Brees has slightly better stats than Brady but he also has a shitload of INTs.

I've decided GOAT discussions are stupid. You can't isolate one QB as the GOAT when you have to take into account so many factors--the head coach, the surrounding talent, the divison they play in, the talent of the opposition, the way the league operated at the time. Take that last point: Montana played in an era with no salary cap where it was easy to keep the talent around him. On the other hand, he also played in an era when you could actually hit the QB. Marino was an amazing talent but he also played in a weak AFC East and only went to one SB and lost it. Brady has done ridiculously well with mediocre talent but he also has one of the GOAT HCs and played in an even weaker AFC East than Marino (at least Marino had the Kelly-led Bills to deal with). Bradshaw won 4 SBs in 6 years but never played extremely well and was surrounded by ridiculous talent. Unitas was a trendsetter, so how much credit does he get for that? Warren Moon, Otto Graham, Peyton Manning, you could go on and on.

I think we need to stop talking about singular GOAT and start talking about levels. All those guys I mentioned could be Knights of the Round Table compared to the others, but the question of who King Arthur is, well, it's always debatable. Unless Mahomes keep playing the way he is.