This study presents a critical analysis of Brazil's journal classification system, Qualis, examining its evolution and effectiveness in assessing journal quality across diverse academic disciplines. The analysis highlights recent Qualis reforms, including unique classifications, and the adoption of "mother areas", plus the application of bibliometric indicators. Preliminary findings from the mid-term evaluation of graduate programs reveal discrepancies between how chosen indicators, including CiteScore and Journal Impact Factor, fail to align with expert committees’ assessment of the same journals. As expected, while these indicators correlate with peer review in a high percentage of STEM journals, they are far from effective in SSH. The study emphasizes the importance of further analysing Qualis' improvements and the role of evaluation committees as the final Qualis classification is released in 2023, thus determining if the system has evolved into a more representative evaluation framework or if its critics are justified in calling for its extinction.