Yes, QBR is useless.

Charlie Batch has the highest QBR in a game ever. Batch went 12/17 for 186 yards 3 TD and 2 INT. Obviously the best play by a Quarterback ever, right?

At least Quarterback Rating actually has a system you can understand and calculate independent of what ESPN does.

---

Pretty sure he was 20th.  Right behind Derek Carr, but ahead of Carson Palmer.  Unless you're talking about the useless QBR stat, in which case he was 15th.  But QBR is useless.

This is how they find passer rating... and QBR is useless??

Passer rating isn't ideal but anybody can apply the calculation and it is completely transparant. On top of that, it hasn't changed since it was invented, if a QB in 1970 gets the same stats as a QB in 2018, they get the same rating. The result in completely reproducible.

QBR on the other hand is completely arbitrary. It's formula is a closely guarded secret by ESPN who also change it each time the stat messes up. Two QB's can have largely similar stats but have wildly different QBR's. It is essentially a BS stat invented by ESPN to get people to talk about a useless stat.

---

This is how they find passer rating... and QBR is useless??

Passer rating isn't ideal but anybody can apply the calculation and it is completely transparant. On top of that, it hasn't changed since it was invented, if a QB in 1970 gets the same stats as a QB in 2018, they get the same rating. The result in completely reproducible.

QBR on the other hand is completely arbitrary. It's formula is a closely guarded secret by ESPN who also change it each time the stat messes up. Two QB's can have largely similar stats but have wildly different QBR's. It is essentially a BS stat invented by ESPN to get people to talk about a useless stat.

Like I said previously... I'm not a big Rating/QBR "stat" guy anyway... but that algorithm or whatever they designed for passer rating is way crazy and almost random in its number usage.
Sure ESPN's QBR could be nonsense (who knows what it is since its a secret)... but the point is that someone was dismissing someone else's statement based on a widely used stat or rating system. 
Which essentially boiled down to one poster likening Bortles to the 12th best QB based on QBR. And someone else, decided that that ranking was too high for their liking so the stat that was used must be dismissed and use of their stat (QB Rating) which ranks Bortles as the 20th best QB was more fitting for their opinion of Bortles.
Kinda snooty. And I think both stats can be or probably are junk.

---