PFF grades for the offense vs. the Browns.

[Joel Buchsbaum]

How can you, I, or anyone trust in PFF 100 % if you, I or anyone do not know how they reached conclusions based on the basis of the data that they present?

Sports are sports. Sports are for entertainment purposes.

As a result, there are a lot of "opinions" in the "sports" world. What is a "catch". What is pass interference? What is holding?

I work in the medical profession where there are governing bodies. I busted my ass to get a license to practice. The governing bodies decide how practice is determined. There are guidelines. There are no governing bodies to provide guidelines for PFF, ESPN, or Fox, or any other networks that have opinions to hold those opinions accountable. PFF has an "opinion" just like any other....sports media center.

Does this make sense to you?

Who says I trust them 100%? I don't trust any profession 100%. I do value their opinion football option of grading professionals players though. Say better than 95% of the data out there in football.

Does that make sense to you?

Yes, the governing bodies are medical profession are well active. IMO, they are greatly influenced by insurance companies and legalities. This has eroded my trust in them and I do not turn them 100% either. You are switching gears form the sport of football to a different topic. The medical profession is a noble one. How they operate well that is a different discussion. I know some doctors are they have had it with the above issues. Sorry to get side tracked.

Back to football.

[Northern_Blitz]

Exactly what I said I think they do too. You cannot grade on a limited range and critique a player accurately.

They do not grade enough of a distinction between a win and a great play.

If you beat your man but DO NOTHING WITH IT, seems near equal to beating your man hitting the QB and stripping the ball resulting in a score.

+1

And it's useful for some things. Because sometimes the question you really want the answer to is "does this guy deliver reasonably good play consistently?". Particularly for guys that don't consistently make big splash plays.

Apparently they said that Benton didn't have a negative play vs the run. I think that's probably good to know and helps make an argument for him getting more snaps. Sometimes consistency is exactly what you're looking for. Especially from a guy who doesn't often make impact plays.

I'd imagine that a PFF grade would also help us understand Najee's worth. Since we know he doesn't get many explosive plays*, the most important question IMO is "is he consistently delivering value".

* although both games so far he has a run of 10+ yards, which was something I think he only about half the time last season...so maybe there's some hope for some moderate level of explosiveness. I think the consistency is horrible, but I think it's true that we're average 1st contact behind the line of scrimmage (because basically everything about this offense is a tire fire).

[WindyCitySteel]

Exactly what I said I think they do too. You cannot grade on a limited range and critique a player accurately.

They do not grade enough of a distinction between a win and a great play.

If you beat your man but DO NOTHING WITH IT, seems near equal to beating your man hitting the QB and stripping the ball resulting in a score.

If you beat your man, the QB hit often depends on the QB.

One scrambles or throws the ball away, the other stands there tapping the ball.

[feltdizz]

If you beat your man, the QB hit often depends on the QB.

One scrambles or throws the ball away, the other stands there tapping the ball.

I wonder if CLE fans are celebrating Garretts performance Monday night based ok PFF grades.

Personally, I think its just something for fans of stats to argue about and has little to no actual value on game contributions.

[WindyCitySteel]

I wonder if CLE fans are celebrating Garretts performance Monday night based ok PFF grades.

Personally, I think its just something for fans of stats to argue about and has little to no actual value on game contributions.

Probably not. But to me, PFF is a predictor. Garrett will likely continue to beat tackles routinely and that will lead to the counting stats everyone worships over the course of a season.

The Steelers winning games with 2 defensive scores on lucky bounces likely won't continue.

[flippy]

Probably not. But to me, PFF is a predictor. Garrett will likely continue to beat tackles routinely and that will lead to the counting stats everyone worships over the course of a season.

The Steelers winning games with 2 defensive scores on lucky bounces likely won't continue.

To PFF’s credit, it’s one measure.

They highlight how they score and some of the grey area they deal with on their site.

They also recommend using their scores in conjunction with other data they track to get a better picture.

Nothing is exact in life. Most things are subjective. I tend to think people will use their data until someone comes up with better data and a grading system.

[NorthCoast]

Probably not. But to me, PFF is a predictor. Garrett will likely continue to beat tackles routinely and that will lead to the counting stats everyone worships over the course of a season.

The Steelers winning games with 2 defensive scores on lucky bounces likely won't continue.

Sure hope their grade on Pickett last season ends up a true prediction cause it's not looking good so far.

[Captain Lemming]

If you beat your man, the QB hit often depends on the QB.

One scrambles or throws the ball away, the other stands there tapping the ball.

You are correct. But this adds to my point. Watt typically ranks lower than Garrett despite ENTIRE SEASONS of better "counting stats".

You can try to justify a play here and there based on circumstances. But in EVERY STAT Watt is better than Garrett who have been in the league the same amount of time.

Sacks
Hits
QB hurries
Tackles
Tackles for loss
Forced fumbles
Fumbles recovered

You can have a better GAME numbers and point here and there to variables justifying one game but when YEAR IN AND YEAR OUT one guys numbers are better, you simply cannot say the guy with lesser numbers is better.

[Blitzer]

When someone explains to me in words I understand how Garrett with 1tackle and zero QB pressures got a higher grade than Highsmith and Watt who basically dominated and won the game, then I will listen. But until then I will continue to ignore PFF and those who post about it

[Mr.wizard]

You are correct. But this adds to my point. Watt typically ranks lower than Garrett despite ENTIRE SEASONS of better "counting stats".

You can try to justify a play here and there based on circumstances. But in EVERY STAT Watt is better than Garrett who have been in the league the same amount of time.

Sacks
Hits
QB hurries
Tackles
Tackles for loss
Forced fumbles
Fumbles recovered

You can have a better GAME numbers and point here and there to variables justifying one game but when YEAR IN AND YEAR OUT one guys numbers are better, you simply cannot say the guy with lesser numbers is better.

I agree with you and I tried to make this argument awhile ago in another thread. Pff scoring is too subjective and it doesn't have a clear system for weighting bad plays versus mediocre plays versus great plays, etc......