QB rating system

Just curious what everyone thinks of the QB rating systems. On one hand we have the traditional system that goes back decades. In this system, RW has a 134 rating after two games this season. That overall rating system has him at 5th in the league. His career rating is at 101 and ranks him second overall to only Aaron Rodgers. That’s 2nd overall in the history of the NFL!

The QBR system employed by ESPN is a more subjective system that relies on individual assessment of a QB play rather than the mathematical formula of the traditional system. In this system, RW is at 64 after two games and is ranked 11th best overall so far in 2019. He had a slightly higher week two traditional rating than week one but in the QBR ESPN system he had a better week one.

IMHO, the ESPN system is an opinionated piece of crap that shows obvious bias.

oldhawkfan":1llzbgai said:

Just curious what everyone thinks of the QB rating systems. On one hand we have the traditional system that goes back decades. In this system, RW has a 134 rating after two games this season. That overall rating system has him at 5th in the league. His career rating is at 101 and ranks him second overall to only Aaron Rodgers. That’s 2nd overall in the history of the NFL!

The QBR system employed by ESPN is a more subjective system that relies on individual assessment of a QB play rather than the mathematical formula of the traditional system. In this system, RW is at 64 after two games and is ranked 11th best overall so far in 2019. He had a slightly higher week two traditional rating than week one but in the QBR ESPN system he had a better week one.

IMHO, the ESPN system is an opinionated piece of crap that shows obvious bias.

Click to expand...

The classic rating system can't account for things out of QB control, i.e. drops and deflected interceptions, however, it is objective in a way that QBR is not. There is no perfect system.

I think QBR is crap. Mostly because I don't trust anything ESPN puts out. Admittedly, I don't know the formula, but any rating using subjectivity is worthless. Whoever is doing the assessing has no clue what a particular QB is trying to do within their system. They're just guessing. They don't know if an incompletion is on the QB or the WR for running the wrong route or cutting a route off. Same for some interceptions. I wouldn't give QBR any more weight than the many useless lists ESPN puts out trying to name the best players or power rankings.

Quickest to 200 career touchdown passes.

1. Dan Marino
2. Aaron Rogers
3. Peyton Manning
4. Bret Favre
5. Russell Wilson
6. Tom Brady

A who's who of quarterback lists.

Under "Ground Pete". Think if he had, for example, Andy Reid utilizing him.

This......is my QB rating system. Touchdowns over an extended time = wins over an extended time

Favre would have knocked it out of the park if he had not wasted his first two years in Atlanta. Then again, Rogers spent his first two years behind Favre. Mahomes, if he stays healthy, is going to destroy this record.

Edit: I got this wrong on Rogers and Favre. This record is based upon number of starts.

QBR is better on paper but as others have said like any grading scheme it is difficult for the observer to set their bias aside and so it just depends on how much you trust that grader. It's not going to convince anybody who disagrees with the conclusions because it lacks transparency.

The sort of things that a grader has to guess about include whether the receiver ran the correct route, who was responsible for protection calls, whether the QB was supposed to check to another play based on the defensive look, whether the running back was supposed to pick up a free rusher or release into the flat, and so on.

SO the ESPN system is the more flawed of the 2. The reason it is an opinion based system not fact. The QB rating system while not perfect at least is based on facts and despite its issues all QBs are measured the same no opinion involved. I ignore QBR, as the peice of crap it is.

While Quarterback Rating doesn't tell the whole story game to game, over a season or career the hope is the law of averages takes hold and you are comparing apples to apples. To compare a given Sunday or head to head performance, the QBR might be better, especially if the biases were neutral.

QBR (The ESPN stat) Is garbage, it is more indicative of offensive line play, more so than QB play.

The traditional passer rating stat as flawed as it is, the cream rises to the top, and all of the best QBs of all time are a top the list.

Brady, Brees, Rodgers, Manning, Rivers, Young, Wilson, though QBs who played pre 1994ish are at a disadvantge due to them opening the game up. Then after the Colts bitched to the league about the Patriots 2006ish, and again after the Seahawks won the superbowl in 2013, the league overreacted, and made illegal contact and PI even more ticky-tack.

So long story short it is easy to have a higher passer rating today than 25 years ago, or even 7 years ago.


I would love to see the league reset back to 2005 rules. I think that is when they had the best balance of rules tilted towards the offense, but you could still play defense. Let me dream.

ESPN? Bwa ha ha ha

All you need to know is that they refuse to make public the entirety of their system.

Wilson is absurdly efficient with his opportunities, and the QB rating calculation really shows that. He's second on the list of active QBs (second all time too, but it's not really fair to compare Otto Graham or Dan Marino on that rating scale to today since the rules are so different) in career QB rating.

But he's also a monster when the game is on the line. He's 45th on the list all time for that (18) but five more gets him to 20th and 15 more gets him to top five.

But the most important thing is that he has over a 67% winning percentage. The only guy who has it better with active QBs with at least 48 wins is Tom Brady. Yes, he's played on good teams, but without him (and replaced by an average QB) they don't win nearly as many games. Dude just wins.

Rating system is only good for the current year realistically. To many changes each year to rules and coaches etc to validate it over a period of time.

Accumulative numbers are great and can show how a player has played over all thru out his career but again it depends on the era he played in.

At least the traditional method take the personal subjectivity out of the Equation, talking to you Ron Jaworski and Trent Dilfer, Steve Young and Kurt Warner.

ESPN’s QBR is an an abortion of a stat.

Many years ago I made up an Excel spreadsheet to calculate QB ratings. What is kinda weird is all of us who have never actually played QB in any game "have" a rating of 39.6, because of not having thrown any interceptions!

Smellyman":2uw8g0ac said:

https://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/11/espn-qbr-stat-worst-stat-tom-brady-behind-ryan-fitzpatrick-what-is-qbr

Click to expand...

:sarcasm_on: How dare they impugn the Hall of Fame credentials of the great Charlie Batch! :sarcasm_off:

OrangeGravy":11l3fsym said:

I think QBR is crap. Mostly because I don't trust anything ESPN puts out. Admittedly, I don't know the formula, but any rating using subjectivity is worthless. Whoever is doing the assessing has no clue what a particular QB is trying to do within their system. They're just guessing. They don't know if an incompletion is on the QB or the WR for running the wrong route or cutting a route off. Same for some interceptions. I wouldn't give QBR any more weight than the many useless lists ESPN puts out trying to name the best players or power rankings.

Click to expand...

We don't need to know all the parameters they use to populate the ratings. All we need to do is look week by week and see the ridiculous results and "top QB's" it tries to push off on us.

It is a bad system based on results. Worthless as tits on a boar!! ukeface: