We 18 guys playing regularly who grade out in the 50's or below

[Whatever]

(12-04-2018, 11:15 AM)THE PISTONS Wrote: It is, but if you look at the amount of players at a position it ranks among the bottom.

Like you might be 50.1 and rank #67 of 69 at your position. That's hardly average. It's Bad relative to the others.

There's lots of players that don't play enough snaps to qualify for the rankings, however.  A lot of teams have mediocre starters that are covered up by the talent around them and gameplanning.  

Another issue with using PFF grades to judge talent is that the game plan and playcalling will directly impact how good or bad a player appears to perform.  I think we can all agree that we would doing a lot better with better coaching.  That would improve those PFF grades.

I also really question their grades.  Our OL grades are the same or worse than last year, but we're running the ball a lot better and on pace to give up a lot fewer sacks.  How can they be playing better as a group, but be graded worse as individuals?  For example, Price is graded at 51, and Fisher and Og were rated mid-50's last year.  He's had his struggles, but no way he was worse than those two last year.