The bearing capacity of shallow foundations is one of the major fields in soil mechanics and foundation engineering. Since 1943, when Terzaghi suggested his famous equation with the three N-factors, several dozens of bearing capacity methods for centrically-vertically loaded strip footings have been proposed in the literature, mainly focusing on refining the Nγ factor. However, these proposed by Terzaghi, Meyerhof, Hansen and Vesic remain by far the most popular ones, with the last one to be component of many contemporary design codes. In this paper, the author put these four methods into extensive comparison against the finite element method. From the results it is clear that the scatter of values is a common characteristic, while none of these methods is superior to the others. During the last 100 years, Nγ was either a demon needing exorcise or a scapegoat. The regression analysis carried out by the author, however, clearly showed that it is not Nγ that prevents us from having a reliable analytical prediction for the bearing capacity of (strip) footings. Instead, all methods need calibration against the Df⁄B parameter, which, surprisingly, affects all three terms of “Terzaghi’s” equation and not only the surcharge term. The author applied both non-linear and linear regression analysis. Generally, the performance of all these methods was significantly improved after using a (const_1+ const_2∙Df⁄B) term as multiplier in front of the (untreated) bearing capacity formula and calibrating the constants against regression analysis and finite elements. Finally, the author offered corrected expressions for the four methods mentioned above, not only for the case of rigid footings but also for the case of flexible footings, as regression analysis was also carried out against the respective finite element results. In addition to the above it is mentioned that, in the calibration procedure against finite element analysis, the author considered the non-associated flow rule (ψ=0°). As known, an analysis with a non-associated flow rule is more representative of the actual soil behavior, while it is on the safe side.