Obviously ESPN has been trying to push their QBR stat the past few years.

For whatever reason, this stat does not seem to favor Flacco's game. I know it is a proprietary formula, and all of the components may not be known. But looking at it a little more closely, I think that it has to severely punish QB sacks and/or QB fumbles, which is why Flacco's QBR is generally lower.

For example, the 2012 NE v Balt playoff game, which was sort of Joe's playoff coming out party before his big year this year, shows a stupid result via QBR. After that game, nearly everyone said he outplayed Brady. It was clearly evident on the field.

Here are the stats from that game:

Flacco:
22/36, 306 yards (8.5ypc), 2 TD, 1 INT, 3 sacks for -24 yards
QBR 43.0

Brady:
22/36, 239 yards (6.6ypc), 0 TD, 2 INT, 1 sack for -5 yards
QBR: 71.5

There is no way Brady played better, and there is no way, when comparing those stats, Brady should have a ~30 point higher QBR. Hell they have identical completions/attempts (22/36). One QB scored 2 TDs. The other scored none. On QB had 2 INTS, the other had 1. The only big difference is sacks and sack yardage.

Now, let's look at how those same stats fair in the traditional QB rating stat:
Flacco: 95.4
Brady: 57.5

This is by far a much more accurate representation of QB play in that game. It reflects reality.

I can't respect the ESPN QBR stat in view of this outcome (and I am sure there are many other examples of how QBR falters compared to traditional QB rating).

It seems pretty clear that the ESPN QBR places way too much emphasis on sacks, to the point where the resultant rating will frequently not mirror reality. I know they are trying to pitch it as being a more accurate representation of QB play, but when the stat produces results that are so far removed from reality, it is hard to give it any respect. Especially when sacks are frequently a product of OL play. To weight a QB formula so heavy with respect to sacks seems silly. And produces silly results.