Yeah I know but I was seeing what elite was in comparison. Roger is a better comparison.

Vernon ****ing davis comapared to teh greatest of all time. Really?

It applies to Alex Smith just fine.

He was able to rack up a good QB rating because he made lots of high percentage throws and never took risks.

Matt Cassel is dumb and did more dumb things and took more risks.

He also had a couple of really bad games that brought his rating down...like a -4.7 against the Raiders and a -1.9 against Buffalo.

And we also know he had a bunch of INTs dropped that year.

By the way I never said they are the same QB. But they have similar play styles. Alex got away with that play style more because of his defense.

While I believe that metrics are helpful in evaluating players, metrics should not be the only tool in which to evaluate players.

Moneyball and Sabermetrics don't work exclusively in the NFL. Hell, they're only part of the equation in MLB.

so PFF doesn't have a sophisticated enough rating system to take into account a QB who never takes any "risks" (why take risks if you don't have to?) and never makes any tough throws?

Well **** PFF then. I guess I'll never take that rating system seriously. Seems way too flawed.

Except Rogers took 8 fewer sacks on 60 more dropbacks while throwing the ball further down field for a better completion percentage and 1500 more yards.

Its actually worse. Because we have a supposed "legend" and "guru" at HC( who by the way has NOT been in a gradual yet steady state of decline!/homer ), and a "surefire" GM upgrade( who may or may not have been the trigger man on guys like Rodgers, Mathews, Raji etc.), these guys are getting Full-License for a horrid jackass like Smith. I can uderstand the burning desire to forget almost the last decade of Chiefs football, but that doesn't mean these new cats aren't doing almost EXACTLY the same old song and dance.
Posted via Mobile Device

He's a decent te. He is dangerous.

But it's not about that now. Has to be a Downfield threat
Posted via Mobile Device

PFF is simply reflective of what you see on the field, Dane.

Watch Alex Smith play. You will see a QB who:

Has bad pocket presence and takes a lot of sacks.

Doesn't throw the ball down the field.

Has a lacking arm.

Doesn't convert third downs.

Watch him and you'll see all of those things.

and Rodgers is arguably the best QB in the NFL...

I was just saying...comparing someone's sack total to Peyton Manning's is ridiculous. You know, since his entire game is predicated on not taking sacks and making quick reads.

and somehow after all of that PFF still rated him as the 8th best NFL QB in 2011?

Damn. PFF sucks. I guess I can no longer take that site serious. Please stop spamming those meaningless ratings.

I'm sure they'll go out of business now!

FYI it would be ****ing stupid to penalize a QB for something he didn't do.

And FYI, dinking and dunking is worth less points than attacking downfield, so they account for that anyway.

so I guess despite all of these perceived flaws he's still good enough to be the 8th best QB in the NFL.

Cool! STEAL! KOBE!

I'll have plenty of chances to watch him this fall.

And if he sucks ass, I'll be amongst the first to call for his head. But given the shit sandwich he's been given over the course of his career, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt in Reid's system, with Charles, Bowe, Avery, Fasano, Moeaki and whoever else they bring, in before unilaterally declaring him as a complete failure.

No, he was good enough to be the 8th best QB in one year during his career.

Whether he can repeat that ever again is highly debatable.