Did Jerry Rice make Joe Montana better or did Joe Montana make Jerry Rice better?

Question

I think Jerry Rice made Montana better..... Because any great running back would make any NFL QB look good. If a QB didn't have a good running back it makes alot harder game for him. Because a good running back knows how to out hustle defenders and get himself open for the QB to have a easy past. I think a great running back could make the worst QB in the NFL look good.

Answer 1

Jerry Rice wasn't a running back... dummy.

He was the greatest wide receiver of all time. He did well under both Montana and Steve Young, and all three of them looked great playing with one another, so it's hard to say who made who look better

Answer 2

Joe Montana did win Super Bowl 16 before Jerry Rice join the 49ers, throwing to Dwight Clark and Freddie Solomon. So it's not like Montana didn't win any championships without Rice. And Rice won with Steve Young as QB. So they were great without each other, and even better with each other.

The West Coast offense is predicated on a short accurate passing game. Montana, who didn't have the strongest arm, was perfect for the system because he threw accurate passes and could look down 3-4 options. Try getting Rex Grossman to look at 2 options... Rice wasn't the fastest or biggest WR, but he ran excellent patterns, had great hands, and could break away from defenders. I remembered Deion Sanders couldn't cover Rice when he was a Falcon and joined the Niners to win a Super Bowl.

Sure Montana and Rice would have been great players without each other. With each other, they are legends and Hall of Famers in the NFL.

Answer 3

totally trick question. Montana to Rice was the rarest of combinations you will ever find. Remember when drafted a lot of teams thought Rice was not fast and Montana didn't have the arm strength. But, to answer, Joe Montana put the ball exactly where it needed to be in Jerry Rice's hands, so Joe made Jerry better. A lesser QB would not have done the same.

Answer 4

First I have no idea why you are talking about running backs because Jerry Rice was a wide receiver. And are you kidding? Before Jerry Rice was on the 49ers he played at Mississippi Valley State. I know that he set all the records there, but it's still D 1AA. In his entire NFL career he had a Hall of Fame QB to throw to him. First he had Joe Montana. Then he had Steve Young. Even when he was with the Raiders he had Rich Gannon. Look I'm not trying to say that Jerry Rice isnt the best wide receiver ever because he is, but he wouldnt have had a good of a career if he had been on teams with worse quarterbacks.

Answer 5

first off Jerry Rice was a Wide Receiver, NOT a running back.

secondly, they both made each other better Equally. if you look at statistics alone,
Joe Montana's numbers w/o rice is constant with or without rice (he played several years before rice did), he also won 2 superbowls without rice.
now the same with rice, he did great statistically with or without Montana, but that is debateable only because his next QB was Steve Young, also a Hall of Famer, but he did well for an old WR on other teams too (also won a superbowl without Montana, and got 3 TD in that superbowl too)

they both proved that they didn't NEED each other to be great. Joe Montana in the early 80's did great and won superbowls w/o rice. Rice in the 90's exceled without Joe Montana. as a team however they made it easier to win championships (3 superbowls together)

if you what to know who made them great in the first place, look at Bill Walsh

Answer 6

Montana wasn't all that successful when he left Rice and The Niners. However, without Montana Rice enjoyed success with QB's like Steve Young, Steve Bono, Rich Gannon and, for a brief time Matt Hasselbeck. Rice is the greatest player in NFL history.

Answer 7

I would say Jerry rice benefited form Montana. Montana had already won two rings so their was no dire need for a WR. Besides who threw the ball if anything Montana helped Rice get those numbers to the magnitude they were. Besides how many WR spend their career with not one but 2 HOF and a QB in the prime of his career. Not taking anything away from Rice since he is one of the if not the greatest player of all time he stilled needed someone to throw to him. Plus the westcoast offense was perfect for him. It really accented his run after the catch abilities. At the end of the day you have to give it to the QB because do you really think he could have put up number like that with someone like rex grossman

Answer 8

This is just like asking if Marvin Harrison made Peyton Manning better or if Peyton Manning made Marvin Harrison better. Like many of the people who answered before me have said, it goes both ways. QB-WR chemistry is a rare find, and Montana-Rice, as well as Manning-Harrison, had that chemistry.

That being said, IF I had to choose one player making the other better, I would say Montana made Rice better because Montana was a Niner before Rice, and after Kansas City acquired Montana, the Chiefs defeated the Niners in Montana's only game against them.

Answer 9

This is very simple......it goes both ways.....if you think Montana would have been just as good without Rice, then check out Dan Marino's career. He holds almost every passing record, but he had no super bowl rings because of his supporting cast.

And Jerry Rice wouldn't have won the super bowls with a QB like Gus Frerrote or similar.

Answer 10

I would have to say that they made each other. Though both are talented, without each other it just would not have worked. Imagine if Jerry Rice had spent his whole career playing with a quarterback the caliber of Joey Harrington for his entire career. He wouldn't be the Jerry Rice that we know today. What if Montana had played with a wide receiver the caliber of J.J. Stokes as his #1 option for his career. He would not be the Joe Montana that we have today. So I think it's safe to say that they made each other.