RND 2. 2. BRADY VS 9. YOUNG

[Don Jacob]

YOU KNOW THE DRILL

[WC Iz Active]

tough call but I pick Brady

["THE" MoSav]

tough call but I pick Brady

me 2. so tough to pick against Steve too..

[Bay Area Jat]

Brady>>>>>>>>>Young

[Shallow]

Unlike my Elway/Manning pick this won't be as much of a surprise. I'm picking Young. He was better in every aspect in my opinion. Better runnner, better thrower, better scrambler, etc. He had the a great team when he got the chance to play but the problem was the teams he was playing were so incredible. In his prime the only times he was knocked out of the playoffs were by Green Bay and by Dallas and I don't see the Pats beating any of those teams in those years. The Pats squeezed by a lot of teams. Green Bay and dallas walked right through teams the years they beat SF. I'll say it till I die; If Tom Brady happened to have the bad luck of going to Buffalo or Houston we wouldn't know or care who he is. I think Steve Young would have at least dazzled us a little if he got to fully start a 16 game season with Tampa. And even more so if they let him do what he did best more often. In Tampa he ran over 200 yards in five games his first year and over 400 his second year in 14 games. Great athlete.

[WC Iz Active]

Unlike my Elway/Manning pick this won't be as much of a surprise. I'm picking Young. He was better in every aspect in my opinion. Better runnner, better thrower, better scrambler, etc. He had the a great team when he got the chance to play but the problem was the teams he was playing were so incredible. In his prime the only times he was knocked out of the playoffs were by Green Bay and by Dallas and I don't see the Pats beating any of those teams in those years. The Pats squeezed by a lot of teams. Green Bay and dallas walked right through teams the years they beat SF. I'll say it till I die; If Tom Brady happened to have the bad luck of going to Buffalo or Houston we wouldn't know or care who he is. I think Steve Young would have at least dazzled us a little if he got to fully start a 16 game season with Tampa. And even more so if they let him do what he did best more often. In Tampa he ran over 200 yards in five games his first year and over 400 his second year in 14 games. Great athlete.

you definitely make some good points.

[swangin and bangin]

young
eazy

[Primo]

I picked Brady because his mechanics are better and pocket awareness is bar none. Young was a better scrambler and a stronger arm and had Jerry Rice..

[swangin and bangin]

I picked Brady because his mechanics are better and pocket awareness is bar none. Young was a better scrambler and a stronger arm and had Jerry Rice..

lol
yea that was a big factor

[MIAMI4LIFE]

tough call but I pick Brady

[TheDeli]

tough call but I pick Brady

[swangin and bangin]

wtf
how steve young losin to brady
yall trippen

[J$crILLa]

voted Young, for now.. ask me in 2 years maybe that changes

["THE" MoSav]

Unlike my Elway/Manning pick this won't be as much of a surprise. I'm picking Young. He was better in every aspect in my opinion. Better runnner, better thrower, better scrambler, etc. He had the a great team when he got the chance to play but the problem was the teams he was playing were so incredible. In his prime the only times he was knocked out of the playoffs were by Green Bay and by Dallas and I don't see the Pats beating any of those teams in those years. The Pats squeezed by a lot of teams. Green Bay and dallas walked right through teams the years they beat SF. I'll say it till I die; If Tom Brady happened to have the bad luck of going to Buffalo or Houston we wouldn't know or care who he is. I think Steve Young would have at least dazzled us a little if he got to fully start a 16 game season with Tampa. And even more so if they let him do what he did best more often. In Tampa he ran over 200 yards in five games his first year and over 400 his second year in 14 games. Great athlete.

you make so many good points. But there is something special about Brady IMO. And when you say if Brady would have ended up in HOU nobody would care who he is. Well you could say that about Montana if he never had Walsh to run that west coast offense. Walsh taught him how to be a master in that offense. Brady>Young but not by much.

[Shallow]

Unlike my Elway/Manning pick this won't be as much of a surprise. I'm picking Young. He was better in every aspect in my opinion. Better runnner, better thrower, better scrambler, etc. He had the a great team when he got the chance to play but the problem was the teams he was playing were so incredible. In his prime the only times he was knocked out of the playoffs were by Green Bay and by Dallas and I don't see the Pats beating any of those teams in those years. The Pats squeezed by a lot of teams. Green Bay and dallas walked right through teams the years they beat SF. I'll say it till I die; If Tom Brady happened to have the bad luck of going to Buffalo or Houston we wouldn't know or care who he is. I think Steve Young would have at least dazzled us a little if he got to fully start a 16 game season with Tampa. And even more so if they let him do what he did best more often. In Tampa he ran over 200 yards in five games his first year and over 400 his second year in 14 games. Great athlete.

you make so many good points. But there is something special about Brady IMO. And when you say if Brady would have ended up in HOU nobody would care who he is. Well you could say that about Montana if he never had Walsh to run that west coast offense. Walsh taught him how to be a master in that offense. Brady>Young but not by much.

At risk of going too off topic, Monatana was more of a warrior in my opinion. He was a better college player and knew how to make big comebacks. He was also a better athlete. Do I think he'd have gotten 4 Superbowls with out Walsh? Absolutely not. But I think that no matter where he went he'd eventually get a team good enough for him to take to the big game. I think Brady could make a run on a team like Baltimore, Chicago, or Philly. I don't think he'd able to take teams like Indy, Cinci, or Oakland and St. Louis a couple years back anywhere. He simply lacks the ability to make certain throws and avoids making them for good reason, and teams like those with break out down the field WRs rely on the long ball over the shoulder catches. From what I've always seen Brady needs at least a pretty level slant to make throws down the field.


As for both Montana and Young I think they'd each have a field day against the 2001 St. Louis team at the Superbowl. I know Brady was still green at the time but even in his game against Carolina which I saw on NFL replay recently, if the guy wan't open in the short field  Brady rarely made the pass. Young could air it out if need be. He could buy time if need be. He could run if neeed be. And he could easily throw short balls. I just don't see how a New England team with with a younger Steve Young would lose the Superbowl runs they were in. And that year that Brady "carried NE on his back" he was lucky to play the Bills and Jets twice each and games with Oakland and New Orleans helped a lot (and Miami wasn't as good as their record that year). 8 of their 10 wins came against real losers of teams. If NE had a schedule like San Diego's that year you see a completely different win/loss record. In any other division I don't see NE making the playoffs that year.

I guess the bottom line is that if I had a bad team I'd pick Monatana and Young over Brady because I think they have a better chance at making a bad team play well. Anyone can win with a great team. Particularly a great defensive team with a an amazing west coast system. What guys like Vick did for Atlanta or Flutie did for Buffalo a guy like Brady could never do. Now I can see why Vick could screw things up in Indy with his attitude and poor passing but I'd like to hear someone explain to me why Doug Flutie would lose wih a team like the Pats. And Young and Monatana aren't erratic like Vick and jump to stupid decision or bad throws.