(08-05-2019, 08:19 AM)fredtoast Wrote: If you post the full list of PFF rankings you will see that NFL teams don't really put a lot of weight on them.  Lot of guys who PFF has rated lower get paid more by NFL teams in free agency than some of the PFF favorites.

In 2015 Dre Kirkpatrick played 97% of the snaps for a top 3 pass defense and finished in the top 30 in almost every OBJECTIVE stat (success rate, yards per target, completion percentage allowed) yet PFF had him ranked as the 114th CB in the league behind a bunch of scrubs who barely played.  It was a complete joke.

I am sure NFL teams use the raw stats that PFF collects, but they don't seem too impressed with the individual player rankings.

Well, I did not ask you because I dont want more HObson type garbage to ignore.  But alas, you are like the school hall monitor and came running to defend the un-defendable.

So, your point to why PFF is garbage is because: 5 seasons ago, a career below avg CB, who had zero INts and allowed a 98 QB rating on balls thrown to him in 2015, was ranked 114th out of CB's.   Got it, that makes sense. 

I am sure QBR is also garbage cause one time, Ryan Fitzpatrick or some other random QB who had a good run of games, finished higher than Brees or Rodgers or BRady in one random year as well. 

(08-04-2019, 08:48 PM)Joelist Wrote: If you actually trust PFF that is laughable. They are in the same credibility club as ESPNs QBR...

Still waiting to hear why both Stats are worthless in your eyes. 

(08-05-2019, 11:11 AM)TopSix Wrote: So, your point to why PFF is garbage is because: 5 seasons ago, a career below avg CB, who had zero INts and allowed a 98 QB rating on balls thrown to him in 2015, was ranked 114th out of CB's.   Got it, that makes sense. 

Yes it does make perfect sense because nothing you mentioned would justify ranking Dre as the 114th CB in the league that year.  You can't defend that ranking.  You know you can't defend it, and that is why you rely more on personal attacks than addressing the actual issue.

You also refuse to acknowledge that teams that sign free agents don't rely on PFF rankings.  NFL teams use PFF for the raw data they compile, not their individual player rankings.

(08-05-2019, 11:45 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Yes it does make perfect sense because nothing you mentioned would justify ranking Dre as the 114th CB in the league that year.  You can't defend that ranking.  You know you can't defend it, and that is why you rely more on personal attacks than addressing the actual issue.

You also refuse to acknowledge that teams that sign free agents don't rely on PFF rankings.  NFL teams use PFF for the raw data they compile, not their individual player rankings.

In 2015, Dre allowed an MVP level passer rating on balls thrown his way

He did not have an int

That is why his rating was low.

(08-05-2019, 11:48 AM)TopSix Wrote: In 2015, Dre allowed an MVP level passer rating on balls thrown his way 

No he did not.

(08-05-2019, 11:51 AM)fredtoast Wrote: No he did not.

And he had 15 penalties.

(08-05-2019, 11:48 AM)TopSix Wrote: In 2015, Dre allowed an MVP level passer rating on balls thrown his way

He did not have an int

That is why his rating was low.

So you have to go back four years to find something about which to rag on a Bengals player.  Got it. 

Maybe you'd enjoy rooting for a team you actually like in some way.  You obviously hate everything about the Bengals.  Rooting for a team you so clearly hate seems like an odd choice.

(08-05-2019, 11:52 AM)TopSix Wrote: And he had 15 penalties.

The best CBs in the league almost always finish high in penalties.

Post the numbers you have for Dre's targets in 2015.  I think your stats must be off.  He had a very low completion percentage allowed and yards per target. 

(08-05-2019, 11:55 AM)McC Wrote: So you have to go back four years to find something about which to rag on a Bengals player.  Got it. 

Maybe you'd enjoy rooting for a team you actually like in some way.  You obviously hate everything about the Bengals.  Rooting for a team you so clearly hate seems like an odd choice.

I didn’t bring up Dres 2015. Fredtoast did. We’re talking about if PFF is a good source stat.

You need to read before you comment. You’re wrong and misinformed often.

(08-05-2019, 12:03 PM)TopSix Wrote: I didn’t bring up Dres 2015. Fredtoast did.   We’re talking about if PFF is a good source stat.  

You need to read before you comment.  You’re wrong and misinformed often.

I feel like PFF is a decent source for most positions. Is it 100% accurate? No way.

I do not think it does a good job with RB's and DT's for whatever reason.

(08-05-2019, 11:12 AM)TopSix Wrote: Still waiting to hear why both Stats are worthless in your eyes. 

Others already answered on PFF ratings - people do use the stats but not their ratings which are both subjective and have a secret sauce component.

As to QBR, it has been proven to be nonsense so many times by so many different people it is indeed laughable. No one but ESPN uses it in any real function - I suspect things like it saying Terrell Pryor was a better QB than Drew Brees is part of the reason...among many others.

Finally, bit of friendly advice. If you persist in the personal attacks and electronic fist swinging you will run afoul of the moderators as both violate forum rules - jungle Noise is a Bengals Fans Only area and the tone here is kept friendly and respectful.

Like D fence. Wait and see on linebackers and who will be the true leader in the game.

(08-05-2019, 01:37 PM)Joelist Wrote: Others already answered on PFF ratings - people do use the stats but not their ratings which are both subjective and have a secret sauce component.

As to QBR, it has been proven to be nonsense so many times by so many different people it is indeed laughable. No one but ESPN uses it in any real function - I suspect things like it saying Terrell Pryor was a better QB than Drew Brees is part of the reason...among many others.

Finally, bit of friendly advice. If you persist in the personal attacks and electronic fist swinging you will run afoul of the moderators as both violate forum rules - jungle Noise is a Bengals Fans Only area and the tone here is kept friendly and respectful.

But TQBR never ranked Pryor over brees

(08-05-2019, 01:37 PM)Joelist Wrote: Others already answered on PFF ratings - people do use the stats but not their ratings which are both subjective and have a secret sauce component.

As to QBR, it has been proven to be nonsense so many times by so many different people it is indeed laughable. No one but ESPN uses it in any real function - I suspect things like it saying Terrell Pryor was a better QB than Drew Brees is part of the reason...among many others.

Finally, bit of friendly advice. If you persist in the personal attacks and electronic fist swinging you will run afoul of the moderators as both violate forum rules - jungle Noise is a Bengals Fans Only area and the tone here is kept friendly and respectful.

    

Weird. TQBR always has the best Qbs, for that season, ranked in the top 5. How is that piece so accurate, but the rest not.


Anyway, back to the defense.

Gave up most yards in the NFL
Bottom 3rd in Turnovers
Gave up thee 3rd most points

They get Lawson back, good guy to have back.

The rest of the defense is the same. Brown cant cover, so he adds nothing.

I even saved off this little QBR gem because it had sports analysts across the country laughing at ESPN:

Drew Brees
26/36 332 5 tds 0 ints 146 passer Rating, but ESPN has a 70 QBR
http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=331027018


Terrelle Pryor
10/19 88 yards 0 tds 2 ints 9 carries 105 yards 1 td
25 Passer Rating, but 96.2 QBR
http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=331027013

Then there was how it said Aaron Rodgers was not as good as Tim Tebow....

Rodgers was 26-39 for 396 yards, 2 TD

Tebow was 4-10 for 79 yards and rushed 6 times for 38 yards and 2 TD.

The list goes on and on and on. There's a very good reason you don't see actual league pros going anywhere near it.

Back to the D.

I have to assume you did not watch the defense play all season - a lot of us here did. We know well about the major scheme issues under Austin and how they had the defense playing hesitant - trying to read and react according to a complex scheme instead of just flowing to the ball and making the play. When Marvin took it over himself things did improve but also by then the injury issues just buried everything.

Oh, and Brown was playing good pass coverage before he got hurt. Vigil also looked good before the injury. So we have reason for a bit of optimism that with them healthy and a scheme that actually plays to their strengths we should improve.

(08-05-2019, 03:51 PM)Joelist Wrote: I even saved off this little QBR gem because it had sports analysts across the country laughing at ESPN:

Drew Brees
26/36 332 5 tds 0 ints 146 passer Rating, but ESPN has a 70 QBR
http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=331027018


Terrelle Pryor
10/19 88 yards 0 tds 2 ints 9 carries 105 yards 1 td
25 Passer Rating, but 96.2 QBR
http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=331027013

Then there was how it said Aaron Rodgers was not as good as Tim Tebow....

Rodgers was 26-39 for 396 yards, 2 TD

Tebow was 4-10 for 79 yards and rushed 6 times for 38 yards and 2 TD.

The list goes on and on and on. There's a very good reason you don't see actual league pros going anywhere near it.

These are one game instances.  One game.  

And ROdgers was still graded as elite in that game (8 years ago).  

• Tebow scrambled six times for 38 yards and a touchdown, giving him considerable credit. Rodgers' only "carry" was a one-yard kneel-down to end the game.
• Rodgers took four sacks. Tebow did not have a play that resulted in negative yardage. Quarterbacks are given a share of blame for sacks.
• Almost half of Rodgers' passing total, 197 of 396, was judged to come after the catch, for which quarterbacks receive less credit.
• QBR weighs a quarterback's performance relative to the game situation. Here's how Bennett described the difference between how QBR viewed Tebow's clutch performance and how it viewed Rodgers': "Rodgers performed about the same as Tebow in bringing his team back from a 14-0 deficit (QBR of 83.6 from start of 2nd qtr). However, unlike Tebow, Rodgers was on the field when he team went into as 14-0 hole. Since those plays count towards his overall [performance], his QBR was 82 for the game."
  

Austin was fired in early November after the Saints Embarrassment.

The Schedule post Saints was also much easier from an offensive opponent standpoint.

Even so, the alleged 'scheme' issues that will now be magically solved (With the same players)

Post Austin


Ravens - L . - Gave up nearly 275 Yards on the ground

Browns - L - Hammered by Cleveland. Mayfield 4 Tds.

Broncos - L Gave up 200+ Yards rushing

Chargers - Played well

Raiders - Played Well

Browns . 425 Yards . 3 More Baker Tds and 150 rushing yards

Steelers - All their skill players were out

(08-05-2019, 03:57 PM)Joelist Wrote: Back to the D.

I have to assume you did not watch the defense play all season - a lot of us here did. We know well about the major scheme issues under Austin and how they had the defense playing hesitant - trying to read and react according to a complex scheme instead of just flowing to the ball and making the play. When Marvin took it over himself things did improve but also by then the injury issues just buried everything.

Oh, and Brown was playing good pass coverage before he got hurt. Vigil also looked good before the injury. So we have reason for a bit of optimism that with them healthy and a scheme that actually plays to their strengths we should improve.

Steeler fans don't get to see every Bengals game.