Fair enough. And it is true, as you show, that the rules are more favorable to QB's in the 2010's than they were in the 2000's, just like it was more favorable in the 2000's than than was in the 90's.
Here's what I don't understand, if the rules make it more favorable for QB success now than in past decades, and there are numerous examples of QB's of the past having horrendous first seasons who went on to improve and become franchise QB's, why would that be less likely now? Wouldn't more favorable rules applied to hitting the QB and WR's mean that there's more for growth? And why do you discount evidence of past QB's with terrible early years going on to become franchise QB's because it was harder to play the position then?
Certainly human nature hasn't changed in the last 20 years. People still have the ability to grow.