If you want to not back down from saying something that is factually untrue, have at it. The facts show that over the course of his career Philip Rivers has been a winning QB.
Depends on how you define what a "winning" QB is. It could be by simple win-lose stats or it could be by something else kinda important, like you know...a championship?
But judging a QB by how many titles he has is unfair. That would mean Trent Dilfer is a better QB than Dan Marino. Peyton Manning and Tom Brady are arguably the two greatest QB's of all time but they couldn't win championships when they didn't have a complete team around them. Philip Rivers has never had an elite team around him or a top tier head coach to play for, yet he has kept the Chargers relevant and even won some big playoff games with them. He kept San Diego close to the Patriots in the 2007 AFC Championship game while playing with a torn ACL in one of the gutsiest performances ever. He led an incomplete Chargers team to 14-2 in 2006 (with a big assist from Ladanian Tomlinson) before falling to New England in the divisional round and then to a 13-3 record in 2009 before his kicker missed three easy field goals again in the divisional round against the Jets in a game that the Chargers arguably should have won. He also led a mediocre team to the playoffs and a wild card round win against the Bengals in 2013. He has taken a team that has more often than not been average at best and elevated them to playoff contention. Even the best QB can't win it all without a strong team around him and Rivers has more than proven himself to be a great QB.
My lifelong friend, colleague (we're both attorneys) and sometime roommate (we lived together in law school) have had this running argument since around 1990. I'm a Giants fan, and he is a DIE HARD Dolphins fan. I maintain (half kiddingly, I admit) that Phil Simms is a better quarterback than Dan Marino.
Look, it's like music. It all depends on what stat/metric you want to pick. In terms of total possible career statistics, there is no question that Marino is more accomplished than Simms or Dilfer (or Flacco, or even Eli). BUT... I think the whole purpose of having 55 guys, of playing 16 games a year, then playoffs, is to WIN CHAMPIONSHIPS. I think - and I've said this before - that there is an intangible in some pro athletes that they just know how to win. They know when the 45 yard bomb with acrobatic catch is pretty, and goes on the highlight reel, but the 8 yard screen to set the receiver up to go out of bounds so you can kick the game winning field goal is the best play FOR THE TEAM. I honestly and truly believe that last years Super Bowl was top three of Peyton's greatest performances, simply because he put everything else aside - the legacy, the pride, the ego, the competitiveness - and did EXACTLY what was necessary to win.
I get that I am biased here, and I don't expect people to agree with me. But Rivers and Marino barking at their receivers - while they are on the sideline, I might add, and therefore NOT scoring - and ultimately losing the game is not what I look for in a QB. I think it takes more than a strong arm and quick feet to be the total package as an NFL QB, and Rivers and Marino don't have it. They have a lot of pieces - pieces that Dilfer and Simms don't have - but they don't have the total package like a Brady, Montana, Staubach, Bradshaw, Manning, Unitas, Rodgers (though I'd like to see him win another SB before the jury can enter their verdict).
Poll