QBR metric broken?

Russell Wilson Week 17 QBR: 65.7
Robert Griffin Week 17 QBR: 76.7

Huh?

PASSING: Wilson 15/19 250 yds 1TD 0 INT RAT:136.3 RUSHING: 10 58 yds 5.8 YPC 1 TD

PASSING: Griffin 9/18 100 yds 0TD 0 INT RAT:66.9 RUSHING: 6 63 yds 10.5 YPC 1 TD

Can one of you mathematical geniuses explain to me how QBR works? This is a rhetorical question since it should be obvious from the stats above that it doesn't work and is a poor measure for evaluating QB performance.

Wilson completely outplayed Griffin yet is 11 points lower. Somehow they engineered the algorithms to produce East Coast Media Bias (ECMB).

:?:

Sam Bradford got a higher QBR as well. Blech.

I was just talking about this with my friend. I will never undertand QBR.

Are sacks taken into account?

Sacks is the reason why, the metric punishes QB's for the number of sacks taken.

DericLee":3qsozuwf said:

Sacks is the reason why, the metric punishes QB's for the number of sacks taken.

Click to expand...

As is appropriate.

DericLee":3o5tjit4 said:

Sacks is the reason why, the metric punishes QB's for the number of sacks taken.

Click to expand...

Well, that puts the onus on the QB for sacks. Kinda sucks when most of them are not the QB's fault.

Wilson took 6 sacks. There were a few times when he could've thrown it away. This is exactly where QBR will actually reward you, and the NFL's QB rating penalizes you for an incompletion.

Also QB Rating doesn't account for rushing yards and TD's. It's an outdated system IMO. QBR may not be perfect, but it's better than Passer Rating.

DericLee":32xpub6p said:

Sacks is the reason why, the metric punishes QB's for the number of sacks taken.

Click to expand...

Which is why it is flawed. I can't say how many of the sacks, but at least the majority were because of the offensive line.