How is "rating" defined? By a consensus of subjective opinions? By statistics?
How does one measure deviation from this rating? And to what extent of variation should one consider a player 'overrated'? Lets take the case of Rodgers, since everyone loves to defend and attack him.
What I'm trying to say is, it's a loaded question because you're* going to get Rodgers detractors coming in here, posting a few sample statistics (generally of the # wins or 4th quarter comeback kind) to declare him "overrated". Well, if you're going to tell me that, then tell me the criteria from which Rodgers is being rated. Tell me if you're basing this rating on consensus or are we taking some select opinions, usually rather extreme hypotheses to counter. Tell me to what extent Rodgers had erred from consensus (or that 1 opinion) that you've decided that he warrants an 'overrating'. Tell me the emphasis you've applied to the complex set of variables (wins, TDs, yards, comebacks, injuries, moustache, speech, whatever) to determine the overall aberration.
If you can tell me all that, then you've convinced me that Rodgers is overrated. Because right now all I'm seeing from most people is a roundabout way of just declaring your likes or dislikes of players.
*'You' used for grammar's sake, and not directed to any individual person.
"TheEngineer" wrote: