08-16-2019, 10:27 AM
(08-16-2019, 10:06 AM)lone bengal Wrote: Not attacking your post but I honestly have now idea how pff works lol or if it’s accurate at assessing good football players. Every time we talk about a player on our defense there studs according to PFF. You would think we had the 85 Bears defense last season even tho they were good awful. Billings is a good NT, Vigil who I think is way overrated had a ton of tackles for loss and was rated a top outside backer, Kirkpatrick rated out as one of the best cb’s. Dennard rated out good in the slot. Williams was good, Hubbard had 6 sacks. Preston Browns is a stud when healthy. Then you have the actually guys like Bates, Jackson III , Lawson, Geno and Dunlap who are actually good and very talented in my opinion based of my eye test not PFF. Does PFF take in account what a players assignment should be and if it’s executed ?
It sounds like some misinformation has been spread to you. Vigil was rated a 59, which grades out as mediocre. Kirkpatrick graded out at 60, which is the same average/mediocre status. Brown was a 55, which is bordering on below average/replacement level.
They do try to take into account what the player should be doing, but they don't have access to every play call. If they aren't sure if a player messed up or if it was just an assignment, they give the player a neutral grade for that play. They do have access to teams and communicate with them, but I believe that it is more for draft purposes.
It is a good tool and is fairly accurate for some of their grades (lineman, for instance) but isn't perfect.
