It's also growing more and more unfair to compare a modern QB with any QB of the past because of the way the NFL has taken it upon itself to coddle all the poor little pussy QBs who can't take a hit, which is duplicitous as all get out because they don't really care at all about the health of the players themselves, it's really just about not wanting to risk injuring the faces of franchises and the faces of the NFL. All about the money.
This is largely bulltrout. The NFL, like anything, evolves over time. As medical research is done, the game will evolve to best reflect said research. If we are going to say that it is unfair to compare Drew Brees' achievements to that of Dan Marino, then we should also make a caveat to say that it is unfair to compare Dan Marion, or any relatively modern player, to any of the first great football players who played the game without pads and a single leather helmet. The game evolves and the rules evolve with it. Get over it.

The last half of that specific paragraph makes no sense. Does the NFL care about money? Yes. The NFL is, first and foremost, a business. Without money, the sport would die. However, without big names like Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Drew Bress, etc. fans would lose interest and the money would wither and die out. Big name players like Brady and Manning, who "can't take a hit" are one of the key reasons that the game is as lucrative as it is these days. So yes, the NFL cares about money, but it also cares about big name players because they are the gateway into making money.

Both of these 'arguments' irk me every time I hear someone utter them without actually know what they are talking about.

As for Brady being the best QB ever? No. Not by a longshot. He's certainly up there with some of the greats, but he isn't leading the pack by any means. Saying the Brady is a horrible QB or that he is overrated is, well, dumb.