Comparing QB's from different era's against different competition is impossible. There are far too many variables to consider to ever make a proper decision of who the GOAT is. If you hold positional stats to a premium guys like Manning, Marino, Brees, Favre, Moon, and Kelly flood the brain. These guys are/will be HOFers and were all great. All were more than capable of winning a SB (and most did). Then you have guys like Montana and Brady who have excelled in the post season. But at what point do we address luck into the equation? Brady is 3-2 in Sb's but could just as easily be 5-0 or 0-5. The difference between them is Brady has not had teams or weapons on par with Montana and that's why I think Brady is the best. Give him a good all round team and he 's damn near unbeatable, where as I think Montana was fortunate to be very good and have the team around him to go un beaten in Sb's. Brady had a great D around him for 3 but had a suspect D for 2 and despite being clutch and putting his team up late in the game his opponent got the ball last and cemented his bust in canton with two victories.
It's hard to compare QB's but for the money, I'd take Brady over any QB in existence given the same overall team. No one has been better even with losing two SB's. just imagine if he had a Jerry Rice his entire career and a Taylor. Imagine the records. If he had that D montana had, Imagine the championships. I just think he's the pinacle with Montan being a close 1b.
My all time list.
3b. Marino (my bad I was hammered writing this)
5. Elway (though I think Rodgers will overtake this spot soon)
The biggest problem for me is where do Graham, Baugh and such fit into the equation? Could they be the GOAT? Judging players from different era's is impossible to me but maybe someone can quantify it.
Last edited by jsagan77 : 01-24-2013 at 10:37 AM.