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.
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.
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*
Oh, valid point. I thought you meant all starters, you should take the time to be more descriptive, don't be shy. —Jaded
Never confuse frustrated candor and disloyal malice.
Love can't be coerced. —Me
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.
I miss the old Mile High Stadium.
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.)
Oh, valid point. I thought you meant all starters, you should take the time to be more descriptive, don't be shy. —Jaded
Never confuse frustrated candor and disloyal malice.
Love can't be coerced. —Me
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.
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.
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)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)