It's May 09, 2024, 03:01:46 PM
Johnny Unitas and it's not even close.Johnny on the 80s Niners would have been in the Superbowl every year and won at least 5. Montana on the late 50s/early 60s Colts would have been injured for the season by the 3rd game of each year and have been cut, plus he simply would not have been very effective against legal illegal contact by DBs where he'd be forced to throw outside the hash marks.Had Paul Brown simply allowed Walsh to get the HC job in Cinci then we may be talking about Ken Anderson like we are Montana, and we may not have ever really known Montana.Someone please get their hands on some Unitas games and then watch some games by other QBs in that era, and see how far ahead of them he was. It was a much harder environment to play QB in and he looks like a modern QB in it.
Montana for now. Everyone has stated why.Peyton Manning is great, but he needs to win the Superbowl this weekend to be considered. For me personally, if Brady had lead the Patriots ahead of the Giants when Eli Manning got his first ring, I might rank him ahead, since they'd have had an undefeated year... something not accomplished in decades.
Quote from: DeeezNuuuts83 on January 30, 2014, 10:14:53 AMMontana for now. Everyone has stated why.Peyton Manning is great, but he needs to win the Superbowl this weekend to be considered. For me personally, if Brady had lead the Patriots ahead of the Giants when Eli Manning got his first ring, I might rank him ahead, since they'd have had an undefeated year... something not accomplished in decades.Had Brady done that, Tom Brady is the best QB hands down and that Patriot team would be the best ever. That's why that Super Bowl was the best Super Bowl I'd ever seen. Because the Patriots were going after history that would have established them and their players in history. It's funny, one game changed that, Montana never had a team that good, but we remember who wins at the end.
My argument to the Brady losing guy. Think about it...Brady walked off the field of both those Super Bowls with the lead and his defense blew it. Not to mention Welker additionally super fucked them in the second one. I get what you're saying about the undefeated season and stuff, but dude did his job to technically win five rings and his team blew two of them for that. Gotta count for something. Also made the AFC Championship game like 8 of 14 years. Absurd shit.
Quote from: NIKCC on January 29, 2014, 12:58:39 PMYea the difference between basketball and football is that football is more team dependent. An individual is much less likely to carry an entire team to the promise land.Ghost, u don't fux wit basketball? I'm not that big of a basketball fan. Baseball is my favorite. Kobe is my favorite player though followed by Steph Curry:)
Yea the difference between basketball and football is that football is more team dependent. An individual is much less likely to carry an entire team to the promise land.Ghost, u don't fux wit basketball?
The Manning assassins here are ridiculous. He's going to own every passing record in the book (games won, touchdowns, passing yards, completions, . He never had the best defense in the league (in 2007 the Colts had the #3 ranked defense and in 2002 they were ranked 8th...that's the best he got) yet he always put his team in the playoffs.The Colts were a top four offense in the league 8 years with Peyton and the Broncos have been twice in two years. Anyone with a brain knows that Dan Marino was a better QB than Terry Bradshaw so using superbowls as an end-all is meaningless.
Quote from: Shallow on January 30, 2014, 07:32:02 AMJohnny Unitas and it's not even close.Johnny on the 80s Niners would have been in the Superbowl every year and won at least 5. Montana on the late 50s/early 60s Colts would have been injured for the season by the 3rd game of each year and have been cut, plus he simply would not have been very effective against legal illegal contact by DBs where he'd be forced to throw outside the hash marks.Had Paul Brown simply allowed Walsh to get the HC job in Cinci then we may be talking about Ken Anderson like we are Montana, and we may not have ever really known Montana.Someone please get their hands on some Unitas games and then watch some games by other QBs in that era, and see how far ahead of them he was. It was a much harder environment to play QB in and he looks like a modern QB in it.You might be right except Joe Montana had a career 63% completion rating, and had a season with 70%. Montana was build for the short passes of the west coast offense. Plus the only season Montana had more INT's than TD's was the strike shorten year. As for Unitas, he NEVER completed more than 59% of his passes and had 8 out of 18 seasons with more INT's than TD's. To be far most those seasons he was passed his prime. But it is hard to compare different eras. What if Johnny U. played in a offense like Peyton Manning which could highlight his strong arm and he had receivers who were faster than he could imagine. I don't think Johnny U. would do well in a westcoast offense though. It would not allow him to use all his arm strength.