Anthony!":2fsnx4av said:
Ahh well for you they can be the facts show they are not 1 and 1a. they are at best 1 and 2. IT is very well established that a QB rating of 85 is avg, it is well established the mark for QBs is complt% over 60. So if you cannot consistently reach those marks you cannot be the #1 QB. In your opinion we have to include running, but the issue is there are only a hand full of QBs that run like Wilson or Cam so you are giving them special treatment because they can do something other cannot so you are now comparing apples to oranges, However when we look at the specific QB related things Complt%, Qb rating, TD/Int ratio etc Cam falls short of being #1. SO in other words you want to use the running because without it is very clear he is not 1 or 1a. FYI Wilson led the league in throws over 20 yards and in complt% over 20 yards so there is the answer for that as well. IT is interesting in years past when people brought up these facts and tried using Wilsons running to make up the difference in yards, and TDs everyone said nope that is not how you measure a QB, but now that it is Cam, n east coast QB, who is over 6 foot and a former #1 pick now those same people want to use them. To me at best it is Wilson 1 and Cam 2, thankfully the QB measuring points support that.
I know you love to thump the stat that helps prove your point.
Should we look beyond completion percentage and QBR? (I'm only arguing this because you have no objectivity and its obnoxious, not because I think one is better).
Last 3 years:
Wilson: 868 completions, 10856 yards, 80TDs, 21 INTs, QBR (101/95/110), 1927 rushing yards, 8 rushing TDs, 88TDS total
Cam: 850 completions, 10343 yards, 77Tds, 35 INTs, QBR (since you love it) 88/82/99, 1837 rushing yards, 21 rush Tds, 98 TDS total
So the stats are extremely similar outside INTs, QBR and Rushing TDs. You pick and choose how to define the positional stats to suit an argument, knowing full well that the some of those stats (including the rushing) that make both unique and special. Using running for two QBs who use variations of a Run-option and scramble is extremely important. Don't be ridiculous.
As for the deep passing logic... when taking out yards after catch, Wilson's "deep pass" numbers fall below Newtons, a particular caveat of the two offenses the teams run. And while trying to play catch up as to who's O-line is better, I wonder whose running game benefited the QB the most? Or whose defense over the last 3 years put their QB in better positions.
the rest of your logic is juvenile.. "east Coast QB... tall..."
Admonishing an argument you can't win with objectivity is the same as "I know you are but what am I"