Robert Kraft: Tom Brady is Better Than Joe Montana

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

"I think that Tommy, with all due respect, is better than Joe Montana," Patriots owner Robert Kraft said. "I know that's a leap, but I really think he might already be the best of all time. I watch how involved he is, how driven he is. He's like (Bill) Belichick, he's into the details. And he's got a skill that makes him so special, he can process all of it so quickly. ... And then, he's just got that quality. Certain people have that sincerity. He's a very genuine guy. People can relate to him. People can trust him."

 

Then again, Kraft isn't exactly an unbiased observer.

 

"He's like a fifth son to me. He's special," Kraft said.

 

NFL.com

[seanbrock 1,684]

[.AirMcNair. 1,232]

He's right up there with him, but I still have Joe at #1.

[SteVo+ 3,702]

[Dutch 874]

 

 

 

I love Tom Terrific but Montana is undefeated in the Superbowl; 4-0. He has NEVER thrown an interception in the superbowl and has had over a 100 QB rating in each superbowl... This dude balled out and is the epitome of the word "clutch". Even if Tom did win a 4th Superbowl, Joe was perfect in each debut and Tom's record is already tarnished because he lost twice; not to mention the spy gate affiliation with the patriots organization. Even with the spygate, I still have respect for Brady and his genius of a head coach. Tom Brady is definitely among the best but comes 2nd to Joe Montana.

Edited August 31, 2012 by dutchff7

[blotsfan 2,112]

Even if Tom did win a 4th Superbowl, Joe was perfect in each debut and Tom's record is already tarnished because he lost twice

so Brady's a worse qb because he wins in the AFCCG?

[Thanatos 2,847]

so Brady's a worse qb because he wins in the AFCCG?

 

Agreed, that's a dumb argument. I hear it thrown around all the time. A guy who goes 4-2 in the SB is better, (just on that stat), than a guy who goes 4-0 in the SB. He made it there six times, that's quite an achievement in and of itself.

 

Not to mention the old and tired spygate argument. Anyone who thinks that actually affected the Patriots wins needs to do some research as to what actually happened and why.

Edited August 31, 2012 by Thanatos19

[BucD+ 648]

Here's a thought...

 

...would Brady have been as successful in that era of the NFL? You know...where CBs could molest WRs?

 

But yea...Montana is still #1 IMO...

[seanbrock 1,684]

Here's a thought...

 

...would Brady have been as successful in that era of the NFL? You know...where CBs could molest WRs?

 

But yea...Montana is still #1 IMO...

Probably but he wouldn't be passing for 5000 yards and 40 TD's.

[Barracuda 629]

I know just about everybody hates Brady now but after he's long gone we'll throw him in there with the best of em. We just have to.

 

And what are the guys 50 years from now gonna say when they have some hotshot QB winning 4 superbowls. "Yeah he's good but there's no way in hell he could have done that when Brady was playing!"

 

I do hate him, because he's good, but I'll come to appreciate it later like most everyone else.

[Omerta+ 1,206]

Ok wont lie, I fucking HATE Brady, and I LOATHE BB even more. There is no way he is better than Montana in SB time. That said he is a great playoff performer, except for against the ravens and we still lose to him..... FUCK.

 

PS. That last part is probably where my hatred for him comes from.

[Dutch 874]

I'm don't hate Brady; not by a long shot. I even have ranked post giving Aaron Rodgers temporary #1 spot but still saying Brady is the best. I do throw Brady as one of the best, just 2nd to Joe Montana. Joe Montana was LIGHTS OUT during his play off runs and perfect in the Superbowls. Joe cool is still #1 and Brady for now is #2.

[Shotgun 442]

If I have to pick I'd obviously say Montana because of his Super Bowl accomplishments, but in reality I think they're equally as good as passers. A human can only be so good and they both worked hard enough to reach the top of the NFL mountain. You can come up with reasons why Brady has it easy in today's NFL but I also think people downplay how much is asked of an NFL QB these days as well. Superbowl victories is a poor way to compare an individuals ability, as football is easily one of, if not the most team oriented game there is.

 

Sure Brady lost two Super bowls and threw INT's in them, but he also hasn't had a consistent, solid-to-great defense every year, and he's never had anything close to the greatest WR of all time playing with him.

[AllYouNeedIsLovie 377]

he's never had anything close to the greatest WR of all time playing with him.

 

Randy Moss?

[Thanatos 2,847]

I'm don't hate Brady; not by a long shot. I even have ranked post giving Aaron Rodgers temporary #1 spot but still saying Brady is the best. I do throw Brady as one of the best, just 2nd to Joe Montana. Joe Montana was LIGHTS OUT during his play off runs and perfect in the Superbowls. Joe cool is still #1 and Brady for now is #2.

 

I agree with you, I just disagree with your reasoning. Just because someone is 4-0 in SBs doesn't make them better than someone who is 4-2. The guy who is 4-2 is a six-time conference champion, and a four-time NFL champion, and the other guy is a 4-time conference champion, and a 4-time NFL champion.

[funnygunny 521]

>_>

 

I never understood comparing players across eras. Simply can't be done IMO.

 

Joe Montana was a beast in his era just like Mr. Starr was in his. And right now its Brady's time. Can't people just leave it at that? One shouldn't have to be "better" than the other.

 

IMO at least.

[Dutch 874]

I agree with you, I just disagree with your reasoning. Just because someone is 4-0 in SBs doesn't make them better than someone who is 4-2. The guy who is 4-2 is a six-time conference champion, and a four-time NFL champion, and the other guy is a 4-time conference champion, and a 4-time NFL champion.

 

I agree. Brady took his team further then Montana did twice; can't discredit him because he lost. Even with that said though, Montana was a god in play offs and all 4 of his superbowl games. He sits on a plateau all by himself in the big games with his flawless performances which separates him from any other QB imo. He's the definition of clutch.

Edited September 1, 2012 by dutchff7

[RazorStar 4,025]

Montana made 4 championships, Brady made 5.

[Dutch 874]

But Montana won 4, Brady won 3.

[Thanatos 2,847]

I'm not saying Brady is 4-2 in SB's. I'm saying if he went 4-2 in Superbowls, that is a better accomplishment than going 4-0 in Superbowls.

[Omerta+ 1,206]

I'm not saying Brady is 4-2 in SB's. I'm saying if he went 4-2 in Superbowls, that is a better accomplishment than going 4-0 in Superbowls.

 

The question becomes is it quantity over quality ? Brady has not been close to montana in the SB. It is not a close competition in my opinion. THe two games against the giants were meh, nothing special which is why they lost. his first one was won in large part by his defense.

 

Montana is the better playoff performer and by far the better SB QB.

Edited September 1, 2012 by Ngata_Chance

[Shotgun 442]

Randy Moss?

 

Rice never gave up on his routes, sorry, but Moss isn't on his level. Instead of nitpicking try to focus on the point, which is that as football players they are very comparable. He only had Moss for 3 seasons and he had more success without him anyway.

Edited September 1, 2012 by Shotgun

[Thanatos 2,847]

The question becomes is it quantity over quality ? Brady has not been close to montana in the SB. It is not a close competition in my opinion. THe two games against the giants were meh, nothing special which is why they lost. his first one was won in large part by his defense.

 

Montana is the better playoff performer and by far the better SB QB.

 

I happen to agree that Montana is the better QB. Dutch seemed to be implying that a person who was 4-0 > 4-2 record, which I would disagree with. The fact that a person made it to six super bowls is more impressive to me than one who made it to four, so long as they've both won the same amount.

[Omerta+ 1,206]

I happen to agree that Montana is the better QB. Dutch seemed to be implying that a person who was 4-0 > 4-2 record, which I would disagree with. The fact that a person made it to six super bowls is more impressive to me than one who made it to four, so long as they've both won the same amount.

 

I understand that. However if Brady were two win one more and he played the way he has played in the last 2 then I still will not put him over montana just because he won two more AFCCG. I still give it to Montana because of the performances in the big games versus brady. Just one mans opinion though.

[Dutch 874]

I happen to agree that Montana is the better QB. Dutch seemed to be implying that a person who was 4-0 > 4-2 record, which I would disagree with. The fact that a person made it to six super bowls is more impressive to me than one who made it to four, so long as they've both won the same amount.

 

 

Correction: Dutch "implied", thought it over and changed my opinion on the matter.

 

Dutchff7: I agree. Brady took his team further then Montana did twice; can't discredit him because he lost. Even with that said though, Montana was a god in play offs and all 4 of his superbowl games. He sits on a plateau all by himself in the big games with his flawless performances which separates him from any other QB imo. He's the definition of clutch.

 

Either way though, it's hard to go against Montanas DOMINATE superbowl performances even if Brady does get a 4th title. Making it to the superbowl 2 more times is great for the resume, but that doesn't make him better for losing them. Like I said, I'm not knocking Brady because he took his team to the big game two more times then Montana did, but Montanas epic and clutch performances out weigh those two loses. Maybe if Brady won 5...Brady has to win 4 1st before this discussion takes place though. Right now he is 3-2 and not better then Montana imo.

Edited September 2, 2012 by dutchff7