Ok, these are all valid points made by those above.
If I can ask, what The Voice of Reason believes to be a legitimate question, is it a fair comparison?
From what I know about Flynn--and Wayne, please correct me if I am wrong--he had a smaller scale operation than Ross. I know he had the architecture business, and then the Toomey/Flynn construction company. From the number of courses he did, is it safe to guess that he visited every one of them, or spent a considerable amount of time on site?
Ross is known in educated circles like ours
for being very prolific. Yet, he is also known, in the same educated circles
for not visiting/supervising all his work. I believe there is hard evidence here. He had a much larger scale operation-satellite offices, foremen such as McGovern and Hatch, perhaps doing some design work?
We have now established that Ross had a more prolific body of work than Flynn. But, because of the scale of his operation, the law of averages states there are bound to be some clunkers in there. Same with RTJ. Some great stuff, and a fair amount of clunkers.
Flynn had a smaller operation, from what I understand, his level of quality was more consistent from course to course. I don't know of any you could call "clunkers". Am I right?
I do know of a few that are/were plowed under.
I fully believe, and this isn't to avoid getting invited to a knuckle sandwich dinner at a Philly area diner
Flynn is underrated. I'm not kissing anyone's a**. I really like what I have seen of his stuff. His stuff seems to be more consistent across the board, most likely due to having personal involvement in each course.
In conclusion, I will stand by this: Ross isn't overrated, but Flynn in the past has been underrated.