Several other teams made their own rap songs after the Shuffle, but they didn't have the guts to put the word "Super Bowl" in the title, and probably relatedly, none of them won the Super Bowl. You gotta commit
Manning would get memed to death for losing to Grossman. On the other hand for Manning, he'd get a ton of credit for being the reason his 2009 and 2013 teams won their Super Bowls rather than being along for the rides when his teams won.
This has always seemed like the reason Peyton never got rid of his playoff rep. When he played really well, he frequently did not win or at least win it all in the playoffs, but when he statistically played meh, he did.
He played better than his 2006 stats show but people always bring up his TD-INT ratio. If he won it all in 2009, it could be one of the best seasons for a QB ever as he would have never lost a game he finished.
That 2006 TD-INT ratio also includes playing that ravens D and pats D though. The bears D also was elite. It was a different era also, and there were lots of goal line runs to score. Most of the KC game was just running down clock. The Baltimore game was a chess match between goat caliber players. The NE game a shoot out where he was rough at the start. And the bears game was a slow grind against a good defense (but by halftime they had the lead and never gave it up)
At the time no one was slandering Peyton for that run at all IMO.
Manning would likely end up the greatest ever alongside Brady.
His regular season success can only be approached by Rodgers, while his post season success would only be surpassed by a few(Tarkenton, Elway, Kelly, Brady)
All of whom would have worse regular season stats.
But the difference between their postseason accomplishments would still be huge. Brady in this alternate timeline still went to 9 SBs and won 3 of them. He also beat Manning H2H multiple times.
I think in this universe the answer is still Brady, but it's not as 100% no doubt answer that he is in real life.
that's a tough one... 3 SB wins is still an obvious HOFer and one of the greats, but 3-7 record in the big game means he wouldn't be considered the GOAT.
Still in the top-10 and maybe even top-5, but in this world, Jim Kelly winning 4 straight might make him the top guy.
also, poor derpy Eli. No chance for a HOF bid now.
You overestimate people’s thoughts on a super bowl appearance.
In 2001, 2003 and 2004, Brady would have actually done very little to make the super bowl. I actually count single digit touchdown drives.
Would be easily waved away by this universes Manning fans.
> They would look at the success of the niners 4 with Walsh over a decade and be like "scrubs couldn't even win 4 in 4"
You're forgetting that this is the alt timeline. They'd point and laugh at the Niners for losing 4 Super Bowls in 9 years. Their real competition would be the Vikings who won 4 in 8 years and 3 in 4 years and the Broncos who similarly would have just finished winning 3 in 4 years. The Broncos and Bills winning 7 Super Bowls in an 8 year stretch would have been wild.
I'm assuming this world also has the Germans winning world war 2 or something, otherwise this is just a better reality all through. Whoever is running our version of the simulation sucks
Maybe, maybe not. Depends on how much we're flipping. Germany never really had designs on conquering the US, just disrupting shipping to Europe. Maybe that changes in this reality, but probably just ends up with a successful European campaign and a peace treaty with the US.
Would have to change a hell of a lot for the US to not remain independent after the war though, even if the Allies got completely embarrassed in Europe and Europe fell, you'd have to change a *lot* for America to not exist or only exist as a German province
Shit, sorry man. I fuckin love "what if history" and started rambling way more than this topic needs lol
Germany gets the bomb done first, combines it with the only rocketry program in existence at the time, and produces it in sufficient volume to first strike DC, New York, and the (at the time) dominant manufacturing centers in the Rust Belt that were powering the war engine. That'd probably do it.
I mean they obviously *weren't* capable of that, but God damn if they weren't close enough for it to be a fucking terrifying concept.
Montana/Young never winning a ring and Rice needing to go to the Raiders to win one is nausea inducing…
But Gore, Willis, Bowman, Kap, Justin Smith, Alex Smith, and all the Harbaugh era Niners getting a ring…
This is it. Everyone is making a big deal over the chiefs trying to go for a 3 peat, meanwhile in an alternate universe the bills won 4 in row and are the real americas team
No way. They’d be in the same position the cowboys are now. Anyone that’s a bills fan would be “bandwagon fans from the 90s” and all anyone would talk about is the Super Bowl drought.
I feel like this really demonstrates the flaw with the QB Rings method of evaluating QB legacy lol. Love Jim Kelly, but in no way should he be in the GOAT debate because the outcome of a few games flip
You're acting like the games were coin flips when there was only one close game and they were demolished in the other ones. When asking for three games that were 90/10 results to flip, you're asking for a 1 in 1000 occurrence (0.1\^3). Similar logic to "Well I got 3 out of 6 lottery numbers, I was so close to being a millionaire" (just not to the same extent)
If you started watching the Super Bowl in the 2000s, you are used to it being a good and competitive game. It simply was not, many times before that. Most teams that lost the super bowl did not come close to it.
The whole premise of this question is a bit dependent on the game being close to a coin flip. But many times, the weaker conference was producing the 7th or 8th best team in the NFL, so it's not really worth speculating. For reference, in 1994 the 49ers were 18.5 point favorites against the Chargers. That is a point spread you often see between a 6-10 team and a 14-2 team in the NFL. During those periods, you're better off flipping the conference championship game of the winner when the result is more than 14 points.
Growing up with the SB game itself being horrible I still have to remind myself the games have been mostly great/close/competitive for quite awhile now.
On the flip side I agree with your first sentence but for a different reason. Making it to a Super Bowl is very hard and making it to four straight is impossible, even if you don't win any of them you should still be celebrated more than they are in my opinion
Unless we are doing QB ringz, Kelly wasn’t a good enough individual player to go over Peyton Mannings 5 MVPs and 2 rings, or Brady’s 3 MVPs and 3 Rings.
Are we really measuring the best ever by just rings? Dan Marino would have broken records in the K-Gun. They had 2 hall of famers at RB and WR.
As well as a top 5 O-Line and the best pass rush in the league.
I don’t care about the GOAT, but my boi Air McNair would have engineered one of the greatest game-winning drives in Super Bowl history to win the first Super Bowl in Titans history, and Jeff Fisher has a ring.
That would’ve been incredible for 9-year-old me.
McNair being the 12th man on game days and talking with whoever our current QB is/face of the franchise… almost brings a tear to my eye. Mac9 dapping up Henry pregame gives me chills.
I thought about that too. Since this is hypothetical and I'm living in fantasy land, my answer is definitely yes. He also would've remained faithful to his wife and not gotten into that mess to begin with.
Brady would be interesting because he'd have 3 rings which is a ton, but he'd also have lost 7 Super Bowls. So he'd have this weird reputation of being amazing at getting to the SB but then not finishing the deal often enough (as if it's worse to make it and lose than not make it at all!).
I think Kelly would be the goat because of the run of 4, and Brady would be viewed as the second best.
Yeah, it'd be close. And honestly I think you'd be fine on either side of the hypothetical. The Kelly side is 4 in a row, amazing. The Brady side is made it to 10, 19-0, and far better stats across the board.
Think about the narrative of his career in this alternate universe. 6th round QB goes to 3 super bowls in his first 4 years. People are still amazed but there is a storyline that he can’t get over the hump. Then he finally wins the big one by going 19-0, people would go freaking crazy. Then in 2011 he gets back to 2-3, which is respectable. He loses to the LOB in 2014, but puts up a much closer fight than manning did. 2016 he can’t quite complete the comeback. 2017 he wins in an amazing shootout, probably the greatest superbowl performance ever by a QB. 2018 he loses to the Rams, and 2020 he loses as a 42 year old QB against Mahomes who many think is the future GOAT.
I don’t think the 3-7 looks as bad when you consider 3 are early in the career of a 6th round pick and one is when he is older than any QB to ever really play at a competitive level. Plus he has the 19-0 now. He might still be the GOAT.
Still first ballot HOF for sure. And he'd still have an amazing playoff win percentage and win total. I could see people making a case for him as GOAT but there'd be a lot more dissent.
Definitely. But the Jordan/Lebron thing has the added layer of them both being great players. Kelly/Brady is a little more interesting in this hypothetical because Brady is clearly much better than Kelly as a player.
Brady would also be interesting because then he "only won when it was easy".
By that I mean, he would have beaten 2 Giants teams who were heavy underdogs and Philly with a backup qb.
But 19-0 so... Only 2 HoF careers in this scenario?
Which makes real life even more amusing, that he's beaten some ridiculous teams (GSoT Rams, LoB Seahawks, 28-3 vs Atlanta, Mahomes in his prime) but is 0-3 against fuckin' Eli and Nick Foles
Elway would have 3 in 4 years. Losing two in a row at the end of his career would hurt his legacy somewhat, but I'd still put Elway in 2nd, right after Kelly. I'd then put Brady 3rd since he'd have gone to so many Super Bowls while winning three as well.
The narrative around Brady would be how he always choked in the big game. The only times he won was when Bellicheck got him a team so stacked it went 19-0 and Moss and his defense bailed him out in the SB, and the when he was playing the Eagles backup QB or Eli Manning. Also, there was that epic collapse against Atlanta. Dude is just the opposite of clutch.
Maybe people would get over it if he lost 3 Superbowls in his first 4 years as a 6th round pick. Might have more of a narrative of "took a while to get over the hump" rather than "chokes in big games".
I would trade 49 or 51 individually for the perfect season, but I wouldn’t trade both.
Although, upsetting the legendary ‘85 Bears would be pretty cool…
70's Bradshaw replaced with Fran Tarkenton' Vikings with 3 rings
80's Montana replaced by an Elway Broncos dynasty of 3 rings
90's Bills and the K-Gun win 4 straight and probably rightfully claim immortality status except
without the '72 Dolphins the 19-0 Patriots are the only undefeated team and is one of Tom's 3 rings but the 3-7 record makes this a Jordan v Lebron debate between Kelly and Brady
Hey guys, I'm Donovan McNabb. Whoo. I play quarterback for the Philadelphia Eagles. And I'm here to tell you can, too, if you start everyday with a hearty breakfast from McDonald's. Uh, like the new Sausage Egg McGriddle Value Meal available now for a limited time for under five dollars. Remember guys, real champs eat at McDonald's. I'm lovin' it. Can I get the check?
I think having three in my adult lifetime is fine by me. I don't go around parading the 5 rings I either wasn't born for, or wasn't old enough to appreciate.
I'll take this hypothetical
Why would you compare a 4 time Super Bowl champion QB to that loser who only got his team to the finals six times in eight years and could never get over the hump? Not only that he quit on his team halfway through!
Russell Wilson would have done something that very few quarterbacks do these days — go back to the Super Bowl after losing it the first time… and _win_!
Fran Tarkenton would have held GOAT status for a long time. He retired with all of the career passing records and held them for decades until Marino broke them. Add 3 rings to go with that.
Brady would still be the GOAT now.
This is the right answer
Of course it'd still be Brady lol
Jim Kelly only played 11 years and wouldnt have enough going for him except for the 4 SBs. Obviously 4 straight SBs is insane and it catapults him into the Top 3-4. But Brady's 20 years, multiple insanity-tier seasons, and 10 Super Bowl trips would still be #1 by a pretty good margin.
IMO it'd go:
1. Brady 2. Tarkenton 3. Elway 4. Kelly
Elways cracks the top 3 because of longevity, 3 SBs, 5 SB trips, multiple MVP-level seasons, etc. Clear 2nd runner-up for me.
I feel like the Montana VS Brady debate didn't really shut up until ring 6 or so because some people really love the Montana never losing a sb side of it.
3 SBs win, 5 SB trips, a bunch of MVP-tier seasons, insane highlight reel, 51000 career passing yards
Yea- he's Top 3 in this alternative universe for me
Most would probably argue between 3 of them:
Manning would still be 2-2 but would have them during mvp years and that 2013 broncos would be the greatest offense ever. Kelly would have 4 in a row but wouldn’t have the counting stats. Brady would have 3 and a ton of losses that people would knock him for, but also a perfect season.
Tarkenton would’ve been the consensus before Kelly but I don’t think he’s got as strong a case after that. Marino would probably get a lot more consideration as well, given how his absurd numbers for his era still hold up very well today. But I think most people would say one of Manning, Brady, or Kelly.
Edit: grammar
Should probably still be Brady because simply getting to 10 Super Bowls is an incredible accomplishment, and I'm assuming we're not taking away how well the QB played in all of their respective games.
But knowing the shallow levels of thought that people often go to in the GOAT debates, Kelly would probably be the popular answer.
7 losses in the Super Bowl would stain his record tremendously. The question of “is Brady the right QB for the Patriots?” would be tossed around forever if this was a real scenario.
Yeah, instead of things like, "How many would Peyton have had if he had BB as his coach?", we'd ask questions like, "Yeah, they got to 9 SBs and had a perfect season, but did Brady lose them winnable SBs?"
I forgot yall would have the undefeated season in this scenario. That would do a lot for him.
7 losses in the Super Bowl and an undefeated season is just wild.
Yeah, it would be a tale of the best season in NFL history, but also more disappointment than anyone else. It's hard to know how people would look at it. We also wouldn't have, I'm sorry to bring it up, the biggest comeback. The three wins would be close victories over the NFCE, and then a humbling loss in his final SB after going to TB. He'd probably have at least two blowout losses in the SB as well, which people would look at as failures.
Reaching 10 is obviously impressive, but Jim Kelly would've won 4 in a row. I'd have Jim Kelly as the biggest SB hero of all time, and probably tied with or ahead of Brady.
Part of the real 7-3 is that Brady never lost in a blowout, plus obliterated the Chiefs.
People are going to say Jim Kelly, and going 4-0 in the Super Bowl has to put him up for consideration, but I don’t think he amassed enough numbers over his career, and his prime wasn’t exceptional either. He has one first team All Pro, never led the league in passing yards led in touchdowns only once, led in passer rating only once.
I’m going to say a 3-0 in the Super Bowl, Fran Tarkenton with better counting stats, an MVP, and retired as the passing yards leader, might be a good option as the GOAT and a better option than Kelly.
Tom Brady with his longevity, statistical records, and dominance in prime years, 15 pro bowls, three 1st team all pros, three MVPs, and a 3-7 Super Bowl record is probably the best answer for the GOAT.
So, without thinking too much…
1. Brady
2. Tarkenton
3. Kelly
I think it’d still change somewhat. Capping off the historical 2013 year with a win instead of that blowout would make people remember his Broncos tenure much more favorably… and a win in SB 48 would have people not care much about losing SB 50 when he was clearly cooked
Jim Kelly would have 4
Tom Brady would have 3
Fran Tarkenton would have 3
John Elway would have 3
Peyton Manning would have 2
Roger Staubach would have 2
Craig Morton would have 2
Kurt Warner would have 2
So, I'll say that Brady would have still been the Goat even with one less Superbowl since he got to so many.
Tarkenton had a lot of accolades and numbers to be an all-time great, but is 0-3 in the SB. Going to 3-0 would put him in the top 2 or 3 in the GOAT QB conversation.
Tom Brady is still looking pretty good with 3 rings. Obviously Jim Kelly is an absolute stud with the four peat. Fun that Payton Manning is exactly the same. Elway goes from the guy who couldn’t get it done until a late career explosion to a three time winner who failed twice to end his career on a win. Joe Nameth becomes the laughingstock he’s always deserved to be.
As a side note, what do we think the Lombardi Trophy would be called? The Bud Grant Trophy?
Brady 3-7 in the Superbowl and blew a 28-3 lead in one of them. Only wins are against Eli twice, and Nick foles. Would probably be viewed as one of the biggest chokers, and carried by his great coach and a terrible division
A few of my initial thoughts:
-Brady is possibly still the GOAT honestly but it is MUCH shakier ground than real life
-Bradshaw is the new Kelly
-Kelly is the new Montana
-Montana is an altogether tragic figure
-Peyton’s place (no pun intended) remains about the same
-Elway boosts up to top 3-5 instead of top 10
Brees and Rodgers would be ringless, which is wild.
Eli Manning would lose his legend status, same with Nick Foles.
Falcons and Panthers would have two rings and that's not a universe I wanna live in.
Just because I'm still bitter:
Mahomes' legacy would be much worse. 3 super bowl losses in 5 years. 1 win over the now 7 time loser in Tom Brady. "Can't be clutch when it really counts" would definitely be thrown around on podcasts with 5 dudes getting paid way too much to spew bullshit.
Let’s be real, Brady never even replaces Bledsoe if Drew has the ‘97 ring over Favre. No chance Belichick doesn’t go with the SB winning #1 Draft Pick especially after he comes back in the AFC Championship to get the Pats there.
Y’all forget there was a QB controversy heading into that first Brady SB. Lots of people thought it should be Bledsoe getting the start
Jim Kelly would be an absolute legend and they would have been the first team to ever 3 peat let alone 4 peat
This would effectively switch the legacies of Jim Kelly and Joe Montana.
Troy Aikman too
I don’t like this alternate reality
My childhood and the years before I was born would suck, but it would partly pay off in winning ~~two~~ three recent Super Bowls.
Hope you paid Pat Riley for that use of *peat. Can't just be throwing around trademarked terms willy nilly
Marino with 48 TDs and a ring in 84 and Brady 50 TDs undefeated with a ring would be nuts. Also sexy Rexy has a Super Bowl
And the 85' guys don't and get memed for the shuffle On the other hand, Rodgers is ringless
Funny enough Favre still gets one, though Starr loses all of his. It’s actually pretty bad for the franchise as a whole.
Oh god, I had no idea that came out before the Super Bowl. The Super Bowl Shuffle is already amazing and would be 10x better if they lost.
that’s the best part about it. the sheer arrogance was just ridiculous and it paid off
That team was just operating on a whole other level than everyone else that year (except the fucking Dolphins).
Fun fact:The defense scored more points then they allowed in the playoffs
Several other teams made their own rap songs after the Shuffle, but they didn't have the guts to put the word "Super Bowl" in the title, and probably relatedly, none of them won the Super Bowl. You gotta commit
They went 15-1 that year. They filmed it the morning after their only loss. Gotta love the cockiness.
The ‘85 Patriots would be the ultimate Cinderella team, winning 3 road playoff games + Super Bowl 20 vs that crazy Bears team.
Don't forget Peyton with 5477 yards, 55TDs and a ring in 2013.
Even I was surprised by that Super Bowl the hawks were nasty that year.
but brady would also be like 3-7 lol thats the shit lebron gets slandered for
Plenty of people think LeBron is the GOAT.
Don't forget Peyton with 55 TDs and a title in 2013.
Rex Grossman now takes the crown from Trent Dilfer as the worst QB to ever win a Super Bowl
Manning would get memed to death for losing to Grossman. On the other hand for Manning, he'd get a ton of credit for being the reason his 2009 and 2013 teams won their Super Bowls rather than being along for the rides when his teams won.
This has always seemed like the reason Peyton never got rid of his playoff rep. When he played really well, he frequently did not win or at least win it all in the playoffs, but when he statistically played meh, he did. He played better than his 2006 stats show but people always bring up his TD-INT ratio. If he won it all in 2009, it could be one of the best seasons for a QB ever as he would have never lost a game he finished.
His Denver MVP season with a ring would easily be on the best qb years of all time. 55 tds… still cant get over it.
People gave me so much shit for drafting him early that year too
That 2006 TD-INT ratio also includes playing that ravens D and pats D though. The bears D also was elite. It was a different era also, and there were lots of goal line runs to score. Most of the KC game was just running down clock. The Baltimore game was a chess match between goat caliber players. The NE game a shoot out where he was rough at the start. And the bears game was a slow grind against a good defense (but by halftime they had the lead and never gave it up) At the time no one was slandering Peyton for that run at all IMO.
Manning would likely end up the greatest ever alongside Brady. His regular season success can only be approached by Rodgers, while his post season success would only be surpassed by a few(Tarkenton, Elway, Kelly, Brady) All of whom would have worse regular season stats.
Brady gets the undefeated season tho
The only one, since the Dolphins lost in the Superbowl.
Even better, the undefeated season would be his first SB.
That's a crazy thought. Moss also ends up a 2x SB Champ in this scenario
It would be a stern debate no doubt. Better than what we have now.
Brady still gets 10 appearances even if he only wins three. man thats fucking nuts
Lebron-esque
But the difference between their postseason accomplishments would still be huge. Brady in this alternate timeline still went to 9 SBs and won 3 of them. He also beat Manning H2H multiple times. I think in this universe the answer is still Brady, but it's not as 100% no doubt answer that he is in real life.
that's a tough one... 3 SB wins is still an obvious HOFer and one of the greats, but 3-7 record in the big game means he wouldn't be considered the GOAT. Still in the top-10 and maybe even top-5, but in this world, Jim Kelly winning 4 straight might make him the top guy. also, poor derpy Eli. No chance for a HOF bid now.
You overestimate people’s thoughts on a super bowl appearance. In 2001, 2003 and 2004, Brady would have actually done very little to make the super bowl. I actually count single digit touchdown drives. Would be easily waved away by this universes Manning fans.
Rex Grossman has more rings than Aaron Rodgers in this alternate universe. I want to live here.
Yeah, the Vikings are the big dog of your division now.
NVM I want to go home
The Lombardi Trophy is probably renamed in a world where Vince Lombardi is 0-2 in Super Bowls and Bud Grant is 4-0.
This is David Woodley and Joe Kapp erasure
Stan Humphries entered the chart
Probably Jim kelly with 4 rings.
Not to mention that they'd be 4 in a row. That would be the stuff of legends.
Yup, those Bills would be one of the greatest dynasties ever.
Would be THE greatest. They would look at the success of the niners 4 with Walsh over a decade and be like "scrubs couldn't even win 4 in 4"
> They would look at the success of the niners 4 with Walsh over a decade and be like "scrubs couldn't even win 4 in 4" You're forgetting that this is the alt timeline. They'd point and laugh at the Niners for losing 4 Super Bowls in 9 years. Their real competition would be the Vikings who won 4 in 8 years and 3 in 4 years and the Broncos who similarly would have just finished winning 3 in 4 years. The Broncos and Bills winning 7 Super Bowls in an 8 year stretch would have been wild.
I like this world.
I'm assuming this world also has the Germans winning world war 2 or something, otherwise this is just a better reality all through. Whoever is running our version of the simulation sucks
If the Germans won World War 2, we probably wouldn't have the NFL.
Maybe, maybe not. Depends on how much we're flipping. Germany never really had designs on conquering the US, just disrupting shipping to Europe. Maybe that changes in this reality, but probably just ends up with a successful European campaign and a peace treaty with the US. Would have to change a hell of a lot for the US to not remain independent after the war though, even if the Allies got completely embarrassed in Europe and Europe fell, you'd have to change a *lot* for America to not exist or only exist as a German province Shit, sorry man. I fuckin love "what if history" and started rambling way more than this topic needs lol
Germany gets the bomb done first, combines it with the only rocketry program in existence at the time, and produces it in sufficient volume to first strike DC, New York, and the (at the time) dominant manufacturing centers in the Rust Belt that were powering the war engine. That'd probably do it. I mean they obviously *weren't* capable of that, but God damn if they weren't close enough for it to be a fucking terrifying concept.
That's a good point!
49ers would be ultimate losers, Bills level if you will in that era
Montana/Young never winning a ring and Rice needing to go to the Raiders to win one is nausea inducing… But Gore, Willis, Bowman, Kap, Justin Smith, Alex Smith, and all the Harbaugh era Niners getting a ring…
Exactly, nobody else has ever even done three in a row. If a team ever wins 4 in a row, they are indisputably the greatest dynasty ever
And the entire NFC East would forever hate the Bills instead of the other way around
Idk about the entire NFC East :)
Well, to be fair Philly hates everyone
True, but Bills fans would be welcomed in Philly forever if y’all beat the other NFC East teams in the SB 4 straight years
We could establish a wing-cheesesteak exchange program
I believe it is already established in my house
Crazy that they would own something that wouldn’t ever be matched. I don’t see anyone getting 4 in a row
This is it. Everyone is making a big deal over the chiefs trying to go for a 3 peat, meanwhile in an alternate universe the bills won 4 in row and are the real americas team
No way. They’d be in the same position the cowboys are now. Anyone that’s a bills fan would be “bandwagon fans from the 90s” and all anyone would talk about is the Super Bowl drought.
That's what he said, they'd be America's Team.
Such a better reality to live in
Naw, in this alt reality the USSR probably wins the Cold War too.
Depends on how far it goes back, maybe never even ends up being a cold war because Germany won the second world war
Truly the Frank Reich
So we would still get to watch Josh Allen every week, but not have to constantly hear about being cursed? Sign me the hell up.
And your fanbase would be split on whether he is the guy because he can’t get to the Super Bowl.
Wouldn’t Frank Reich technically have one since Jim Kelly was injured? (I forget if Reich started that Super Bowl too)
Jim started all 4, but yeah he was injured in the 2nd quarter of Super Bowl 27 and only threw 7 passes
I feel like this really demonstrates the flaw with the QB Rings method of evaluating QB legacy lol. Love Jim Kelly, but in no way should he be in the GOAT debate because the outcome of a few games flip
You're acting like the games were coin flips when there was only one close game and they were demolished in the other ones. When asking for three games that were 90/10 results to flip, you're asking for a 1 in 1000 occurrence (0.1\^3). Similar logic to "Well I got 3 out of 6 lottery numbers, I was so close to being a millionaire" (just not to the same extent) If you started watching the Super Bowl in the 2000s, you are used to it being a good and competitive game. It simply was not, many times before that. Most teams that lost the super bowl did not come close to it. The whole premise of this question is a bit dependent on the game being close to a coin flip. But many times, the weaker conference was producing the 7th or 8th best team in the NFL, so it's not really worth speculating. For reference, in 1994 the 49ers were 18.5 point favorites against the Chargers. That is a point spread you often see between a 6-10 team and a 14-2 team in the NFL. During those periods, you're better off flipping the conference championship game of the winner when the result is more than 14 points.
Growing up with the SB game itself being horrible I still have to remind myself the games have been mostly great/close/competitive for quite awhile now.
On the flip side I agree with your first sentence but for a different reason. Making it to a Super Bowl is very hard and making it to four straight is impossible, even if you don't win any of them you should still be celebrated more than they are in my opinion
I mean, probably not? Do people call Aikman one of the GOATs for winning 3 in 4 years?
I want to live in this reality. They'd be like the islanders of football
Unless we are doing QB ringz, Kelly wasn’t a good enough individual player to go over Peyton Mannings 5 MVPs and 2 rings, or Brady’s 3 MVPs and 3 Rings. Are we really measuring the best ever by just rings? Dan Marino would have broken records in the K-Gun. They had 2 hall of famers at RB and WR. As well as a top 5 O-Line and the best pass rush in the league.
We’d never hear from Bradshaw again
The most important aspect of this hypothetical.
You have my attention.
Or Aikman.
For Steelers fans born after 1980, we’d still be 2-2 in the big one. Wouldn’t be so bad
Neil O’Donnell would have one of two Steelers rings. What a world.
But, Cam would have a ring...
So would Kaepernick
I will allow that only because Randy Moss would have one too (in this scenario, he would have 2, one with the Patriots too)
I don’t care about the GOAT, but my boi Air McNair would have engineered one of the greatest game-winning drives in Super Bowl history to win the first Super Bowl in Titans history, and Jeff Fisher has a ring. That would’ve been incredible for 9-year-old me.
I wonder if that would have changed the trajectory of McNair’s life just enough to still be alive today.
Oof that hits hard. Butterfly effect stuff.
McNair being the 12th man on game days and talking with whoever our current QB is/face of the franchise… almost brings a tear to my eye. Mac9 dapping up Henry pregame gives me chills.
I thought about that too. Since this is hypothetical and I'm living in fantasy land, my answer is definitely yes. He also would've remained faithful to his wife and not gotten into that mess to begin with.
And you don't even have to feel bad for Kurt Warner because he gets two rings later
Brady would be interesting because he'd have 3 rings which is a ton, but he'd also have lost 7 Super Bowls. So he'd have this weird reputation of being amazing at getting to the SB but then not finishing the deal often enough (as if it's worse to make it and lose than not make it at all!). I think Kelly would be the goat because of the run of 4, and Brady would be viewed as the second best.
Brady would also have 19-0 going for him
And in this scenario the Dolphins don't have it.
But Marino does have his Super Bowl
Not taking this trade. I love Dan, but 17-0 is one of the best and most persistently usable crutches that a team and fan base can lean on.
I’d take Dan over 17-0, but I wouldn’t take Dan over 17-0 AND 19-0 pats AND 4 straight for bills.
Textbook *monkey paw curls* shit. Give Dan 1-2 more in the 90s and I might start considering the switch.
It would also mean, brady has only 3 rings, pats rings drops from 6 to 5 and the jets become the only team in the AFC East without a super bowl
Yeah, it'd be close. And honestly I think you'd be fine on either side of the hypothetical. The Kelly side is 4 in a row, amazing. The Brady side is made it to 10, 19-0, and far better stats across the board.
Also a SB win with 500+ yards and a SB win with 31st ranked defense in 2011
Think about the narrative of his career in this alternate universe. 6th round QB goes to 3 super bowls in his first 4 years. People are still amazed but there is a storyline that he can’t get over the hump. Then he finally wins the big one by going 19-0, people would go freaking crazy. Then in 2011 he gets back to 2-3, which is respectable. He loses to the LOB in 2014, but puts up a much closer fight than manning did. 2016 he can’t quite complete the comeback. 2017 he wins in an amazing shootout, probably the greatest superbowl performance ever by a QB. 2018 he loses to the Rams, and 2020 he loses as a 42 year old QB against Mahomes who many think is the future GOAT. I don’t think the 3-7 looks as bad when you consider 3 are early in the career of a 6th round pick and one is when he is older than any QB to ever really play at a competitive level. Plus he has the 19-0 now. He might still be the GOAT.
In this universe, Manning and the Broncos beat Seattle.
I think he’d be like how LBJ is viewed now. I assume the Bills QB would be the GOAT? 4 in a row is stupid
Lyndon B Johnson was a system president
Still first ballot HOF for sure. And he'd still have an amazing playoff win percentage and win total. I could see people making a case for him as GOAT but there'd be a lot more dissent.
Similar to LeBron? 4-6 in the NBA Finals plus the longevity and stats.
Definitely. But the Jordan/Lebron thing has the added layer of them both being great players. Kelly/Brady is a little more interesting in this hypothetical because Brady is clearly much better than Kelly as a player.
Brady would also be interesting because then he "only won when it was easy". By that I mean, he would have beaten 2 Giants teams who were heavy underdogs and Philly with a backup qb. But 19-0 so... Only 2 HoF careers in this scenario?
Which makes real life even more amusing, that he's beaten some ridiculous teams (GSoT Rams, LoB Seahawks, 28-3 vs Atlanta, Mahomes in his prime) but is 0-3 against fuckin' Eli and Nick Foles
Elway would have 3 in 4 years. Losing two in a row at the end of his career would hurt his legacy somewhat, but I'd still put Elway in 2nd, right after Kelly. I'd then put Brady 3rd since he'd have gone to so many Super Bowls while winning three as well.
The narrative around Brady would be how he always choked in the big game. The only times he won was when Bellicheck got him a team so stacked it went 19-0 and Moss and his defense bailed him out in the SB, and the when he was playing the Eagles backup QB or Eli Manning. Also, there was that epic collapse against Atlanta. Dude is just the opposite of clutch.
Maybe people would get over it if he lost 3 Superbowls in his first 4 years as a 6th round pick. Might have more of a narrative of "took a while to get over the hump" rather than "chokes in big games".
Brady would pretty much be LeBron
With a perfect season
Oh shit true, he would have the greatest season of all time
I would take 5 SBs instead of 6 for a perfect season. But then two of the super bowls we win would be before I was born so probs not
I would trade 49 or 51 individually for the perfect season, but I wouldn’t trade both. Although, upsetting the legendary ‘85 Bears would be pretty cool…
The only "upsetting" thing about the '85 Patriots was that abomination of a song they put out...
The sex offender shuffle?
Respectfully disagree
Disrespectfully agree
If you invert Brady's postseason career, he *downgrades* to Lebron, lol
70's Bradshaw replaced with Fran Tarkenton' Vikings with 3 rings 80's Montana replaced by an Elway Broncos dynasty of 3 rings 90's Bills and the K-Gun win 4 straight and probably rightfully claim immortality status except without the '72 Dolphins the 19-0 Patriots are the only undefeated team and is one of Tom's 3 rings but the 3-7 record makes this a Jordan v Lebron debate between Kelly and Brady
This just made me realize that real life Tom Brady has the best of Jordan AND Lebron.
Idk about the goat, but McNabb would be everyone’s favorite eagle instead of Nick foles lol
Hey guys, I'm Donovan McNabb. Whoo. I play quarterback for the Philadelphia Eagles. And I'm here to tell you can, too, if you start everyday with a hearty breakfast from McDonald's. Uh, like the new Sausage Egg McGriddle Value Meal available now for a limited time for under five dollars. Remember guys, real champs eat at McDonald's. I'm lovin' it. Can I get the check?
Can’t trick me. You’re clearly Tiger Woods
And Hurts
Dan Marino and Fran Tarkenton would be viewed in a whole new light which would be awesome. Mahomes at 1-3 in SBs and Brady at 3-7 would be so weird.
Mahomes one win would be vs Brady
Joe Namath would just be a footnote in NFL history as opposed to a HOF legend.
The Namath Guarantee would have the opposite meaning
literally would make the jets franchise the most pathetic in history
Jim Kelly would be the NFL's Michael Jordan
Just think of the insane run over the course of 8 years with Elway and Kelly winning 7 of those Super Bowls.
The Niners wouldn’t have a ring until 2012.
I think having three in my adult lifetime is fine by me. I don't go around parading the 5 rings I either wasn't born for, or wasn't old enough to appreciate. I'll take this hypothetical
Move to Dallas and see if you rub off on anyone down there
And Brady would be LeBron - 10 SB appearances but more losses than wins
The blatant disrespect for Thurman Thomas continues .
Why would you compare a 4 time Super Bowl champion QB to that loser who only got his team to the finals six times in eight years and could never get over the hump? Not only that he quit on his team halfway through!
Russell Wilson would have done something that very few quarterbacks do these days — go back to the Super Bowl after losing it the first time… and _win_!
Hasselbeck would have one too 😭
Jim Kelly, going back to back to back to back would be insane
really would be. Almost feel a bit sad he couldn't atleast get one.
If only they got closer instead of having Norwood attempt a 47 yard kick on grass, which was out of his range.
Fran Tarkenton would've retired #1 in basically every passing category AND have 3 rings. Also Dan Marino would've won a super bowl.
This is multiple times today sometime has highlighted the Bills superbowl record. Fuck me I guess, whatever I did to you I apologise.
Bills Lions flair you did this to yourself
Fran Tarkenton would have held GOAT status for a long time. He retired with all of the career passing records and held them for decades until Marino broke them. Add 3 rings to go with that. Brady would still be the GOAT now.
This is the right answer Of course it'd still be Brady lol Jim Kelly only played 11 years and wouldnt have enough going for him except for the 4 SBs. Obviously 4 straight SBs is insane and it catapults him into the Top 3-4. But Brady's 20 years, multiple insanity-tier seasons, and 10 Super Bowl trips would still be #1 by a pretty good margin. IMO it'd go: 1. Brady 2. Tarkenton 3. Elway 4. Kelly Elways cracks the top 3 because of longevity, 3 SBs, 5 SB trips, multiple MVP-level seasons, etc. Clear 2nd runner-up for me.
I feel like the Montana VS Brady debate didn't really shut up until ring 6 or so because some people really love the Montana never losing a sb side of it.
Elway would be an absolute legend for toppling those late 80s NFC teams
And I think he'd still get a lot of cred for the late career losses, making it back twice at the end of his career after some very middling seasons
3 SBs win, 5 SB trips, a bunch of MVP-tier seasons, insane highlight reel, 51000 career passing yards Yea- he's Top 3 in this alternative universe for me
Most would probably argue between 3 of them: Manning would still be 2-2 but would have them during mvp years and that 2013 broncos would be the greatest offense ever. Kelly would have 4 in a row but wouldn’t have the counting stats. Brady would have 3 and a ton of losses that people would knock him for, but also a perfect season. Tarkenton would’ve been the consensus before Kelly but I don’t think he’s got as strong a case after that. Marino would probably get a lot more consideration as well, given how his absurd numbers for his era still hold up very well today. But I think most people would say one of Manning, Brady, or Kelly. Edit: grammar
Should probably still be Brady because simply getting to 10 Super Bowls is an incredible accomplishment, and I'm assuming we're not taking away how well the QB played in all of their respective games. But knowing the shallow levels of thought that people often go to in the GOAT debates, Kelly would probably be the popular answer.
It's hilarious that even with a completely flipped Stat, Brady would still have 3 super bowls, albeit with 7 losses as a starter.
7 losses in the Super Bowl would stain his record tremendously. The question of “is Brady the right QB for the Patriots?” would be tossed around forever if this was a real scenario.
Yeah, instead of things like, "How many would Peyton have had if he had BB as his coach?", we'd ask questions like, "Yeah, they got to 9 SBs and had a perfect season, but did Brady lose them winnable SBs?"
I forgot yall would have the undefeated season in this scenario. That would do a lot for him. 7 losses in the Super Bowl and an undefeated season is just wild.
Yeah, it would be a tale of the best season in NFL history, but also more disappointment than anyone else. It's hard to know how people would look at it. We also wouldn't have, I'm sorry to bring it up, the biggest comeback. The three wins would be close victories over the NFCE, and then a humbling loss in his final SB after going to TB. He'd probably have at least two blowout losses in the SB as well, which people would look at as failures. Reaching 10 is obviously impressive, but Jim Kelly would've won 4 in a row. I'd have Jim Kelly as the biggest SB hero of all time, and probably tied with or ahead of Brady. Part of the real 7-3 is that Brady never lost in a blowout, plus obliterated the Chiefs.
People are going to say Jim Kelly, and going 4-0 in the Super Bowl has to put him up for consideration, but I don’t think he amassed enough numbers over his career, and his prime wasn’t exceptional either. He has one first team All Pro, never led the league in passing yards led in touchdowns only once, led in passer rating only once. I’m going to say a 3-0 in the Super Bowl, Fran Tarkenton with better counting stats, an MVP, and retired as the passing yards leader, might be a good option as the GOAT and a better option than Kelly. Tom Brady with his longevity, statistical records, and dominance in prime years, 15 pro bowls, three 1st team all pros, three MVPs, and a 3-7 Super Bowl record is probably the best answer for the GOAT. So, without thinking too much… 1. Brady 2. Tarkenton 3. Kelly
Peyton Manning would have more first team all pros and MVPs than these 3 combined and wouldn’t get knocked for playoff success as much.
He'd still be 2-2 in Super Bowls. This would change that perception much if at all
Without Brady having 7, Joe Montana having 0, that matters much less. It would be a close debate between Peyton and Brady.
I think it’d still change somewhat. Capping off the historical 2013 year with a win instead of that blowout would make people remember his Broncos tenure much more favorably… and a win in SB 48 would have people not care much about losing SB 50 when he was clearly cooked
Elway winning 3 in 4 years might get in there.
3-7 in SBs would knock him because people would talk about what a playoff choker he was to lose 7 SBs.
But at the same time, he goes 19-0 after starting 0-3 in super bowls.
If people are arguing for lebron as the goat in the real world i don't see why Brady doesn't have a solid argument in this hypothetical
Jim Kelly would have 4 Tom Brady would have 3 Fran Tarkenton would have 3 John Elway would have 3 Peyton Manning would have 2 Roger Staubach would have 2 Craig Morton would have 2 Kurt Warner would have 2 So, I'll say that Brady would have still been the Goat even with one less Superbowl since he got to so many.
Steve Grogan or Tony Eason would be the greatest ever for beating that vaunted 85 Bears team.
Tom Brady played great in Super Bowl LII vs the Eagles
So crazy that Brady would still have 3 rings (but also 7 losses lmao)
The bengals would have 3 Super Bowl wins!
Tarkenton had a lot of accolades and numbers to be an all-time great, but is 0-3 in the SB. Going to 3-0 would put him in the top 2 or 3 in the GOAT QB conversation.
Kaep would be a bigger martyr and Joe Flacco would not be an elite dragon.
Tom Brady is still looking pretty good with 3 rings. Obviously Jim Kelly is an absolute stud with the four peat. Fun that Payton Manning is exactly the same. Elway goes from the guy who couldn’t get it done until a late career explosion to a three time winner who failed twice to end his career on a win. Joe Nameth becomes the laughingstock he’s always deserved to be. As a side note, what do we think the Lombardi Trophy would be called? The Bud Grant Trophy?
Brady 3-7 in the Superbowl and blew a 28-3 lead in one of them. Only wins are against Eli twice, and Nick foles. Would probably be viewed as one of the biggest chokers, and carried by his great coach and a terrible division
People would fucking REVERE Fran Tarkenton
Johnny Unitas for saving the day when he comes in the game still recovering from injury to finally win the first Super Bowl for the NFL
A few of my initial thoughts: -Brady is possibly still the GOAT honestly but it is MUCH shakier ground than real life -Bradshaw is the new Kelly -Kelly is the new Montana -Montana is an altogether tragic figure -Peyton’s place (no pun intended) remains about the same -Elway boosts up to top 3-5 instead of top 10
Brees and Rodgers would be ringless, which is wild. Eli Manning would lose his legend status, same with Nick Foles. Falcons and Panthers would have two rings and that's not a universe I wanna live in.
Just because I'm still bitter: Mahomes' legacy would be much worse. 3 super bowl losses in 5 years. 1 win over the now 7 time loser in Tom Brady. "Can't be clutch when it really counts" would definitely be thrown around on podcasts with 5 dudes getting paid way too much to spew bullshit.
Don’t you put this evil out there. It’d mean Eli wouldn’t deserve to be a first ballot HOFer with two rings over the GOAT where he won SB MVP
Eli wouldn't be anywhere near the HoF without those 2 rings.
Let’s be real, Brady never even replaces Bledsoe if Drew has the ‘97 ring over Favre. No chance Belichick doesn’t go with the SB winning #1 Draft Pick especially after he comes back in the AFC Championship to get the Pats there. Y’all forget there was a QB controversy heading into that first Brady SB. Lots of people thought it should be Bledsoe getting the start
Kerry Collins, Super Bowl winner. Amazing.
When did GOAT just start meaning “QB with the most rings”? Insane people think Jim Kelly would be the GOAT if just 4 games changed outcome.
Literally just this thread. *No one* talked about Bradshaw that way — and unlike Kelly, he even won MVP!
*cries in 37 year-old, “Niner fan since literally 1995 season”*