Just something interesting

[Jakology]

Player A: 509 out of 800 63.6%, 6,475 yards, Yards per pass: 8.09. 57 total TDs, 34 turnovers. Rating: 100.6

Player B: 682 out of 1,197 57%, 8,196 yards, Yards per pass: 6.85. 55 total TDs, 43 turnovers. Rating: 81.5

QBR: Player A: 65.8 Player B: 63.8 Does not compute

Somebody with almost 400 more pass attempts, with less TDs, more turnovers, worse yards per pass, worse completion percent, is virtually an equal according to QBR? No. Just no. I'm sure you guys can figure out who these 2 are. This should be an interesting conversation.

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

Wilson vs. Tannehill (partly because I know Wilson's stats so well cause, duh I'm a Seahawks fan).

Probably close because Tannehill has put on the moves when it's crunch time. And I'm sure they factor more throws into the equation (whatever the F it is) because it's harder to maintain Wilson's stats when you throw the ball more.

Regardless, the QBR is stupid. Can't remember what game is was... but Tebow as like 4/10, a TD and a 70 yards. And he ran a few times and got a TD. Rodgers got like 400 yards and a couple TDs, and Tebow was a higher QBR rating, despite the Broncos D really winning that game.

Give me a break.

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

Oh and for the record I do like Tannehill. I'm SHOCKED a converted WR could play the QB position as well as he has. I hope he continues to improve and keeps it up.

 

[Jakology]

Tannehill: 637 of 1,072 59.4%, 7,207 yards, 6.72 yards per pass 39 TDs 47 turnovers QBR: 47.8 Rating: 79.1

Though Tannehill has been in arguably one of the worst situations in the league, yeah, his numbers can't compare. I love Tannehill and think he will be great, but I can't mention him in these debates just yet.

 

[gohusk]

QBR's a joke. A QB could smoke a team in the 1st half and ride it out the entire 2nd and be lower than a qb who did next to nothing the entire game but had a few "clutch" plays late. ESPN"s jumped on the lame stat bandwagon and came up with one of their own that basically turns the QB position into a judged sport like gymnastics.

 

[Southieinnc]

QBR is meaningless. Totally contrived garbage.

 

[Smart]

It's because Wilson's sacked more. Somehow its his fault that his offensive line gives up the most pressures in the league. ESPN logic at its finest.

And yes, I know who they are. I've been dumbfounded with the media's preference for QB B since they were both in college. I told people Russell would be better, but because of some factor that Luck does better (which no one can name), he's better, despite what numbers and the eye test say.

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

Oh it's just dumb in general. Wilson goes against 2 of the NFL's best defenses (division wise) and a ridiculous D-Line that generates a ton of sacks in the Rams. Meanwhile Luck plays in a complete cupcake division. I hope Watt/Clowney tear his head off and expose the Luck jock sniffers this year.

 

[Jakology]

Its not that I'm a Luck hater, I just don't think we should anoint him the next coming like everyone did right off. Yes, he has the talent to be one of the best, but he needs to improve just like everyone else. Why doesn't he get called out for all of his boneheaded plays and turnovers? People just think that because Luck has more "talent" than Wilson, he's better. This just irks me because its just like the Montana vs Marino days, but its flipped. Now everyone sides with the "talent" instead of the winner. You can't flip flop people. Its either one or the other.

 

[Davis_Mike]

QBR is meaningless. Totally contrived garbage.

^^^This. QBR is just a stat that allows mediocre QB(s)to justify their existence. There is too much human interpretation that goes into the equation instead of only stats. This is Trent Dilfer's baby, that is all that needs to be said.

People need to stop referencing this made up nonsense.

 

[Jakology]

So everyone can see that to this point, Wilson is better than Luck.

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

So everyone can see that to this point, Wilson is better than Luck.

Well duh, Wilson/Kaep are both better than Luck. I might even take some other young guys over Luck.

Luck is HORRIBLY overrated. Put that dork in the NFC West and let's see how that 87 QB rating does. Playing in that cupcake division in the NFL and the most he can muster is that? LOL, please. And his D got him 2nd best AFC turnover differential, so not like he had nothing to work with. Also has a relative cake walk in the AFC playoffs. Brady and Rivers are easily beatable and while the Broncos are tough Seattle exposed them and Manning can be beat.

Saints/49ers/Seahawks/Panthers/Packers as playoff competition vs. Broncos, MAYBE Patriots, and umm.... uhh.. Chargers? Bengals? UHHHH..... reaching here.

Please. Look Luck is a good QB but HOLY CRAP have I never seen media CONTINUE to stick with a top prospect and continually overrate him based on NFL play.

 

[Wolvie]

QBR to me is more of a passing game efficiency number. It should be treated as a team stat more than a QB stat. If a QB doesn't ever have time to throw it isn't fault but hurts the team's overall pass efficiency. If anything, being pressured a high % of times and still producing good numbers should actually BOOST any individual QB rating