Poll: Greatest qb ever?

[SuperZeke50]

Aaron Rodgers got spanked by the Falcons in the 1st half... and couldn't overcome it.

Tom Brady got spanked by the Falcons in the 1st half... the rest is history.

Roger That

Those last two statements would be true ... if they weren't provably false.

Brady's QB rating is a 97.2 ... Aaron Rodgers obliterates that with a 104.1

Brady's TD to INT ratio is 3-to-1 ... Aaron Rodgers obliterates that with a 4.125-to-1 ratio.

[Jameis1of1]

Aaron Rodgers got spanked by the Falcons in the 1st half... and couldn't overcome it.

Tom Brady got spanked by the Falcons in the 1st half... the rest is history.

Roger That

Yes indeed and I loved every minute of that comeback ... but that doesn't change the fact that Rodgers has a far better career QB rating and TD-to-INT ratio than Brady ... facts are facts even when people don't like them.

I tend to agree with Max Kellerman and others when they say that Brady may be the "greatest" QB ever but Aaron Rodgers is "better" than Brady.

I also loved how when Joe Montana was interviewed he said you couldn't put Brady ahead of my man Otto Graham on a GOAT list ... I've been saying the same for years.

[sportsnutz1915]

Tom Brady will go down as the greatest Quarterback in history. 6 Superbowl victories by a starting quarterback will never be seen again. 4 mvp's for superbowl by 1 player will never be seen again. Tom Brady by far is and will always be the greatest Quarterback ever in the NFL!!!!!!!!

[14smoke2x]

Aaron Rodgers got spanked by the Falcons in the 1st half... and couldn't overcome it.

Tom Brady got spanked by the Falcons in the 1st half... the rest is history.

Roger That

Close minded statement. It's a bit hard to come back when you have ancient Dom Capers as your D coordinator and a 32nd ranked defense giving up touchdowns every possession. That being said, Brady is still the greatest, he's a had one dominant WR in his career (Moss). Montana had Rice but was better in big games. Flip a coin.

1a. Brady
1b. Montana
1c. Rodgers
everyone else

[Jameis1of1]

Tom Brady will go down as the greatest Quarterback in history. 6 Superbowl victories by a starting quarterback will never be seen again. 4 mvp's for superbowl by 1 player will never be seen again. Tom Brady by far is and will always be the greatest Quarterback ever in the NFL!!!!!!!!

Brady has 5 rings NOT 6 ... you're getting ahead of yourself.

Also, OTTO Graham went to TEN STRAIGHT title games and won SEVEN championships ... Brady would need to win THREE MORE RINGS to best Otto.

[Jameis1of1]

Close minded statement. It's a bit hard to come back when you have ancient Dom Capers as your D coordinator and a 32nd ranked defense giving up touchdowns every possession. That being said, Brady is still the greatest, he's a had one dominant WR in his career (Moss). Montana had Rice but was better in big games. Flip a coin.

1a. Brady
1b. Montana
1c. Rodgers
everyone else

You've got Aaron Rodgers as the 3rd greatest QB of all-time already? Ahead of Otto "I went to 10 straight titles and won 2 more than Tom Brady" Graham, Elway, Favre, Manning and Unitas .... really??????????????

[14smoke2x]

Yes absolutely. Look at his QB rating. Look at the Lambeau field weather half the games. Look at his TD/Int ratio. Mediocre defenses and RBs his entire career.

I love Favre but he was an INT machine. Manning is right towards the top. Elway lost a ton of Super Bowls and his numbers are borderline.

As far as the 50s and 60s guys go I can't comment because I never saw them play. However, there were only a handful of teams back then and a championship was much easier to attain then a Super Bowl now.

[rocketman818]

I am so tired of this Otto Graham BS. Yes he won those titles but as I have already mentioned he did it when he didn't play as many games regular or playoffs as brady had to and some of those titles were in an inferior league as well. You want statistics. Here a few of Otto Grahams TD to INT marks.
1950 14 TD passes to 20 INT
1951 17 TD passes to 16 INT
1952 20 TD passes to 24 INT
1953 11 TD passes to 9 INT
1954 11 TD passes to 17 INT

Are those REALLY THE MARKS OF A GOAT!!!!!! These are absolutely awful stats for someone so supposedly great. No GOAT should EVER have numbers like that. I don't want to hear another word about Otto. Haha.

And montana is just salty. He didn't even know who Otto was. He said he wasn't sure if it was Otto or Sammy Baugh but one had a bunch of titles. Doesn't sound knowledgeable enough to be saying that person is better when you don't even know his name..LOL. Salty Joe.

And on Brady. He has had no supporting cast. In the 5 superbowls he won he had 1 pro bowl receiver which was Troy brown in his first superbowl. Nevermind HOF WR he didn't have pro bowl caliber WR's.

Want some more statistics. Since Brady has had such a revolving door of WR and offensive players in general he has had to adjust and work much harder. Case in point look at these stats below. They list the top 3 players in TD catches for Manning, Brady and Montana. It basically shows how Manning and Montana have leaned on their greater offensive players. There job was so much easier because all they had to do was throw it to their star players. Brady has had to use more players. Also to emphasize the revolving door on offense for brady. Brady has thown a TD to 65 different receivers!!!

Manning Montana Brady
114 TD Harrison 55 TD Rice 76 TD Gronk
76 TD Wayne 44 TD Clark 40 TD Moss
48 TD Clark 38 TD Solomon 38 TD Welker
60% of Manning TD 51% of Montana TD 34% of Brady TD

Some people will even say crazy stuff like well Brady had Randy Moss. You know what your right but even moss was at the end of his career not the peak. You want to know how many TD's Randy moss caught after leaving the Pats. A total of 5!! He was done and that is why Pats traded him mid season.

And since some people hold regular season stats in such high regard I saw this article by Neil Greenberg called "Statistical Confessions of an alleged Tom Brady hater" I included a part that I thought was fairly informative here. It basically stats how because brady has had his teams in the lead so much it has actually hurt his numbers.

"But that brings us to the second, and perhaps biggest reasonI’ve discounted Brady in the past, and why I’m coming around now:regular-season statistics lack context and perhaps penalize Brady and thePatriots for being too good. Since 2001, Brady’s first year as a starter, the Patriotshave run 11,626 offensive plays with the lead (54 percent), the most of anyteam over that span. The Green Bay Packers (9,612) are a distant second. Infact, the difference between No. 1 and No. 2 on this list is almost the same asthe gap between No. 2 and No. 14, the Kansas City Chiefs (7,632). The averageteam has played with a lead 36 percent of the time over the past 15 years. Letthat sink in for a second.
Playing with a lead so often will depress anyone’s passingstats, since leading teams are more likely to focus on the run to keep the clockticking down. In the Brady era (since 2001), NFL teams have passed the ball, onaverage, 14 times per game while leading and 24.3 times if theyare behind. So, if Brady played on an average NFL team instead of the Patriots,and we kept his skill level constant in terms of yards per attempt, hisoverall career totals would be 79,609 yards and 568 touchdowns, whichwould rank No. 1 in both categories all time. It’s also worth noting Bradyhasn’t had an all-star cast of receivers during his tenure with New England,justifying a static overall yards per attempt for this exercise."

So I could come up with much more in terms of facts but there are some people you just cannot reach. They have some issues with Brady that they just don't want to admit. Like the scandals which of course is also BS since others have also cheated. Hey Jerry Rice. Still using that stickem? LOL. They all do it. Or people will claim one fact above all others like "Hey montana was perfect in the superbowl!" Yes but as many pundits will tell you. With such a great team around him he ACTUALLY should have gotten to the Superbowl more but I guess he couldn't.

And lastly for those who have the Aaron Rodgers is better than Brady arguments. Could you say he is physically better? Yes. He may throw further or run faster but guess what. That isn't just what makes up a QB. Championships are important. It is the whole purpose of the game. "You play to win the game" as Herm Edwards famously says. Well Brady has won more games and championships than anyone! These haters are the same ones who would pass on brady coming out of college today!! And you know what I cannot blame them on that respect but now 17yrs after Brady was drafted he has more than proven those people wrong. Even though some still will not give him the credit he deserves. Michael Jordan is great not just because of his talent but also because of those championships. If Jordan was 0-6 do you honestly think people would call him the greatest. So when Aaron Rodgers wins his 6th Superbowl let me know. I will admit he is the the GOAT but until then "facts are facts even when people don't like them." Haha. People make me laugh. You give them eyes yet they cannot see...Blitz for 6...

Yes indeed and I loved every minute of that comeback ... but that doesn't change the fact that Rodgers has a far better career QB rating and TD-to-INT ratio than Brady ... facts are facts even when people don't like them.

I tend to agree with Max Kellerman and others when they say that Brady may be the "greatest" QB ever but Aaron Rodgers is "better" than Brady.

I also loved how when Joe Montana was interviewed he said you couldn't put Brady ahead of my man Otto Graham on a GOAT list ... I've been saying the same for years.

[Jameis1of1]

Yes absolutely. Look at his QB rating. Look at the Lambeau field weather half the games. Look at his TD/Int ratio. Mediocre defenses and RBs his entire career.

I love Favre but he was an INT machine. Manning is right towards the top. Elway lost a ton of Super Bowls and his numbers are borderline.

As far as the 50s and 60s guys go I can't comment because I never saw them play. However, there were only a handful of teams back then and a championship was much easier to attain then a Super Bowl now.

I love you defending your statement and you make some valid points. I'm just surprised to see anyone rank Rodgers in the top 3 when he only has 1 ring as-is ... personally I think he may indeed be the "best" QB ever but nowhere near top 3 in regards to having the "greatest" career as he just hasn't played long enough or done enough yet.

[Jameis1of1]

I am so tired of this Otto Graham BS. Yes he won those titles but as I have already mentioned he did it when he didn't play as many games regular or playoffs as brady had to and some of those titles were in an inferior league as well.

So what? You can only control what you can control. The NFL might have 40 teams some day and play 18-20 games a year ... that won't detract from Brady's 5 rings at all.

We have already established you are a massive Brady fan, to the extent that you are emotionally invested in him, so you're statements lack credibility at times.

Poo-pooing Otto going to the title game in TEN STRAIGHT YEARS and winning SEVEN championships just comes off as ridiculous.

You want statistics. Here a few of Otto Grahams TD to INT marks.

Comparing stats in different eras, let alone eras that are separated by multiple decades is an exercise in futility and quite absurd. Suck QB's in the modern NFL like Brock Osweiler have "stats" that put HOF QB's from past eras to shame .. and you know this ... I don't like silly and dishonest debating.

Are those REALLY THE MARKS OF A GOAT!!!!!! These are absolutely awful stats for someone so supposedly great. No GOAT should EVER have numbers like that. I don't want to hear another word about Otto. Haha.

You're being silly and you know it. If the NFL morphs into a flippin touch football league where the "suck" QB's are throwing for 6k+ yards per year there are going to be tons of "average" QB's that will retire with far more impressive "stats" than Brady ... and that will mean NOTHING. The only way you can compare players from different eras is to look at how they dominated or failed to dominate their own era ... and Otto dominated his era to a FAR, FAR GREATER EXTENT than Tom Brady has dominated his.

And montana is just salty. He didn't even know who Otto was. He said he wasn't sure if it was Otto or Sammy Baugh but one had a bunch of titles. Doesn't sound knowledgeable enough to be saying that person is better when you don't even know his name..LOL. Salty Joe.

I agree he wasn't as knowledgeable as he could have been but his point was still valid and I didn't take it that he was being "salty" ... if he was being "salty" he would have said he was the GOAT, but he didn't say that, he brought up Otto/Sammy as he knew one had "won" a whole lot more than Brady has.

And on Brady. He has had no supporting cast. In the 5 superbowls he won he had 1 pro bowl receiver which was Troy brown in his first superbowl. Nevermind HOF WR he didn't have pro bowl caliber WR's.

Ugh, we have been over this. The NFL is NOT just about the offensive side of the ball ... Brady has had great defenses, great special teams and the GOAT Coach for his entire career ... that is a whole lot more important than having a great receiver ... when Brady had an all-world receiver (Moss) he couldn't win a single ring

Want some more statistics. Since Brady has had such a revolving door of WR and offensive players in general he has had to adjust and work much harder. Case in point look at these stats below. They list the top 3 players in TD catches for Manning, Brady and Montana. It basically shows how Manning and Montana have leaned on their greater offensive players. There job was so much easier because all they had to do was throw it to their star players. Brady has had to use more players. Also to emphasize the revolving door on offense for brady. Brady has thown a TD to 65 different receivers!!!

Manning Montana Brady
114 TD Harrison 55 TD Rice 76 TD Gronk
76 TD Wayne 44 TD Clark 40 TD Moss
48 TD Clark 38 TD Solomon 38 TD Welker
60% of Manning TD 51% of Montana TD 34% of Brady TD

I don't see how that is a point in Brady's favor at all, I really don't. It's just a completely meaningless stat ... you say he had to "work harder" ... why? When you have a great receiver you often force throws to him to keep him happy ... a balanced offense is much, much more dynamic than one with one great receiver. Matt Stafford was an MVP candidate for the first time in his career this year, his first year without Megatron. I just don't view this as some sort of great plus on Brady's side.

Some people will even say crazy stuff like well Brady had Randy Moss. You know what your right but even moss was at the end of his career not the peak. You want to know how many TD's Randy moss caught after leaving the Pats. A total of 5!! He was done and that is why Pats traded him mid season.

Moss was great when he was with the Pats and Brady never won a single ring with him ... that sort of destroys your entire argument, no?

And since some people hold regular season stats in such high regard I saw this article by Neil Greenberg called "Statistical Confessions of an alleged Tom Brady hater" I included a part that I thought was fairly informative here. It basically stats how because brady has had his teams in the lead so much it has actually hurt his numbers.

"But that brings us to the second, and perhaps biggest reasonI’ve discounted Brady in the past, and why I’m coming around now:regular-season statistics lack context and perhaps penalize Brady and thePatriots for being too good. Since 2001, Brady’s first year as a starter, the Patriotshave run 11,626 offensive plays with the lead (54 percent), the most of anyteam over that span. The Green Bay Packers (9,612) are a distant second. Infact, the difference between No. 1 and No. 2 on this list is almost the same asthe gap between No. 2 and No. 14, the Kansas City Chiefs (7,632). The averageteam has played with a lead 36 percent of the time over the past 15 years. Letthat sink in for a second.
Playing with a lead so often will depress anyone’s passingstats, since leading teams are more likely to focus on the run to keep the clockticking down. In the Brady era (since 2001), NFL teams have passed the ball, onaverage, 14 times per game while leading and 24.3 times if theyare behind. So, if Brady played on an average NFL team instead of the Patriots,and we kept his skill level constant in terms of yards per attempt, hisoverall career totals would be 79,609 yards and 568 touchdowns, whichwould rank No. 1 in both categories all time. It’s also worth noting Bradyhasn’t had an all-star cast of receivers during his tenure with New England,justifying a static overall yards per attempt for this exercise."

So I could come up with much more in terms of facts but there are some people you just cannot reach.

I appreciate you finding that article as I hadn't seen that ... however, while think the author makes valid points in regards to "stats", I think it also obviously demonstrates how great the Pats "teams" have been during Brady's tenure. So yes, has he had worse defenses and worse teams, he would have better "stats" ... but he;d also have less "rings", so it's a trade off and this is why I feel EVERYTHING needs to be weighed and not just stats or just team success.

They have some issues with Brady that they just don't want to admit. Like the scandals which of course is also BS since others have also cheated. Hey Jerry Rice. Still using that stickem? LOL. They all do it. Or people will claim one fact above all others like "Hey montana was perfect in the superbowl!" Yes but as many pundits will tell you. With such a great team around him he ACTUALLY should have gotten to the Superbowl more but I guess he couldn't.

There are obviously a ton, and I do mean a ton, of "Brady haters" and even just "Pats haters" in general, so you certainly have a point. However, I am not one of those people. I don't care about the scandals though acknowledge they will always be a stain on Brady's legacy to "many" fans and I believe that is a fact that can't even be argued.

And lastly for those who have the Aaron Rodgers is better than Brady arguments. Could you say he is physically better? Yes. He may throw further or run faster but guess what. That isn't just what makes up a QB. Championships are important. It is the whole purpose of the game. "You play to win the game" as Herm Edwards famously says.

Again, TEAMS not individual players "win games". Brady has never won a single ring ... the Patriots have won 5 of them. I do think it's pretty obvious that Rodgers is "better" than Brady and not just "physically" but as a QB in its entirety ... however the Packers are NOT the Patriots, period.

Playing to win the game from the QB position would mean to have the best possible QB rating you can have and the best possible TD-to-INT ration you can have as obvioously throwing picks does not help one "win the game" and Rodgers QB rating and TD-to-INT ratio blow Brady's out of the water which means Brady "wins" more because his "team" is simply better and not because he as an individual is better. This is a very simple concept to grasp.

Well Brady has won more games and championships than anyone!

True but Otto won two more titles and appeared in three more title games ... and again, "team success" does not equal "individual greatness".

These haters are the same ones who would pass on brady coming out of college today!!

You probably shouldn't bring that up in a debate as Brady being drafted #199 is a knock on him and not a positive. He simply was NOT viewed as a franchise changer coming out of college, not even by the Patriots and he did not have to be such as he was drafted to a very good team with an established QB in place ... that's not any different than Rodgers but it's entirely different than a guy like Peyton Manning who had the weight of the world heaped on his shoulders from Day 1.

And you know what I cannot blame them on that respect but now 17yrs after Brady was drafted he has more than proven those people wrong. Even though some still will not give him the credit he deserves.

Now that I can agree with 100%!!!!

Michael Jordan is great not just because of his talent but also because of those championships. If Jordan was 0-6 do you honestly think people would call him the greatest.

No ... because most sports talking heads and fans are nonsensical, illogical loons ... I have always said that if Pip just happened to get hurt in every single Eastern Conference series and Jordan lost all 6 Finals series but played the same way, he should still be considered just as "great" as he is now ... people are just goofy and don't understand logic and put far too much emphasis on "team success".

So when Aaron Rodgers wins his 6th Superbowl let me know.

That's a childish and illogical statement ... you're better than that ... I think.

I will admit he is the the GOAT but until then "facts are facts even when people don't like them." Haha. People make me laugh. You give them eyes yet they cannot see...Blitz for 6...

Let me know when you start saying Trent Dilfer is higher on the GOAT list than Dan Marino ... team success is soooooooo over-rated when it comes to evaluating individual excellence.

You said it yourself above, Rodgers is "better" than Brady. And, it's not just that he is more "physically gifted", it's that he's flat out "better". Everyone knows Vince Carter was more "physically gifted" than Kobe Bryant but NO ONE in their right mind would ever say VC was "better" than Kobe. Everyone knows Randy Moss was more "physically gifted" than Jerry Rice but no one in their right mind would say Moss was "better" than Rice. However, many believe Rodgers is "better" than Brady.

Brady is the new-era Montana which is fitting as that was his idol growing up. However just as many considered Marino to literally be "better" than Montana, so to do many consider Rodgers to be "better" than Brady, but unlike Marino, Rodgers has a ring as well ...

I love Brady but I don't think he'll ever be viewed like Jordan or Gretzky ... those guys aren't just considered the "greatest" but the "best" as well, whereas Brady, fair or not, will probably always be viewed as a system QB and a product of Bellichick and the Pats great organization, even more so than people consider Montana a product of Bill Walsh. A guy like Rodgers and even Manning, Favre, Marino and others don't have that "stigma" attached to them.