I don’t think we can use numbers alone to declare the GOAT. It’s a judgment call based on observation and comparison. I really can’t judge QBs from before the late 1950s because I didn’t watch them or have a feeling for how the game was played and the changes. That eliminates Sammy Baugh and even YA Tittle or others. I also try to include my understanding of how the game and the players have changed over time. When I first watched many played both offense and defense. Most were part time players with summer jobs. Read Paper Lion for a glimpse of the late 50s through mid to late 60s. Most didn’t consider conditioning until fall practice and even then smoked, drank and ate poorly. So we have to take these vast differences into account. It’s not science but it is interesting and fun.
crack free the best QB doesnt have the most wins or superbowls, just like the best baseball player doesnt have the most championships. these are team sports. do you think archie manning sucked? nope. he was awesome. his team sucked. ignore titles. look up QBR, quarterback rating. rodgers is the best ever. https://www.profootballhof.com/all-time-passer-rating/
Nah, he got it. Some people are just emoji ODd. Same thing with his Rodgers/Mahommes statement. Pretty sure he forgot </sarcasm>
I often prefer using an emoji. It's short & sweet and I don't have to waste my time writing sentences which are going to ignored anyway.
