Another QB ranking from football perspective

[Rupert Patrick]

....In eras with less passing, the position should be discounted, since it doesn't have the same level of impact....

Not to argue but in a way they did more than modern QBs.
Many of the quarterbacks of whom we would be speaking called their own plays.

So I guess I agree with Rupert in that we should think of the eras differently.
Before the helmet-radio (or messenger guards, etc) Quarterbacks called plays and directed the offense on the field.
Nowadays (post whatever criteria you choose to use) Passers throw the football where they are told to.

The criteria for the position has changed as have the rules (especially regarding the passing game).
Not only are there difference between eras but one might almost argue the two positions are the same only in name (and the fact that both throw the ball).

I believe we've discussed this before but where would one draw the line in eras?

I would perhaps consider three distinct "eras."
Before 1940 or so (when passing was a rarity), 1940-1978 (??) when the rules changed and post-1978 for the "modern" passing game.

I draw the line at the 1970 merger/realignment. You have 10/12/16 team leagues on one side of the line, and 26/28/32 team leagues on the other side.

[JuggernautJ]

I draw the line at the 1970 merger/realignment. You have 10/12/16 team leagues on one side of the line, and 26/28/32 team leagues on the other side.

If one is going to draw a single line that makes as much sense as anywhere else.
I'm sure I'd choose either there or '78 for the rules changes.

But I do think any division is somewhat arbitrary and artificial.
Comparing some of the great quarterbacks of the 50's and 60's (Van Brocklin, Unitas, etc) with those of the very early game (Friedman, Clark, etc) is problematic.

Placing things in their proper context is often one of the most difficult tasks for a historian.