In my opinion, proponents of the rings argument do not push the issue, hoping their personal observations of quarterback skill level are not debated. That said, I will always side with Joe Montana over Terry Bradshaw every time. Montana ran the West Coast offense to perfection. He could throw the short, intermediate and deep route on the money within Bill Walsh's offense. He made pretty good throws while improvising. On the other hand, Bradshaw intermediate passes were pretty solid. He had the gun for the short passes, especially the out patterns but he tend to lead his receivers a little too much at times. His deep ball wasn't spectacular, but his receivers made more than their share of great catches. Statwise, I'm just not going to pump up Bradshaw. The man threw 212 touchdowns along with 210 interceptions. I would never characterize him as a gambler like Brett Favre, but sometimes Bradshaw would just heave it and Lynn Swann and John Stallworth would make his passes look a LOT better caught than delivered. Plus, the man couldn't spell the word cat. Just kidding. People who have heard or read my comments about Tom Brady in the past know how I feel about him. He's an excellent quarterback, but he should always thank Adam Vinateri (sp?) for a good portion of his championship legacy. Granted, Brady didn't crack at the end of his early Super Bowls and got his team into scoring position, but Vinateri was clutch. The man solidified the pump fist after each Super Bowl winning kick.