Mahomes vs. Brady: If Chiefs win Super Bowl, there will be a new playoff GOAT

[Hammock Parties]

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/611...&userId=729655

If Patrick Mahomes and his Kansas City Chiefs win the Super Bowl this Sunday in New Orleans, the debate is over. Mahomes would become the greatest playoff quarterback of all time. Tom Brady fans might not want to admit it, but they wouldn’t have to. A mountain of evidence points to Mahomes taking the mantle from him.

Before diving into the debate, let’s clear one thing up: With all due respect to the other quarterbacks with four Super Bowl rings (Joe Montana and Terry Bradshaw), this is a two-horse race. Mahomes has already won more playoff games than Montana (17-16), and Bradshaw’s statistical profile pales in comparison with Brady’s and Mahomes’.

So it’s really down to two. And as you’re about to see, it’s actually down to one. Mahomes is in position to become the clear playoff GOAT.

Admittedly, it’s shocking how little time it will have taken for the torch to be passed. Just two years after Brady announced his retirement, Mahomes is poised to do something Brady — or any other QB — never did: win a third consecutive Super Bowl. Just by getting to this stage, he’s already accomplished something Brady never did. No quarterback who had won back-to-back titles had ever even returned to the Super Bowl in their quest for a three-peat. Until Mahomes. If he wins Sunday, he’ll be a four-time champion before he turns 30 — once again, something no other quarterback has ever done.

As you’ll see, the only argument in favor of Brady being the better all-time playoff QB than Mahomes is longevity. If you argue Brady is still the playoff GOAT because he won more rings (7-4 if Mahomes wins Sunday) in his 21 seasons as a healthy starter, that’s your prerogative. But just remember, Brady won 33 percent of the Super Bowls he was eligible to win; if Mahomes wins Sunday, he’ll be at 57 percent (4-of-7 as a starter). By the time Brady won his fourth title (at age 37), he was at 30 percent.

By the time you’re finished reading this story, you will understand that a four-time Super Bowl champion Mahomes wins the argument in three of the primary categories you would use to settle this debate. Mahomes will have the higher peak (three-peat); his performance in the clutch far supersedes Brady’s; and he has easily been the superior statistical performer.

Let’s start with that last point. If you just want to use stats to analyze Brady vs. Mahomes in the playoffs, this debate won’t last long. It’s Mahomes by a mile.

Mahomes vs. Brady, Part 1



As you can see, Mahomes has the advantage in just about every stat that’s indicative of quarterback success or is typically used in determining superiority. Brady’s only advantage comes in sack percentage and in the places where longevity matters (total wins, fourth-quarter comebacks and game-winning drives). But Mahomes is already closing in on Brady’s game-winning drives total, despite playing in 28 fewer games.

From an advanced metric standpoint, Mahomes’ 0.23 EPA is roughly equivalent to what Buffalo Bills superstar Josh Allen (0.24) posted during the regular season. That is to say, Mahomes plays at an MVP level in the playoffs. Brady’s mark of 0.14 nearly mirrors what Philadelphia Eagles QB Jalen Hurts (0.13) posted this season.

It’s also worth pointing out what an asset Mahomes has been as a runner in the playoffs. Despite playing in 28 fewer games, he’s already tallied more rushing touchdowns and first downs than Brady — the original king of the QB sneak — ever did. And that’s with virtually no difference in passing volume. Mahomes averages 277.8 passing yards per game in the postseason, and Brady averaged 279.2.

Taken on the whole, there’s pretty much no statistical argument for Brady.

But Mahomes’ superiority goes beyond total stats. We all know Brady’s reputation in the playoffs was that if you gave him the ball in a had-to-have-it situation, he was going to make you pay. It was inevitable. Put another way: Before Mahomes, you could have won any GOAT QB argument in favor of Brady by simply asking: If you could pick any quarterback to win one playoff game, who would it be?

The answer was Brady. It had to be. But not anymore. If you could pick any QB to win one big game, to lead your team down the field in a have-to-have-it situation, you pick Mahomes. He’s the new clutch king.

The data speaks for itself. These are their playoff numbers in one-score games in the last five minutes and overtime:

Mahomes vs. Brady, Part 2



The gap between Mahomes and Brady is even wider here. Look at the EPA. Brady raised his play to MVP level in these scenarios, but Mahomes goes to another planet. The greatest EPA regular season ever recorded (dating to 2000) was posted by Peyton Manning in 2004. He delivered 0.45 EPA, according to TruMedia. Brady’s historic 2007 season EPA was 0.41. Somehow, when it matters most, Mahomes is better than the best ever.

Brady and the New England Patriots used to feel inevitable, but they don’t hold a candle to Mahomes and the Chiefs.

Now, to get ahead of (at least) one argument Brady’s defenders will try to use, we’ve analyzed another set of data to prove the point. Eras.

Some will say the early part of Brady’s career occurred before the league became so pass heavy. That’s somewhat fair. Though it’s impossible to assess what kind of numbers Brady might have posted if he had played in a more pass-happy league in the early part of his career, it’s at least worth mentioning the difference in eras isn’t quite as severe as you’d think.

NFL teams in 2024 averaged 1.5 passing touchdowns and 217.6 yards per game. In 2000, Brady’s first year as a starter, teams averaged 1.3 passing touchdowns and 206.9 yards per game. QBs today complete a greater percentage of passes and throw fewer interceptions, but again, the numbers aren’t drastic.

Still, let’s try to even things out a little. Let’s drop early-career Brady and his first three Super Bowls and use only his numbers from 2014 until his retirement, a span in which he won four Super Bowls.

That’s an eight-year sample, similar to the seven years Mahomes has been the starter in Kansas City, with their time overlapping for five seasons (2018-22). So, let’s take a look at how the data stacks up now. Again, we’re looking at one-score playoff games in the last five minutes and overtime:



Brady saw an increase in his performance when dropping his 2001-13 data, but it’s clear his numbers still don’t stack up against Mahomes’. It’s a similar story if you move away from clutch situations and look at their playoff numbers as a whole. Mahomes wins in almost every significant category.

Sure, it’s fair to suggest Mahomes’ metrics could fade as he ages. After all, few have ever held off time and aged as gracefully as Brady. Then again, haven’t we all learned by now that betting against Mahomes is a bad idea?

OK, so when we said there was only one argument (longevity) in favor of Brady, that might have been a touch unfair. It should at least be mentioned that Brady is 2-0 against Mahomes in the playoffs, including a Super Bowl victory.

However, for those keen to use that argument for Brady, let’s remember Eli Manning is 2-0 against Brady in the playoffs, including two Super Bowls, and no one would dare suggest Manning is the superior playoff quarterback. Two games are too small of a sample to determine much, and head-to-head matchups are too circumstantial to use as significant evidence.

The truth is, the further you dive into this debate, the more the evidence stacks up for Mahomes over Brady. Here’s just a small sampling of further research:

• With a win against the Eagles on Sunday, Mahomes will have won 10 straight playoff games, which would tie Brady’s record from 2001 to 2005. The difference, however, is Brady’s Patriots missed the playoffs entirely in 2002, whereas no one has beaten the Chiefs since the 2021 AFC Championship Game.

• Mahomes already has the second-most wins in the playoffs when his team trails by double-digits (five). He’s only one behind Brady, but Mahomes is 5-2 when he has found himself down double digits, and Brady finished 6-8.

• Mahomes’ teams have scored 595 points in his first 20 playoff games (29.7 points per game); Brady’s teams scored 455 (23.9) in his first 20. Want to adjust for era again? Mahomes’ 595 points are more than Brady’s teams scored in his last 20 playoff games, too (568).

• Brady’s defenses only allowed 20.8 points per game in the playoffs, and Mahomes’ defenses have yielded 23.1. Once again, if you adjust for era and only count Brady’s playoff games from 2014 onward, Brady still got more help from his defenses. They allowed just 21.8 points per game.

I understand those who want to stand by Brady and his seven championships. But if you had to pick one QB to win a Super Bowl, could you really pick against Mahomes? I couldn’t.

If his Chiefs win Sunday, the debate will be over. Mahomes will be the greatest playoff quarterback of all time. And part of me wonders: Isn’t that just really saying he’s the greatest quarterback of all time?

That’s an argument for another day.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by O.city

It's not a play in the first half that changed anything.

It's literally, if he doesn't line up there the game is over. We kneel it out.

Cardinals fans hear this argument w/r/t the Denkinger call.

"Well you still had game 7 to win it..."

Yeah, but if he gets that call right, it's over. Right there -- series done.

Yes, the Chiefs still had a chance to get a stop and win the game (or win it in OT) but if that one play right there doesn't happen the way it happened, the game was done. It was over.

I'm not saying ignore it and count it in Mahomes championships column. You can't - it happened. But I can absolutely lament the fact that it did.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by BigRichard

Montana played in a different era and I still consider him to be the GOAT. No way any of the QB's being talked about would have done as well as they have if they would have been playing back then. It was just a different ball game. There should be designation for the time frame in football... We are 15 AP (after pussy) or 10 BP(before pussy).

But by that same token, Montana was running an offense at that time that the league just didn't know how to deal with. At all.

You can say "Well these guys couldn't have done this in Montana's era" but you also have to consider the possibility that Montana, with very little mobility and passable at best arm strength, would've struggled to deal with defenses designed specifically over the course of decades to stop the WCO sort of system that Walsh was just ahead of the league on.

He was incredibly smart and knew that offense backwards and forwards at a time when opposing DCs just didn't.

I don't think Montana is any more 'timeless' than anyone that's playing today. He was, just as Brady and Mahomes, a product of his era. For good AND bad.

[pugsnotdrugs19]

Nick frames it the right way today on his show:

If you are a GM and someone tells you they have your whole team 2-53 picked out besides the QB, and they aren't going to tell you anything about the roster ahead of choosing your QB, who are you going to take?

That's Mahomes if people are being real and removing the hate out of it.

[BigRichard]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

But by that same token, Montana was running an offense at that time that the league just didn't know how to deal with. At all.

You can say "Well these guys couldn't have done this in Montana's era" but you also have to consider the possibility that Montana, with very little mobility and passable at best arm strength, would've struggled to deal with defenses designed specifically over the course of decades to stop the WCO sort of system that Walsh was just ahead of the league on.

He was incredibly smart and knew that offense backwards and forwards at a time when opposing DCs just didn't.

I don't think Montana is any more 'timeless' than anyone that's playing today. He was, just as Brady and Mahomes, a product of his era. For good AND bad.

I am not talking about the different type of offenses and what not... I am talking about the no touch football defenses have to play with QBs anymore. In Montana's time there was just some major brutal hits on QBs and they just had to deal with it. You can't stand there and tell me, with a straight face, that the good QBs now would have the same success back then. They just wouldn't. I am not saying that wouldn't have been good, I am just saying that wouldn't have been as good as they are today because they never have to worry about taking shots like those guys did back then. I don't know how you measure that but it is what it is. You can't even compare Montana to those two. There isn't a comparison to be made really.

[PAChiefsGuy]

Originally Posted by BigRichard

I am not talking about the different type of offenses and what not... I am talking about the no touch football defenses have to play with QBs anymore. In Montana's time there was just some major brutal hits on QBs and they just had to deal with it. You can't stand there and tell me, with a straight face, that the good QBs now would have the same success back then. They just wouldn't. I am not saying that wouldn't have been good, I am just saying that wouldn't have been as good as they are today because they never have to worry about taking shots like those guys did back then. I don't know how you measure that but it is what it is. You can't even compare Montana to those two. There isn't a comparison to be made really.

CBs were also allowed to be much more aggressive back then than they are today.

So yeah Montana in today's era would have killed it. Mahomes would of still been great back then, obviously, but not as good stat wise and that's not debatable with anyone who is being objective

[TripleThreat]

Originally Posted by Omaha

Why can't you understand that SB wins are a team accomplishment? Put Mahomes or Manning or Drew Brees on those Patriots teams and you'd have undefeated seasons year after year.

You’re not wrong, I think just certain people here have difficulty understanding it’s not whether those teams with that specific qb win a bunch, but it’s more by how much. (Thank god we have the privilege of having this debate).


But yes, you put a goat on any superbowl winning roster and they probably win the SB, that’s just the way it is… we are arguing nonsense in my opinion.

Mahomes is the greatest to ever do it, and it will be solidified once he retires,… only reason we are having this debate is because he’s over a decade away from retirement. I love this crap tbh.

[dlphg9]

Originally Posted by Red Dawg

Pats cheating dismiss those 3 SB wins in my book. Deflategate does as well. You don't get to call yourself the greatest when you have twice been punished from the league. They are guilty both times.

Deflategate was a huge nothing burger. Like big ****ing deal, no one cares.

The video taping practices and shit though is huge. The Chiefs have an insane advantage, because they don't run a ton of their playoff/important plays during the regular season. Imagine if there practices got taped and they didn't get that advantage. The Patriots would know every single thing the Chiefs would run and would design a way to stop it.

The thing that I hate is that the Patriots had all kinds of tapes and the league destroyed them without even watching them. Who knows how much they really cheated.

[seamonster]

Originally Posted by dlphg9

Deflategate was a huge nothing burger. Like big ****ing deal, no one cares.

The video taping practices and shit though is huge. The Chiefs have an insane advantage, because they don't run a ton of their playoff/important plays during the regular season. Imagine if there practices got taped and they didn't get that advantage. The Patriots would know every single thing the Chiefs would run and would design a way to stop it.

The thing that I hate is that the Patriots had all kinds of tapes and the league destroyed them without even watching them. Who knows how much they really cheated.

Bullshit. The league suspended their golden boy four games, docked picks and fined the organization. They went after him like he beat his wife. To the powers that Brady crossed a line.

[dlphg9]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

But by that same token, Montana was running an offense at that time that the league just didn't know how to deal with. At all.

You can say "Well these guys couldn't have done this in Montana's era" but you also have to consider the possibility that Montana, with very little mobility and passable at best arm strength, would've struggled to deal with defenses designed specifically over the course of decades to stop the WCO sort of system that Walsh was just ahead of the league on.

He was incredibly smart and knew that offense backwards and forwards at a time when opposing DCs just didn't.

I don't think Montana is any more 'timeless' than anyone that's playing today. He was, just as Brady and Mahomes, a product of his era. For good AND bad.

You know what I hate about the "these guys couldn't do it in so and so era"?

Players now are so much better than they were 20+ years ago. The defenders of this age are so much more athletic than they were back in the day.

People act like Patrick Mahomes would be destroyed, but I just don't think that's the case. He's sneaky athletic and does a good job of avoiding being hit. He's legitimately hard to hit and if guys now are having a hard time, then I think guys back in the day would have a really hard time hitting him.

[Misplaced_Chiefs_Fan]

Drew Brees with a great analysis of Patrick Mahomes:

Drew Brees was great on Mahomes and the "true brilliance" he developed.

"In the past I used to see him as a freelance player, doesn't have his feet set...it didn't look super rhythmic. The more I watched him the more I recognized that I think he truly creates his own rhythm." pic.twitter.com/DAcuTanrhe

— Kevin Clark (@bykevinclark) February 7, 2025

[Fishels]

I have legitimately believed that Mahomes could end up with 7 plus rings since SB 54. Am I delusional?

I think it kind of depends on how his age affects his play but he just feels inevitable. If we win tomorrow he’s not that far behind.

Even if he had to go to another team in his 40’s I would root for him

[Fishels]

Originally Posted by SHOWTIME

Says who? Brady re-wrote what it meant to be the GOAT. The Montana standard was 4-0 in super bowls and no INTs. Brady changed that narrative. Mahomes has a chance to do the same.

If Mahomes 3-peats and wins another 2, he'll have 6 in total and the three-peat could be seen as a sort-of tie breaker. H2H is such a silly argument when Brady didn't even play well in the 2018 AFCCG (1 TD, 2 INTs) despite playing the worst defense in the NFL under Bob Sutton.

Also Mahomes had no O line in SB 55. Mahomes was not the reason we lost either game. Dee ford dumbass offsides and we would have been there first year

[DRM08]

Originally Posted by pugsnotdrugs19

Nick frames it the right way today on his show:

If you are a GM and someone tells you they have your whole team 2-53 picked out besides the QB, and they aren't going to tell you anything about the roster ahead of choosing your QB, who are you going to take?

That's Mahomes if people are being real and removing the hate out of it.

If I was a GM, I would go with Brady due to the known longevity factor. Brady played at a very high level for over 20 years. Mahomes has been awesome for 7 years, but we don't know what might happen in the future with injury & aging. The injury stuff is a major wild card.

[suzzer99]

This is an incredible 4 minutes by Tom Brady. Say what you want about him as an analyst, but he’s so much more comfy and informative in these settings. His emphasis on being prepared for the moment always comes through. pic.twitter.com/zFnPvJm3k9

— Steve Perrault (@Steve_Perrault) February 8, 2025

At 2:10 Brady starts talking about the Bucs Super Bowl, says he knew everything our D was going to do from they way they moved around pre-snap. Crazy.

Also calls Dirty Dan "Nick Sorenson"

[Titty Meat]

Brady never got blown out in a super bowl Mahomes has been blown out in 2 including one against Brady