+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: JUNGLE NOISE (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-2.html)
+--- Thread: PFF Grades for Seattle Game (/thread-21095.html)
RE: PFF Grades for Seattle Game - NKURyan - 09-10-2019
(09-10-2019, 09:23 PM)McC Wrote: Wilson completed 14 passes for 196 yards. Seattle ran for 72 yards. Hard to believe anyone on the defense could have graded out poorly.
I'd be curious to see how they scored the Seahawks. If they scored their o-line or secondary much higher than ours... they're wrong lol.
I'd give the Seahawks the edge at linebacker and running back (marginally) scores for that game, but that's it.
RE: PFF Grades for Seattle Game - Nicomo Cosca - 09-11-2019
(09-10-2019, 11:58 PM)NKURyan Wrote: I'd be curious to see how they scored the Seahawks. If they scored their o-line or secondary much higher than ours... they're wrong lol.
I'd give the Seahawks the edge at linebacker and running back (marginally) scores for that game, but that's it.
Hubbard should be the highest rated for either team, that’s for sure.
RE: PFF Grades for Seattle Game - GodFather - 09-11-2019
Hopkins played well. It doesn't bode well for Price...
RE: PFF Grades for Seattle Game - McC - 09-11-2019
(09-11-2019, 12:58 AM)GodFather Wrote: Hopkins played well. It doesn't bode well for Price...
Watch him end up at RG.
RE: PFF Grades for Seattle Game - SHRacerX - 09-11-2019
(09-10-2019, 01:30 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: Here they are for the offense. I have to say, MUCH lower than you would expect from the optimism on the board. Really Hopkins is the only player who they considered as having a good game.
They thought that Miller, Jordan, Mixon, Bernard, and Willis had bad games apparently.
Dalton - 69.5
Ross - 68.8
Boyd - 63.5
Willis - 57.7
Erickson - 68.9
Mixon - 53.5
Bernard - 52.5
Eifert - 66.8
Uzomah - 68.3
Hopkins - 77
Michael Jordan - 56.2 (0 sacks allowed)
John Miller - 52.9 (0 sacks allowed)
Andre Smith - 59.5 (1 sack allowed. 1 penalty)
Bobby Hart - 64.0 (1 sack allowed)
On Defense - The Line and LB's were generally good. The secondary was bad with Bates and WJ3 being HORRIBLE.
Webb - 51.5
WJ3 - 42.6 - Wow - Terrible
Kirkpatrick - 68.8
Williams - 71.0
Bates - 29.5 Ouch - Horible
Fej - 68.7
Brown 78.9
Vigil - 63.8
Wren - 46.4
Billings - 87.8
Atkins - 86.5
Wynn - 45.9
Dunlap - 79.7
Lawson - 71.8
Hubbard - 88.1
Glasgow - 76.0
Thanks, Pistons. Really appreciate the sharing of this information.
With a defensive front that looked like that, the LBs will surely look better. I thought aside from one missed tackle that led to a fairly large gain, Vigil looked outstanding on defense. He was really pumped up, too. It will be a bigger challenge when they face teams that will throw it 50 times, but I was very encouraged by what I saw.
I believe I head that they played 24 snaps with 3 safeties on the field. Interesting.
RE: PFF Grades for Seattle Game - SHRacerX - 09-11-2019
(09-10-2019, 01:44 PM)McC Wrote: It is impossible to reconcile the crazy low score given to WJIII with what happened on the field. Not sure what the hell game they were watching in that case.
I agree. He followed their #1 WR all game and I think Lockett only got the one catch, which was potentially blamed on Bates, as it was apparently a blown assignment.
And I think he was not one of the 3 people that whiffed on that TD.
RE: PFF Grades for Seattle Game - SHRacerX - 09-11-2019
(09-11-2019, 01:59 AM)McC Wrote: Watch him end up at RG.
Beat me to it. I think once his foot is better, he will push for a starting job there. He also can provide solid depth at both guard spots and center. Not what you want for a first round pick, but I think he isn't done here. I bet he is the RG of the future. No disrespect to Miller, but Price is much better suited as a guard...Lapham, to his credit, has been saying this from day 1.
RE: PFF Grades for Seattle Game - Catmandude123 - 09-11-2019
(09-10-2019, 02:11 PM)The Caped Crusader Wrote: I think if you remove the BS fumble for Dalton, his score would probably be in the mid 70s. I'd assume anyway.
Yes and if the safety doesn't jump too soon on Ross's second TD Dalton would have had three turnovers and an even lower score.
RE: PFF Grades for Seattle Game - Luvnit2 - 09-11-2019
(09-10-2019, 01:52 PM)THE PISTONS Wrote: According to the scores. But a 64 rating isn't what you want your best offensive lineman to have. You want your top guys to be low 80's to upper 70's. A rating of 64 should be your worst starter.
The line gave up pressure on something like 36% of the passes.
I think you are being unrealistic. Please share the 16 NFL lines that had an aggregate score of 70 to 75 which is what it would need to be based on your numbers.
My guess is one OL Dallas scored that high (average of 70 to 75) in 2018 or in week #1 of 2019.
Could you look it up?
RE: PFF Grades for Seattle Game - grampahol - 09-11-2019
Since PFF isn't calling any plays, makes zero decisions on who plays and who doesn't and assigns scores according to their own criteria and NOT that of any team I'd say it's speculative at best...basically just punditry and little more.
RE: PFF Grades for Seattle Game - Luvnit2 - 09-11-2019
(09-11-2019, 10:38 AM)grampahol Wrote: Since PFF isn't calling any plays, makes zero decisions on who plays and who doesn't and assigns scores according to their own criteria and NOT that of any team I'd say it's speculative at best...basically just punditry and little more.
I agree with most you said.
The alternative though is to use fans opinions based on their perception, some are more knowledgeable than others, but overall I give fans an "F" on their grades. That includes me.
RE: PFF Grades for Seattle Game - THE PISTONS - 09-11-2019
(09-11-2019, 07:02 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Thanks, Pistons. Really appreciate the sharing of this information.
With a defensive front that looked like that, the LBs will surely look better. I thought aside from one missed tackle that led to a fairly large gain, Vigil looked outstanding on defense. He was really pumped up, too. It will be a bigger challenge when they face teams that will throw it 50 times, but I was very encouraged by what I saw.
I believe I head that they played 24 snaps with 3 safeties on the field. Interesting.
Agreed. The front 6-7 looked pretty good.
Billings had a great game too. Kind of quietly.
RE: PFF Grades for Seattle Game - McC - 09-11-2019
(09-11-2019, 08:01 AM)Catmandude123 Wrote: Yes and if the safety doesn't jump too soon on Ross's second TD Dalton would have had three turnovers and an even lower score.
Really bad comparison. The BS fumble actually happened in real life but your scenario only happened in your head because, for all we know, he might have times his jump perfectly and still missed the ball.
How many passes in the NFL come within a whisker of not being completed? Half? Maybe even more? How much time do reasonable people spend talking about how close they came to not being completed?
See, this is the ridiculousness of having an unyielding stance. It prevents one from seeing the entirety of the picture leads one to say some really goofy things.
RE: PFF Grades for Seattle Game - Catmandude123 - 09-11-2019
(09-11-2019, 12:33 PM)McC Wrote: Really bad comparison. The BS fumble actually happened in real life but your scenario only happened in your head because, for all we know, he might have times his jump perfectly and still missed the ball.
How many passes in the NFL come within a whisker of not being completed? Half? Maybe even more? How much time do reasonable people spend talking about how close they came to not being completed?
See, this is the ridiculousness of having an unyielding stance. It prevents one from seeing the entirety of the picture leads one to say some really goofy things.
Yeah you do say goofy things but it's ok we understand.
RE: PFF Grades for Seattle Game - Joelist - 09-11-2019
Sorry but I watched that play and the ball was dropped in there just fine - it would have taken the safety making a big leap and somehow reaching backwards over Ross to have a shot at it. It wasn’t some easy INT that got missed.
What I liked about the play aside from the nice throw was seeing Ross actually locate the ball in the air after getting behind the secondary and making sure he was ready to catch it. Good sign.
RE: PFF Grades for Seattle Game - Luvnit2 - 09-11-2019
(09-11-2019, 12:33 PM)McC Wrote:
Really bad comparison. The BS fumble actually happened in real life but your scenario only happened in your head because, for all we know, he might have times his jump perfectly and still missed the ball.
How many passes in the NFL come within a whisker of not being completed? Half? Maybe even more? How much time do reasonable people spend talking about how close they came to not being completed?
See, this is the ridiculousness of having an unyielding stance. It prevents one from seeing the entirety of the picture leads one to say some really goofy things.
This is spot on, we can analyze every QB pass and find fault with 80% completed or not (not perfect spot) and we will see just missed a defensive lineman's fingers or LB or DB.
But since Dalton and Ross were involved, 2 players fans love to be overly critical, it made a difference.
The guy did not jump too soon, he jumped and missed the ball.
Great throw and great concentration by Ross to catch a bullet for the TD
RE: PFF Grades for Seattle Game - bfine32 - 09-11-2019
(09-11-2019, 12:33 PM)McC Wrote: Really bad comparison. The BS fumble actually happened in real life but your scenario only happened in your head because, for all we know, he might have times his jump perfectly and still missed the ball.
How many passes in the NFL come within a whisker of not being completed? Half? Maybe even more? How much time do reasonable people spend talking about how close they came to not being completed?
See, this is the ridiculousness of having an unyielding stance. It prevents one from seeing the entirety of the picture leads one to say some really goofy things.
The comparison is not bad; as you both are playing the "what if" game, it's just your what if is presented to make Andy's performance look better and his is to make Andy's performance look worse. IMO Andy's passer rating caught "a break" because the play was ruled a fumble; I thought it should have been an INT; not that it matters in the grand scheme
RE: PFF Grades for Seattle Game - Luvnit2 - 09-11-2019
(09-11-2019, 02:14 PM)bfine32 Wrote: The comparison is not bad; as you both are playing the "what if" game, it's just your what if is presented to make Andy's performance look better and his is to make Andy's performance look worse. IMO Andy's passer rating caught "a break" because the play was ruled a fumble; I thought it should have been an INT; not that it matters in the grand scheme
I thought it was an interception as well.
I also think the fumble at the end of the game was an incomplete pass, which also would have hurt AD's QBR.
But, also thought 9 times out of 10 that is called an incomplete pass and no fumble and maybe we complete long pass next play and then win the game.
Lot of what if's in that game.
RE: PFF Grades for Seattle Game - THE PISTONS - 09-11-2019
(09-11-2019, 02:25 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: I thought it was an interception as well.
I also think the fumble at the end of the game was an incomplete pass, which also would have hurt AD's QBR.
But, also thought 9 times out of 10 that is called an incomplete pass and no fumble and maybe we complete long pass next play and then win the game.
Lot of what if's in that game.
One would hope that IF PFF discredits a TD because it was not a good throw, that they would not count a play ruled a fumble against him that was an incomplete pass.
idk...dealing in hypothetical either way has the chance to introduce some bias into the mix.
No real perfect way to do it though.
RE: PFF Grades for Seattle Game - McC - 09-11-2019
(09-11-2019, 01:37 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: Yeah you do say goofy things but it's ok we understand.
Ah, the old I know you are but what am I. The go to of seven year olds everywhere. Weak but not at all unexpected non-response.