Right, so you go by their baseline or average. You don't pick a guy based on his peak, because you may never see it again. I want the highest ho-hum, normal output for a player.
.
I see it as the type of person that tabs Young as their best all-time college QB is the same as the one who tabs Barry Sanders their best all-time college RB. They care about peak, whether it's 1 game or 1 season. I disagree, but if a person prefers that and they're consistent with it, fine. Whatever.
.
That being said, the problem with holding Young so high is that you're literally ranking him based on the peak of ONE GAME. For an all-time season ranking, this is a mistake....so yes, for a CAREER ranking, it's ludicrous.
Want a great dual-thread season? Cam Newton's 2013 was better than Young's, statistically. And he also won a NC. But he had a better passing season, a bigger rushing season.....very likely had worse players around him.
I'd argue being down 24-0 to a Saban-coached defense and winning the game is every much as impressive as Young's RB performance. But everyone wasn't tuning in, as it wasn't the NCG.
.
I think you could say someone who puts Young on their all-time team is lazy. Not as an insult, but with the understanding that they watched that RB, said to themselves that it's the best a player could ever play, and that the case is closed. Easy. No effort. Yeah, lazy.
This is how players of yesteryear often were held in such high esteem, while their statistics don't support it. Who am I talking about?
Guys like Roger Staubach, Archie Manning, Anthony Davis, Tommie Frazier, Joe Montana, etc became legends largely for being great players who had special games or plays.
Earned or not, those games and plays happened and people love witnessing greatness. Don't care about Archie's stats, that game against Bama was legendary. Don't care how bad he played, Montana showed true grit in that Cotton Bowl.
.
There are varying degrees of validity, statistically-speaking, but as long as you're consistent, at least that's something.
