- Joined:
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts:
- 57,620
- Liked Posts:
- 37,541
I quoted your posting. What more do you want from me?
So, if I am understanding you correctly...your whole point is that EVERY QB is on this hypothetical "game manager QB scale"...so what is the point in using the term "game manager QB" if every QB is a "game manager"? I don't get it. Why not just have a "QB scale"?
I have an amp...it goes to 11.
You left off a part of my statement and then pretended my comment about low end of the scale applied to Brady and not Dilfer. If you had included the full statement that would be clear to anyone reading so it is obvious you kept leaving off that part of the statement to create a false narrative.
No you are not understanding correctly. I gave you an example to prove that having people on a scale doesn't mean they are comparable. If there is a population of game managers then the guys that are a 10 are not comparable to the guys that are 1 even if they are still game managers.
Just like if I graded speed RBs from 1 to 10, the guy I put as a 10 is not comparable to the guy I put as a 1. You can apply a scale to any subset of a population and what determines if they are comparable is where they rank on the scale not simply their inclusion in the analysis. The analysis is carried out to determine who is and is not comparable and thus if Wilson and Brady are much better then it means they are not comparable to Dilfer. Pretty simple logic if English is your first language Rory.
Last edited: