Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

Jay Z wrote:If Montana was such a cinch, why did the Niners draft James Owens in Round 2? Why take the risk? Even an average NFL starting QB would be well worth taking at the beginning of Round 2. Yet the Niners waited until the end of Round 3 to draft the HOF lock Montana.

They got lucky.

Don't think anyone can ever say for sure a quarterback is going to have the QB chops like Montana did. Or else they'd be the highest paid scout in football. There is always some luck involved when the player turns out better than advertised at the QB position. Walsh got lucky like Belichick got lucky with Brady in the 6th.

Personally I don't really like that description because it makes it seem like they drew his name out of a hat, and did no homework on the guy what-so-ever. Which I doubt is true.

Luck and Synergy are not (exactly) the same thing...
although it is certainly lucky when disparate elements come together to form a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts.

I don't think Brady or Montana would have had the careers they've had if Belichick and Walsh weren't their coaches... and vice versa.

by JuggernautJ » Sat Sep 26, 2015 2:44 pm
"Luck and Synergy are not (exactly) the same thing...
"I don't think Brady or Montana would have had the careers they've had if Belichick and Walsh weren't their coaches... and vice versa."

Indeed! and Divine Circumstance overshadows all. (current Papa influence...)

With any other coach - save possibly Hank Stram - Montana would have been just another Notre Dame back-up.
(He certainly couldn't play Halfback and he couldn't place-kick.)

There are any number of QBs that Walsh could have made into legends. The best of the bunch might have been Flutie.
Coincidentally, Flutie would have positively glistened in Stram's moving pocket.

Brady would have eventually had an opportunity to start. His success would have been completely dependent upon the system.

Any one of a dozen-odd QBs would have been successful under bellyache. Strict adherence to the plan would have been mandatory.
A Grogan, a Morrall, or a Simms are perfect examples.

The only Montana you would recognize would have been a Pontiac and the only Brady a bunch.

JuggernautJ wrote:Luck and Synergy are not (exactly) the same thing...
although it is certainly lucky when disparate elements come together to form a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts.

I don't think Brady or Montana would have had the careers they've had if Belichick and Walsh weren't their coaches... and vice versa.

Montana minus Walsh = Solid starter (Maybe like Joe Ferguson as Glenn Dickey eluded to in Dec. 1980)

Brady minus Belichick & Ernie Adams = Career may not even have happened at all.

7DnBrnc53 wrote:

JuggernautJ wrote:Luck and Synergy are not (exactly) the same thing...
although it is certainly lucky when disparate elements come together to form a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts.

I don't think Brady or Montana would have had the careers they've had if Belichick and Walsh weren't their coaches... and vice versa.

Montana minus Walsh = Solid starter (Maybe like Joe Ferguson as Glenn Dickey eluded to in Dec. 1980)

Brady minus Belichick & Ernie Adams = Career may not even have happened at all.

Yes, I saw the late 1980 Glenn Dickey column in Pro Football Weekly. He wrote Walsh saw Montana as being on the level of Joe Ferguson and Danny White.

Looks like the genius underestimated his pupil.

Walsh and Montana made each other the best of their era. The same is true of Brady and Belichick.

Having said that, Montana was still great after Walsh left, and also at KC. I also have no doubt that Brady would have been successful anywhere IF he would have gotten a chance to play.

JohnH19 wrote:Looks like the genius underestimated his pupil.
Walsh and Montana made each other the best of their era. The same is true of Brady and Belichick.

Much like the other teams of the decade: Starr didn't thrive until Lombardi arrived, Noll got the most out of Bradshaw and Johnson got a pair of Super Bowls from Aikman,

oldecapecod11 wrote:by JuggernautJ » Sat Sep 26, 2015 2:44 pm
"Luck and Synergy are not (exactly) the same thing...
"I don't think Brady or Montana would have had the careers they've had if Belichick and Walsh weren't their coaches... and vice versa."

Indeed! and Divine Circumstance overshadows all. (current Papa influence...)

With any other coach - save possibly Hank Stram - Montana would have been just another Notre Dame back-up.
(He certainly couldn't play Halfback and he couldn't place-kick.)

There are any number of QBs that Walsh could have made into legends. The best of the bunch might have been Flutie.
Coincidentally, Flutie would have positively glistened in Stram's moving pocket.

Brady would have eventually had an opportunity to start. His success would have been completely dependent upon the system.

Any one of a dozen-odd QBs would have been successful under bellyache. Strict adherence to the plan would have been mandatory.
A Grogan, a Morrall, or a Simms are perfect examples.

The only Montana you would recognize would have been a Pontiac and the only Brady a bunch.

Ah, the sweet sting of satire.
How nice to be noticed. I especially enjoyed the Paul Hornung reference (another Notre Dame QB of some note).
Alas, you mock me for that which was not my intent.

Many coaches have excelled in recognizing a particular QBs skills and maximizing his potential.
I'm pretty confident Montana would have succeeded had Don Shula been his coach. Shula seemed to do OK with such disparate talents as Bob Griese and Dan Marino.
Any number of coaches might'e put Montana in a position to succeed... but few probably could've done better at that particular task than Bill Walsh actually did.

I sincerely doubt that it could be said of Bill Walsh (or any mere mortal coach) that "there are any number of QBs that Walsh could have made into legends" but he certainly did OK with that Steve Young fellow. And he seemed to have thought Greg Cook had the talent to develop.
Heck, he even made Steve DeBerg and Virgil Carter seem respectable (for a while).
Flutie would've been interesting....

Brady's success is dependent upon the fire in his belly and the opportunity to excel, not the system he is in.

He of the hooded crown probably would have had some success without his best player. How much is anyone's conjecture (and opinion).

Lastly, how dare you insult my knowledge of geography, sir.
"The only Montana you would recognize would have been a Pontiac..." Indeed.
Its also that state that's square on three sides and squiggly on the western edge.

by JuggernautJ » Sun Sep 27, 2015 10:43 pm
"... Lastly, how dare you insult my knowledge of geography, sir.
"The only Montana you would recognize would have been a Pontiac..." Indeed.
Its also that state that's square on three sides and squiggly on the western edge."

Mea culpa
That statement certainly could use some clarification.
The only Montana recognized since 1889 would have been a Pontiac and the only Brady a bunch.

Meanwhile... magic Tom and his leader today achieved additional milestones.
A few hours prior to the eclipse, Tom, the terrific one, joined the 400 club; and,
the bellyache saw his minions score more points than any team previously versus Jacksonville.
And, to hush the weeping "masses," there was no whining about radio transmissions or questionable balls.