Whats the pros and cons with this system? In ESPN Total QBR ratings, Tannehill ranks 30th. Behind the likes of Schuab, Glennon, Eli, Hoyer, Pryor, EJ Manuel, and Christian Ponder. I mean, wow, ESPN just think Tannehill is a terrible QB.
Think of it this way, Ryan's fumble was recovered and the Pat's scored a TD off it. That hurts Ryan's rating. Brady fumbles, his team recovers and the Pats are advanced the ball about 35 yards from the recovery and score a TD. The fumbles are measured differently
Sacks are also accounted for (I believe regardless of who the sack was actually the fault of). Also, you can pass for 3TDs in the 1st half of a game, but that's less QBR-worthy than TDs in the 2nd half, even if both result in a win. I personally dislike their rating immensely.
Tannehill is a turnover machine. I don't really have any qualms with his ranking. Stupid is as stupid does. I love Tannehill and love his potential, but as long as he's turning the ball over reguarly, he's just as crappy as Ponder and all those scrubs. I don't see how that's controversial.
IMO it's a rating of how the team is doing rather than a QB rating. If you have a crappy QB paired with a defense that overcomes his errors, the crappy QB will have a better TQBR than a great QB on a team with a horrid defense. I don't see it as an effective tool for rating QB play.
Total QBR is nothing more than ESPN's attempt at creating a metric they branded. There are several superior metrics available. You can ignore it.
It's flawed just like EVERY other system of metrics out there, whether it's for football or not. their system tries to incorporate context to the numbers, but just not feasible to have a system that takes enough context into consideration to cover even the majority of possibilities.