Hawknight
Well-known member
While Geno Smith has put up respectable numbers in the past two seasons, including a Pro Bowl selection and a comeback player of the year award in 2022, the notion that he has “top ten” statistics requires scrutiny. The "top ten" designation can be subjective based on which stats are emphasized (e.g., passing yards, touchdowns, passer rating). While he has excelled in some areas, such as completion percentage, other elite quarterbacks consistently outperform him in key metrics such as yards per game, touchdown-to-interception ratio, and deep-ball accuracy. Therefore, while his numbers are solid, they do not necessarily place him among the NFL's elite quarterbacks across all metrics.
It’s true that Geno's current contract provides better value compared to the massive deals of some other quarterbacks not on rookie contracts. However, contract value doesn't equate to being a franchise quarterback. It speaks more to market dynamics and the team’s ability to secure him at a favorable price. Geno Smith's contract extension was for three years, $105 million, which is far less than other starting QBs, but that doesn't inherently make him better than those with larger contracts . His value in terms of performance relative to salary might be high, but this argument should not be conflated with him being an elite or top-tier QB.While the results Geno Smith produced in the past two seasons are measurable and repeatable, this is a small sample size compared to other established franchise quarterbacks. The "scientific method" relies not just on repeatability but also on larger, representative sample sizes. Two good seasons out of a 10-year career (with earlier struggles) could suggest a late-career resurgence, but it doesn’t provide enough evidence to declare him a consistently elite quarterback.
Additionally, several of Geno’s successes were context-dependent, such as Pete Carroll’s system and a run-heavy offense that supports his strengths. His performances have improved, but calling him a top-tier QB based solely on these recent performances may overestimate the evidence.
The reference to Seahawks' offensive coordinator Shane Waldron or Pete Carroll praising Geno Smith is a classic example of coach speak. Coaches often praise their players to build confidence and keep the locker room united. While their praise for Geno may be genuine, it doesn't necessarily elevate him to franchise QB status. Praise from coaches is common, but it should not be conflated with hard data. Moreover, Geno being appreciated by the coaching staff doesn't automatically mean he is on par with elite QBs like Patrick Mahomes or Josh Allen.
Being in the minority in a fan poll doesn’t invalidate an argument. This is an appeal to popularity fallacy, where the majority opinion is used to suggest that something must be correct. Fans often have emotional investment in their team’s players and may not analyze performance with the same rigor as analysts or insiders. Just because Geno Smith is well-liked by fans doesn't necessarily confirm his status as an elite quarterback.
While Geno Smith has been performing well and offers good contract value, labeling him a franchise quarterback or placing him in the top ten is an oversimplification. His recent success is encouraging, but the full scope of his career must be considered when making such judgments. Context, system fit, and small sample sizes make it premature to declare him an elite QB. The argument for Geno as a franchise quarterback lacks the depth needed when compared to players who have demonstrated consistent excellence over longer periods.
Thank you for engaging, but let’s clarify a couple of things. Holding a minority opinion does not inherently weaken an argument, nor does majority consensus automatically validate the opposite. In fact, minority viewpoints often bring valuable, critical perspectives that challenge the majority to think more deeply. Disagreement is essential in debates, particularly on a forum where multiple angles deserve to be considered.
By claiming to speak directly for “lurkers” or implying that the majority is always right, you’re invoking the appeal to popularity fallacy, where an argument’s merit is judged based on the number of people who agree with it. This fallacy suggests that popular beliefs are inherently true, which isn't the case in nuanced discussions like sports, where data, context, and interpretation all play significant roles.
Also, my analysis of Geno Smith’s performance wasn’t just based on opinion—it referenced measurable stats and tangible outcomes, such as passer rating, touchdowns, and sack rates, just as you did. Ultimately, it's this blend of quantitative data and qualitative analysis that informs the most well-rounded discussions, rather than relying on majority opinion alone.
