Joe Montana - "Titles don't define quarterbacks."

[Fx Stryker]

I just seen this on Inside the Numbers. Foes anyone have the direct quote?

[House]

Too bad they do.

[Dustin]

100% correct.

[southwest1]

Sorry FX, I never watch that show & therefore I would have no idea what the actual full quote is, but my already high respect for Joe Montana just skyrocketed because I'm assuming that the heart of that statement refers to the consistency of regular season wins year in & year out & just getting to the SB multiple times in a QB's illustrious career. 

 

Yes, SW1 places a high premium on SB rings, but at the end of the day going to 3 SBs & taking the Broncos to the Promiseland with a new OC & coaching staff/scheme is very impressive for #18. Yoda will do what must be done to seal the deal. I can't even fathom another outcome. No disrespect to Seattle, but business is business & Denver didn't make it this far just to come up short. That's not happening. We all know what time it is. 

[lennymoore24]

I think Kurt Warner proved a point on this argument.  I remember people were saying if he wins the Super Bowl vs the Steelers, he would be a Hall Of Famer. If he loses, he won't be.  So Warner gets them ahead, the defense folds, and they lose.  So because their defense doesn't get the job done, Warner isn't a Hall Of Famer?  Dumb...Dumb...Dumb.   Dan Marino was a great QB.  Jim Kelly was very good.  They never won a Super Bowl.  But Trent Dilfer and Joe Flacco did. Makes no sense.

[jvan1973]

I think Kurt Warner proved a point on this argument. I remember people were saying if he wins the Super Bowl vs the Steelers, he would be a Hall Of Famer. If he loses, he won't be. So Warner gets them ahead, the defense folds, and they lose. So because their defense doesn't get the job done, Warner isn't a Hall Of Famer? Dumb...Dumb...Dumb. Dan Marino was a great QB. Jim Kelly was very good. They never won a Super Bowl. But Trent Dilfer and Joe Flacco did. Makes no sense.

Jim Plunkett won two.

[BrentMc11]

Jim Plunkett won two.

Yeah and he looked like a Cabbage Patch doll....

 

 

[lollygagger8]

[dgambill]

I love me some Joe Montana...huge fan as a kid but his words don't change anything. Everyone has their own view of a player...and honestly...they can't be persuaded...for whatever reason most have already made up their mind. Whether it should or not..Joe may be right..but fact is it does for many people and thus it doesn't matter what he says. Totally respect Joe Montana....GREAT qb...did anything and everything asked of him but his word isn't going to sway people.

[Fx Stryker]

Jim Plunkett won two.

 

So did Phil Simms. Neither were Hall of Fame worthy.

[Colts_Fan12]

This is true and exactly why Peyton is GOAT no matter how many SBs he's got

[dgambill]

So did Phil Simms. Neither were Hall of Fame worthy.

Did he? I thought Jeff Hostetler won the second...huh.

[Poster X]

You play for the love of the game, and sure a title is nice... but they don't make the player. If you think Dilfer is better than Marino, or Eli is better than Peyton you are out of your mind.

[Fx Stryker]

Did he? I thought Jeff Hostetler won the second...huh.

He did, bit Simms was the quarterback most of the season.

[southwest1]

You play for the love of the game, and sure a title is nice... but they don't make the player. If you think Dilfer is better than Marino, or Eli is better than Peyton you are out of your mind.

I agree 100% with the section I bolded Gandalf & I won't hold it against 18 if god forbid he only has 1 ring, but I just want at least 1 more Championship. 2 more would be gravy, but SW1 isn't that greedy. 

 

I just know what the best QB in football is fully capable of that's all. Manning should & will pull this victory off. 

[BOTT]

He says this every year around Super Bowl time

[southwest1]

I hear what you're saying Lollygager. I just want a 2nd ring to offset the multiple MVP Awarding winning individual stat argument. 2 SBs & 5 MVPs would cement Manning's legacy in the record books & in the Big Moment clutch factor. Everyone would be forced to admit both fans & recent naysayers that Peyton is in the top 5 QBs of all time. JMO. 

[nburgmei]

I agree 100% with the section I bolded Gandalf & I won't hold it against 18 if god forbid he only has 1 ring, but I just want at least 1 more Championship. 2 more would be gravy, but SW1 isn't that greedy. 

 

I just know what the best QB in football is fully capable of that's all. Manning should & will pull this victory off. 

With a lot of help from the rest of the other Broncos as well.

[southwest1]

So did Phil Simms. Neither were Hall of Fame worthy.

Is it just me or does Phil Simms remind me of Julian Assange, WikiLeaks founder & whistleblower? Take a look...At least 1st cousins right? 

 

Maybe Phil should have been cast in the film "Fifth Estate?" Hmmm...

 

 

 

 

[oldunclemark]

I just seen this on Inside the Numbers. Foes anyone have the direct quote?

Titles don't define greatness at the QB position...

 

..but, if you must rank them, championships separate the greats...

 

..but I think that division championships and conference championships must also be considered

[Gavin]

Of course they dont, Its ridiculous for many to think that they do

[coltsfanatic24]

Titles should only define QB's if they had a major role in the team winning. Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson weren't good players, they were just on the two best defenses. Tom Brady and Big Ben were game managers for their 1st superbowls and Bradshaw was only a notch above them. Montana and Elway are the only two guys that weren't game managers for anyone with multiple superbowls, both of those guys were one of the main reasons that their team won. 

[The Fish]

Titles are icing on top. They matter, no doubt, but it's one game out of many every season. 

[tonychen]

Montana can say this because he has all those rings. You can ask Dan Marino to say the same thing and see how people react.

[The Old Crow]

Titles should only define QB's if they had a major role in the team winning. Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson weren't good players, they were just on the two best defenses. Tom Brady and Big Ben were game managers for their 1st superbowls and Bradshaw was only a notch above them. Montana and Elway are the only two guys that weren't game managers for anyone with multiple superbowls, both of those guys were one of the main reasons that their team won.

Elway lost three Super Bowls in blow out fashion. 2-3 doesn't rate you as GOAT. Montana 4-0 in Super Bowls, Unitas 3-1 in NFL Championship games, and 1-1 in Super Bowls.

Dilfer obviously wasn't the greatest quarterback, but the Ravens were 5-4 when he took over and reeled off 11 in a row. Trent did a nice job, and Billick should have kept him around for 2001. Cry-baby Elvis Getbac lost in the playoffs with mostly the same defense back.

[chad72]

Montana can say this because he has all those rings. You can ask Dan Marino to say the same thing and see how people react.

 

True, which is also the reason that makes it more credible, IMO.

 

Its like a guy who you know can beat you up choosing not to beat you up by saying he is not here to beat you up. If its a guy who you know can be taken on head-to-head that says that, you'd probably smirk/laugh and dismiss it.

 

I've said it before, I will say it again.

 

SB rings and regular season accomplishments have to be considered in totality. If 2 QBs like Montana and Bradshaw are tied in terms of SB rings (or Big Ben and Eli), then you can see who has fared better regular season wise to give them the tie-breaker. If 2 QBs like Jim Kelly and Brett Favre are compared with comparable regular season success, then SB rings can be a tie-breaker.

 

That is what will be done for Peyton and Brady when they are done playing too, considering things in totality. Yes, multiple rings does put someone from a top 10 conversation to top 5 conversation, with most of the other things considered equal or comparable enough, IMO.

 

Just my

 

So, the bottom line statement should be "Titles are not the only things that define QBs in history"

[GoPats]

There is no formula. Every great QB's legacy is different and unique. That's what makes it so hard to compare them. It is kind of surprising to hear from this particular guy, I have to say. If Joe Montana played in the current era with the same career-long statistical output, he'd be considered average at best, maybe a game-manager-type. This is a guy who never threw for 4,000 yards in a season and only eclipsed 30 TDs once. 

 

I don't think it's necessarily championships, but overall postseason success - number of games played, number of wins, etc - has to factor in, at least a little. 

[Blueblazes]

I think Kurt Warner proved a point on this argument.  I remember people were saying if he wins the Super Bowl vs the Steelers, he would be a Hall Of Famer. If he loses, he won't be.  So Warner gets them ahead, the defense folds, and they lose.  So because their defense doesn't get the job done, Warner isn't a Hall Of Famer?  Dumb...Dumb...Dumb.   Dan Marino was a great QB.  Jim Kelly was very good.  They never won a Super Bowl.  But Trent Dilfer and Joe Flacco did. Makes no sense.

You are on the money. Particularly with the Warner analogy. The defense let them down so he's not a HOF'r?? Trent Dilfer, Joe Flacco, Jim Plunkett, Jeff Hostetler and Doug Williams won Super Bowls. Fran Takenton, Dan Marino, Jim Kelly, Dan Fouts, Warren Moon among others did not.

[dgambill]

Maybe what Joe is saying is that some of the greatest season's don't always end in a SB. Great players don't always get to have the fairy tale ending. FB is a game that relies on so much more than one man's contribution. Sure a QB will play a huge part...very intrical part of the team but it doesn't mean that if they don't win it all that diminishes their legacy or what they did. Dan Marino was fiery...fiercly competitive and possibly one of the most talented qbs to ever play. He was limited by circumstances and sometimes someone else just having a better team or game when it counted. You can only control your own play...and he played brilliantly. Same thing about Joe....to me his greatest achievement/season was leading the Kansas City Chiefs to the AFC Championship game in 2003 with two brilliant playoff performances. Even though it didn't end in another ring when we talk individual accomplishments...performances/stats and individual play are what define a player. We don't take away from Barry Sanders for never having playoff success...its only QBs....and there are plenty of great ones that didn't have the team to win it all.

 

That said...it is what it is...people won't change their minds about this...its like asking them who their favorite player is...your not going to convince someone who's favorite player is Lebron James that Kevin Durant is better...so those that place more importance on rings...are always going to be drawn to Montana over Marino and Brady over Peyton...but if Peyton is capable of closing the distance..it sure will make it a more interesting conversation. To me...it's always an eye test....the only deal is that people see what they want to..or focus on what they want...but its been a thrill to watch Peyton play..and I hope to have another great performance this Sunday...I marvel at how he plays and it never ceases to amaze me.

[The Old Crow]

You are on the money. Particularly with the Warner analogy. The defense let them down so he's not a HOF'r?? Trent Dilfer, Joe Flacco, Jim Plunkett, Jeff Hostetler and Doug Williams won Super Bowls. Fran Takenton, Dan Marino, Jim Kelly, Dan Fouts, Warren Moon among others did not.

 

Some of the guys who won a Super Bowl with average regular season stats are immediate tosses, as are QB's who have never won a Championship. When you get down to the final candidates, you have to take into account regular season, MVP's, playoff stats, and of course, Super Bowl or NFL Championships. This is why this game is so important to Manning's legacy. A win put him at two, versus Brady's three. At that point, Manning may well surpass Brady. A third one, two in Denver, would put him up there with Unitas and Montana. My top four would be Unitas, Montana, Brady, and Manning. Depending on how Manning or Brady finish out their careers, will depend if they can eclipse the top two. Bradshaws, Starrs, although Championship heavy, have few MVP's and lesser regular season stats. The Dilfer and Doug William's, aren't even in the argument, as they lack many of the other stats.

[southwest1]

Maybe what Joe is saying is that some of the greatest season's don't always end in a SB. Great players don't always get to have the fairy tale ending. FB is a game that relies on so much more than one man's contribution. Sure a QB will play a huge part...very intrical part of the team but it doesn't mean that if they don't win it all that diminishes their legacy or what they did. Dan Marino was fiery...fiercly competitive and possibly one of the most talented qbs to ever play. He was limited by circumstances and sometimes someone else just having a better team or game when it counted. You can only control your own play...and he played brilliantly. Same thing about Joe....to me his greatest achievement/season was leading the Kansas City Chiefs to the AFC Championship game in 2003 with two brilliant playoff performances. Even though it didn't end in another ring when we talk individual accomplishments...performances/stats and individual play are what define a player. We don't take away from Barry Sanders for never having playoff success...its only QBs....and there are plenty of great ones that didn't have the team to win it all.

 

That said...it is what it is...people won't change their minds about this...its like asking them who their favorite player is...your not going to convince someone who's favorite player is Lebron James that Kevin Durant is better...so those that place more importance on rings...are always going to be drawn to Montana over Marino and Brady over Peyton...but if Peyton is capable of closing the distance..it sure will make it a more interesting conversation. To me...it's always an eye test....the only deal is that people see what they want to..or focus on what they want...but its been a thrill to watch Peyton play..and I hope to have another great performance this Sunday...I marvel at how he plays and it never ceases to amaze me.

A very nice entry there dgambill. I like what you said about Peyton closing the distance & if he does indeed do that this Sunday it makes the conversation really fascinating to talk about. I love older guys closing the deal & winning SBs. I just have never been enamored or mesmerized with youth & athletic talent. Sure, speed has it's place & so does being too young to realize who you are going up against & how scared you should be.

 

I just crave patience, experience, & brain power over elusiveness & fast legs. This game will be defined by 5 or 6 plays & who makes the fewest mistakes like a SB always is. 

 

Regardless of what transpires Sunday, I am blown away at what Peyton & the Broncos have done in very short order & 18 has earned my profound respect for getting back to the Promiseland again. 

 

Now, let's win this one for Champ Bailey, Wes Welker, John Fox, John Elway, & Yoda darn it! LOL! 

[Fx Stryker]

Unitas 3-1 in NFL Championship games, and 1-1 in Super Bowls.

I wouldn't call Unitas 1-1 in Super Bowls. I would say more like 1-0. He didn't enter SB III until 4 minutes left in the third. Also he outscored them 7-3.

Also he is 2-1 in NFL championship games.

[southwest1]

The strange thing is this: Football is always referred to as a team sport, but usually the QB must convert a key 3rd & long to run the clock out or keep a crucial drive alive to tie the game up. Yes, the defense can intercept the ball & get the ball back for it's offense or special teams can chew up chucks of yards as the return guy strides into the endzone, but the success or failure of most SBs comes down to your franchise QB's decision making & overall completion percentage. 

 

Moreno & Ball have played tremendous in the Playoffs this year, but I still say that Manning is gonna get hit on Sunday like he's never been hit this season & whatever back is in there is gonna need to chip, block, & slow down the pass rusher & 18 must deliver the ball perfectly with a Hawk gunning for him. I have every confidence in Peyton Manning to take a licking & make the key completion that wins the SB on Sunday. 

 

SW1 truly believes that no nonsense I swear. 

[The Old Crow]

I wouldn't call Unitas 1-1 in Super Bowls. I would say more like 1-0. He didn't enter SB III until 4 minutes left in the third. Also he outscored them 7-3.

Also he is 2-1 in NFL championship games.

Agree with Super Bowl 3 , as Morall played most of the game. He was 3-1 though in NFL Championship games:

Colts won in 58, 59, and 68 and lost in 64.

[The Old Crow]

The strange thing is this: Football is always referred to as a team sport, but usually the QB must convert a key 3rd & long to run the clock out or keep a crucial drive alive to tie the game up. Yes, the defense can intercept the ball & get the ball back for it's offense or special teams can chew up chucks of yards as the return guy strides into the endzone, but the success or failure of most SBs comes down to your franchise QB's decision making & overall completion percentage. 

 

Moreno & Ball have played tremendous in the Playoffs this year, but I still say that Manning is gonna get hit on Sunday like he's never been hit this season & whatever back is in there is gonna need to chip, block, & slow down the pass rusher & 18 must deliver the ball perfectly with a Hawk gunning for him. I have every confidence in Peyton Manning to take a licking & make the key completion that wins the SB on Sunday. 

 

SW1 truly believes that no nonsense I swear.

I would be happy for Manning. Even as a Baltimore fan , who killed our Super Bowl chances on a couple of occasions , you still had to like and respect the guy. Elway is another matter. I could never root for the guy, so a Denver win would leave me conflicted.

[Fx Stryker]

Agree with Super Bowl 3 , as Morall played most of the game. He was 3-1 though in NFL Championship games:

Colts won in 58, 59, and 68 and lost in 64.

Johnny didn't play in '68.

[The Old Crow]

Johnny didn't play in '68.

He was still part of the team, although he was injured for the Championship game. In fact, he did manage to play in parts of five games in the 1968 season. It's still the same based on how you look at it. 3-1 and 1-1 if you look at Unitas and the team outcome, or 2-1, and 1-0 in the Super Bowl. Does Brady not get credit for the AFC Championship game, because Bledsoe played most of the game ? I guess it depends on how you look at it.

[Fx Stryker]

He was still part of the team, although he was injured for the Championship game. In fact, he did manage to play in parts of five games in the 1968 season. It's still the same based on how you look at it. 3-1 and 1-1 if you look at Unitas and the team outcome, or 2-1, and 1-0 in the Super Bowl. Does Brady not get credit for the AFC Championship game, because Bledsoe played most of the game ? I guess it depends on how you look at it.

He was part of the team, but the starting QB gets the record.

And in the case of Brady, you can say the same about Johnny in Super Bowl V. He left middle of the second.

I'm not taking away from Johnny because I love him, but as a starter he is 2-1 and 1-0.

[southwest1]

I would be happy for Manning. Even as a Baltimore fan , who killed our Super Bowl chances on a couple of occasions , you still had to like and respect the guy. Elway is another matter. I could never root for the guy, so a Denver win would leave me conflicted.

Thanks for the Manning props Old Crow. I appreciate that. Regarding Elway, it's cool you can have disdain for John if you want to, but John & Pat Bowlen have spent the money to give 18 a great offense line & numerous weapons to throw to or hand the ball off to. 

 

My point is this: John Elway has been an exceptional front office executive giving Peyton & company whatever he needs to secure this:   

 

For that reason, SW1 will always be grateful to #7 forever. [No a slam against Jim Irsay BTW who was also a great owner minus the twitter foolishness that is.]

[HtownColt]

Did the majority praise Jim Kelly for making four straight Super Bowls or get criticized for losing four straight Super Bowls? I don't know I was just 0-3 years old at the time lol.