In case you guys have not heard, ESPN has been championing their QBR rating as a better formula for a QBs performance than the typical nil QB rating, and looking at how they rated quarterbacks this week, it looks like complete nonsense, and some people at ESPN need to acquire some common sense in how they rate quarterback performances. Case in point: Donovan Mcnabb's stats were: 7/15 (46.7%) for 39 yards with 1 TD and 1 INT, this performance earned Mcnabb a QBR rating of 20.7 Now compare this to Sanchez who went 26/44 (59.1%) for 335 yards with 2 TD 1 INT (and a fumble) this earned Sanchez a QBR rating of 17.6 That's right 17.6, 3 points LOWER than McNabb's pathetic performance. Sanchez completed more passes, for a higher completion percentage with 300 more yards, and one more score and both McNabb and Sanchez's picks led to TDs, how the heck is this supposed to work out? Looks like ESPN needs to go back to the drawing board.
That makes no sense to me. Sanchez also fumbled but all the positive stats are insanely better then McNabbs.
I do think a good chunk of it is a difference in sample size with McNabb throwing just 15 passes whereas Sanchez had a lot more. But that does seem ridiculous.
they always try these proprietary algorithms used to evaluate players, and they're always a bunch of horseshit. the john hollingers of the world can DIAF
in their rookie season Ryan Leaf started 2-0 and Peyton Manning 0-2. Ryan Leaf was never, at any point of his life, ever better than Peyton Manning. I suppose Alex Smith is better then Roethlesberger because he is 1-0 and Big Rapist is 0-1.
on sunday he was. Smith didnt throw 3 ints and contribute a fumble to the other teams cause. Big Ben did. Its a gigantic reason his team is 0-1. but yeah your premise is correct, purely on wins doesnt work either. There really is no set way to properly (objectively) judge a QB.
