Not that I'm against the thoughts that Alex is mediocre, but seriously.. use better stuff to back yourself up.
QB Rating is probably the worst statistic you can use to compare players. Also, your using his career average to make your point which is vastly skewed by his first 3 NFL seasons. His last five season QB Rating avg is 93.6.
that's a funny way to do stats - throwing out the bad years. ps, even if you throw out the 3 nightmare years and give him credit for his exceptional 2012 (which is pretty Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)) his career QBR is 90.15.
QBR is a fairly decent indicator of where QBs stack up. lo
QB Rating is not a decent indicator at all. It is completely flawed. The only reason Alex has a somewhat high QB Rating is his completion percentage. Does this make him a good QB or is that because he checks down like crazy. It's why ESPN came up with Total Passer Rating to try and fix it.
Chad Pennington is currently ranked as the 12th best quarterback of all time in terms of Passer Rating while Hall of Famer Joe Namath ranks 182nd.
Are you of the opinion that passers from the 60's are as effective and efficient as modern QBs in modern offenses? Pro-tip: they aren't. Namath had a career losing record and threw 47 more interceptions than TDs.
I am of the opinion that QB Rating is a terrible stat. That was just one minor sample. There are other players from the 40's and 50's in the top 50.
The point is that QB Rating applies way too much value to completion percentage and interceptions. So the QB's that don't take shots downfield are rewarded for both of these stat categories.
Alex Smith is #35 of all time in QB Rating. Cassel is #64. You can't convince me it's a good barometer of QB play.
