I've heard of QBR before because of how hard ESPN touts it (despite their refusal to actually release the formula), but I never looked at the top 10 before. These are their top 10 quarterback games starting in 2008. http://espn.go.com/nfl/qbr/_/year/0/type/alltime-game #1 Charlie Batch (3 TDs, 2 INTs, 186 yards) #2 Carson Palmer #3 Michael Vick #4 Tony Romo #5 Eli Manning #6 Palmer again and Roethlisberger #8 Jay Cutler #9 Drew Brees (the only elite QB in the top 10) and #10 is.... JAMARCUS RUSSELL :breakdance: noticeably absent are three of the top four QBs in recent history: Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, and Peyton Manning
That entire rating system seems flawed to me because one of the key elements is some kind of subjective "clutch" rating for various stats and plays. It didn't exactly catch on like ESPN hoped, probably for good reason. The standard QB rating isn't perfect but it's probably the best we'll get.
Evidently they read my threads, because they deleted the Charlie Batch and Jamarcus Russell performances :breakdance: http://espn.go.com/nfl/qbr/_/year/0/type/alltime-game
So basically a high QBR and winning the superbowl aren't related. The stat is stupid because if you are a dominant QB and keep your team ahead, you won't have a high QBR, but if you don't play well early and then have to bring your team back at the last minute it counts more, so the best QBs are never on the list. Very flawed to say the least and the fact that they won't release the formula proves it's just a bunch of espn guys in a room going, "yeah that guy did good and made a comeback. Let's give him 99 QBR!". Stats shouldn't be subjective. Playing well the entire game > playing well in the clutch.
QBR legend Charlie Batch led the Steelers to a loss against the Browns. One of the buffoons who handles QBR must've seen my threads, because they deleted the Batch and Russell performances from their top 10. :lol: http://espn.go.com/nfl/qbr/_/year/0/type/alltime-game
Charlie Batch is back! 3 TDs, 2 INTs, 186 yards is once again considered by ESPN to be the greatest QB game since they created their awful formula. http://espn.go.com/nfl/qbr/_/year/0/type/alltime-game 1Charlie Batch, PITW 38-13 @ TB on 9/26/105.1-0.00.00.07.2180.00.099.9 2Carson Palmer, CINW 45-10 vs CHI on 10/25/097.30.00.00.07.3260.00.099.9 3Tom Brady, NEW 49-28 @ MIA on 10/21/077.90.0-0.40.27.7280.00.099.9 4Michael Vick, PHIW 59-28 @ WSH on 11/15/106.20.4-0.2-0.29.6390.00.099.8 5Colin Kaepernick, SFW 42-10 @ JAX on 10/27/132.82.70.00.98.4240.00.099.8 6Eli Manning, NYGW 42-7 vs PHI on 12/30/125.10.0-0.31.16.0270.00.099.6 7Peyton Manning, INDW 44-20 @ BAL on 12/9/075.70.00.0-0.15.6190.00.099.6 8Tony Romo, DALW 44-7 vs BUF on 11/13/117.60.00.00.37.9290.00.099.6 9Russell Wilson, SEAW 50-17 @ BUF on 12/16/124.13.5-1.0-0.110.0370.00.099.5 10Tom Brady, NEW 56-10 @ BUF on 11/18/0710.20.00.0-0.59.8410.00.099.4
I'd say the best part is the names. #1 Batch #2 Carson Palmer #4 Vick and JaMarcus Russell is on the list too! #43 Damon Huard tied at #27 with another Carson Palmer game. Kaepernick is 5th and 20th. The 2006 is because they're too lazy to run the numbers on past seasons. But you will hear ESPN trumpeting it as the revolutionary formula and the best way to evaluate QBs. Even a cursory glance at this list should disavow anyone of that notion.
I thought it basically gave credit to the QB when the team performed well, regardless of the QB's performance, but.... http://espn.go.com/nfl/qbr/_/year/0/type/alltime-game 20 Jake Locker, TEN L 29-28 vs CLE on 10/5/14 Jake Locker is on the list. He didn't play the whole game. Maybe the Titans outscored Cleveland while he was playing, fooling this idiotic rating system into thinking he had an exceptional game.
why doesn't ESPN fix it? If you are going to tout your rating system, hoping it takes off, seems like you would at least want it to be considered professional/respected. Even if that's not a concern- have some damn personal pride Things like Fitzpatrick being rated higher than Brady this season.... you know they know about that! Anyone with a brain would see how stupid that is. Why wouldn't they look into why thats the case and fix it? at least for some respectability. Whats wrong with noticing flaws and fixing them over time. Development. perfecting your system, etc??? ESPN is struggling right now and this is one of the reasons why. They've gotten so freakin cocky and lazy with their sports stuff that their traditional core users are being turned off by them. Fix your QBR and become respectable. It isn't that hard/expensive but its something that could go a long way
Kaepernick and Michael Vick are all time great QBs, going by QBR I can't stop laughing at this rating Maybe it overvalues running. Would explain Brady being lower, because he doesn't run.
