- Joined
- Aug 13, 2005
- Messages
- 19,463
- Reaction score
- 13,230
4-0 is better than 4-2 if you are comparing the standings in MLB or NBA, because at the end of the season both teams will have played the same number of games.
That logic fails when transferring to a debate over the best quarterback for multiple reasons.
First off at the end of a career each QB will have reached the championship a different number of times.
Secondly this means that whoever loses in the SB had a worse season than 30 other quarterbacks. Based on this rationale Case Keenum, Colin Kapernick, Ryan Fitzpatrick and Brock Osweiler all will have had a better year than whichever QB loses Sunday. That in itself should make this line of reasoning a huge enough fail that this so-called evidence is never again used. It completely omits all the other elimination games leading up to the SB; that number would be more useful.
Perhaps most importantly the use of these won-loss records omits the fact that pro football is the ultimate team sport. This is not tennis or bowling or golf. Winning and losing the Super Bowl is the cumulative effort of 45 players, a dozen coaches, and a score of front office personnel. Just because the QB is more important than the RG, it does not mean he is the sole influence in determining a win or a loss.
The use of these stats is low hanging fruit for lazy sports talk radio hosts and football columnists. Other than that the numbers are useless.
That logic fails when transferring to a debate over the best quarterback for multiple reasons.
First off at the end of a career each QB will have reached the championship a different number of times.
Secondly this means that whoever loses in the SB had a worse season than 30 other quarterbacks. Based on this rationale Case Keenum, Colin Kapernick, Ryan Fitzpatrick and Brock Osweiler all will have had a better year than whichever QB loses Sunday. That in itself should make this line of reasoning a huge enough fail that this so-called evidence is never again used. It completely omits all the other elimination games leading up to the SB; that number would be more useful.
Perhaps most importantly the use of these won-loss records omits the fact that pro football is the ultimate team sport. This is not tennis or bowling or golf. Winning and losing the Super Bowl is the cumulative effort of 45 players, a dozen coaches, and a score of front office personnel. Just because the QB is more important than the RG, it does not mean he is the sole influence in determining a win or a loss.
The use of these stats is low hanging fruit for lazy sports talk radio hosts and football columnists. Other than that the numbers are useless.