Seeing as it was ESPN, the show most likely used their self aggrandizing and totally made up because they don't divulge the algorithm, QBR.
Those numbers would not be QBR. However ESPN calculates it, which is a black box as you say, the ranking are as follows:
http://www.espn.com/nfl/qbr
Passer rating is what is it says it is: a transparent calculation of what happens after the ball leaves the QBs hand. There's no mystery to it. Anybody can calculate it themselves by using the formula illustrated here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passer_rating
Passer rating is based on only 4 stats: completion percentage, yards per attempt, TDs as a percentage of passes, and INTs as a percentage of passes.
ESPN's QBR attempts to include all aspects of QB performance:
http://www.espn.com/blog/statsinfo/...-calculated-we-explain-our-quarterback-rating
Among other things, it purports to:
- for example, weight a 5 yard completion on 3rd. and 5 more than a 5 yarder on 3rd. and 8
- factor in a QBs runs
- factor in sacks, QB fumbles, pre-snap penalties committed and pre-snap penalties drawn
- scores each QB play on a scale of 1-100
- adjusts for level of competition
- "allocates credit to the quarterback and his teammate to produce a clearer measure of quarterback efficiency"
That last point in particular is quite problematic. It is included in the formulation of Expected Points Added (EPA) on each play which is at the core of QBR. Teammate performance is statistically determined to allocate success and blame. This is illustrated as follows:
"That means on completed passes, the EPA is divided among the quarterback, his receivers and the offensive line based on how far the ball travels in the air, what percentage of the yards were gained after the catch
(compared to how many yards after catch are expected) and whether the quarterback was under pressure.
This division of credit is based on statistical analysis of thousands upon thousands of NFL plays.... The details of every play (air yards, drops, pressures, etc.) are charted by a team of trained analysts in the ESPN Stats & Information Group. Every play of every game is tracked by at least two different analysts to provide the most accurate representation of how each play occurred."
So, to take one example, what are the expected yards after catch for a receiver on a particular play in particular situation? For this to make any sense, somewhere along the line that receiver's historical record must be measured against some league average in similar situations based on that "analysis of thousands upon thousands of NFL plays" to have a baseline for that player on that play.
Lets say Adams baseline score on short slants or 5 yard in the air while needing another 3 yards for a first down or a TD is a high score of 80 relative to a league average, lets say 65. So, when Rodgers completes such a pass to Adams, more credit is weighted to Adams than Rodgers. If the ball goes incomplete, Rodgers gets docked more than Adams.
I see a circularity in this logic. What if Adams was playing with a lesser QB who does not successfully recognize when those slants will achieve the first down or TD vs. when the defense is such to argue against the throw. Then Adams is not an elite short slant receiver with, lets say, a 65 score. Then when such a throw is successful the QB gets more credit than Rodgers would and Adams is docked more if it goes incomplete. Further, even if the QB is not under pressure, is the line blocking in such a way as to provide the passing lane needed to successfully make that throw?
I'll add something of a digression related to this last point. Why does a QB pass up an open receiver? Sometimes he doesn't have the passing lane to do it or his vision is obscured. He might have to move off his spot to find that lane and when he gets there the opportunity has closed. It's why, all other things being equal, the NFL prefers those 6'5" QBs with high release points to see and throw over the line. That's "all things being equal". There's a whole lot of other things that go into a successful QB.
