Dan Soloman, an Austin-based freelance writer, has devised what he not-so-affectionately refers to as The Matt Ryan Test. Here's the article where it's explained. And this is his description:
Here’s a way to determine whether a team has a decent quarterback in place or not — let’s call it The Matt Ryan Test. Matt Ryan, the Atlantaquarterback, is an above-average player whose best years are still ahead of him, but he’s unlikely to ever be confused with Joe Montana or Johnny Unitas — the very definition of "decent." The Matt Ryan Test is this: If you’d trade your team’s quarterback for Matt Ryan in an even exchange, then your team doesn’t have a decent quarterback in place.
Yikes. I don't like that. It's unlikely to catch on, especially if Nolan can deliver. His logic is flawed. There are less efficient QBs you'd label as "decent." For example, during their 2011 campaigns, Vick, Smith, Flacco, Cutler, Roethelisberger, Schaub, and Rivers were less efficient than Ryan.
But c'mon! Facts don't matter. Not when you can rely on a bad playoff record to make you're point. The 2011, 2010 , and 2008 weren't that good anyway.