Is Brady now the greatest ever?

I agree.

His pattern of winning is no accident. Best ever, until the next best ever, which may be Russel Wilson who has won everywhere he's been.

 

But the point is that the Pats did win so Brady's performance is looked at in an entirely different light. That's what winning does. James Harrison's 100 yard INT return in the Super Bowl is looked at as the greatest defensive play in the history of the Super Bowl but had the Steelers lost, it wouldn't have the same kind of meaning. Since they won, it's looked at as the greatest play in Super Bowl history AND a crucial play that helped the Steelers win the game. Brady's 4 TDs and 37 completions, a Super Bowl record, was a huge contributor to the Pats beating one of the best defenses in football. Manning couldn't do it last year but Brady did it this year.

I'm certainly not a Brady applogist, I'll leave that to BFT , and I believe we can debate whether or not his accomplishments should have an asterisk because of the Pats proven culture of cheating, but I don't understand those who want to dismiss the question without objective consideration.

 

You would wind up with about half a dozen less Super Bowls chances too though. It's hard for me to say that he's the greatest honestly just because I grew up loving Joe Montana and I hate to put anyone above him. HOWEVER, Joe Montana was even benched at one point in his career. That's not gonna happen to Brady. Montana was the best "big game" qb. Overall though Brady probably honestly is if you just look at it from an all around perspective. Brady just plays on a polarizing team and is sort of a villain or like the dude in the movies that always gets the hot chicks and seems to have all the luck. Also it's pretty ridiculous for people to act like what Brady did last night wasn't a great feat and not realize that Montana had a MUCH easier path in his Super Bowl moments. NONE of the defenses that Montana played were as good as what Brady played last night. Why is it that people say Marino never won it? Because he didn't have a defense. What does that have to do with Montana? He played against the fins in one of his Super Bowls. Also why did it take Elway so long to finally win one? He played on a team that gave up the biggest quarter in Super Bowl history to DOUG....FREAKING....WILLIAMS. Also Montana got to play that Denver defense. I'm not trying to take away from what Montana did but just trying to put it in perspective of what Brady did last night. I don't see how a case can be made that Joe Montana ever played a tougher team than what Brady did last night. That 9ers d wasn't anything to sneeze at either. They were a great team. Better overall than this years Pats team I'd say.

 

What could Montana have done with Gronk?

 

I thought Brady was pretty pedestrian last night. All his did was dink and dunk to Vareen and Edelman. When he tried to throw it downfield a bit, he was picked off twice. His inability to throw down field is why they lost twice to the Giants and should have last night. A rookie makes a pick and suddenly he's the best ever. If he doesn't the talk would have been about Brady's turnovers, as that cost them 10 points.

 

I agree that Brady's turnovers were costly but what's amazing is how many people talk about how they wish Ben would "take what the defense gives him" but then Brady does it and people basically say "all the guy does is takes what the defense gives him". LOL. There's also the classic argument about how he "only won by field goals" earlier in his career. Yeah. I'm sure that Brady probably loses sleep at night thinking "oh this ring would be so much sweeter if only we had won by more than a fg". MOST qbs don't go down the field against that Hawks d and MOST qbs don't throw at Richard Sherman and when they do they pay. They done what it took to win and you don't get a super special extra shiny trophy for going down field more. You get it for scoring more points and doing whatever it takes to do that. If we had played last night and Haley's gameplan would have been what McDaniels' was then everyone would be talking about how genius it was. The pats do it and it's just "dink and dunk". Come on now man. Regardless of whether we like them or not in all fairness they done the one thing that needed to be done against that defense and it worked.

 

That's exactly the argument people would make against Montana, that he was dink and dunk, a product of the west coast system which emphasized the short passing game. In spite of that, history has confirmed Montana's place as perhaps the best quarterback of all time. But there are those that want to throw Brady completely out of the discussion for that same reason. Say what you will about him, but he's a great competitor who finds a way to get it done. Some of the questionable tactics may taint his legacy a bit, but you don't play in 6 Super Bowls in 14 years winning 4 of them and being named MVP in 3 without being in the discussion for greatest of all time.

 

if it was so easy to just dink and dunk all game long, everyone would do it. He reads the defence well and exploits their weaknesses. Remember, he also doesn't have any good WR's that are going to beat Sherman on the outside, so he uses the speed of his WR's to create mismatches. If he had a Calvin Johnson on the outside, I'm sure he would go deep more, just like he did with Moss.

 

IF all things were equal, I'd put Montana at #1 by a mile. I'd also take Marino,Favre, and Staubach over Brady, as good as he is.

 

They're are 3 great QB's with different skill sets, playing in different eras who now have 4. Who's better? I don't care.

But to even talk about Payton Manning anywhere in this thread is a travesty to these 3 immortals...

 

good post!

 

You seem to be aware of the problem, but not doing anything about it. You can control how you look at things. If Santonio Holmes somehow bobbles that last pass and tips it backwards for an interception and we lose, that doesn't change Harrison's INT. You're absolutely right that no one would consider it the best anything. It would get lost in history, and rank behind the pick 6 the Seahawks got in last year's Super Bowl blowout on any kind of list made by professionals. What I'm saying is, that's stupid.

The fact the Seahawks failed to score at the end has nothing to do with the plays Brady made, either good or bad. It doesn't change his performance one bit, and yet everyone seems okay letting judging him more severely when he's on the bench than when he's on the field. Stuff that doesn't matter affects the way people see things all the time. For example, the Patriots cheating by deflating balls in God knows how many games will largely be erased in many minds because they won a game without cheating (presumably) after they were caught. For many, including some on this board, even conceding they cheated in all 18 games this year leading up to the Super Bowl isn't enough for them to feel like the Pats' win is any less legitimate than if the Seahawks had won. Like, "Yeah, they may have cheated their way to the Super Bowl, but they won it fair and square." Again, I think that's stupid.

 

Here is the question that answers all. If you remove Brady from his dark master does he lead a team to 4 SB wins in 6 tries. A lot is being made about the cast, does more with less, and so on but ask yourself if Tom Brady is drafted by the Jets or the Browns do we know who he is? If the Pats cut him does he see another SB or is his legacy tied to BB

 

I understand your premise completely and don't necessarily disagree. But for some to assert, as many seem to be doing, that the question of whether or not Brady is the greatest of all time doesn't even deserve to be asked is just ridiculous.

Is Montana as successful under somebody other than Bill Walsh? I think he was the perfect quarterback for Walsh's system, Brady is perfect for Belichick and Bradshaw was perfect for Noll. Every now and then the stars line up with coach/quarterback partnerships but that shouldn't diminish the overall greatness of the individual.

 

Althought I think you can make a case that Marino might have had more success under a different coach.

 

IMO you're not going to change anyone's mind who thinks he is or isn't. Number of rings, number of SB's, salary cap era, Mel Blount rule, lucky catches, less talent, more talent, etc., etc. I do NOT believe he's even in the top five and if it comes out that he had any involvement in this last cheating allegation, then he falls considerably. After watching the Costas interview.......guess we'll wait and see. More importantly, I have given myself a 15 day penalty for commenting on something regarding the Cheatriots on my beloved Steeler message board.

 

More debate material (aka fuel for the fire) from Pete Prisco.

http://mweb.cbssports.com/nfl/write...om-brady-is-the-greatest-qb-of-super-bowl-era

 

Yes Jack we know Montana was successful beyond Walsh he may not have had the SB success but that can be looked at as age, diminishing skills, multiple surgeries to his throwing arm and he still led a Chiefs team to the playoffs.Right now we don't know what Brady is like without BB and we may never know. BB has had limited success without Brady so that part of the equation is known. I won't elevate Brady to even near Montana without qualifYing the statement to say with BB

 

How did Brady get MVP with two picks????

 

It is interesting how some sports people act as if the NFL didn't exist before the Super Bowl. Altogether, Bart Starr's teams won 8 championships yet his name rarely comes up when people talk about winning QB's.

 

Bradshaw got the MVP in Super Bowl XIV and threw 3 INT's.

 

But, thorn, aren't you penalizing Brady because he's been with one coach his entire career? I think Brady would have success elsewhere but maybe not the same level of success. And you're right, Montana did have some success with the Chiefs but not the same kind of success he had with the Niners. I had the privilege of watching Montana play in person against the Falcons and he had one of his best games as a Chief that night. He was the old Joe Cool picking the Atlanta D apart with short, precision passing, what some refer to as dink and dunk. Sound familiar?

 

He had 4 TD's, including 2 in the 4th quarter when his team was behind.

 

I'm not penalizing I'm offering criteria. Bradshaw with out Noll and the cast would be the same way as Brady, just more questions. To me Montana is the top and for Brady to even come close he would need the taint of scandal lifted and success beyond BB