[HOF Morten Andersen YES or NO?]

We should exclude guys who only play 7 or 8 plays a game if that......

That's not anywhere NEAR Hall-of-Fame material...

Hmm... so how do you define what is anywhere near Hall of Fame material. If you are not going to leave it up to a vote then surely you must have some criteria?? Perhaps a player has to play 9 plays per game on average? By the way, I have seen a certain punter/kick-off guy make a TD saving tackle or two this season. So does the play have more weight if a player makes a tackle like this?

[Quarterbacks on Money Down(3rd down)]

Look I really like Luck alot, love his game, his personality and I think he will be a great QB in this league throughout his career but the simple fact is his play and and record is overrated proven statistically

You mean, proven statistically with the statistics in which you choose to evaluate him?

...There is alot more that goes into your record than 70 passer rating quarterback with 5 come from behind victories...

...and this thread is attempting to quantify one additional aspect, what's the problem?

[Quarterbacks on Money Down(3rd down)]

Fair point for the first.

The second, however, is an argument on context, and nothing else. It's entirely different situation: much as the Redskins aren't required to be excellent on third downs, Mac owners don't have to worry about viruses because nobody bothers to make them for Macs because of the smaller userbase. While Mac OS and Windows are just as proficient and deficient as each other, the reason why one gets so many more viruses than the other relies completely on existential factors that have nothing to do with the operating system itself.

Just because the Redskins have been in fewer 3rd down situations doesn't mean that they "aren't required to be excellent on third downs". Perhaps they are thinking, "you know what; since we generally don't put ourselves in this situation, it's not that important". Probably not.

" the reason why one gets so many more viruses than the other relies completely on existential factors that have nothing to do with the operating system itself"... This statemest serves as a testiment as to why this analogy is not good because either QB's play on third down (which I assume is what you are trying to point out in the analogy) does not "completely rely on existential factors that have nothing to do with the operating system itself". It relies on the QBs actions, the actions of his teamates, and the actions of the defense.

Also, let's not act like the Redskins are so good on 1st and 2nd downs that we don't have a sufficient sample size for 3rd down data. They still have been in 119 third down situations (as compared to 158 for the Colts).

[HOF Morten Andersen YES or NO?]

He absolutely should be in the HOF. Kickers, while not as important as QB (what position is?), are still an important part of the game of football. (Perhaps we should exclude linemen because all they do is block??)

As a side note, he is a great person as well. I have met him and he is very humble, generous, and easy to talk with. He is an all around great football player and person.

[Quarterbacks on Money Down(3rd down)]

You ignored my ENTIRE point. These stats are hardly relevant for comparison because RG3 is hardly ever in third down situations compared to Luck because the Redskins are vastly superior to the Colts on first and second down. It's like trying to argue that Macs are better than PCs because PCs get more viruses: yes, this is true, but it's not because the software is greatly inferior, but simply because PCs have a much larger user base.

Not that I am advocating one QB over another (although I have my opinion), however, your point is moot due to the fact that the statistic is presented as a percentage which would already take into account the difference between the number of times each quarterback has been in the situation (the denominator).

Your computer analogy misses just the same as your original point. To use your analogy; nobody is saying that Macs are better than PCs because PCs get more viruses, they are saying that Macs are better than PCs because the percentage of PCs infected are greater than with Macs.