The Instigator
Stefanogmb49
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
deabteking
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Joe Montana is better than Tom Brady

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Stefanogmb49
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/14/2013 Category: Sports
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 704 times Debate No: 36682
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)

 

Stefanogmb49

Pro

First off I would like to start by defining what is classified as better in the NFL. Then I will go over my contentions for the affirmation. FIrst of all we need to assess the different eras this played/ are playing in. Back in Joe Montana's era there was not as many rules as to how you could hit the quarterback, while in the era that Brady is playing the nfl has implemented various new rules for hard hitting. Also, the current NFL is a more pass- heavy league than it was during Montana's career as seen through the fact that teams average 11 more passing yards and 2 more pass attempts per game. The model of a quarterback of the NFL is to be able to find a way to win games no matter the situation and be able to make quick reads and get out of trouble quickly and be able to accurately throw the ball with the ultimate goal being super bowl wins. Joe Montana has all of these aspects and has showed so through his illustrious career winning 4 super bowls and winning 3 super bowl mvps. He should have gotten 4 for 4 in mvps however because he was the one who was throwing to Jerry Rice, but even without that many mvps he still has managed to attain 3 sb mvps and win all of the super bowls he has played in one including a game winning drive against the cincinatti bengals where the 49ers entered as severe underdogs. In order to look at his passing yards efficiently you must look at how they were/are in their eras. From 1979-1990, Montana led the NFL in passing yards and passing touchdowns (only Dan Marino was even within 40 of him), completions (noone within 40 of him) and completion percentage. By comparison, Brady is 4th in passing yards, seconds in passing touchdowns, 4th in completions and ninth in completion percentage as of 2012. Joe Montana truthfully shine, however, in the postseason especially in super bowls where Montana has a career high super bowl record of 11 passing touchdowns with no interceptions for a 127.8 SB record. While Brady has the record for completions and passing yards, due to a heavy pass offense now. But even if you look at those stats in the end the important thing is winning and Montana did that with a 4-0 super bowl record while Brady has not been able to win his last 2 super bowls going 3-2. From 1979-1990, Montana had more than twice as many postseason passing touchdowns and over 2,000 more postseason passing yards than anyone else. Since 2000, Brady leads the NFL with passing touchdowns and yards in the postseason but his margins are nowhere near Montana's. Montana was also very good at being able to find a way to win games, whether it was in the super bowl or the regular season he has led 31 comebacks in his career with comparison to Brady's 26. In conclusion, Montana is better than Brady because of the different perspectives you have to look at in terms of eras, accuracy, ability to win games, and super bowl wins.
deabteking

Con

you may think that but your problem, that u don't see is that Brady has set more records than Joe, also Brady is in more commercials that Joe. Brady is taller, stronger, on a great, also sponsored by pop tarts, and Joe isn't. Also why bring in football. Football was never mentioned so my argument is valid. Tom has more swag than Joe and makes more than Joe so there for he is better than Joe. Because, his money makes he is swag awesome therefore he is better than him. $W@6
Debate Round No. 1
Stefanogmb49

Pro

First off I would like to thank my opponent and the voters for making this debate possible. I would like to start out refuting my opponent's contentions and then refute his responses to my contentions. My opponent stated that Tom Brady has set more records than Joe, however since he did not refute my definition of being better my definition still stands and my opponent agrees with it. Therefore, by my definition one aspect that must be included to be a better quarterbacks is to win super bowls something Joe Montana was the best at doing going a prefect 5 for 5 while Brady going 3 for 5. His other point stating that Brady is in more commercials than Joe because Brady is a current quarterback living in a different era something I addressed in my contentions. One has to look at the different eras of these 2 qbs. Back in 1980s-1990s commercials in the NFL were less common to be found so this argument cannot be made because by not refuting my definition of being better he is therefore agreeing with it and the idea of era comparisons was brought up in my definition. He also said that Brady is taller however he did not provide the advantages to being taller and stronger and the success of a taller quarterback in the NFL. Brady stands at 2 inches taller than Montana and that certainly has not helped him get out of a sack while Joe would roll out of the pocket when in trouble and could run with his nimble legs. His teammates in San Francisco would even call him Bird Legs for having legs so short yet being able to run away from defenders most famously seen in the catch. My opponent said why bring in football however since he did not refute my definition of better my definition stands which is clearly stated as a qb who is clutch, has super bowl wins, and can win in any situation. He also used the argument of being advertised for pop tarts yet since my definition was not refuted my definition of better stands and in nowhere in my definition does the standard of being better is seen as being advertised. In fact, my argument states you have to look at the different eras. Currently we are living in an electronic era while back then there was not as much focus on electronics therefore it is unfair to compare and you cannot due to my definition which was never refuted. He also stated the idea that Tom has more swag yet provided no definition for swag and did not state how that makes him better he just poses it as an assumption. My definition of better was never refuted so it still stands, and since my definition did not include money his argument is invalid. Thank you voters and I would like to ask for your vote in this debate for the affirmative.
deabteking

Con

deabteking forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Stefanogmb49

Pro

All my points extend forward.
deabteking

Con

When u say Joe Montana is better than Brady you simply don't see how stupid you are but exuse my language plz. Your an loser and Brady has a geico sponsorship awesome hair all the girls.He way better than Joe he even wipes his face with Joes jersey because the level of $W@6 is to much and I rest my case and vote for me if u want free soup
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by rja7 4 years ago
rja7
Of course not..I use the poptart argument all the time when defending tom bradys greatness!
Posted by Stefanogmb49 4 years ago
Stefanogmb49
I hope that is sarcasm
Posted by rja7 4 years ago
rja7
Nice work con!the poptart argument was solid!you forgot male uggs though?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Mikal 4 years ago
Mikal
Stefanogmb49deabtekingTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Brady is better, but con did nothing to prove so. Also FF