I'm talking about rating. Now whether you think the ratings are legitimate is another question. But in the rankings whether it be PFF, QBR, or PR, etc. He is bottom half. Maybe top of the bottom half, but bottom half. In other words he is a replacable player by most of these analytics.
Now we can criticize these analytics and there is a lot of wiggle room and context, but some of his supporters, namely you Chloe are a little over the top. I don't hate the guy, I just don't think he's very good.
Now what I like to do on here is armchair analyze what I think I see and debate back and forth about it. It's fun to me. I really like this kind of diversion and think it requires some higher level thinking which is good for the brain. I don't care if someone disagrees with me. For instance, you downgrade Hooker, I think that kid is a freaking stud.
Not a similar comparison, Brissett isn't a 2nd year player who started as a Rookie. He's had time to sit and learn in the league.
What trouble were you referring too exactly?
Quit misrepresenting what people are saying, the vast majority at no point have used terms such as awful. There's a wonderful example in this very topic when two people actually have a sensible informed conversation about football despite having differing opinons at the outset. Think on it.