The problem with your point is that you are making comparison between quarterback ratings, when there are many factors (even beyond just talent level) that determine quarterback rating. First you knocked Unitas for having a low rating. This is true, but it is by todays standards. When Unitas played the passing game was not opened up as it is now. Cornerbacks were allowed to abuse the receivers downfield, and football was this way until 1978, when the pass defense rules were liberalized. They were further opened up in 1994, and then again in 2004. Todays quarterbacks benefit from a passing game that is geared towards efficiency, and is allowable because of the promotion of downfield passing by the league. You also knocked Elway for having a rating lower than 80. This was in part due to the lack of talent around him, but also was because of the conservative nature of his first head coach, Dan Reeves. The year after Reeves left his rating shot up some 25 points. It wasn't coincidence, and it wasn't because Elway just suddenly got better. His rating with and without Reeves is dramatically different. This was because the Broncos moved to a "West Coast/Bill Walsh type offense" based on using the backs more, intermediate passes, and was based on a greater total efficiency than the Reeves offense: not using the backs as outlets, have Elway run around and throw deep. Since the league has copied the Bill Walsh offense, quarterback ratings and completion percentages have gone up dramatically. Teams throw less deep passes, and more intermediate passes to the backs and stress higher efficiency. So the rating comparison is an invalid comparison. If you want to compare quarterbacks, and it is something I never see done, compare the skillsets. Why is it that when comparing quarterbacks no one compares skillsets? I get bothered by this. If you're comparing Manning to Brady, compare who gets to his 3rd or 4th read better. Who handles a pass rush better. Who throws deep better. Who moves better. Who has a better arm. Who throws more accurately. Who leads his recivers better. Etc, etc, etc. Stop simplifying the argument by saying Player A has more championships than Player B, A must be better than B. B has better stats then A, B must be better than A. Make the arguments as analytical as possible.