Andrew, here's a quote from one of the links:
But that isn’t necessarily appropriate. Even if all elite quarterbacks, Rodgers included, had the exact same odds when it came to 4th quarter comeback opportunities, and therefore chance was completely responsible for any discrepancy in the results, over time, there would undoubtedly still be an elite quarterback like Rodgers who would have that 3-18 record (about 1% of all star quarterbacks, in fact!). Do you see why?

Some in the statistical community refer to this as the Wyatt Earp Effect. You’ve undoubtedly heard of Wyatt Earp, who is famous precisely because he survived a large number of duels. What are the odds of that? Well, it depends on your perspective. The odds that one person would survive a large number of duels? Given enough time, it becomes a statistical certainty that someone would do just that.
The comparison of Aaron Rodgers record in 4th-quarter comebacks to Wyatt Earp is badly flawed. First, in a duel, each one has a chance to "win." A quarterback who has a lead by definition cannot "win" a comeback, so you can't include those "wins" in the statistical category. And of course, unlike a single-elimination draw (a dual being the ultimate), a quarterback may play the same opponent many times, with 4th-quarter comebacks a potentiality every time. IOW, if Wyatt Earp's (or anyone's) dueling partners could fight them many times, the results might be quite different. In a physical test of skill, learning an opponent is possible, whereas in a physical game of chance (roulette, flipping a coin), there are not strengths or weaknesses in the opponent.