Fins DC Coyle Answers PFF Evaluation Question

[So Be]

Completely agree. If Tyson Clabo is expecting chip help on the outside from an RB, and the RB doesn't show up, all it looks like to us is Clabo whiffed completely and got his QB killed (again). He gets a negative grade on his PFF report card while the RB gets off scot free.

Having said that, for most plays I do think an intelligent football observer can determine the assignment for most players, even without knowing their playbook. As a result, an assessment of each of the players relative to their assumed assignment is, IMO, going to be fairly accurate. No, it's not perfect and yes, there is some subjective judgement going on. But there's definitely value in it, and over the course of a season, I think the inaccuracies average out - and what you're left with is a pretty good overall ranking. I have no issue with calling PFF the best NFL-wide grading system out there not only because it tries to use the data from each play (as opposed to a few highlight reel plays that many so-called "analysts" base their opinions on), but because they also try to standardize their approach across all the games and teams. Unless we can get a bunch of ex-coaches to do the grading for PFF, I'm not sure how we can improve it much (maybe normalizing a player's grade based on the ranking of the player they're playing against?). It's not perfect but it's pretty good.

Again, that is not true. You need to do a little research on how they grade, and what they do, before coming to any conclusion. No?

 

[So Be]

Statistics and #'s are for people that weren't at the game. It's that simple lol.
Do you trust your eyes or somebody else's eyes. That's all there is to it.
Obviously it's not possible to watch every game for most people, hence statistics come in handy, but not as the end all-be all.

When asked in post game pressers about the who, what, where that took place in a game. Philbin and every other NFL HC often say that they have to go back and look at the tape. I think they have better seats than you. :)

When you go to games, are you not like everyone else in looking at the overall flow of the game, and it's highlights and low lights?

Players play 60 snaps on average. How many plays are you watching Cog block or OV rush and defend the run? My guess would be 0, unless it was a big play. True or false?

PFF fills in the blanks.

 

[ATL_PHIN_FAN]

I remember the OV deal vs Cleve. Coyle said that V was getting VG pressure on the QB, which was true. He had a hit and 3 hurries. PFF was not as kind, giving him a very negative grade. Vernon played 62 snaps, 5 being good. However, he had 0 tackles, 0 stops, two missed tackles, and was beaten by Joe Thomas more than he beat him.

Both were right in the context of what they said.

I cannot be certain, but I doubt Coyle believed OV had only 5 good snaps of 62. Why is that? Because only Coyle knew for sure what he expected of OV against Joe Thomas for that game, right? Also, he was positively glowing about OV's performance in his presser the following week. Therefore, if Coyle never comments on OV's performance for that game, as is the case for most players, what conclusion would be left to us if all we had was PFF? As fans, we would be left to believe OV was a failure.

In my view that is a tragedy. A grossly unfair judgment of a player. This incident makes me wonder how often it happens every game to all players, yet goes unnoticed? I imagine it could be quite often. The bottom line is, I don't need filler by possibly ill-informed statisticians to enjoy the game and the team as I do. I certainly won't pay for the privilege, yet I don't begrudge you that you feel you need it. What I ask from those who do like to delve into PFF's statistics and grades is that you don't splash my screen with them as though they are proof positive that something is true.

I once spent a few hours considering a subscription to PFF. I reviewed their methods and what samples they provided of their reports. Ultimately, I decided I'd rather not parse the games I watch in quite so much detail. I figured, how will this add to my enjoyment of games or interviews of those involved afterward? For me, going into that much detail is drudgery. In a way, it ruins the game experience for me.

Watching a game again much later is an entirely different story. I get to watch it in the context of the season, and that is very cool because I often get more of a feel about a player's development, or lack thereof, over time. And sometimes, I can also track how a coach changes over time. Oftentimes, first hand and contextual observation of a process is an unbeatable source for understanding what the hell actually happened.

 

[GasPed]

Again, that is not true. You need to do a little research on how they grade, and what they do, before coming to any conclusion. No?

What part isn't true? Btw, I'm a fan of you and PFF, so be careful who you diss.

 

[So Be]

What part isn't true? Btw, I'm a fan of you and PFF, so be careful who you diss.

http://www.profootballfocus.com/about/grading/

Thanks GP, and no diss intended. PFF does consider things on plays where other players have fault in the result. Not perfect but, considered.

 

[So Be]

I cannot be certain, but I doubt Coyle believed OV had only 5 good snaps of 62. Why is that? Because only Coyle knew for sure what he expected of OV against Joe Thomas for that game, right? Also, he was positively glowing about OV's performance in his presser the following week. Therefore, if Coyle never comments on OV's performance for that game, as is the case for most players, what conclusion would be left to us if all we had was PFF? As fans, we would be left to believe OV was a failure.

In my view that is a tragedy. A grossly unfair judgment of a player. This incident makes me wonder how often it happens every game to all players, yet goes unnoticed? I imagine it could be quite often. The bottom line is, I don't need filler by possibly ill-informed statisticians to enjoy the game and the team as I do. I certainly won't pay for the privilege, yet I don't begrudge you that you feel you need it. What I ask from those who do like to delve into PFF's statistics and grades is that you don't splash my screen with them as though they are proof positive that something is true.

I once spent a few hours considering a subscription to PFF. I reviewed their methods and what samples they provided of their reports. Ultimately, I decided I'd rather not parse the games I watch in quite so much detail. I figured, how will this add to my enjoyment of games or interviews of those involved afterward? For me, going into that much detail is drudgery. In a way, it ruins the game experience for me.

Watching a game again much later is an entirely different story. I get to watch it in the context of the season, and that is very cool because I often get more of a feel about a player's development, or lack thereof, over time. And sometimes, I can also track how a coach changes over time. Oftentimes, first hand and contextual observation of a process is an unbeatable source for understanding what the hell actually happened.

I'm a Canes Fanatic, re-watched the game, and agreed with both. OV did much better than I thought in bringing pressure vs Thomas but, overall did not have a good game. JMO They were down on him for 2 weeks, and up on him in the last 3, based on what they saw.

It is not your screen and most PFF threads are identified. All ya gotta do is ignore them. There are MANY threads with links from Jackson, Omar, Mando and others using PFF as proof positive as much as posters but, no one seems to care. Why is that? Because they do not here to follow up on what they wrote?

I do agree on watching the games live. No way in hell do you want to be analyzing players play. It would kill the game. For me, PFF is a bit like learning about the salary cap. It is not fun but, it is learning and becoming more knowledgeable of my/our team.

Let's see if I can finalize this VG discussion. When I post PFF, I mostly use factual stats, some opinion, and their player rankings. Seldom do I post grades, which are somewhat subjective, although mostly accurate based on what I see.

I do this to add something different, which most do not pay for, and many seem to enjoy. We may know of what we see from our players but, no one knows what the other 1,500 or so are doing. PFF supplies this info.

To make a point, how much does anyone know about who is who on the Bills, other than maybe our Buff fan? How much does anyone know of potential players for a trade or FA's from other teams.

IMO, PFF is as much as a proof positive that anyone here is going to find, with very few exceptions. Again, JMO.

 

[Shouright]

IMO, PFF is as much as a proof positive that anyone here is going to find, with very few exceptions. Again, JMO.

Or at the very least, it's going to provide the kind of information that allows us to be incorrect as little as possible (though perhaps not always). When on the other hand we rely only on what we see, confirmation bias and selective sampling enter the picture, and we're likely to be incorrect far more often IMO (though again, not always).

 

[So Be]

Or at the very least, it's going to provide the kind of information that allows us to be incorrect as little as possible (though perhaps not always). When on the other hand we rely only on what we see, confirmation bias and selective sampling enter the picture, and we're likely to be incorrect far more often IMO (though again, not always).

With few exceptions, posters taking shots at PFF claim they go with their own eyeballs but, very few post what they see, and no one can rank any players because they have not seen them all, and have no alternate solution.

I guess it's the fame and fortune of posting which has taken over. :)

 

[Shouright]

With few exceptions, posters taking shots at PFF claim they go with their own eyeballs but, very few post what they see, and no one can rank any players because they have not seen them all, and have no alternate solution.

I guess it's the fame and fortune of posting which has taken over. :)

The way I see it, when you believe you can conclude something based on what you're seeing, you should check and see if the objective data comports with it. If it doesn't, the chances your eyes are deceiving you are better than the chances that you're seeing something that isn't revealed in the data. Therefore the objective data should be the "gold standard" IMO, not what we're seeing ourselves, and not even the forum consensus of what we're seeing ourselves.

I went to the New Orleans game earlier this year, sat in the upper deck, and felt like I saw a "statuesque" Ryan Tannehill and an ineffectual Mike Wallace, especially when the team needed both to perform to stay in the game. I then went to the objective data to determine whether there was any merit for those perceptions on my part.

 

[So Be]

The way I see it, when you believe you can conclude something based on what you're seeing, you should check and see if the objective data comports with it. If it doesn't, the chances your eyes are deceiving you are better than the chances that you're seeing something that isn't revealed in the data. Therefore the objective data should be the "gold standard" IMO, not what we're seeing ourselves, and not even the forum consensus of what we're seeing ourselves.

I went to the New Orleans game earlier this year, sat in the upper deck, and felt like I saw a "statuesque" Ryan Tannehill and an ineffectual Mike Wallace, especially when the team needed both to perform to stay in the game. I then went to the objective data to determine whether there was any merit for those perceptions on my part.

And with Wallace, you were right, and with RT you were dead wrong, he played his best game.

 

[Hayden Fox]

Coyle will blitz a ton this week and get burned.

 

[ATL_PHIN_FAN]

I'm a Canes Fanatic, re-watched the game, and agreed with both. OV did much better than I thought in bringing pressure vs Thomas but, overall did not have a good game. JMO They were down on him for 2 weeks, and up on him in the last 3, based on what they saw.

It is not your screen and most PFF threads are identified. All ya gotta do is ignore them. There are MANY threads with links from Jackson, Omar, Mando and others using PFF as proof positive as much as posters but, no one seems to care. Why is that? Because they do not here to follow up on what they wrote?

I do agree on watching the games live. No way in hell do you want to be analyzing players play. It would kill the game. For me, PFF is a bit like learning about the salary cap. It is not fun but, it is learning and becoming more knowledgeable of my/our team.

Let's see if I can finalize this VG discussion. When I post PFF, I mostly use factual stats, some opinion, and their player rankings. Seldom do I post grades, which are somewhat subjective, although mostly accurate based on what I see.

I do this to add something different, which most do not pay for, and many seem to enjoy. We may know of what we see from our players but, no one knows what the other 1,500 or so are doing. PFF supplies this info.

To make a point, how much does anyone know about who is who on the Bills, other than maybe our Buff fan? How much does anyone know of potential players for a trade or FA's from other teams.

IMO, PFF is as much as a proof positive that anyone here is going to find, with very few exceptions. Again, JMO.

I agree, it's been a very good discussion over this issue. I think fair points were made by both sides and opinions were respected.

I agree that PFF is very useful for comparing NFL players and teams. My concern, and the reason I posted this thread, is that I think PFF's stats are sometimes presented as gospel on this forum. It was my hope to influence posters, who sometimes portray them as such, in a positive way. It was meant to be a small warning that depending on only one source to make a point to longtime and dedicated Dolphin fans on this forum could eventually get you burned, especially if there are some questions as to the one source's validity and consistency.

I truly did not mean to minimize the value of PFF for debate, especially for players and teams for whom we have little "eyeball" information. You are right, for other teams accurate information is very scarce here. PFF is likely the only source we'll have on most of their players.

Thanks for the discussion and I'm hoping for more on other topics soon. Fins Up!! :brewskis:

 

[FSU Truth]

I'm a Canes Fanatic, re-watched the game, and agreed with both. OV did much better than I thought in bringing pressure vs Thomas but, overall did not have a good game. JMO They were down on him for 2 weeks, and up on him in the last 3, based on what they saw.

It is not your screen and most PFF threads are identified. All ya gotta do is ignore them. There are MANY threads with links from Jackson, Omar, Mando and others using PFF as proof positive as much as posters but, no one seems to care. Why is that? Because they do not here to follow up on what they wrote?

I do agree on watching the games live. No way in hell do you want to be analyzing players play. It would kill the game. For me, PFF is a bit like learning about the salary cap. It is not fun but, it is learning and becoming more knowledgeable of my/our team.

Let's see if I can finalize this VG discussion. When I post PFF, I mostly use factual stats, some opinion, and their player rankings. Seldom do I post grades, which are somewhat subjective, although mostly accurate based on what I see.

I do this to add something different, which most do not pay for, and many seem to enjoy. We may know of what we see from our players but, no one knows what the other 1,500 or so are doing. PFF supplies this info.

To make a point, how much does anyone know about who is who on the Bills, other than maybe our Buff fan? How much does anyone know of potential players for a trade or FA's from other teams.

IMO, PFF is as much as a proof positive that anyone here is going to find, with very few exceptions. Again, JMO.

As much as I dislike PFF, I will agree with what you are saying here. Like anything else....if it is used as a tool and not the definitive on a player it be useful.

 

[So Be]

I agree, it's been a very good discussion over this issue. I think fair points were made by both sides and opinions were respected.

I agree that PFF is very useful for comparing NFL players and teams. My concern, and the reason I posted this thread, is that I think PFF's stats are sometimes presented as gospel on this forum. It was my hope to influence posters, who sometimes portray them as such, in a positive way. It was meant to be a small warning that depending on only one source to make a point to longtime and dedicated Dolphin fans on this forum could eventually get you burned, especially if there are some questions as to the one source's validity and consistency.

I truly did not mean to minimize the value of PFF for debate, especially for players and teams for whom we have little "eyeball" information. You are right, for other teams accurate information is very scarce here. PFF is likely the only source we'll have on most of their players.

Thanks for the discussion and I'm hoping for more on other topics soon. Fins Up!! :brewskis:

Back at ya APF. I believe your thread has changed tho opinions of some, on both sides. It's great to have a VG discussion/debate with no nonsense. SLAINTE!!! Irish for CHEERS.

One last thing for everyone to understand is that when someone posts a players rank and/or overall grade, it can be very misleading. PFF's overall grade includes their grades on different things. For example, a guy on the OL includes pass blocking, run blocking, screen blocking (Dolphins have not heard of this), and penalties, etc.

When anyone posts the overall, they should also give the breakdown for posters to have a better understanding.

 

[So Be]

As much as I dislike PFF, I will agree with what you are saying here. Like anything else....if it is used as a tool and not the definitive on a player it be useful.

Yeah, until we can get Philbin and his coaches posting here, it is a pretty good source of info. :)