitve in Montana's ear then in today's watered down NFL. Montana and the 49ers had to beat GREAT teams. He beat the famed Bears defense in championship games twice ('84 & '88). He beat the Doomsday Cowboys when they were the hottest thing in the NFL ('81). He outdueled Marino and the 14-2 Dolphins 38-16. He dismantled the top ranked Broncos defense 55-10 in '89. John Elway could not rescue the Broncos from this one LOL.
Montana had to deal with great teams since there was no salary cap or free agency until 1990 IIRC. He also had to get through Joe Gibbs' Redskins squad, that insanely talented Eagles defense, the LT Giants, da Bears.
His '88 49ers squad was 10-6, and seen as declining franchise who would be overmatched by the hungry, phyiscally superior, and rising Bengals but he led the 49ers on a true com from behind win in the last minute going 92 yards
Joe Montana kept Steve Young on the bench until he suffered a major elbow injury in 1990. People had been calling for Young to take over in 1988 because he was the younger and more athletically gifted of the two.
Joe Montana almost took the Chiefs to the Super Bowl in his late 30's with an aged Marcus Allen as his main offensive weapon. I think this truly shows how great he was since he had an average squad that was know for never getting past the wild-card round.
Joe Montana won 2 Super Bowls w/out Jerry Rice. His 1981 squad's leading rusher had 543 yards and a team high 3.6 yards per carry. He also won a Super Bowl without a 1,000 yard receiver in 1984. Dwight Clark was on the decline and there was no Jerry Rice at the time.
I think I could work for NFL films or edge NFL match-up![]()
Lol, I believe you could. Nice post iron! :thumbsup:
Most successful, possibly but best ever? I don't know about that. I would say that Terry Bradshaw would have a say in this discussion.
:bruce3:
I was wondering when you would show up in this thread haha :FUfinger:........![]()
He's defintely the best of his era. IMO, the best ever would be Joe Montana. Brady's career isn't over yet so it's hard to say he's the best ever at this point. Montana has done things Brady hasn't done YET, Brady might be it whe it's all said and done but it's premature right now.
The NFL was more competitve in Montana's ear then in today's watered down NFL. Montana and the 49ers had to beat GREAT teams. He beat the famed Bears defense in championship games twice ('84 & '88). He beat the Doomsday Cowboys when they were the hottest thing in the NFL ('81). He outdueled Marino and the 14-2 Dolphins 38-16. He dismantled the top ranked Broncos defense 55-10 in '89. John Elway could not rescue the Broncos from this one LOL.
Montana had to deal with great teams since there was no salary cap or free agency until 1990 IIRC. He also had to get through Joe Gibbs' Redskins squad, that insanely talented Eagles defense, the LT Giants, da Bears, the rising Rams which were supposed to overtake the 49ers in the mid to late 80's. All these squads would have been AFC Super Bowl representative at one time if they were lucky enough to have been in that conference. That's another reason why Elway's Broncos and later on the Bills got the Super Bowl that many times. It was because they had weak competition.
His '88 49ers squad was 10-6, and seen as declining franchise who would be overmatched by the hungry, phyiscally superior, and rising Bengals but he led the 49ers on a true com from behind win in the last minute going 92 yards
Joe Montana kept Steve Young on the bench until he suffered a major elbow injury in 1990. People had been calling for Young to take over in 1988 because he was the younger and more athletically gifted of the two.
Joe Montana almost took the Chiefs to the Super Bowl in his late 30's with an aged Marcus Allen as his main offensive weapon. I think this truly shows how great he was since he had an average squad that was know for never getting past the wild-card round.
Joe Montana won 2 Super Bowls w/out Jerry Rice. His 1981 squad's leading rusher had 543 yards and a team high 3.6 yards per carry. He also won a Super Bowl without a 1,000 yard receiver in 1984. Dwight Clark was on the decline and there was no Jerry Rice at the time.
I think I could work for NFL films or edge NFL match-up
In reality, it's unfair to compare players from different eras. The game keeps evolving and the players have to adapt to their situation(s). Brady has to deal with more drastic roster changes on his team and other teams while Montana had to deal with some tougher opponents that got the lion's share of success in the 80's.
I'm not even going to offer an opinion, but for different reasons than you may assume. I find, more than any other professional league, opinions on certain players in the NFL are incredibly fickle. People were so brash as to proclaim AP as the up-and-coming greatest RB ever earlier this season, now, for ostensible reasons, the hype surrounding him has somewhat died down (for the record I think he is unreal, just demonstrating how opinions flare and then wain).
When Peyton set the record (which Brady broke) he was inarguably (so pundits would say) the most gifted, and statistically endowed QB of his generation; a veritable 'student-of-the-game' who could single-handedly disseminate a secondary pre-snap. Now, a few years later, Brady has all but unseated him as the 'fantasy-league king' with his play.
I suppose my point is that hindsight is 20/20, and with the average career of the NFL'er being so short, coupled with the parody created by the salary-cap era, it is easy to get excited before true patterns emerge. Brady has led his team to 'the Bowl' with clutch performances in the playoffs, but until this point was not seen as the Marino-Peyton type of statistical QB. If the game-winning performances of the Pats in recent years are what primarily characterize Brady as a great QB, then some of that misplaced acclaim should fall on A-Vin. :twisted:
I think Iron's post also demonstrated, maybe, the difference between a good QB on great teams, and the greatest QB on good teams. I think this goes double for Bellichek.
Great 10th post man LOL. I hope you're being sarcastic![]()
Everyone does realize that Brady through 50 touchdowns and only 8 interceptions this year right? Pointing out that he threw 3 INTs in the Chargers game does not even matter, the Pats still finish the game and not once does a football fan even think that Brady is going to melt under pressure. The man has 3 super bowl rings. He does not crack under pressure or self destruct (see Brett Favre and is pension for throwing like 8 INTs in a game once in a while.) He does not care about stats, he cares about wins. He is consistently great, does not complain, does not make excuses, and he adapts to whatever the defense throws at him. Hell, he made WES WELKER the #1 receiver in the NFL this year. He can go entire games without even having to look Moss' way. He did all this for an entire season while having virtually no running game (Maroney's 1st TD of the year came in week 11). As far as I am concerned Montana and Brady are tied for that top spot.
I think you touched on a few points that a few of us were attempting to make, just from a different perspective. Tom Brady didn't make Wes Welker the #1 receiver, the Patriots Offense did. Do you think that if you took T. Brady and Welker off that team and interjected them into the Dolphins O they would have the years they did? They wouldn't, because the Patriots as a whole were greater than the sum of their parts. Their Wide-Out core was almost impossible to stop; double team Moss? Great, Welker is there for quick post routes for a first down. Shallow coverage for him? Cool, Stallworth and Moss are there. Point is, Tom Brady didn't single handedly do any of that.
And the fact he threw 3INTs proves the above point, that being the team and not necessarily the man are arguably the best ever (pending next weekend's victory of course). They can win with Moss making one reception and Brady throwing 3INTs. Rex Grossman could have had a stellar Offensive year on this team.
Everyone does realize that Brady through 50 touchdowns and only 8 interceptions this year right?
Bradshaw's stats aren't impressive but the man was a great big game performer. Great players aren't always great, they're just great when they have to beThe guy's a decent entertainer too LOL.
Couple of things, brady won 3 other superbowl with basically no star wrs. Anybody tell me how Brown,branch, and givens are fairing with the rest of their NFL careers. 2nd 2 of those superbowl were basically without a consistent rb.
Its simple
The patriots without moss dont go undefeated
The patriots without brady dont win 10 games
The patriot without their current offensive line wouldnt be a
.500 ball club.
and no you cant just play musical qbs and plug any qb in to that offense and say they are just as succesful, brady fits that team to a tee. people forget brady wasnt drafted to be a starter the guy won the job and kept it from what some say was a probowl qb.
I disagree completely. Brady is a perfect fit for that offense because of his accurate, game-control style. You could not 'plug and play', but my above point was that he is not the sole reason for their success, no player is. Conversely, I was making the point that another QB could have success in that offense pending his ability to play within that system.
No, it wasn't. You stated that without Brady that team does not achieve 10 wins, implying another QB could not assist them to win 10 games. I said I disagree.
I didnt imply that at all, their are some qbs that they would win 10 games with this year, but previous ones I disagree. I dont think they win 3 superbowls without him.
The patriots without brady dont win 10 games
Are you sure?
it is still too early in his career to be the "greatest"
Oh no, he definitely pioneered those wins, and was a very large aspect of them; I was only disagreeing with the 10 win comment, and the 'Are you sure?' was directed at rugger saying he did not imply that.
it is still too early in his career to be the "greatest"
Let's spread some of the credit to his O-line. Those guys give him just ridiculous amounts of time in the pocket. Any NFL QB would be good with that much time.
Let's spread some of the credit to his O-line. Those guys give him just ridiculous amounts of time in the pocket. Any NFL QB would be good with that much time.
Every great QB had a great O line. Its ALL relative. In fact, if I look at the Colts line (when Manning broke the record) and Montana's great years, I think they had MORE offensive talent then New England has now.
Every great QB had a great O line. Its ALL relative. In fact, if I look at the Colts line (when Manning broke the record) and Montana's great years, I think they had MORE offensive talent then New England has now.
True, but he's very decisive and has great footwork in the pocket. Those little things can be the difference between getting sacked or completing a clutch 3rd & long pass![]()
You make a valid point, but I'm not sure you can say Manning's/Montana's lines were better than Brady's.
Sure I can. I watched them all.
Sacks allowed this year.
New England 18 games 24 total
Indy 17 games 23 allowed.
Both were beat by Saints, Bengals, Packers and Browns.
Colts led the league in 2005 and 2006
Manning gets rid of the ball much quicker than Brady.
Maybe that's true, but in doing so manning also made more mistakes than brady in the end of the year. All in all the results and performances speak for themselves......brady is playing in the superbowl yet again, and manning will be at home watching it on tv again. You could go round and round all day long with the "Who's the better quarterback arguement." This year there's really no question about who it was. I'll completely agree to the fact that brady isn't the best QB ever "yet", but he's well on his way of accomplishing that feat if his progress and accomplishments continue.
If the pats win this superbowl convincingly and complete the perfect season, they'll be no doubt in my mind he's one of the best to ever play the position. It's really amazing the similarities montana and brady have in their overall play, leadership and demeanor.
Sacks don't tell the whole story. Factors such as elusiveness, how long a QB holds onto the ball, etc play a part as well. Manning gets rid of the ball much quicker than Brady.
Maybe that's true, but in doing so manning also made more mistakes than brady in the end of the year. All in all the results and performances speak for themselves......brady is playing in the superbowl yet again, and manning will be at home watching it on tv again. You could go round and round all day long with the "Who's the better quarterback arguement." This year there's really no question about who it was. I'll completely agree to the fact that brady isn't the best QB ever "yet", but he's well on his way of accomplishing that feat if his progress and accomplishments continue.
If the pats win this superbowl convincingly and complete the perfect season, they'll be no doubt in my mind he's one of the best to ever play the position. It's really amazing the similarities montana and brady have in their overall play, leadership and demeanor.