So I think this would clear up a lot of confusion if people laid down the system that they use for personally ranking Quarterbacks.
For instance if someone puts a higher stock in Superbowls than another then they will never really agree on each other ranking, however I find they continue to debate back and forth (I'm guilty of this as well) instead of simply saying "we use different criteria for our rankings, therefore our results are different".
For me personally I put a tremendous amount of stock in Clutch play. Perhaps it's because I'm a Niners fan and therefore marvel at Joe Montana, but I think the ability to pull a win out in critical moments on a consistent basis is a big difference between quality Quarterbacks and truly great ones.
For me, I don't think you can be labelled a truly great Quarterback until you have the following 3 items:
1). The ability to play well in the clutch (evidenced by clutch moments)
2). Statistical dominance vs peers
3). Playoff success (not necessarily SB, just success in playoffs)
I think having all 3 of those guarantees greatness.
But enough about me! What is your system for ranking Quarterbacks (if you have one?)
(Also, if you have a problem with personally as a poster please don't post or at the least keep your bias against me outside the forum. Bottom line: keep it civil!)