Thread: John Clayton's GOAT QB Ranking

Originally Posted by Northman

Elway will still always be #1 for me but you make a solid case for Brady.

You hit a certain threshold of achievement and you have a claim to stake. I tend to prefer players that I *know* could succeed in any system. Watching Montana try to run the Dolphin's offense would be pretty damn funny.

Originally Posted by Joel

Sometimes people say more than they intend....

I used to say it's so hard for a SB-winning QB in his careers final days to drop everything he's had so long and successfully, move across the country, start over with a completely different team and DO IT ALL AGAIN that NO ONE could ever do it—until someone DID. Without taping practices, or play signals, or deflating any balls.

Until/unless someone ELSE does that, it's the mark to beat. Literally EVERYONE else is open to charges of "system QB" because they never did it any other way anywhere else. Not that guy: He TRANSCENDED systems.

As for Graham vs. Elway, Graham was elite, but Reeves would've loved him because he never called his own plays. And his career rushing average would make Hillman cringe. Plus two years after he retired his team was back in the NFL Championship (though they did draft Jim Brown that year, and went 5-7 the year in between.) I still think was the best PLAYER ever, because he was an elite passer, runner and even kicker. But he did it so long ago his stats are nonexistent, so it's purely a matter of opinion with only anecdotal evidence to support it.

Sammy Baugh (a contemporary of Graham) may have been a better passer than Otto, and he led the league in punting, passing, and INT's in 1943.

I have a question, though: You have three coaches in Belichick, Paul Brown, and Walsh that were considered great coaches. Belichick (although he has been cheating) has done wonders in Foxborough. Paul Brown was ahead of his time in the 40's and 50's. And, while Walsh didn't invent the short passing offense (or WCO), he did refine it to a higher level. So, with that in mind, why are Brady, Graham, and Montana given so much credit, but someone like Elway (who took Denver to three SB's in the 80's in spite of Dan Reeves) is considered overrated by a lot of people?

Originally Posted by 7DnBrnc53

Sammy Baugh (a contemporary of Graham) may have been a better passer than Otto, and he led the league in punting, passing, and INT's in 1943.

I have a question, though: You have three coaches in Belichick, Paul Brown, and Walsh that were considered great coaches. Belichick (although he has been cheating) has done wonders in Foxborough. Paul Brown was ahead of his time in the 40's and 50's. And, while Walsh didn't invent the short passing offense (or WCO), he did refine it to a higher level. So, with that in mind, why are Brady, Graham, and Montana given so much credit, but someone like Elway (who took Denver to three SB's in the 80's in spite of Dan Reeves) is considered overrated by a lot of people?

Because people just see a guy out there throwing the ball like a boss and they forget about everything else. If you walk into Harvard, you're going to see a lot of brilliant people. Most of them, however, had a ton of advantages in life. It's an analogue here. Who knows how Joey Harrington would have done with BB. Or even Matt Cassel had he been a full time starter with BB.

Then again, BB isn't throwing the ball for Brady. He's not sliding around in the pocket, or taking the abuse.

Originally Posted by Von Kinger

Because people just see a guy out there throwing the ball like a boss and they forget about everything else. If you walk into Harvard, you're going to see a lot of brilliant people. Most of them, however, had a ton of advantages in life. It's an analogue here. Who knows how Joey Harrington would have done with BB. Or even Matt Cassel had he been a full time starter with BB.

Then again, BB isn't throwing the ball for Brady. He's not sliding around in the pocket, or taking the abuse.

Yeah, but it's possible that Belichick's right hand man (Ernie Adams) was talking to Brady through a second frequency in his helmet that the NFL didn't monitor (they cut it off 15 seconds before the snap), and was talking to him right up to (and maybe even after, heaven forbid) the snap of the ball. If that happened (Doug Flutie was the one who found this when he was NE backup 11 years ago), Brady's legitimacy has to come into question.

I wouldn't even put Brady above Elway in alphabetical order.

Originally Posted by OrangeHoof

Bradshaw won all his Super Bowls with a HOF running back next to him. So did Aikman. Changes your whole passing game completely. Montana won a SB with Bill Ring and Linville Elliott as his RBs. Before TD, the best Elway played with was Sammy Winder who wasn't terrible but was no Franco or Emmitt. Brady's running backs were largely cast-offs and low picks. Give him his due but Montana is still #1 in my books in terms of Super Bowl play.

I f you are going to use that argument though, so did Elway, we didn't win a Superbowl till Davis came along. Does that diminish Elway too by extension?

Originally Posted by Von Kinger

He needed about six or seven seasons to have a good year, even in his era. He has one of the worst TD to INT ratios for any QB in the HoF, including his peers in that era.

If he didn't have an all-time team he wouldn't have had the chance to play well when it counted. He is probably the worst player in the HoF.

I dunno...Bettis made it in somehow with his paltry 3.9 YPC rushing average...

Apparently all you have to do to make the HoF is have a long, slightly below average career and play for the Pittsburgh Steelers.

Originally Posted by Freyaka

Montana deserves the top honors hands down IMO. Brady is probably 3-4 behind Manning and Elway, but I cannot agree with #1.

Y'know, it's funny: Brady has as many Rings (more, if we count CCG Rings) but is criticized as a system QB; Terrell Davis is routinely dismissed as a HoF back because his successors regularly churned out 1000 yd seasons in Shannys system, but Joe Cool is different. Even though HIS successor immediately went to three straight NFCCGs against the Cowboys second dynasty, won a SB and finished with a BETTER career rating than Montana.

*ponders*

Originally Posted by Freyaka

I f you are going to use that argument though, so did Elway, we didn't win a Superbowl till Davis came along. Does that diminish Elway too by extension?

First, Davis isn't in the Hall yet but, secondly, it does diminish Elway slightly. Elway couldn't win a Super Bowl on his arm alone. There's no shame in admitting that. To win championships, you need to have a solid running game so the defense has to respect it. Even Peyton Manning had some great runners.

Originally Posted by OrangeHoof

First, Davis isn't in the Hall yet but, secondly, it does diminish Elway slightly. Elway couldn't win a Super Bowl on his arm alone. There's no shame in admitting that. To win championships, you need to have a solid running game so the defense has to respect it. Even Peyton Manning had some great runners.

He had some OK runners; the only really great ones were James and Faulk (who was only there Mannings first year) and both were gone before Mannings first SB. But you're preaching to the choir on this one; my point was that if the "system" criticism can keep historys greatest playoff back out of Canton, it DEFINITELY applies to Montana coming along just in time to play in a system that (as much as I loathe it) revolutionized the game to an extent still extant.

It's the EXACT argument used to keep Roger Craig out of Canton even though he once had a season where with more targets than every 49er but Rice. Montana played with more HoFers (including the greatest WR since Don Hutson) than anyone but Bradshaw and (maybe) Starr. It's easy to tell just how replaceable he was: Again, the guy who DID replace him had a BETTER career rating in that system (and the NFLs passer rating might as well have been DESIGNED to rate WC passers.)

Originally Posted by Joel

Y'know, it's funny: Brady has as many Rings (more, if we count CCG Rings) but is criticized as a system QB; Terrell Davis is routinely dismissed as a HoF back because his successors regularly churned out 1000 yd seasons in Shannys system, but Joe Cool is different. Even though HIS successor immediately went to three straight NFCCGs against the Cowboys second dynasty, won a SB and finished with a BETTER career rating than Montana.

*ponders*

I actually agree with you a bit here. To me Montana and Brady are virtually the same type of player/QB. In fact i would say Montana had it a little better because of Rice. But if some people consider Brady a system QB than for sure Montana falls in that same category.

I can't stand when people still refer to Tom Brady as a system QB. He was a system QB early in his career when they simplified the playbook and didn't ask too much from him. But things changed in 2007 when he had both Welker and Moss and set all kinds of passing records.

The term system QB means the quarterback succeeds under a specific type of offensive system but likely cannot replicate those same numbers in a different system. Where do you think the Broncos would be right now if they had Brady in 2016 instead of Paxton/Siemian? I think they would be in Houston.

Look at last years AFC Championship game in Denver when Brady got pummeled 25 times and still was a two point conversion away from bringing the game to OT. System QB's do not do that.

Originally Posted by Northman

I actually agree with you a bit here. To me Montana and Brady are virtually the same type of player/QB. In fact i would say Montana had it a little better because of Rice. But if some people consider Brady a system QB than for sure Montana falls in that same category.

You mention Rice for Montana, but don't forget that Brady for much of his successful period had Moss and Welker or Gronk to throw to..

Originally Posted by Freyaka

You mention Rice for Montana, but don't forget that Brady for much of his successful period had Moss and Welker or Gronk to throw to..

I think Brady had Moss for like 2-3 years. Welker despite being good is nowhere in Rice's league as a receiver. Also, after Montana left both Steve Bono and Steve Young had the same amount of success in SF as Montana did. So many people want to compare Brady with Matt Cassell (who did nothing after leaving NE) yet forget how successful SF was without Montana. Personally, i think Montana was a great QB, but so is Tom Brady. Neither are as good as John Elway to me but to try and dismiss Brady as a system QB and a product of coaching and surrounding talent and then give a pass to Montana who was in the very same situation is disingenuous to me.

Originally Posted by Northman

I actually agree with you a bit here. To me Montana and Brady are virtually the same type of player/QB. In fact i would say Montana had it a little better because of Rice. But if some people consider Brady a system QB than for sure Montana falls in that same category.

The reason I cut Montana slack that I don't cut Brady is unlike Brady, Joe had continued success with another team. He actually managed to take the Chiefs to the AFC Championship game in 93 at the end of his career. He was one game away from doing what only Peyton Manning has done (taking two separate teams to the Superbowl)