Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise

(09-27-2021, 11:37 AM)Wyche Wrote: [ -> ]This is nuts. In future debates, I'll no longer be accepting PFF grades as an arguing point.

Sounds like PFF is on par with ESPN's stupid QBR stat.

(09-27-2021, 11:20 AM)Synric Wrote: [ -> ]Steelers RT Joe Haeg scored a 67 and RG Trai Turner scored a 71 both gave up sacks and pressures vs the Bengals.

Honestly PFF is making it very hard to take seriously after their week 1 analysis and now these grades week 3.

That makes no sense, whatsoever.

Regardless of the scores, they kept the QB on his feet and out of the pinball game he was subjected to the first 2 games

Pass-blocking grades for the #Bengals starting OL vs Pitt:

Williams - 52.7
Spain - 5.6
Hopkins - 26.5
Carman - 68.8
Reiff - 68.0

Both QB pressures were charged to Spain, and with only 22 pass-block snaps, a single error really hurts the grade.

— Andrew Russell (@PFF_AndrewR) September 27, 2021

I’m never been in the “PFF is total BS camp” but man these are really hard to agree with. Granted I haven’t gone back and rewatched the game, but still. This is as big of a discrepancy between my eye test and their grades as I can remember.

Needless to say I think some guys are much too low (like Carman), but how the hell is Pratt so high? There’s no way he was one of the best 5 on that defense yesterday. I saw him miss more tackles than anyone else.

Can we finally stop using PFF in arguments? Burrow is not only not sacked he only gets 1 pressure AND the backs run for over 5 yds a clip and THOSE are the grades? Meanwhile the Stealers line gets crushed all day and gets higher grades…..

I'm guessing the higher the number means the player was better? Cause these numbers between both O-Lines are terrible

(09-27-2021, 01:17 PM)Joelist Wrote: [ -> ]Can we finally stop using PFF in arguments? Burrow is not only not sacked he only gets 1 pressure AND the backs run for over 5 yds a clip and THOSE are the grades? Meanwhile the Stealers line gets crushed all day and gets higher grades…..

The explanation was that they ran so few offensive plays that each mistake was magnified.  Like having a 4 question test and missing 1 you're a average, if you miss 2 you fail.  T

I wonder where all of the PFF supporters are today? I caught a lot of shit in the off-season for disputing their grades and evaluations.

(09-27-2021, 11:33 AM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: [ -> ]I just wrote on Twitter, that while I'm not blaming Collinsworth for anything, when he bought his stake, things changed immediately and within a year, the grades changed to the current, ridiculous system, from the sane, sound methodology of the previous one.

Haeg was destroyed and Turner was getting abused by our DT rotation, all game.

I think we talked about that a while ago that when collinsworth came in they changed for the worse. I think it was around then too when they started showing the pff grades underneath the players during the offensive and defensive player introductions during the games.

(09-27-2021, 01:39 PM)MasonDT70 Wrote: [ -> ]I think we talked about that a while ago that when collinsworth came in they changed for the worse. I think it was around then too when they started showing the pff grades underneath the players during the offensive and defensive player introductions during the games.

Correct; it started in 2017 or 2018, IIRC and only on NBC (since he commentates on SNF).

(09-27-2021, 10:27 AM)Whatever Wrote: [ -> ]Pollak should post those OL grades as bulletin board material.

What, as a joke?  He's trying to make them laugh before getting to the film?

(09-27-2021, 10:01 AM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: [ -> ]Are people still going to put stock into these bullshit grades? What a goddamn joke.

PFF is great for their counting numbers and things they do that no one else does; these grades have been pure BS since 2015, fact.

Was curious about PFF grades but don't subscribe anymore so I thought...i'll check out the bengals board, there used to be a guy there that would post them.

...find this thread and think "oh it's not the same guy anymore?"...

...find this post and now wonder how far PFF has fallen for Truck to lose faith...

Guess i'll just have to use my own mind to form my opinions

(09-27-2021, 03:44 PM)basballguy Wrote: [ -> ]Was curious about PFF grades but don't subscribe anymore so I thought...i'll check out the bengals board, there used to be a guy there that would post them.

...find this thread and think "oh it's not the same guy anymore?"...

...find this post and now wonder how far PFF has fallen for Truck to lose faith...

Guess i'll just have to use my own mind to form my opinions

Yeah, not the same anymore; transparency and methodology have gone out the window with them.

And the, "there were only 14 true pass sets, so giving up 2 pressures hurts the grade," is a complete and total cop out; I don't even want to begin extrapolating that point to show the inherent bias/bs/both of what it's supposed to mean.

(09-27-2021, 01:27 PM)pally Wrote: [ -> ]The explanation was that they ran so few offensive plays that each mistake was magnified.  Like having a 4 question test and missing 1 you're a average, if you miss 2 you fail.  T

People are going to miss this and it is 100% correct.

The grades will upset people but with limited plays a blown assignment ends up hurting you more. 

Meanwhile, the steelers line has twice the plays so their mistakes hurt them less.

By the end of the season the grades will most likely average out and make sense as they tend to do most years. Judging them week by week in a vacuum isn't really the best way to go about it.

(09-27-2021, 03:48 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, not the same anymore; transparency and methodology have gone out the window with them.

And the, "there were only 14 true pass sets, so giving up 2 pressures hurts the grade," is a complete and total cop out; I don't even want to begin extrapolating that point to show the inherent bias/bs/both of what it's supposed to mean.

I can understand the low # of pass plays combined with the errors creating extreme numbers, but not that extreme.  

For example, in week 1, Sewell allowed 6 pressures on 71 passing sets and got a 67.5 pass block grade.  How do they also get a score of 5 on 2 pressures on 20 or so pass sets?

Unfortunately, for OL grades, the base score for doing your job is a 0.  You have to do something exceptional to earn a positive grade on a play.  That's a big issue I have with their run blocking grades.  It's weighted to give guys in man-power schemes an advantage because of more opportunities to tee off on the guy directly  in front of them to get a pancake or drive them off the LoS.

Carman had a damn good first game as a rookie. Don't know who they were watching?

He had a penalty but after that was just maulin'.

Logan Wilson and ADG were fantastic as was our DL and Hubbard had a great game.

Auden had a couple really nice catches and made us not hurt as bad as we would since Tee was out.

BJ Hill with another sack, dude is good. Same with Larry O.

PFF grades are flawed. This week is a great example of why that is the case. Grading on a subjective scale the performance of players in situations with objective, measurable values only accessible through a lens of subjective situational interpretation is a messy business.

In general though, over larger sample sizes, they do a better job at assessing how well a player performs than random message board posters ever do. That's not even close. They do a decent enough job to evade the immense biases and contradictions that plague people on forums like these trying to assess in a reasonable way the performances of players in whom they have invested emotion (positive or negative).

Take it with a grain of salt, especially single-week grades. Dismiss their season-long grades if you like, but I will trust them before I trust you (the general "you", whoever you may be reading this post).

So...according to PFF the Stealer line which let Ben get pummeled all day played better than the Bengal line which kept Burrow upright with virtually no pressure, all because Ben dropped back nearly 60 times? I think the whole PFF infatuation on the board may fade now.

(09-27-2021, 08:22 PM)JaggedJimmyJay Wrote: [ -> ]PFF grades are flawed. This week is a great example of why that is the case. Grading on a subjective scale the performance of players in situations with objective, measurable values only accessible through a lens of subjective situational interpretation is a messy business.

In general though, over larger sample sizes, they do a better job at assessing how well a player performs than random message board posters ever do. That's not even close. They do a decent enough job to evade the immense biases and contradictions that plague people on forums like these trying to assess in a reasonable way the performances of players in whom they have invested emotion (positive or negative).

Take it with a grain of salt, especially single-week grades. Dismiss their season-long grades if you like, but I will trust them before I trust you (the general "you", whoever you may be reading this post).

Uh, no.

(09-27-2021, 08:24 PM)Joelist Wrote: [ -> ]So...according to PFF the Stealer line which let Ben get pummeled all day played better than the Bengal line which kept Burrow upright with virtually no pressure, all because Ben dropped back nearly 60 times? I think the whole PFF infatuation on the board may fade now.

Uh, yes.

I take back my knock on their grades this week, they obviously know what they’re talking about… :D

The highest-graded QB from Week 3:

Joe Burrow - 90.3 ? pic.twitter.com/KQTt9rB3dX

— PFF (@PFF) September 27, 2021