Why many of the so-called "metrics" miss the forest for the trees.

[Blue and Gold]

http://www.footballperspective.com/the-greatest-qb-of-all-time-v-part-i-methodology/


Kurt Warner's 1999 season is 43rd all-time? Please.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

I couldn't get past the first paragraph. I think that egghead way of trying to convert everything into numbers can't accurately be done with football. It has proven to work in baseball to some extent, but even then, there is no way to quantify greatness, like 'The Jeter Flip' Or Kirk Gibsons game winning Home Run in he World Series when he could barely walk much less swing affectively enough to hit it out of he park.

Measuring a guys will power is not possible and in football that is the biggest variable.

 

[-X-]

http://www.footballperspective.com/the-greatest-qb-of-all-time-v-part-i-methodology/


Kurt Warner's 1999 season is 43rd all-time? Please.

That's kind of predicated on a SOS adjustment, though. And we all know the 99 Rams schedule was cake.
In an earlier article, Chase (same guy who wrote that blog post and co-owner of PFF) wrote this:

And it puts him at 5 overall.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=550

That said, it's all subjective when you start playing with an adjusted yards (AY/ANY) stat.

 

[Rambitious1]

http://www.footballperspective.com/the-greatest-qb-of-all-time-v-part-i-methodology/


Kurt Warner's 1999 season is 43rd all-time? Please.

That article................................