Fins DC Coyle Answers PFF Evaluation Question

[ATL_PHIN_FAN]

http://www.miamidolphins.com/multim...in_Coyle/8ce00b31-9285-4384-89f1-8934edac103b


During his presser the day after the Ravens game, a reporter asked DC Coyle whether or not he

consults PFF's numbers when evaluting a player. He gives a very interesting and telling answer at time stamp 8:45 :


To paraphrase, he thinks it is impossible to accurately judge a player's performance if you don't

know exactly what play was called, or what a player's responsibilities were for a play.


I think some positions on some plays can be judged with some accuracy by PFF's system, such

as straight forward offensive line PP plays, or whether or not a running back follows his blocking.

Beyond that, I think that although it is interesting at times, PFF should not be used as a standard

by which we fans judge a player's individual performance.


I think it is wiser to use our eyeballs if we can see everything a player does during a play,

along with a heavy dose of expert opinion as to the result of a play from coaches who call the

play.


Discuss . . .

 

[FSU Truth]

I think most people understand that PFF is somewhat of a joke, as explained above, it is too difficult to evaluate a player without knowing his specific responsibilities on each play. What is even sadder is many "journalist" site it in their articles...

 

[ATL_PHIN_FAN]

time stamp 8:45

 

[ATL_PHIN_FAN]

I think most people understand that PFF is somewhat of a joke, as explained above, it is too difficult to evaluate a player without knowing his specific responsibilities on each play. What is even sadder is many "journalist" site it in their articles...

Yeah, and I'd be OK with that as long as they let the reader know they are just kinda using it as a starting point for discussion, rather than the final say in a player's evaluation. Some people seem to view it as such.

 

[TheWalrus]

Makes sense until you realize Coyle is asked to evaluate film all the time when he doesn't know exactly what players' specific assignments are. College and pro. Offense and defense. He evaluates a lot of film, not just to draw up gameplans but to give his evaluations on pro free agents and college players. It's a huge part of his job, yet he doesn't know exactly what the play call is or what the sight adjustments are or what the protection is or any of the stuff you apparently need to know before you can watch a player and grade their performance.

Somehow he manages.

 

[DefensiveEnd76]

I think most people understand that PFF is somewhat of a joke, as explained above, it is too difficult to evaluate a player without knowing his specific responsibilities on each play. What is even sadder is many "journalist" site it in their articles...

Omar does all the time.

 

[ANUFan]

Omar does all the time.

I think the OP was taking a shot at someone else we all know....

 

[Shouright]

...I think that although it is interesting at times, PFF should not be used as a standard by which we fans judge a player's individual performance.

Do you think we're going to do a better job ourselves, knowing equally little about what the players' responsibilities are?

I think it is more wise to use your eyeballs if you can see everything a player does during a play along with a heavy dose of expert opinion about the result of a play from the coaches who call the play.

The people at PFF use their eyeballs as well, but they use them for all 32 teams, with the same criteria applied to each. We on the other hand tend to watch the Dolphins very intently, and then think we can make reliable comparisons with other teams and other teams' players, despite the fact that we're likely watching the other 31 teams nowhere near as intently (nor without the same bias in some areas).

The problem with expert opinions from the coaches is that they're rarely available free of being "filtered" for media and public consumption, and of course although coaches are experts, they can be wrong as well.

There is no perfect solution. But I suspect that likely the most inaccurate solution is to believe we can do something magnificent with our eyeballs alone.

IMO the best solution is to look for convergent evidence, with objective evidence being weighted far more heavily than what we come to believe with our eyes alone. Without that, we should be saying "I don't know for sure" a whole lot more often IMO, rather than being grandiose. We're highly limited in this enterprise of player and team evaluation, and we should recognize and appreciate those limitations IMO.

 

[SCLSU Mud Dogs]

I think most people understand that PFF is somewhat of a joke, as explained above, it is too difficult to evaluate a player without knowing his specific responsibilities on each play. What is even sadder is many "journalist" site it in their articles...

Is a joke? Come on. It's not perfect but it's a lot better than people trying to guru it up. It's cited in many different organizations, as it's one of the only websites of its kind that answers many question regarding the efficiency and productivity of players.

The "not knowing specific responsibilities" argument isn't really valid, because unless you know a team's playbook, you're not going to know their responsibilities. Essentially, when they break down film of opponents, even they don't know the true responsibility of what players on the other teams are doing - just tendencies.

 

[SCLSU Mud Dogs]

I think most people understand that PFF is somewhat of a joke, as explained above, it is too difficult to evaluate a player without knowing his specific responsibilities on each play. What is even sadder is many "journalist" site it in their articles...

Is a joke? Come on. It's not perfect but it's a lot better than people trying to guru it up. It's cited in many different organizations, as it's one of the only websites of its kind that answers many question regarding the efficiency and productivity of players.

The "not knowing specific responsibilities" argument isn't really valid, because unless you know a team's playbook, you're not going to know their responsibilities. Essentially, when they break down film of opponents, even they don't know the true responsibility of what players on the other teams are doing - just tendencies.

 

[ATL_PHIN_FAN]

Is a joke? Come on. It's not perfect but it's a lot better than people trying to guru it up. It's cited in many different organizations, as it's one of the only websites of its kind that answers many question regarding the efficiency and productivity of players.

The "not knowing specific responsibilities" argument isn't really valid, because unless you know a team's playbook, you're not going to know their responsibilities. Essentially, when they break down film of opponents, even they don't know the true responsibility of what players on the other teams are doing - just tendencies.

Yup, you've got an excellent point. However, there is a set of evaluators who have vastly more experience than others and who are paid well to an extreme for their guru-like knowledge. Coaches. Additionally, who of all people are more likely to guess right as to the intent of a particular play, or the player's responsibility on a particular play? Coaches. This is because coaches are more able to place themselves in the shoes of the coach who actually called the play for a particular situation, thus he's considering more variables more accurately than PFF does or ever could.

 

[FSU Truth]

Is a joke? Come on. It's not perfect but it's a lot better than people trying to guru it up. It's cited in many different organizations, as it's one of the only websites of its kind that answers many question regarding the efficiency and productivity of players.

The "not knowing specific responsibilities" argument isn't really valid, because unless you know a team's playbook, you're not going to know their responsibilities. Essentially, when they break down film of opponents, even they don't know the true responsibility of what players on the other teams are doing - just tendencies.

What are these guys resumes? What gives them the insight in evaluating these players? Are they former coaches, or staff....at any level with years of experience in understanding what is going on in each play? No, they are amateurs who charge people a premium to get an analysis based on their opinion on how a player did on each play.

 

[FSU Truth]

Is a joke? Come on. It's not perfect but it's a lot better than people trying to guru it up. It's cited in many different organizations, as it's one of the only websites of its kind that answers many question regarding the efficiency and productivity of players.

The "not knowing specific responsibilities" argument isn't really valid, because unless you know a team's playbook, you're not going to know their responsibilities. Essentially, when they break down film of opponents, even they don't know the true responsibility of what players on the other teams are doing - just tendencies.

What are these guys resumes? What gives them the insight in evaluating these players? Are they former coaches, or staff....at any level with years of experience in understanding what is going on in each play? No, they are amateurs who charge people a premium to get an analysis based on their opinion on how a player did on each play.

 

[ATL_PHIN_FAN]

This was a duplicate post, sorry.

 

[ChambersWI]

PFF can be useful, but don't take it as gospel.