Is Brady GOAT?

The same can be said for any great; Montana, P. Manning, and I imagine Starr and Graham.

Great players aren't great all the time, they are great when they need to be.

To fail in a huge spot, you first need to get yourself into that huge spot, which Brady had done consistently his entire career.

I could go on and on with the platitudes.

Brady is, IMHO, the best to play the position.

I'll just have to live with that.

Sheep... Eli beat his ass twice... LOL

My daughter is 16 years old. Of those 16 years, the Patriots have been to the Super Bowl 7 times! It's to the point where she thinks it's just the last Patriot game of the year lol. Only one player has been there for all of them: Brady.

I still revel in the fact the Eli and Tom were the only ones to best them.

There might be QB who have played better over shorter spans...but NO one has had the success he has had over the length of time he has been playing.

Do I like Brady...not really. I find him arrogant. But there is no denying the success.

It's impossible to compare QBs from when the defense was allowed to play defense and QBs from more recent history. How many drives are aided by automatic first downs for defensive holding?

But

Given the circumstances that have presented themselves and judging the performances dictated by those circumstances, no question in my mind Brady is the best to ever play the game. Although I believe Aaron Rodgers is the best QB in the NFL at present. We'll see where he goes from here.

And I believe your logic is skewed due to your dislike of him. The guy has done it year after year many if not all with a supporting cast that many of them are outcast’s from other teams and he makes them better. The only two true pro bowlers that I can think of he has had was Moss & Gronk and Gronk has not been a real factor for them the last few year not being on the field injured.

If you want to point out others bail him out that’s fine but he is the one who made them better players to do so. I don’t think there is a question he is the GOAT and it doesn’t hurt having the best coach in history to boot.

about Brady. I find it the most tedious of all the tedious topics. But I have to say he is the greatest, especially with the long-standing success. Others might have had better individual seasons, but looking at the whole thing, it's hard to argue with. Gosh, after we went ahead, he darned near brought the team back both times. The mental toughness is incredible. Montana was second best.

He was the first pure passer in a run first league. First QB to read the defense and adjust. Had a DiMaggio-like streak of TD passes. Executed the first 2 minute drill as well. He was way ahead of his time.

And all without the GOAT coach Belichick.

Never saw Unitas. But no one since Unitas (Staubach, Montana, Marino, Favre, Manning etc) is better than Tom.

As much credit as Belichick gets, I think he might actually be a bit underrated. Remember that, in the Brady era, his Patriots are still 14-6 without Brady.

has had the most success at QB in NFL history. He's great. But a large part of that is the coach he plays under, the teams that coach built, and the organization supporting that team.

But best? As in, if I were starting a team from scratch across NFL history? I'm first taking Peyton.

to actually go through and do an exhaustive effort to try and disprove he's the GOAT, probably proves that point in and of itself.

Did you waste that much time going over the merits of other QB's? If not, then doing it for Brady pretty much cements that he's #1.

So much has changed in football over the last fifty or sixty years, QB is a different position. The coaching mindset is different.

Hall of Fame right now. He's that good.

the guy wasn't ever picked off in a Super Bowl and led the blowout often. Two of these Brady Super Bowl wins were more coaching mishaps by the opponent than he. That Atlanta defense was gassed.

And 1)if he was a giant you'd sing it from the rooftops and 2)the gymnastics people go through are unreal to say otherwise....

He shames Joe Montana at this point and is way more clutch than Peyton.

Montana had rice and Walsh. Tom b win sbs with a paucity of pro bowl offensive players early in his career.

But what would determine the GOAT? I mean he's a great QB, no question, but just looking at the SuperBowl, he was giving a pretty epic choke job for half the game and then he caught fire and hit all his passes and they won. But he didn't do anything magical like with someone like Aaron Rogers who makes plays sometimes that make you step back and say "wow, did I just see that?!" and he doesn't take over the offense and make calls to the extent of someone like Eli or Peyton. Brady just seems (to me) to be a good QB playing for probably the GOAT NFL coach

The guy not only lost two Super Bowls but should have lost four. He was awful for three quarters against Atlanta. He was great against a spent defense.

In comment 13355320 Giants2012 said:

Quote:

The guy not only lost two Super Bowls but should have lost four. He was awful for three quarters against Atlanta. He was great against a spent defense.

He could of won the two games against the Giants as well. A play here and a play there and he is 7-0 or 3-4. The scary thing about Brady is that he is still at the top of his game. He is not Peyton Manning who was a shell of his former self last year.

I would take Brady over Peyton any day.

Vs Montana's 4. And Montana could have lost both Cinci Super Bowls so coulda woulda should have. He won them. Bradshaw could have lost towns sb himself.

'But he has a great coach, the greatest'....yes Walsh and Noll are nobodies right?

In fact he's done it in an era of parity AND better super bowl opponents than SF faced, a hard to accomplish double whammy working against NE. The Giants and Seahawks won sb that he faced. Montana had the bungals and broncos.

Would agree Pittsburgh had tougher roads to sb in arc in 70s. But Bradshaw was not the qb Montana nor Brady is.

Could have lost two sb himself should read.

in Francessa's world losing the super bowl twice like Brady has is worse than Joe Montana getting curb stomped in the divisional playoffs twice.

I don't get that logic, but some insist that 5-2 in the big game is worse than 4-0. I guess the % is worse...but how on earth is it worse than not even getting out of the first round? WTF are people talking about?

Brady has the numbers. It's that simple. You can make the argument that Joe was a better big game QB...that's fine...you could even say that BRady would struggle more in the 80s during a tougher era on QBs...that's fair...but these debates are silly. The old timers get their panties in a wad every time someone says today's star is better than yesterday's star. They were/are both awesome.

About 204 QBs were drafted since 2000 and prior to #199. 4 QBs selected after Brady that yea I'm not countingr. Don't know about udfa.

I have no clue how many starters have taken the field in that time, but we have seen the comedy of errors up close with the Jets or Bills or Skins. Whatever. he's Still around and playing at Championship level.

Would also take him over Peyton. I don't think their big game credentials are close.

But I often wonder how Peyton Manning would have done with BB as his coach for his entire career. You know he'd have more then 2 rings that for sure. Coaching has a lot to do with it.

In comment 13355400 glowrider said:

Quote:

About 204 QBs were drafted since 2000 and prior to #199. 4 QBs selected after Brady that yea I'm not countingr. Don't know about udfa. I have no clue how many starters have taken the field in that time, but we have seen the comedy of errors up close with the Jets or Bills or Skins. Whatever. he's Still around and playing at Championship level. Would also take him over Peyton. I don't think their big game credentials are close.

Manning has a winning record against the pats in the playoffs.

Put him on any other team and he's just another good QB.

everything else just confirms the greatness.

You can't really argue with 5 superbowl wins and 2 more but-for-Eli appearances.

In comment 13355425 weeg in the bronx said:

Quote:

In comment 13355400 glowrider said: Quote: About 204 QBs were drafted since 2000 and prior to #199. 4 QBs selected after Brady that yea I'm not countingr. Don't know about udfa. I have no clue how many starters have taken the field in that time, but we have seen the comedy of errors up close with the Jets or Bills or Skins. Whatever. he's Still around and playing at Championship level. Would also take him over Peyton. I don't think their big game credentials are close. Manning has a winning record against the pats in the playoffs.

25-9 with 5 rings vs 14-13 and 2 rings in the playoffs.

.735 vs .519

It's not close.

has 4 MVP performances and 5 rings

and someone is analyzing why he's not the GOAT -- that's a long uphill climb you've dug in for -- but Stan supports you

Its a tough position, there are professional defenders trying to stop them, and their play depends on others to some extent (like the OL or WR's). This myth that good QB's are perfect is not true. Here on BBI people kill Eli for his mistakes.

to determine what success belongs to Brady, Bill or both/combo. No one can deny that the Pats success in the free agency/cap era is unparalleled. I'd have to think based on every NFL game I've seen, that over the long haul, Brady is the GOAT at QB while Belichick is GOAT head coach.

Then guys like Montana, Manning, Morino, Young, Testaverde & others fight out the next slots. Even Brees is in the conversation for the next grouping.

Caldwell doesn't have those 2 massive drops against the Colts in 2006 (They would have decimated the Bears)...

If Webster doesn't get a finger on the 2nd last pass to Moss in 2007...

If Welker holds onto that ball in 2011...

He's a few plays away from having 8 rings in this era.

In comment 13355439 Stan in LA said:

Quote:

Put him on any other team and he's just another good QB.

This is an opinion. Not fact. Facts mean more. Brady has Montana beat nearly everywhere in terms of numbers. He's also been the healthier player who compiled a much longer career, which is still going.

One game? Montana is a fair choice. Brady has had the better career. 5 suoer bowls is better than 4 no matter how much arrogance is shouted down by big mike.

By the way Stan, Montana was the quintessential system qb. Bill Walsh ring a bell?

In comment 13355239 hassan said:

Quote:

Montana had rice and Walsh. Tom b win sbs with a paucity of pro bowl offensive players early in his career.

Montana had two rings while Rice was still in college, and it took 4 years to get back to the SB after he was drafted. People forget that Rice played more years with Young than Montana.

When Brady had Moss and his 23 TD season, he couldn't get it done.

Is Gronkowski going to the Hall of Fame? Because if he is, that will be 2 Hall of Fame offensive players that Brady has played with compared to 1 that Montana did.

It can be argued both ways forever. Facing juggernauts and getting physically annihilated by some epic defenses vs. salary cap & free agency. I've heard them all....best leave each era alone.

Brady's argument is very clutch over a very long period of time and longevity.

Montana's is maybe even more clutch, and greater mobility/footwork.

Little known fact: Montana & Young played their entire 49er career under center. No shotgun snaps.

The debate is over.

Better than Montana, Better than Johnny U, Better than Manning, Marino, you name it, he's better.

I dislike the Patriots greatly.

But am happy I had the privilege of watching the bastards career.

...AND he had a really good Chiefs team that he lost with. Johnny U was behind the wheel at the end of the loss to the Jets. Marino never won a SB.

Brady didn't lose 2007 or 2011. Eli won those games. Or NE's defense lost them.

.

Is that Brady has been responsible for a lot of his opponents points, and not because someone made an incredible play on defense. All of the things I mentioned were flat out Brady mistakes. That never gets discussed.

Eli has thrown 1 INT in the Super Bowl, and that was a ball that hit Steve Smith directly in the hands and he bobbled it for the pick. That was Steve Smith's misplay. Watch the Brady INTs and you can't say the same thing. He makes a bad decision/throw on all of the. It's not like his receiver falls down or the defender makes a incredible play. They are all bad throws.

That's why Montana gets so much credit. 0 turnovers in championship games. Brady has six and all of them in critically close games. Watch the tape!

Montana played many years with pro bowlers like Craig Clark and Rice. Tom B played with givens and Deion branch and David patten early in his super bowl runs.

Not even close. 9er offense was way more loaded consistently than pats offense has been (save 2007). He had Edelman as a number 1 this year anendola and hogan?

The more people try to hate on him, the more I like him.

He is the greatest.

There was a thread asking "If you could make one move to make the Giants better, what would it be?" Lots of good answers, of course. But I was one of the few that said to replace Eli with Brady. And I got ridiculed. Its wasn't a knock on Eli, but just getting the best guy at the most important position. I feel vindicated.

Dan Marino played in an Era with real hitting Defenses and WRs who were mugged. Bradys talent not even close to Marino and his rocket arm and quick release.

Not even close to Big John Elway and the Cross he used to leave on his receiving core bodies from a ball thrown harder than the Juggs machine. Or as elusive and fast Elway was on the bootleg.

Jim Kelly the king of reading defenses and shredding them.

Brady would have been destroyed back then a Jeff George type without the support from cheating.

I left out Steve Young and Troy Aikman both more talented.

In comment 13355367 djm said:

Quote:

I don't get that logic, but some insist that 5-2 in the big game is worse than 4-0. I guess the % is worse...but how on earth is it worse than not even getting out of the first round? WTF are people talking about?

The logic is very solid.

If you think the two SB losses are a plus to Brady's claim to be GOAT, well, a plus is something you wish you have a lot of, the more the better.

Imagine if he loses four straight Super Bowls from now on, and his record at the big game stands at 5-6 -- does it enhance his statue? Embellish his legacy? Or does it put a significant dent on it?

How about this: if, after the 2007 or 2011 season, some fan went up to Brady to sincerely congratulate him on a wonderful year, "I hope this result repeats next season! And again the year again" What do you think Brady's reaction would be? He would punch the guy, if there is no video camera around.

A Super Bowl loss is a plus and something to dream about for the likes of Tony Romo, Matt Stafford, Alex Smith. Not for someone who wants to be GOAT.

In comment 13355977 LAXin said:

Quote:

In comment 13355367 djm said: Quote: I don't get that logic, but some insist that 5-2 in the big game is worse than 4-0. I guess the % is worse...but how on earth is it worse than not even getting out of the first round? WTF are people talking about? The logic is very solid. If you think the two SB losses are a plus to Brady's claim to be GOAT, well, a plus is something you wish you have a lot of, the more the better. Imagine if he loses four straight Super Bowls from now on, and his record at the big game stands at 5-6 -- does it enhance his statue? Embellish his legacy? Or does it put a significant dent on it? How about this: if, after the 2007 or 2011 season, some fan went up to Brady to sincerely congratulate him on a wonderful year, "I hope this result repeats next season! And again the year again" What do you think Brady's reaction would be? He would punch the guy, if there is no video camera around. A Super Bowl loss is a plus and something to dream about for the likes of Tony Romo, Matt Stafford, Alex Smith. Not for someone who wants to be GOAT.

I kind of get what you're saying, but disagree with it.

It's about accomplishing as much as you can.

5 Super Bowls > 4 Super Bowls
7 Conf. Championships > 4 Conf. Championship

5-2 record in the Super Bowl > 5-0 record

...he'd probably have won ALL of his Super Bowls, maybe even made it to one or two he missed, PLUS he'd have had a couple of MVP awards that Peyton won.

In comment 13355200 FatMan in Charlotte said:

Quote:

to actually go through and do an exhaustive effort to try and disprove he's the GOAT, probably proves that point in and of itself. Did you waste that much time going over the merits of other QB's? If not, then doing it for Brady pretty much cements that he's #1.

You're back?

In comment 13356378 Rover said:

Quote:

In comment 13355200 FatMan in Charlotte said: Quote: to actually go through and do an exhaustive effort to try and disprove he's the GOAT, probably proves that point in and of itself. Did you waste that much time going over the merits of other QB's? If not, then doing it for Brady pretty much cements that he's #1. You're back?

Better him than you.

In comment 13355977 LAXin said:

Quote:

In comment 13355367 djm said: Quote: I don't get that logic, but some insist that 5-2 in the big game is worse than 4-0. I guess the % is worse...but how on earth is it worse than not even getting out of the first round? WTF are people talking about? The logic is very solid. If you think the two SB losses are a plus to Brady's claim to be GOAT, well, a plus is something you wish you have a lot of, the more the better. Imagine if he loses four straight Super Bowls from now on, and his record at the big game stands at 5-6 -- does it enhance his statue? Embellish his legacy? Or does it put a significant dent on it? How about this: if, after the 2007 or 2011 season, some fan went up to Brady to sincerely congratulate him on a wonderful year, "I hope this result repeats next season! And again the year again" What do you think Brady's reaction would be? He would punch the guy, if there is no video camera around. A Super Bowl loss is a plus and something to dream about for the likes of Tony Romo, Matt Stafford, Alex Smith. Not for someone who wants to be GOAT.

But he hasn't lost four straight. What if he wins 4 more in a row?

Aks any pats and niners fan which they'd prefer as a fan? Which would you prefer? Would you rather be 5-2 in the super bowl or 4-0? Now it's pretty simple isn't it?

5-2 is better than 4-0. The more lombardi trophies the better.

Postseason records:

Brady 25-9
Montana 16-7

Use those math skills to see who has the better postseason winning %. It's Brady. But let's killl Brady for the 2 super bowl losses? That's bullshit. Montana lost more often in the playoffs. Fact.

Brady has everything on Montana except one stat: QB rating in the super bowl. OK fine...he can have it. Ask every fan from both the Pats and Niners which they'd prefer--the 4-0 super bowl record or the 5-2 super bowl record. Not one Pats fan trades in their 5 for the Niners 4. And neither would Brady himself.

The main reason Montana is better than Brady is competition. During Montana's career the NFC title game was the Super Bowl. Montana had to contend with four great teams Bears, Giants, Redskins and Cowboys just to get to Super Bowl, Brady has never faced a team close to this caliber in his career. If The Niners were in the AFC during his career Montana would have gone to ten straight SB's. Wouldn't have won them all but would have played in many more. Montana also played before the league put skirts on QB's. Montana ended two playoff games against Giants not knowing what his name was. If you hit a QB like that today you'd probably get arrested. Finally I see no way Montana playing for a perfect record against a 14 point underdog would have ever lost that game.

In the modern era there is really only one argument against him now. Montana is 4-0 in the Superbowl and Brady has lost two. That's countered by getting to seven for Brady. It's still a close thing between the two men. I'll go with Montana because he played under rules where the defense wasn't nearly as hamstrung as they are now and QB's weren't untouchable.