The Catch II

[Ray_Dogg]

They were both outstanding. But lets be brutally honest. Montana played with MUCH better teams for a MUCH longer stretch of his career and it isn't even debatable. Bill Walsh was his coach. It isn't a shocker as a result that Montana won more Super Bowls.
Young gets the advantage for me because he was a far superior runner.

 

[SFAnthem]

The Joe vs Steve is an argument between actual football skills and legend. The legend of Joe Montana will always eclipse Steve's, IMO.

I love both QB's and have both their jerseys but Joe is a childhood hero for many and it's tough for anyone else to overcome that.

The 80's niners west coast offense changed the way football was played, but for this debate, the 94 niners were the best niner team in their history. Explosive players on both sides of the ball.

 

[Bemular]

The Joe vs Steve is an argument between actual football skills and a fantasy. The football skills of Joe Montana will always eclipse Steve's.

I love both QB's and have both their jerseys but Steve is our generations childhood hero, so it is natural that we want him to be better - problem is, he just wasn't - on any level. But it is hard for myself and others to accept that.

The 80's niners west coast offense changed the way football was played, but for this debate, the 94 niners were not even the second best niner team in their history.

fify!

 

[gp956]

The Joe vs Steve is an argument between actual football skills and legend. The legend of Joe Montana will always eclipse Steve's, IMO.

I love both QB's and have both their jerseys but Joe is a childhood hero for many and it's tough for anyone else to overcome that.

The 80's niners west coast offense changed the way football was played, but for this debate, the 94 niners were the best niner team in their history. Explosive players on both sides of the ball.

Didn't Joe beat that team while carrying the clearly inferior Chiefs on his back?

 

[TobyTyler]

They were both outstanding. But lets be brutally honest. Montana played with MUCH better teams for a MUCH longer stretch of his career and it isn't even debatable. Bill Walsh was his coach. It isn't a shocker as a result that Montana won more Super Bowls.
Young gets the advantage for me because he was a far superior runner.

I disagree. The '94 team was as good or better than any team Montana played on with the possible exception of the '89 team.

 

[TobyTyler]

fify!

Ha ha! Well done!

 

[Bemular]

Ha ha! Well done!

Steve was better than Joe - yeah, sure and politicians are honest. Crazy kids.

 

[SFAnthem]

fify!

lol nice

 

[SFAnthem]

Didn't Joe beat that team while carrying the clearly inferior Chiefs on his back?

Super Bowl victories trump all regular season wins

on the road at places like arrowhead always give the niners trouble

 

[TobyTyler]

Steve was better than Joe - yeah, sure and politicians are honest. Crazy kids.

Maybe I'm hopelessly biased but he was the best I ever saw. He was a cool, calculating killer who made everyone around him better and boy, he had a knack for the big play in crunch time.

 

[MHSL82]

Maybe I'm hopelessly biased but he was the best I ever saw. He was a cool, calculating killer who made everyone around him better and boy, he had a knack for the big play in crunch time.

I had to remind myself that she was just a woman who doesn't know football, but some woman once asked me that if Joe Montana were so good, why did he need to be clutch at the end of the game? Why weren't the Niners already up? Ugh.

 

[NinerSickness]

Joe is the GOAT, but Steve Young peaked higher than any other QB in history IMO.

Both had their share of bad luck. Joe had to deal with 2 strike years & got knocked out of the 1990 NFC Championship game (the darkest day in 49er history). He also got screwed in 1983 with one of the biggest screw-job calls in NFL history against the Redskins.

Young had to sit behind Joe, and he lost practically his entire OL in 1993, lost Hearst & Rice in 1997, and he lost Hearst & BY in 1998. Young carried those late-90's teams. Relative to the average, his efficiency numbers just blow away anyone else who ever played. Unfortunately, he didn't play long enough to show what he really could've done.

Young was the single most dangerous man with a football in his hands who ever played IMO. But in terms of an entire career, Joe is easily the greatest. 127+ passer rating in 4 superbowls. 12 TDs, 0 picks. Had 2 rings before Rice or Taylor were even drafted, and he beat both Marino & Elway.

It's just so hard to compare Young to other QBs because he didn't have the longevity. Most people would say Peyton had a better career than Young did, but I'd still take Young in his prime over Peyton (it's damn close though).

My top 4 of all time (in alphabetical order; modern era only):

Peyton Manning
Joe Montana (GOAT)
Kurt Warner (tied w/ Steve as most underrated QB ever)
Steve Young

Tom Brady doesn't count because he's a cheater. I can't decide whom I'd put as 5th. John Elway actually had BELOW average #'s for his era. Marino is a HOFer & an all-time great, but he wans't THAT great. Favre was a turnover machine. My 5th guy would probably be a 3-way tie between Favre, Elway & Marino.


I didn't include Graham, Unitas, Baugh, Star, etc. because it's impossible to cmopare them to modern-era QBs. And pretty soon, it's going to be impossible to cmopare post-rule-changes QBs to the men of the '80's, '90's and early '00's; it's not even the same game any more.

Some modern-day QBs who'll eventually deserve consideration: Eli, Brees, Rodgers, Roethlisberger, Alex Smith.

 

[TobyTyler]

I had to remind myself that she was just a woman who doesn't know football, but some woman once asked me that if Joe Montana were so good, why did he need to be clutch at the end of the game? Why weren't the Niners already up? Ugh.

Haha! Women; what would we do without them!

 

[SFAnthem]

Imagine Joe playing in the tech era where he can have Walsh the Genius in his ear via the helmet radio before every play..

Regardless of any physical deficiencies, whatever coach Walsh wanted to do, Joe could execute.

 

[NinerSickness]

I think Joe's physical deficiencies was a myth. He was a lot more athletic than people gabe him credit for. He turned down a scholarship to play basketball, and he had great, quick feet.

He didn't have the arm of a Marino, but his arm was strong enough to make any throw.

 

[sjballer03]

I respect Joe Montana, but I grew up watching Steve Young, so his play resonates the most with me. He is by far my favorite NFL player of all time.

On a side note, I absolutely hated watching the late 90s teams always get bounced out of the playoffs by the damn packers. And then when they finally get past the Packers (Catch II), Hearst gets hurt against Atlanta. I figure we deserved at least 2 more superbowl trophies in the Steve Young era.

 

[Ray_Dogg]

I have heard Montana could 360 dunk back in the day.

 

[Ray_Dogg]

I disagree. The '94 team was as good or better than any team Montana played on with the possible exception of the '89 team.

Yes that one year it was good. Young played with a lot of shit the other seasons. That is my point. Just look at the bums he had at RB for several years for example.

 

[Bemular]

Maybe I'm hopelessly biased but he was the best I ever saw. He was a cool, calculating killer who made everyone around him better and boy, he had a knack for the big play in crunch time.

Because he was the best there ever was. You're not biased - you watched them both play with full consciousness and understanding - bias describes those who can barely remember Montana but still think Young was better.

 

[Bemular]

I had to remind myself that she was just a woman who doesn't know football, but some woman once asked me that if Joe Montana were so good, why did he need to be clutch at the end of the game? Why weren't the Niners already up? Ugh.

Ahhh, perhaps because Montana didn't play defense - that's all I got