There is no such thing as a ‘talent’ or ‘eye test’ argument for Brady vs Mahomes


Feb 12, 2017
SMF and LAX to VA and NC
I’m not sure what the sum of all of this means. Seems like some contradictions there

So rings don’t matter, but he needs some more moments in super bowls :wtf:

Also it sounds like you’re saying he needs to win a few rings, and just play a long time, really well

If that’s the case,

1) Then what exactly are you basing it on?! Multiple QBs can meet that criteria’s so what separates them??

2) How do you arrive at your arbitrary # of acceptable rings? How can you say more rings don’t matter but at the same time say ‘you gotta have a few tho’.So if Mahomes needs more to get in the convo, you DO value rings.

3) Otherwise, why isn’t Marino, or Elway, or manning, or Brees, or Rodgers goat?!? Bc they fit your criteria of ‘play really well, for a long time, at a high level, playoffs, etc’

Bottom line…that seems like a loooot of explaining just to avoid flat out saying ‘he needs to get close to 7 rings’ :yeshrug:
Nothing I said was contradictory, you just misunderstood me:

•where you ultimately land in historical hierarchy is a combination of many factors, including, but not limited to, championship success and longevity;

•I don't have an arbitrary ring count, I stated a declaration of fact. No one is considered a candidate for the greatest ever with less than 2 rings. There was a 3-year or so stretch mf's tried to push Rodgers in there, but it didn't stick because he kept having bad games when it mattered...

The pre-Mahomes trio of greatest QBs ever was a pretty set in stone Brady, Manning, Montana. Brady has 7, Montana has 4, Manning has 2. This pretty clearly indicates that you're not really approaching this convo with fewer than 2 Lombardi's; Mahomes has 2 and counting, he's now a Rushmore guy...

As great as Rodgers was, and he was probably the next closest guy after Manning, there was a pretty substantial gap between he and Manning...

•you can have a long prime at a high level but you need rings to validate your entrance. Marino was a playoff choke artist, nobody is entertained as the GOAT with no ring...

Brees played a long time but was only at best the third best quarterback of his own era. And sure, it was a stacked era, but if you're #3 in you're era you're not in the convo for #1 ever---->and most cats put Rodgers over him so the general opinion is Brees was the 4th greatest QB of his own era...

As with everything, perception evolves with time. 25 years ago we could argue Marino as the GOAT in a league that hadn't yet introduced Brady, Manning, Brees, Rodgers. 25 years later we have more information and just better guys have come along since Marino, period. Elway as well...


TLDR, in case you're confused still, you can't be in the convo with no rings, 2 is the threshold for admission; just because you have 2+ doesn't make you automatic (see Eli, Bradshaw, Elway), so it's not simply based on a number, you have to have historic presence along with championship success...