Top 10 Highest Graded Seasons for College Centers in PFF Era

[SunsetBengal]

(04-04-2018, 08:37 PM)wildcats forever Wrote: I have nothing to base this on but I doubt Ragnow lasts until 46, and maybe not Price. While I'd love to have Wynn, unless we trade up to ensure getting both, I'd go with Ragnow at 21. Center is the position that we don't have squat on the roster right now. I admit to being biased towards drafting a center first, then doing the best we can afterward. 

Is Frank Ragnow the next Travis Frederick, Alex Mack, or Eric Wood?  Hell, is he even the next Mauquise Pouncey?  We really don't know, until he reaches the field against real competition.  However, I like his as well as Billy Price's chances of handling a 3-4 NT on a regular basis.

We don't need a Center to bust a move, pop-lock-and drop, or even break dance.  We just need a bruiser to contend with large NTs that they will be seeing 6-12 times per year.

[*wildcats forever*]

(04-04-2018, 09:31 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Is Frank Ragnow the next Travis Frederick, Alex Mack, or Eric Wood?  Hell, is he even the next Mauquise Pouncey?  We really don't know, until he reaches the field against real competition.  However, I like his as well as Billy Price's chances of handling a 3-4 NT on a regular basis.

We don't need a Center to bust a move, pop-lock-and drop, or even break dance.  We just need a bruiser to contend with large NTs that they will be seeing 6-12 times per year.

Yeah, you can say something similar for just about every top pick. It's how we drive ourselves crazy every year around this time. The last few weeks before the draft are brutal. It's why alcohol was invented ....

[*Synric*]

(04-04-2018, 03:42 PM)ochocincos Wrote: People need to recognize this is the Top 10 from the past 5 or so years. Just because a guy like Pat Elflein isn't on the list doesn't mean they are bad.
But in regards to Pat Elflein, I don't think he'd be ahead of Ragnow anyway if they were in the same draft class. Elflein is good but not great.
Also, Elflein didn't look "great" last year in the NFL. He was just ok.

Elflein was decent in pass pro but struggled in the run game. I think even Bodine ended up with a higher pff rating than Elflein. I believe Elflein will continue to get better but I don't see all pro in is immediate future.

(04-04-2018, 06:42 PM)bambino5130 Wrote: I think these college grades are a little suspect because of the massive diversity of talent of the schools some of these teams play.

For example Arkansas didnt really schedule World Beaters in their out of conference, no offense to Florida A&M, New Mexico St, Coastal. Those could boost the rankings

When Arkansas did play decent SEC teams they didnt even score double digits. I know this is not on players like Frank Ragnow who is a really great player and would love

to have him. I just dont trust these ratings as much as I do with a more even talent pool in the NFL.

What do you do when you play tough and stiffer competition.

Boiling played well on a struggling team on a struggling offensive line. 

Frank Ragnow was in the same boat because Arkansas's offensive line was very bad especially at tackle. The struggling tackles really hurt the entire offense no matter how well the center played.

(04-04-2018, 06:49 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: But, if you back up a season, Ragnow was healthy the entire year.  His production was outstanding, when he was healthy.

Let's not forget that the Head Coach that recruited him was Brett Bielema, the same one that brought Travis Frederick to the NFL.  

I believe I read somewhere Bielema said Ragnow was the best lineman he's ever coached which speaks volumes. 

Ragnow actually reminds me alot of another Bielema product Cincy fans might have heard of.... Kevin Zeilter.

[SunsetBengal]

(04-04-2018, 09:52 PM)Synric Wrote: I believe I read somewhere Bielema said Ragnow was the best lineman he's ever coached which speaks volumes. 

Ragnow actually reminds me alot of another Bielema product Cincy fans might have heard of.... Kevin Zeilter.

I've got a bad memory about Zeitler's departure from the team.  Let's just stick with Ragnow might be the next Travis Frederick.  

[*psychdoctor*]

If the Cincinnati Bengals somehow came out of this draft with Ragnow and Wynn. Wow. I sure would feel better about the offensive unit.

[CJD]

While we're at it, we should probably draft Tejan Koroma.

Weird thing is, despite having two of the top PFF scores, he still is on nary a draft prospect site. I wasn't even sure if he even entered the draft at all.

But the PFF stats say he'll be great, so we should definitely take him. Let's say the 2nd round?

Or how about Anthony McMeans? Or Joe Scelfo? NFL.com is projecting both of them to be an UFDAs. What a steal!!

[*ochocincos*]

(04-04-2018, 09:31 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Is Frank Ragnow the next Travis Frederick, Alex Mack, or Eric Wood?  Hell, is he even the next Mauquise Pouncey?  We really don't know, until he reaches the field against real competition.  However, I like his as well as Billy Price's chances of handling a 3-4 NT on a regular basis.

We don't need a Center to bust a move, pop-lock-and drop, or even break dance.  We just need a bruiser to contend with large NTs that they will be seeing 6-12 times per year.

Well now that you brought it up, I think I DO want that now!

[*SHRacerX*]

(04-04-2018, 03:33 PM)Shady Wrote: So, 10 points behind Ragnow. I wonder if Pollack, Mervin, et al see it the same way.

Also, wasn't Bodine's PFF score in the NFL something like a 63?

EDIT: In 2017, Bodine was a 46.8.  SMDH

Good question, albeit Bodine was facing NFL talent.

Then again, a lot of DTs that Ragnow faced in the SEC are NFL talent.  More so than the Big 10, I would imagine.  

[*ochocincos*]

(04-05-2018, 08:19 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: While we're at it, we should probably draft Tejan Koroma.

Weird thing is, despite having two of the top PFF scores, he still is on nary a draft prospect site. I wasn't even sure if he even entered the draft at all.

But the PFF stats say he'll be great, so we should definitely take him. Let's say the 2nd round?

Or how about Anthony McMeans? Or Joe Scelfo? NFL.com is projecting both of them to be an UFDAs. What a steal!!

Before you go bashing Tejan Koroma, he went up against current NFL early-round picks Malcom Brown, Maliek Collins, Kenny Clark, and Malik McDowell.
https://www.nfldraftdiamonds.com/tejan-koroma/

The main reason he's not being talked about is because of how short and light he is. But he was able to hang with DTs who have become early-round NFL selections.

[CJD]

(04-05-2018, 10:02 AM)ochocincos Wrote: Before you go bashing Tejan Koroma, he went up against current NFL early-round picks Malcom Brown, Maliek Collins, Kenny Clark, and Malik McDowell.
https://www.nfldraftdiamonds.com/tejan-koroma/

The main reason he's not being talked about is because of how short and light he is. But he was able to hang with DTs who have become early-round NFL selections.

I can't trash the guy because sites like Walterfootball, NFL.com, NFLDraftCountdown.com and CBS sports don't even have a profile for him.

But the fact that this list has a bunch of nobodies, non-prospects, bad players as well as James Daniels and Frank Ragnow should not influence a single person's opinion of the Center prospects in this draft.

There was another player that was graded off the charts by PFF.
His name was Paul Dawson.
Dude couldn't even make it on the field for us.

I don't mind using PFF to discuss players currently in the NFL. If a player is graded to be performing well in the NFL by PFF, that generally means they're a good player.

But their grading system in college completely ignores projection, potential, physical traits and ceiling and focuses entirely on how they happened to do during 11 games against mostly poor competition (or exclusively poor competition in the smaller school products). It basically boils down to nonsense.

The numbers are interesting, but should have no bearing on who we decide to draft when it comes to who we want to play for us in the NFL.

[*ochocincos*]

(04-05-2018, 10:09 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I can't trash the guy because sites like Walterfootball, NFL.com, NFLDraftCountdown.com and CBS sports don't even have a profile for him.

But the fact that this list has a bunch of nobodies, non-prospects, bad players as well as James Daniels and Frank Ragnow should not influence a single person's opinion of the Center prospects in this draft.

There was another player that was graded off the charts by PFF.
His name was Paul Dawson.
Dude couldn't even make it on the field for us.

I don't mind using PFF to discuss players currently in the NFL. If a player is graded to be performing well in the NFL by PFF, that generally means they're a good player.

But their grading system in college completely ignores projection, potential, physical traits and ceiling and focuses entirely on how they happened to do during 11 games against mostly poor competition (or exclusively poor competition in the smaller school products). It basically boils down to nonsense.

The numbers are interesting, but should have no bearing on who we decide to draft when it comes to who we want to play for us in the NFL.

It's a piece of evidence to help support Ragnow and Daniels as very good centers. That's the purpose of this chart. It's better than having bad ratings, that's for sure.
And in regards to Paul Dawson, he had good talent on the field. From everything I recall hearing about him, it was his terrible attitude that kept him from seeing the field.

EDIT - And even if you took out the "nobodies", Ragnow (x2) and Daniels would still top the list. So the rest of the players on there don't matter.
What's the purpose of your criticism btw? Do you think Ragnow and Daniels aren't that good? Do you think Billy Price is a better prospect than either of them? If so, why?

[CJD]

(04-05-2018, 10:17 AM)ochocincos Wrote: It's a piece of evidence to help support Ragnow and Daniels as very good centers. That's the purpose of this chart. It's better than having bad ratings, that's for sure.
And in regards to Paul Dawson, he had good talent on the field. From everything I recall hearing about him, it was his terrible attitude that kept him from seeing the field.

Sure. If it makes you feel better that a guy who is projected to be good in the NFL (due in part to his play on the field, but moreso due to his physical traits and projectibles) also played well enough according to a site that consistently gets draft prospects wrong to an almost uncanny degree, then yes. That is an appropriate way to use this chart.

But it shouldn't CHANGE your opinion about any player that is or is not on the list.

Like, for example, people condemning Price for not being in the top 10 are ridiculous.

Likewise, people who see this list and upgrade Ragnow from a 2nd round prospect to a 1st round prospect because of this list (and only because of this list) are also ridiculous.

Take it for what it is. He played well in college. That has so little bearing on the NFL it's not even funny. The number of times the College Football Sack Leader or Rushing leader or Passing Leader in the last 10 years ends up being a star in the NFL can likely be counted on, at most, 2 hands. Probably just 1 hand.

College football and the NFL are, for all intents and purposes, completely different games. Success in one is not an accurate predictor for success in the other.

[shanebo]

Methinks this list is not the best predictor of NFL talent ... Aside from Ragnow and Daniels:

Tejan Koroma - as mentioned above, "might" be a UDFA this year
Anthony McMeans - Rams UDFA in 2017, didn't make team or practice squad.
Antonyo Woods - eligible for this years's draft, but not expected to be picked up; currently studying for the MCAT and plans to be a doctor
Graham Shuler - quit football after his Jr. year at Stanford
Will Kreitler - still in college, will be a Sr. at UNLV (i.e., not leaving early)
Joe Scelfo - Texans UDFA in 2017, didn't make team, now a GA at NC St.

Not to say I don't like Ragnow or Daniels -- I do -- just that I wouldn't use their inclusion on this list as the sole basis of picking one of them over Price.

[CJD]

(04-05-2018, 10:17 AM)ochocincos Wrote: EDIT - And even if you took out the "nobodies", Ragnow (x2) and Daniels would still top the list. So the rest of the players on there don't matter.
What's the purpose of your criticism btw? Do you think Ragnow and Daniels aren't that good? Do you think Billy Price is a better prospect than either of them? If so, why?

The point of my criticism is you take a prospect who is a 2nd round player. You assign these stats to them and now people are saying we should take him in the first round.

That wreaks of panic.

These players are graded on a number of things. On field production is part of it, but far from the defining factor.

I'm happy that James Daniels and Ragnow are at the top of the list. I even have Daniels as my first round pick in my most recent mock draft. I would be thrilled with either player on my team. But upgrading a player from where he is likely worth the slot, in the second round, to a first round grade is just alarmism at its best. And I don't want this board to descend into that again. I remember back in 2012, we were convinced, absolutely convinced, that we would have no shot at all at drafting a guard in the first round because DeCastro and Zeitler were almost assuredly going to be top 15 picks. When DeCastro fell out of the top 10, I remember people SCREAMING to trade up to get him.

I just don't want to repeat this process with Center this year. We'll get a good Center prospect. It may be in the first round. It may be in the second round. But interior offensive linemen don't fly off the board typically. I think either Daniels or Price will go in the first. I expect Ragnow or the other one to be there at our 2nd round pick. I may be wrong, but I don't think we need to reach for Ragnow at 21 just for fear that he won't make it to our 2nd round pick.

I also have a bit of an ax to grind with PFF regarding their college player projections. They rank players every year based on production in college and their rankings often have extreme outliers compared to other drafting sites. And then those players almost never go where they expect them to go and follow the other more conventional sites better.

I also find it really really shady that PFF deletes their articles after 2 to 3 years. They're basically erasing their accountability on the grades they assign these players.

I have multiple pages from PFF bookmarked where they rave about various players, including rankings that don't match how the draft went. I just checked those bookmarks and they all lead to a blank page now:
https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/04/16/cff-overview-lb-top-of-the-crop/
https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/04/16/cff-overview-lb-buyer-beware/
https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/05/06/10-biggest-draft-reaches/
https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/05/07/10-biggest-draft-steals/

These are 4 links from their 2015 nfl draft coverage that had incriminating data, like regarding Dawson as a steal and several good players that were "reaches."
They're all gone now. I don't know if they deleted them because they have incorrect information or if they just happened to be automatically archived/deleted as soon as the players reach the point at which they could prove their projections right or wrong.

As an example of how their grades don't mean much on draft day, look at their board from last year:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/draft-final-pff-draft-board-top-250-prospects-of-2017

They got Garrett right, but then Allen 2 (went at 17). Barnett 3, went 14. Foster 5, went 31. Dalvin Cook 9, Carl Lawson 14, Jordan Willis 15, Fournette 23, Lewis 24, Williams 26.

These rankings make sense if you look at only production, but once you consider projectibles, physical traits, injury history and the like, they start to make a lot less sense.

Or how about this:
https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/focus-draft-round-1

They had us drafting Trey Flowers in the first round in 2015. He went in the 4th round.

It's stuff like that that bothers me when people try to use PFF rankings as if they mean anything.

[*ochocincos*]

(04-05-2018, 10:25 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: Sure. If it makes you feel better that a guy who is projected to be good in the NFL (due in part to his play on the field, but moreso due to his physical traits and projectibles) also played well enough according to a site that consistently gets draft prospects wrong to an almost uncanny degree, then yes. That is an appropriate way to use this chart.

But it shouldn't CHANGE your opinion about any player that is or is not on the list.

Like, for example, people condemning Price for not being in the top 10 are ridiculous.

Likewise, people who see this list and upgrade Ragnow from a 2nd round prospect to a 1st round prospect because of this list (and only because of this list) are also ridiculous.

Take it for what it is. He played well in college. That has so little bearing on the NFL it's not even funny. The number of times the College Football Sack Leader or Rushing leader or Passing Leader in the last 10 years ends up being a star in the NFL can likely be counted on, at most, 2 hands. Probably just 1 hand.

College football and the NFL are, for all intents and purposes, completely different games. Success in one is not an accurate predictor for success in the other.

Who said anything about this chart changing someone's opinion on Price, Ragnow, or Daniels because of this?
I think it's safe to say that Daniels, Price, and Ragnow are about on the same level then it's a drop off after that.
It's just a data point.

Also, you're absolutely right that a lot of players do well in college but flounder in the NFL. However, it's extremely rare for a player to play poorly in college then magically become a great NFL player. Doing well in college is most often a precedent for being a good professional.

[*ochocincos*]

(04-05-2018, 10:48 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: The point of my criticism is you take a prospect who is a 2nd round player. You assign these stats to them and now people are saying we should take him in the first round.

That wreaks of panic.

These players are graded on a number of things. On field production is part of it, but far from the defining factor.

I'm happy that James Daniels and Ragnow are at the top of the list. I even have Daniels as my first round pick in my most recent mock draft. I would be thrilled with either player on my team. But upgrading a player from where he is likely worth the slot, in the second round, to a first round grade is just alarmism at its best. And I don't want this board to descend into that again. I remember back in 2012, we were convinced, absolutely convinced, that we would have no shot at all at drafting a guard in the first round because DeCastro and Zeitler were almost assuredly going to be top 15 picks. When DeCastro fell out of the top 10, I remember people SCREAMING to trade up to get him.

I just don't want to repeat this process with Center this year. We'll get a good Center prospect. It may be in the first round. It may be in the second round. But interior offensive linemen don't fly off the board typically. I think either Daniels or Price will go in the first. I expect Ragnow or the other one to be there at our 2nd round pick. I may be wrong, but I don't think we need to reach for Ragnow at 21 just for fear that he won't make it to our 2nd round pick.

I also have a bit of an ax to grind with PFF regarding their college player projections. They rank players every year based on production in college and their rankings often have extreme outliers compared to other drafting sites. And then those players almost never go where they expect them to go and follow the other more conventional sites better.

I also find it really really shady that PFF deletes their articles after 2 to 3 years. They're basically erasing their accountability on the grades they assign these players.

I have multiple pages from PFF bookmarked where they rave about various players, including rankings that don't match how the draft went. I just checked those bookmarks and they all lead to a blank page now:
https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/04/16/cff-overview-lb-top-of-the-crop/
https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/04/16/cff-overview-lb-buyer-beware/
https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/05/06/10-biggest-draft-reaches/
https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/05/07/10-biggest-draft-steals/

These are 4 links from their 2015 nfl draft coverage that had incriminating data, like regarding Dawson as a steal and several good players that were "reaches."
They're all gone now. I don't know if they deleted them because they have incorrect information or if they just happened to be automatically archived/deleted as soon as the players reach the point at which they could prove their projections right or wrong.

Why do you think Ragnow isn't worth a 1st round pick?

[CJD]

(04-05-2018, 10:52 AM)ochocincos Wrote: Who said anything about this chart changing someone's opinion on Price, Ragnow, or Daniels because of this?
I think it's safe to say that Daniels, Price, and Ragnow are about on the same level then it's a drop off after that.
It's just a data point.

Also, you're absolutely right that a lot of players do well in college but flounder in the NFL. However, it's extremely rare for a player to play poorly in college then magically become a great NFL player. Doing well in college is most often a precedent for being a good professional.

From this thread:
"Billy Price is conspicuously absent. Anyone have insights as to why that might be?"
"So, 10 points behind Ragnow. I wonder if Pollack, Mervin, et al see it the same way. "
"So.... now that he's "healthy," you really can't wait until round 2 to take the guy. He's probably all but assured to go in the late 20's - late 30s."
"Yea I think so too. Bengals might be able to trade back from 21 and get him if they can, but I'm cool with him at 21."
"Well, i am sold at taking Ragnow at 21 now. From the SEC, longer arms than Price, bigger and nastier than Daniels. Smart."
"So this Tejan Koroma dude from BYU has some impressive scores from the past two years, he's in this draft class, yet we've not seen a single mention of him in any draft conversation."
"Either way this is who i want now, took awhile but is tops in my eyes now for sure."
"Yet, before it was official that Daniels was declaring, Price was the "hands down" top rated Center by all of the geeks that rate them."
"Yep, talking heads and i have to admit they got to me for awhile. No more, Ragnow was the best Center before his injury and now"


All of these comments are indicative of this list changing opinions, rather than reinforcing them.

[CJD]

(04-05-2018, 10:57 AM)ochocincos Wrote: Why do you think Ragnow isn't worth a 1st round pick?

For the same reasons I am hesitant about him in the first round before this chart made it on the board.

He's an average athlete, coming off an injury, mediocre footwork, relatively average in just about every metric relative to other prospect's projectable value.

Walterfootball ranks the Centers based on each skill of a Center here:
http://walterfootball.com/draft2018positionreviewC.php

Ragnow is in the middle of the pack in just about every category.

Why do you think he is worth a 1st round pick, other than college production?

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(04-04-2018, 08:37 PM)wildcats forever Wrote: I have nothing to base this on but I doubt Ragnow lasts until 46, and maybe not Price. While I'd love to have Wynn, unless we trade up to ensure getting both, I'd go with Ragnow at 21. Center is the position that we don't have squat on the roster right now. I admit to being biased towards drafting a center first, then doing the best we can afterward. 

Agreed.

Frederick was ranged from mid 2nd round - late 4th round during his draft; I remember that VIVIDLY and was completely shocked that he was taken in the first.

Ragnow has been my guy this whole process (though wouldn't mind the other two) and would love to see him be taken that early; wasn't Pollock the OL coach when Frederick was drafted?

Make it happen.

Koroma, btw, just looking at him for the last 10 minutes (because I haven't heard of him either, lol), I think will be a damn good C in the league, though it may take him a couple of years;

Pretty good tape (albeit against less-than stellar competition), great athleticism, good character and strong work ethic.

[Big Boss]

The first two rounds of the draft will dictate how serious the Bengals are about winning now. Even by this franchise's standards, I cannot wrap my head around the idea of them not taking a Center with one of their first two picks. The thought of going into the season with Bodine's backup as the de facto starter is terrifying.