San Diego Chargers: Addressing Philip Rivers' Position on List of Best QBs Today

In case you didn't know, Philip Rivers is freaking awesome. The dude puts up stats like you put up your Star Wars collection for sale on Craigslist. You guys are such nerds.

The past three season, Rivers has thrown for 4000 or more yards. That's in addition to the combined 92 touchdowns to just 33 interceptions in that time span. I don't care how much his throwing motion resembles your five-year-old daughter trying to throw something at you; the dude's a beast. 

Rivers is a legitimate elite quarterback—that's a no-brainer. You don't become the best QB in franchise history in just six years as a starter. Trust me, this guy knows from experience.

But his positioning on the list of best active quarterbacks in the NFL? Now, there's a debate.

The answer varies from third to 10th in the league—we all know Rivers is at least a top-10 quarterback, yet we all know Tom Brady and Peyton Manning take the first two spots. 

To these eyes, Rivers is the third best QB in the league. And while these eyes used to wear coke bottle glasses—now thick pieces of plastic that are inside the eyelids— that's clear. To these eyes, at least. 

Now, I'm not gonna lie—that's a bold-ass opinion that the majority won't take seriously. They'll think I'm crazy, but I'm not, I tell ya! I'm not!

Let's take a look at who's contending for that third spot. Obviously, people are in love with Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers, both elite quarterbacks, for sure. Then, there are the long-shots like Ben Roethlisberger and Michael Vick.

Let's not bring in Vick or Roethlisberger -- though both are fine starters, neither have had the consistency or have played at the level that Rodgers, Brees, or Rivers have. Vick's had one good passing season his entire career and Ben Roethlisberger has only thrown for over 20 touchdowns twice in his career, neither times being recent.

So it's a three-man race for third place.

Aaron Rodgers is friggin' beastly. Let's get that out of the way first, kids. We know that, since Brett Favre's departure from Green Bay, he's removed himself from the old man's shadow. He's thrown for 86 touchdowns to 31 picks in the past three years, since he started for the Packers. It's easy to say that he is—without question—the Packers' best player.

But is he as good as Philip Rivers? Statistically, no, he isn't. And though stats won't matter as much as intangibles (or other tangibles, like hardware), they matter when they're applied correctly.

According to Pro-Football-Reference.com, its Approximate Value stat is its best attempt to portray how important a player is to his team. And though it's hard to come up with a stat like that, it's easily the best available. In that category, Aaron Rodgers has had an Approximate Value of 15, 19 and 15 to the Packers over the past three seasons.

While that's high as hell, Rivers has his number there, too—Felipe has Approximate Values of 17, 19 and 17 over the past three years. That tells us that Rivers has meant more to his teams than Rodgers has since Rodgers started.

What wins the argument here, though, is the success of each QB's team. Rodgers has obviously won a Super Bowl, but he has little else (for right now) going on for him and his squad. The Packers have only made the playoffs twice under Rodgers' tenure, and though a title came out of the most recent, they were also really one-dimensional on offense all three years.

Rivers has seen his teams make it to four out of a possible five playoff appearances. That's not too much more, but what this shows is that Rivers has the advantage of time on his side. He's been in the league longer and has played slightly better than Rodgers has. I freaking hate using quarterback wins, but Rivers' record as starter is 55-25, while Rodgers' record is 27-20. In two years, ask me if Rodgers is better than Rivers, and—if things keep going the way they are now—I'll probably tell you yes.

That leaves us with the other bro up for contention on that coveted third spot: Drew Brees.

Now, the first thing you'll do here is check the stat-sheet for each player. I'll give you a minute ... Ready? Cool.

Yes, Brees looks better on shallow paper. He's thrown for 4000 yards four times and 5000 yards once. In addition, the dude's also the guy who mentored Rivers and had success with the Chargers before Rivers got his starting role.

If we check back to Approximate Value, you'll notice that Drew Brees has never, ever had an Approximate Value of 19 and has had an Approximate Value of 17 just once out of five seasons with the New Orleans Saints. That doesn't mean he's not as good, but that means his teams have been relatively better than both Rivers' and Rodgers teams. Brees has hardware, too, but that season, he had his only QB rating over 100 in New Orleans. Rivers has had a QB rating over 100 in the past three seasons.

The argument some of y'all are about to use in the comments below is this: Brees and Rodgers both have Super Bowl rings—Rivers does not.

Trent Dilfer has a Super Bowl ring. Dan Marino does not. That argument kind of sucks now, doesn't it? 

In most cases, Super Bowl wins are team efforts. When Rivers gets his bling—if A.J. Smith can put some talent around him, dammit! -- he may have a sub-par season by his standards. That's because it takes an entire team to win a Super Bowl -- these are not individual accomplishments.

If you're going to compare quarterbacks, compare quarterbacks; don't compare team accomplishments.

And, based purely on comparison of the quarterbacks vying for third-best in the NFL, Rivers comes out on top.

Carlos Sandoval is co-host of weekly NFL podcast and blog, the Pigeon Toe. Follow the Toe on Twitter: @ThePigeonToeNFL