Stash
Staff member
- Messages
- 78,381
- Reaction score
- 102,324
Liability? No, it's simple. Numbers for QBs are up compared to what they were in the past, because the game changes. The rules are different and things are easier for QBs in general. Thus, QBs who have only played more recently with more rules in their favor will tend to have higher numbers.
It's why we don't say Roger Staubach and Troy Aikman sucked based on their passer ratings compared to what we see today.
It doesn't explain why those young QB's aren't sitting atop all of those lists.
Wentz and Goff are trending better. Mahomes likely will be, but since he really just has one year (+1 game), you can't say there is a trend. But as with Dak, those are also pretty small sample sizes/trends.
No, they're not. Here are the actual, unfudged, numbers:
https://www.pro-football-reference....toyear_3=2018&player_id3=PresDa01&idx=players
Sorry, the guy you're attempting to minimize has only been in the league 3 years.You can compare him to other players today. But, using a 3 year sample size in the most prolific passing period in NFL history as a basis of historical comparison is just foolhardy.
And no, I provided proof of the fact that in 2018 those numbers are middle of the road. How can you argue they are not? They are hard numbers, nothing more.
Anyone else seeing this? The blatant hypocrisy being clearly shown here?
Someone who says that "using a 3 year sample size is foolhardy" and then trying to use a 1 year (2018) "sample size"?
You're just making things look worse and worse for you. You should just let it go and quit while you're behind.