It wouldn't change much really. For instance, one of the most glaring examples at the top of the list is Tim Couch, who played in the SEC.

Kidding or not: rochambeau

This isn't a predictor of success. It's a predictor failure. As you near the top of that list (working up from the bottom), the presence of Tim Couch indicates that your chance of being a complete bust is decreasing into the sub-20% range.

ALSO

You should take into account the quality of the QB's own Defense, Special Teams, Running game, and WR dropped balls. This way you know what kind of support they had.

If they have a ton of support, it might ding them. If they performed well in spite of shitty support (Geno) it would be a credit to them.

Look at Peyton Manning compared to Ryan Leaf just based on college stats...

Quarterback Rating
The NCAA formula is: [ { (8.4 * yards) + (330 * touchdowns) - (200 * interceptions) + (100 * completions) } / attempts ].

lets remember one thing

Flacco is a recent phenomenon.

if Rahim Moore didn't exist the majority would still consider him an inconsistent, non-franchise QB

I don't think you're going to appreciably alter the results, you're just making the calculation more difficult.

This is precisely why I made the post I did.

This isn't an indicator of SUCCESS, it's an indicator of FAILURE.

Flacco is clearly NOT a failure and his number would put him at the very bottom of the "strong likelihood of success" category. That means he might have a 30 or 40% chance of sucess if he's at the bottom of that group.

But it also means he has a near zero chance of being a COMPLETE BUST.

Maybe. I'm just throwing shit out there.

Maybe CDCOX wants to get all nasty with it.

You're missing the point. This is ESPN's formula. ESPN is telling us there are no good QB options. According to THEIR formula, Geno is about as can't miss as you can get.

Keep in mind......from 2009.

True, but that's a few seasons, not a decade or anything.

You should send this in and ask them if their research team's formulas are bullshit, or if their current analyst predictions are bullshit. One way or the other, that's pretty blatant hypocrisy.

anybody who puts Flacco in the top 10 is CRAZY

he had a postseason of a lifetime...he also got a 1% on par with the Music City Miracle to have said postseason

PERHAPS NEXT YEAR if he parlays this Super Bowl into an actual regular season where he doesn't have 4 Tom Brady games, 4 Matt Schaub games, 2 Andy Dalton games and 6 Mark Sanchez games I'll be willing to reconsider.

As of right now, Flacco is who he is...a SUPREMELY talented INCONSISTENT QB who sometimes looks like the best in the league but often looks like Mark Sanchez as well.

He is the most confusing QB I've ever watched in my life. Maybe it really was Cam Cameron holding him back...I don't know.

but there is no way that, because of one Rahim Moore I'd take Joe Flacco over:

Aaron Rodgers
Tom Brady
Peyton Manning
Eli Manning
Drew Brees
Colin Kaepernick
Russel Wilson
Andrew Luck
RGIII
Matt Ryan
Ben Roethlisberger
Cam Newton (I admit I appear to be higher on him than most)

but again...I'm not ruling out this Super Bowl elevating Flacco to 'swagger mode' where he finally stops with the inconsistency and becomes a true franchise QB.

Until then, no way. He still has something to prove in my eyes.