Yesterday, I explained the methodology behind the formula involved in ranking every quarterback season since 1960. Today, I’m going to present the career results. Converting season value to career value isn’t as simple as it might seem. Generally, we don’t want a player who was very good for 12 years to rank ahead of a quarterback who was elite for ten. Additionally, we don’t want to give significant penalties to players who struggled as rookies or hung around too long; we’re mostly concerned with the peak value of the player.

What I’ve historically done — and done here — is to give each quarterback 100% of his value or score from his best season, 95% of his score in his second best season, 90% of his score in his third best season, and so on. This rewards quarterbacks who played really well for a long time and doesn’t kill players with really poor rookie years or seasons late in their career. It also helps to prevent the quarterbacks who were compilers from dominating the top of the list. For visibility reasons, the table below displays only the top 25 quarterbacks initially, but you can change that number in the filter or click on the right arrow to see the remaining quarterbacks. ^[1]Note that while yesterday’s list was just from 1960 to 2013, the career list reflects every season in history, using the same methodology as used in GQBOAT IV.

Here’s how to read the table. Manning’s first year was in 1998, and his last in 2013. He’s had 8,740 “dropbacks” in his career, which include pass attempts, sacks, and rushing touchdowns. His career value — using the 100/95/90 formula ^[2]And including negative seasons. is 12,769, putting him at number one. His strength of schedule has been perfectly average over his career; as a reminder, the SOS column is shown just for reference, as SOS is already incorporated into these numbers (so while Tom Brady has had a schedule that’s 0.25 ANY/A tougher than average, that’s already incorporated into his 10,063 grade). Manning is not yet eligible for the Hall of Fame, of course, but I’ve listed the HOF status of each quarterback in the table. Note that I only have quarterback records going back to 1960; therefore, for quarterbacks who played before and during (or after) 1960, only their post-1960 record is displayed. In addition, SOS adjustments are only for the years beginning in 1960.

• Perhaps the most shocking name at the top of the list is Fran Tarkenton, but he gets a big strength of schedule boost (which is consistent with Doug’s findings from years ago). Tarkenton played during some terrible years for quarterbacks, faced a brutal schedule, and played outdoors in Minnesota and New York. His numbers today may look unimpressive, but I’m not too bothered by his top-five ranking here, even if it doesn’t jive with popular opinion. He played forever, which helps, but his efficiency numbers look outstanding once you account for strength of schedule. Had Minnesota won a couple of Super Bowls, his legacy would be quite different, but his regular season numbers would be the same. He does get a bit of a boost by having so many dropbacks, but Tarkenton wasn’t really a compiler. He had three seasons with over 1,000 yards of value added, four more with 800+ yards, three more with 700+ yards, and two more with 600+ yards above average. That’s a dozen years of very good to excellent play.

• Here’s what I said about Joe Montana last time, when he checked in at #4: “[Montana’s] reputation as the game’s best clutch passer has overshadowed how elite of a quarterback he was whenever he was on the field. His high placement validates this system and shows why football analysts need to ignore volume based passing stats in favor of refined efficiency models.” Well, Brady’s 2012 vaulted him over Montana, and Tarkenton moved up because of SOS, but Montana still sits as the 6th best regular season quarterback ever. That’s pretty darn good, and it’s before you begin to add in his 2800+ yards of postseason value added.

• I’m not too comfortable with how this list handles older players who simply didn’t get to throw enough passes. But frankly, how do you compare Otto Graham and his 2,861 dropbacks to Drew Brees and his 7,082? I’m pretty lost, but leave your suggestions in the comments and I’ll see what I can do. Surely Brees has provided more value to his teams because well, he’s been involved in another 4000+ plays. But Graham, Sid Luckman, Norm Van Brocklin, and Sammy Baugh could rank in your top ten and I wouldn’t argue with you. Roger Staubach played in more modern times, but he barely finished with more dropbacks than Baugh. Comparing rate versus volume guys is frustrating enough in modern times (say, Matthew Stafford vs. Russell Wilson), and that difficulty is only magnified when you compare across eras.

• Brett Favre was a great quarterback, but I have a hard time putting him in my top ten. This list seems to confirm that feeling, and that’s before putting Luckman, Baugh, and Graham ahead of him (and, I think, the better argument probably goes in favor of doing just that). He’s pretty clearly behind Dan Marino in my eyes, but I’m willing to hear counter-arguments.

• Ken Anderson, to nobody’s surprise, ranks as the top quarterback passed over by the Hall of Fame. He even moved up from #12 to #10 this time around, after including the SOS adjustment. Anderson faced a slightly harder than average schedule, which was enough to move him ahead of Van Brocklin (note that for Brocklin, his -0.33 SOS grade consists of just one season — 1960 ^[3]In all seasons before 1960, there was no SOS adjustment. — but Anderson was only 16 yards behind NVB last time around) and Favre, who had a slightly easier than average schedule.

• The Hall of Fame needs more 49ers quarterbacks like it needs more Steelers, but John Brodie is another glaring omission.

• Speaking of Steelers quarterbacks, Terry Bradshaw doesn’t fare too well here, coming in at #58. Then again, his playoff performances were arguably even better than advertised.

• Tony Romo doesn’t just rank ahead of Troy Aikman, but he also has abetter career winning percentage. I bet you didn’t know that. ^[4]Of course, Aikman provided slightly more value than Romo in the postseason.

• Regarding John Elway’s 24th-place ranking, you can read some more thoughts I have on Elway here.

• Joe Namath drops from #22 to #26, but that’s still a lot higher than where the uninformed believe he should be ranked.

• The anti-Tarkenton is Kurt Warner, who comes in at #34 on this list. Warner had one of the easiest schedules and played in a passer-friendly era, but I doubt he’ll ever make one of my top 25 lists. Frankly, he’s probably too high at 34, which ignores that he played the vast majority of his games in domes and had four Hall of Fame caliber receivers (and Marshall Faulk) on his teams.

What stands out to you? What suggestions/modifications do you have?