You can tell Frank Pollack is working under Marvin Lewis. Saying your best graded olineman isn't starting because he needs to learn better technique. Think he even giggled after that comment.

(08-13-2018, 10:01 PM)Jhowdy54 Wrote: You can tell Frank Pollack is working under Marvin Lewis.   Saying your best graded olineman isn't starting because he needs to learn better technique. Think he even giggled after that comment.

Frank Pollack don't giggle man!

(08-13-2018, 06:45 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Still only saw the great TD play from Driskel to Auden, thanks for this Truck.

I was in the Game Day thread and people were acting like Driskel was terrible in there.

This makes me feel much better about our backup situation but i think we should atleast bring in a guy to backup Driskel.

Sounds like Barkley is not the answer and i just wonder why they have him as the 2nd string QB when Driskel is clearly better.

Best-graded by whose account? Actual NFL coaches or a joke, "organisation," that has meaningless and biased, "grades?"

Look, PFF *used* to be a damn good resource, when they had context to their grades and they posted more signature/unique stats than they do now.

Now that they have backing from the big boys, they are biased, inaccurate and because there is no context or explanation as to how the grades work, its no surprise that fewer teams in the NFL are taking them seriously.

Glad Pollack isn't taking them as gospel and neither should anyone.

(08-14-2018, 12:26 AM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: Best-graded by whose account? Actual NFL coaches or a joke, "organisation," that has meaningless and biased, "grades?"

Look, PFF *used* to be a damn good resource, when they had context to their grades and they posted more signature/unique stats than they do now.

Now that they have backing from the big boys, they are biased, inaccurate and because there is no context or explanation as to how the grades work, its no surprise that fewer teams in the NFL are taking them seriously.

Glad Pollack isn't taking them as gospel and neither should anyone.

I agree, i think you were wanting to quote someone else though Truck lol

(08-14-2018, 04:56 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: I agree, i think you were wanting to quote someone else though Truck lol

... I'm sorry Nate...

(08-15-2018, 12:21 AM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: ... I'm sorry Nate...

It's all good bro.

(08-14-2018, 12:26 AM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: Best-graded by whose account? Actual NFL coaches or a joke, "organisation," that has meaningless and biased, "grades?"

Look, PFF *used* to be a damn good resource, when they had context to their grades and they posted more signature/unique stats than they do now.

Now that they have backing from the big boys, they are biased, inaccurate and because there is no context or explanation as to how the grades work, its no surprise that fewer teams in the NFL are taking them seriously.

Glad Pollack isn't taking them as gospel and neither should anyone.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/pff-player-grades?gclid=CjwKCAjwwdTbBRAIEiwAYQf_EzqsIlxyBlgjP38FGlvaULcFPjK_z8NaqC2R1t5nnminTzO344mlEhoCuR0QAvD_BwE

Here you go.. simple "how does pff grading system work" google search.  Not sure how there is "no context or explanation." 

Do you have any evidence that fewer teams are taking them seriously? I mean do teams even take them seriously to begin with?

What happened to Rod Taylor?

To the original question that started this thread - they did not grade it the same. I don't know what the grade was (or how Pollack does it) but just know it's not similar.

(08-16-2018, 06:36 PM)bfine32 Wrote: What happened to Rod Taylor?

ACL tear

(08-16-2018, 03:56 PM)TheUberHuber Wrote: https://www.profootballfocus.com/pff-player-grades?gclid=CjwKCAjwwdTbBRAIEiwAYQf_EzqsIlxyBlgjP38FGlvaULcFPjK_z8NaqC2R1t5nnminTzO344mlEhoCuR0QAvD_BwE

Here you go.. simple "how does pff grading system work" google search.  Not sure how there is "no context or explanation." 

Do you have any evidence that fewer teams are taking them seriously? I mean do teams even take them seriously to begin with?

Yeah, I know how they do it, but the context issue, I'm not sure you understood what I meant.

Yeah, they add or take away 0-2 in ether way, I know that; that's never changed.

But do they start at 0? Do they start at 50? 100? Do different players start off at different points, depending on position? etc.

(I know they most-likely start off at 50)

When they used to have it, it started at 0, a good play was +0.5, bad was -0.5 and everything in-between was, well, in-between.

So a player with a good game had 2 or high, a bad game was -2 and lower. THAT is much more contextual and makes more sense and when I was going through their training and job interview process, it made sense and worked, like that.

Furthermore, the grade was updated throughout the year, cumulatively; now they weigh it, which it makes it even more confusing.

To add to that, they used to charge $20.00 a year, now its something like $60.00-70.00 and Faluk was quoted by them at some outrageous price.

They now have backing; why charge exponentially more, for less content and worse content?

Not to mention, a lot of the original crew that worked for the site (the good guys) are gone and the writing is done by idiots who sound like they've never attended High School, at times.

Change and evolution is good and necessary in the world, but de-evolution regresses and holds back something that could potentially be (or was) good to begin with.

EDIT*: Do keep in mind, I pulled myself out of the running for a job there, myself; I have no bad blood or animosity towards PFF and Khaled was an awesome guy who really had a good handle on the analytics and statistics-side of things (he's gone, by the looks of it). I simply couldn't hack it at that point in my life, with a full-time University schedule, working 35+ hours a week at my local grocery store and having a girlfriend... just too much on my plate, not to mention the video quality I was using was so grainy (NFL Gamepass is significantly better in 2018), I could barely make out the players I was grading (and even then, I was deemed to be at 93.5% accuracy).

(08-12-2018, 11:18 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Looks like Ced was our 4th best according to PFF. Fisher and Perkins were worst by far and Price was mediocre.

Either way, we have a lot of OL work to do and may the best men win starting jobs and roster spots.

Price was actually very good in pass blocking, which was a bigger concern for me than his run blocking, given the scheme he came from.  You also have to consider he was going against #1s, and the guard play to his right sucked ass.

Hopkins, Fisher, and Perkins were hot garbage...I think Perkins could be a PS candidate, but I don't see the others as starter material...ever.  

Ced's numbers were somewhat encouraging,  but you would think a first round talent going against backups would have fared even better. 

He will likely be our "third tackle" for such formations and back up both tackle spots.  Hard to imagine they let Fisher go with one year left on his deal, but he sure looks bad.  

(08-13-2018, 03:51 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote:


We will see, i just am giving my honest opinion on what looks like to me would be the best Lineup with the players
at their area of strengths. Boling played LT pretty darn well those last two games, played LT in college. Westerman
is clearly a LG and pretty much everyone is agreeing on this. Redmond is a mauling RG that just needs to work on
his pass protection and Glenn would be that monster RT to dominate on the right side.

Just makes sense to me.

I like Hopkins as a backup, a versatile backup.

This isn't meant to be a slight on the Brown Family financials or anything, but I can't help but wonder if they are somewhat afraid that Boling's next contract would be sky-high if he played a good LT and then they might be overpaying for a quality RT in Glenn?  And I have no clue if Glenn has ever been on the right side, but it sure seems to fit him.

Based on how Boling played there last year, and my desire to have the middle be the big, nasty trio of Westerman-Price-Redmond on the field, I can't imagine that this doesn't give the Bengals the best possible line in both rush and pass protection.  

I don't pretend to know squat about line play, but I do know the day Frank Pollock relies on PFF grades to tell him who should play, is the day I want him gone.....

I guess Boling played alright at LT last year, but I don't know if he would be better there than Glenn.

If we move Boling to LT then we definitely make the LG position weaker.  So do we want to possibly make both LT and LG weaker in order to upgrade RT by moving Glenn there?

I am sure Pollack will look at all the possibilities.  While in Dallas he moved La'el Collins from LG to RT and Jonathan Cooper from RG to LG.

(08-17-2018, 10:21 AM)Sled21 Wrote: I don't pretend to know squat about line play, but I do know the day Frank Pollock relies on PFF grades to tell him who should play, is the day I want him gone.....

On the NFL channel on Siruix Radio a few months back they were discussing PFF (and Football Outsiders I believe). They noted that 30 teams in the NFL use the service and it is simply another tool the teams use to evaluate much like they use draft forums - they use it to see if they 'missed' or are missing something. So it is a resource for teams, nothing more but can still be useful.

(08-17-2018, 10:07 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: This isn't meant to be a slight on the Brown Family financials or anything, but I can't help but wonder if they are somewhat afraid that Boling's next contract would be sky-high if he played a good LT and then they might be overpaying for a quality RT in Glenn?  And I have no clue if Glenn has ever been on the right side, but it sure seems to fit him.

Based on how Boling played there last year, and my desire to have the middle be the big, nasty trio of Westerman-Price-Redmond on the field, I can't imagine that this doesn't give the Bengals the best possible line in both rush and pass protection.  

I mean, wouldn't we have to pay the Tackles the same anyway?

I just think we would want the best Line regardless and if Boling plays great at LT so be it.

(08-17-2018, 11:03 AM)fredtoast Wrote: I guess Boling played alright at LT last year, but I don't know if he would be better there than Glenn.

If we move Boling to LT then we definitely make the LG position weaker.  So do we want to possibly make both LT and LG weaker in order to upgrade RT by moving Glenn there?

I am sure Pollack will look at all the possibilities.  While in Dallas he moved La'el Collins from LG to RT and Jonathan Cooper from RG to LG.

I agree, Pollack has been open minded in the past.

Westerman is a LG and has high potential. I think it would be a shame to just have him rotting on the bench.

Need to give the guy a shot to know what we have there. Has always impressed me. Hard to say if we would make LG
weaker with him, he is a very good pass protector from what i have seen. Who knows how good of a LT Boling could be.

(08-17-2018, 01:50 PM)I_C_DeadPeople Wrote: On the NFL channel on Siruix Radio a few months back they were discussing PFF (and Football Outsiders I believe). They noted that 30 teams in the NFL use the service and it is simply another tool the teams use to evaluate much like they use draft forums - they use it to see if they 'missed' or are missing something. So it is a resource for teams, nothing more but can still be useful.

Anything that helps to judge your players is a good thing to look at even if it is PFF.

Glenn is well above average at LT so let him stay there. Boling is good at LG so let him stay there too. Let them settle in to their positions and develop proper rhythm together.

BTW I rewatched the game with an eye on Price. It just reconfirmed my game night thinking - he did very well. It was fun watching the Bears DL try and fail to move him backwards off the point and also great to see no defenders fly in unblocked.

(08-17-2018, 12:01 AM)Jakeypoo Wrote: ACL tear

Well that sux. I had high hopes