But when you can give up 2 sacks and 3 hurries in one game and still have a positive grade, there's something wrong.
Fins DC Coyle Answers PFF Evaluation Question
- Thread starter ATL_PHIN_FAN
- Start date
-
- Tags
- coyle film pff statistics
But when you can give up 2 sacks and 3 hurries in one game and still have a positive grade, there's something wrong.
I know what they do. I'm talking about when formulating an opinion. There are some posters on here who when stating their side of the argument only look at stats or numbers while others only use their eyes. I think you have to use both. Stats, especially objective ones, aren't made in a vacuum and play, or an opinion based on play only, can be deceptive on the eyes as well.
hoops
Tua time!
it was a joke really...shouldn't you be telling some neighborhood kids to get off your lawn about right now bob cratchett
hoops
Tua time!
Don't need to. That's what sprinklers are for.
too tight to spring for an irrigation system i see
finfan54
Active Roster
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2002
- Messages
- 26,168
- Reaction score
- 29
I dont buy this stuff completely because its more a game of matchups and mismatches if you will.
I dont expect Clabo to have a great game vs. Mario Williams, but I would like to see some scheme where it keeps Williams off balance and miss from time to time and throw him off simply seeing we are back in shotgun again so he is licking his chops thinking he is just going to blow by this poor sap who only has one counter move and lost strength/balance.
Our offense is predicated on the open man or who is not covered tight/zone coverage ect. So what does it mean if my team gives up 5 sacks on avg every game but puts up 24 points/game?
I use eyeball to see if they are offbalance, beat cleanly and quickly, or their feet are not right. You can do everything the coaches are asking to do yet still get beat by the best. You are not going to shut down the best 100% of a game. And PFF is apparently what Armando and others use so I become a little skeptical because our problems are not really the blocking all the time. Its a hell of a lot more than that based on what every matchup is doing or not doing. That is what they are looking at. They are trying to fix multiple problems to the point where they can counter what a defense is doing to them.
I dont care so much about the sacks as long as 1. They make you pay on next play. 2. Figure out the defense 3. Dont turn the ball over.
Tom Brady got sacked plenty yesterday but the guy turns up the heat and goes hurry up and ends up dictating to the defense more than they do to him.
We do much better when 1. We are in two minute offense 2. Can run the ball at least to a point where we are not one dimensional 3. When the refs dont give the other team 7 points on PI all the way down the field.
The coaches are looking at the big picture. PFF is looking at individuals statistically and putting a negative or postive number to it which I quite frankly could give a rats azz about.
I dont expect Clabo to have a great game vs. Mario Williams, but I would like to see some scheme where it keeps Williams off balance and miss from time to time and throw him off simply seeing we are back in shotgun again so he is licking his chops thinking he is just going to blow by this poor sap who only has one counter move and lost strength/balance.
Our offense is predicated on the open man or who is not covered tight/zone coverage ect. So what does it mean if my team gives up 5 sacks on avg every game but puts up 24 points/game?
I use eyeball to see if they are offbalance, beat cleanly and quickly, or their feet are not right. You can do everything the coaches are asking to do yet still get beat by the best. You are not going to shut down the best 100% of a game. And PFF is apparently what Armando and others use so I become a little skeptical because our problems are not really the blocking all the time. Its a hell of a lot more than that based on what every matchup is doing or not doing. That is what they are looking at. They are trying to fix multiple problems to the point where they can counter what a defense is doing to them.
I dont care so much about the sacks as long as 1. They make you pay on next play. 2. Figure out the defense 3. Dont turn the ball over.
Tom Brady got sacked plenty yesterday but the guy turns up the heat and goes hurry up and ends up dictating to the defense more than they do to him.
We do much better when 1. We are in two minute offense 2. Can run the ball at least to a point where we are not one dimensional 3. When the refs dont give the other team 7 points on PI all the way down the field.
The coaches are looking at the big picture. PFF is looking at individuals statistically and putting a negative or postive number to it which I quite frankly could give a rats azz about.
finfan13131313
Practice Squad
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2004
- Messages
- 117
- Reaction score
- 4
Nail on the head. This day and age everything is stats stats stats. I think Gruden was talking about this last week on Colin Cowherd. OC's and DC's are getting HFC jobs based on off and def stats.
So Be
Club Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2006
- Messages
- 16,572
- Reaction score
- 2,216
PFF looks at individual battles, and no one can tell me that coaches do not do the same, and how many players were analyzed by coaches in the first 5 weeks?
Some say, like Coyle, that you have to know what was expected. Well, I have to say that the OL is expected to block the guy in front of him, the DL is expected to not be blocked by the OL in front of him. The receivers are expected to get open and catch catchable balls, The DB's are expected to stop them from catching catchable balls.
RB's are expected to get the most out of a run. The D is expected to stop that. The QB is expected to make accurate throws to receivers. The DB's are expected to stop them from catching the ball.
In the bigger picture, are players not expected to block, tackle, run, throw, catch, and beat the player in front of them?
What change this?
Some say, like Coyle, that you have to know what was expected. Well, I have to say that the OL is expected to block the guy in front of him, the DL is expected to not be blocked by the OL in front of him. The receivers are expected to get open and catch catchable balls, The DB's are expected to stop them from catching catchable balls.
RB's are expected to get the most out of a run. The D is expected to stop that. The QB is expected to make accurate throws to receivers. The DB's are expected to stop them from catching the ball.
In the bigger picture, are players not expected to block, tackle, run, throw, catch, and beat the player in front of them?
What change this?
ATL_PHIN_FAN
Winner Under Construction
Major over simplification, IMO. It is this view that causes players like OV to be discarded by fans when PFF gives them a low rating for a game, while his coach says he had an outstanding game. How do you explain that, SB2?
In the simplest way, if the defensive scheme dictates to the free safety to play a very conservative Cover-2 defense and leave a soft zone underneath and he continually gives up 10 yard plays underneath his zone, PFF will give him a low grade but his coach will turn around and tell you "He did his job exactly as we wanted him to."
PFF is good to consider but not the standard because is impossible, like Coyle mentioned, to know what every players responsibilities are for every play.
PFF is good to consider but not the standard because is impossible, like Coyle mentioned, to know what every players responsibilities are for every play.
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.
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.
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.
So Be
Club Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2006
- Messages
- 16,572
- Reaction score
- 2,216
It is an over simplification, and one which which coaches from Saint Vince and Shula to today's coaches, GM's, and HOF players have been using. The game has become somewhat complicated with schemes on O and D but, the bottom line is that if you beat or whup (Cris Carter) the guys in front of you, you will be a winning team.
I saw Philbin's show, a few weeks ago, when Kimbo asked him wht he saw as problems with the team. Philbin said that we have to give the QB more time, open up some running lanes, and we have to many missed tackles. Translation, over-simplified, is we gotta block and tackle. :)
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.
So Be
Club Member
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2006
- Messages
- 16,572
- Reaction score
- 2,216
That is simply not true. Based on the way PFF grades, that would not happen. I'm curious as to why you would say that. Are you familiar with how they grade, ever seen what they do or, just speculation (no fact) on what you think they may do?