# Why did Joe Montana seem so much better than Manning or Marino? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [December 20, 2004, 8:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-joe-montana-seem-so-much-better-than-manning-or-marino/280764 "2004-12-20T08:40:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![EllisDee](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ellisdee/32/4531_2.png) [@EllisDee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EllisDee)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2004, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-joe-montana-seem-so-much-better-than-manning-or-marino/280764/21 "2004-12-21T06:40:21Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Skill-wise, Manning is about as good as anyone, and I don’t think he lacks the ability to win big games. You do need a good defense; I’m not sure how much he can do to win these games single-handedly beyond what he’s done before. I would equate Peyton’s Colts with the same talent level as Elway’s Broncos before they had a running game. The Broncos had a better defense, but not nearly the running game or receiving core as the Colts, so it seems a fair comparison. You could draw from this that Elway was better, because he kept getting to The Show while Peyton still has not. However, back in the day of Elway’s Superbowl futility, the NFC was the conference of defense, while the AFC was a bunch of finesse offensive teams. That led to quite a few ass whuppins for the AFC at the hands of the NFC. In today’s game, the AFC is clearly the defensive conference, so it could be argued that the Colts are doing every bit as well as the Broncos did in their day. I think the only fair comparison for Manning’s passing ability is Marino. Virtuosos who unbalanced their team, thereby preventing any real shot at winning it all. ---
**Author:** ![Eats\_Crayons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/278dde/32.png) [@Eats\_Crayons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eats_Crayons)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2004, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-joe-montana-seem-so-much-better-than-manning-or-marino/280764/22 "2004-12-21T13:31:34Z")
> [@NurseCarmen](#): > > Another thing about Montana is that he was friggen _everywhere_. Turn on the TV, and there he was, pimping everything from bubblegum to bullets. He was good looking and could enunciate. Whereas Payton has a bit of a oafish dumb jock quality to him. On the field, Payton this year is nearly as good as any of Joe’s years, and if he finishes off with a ring he’ll be equal in my mind. I was going to mention this too (I work in PR). Even non-football fans new who he was because he was _everywhere_. He had an affable smile, a sexy gravelly voice and a charisma that presents him as an “all-around likeable guy you’d like as a neighbour.” He was exceptionally good as a roll model (like Wayne Gretzky who was known as a gentlemanly player who almost never got into fights or racked up penalty points). He spoke well and was articulate so he could make cameo appearances on TV sitcoms (usually playing himself) and he could do commercials up the wazoo with his toothy grin and boyish charm. Rather than just be a very gifted athlete, he was able to be a “star” (in the eyes of non-sports fans too). Recognizable by everyone in a positive light. My mother has never seen a football game in her entire life, and she’d still be able to recognize Joe Montana. And his “star” status also, in the eye of the general public, had merit (unlike Paris Hilton who is a star for being a helpless rich kid), and was not the product of talent+notoriety. My mom can recognize the name “Kobe Bryant” because in the context of “Isn’t he that sports guy who was arrested for raping or murdering someone? What is he a boxer?.. Basketball player?..” If you’re going to be eclipsed by your media attention, it’s best to have it with a positive spin. Which Joe Montana had. Like Gretzky, he had the public persona of a “great athlete” and “good person.” So that contributes to the sense of a larger-than-life hero much more than stats. If you’re “extra-memorable” than even non-football fans will say “Oh, he’s that football superstar. And since I remember his face better than anyone else’s he must be the greatest.” If you were to ask my mom, the total non-sports person to name The Best, in the main prime-time sports, she’d probably pick Michael Jordan, Wayne Gretzky, Joe Montana, and Babe Ruth… Only because she knows who they are as “sports heroes”. ---
**Author:** ![Philster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/13edae/32.png) [@Philster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Philster)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2004, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-joe-montana-seem-so-much-better-than-manning-or-marino/280764/23 "2004-12-21T15:36:45Z")
> [@kevja](#): > > Nothing against Manning, but he even hasn’t won an AFC Champioship game. > > Montana played for great teams. But he was a genuinly GREAT QB. Stats and leadership. A winner! He’s in in the class with Elway, Uniitis, Marino, and Favre. > > To compare him with Simms, Dilfer, and the others you mentioned is a laugh. This argument continues to be lame: ’ So and So QB never won X or Y’. Look, on some sports talk show, that shit might fly, but in the real world, we all know that Trent Dilfer couldn’ t sniff Manning’s jock. The QB can’t control anything beyond the offense. The whole freakin’ Colts team is accountable. And if the defense BLOWS, then we can say so. We ain’t coaches who have to sugar coat shit and blow sunshine up asses. I didn’t compare Montana with Simms or Dilfer, but **your** f-ed up logic does! Damn! See your comments about Manning not winning an AFC Champ game!!! Montana was great. Duh. Dilfer was\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_. Simms was \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Manning is \_\_\_\_\_\_\_. Hoestetler was \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_. Marino was \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_. Use your twisted logic wisely. ---
**Author:** ![Trunk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/87869e/32.png) [@Trunk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trunk)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2004, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-joe-montana-seem-so-much-better-than-manning-or-marino/280764/24 "2004-12-21T16:02:08Z")
> [@Philster](#): > > This argument continues to be lame: ’ So and So QB never won X or Y’. Look, on some sports talk show, that shit might fly, but in the real world, we all know that Trent Dilfer couldn’ t sniff Manning’s jock. The QB can’t control anything beyond the offense. Right, but you make it sound like controlling the offense is simply a matter of how well he executes. I think there’s an element of how well a QB manages _risk_ while performing. There are some naturally talented guys who don’t do that as well as others. They need to know what their defense is giving them, what the game situation is, how to manage the clock. And decide on a play-by-play, option-by-option basis which attempts are worth the risk. Those things might not be as quantifiable as “Yards Per Attempt” or “Completion Precentage”. But they’re certainly aspects of being a pro quarterback. How do you judge “risk management” against something quantifiable like “QB rating”? Wins. Superbowls. I’m not convinced that if you plugged a Manning or a Marino into, for example, the Ravens team in '01 that they win the Superbowl any easier, or at all. Perhaps defenses get soft with big leads. Perhaps they can’t get the toughness back when they need to. They bring a completely different dynamic to the team. Unless Manning shows that he can handle the pressure of winning in the playoffs, he’s going to remain with one fewer rings than Trent Dilfer. ---
**Author:** ![bauble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/f6c823/32.png) [@bauble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bauble)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2004, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-joe-montana-seem-so-much-better-than-manning-or-marino/280764/25 "2004-12-21T16:29:26Z")
> [@pepperlandgirl](#): > > He was also just plain fun to watch. > > Except, you know, when he made the Broncos defense his bitch in that one Superbowl I pretend never really happened. It was all a very bad nightmare, produced by consuming too much chili during the pre-show. > > There was one game when he played for the Chiefs that I remember in particular. It was a “anything you can do I can do better” shoot-out between Elway and Montana. I don’t even remember who won that game–I’m going to say the Broncos because well, I’m biased–but it was just the kind of exceptional excitement that makes the NFL great. Sorry, **pepperlandgirl** , but it was the [Chiefs](http://images.nfl.com/news/nflcentury_memorablegames.html) (see game #90) that won that night. One of the most exciting games ever. ---
**Author:** ![kevja](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/aeb1de/32.png) [@kevja](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kevja)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2004, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-joe-montana-seem-so-much-better-than-manning-or-marino/280764/26 "2004-12-22T01:38:29Z")
> [@Philster](#): > > Montana was great. Duh. Thank you. And if you recall in my first post I said I had nothing against Manning. In fact, he’s great. Duh. I’d actually like to see the Colts go to the Super Bowl this year. If they don’t, I’m sure the defense will be to blame. But like it or not, in the NFL, winning “the big one” is a huge part of the game and a player’s legacy. If Manning wins just one Super Bowl and keeps playing at his current level for another six or eight years, no one past or present will be able to “sniff” him. ---
**Author:** ![Trailer\_Park\_Casanova](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8baadc/32.png) [@Trailer\_Park\_Casanova](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trailer_Park_Casanova)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2004, 6:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-joe-montana-seem-so-much-better-than-manning-or-marino/280764/27 "2004-12-22T06:17:10Z")
Montana could connect early in his career with the long pass. The others quickly gained fame with lots of very quick short passes. Elway being added to this list, but Marino the master of the quick release. Montana had smarts, skill and ballz. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2004, 6:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-joe-montana-seem-so-much-better-than-manning-or-marino/280764/28 "2004-12-22T06:46:05Z")
> [@Trunk](#): > > Unless Manning shows that he can handle the pressure of winning in the playoffs, he’s going to remain with one fewer rings than Trent Dilfer. But he’ll still be a better QB than Dilfer ever was. I mean, [look at his career stats.](http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/1065) Dilfer wasn’t clutch, he was pretty bad. He just didn’t have to do anything. The most you could say for him is that he fit into the team’s system. On his team, Manning has to actually do something. Not just complete the passes and win the games, but call the plays. ---
**Author:** ![I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/i_love_me_vol.i/32/521_2.png) [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Love_Me_Vol.I)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2004, 6:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-joe-montana-seem-so-much-better-than-manning-or-marino/280764/29 "2004-12-22T06:57:16Z")
A little hijack perhaps-- Marino, Montana, Manning. Great quarterbacks whose names start with M. Any others? (Who can at least be considered “great” without making anyone laugh?) ---
**Author:** ![CapnPitt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/edb3f5/32.png) [@CapnPitt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CapnPitt)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2004, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-joe-montana-seem-so-much-better-than-manning-or-marino/280764/30 "2004-12-22T20:04:23Z")
I really, really fail to understand how winning the Super Bowl is a measure of worth as a QB. It’s a measure of team worth, not QB worth. Measure coaches by Super Bowl wins if you must (but Bud Grant, you were a helluva coach), but not QBs. For my money, the top 5 QBs: 1. Marino (nobody, but nobody had that kind of talent) 2. Manning (the total package) 3. Dan Fouts 4. Steve Young (best touch of any QB) 5. Joe Montana As to why Montana seems that way has already been mentioned, but in my own words: You only see the highlights of when he was good. Every player has bad games; there’s just a stunning lack of historicity when it comes to the sports media (but heaven knows I love NFL Films and they’re the greatest promoter of hagiography). ---
**Author:** ![kevja](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/aeb1de/32.png) [@kevja](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kevja)\ **Post date:** [December 22, 2004, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-joe-montana-seem-so-much-better-than-manning-or-marino/280764/31 "2004-12-22T22:22:43Z")
> [@CapnPitt](#): > > I really, really fail to understand how winning the Super Bowl is a measure of worth as a QB. It’s a measure of team worth, not QB worth. I agree, a Super Bowl win(s) should not be the ultimate judge of a Quarterback’s greatness. To me it’s a combination of statistics and leadership. The Quarterback is the team leader, and the great ones lead their teams to divisional or wild card berths and step it up in the playoffs. Guys such as Dan Fouts or Warren Moon were better quarterbacks than say Jim Plunkett, who has two rings. He had some respectable, if not good, seasons with the Raiders in the early 80s. But great, no. And if a great QB plays on a lousy team he’s still a great QB. But, imho, to be all time great, they “need to have it all” So by my “formula” for greatness I would rank the top QBs of all time this way. 1. Montana. Second highest career QB rating of all time. Top ten in career yards and TDs. 16-7 in the playoffs, two league MVPs, three Super bowl MVPs, and four rings. 2. Elway. Second in total career yards, over 300 TDs. Five super Bowl appearances, two wins, and the MVP in the ’99 super bowl. The last game he ever played. I would expect every Bronco fan to tell me to fly a kite, and put him at number 1. 3. Marino. Owns the record book. Pure talent. Total competitor. 4. Farve. I’m not a Packer fan. But he’s about as tough as they come. He has some impressive stats and a ring. 5. Young. Kind of a homer pick. A lot of guys could be in the number five spot. One of the most exciting QB’s ever. Pass, run, and as tough and determined as they come. I’ve seen the Super Bowl highlights for the 1995 game. Near the end of the game on the sideline, he says to his team as the game was winding down “will somebody take this monkey off my back.” Meaning now that I’ve won A super Bowl on my own (he has another two rings as a backup to Montana) maybe I’ll be considered a great QB. Honorable mention of the “modern era” retirees. Johnny Unitas and a few others should be considered on any top QB list. But as old as i am, they were a little before my time. Fouts Tarkington Aikman Bradshaw Staubach Kelly Current Manning and Brady. I think it’s a little too early to rank them with the all time greats. but if they keep going like they have been for the rest of their careers, the top five is going to change. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2004, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-joe-montana-seem-so-much-better-than-manning-or-marino/280764/32 "2004-12-23T02:27:28Z")
> [@don't ask](#): > > Apart from the fact that if you invented a fictional QB you would call him Joe Montana, my recollections are that his greatness was achieved by being the QB you would pick to control a last minute drive if your life actually depended on it. Yes, indeed, on both counts. I still remember the sheer artistry of The Drive, which I haven’t seen tape of since it actually happened. And that drive came against a very good Cowboys defense (defending a 6-point lead with just a few minutes left), so it was a fair test in every way: Montana had a lot of weapons, working within a very good system, but he was working against a talented and experienced defense with a very good system of its own. And this was before Montana was deified. The 49ers that year were an upstart team, really; it was Montana coming through when it counted, that finally got them regarded as one of the serious teams. ---
**Author:** ![kevja](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/aeb1de/32.png) [@kevja](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kevja)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2004, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-joe-montana-seem-so-much-better-than-manning-or-marino/280764/33 "2004-12-23T02:38:28Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Yes, indeed, on both counts. > > I still remember the sheer artistry of The Drive, which I haven’t seen tape of since it actually happened. And that drive came against a very good Cowboys defense (defending a 6-point lead with just a few minutes left), so it was a fair test in every way: Montana had a lot of weapons, working within a very good system, but he was working against a talented and experienced defense with a very good system of its own. > > And this was before Montana was deified. The 49ers that year were an upstart team, really; it was Montana coming through when it counted, that finally got them regarded as one of the serious teams. Not to nitpic, but I think the drive against the Cowboys you are refering to is known as “The Catch” Montana to Clark. TD, 58 seconds left. SF 28 Dallas 27. NFC championship game, January 1982. They went on to win their first super Bowl against the Bengals. It was a hell of a drive, but around here every Niner fan knows that game as “The Catch” ---
**Author:** ![nivlac](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/3bc359/32.png) [@nivlac](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nivlac)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2004, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-joe-montana-seem-so-much-better-than-manning-or-marino/280764/34 "2004-12-23T04:42:37Z")
> [@kevja](#): > > Not to nitpic, but I think the drive against the Cowboys you are refering to is known as “The Catch” Montana to Clark. TD, 58 seconds left. SF 28 Dallas 27. NFC championship game, January 1982. They went on to win their first super Bowl against the Bengals. > > It was a hell of a drive, but around here every Niner fan knows that game as “The Catch” And “The Drive” was in SB XXIII against the Bengels that ended with a perfectly-threaded TD to Taylor that won the game. Without a doubt, the most nerve-wracking drive ever for this Niner fan. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2004, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-joe-montana-seem-so-much-better-than-manning-or-marino/280764/35 "2004-12-23T04:49:37Z")
Manning and Marino are better passers. Montana was a better leader. He had a way of getting the best from his teammates when he needed it most. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-joe-montana-seem-so-much-better-than-manning-or-marino/280764.md?page=1)