Packing the Stats: A Closer Look at Aaron Rodgers' PFF Grade Against Chiefs

Aaron Rodgers received a shocking PFF grade for his Monday Night performance against the Chiefs. Was it ludicrous? Let's look.

Last Monday night, Aaron Rodgers led the Green Bay Packers to victory over the Kansas City Chiefs. I say led because he had an impressive stats line of 24/35 for 333 yards, 5 touchdowns and no interceptions (138.5 rating).

While watching the game, I felt it was one of his more memorable performances because he was able to drive against a very good Chiefs defense.

However, the next morning, Pro Football Focus (PFF) gave Aaron Rodgers a very low grade. Was it justified? How ridiculous was it when compared to other grades?

Let's take a look.

When the news first broke, Ian Rapoport tweeted that the PFF grade was initially -2.3, which is an insanely low grade.

Immediately, there was initial shock and push back, which then prompted PFF to admit it was a mistake. It was supposedly a typo.

Whew.

Wait.

It's still a negative grade. How is -0.8 possible? Did they watch the same game the rest of the world did? Clearly, there still had to be a mistake. 

Nope.

In fact, PFF felt the need to write a post justifying and explaining their low grade.

I'm sorry, but any time you feel the need to explain yourself because of the heat you're receiving, something is usually amiss. Something isn't right. Maybe you even knew you made a mistake, but choose to never let go of it and will defend it until the death.

I read the explanation. It didn't make a whole of sense.

The cynic in me immediately thought of this famous ramble, which was grasping at straws at its finest:

Then, as of Wednesday morning, the PFF grade silently changed to +0.7.

Very interesting. 

As I wrote last week about PFF's grade of Don Barclay, the people at PFF have a very tough job and they do the best they can. They are more interested in play outcome and performance.

I get that. I don't have a personal grudge against them. I respect their effort and understand the tough situations they face every week.

However, this grade of Aaron Rodgers is ludicrous. 

It's not my personal opinion, either. I decided to dig into the stats a little to see just how erroneous the grade was.

I went back to the start of the 2014 season and plotted Aaron Rodgers' quarterback rating vs. PFF grade for every game, including the playoffs, up to last Monday's game against the Chiefs. The results were pretty telling. 

While the trend isn't perfect, there is still a pattern. There are some outliers, but usually the outliers are positive in Rodgers' favor, except for the Chiefs game that I circled in red. That game was the most extreme negative outlier in the whole graph.

Using those data, I was able to calculate a formula that reasonably predicts the PFF grade from the quarterback rating.

The formula is: (quarterback rating x 0.05) - 3.0.

I'm the first to admit the formula isn't perfect, but it's decent enough. Here are some examples of comparing real grades to predicted grades from the formula:

Quarterback Rating Actual PFF Predicted PFF
34.3 -3.1 -1.3
81.5 +0.2 +1.1
125.4 +2.9 +3.3
139.6 +2.7 +4.0
145.8 +5.0 +4.3

Like I said, it's not a perfect prediction, but the trend is obvious. Grades go up with quarterback ratings.

When quarterback rating approaches 120 and higher, the PFF grades are usually above +3.0, which means a great game was played.

So, how does Aaron Rodgers' 138.5 rating against the Chiefs from Monday night fare when using the predictive equation?

It should be +3.9!

That's a far cry from -2.3, -0.8, or even the silently updated +0.7.

I understand that PFF doesn't grade according to stats. I understand they do the best they can. They're all humans and grade according to their established metrics and methods. They aren't shy about sharing their metrics, either. I commend them for that.

However, I disagree with how they graded Rodgers' game against the Chiefs, as did many others in the Twitterverse. The grade doesn't make sense and it doesn't add up. The numbers, if you take them seriously, don't lie.

Maybe it's time PFF changed their grading criteria. 

Quarterback stats are courtesy of NFL.com and player grades are courtesy of ProFootballFocus.com. Miss Teen South Carolina is courtesy of US Americans. 

NFL Categories: 
0 points
 

Comments (99)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
Mojo's picture

September 30, 2015 at 11:32 pm

Looks like Rodgers PFF score is trending up. I expect in a few days it should be +3 or higher.

Maybe they didn't originally notice the stuff the wrote in the margins.

I was curious as to PFF's methodology and was able to track down one of their instructional videos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5QbrRRMg20&index=4&list=PLtzvlN5KENHN9B...

0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

October 01, 2015 at 12:18 am

I honestly don't understand why everyone is in a tizzy over PFF. It's not like I had tremendous respect for their work before now. Let 'em have their wacky little grading system...

0 points
0
0
xuyee's picture

October 01, 2015 at 12:44 am

I get what they're trying to do. I think one of the points of discrepancy is what happens during a penalty. When Rodgers knows he has a penalty, he takes risks because he knows that there's less risk in doing so. Since PFF grades penalized plays, negative passes or fumbles are graded even though they don't count. PFF assumes that you're playing the same on penalized plays than not. They have no way of judging someone who intentionally induces and utilizes penalties.

0 points
0
0
thebeast431's picture

October 01, 2015 at 06:39 am

But if Rodgers is the one that got the opposing team offsides in the first place, it should count 100% toward his number, because it was 100% his doing.
Just as a WR with YAC is 100% the WR's doing, not the QB (PFF's rule, not mine).

0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

October 01, 2015 at 09:46 am

I think you hit the nail on the head. Other QBs have mastered the hard count. Other QBs have caught opposing defenses with 12 men on the field. I don't know if anyone has been as good at it as #12. Maybe someone should look THAT statistic up, if they can, because he is just plain toyed around with a very good KC defensive line.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

October 01, 2015 at 03:19 am

Alex Smith had a passer rating of 80.2. PFF gave him a -7.3 grade.

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 05:20 am

I have a brother who just moved back to Wisconsin from Colorado. Die hard Broncos fan. But it is nice to watch a Packer game with him and get his perspective. He claims watching Packer games is boring because Rodgers makes running Green Bays offense look easy. While watching Rodgers as a fan of his, I enjoy watching a technician who has mastered his craft. Rodgers has incredible pocket awareness and would blow away any quarterback to ever play in the NFL if there was a metric to grade quarterbacks on their ability to move around in the pocket to make the easy throw. This is why my brother says Rodgers is boring to watch. Hes not going to give you the gunslinger hold your breath, how did he do that, risk taking throws. He is an assassin who bounces around behind the line of scrimmage to get his body in position to hit the perfect option on every throw. PFF is a metric that grades a quarterback on his ability to make the tough passes. Rodgers doesnt need to make the tough throw. He diagnoses a defense pre-snap, uses his killer ability to go through his progressions, and uses his FEET to put himself in a position to give him an easier completion. This is why Rodgers doesnt throw interceptions, its also why rodgers has struggled in the past at putting the ball in the end zone when he is in the red zone and loses space on the field. However, this year the play calling in the red zone has been magnificent while using route trees that conplement Rodgers' exclusive ability. Rodgers is changing the way the quarterback position is being played. Rodgers wins before the ball is thrown by using his INTELLIGENCE, and his FOOTWORK. No quarteback in the history of the game has played with Rodgers style. There is no metric to grade what Rodgers excels at because it hasnt been done before. PFF and rodgers is like using a ruler to measure time. They are judging how difficult the throw he completed was without considering that he put himself in position to make the throw easier.

0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

October 01, 2015 at 06:03 am

Interesting explanation (there is no cinizm). You might be on right track...

0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

October 01, 2015 at 06:34 am

"this year the play calling in the red zone has been magnificent"

It's only been three games but i agree there has been no drop off in playcalling, and maybe it's even better. He haven't seen nearly as many of the headscratcher calls like FB dives that we have seen in the past.

0 points
0
0
BradHTX's picture

October 01, 2015 at 09:15 am

Really great comment, Nicholas. Well said on all your thoughts.

0 points
0
0
BradHTX's picture

October 01, 2015 at 09:19 am

Note to self: Read all comments before posting reply... *smh* Oh, the drama.

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

October 01, 2015 at 05:27 am

I'm sure pff is enjoying all the attention. Its like when bloggers post stupid shit on blogs and get reemed all day, they love it. I never read anything on pff in my life, but checked it out for the first time, to read the negative feed back,lol.

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 05:49 am

PFF has done nothing wrong. Their metric doesnt apply to Rodgers playing style. If anything they are exposing to the world that Rodgers has changed the game. Rodgers stats are amazing. But they were amassed by making average throws. Its plain and simple. What they fail to do is give Rodgers the credit for making those throws average by using his footwork and intelligence. No other quarterback has mastered the art of playing football the way Rodgers has. Instead of changing a difficult throw into an average throw, other quarterbacks just attempt the difficult pass. Carson Palmer is a great example this year of a quarterback who is completing the difficult pass with great efficiency. Palmer is playing out of his mind this year by completing very difficult throws. In the Chiefs game, Rodgers won because he has mastered an offense to such a degree that he has transcended the need to attempt a difficult pass. We are witnessing greatness on such a level that people are having a hard time finding a way to grade it. Its exclusive to Aaron Rodgers.

0 points
0
0
JerseyAl's picture

October 01, 2015 at 09:54 am

" We are witnessing greatness on such a level that people are having a hard time finding a way to grade it. Its exclusive to Aaron Rodgers."

+1

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

October 01, 2015 at 03:44 pm

I know particular completion to Jones wasn't an easy throw. The guy had tight coverage on the sidelines and Rodgers dropped it in over the top perfectly. Also the long pass to Cobb who almost kept his feet in in the the end zone.

0 points
0
0
Kelly's picture

October 01, 2015 at 05:08 pm

The problem with your assumption is that you're assuming PFF rewards circus throws and a wow factor. The fact that Rodgers doesn't need to take risks because he is very purposefully executing a play would then be a negative and not a positive. No, he isn't going to be exciting, because intentional, calm and exceptionally disciplined doesn't have a wow factor. He's not a gunslinger because he doesn't need to be. Why go off script and pull it out of your rear if you know the simpler route will march the ball down the field?

To play devils advocate, why are they awarding the circus wow factor and not the efficiency of Rodgers' style of play? After all "big plays" hinge on more of a luck factor more often than not that repeated short passes. But you really think 5 TDs, 300+ yards and Zero interceptions is somehow boring and not worthy of merit?

The system PFF is flawed. But yet this author, who is looking for objective metric, not just subjective clickbait parameters is the uneducated hack and jackass. Really, because let's see your metrics.

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 05:33 am

Another aspect of Rodgers game that demonstrates his greatness is the free play. When Aaron gets that play he does take a chance on the harder throws that come with a higher risk of being intercepted. Just from memory, I can only recall one pass that Rodgers missed on while trying that harder throw. So its not as if Rodgers cant make those throws. Its because he finds and CREATES the easier throw that he doesnt have to.

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 06:27 am

PFF is grading a quarterbacks ability to make difficult throws. Nothing more, nothing less. Its kind of a cool grading system in its own right by judging a passers pure arm strength and accuracy. With that being said, PFF's metric fails miserably at assessing a quarterbacks mastery of an offense. If you are a true master of your offense and truly on top of your game, you dont always need to go to the throw that is the most difficult. In fact, the opposite is true in my honest opinion. Rodgers is going to the reciever that is running his route tree against a defense running its own coverages. Rodgers is finding the mismatch and hitting his guy that has the greatest ability to gain YAC and is being penalized by that because the credit is being put on the reciever. PFFs grading system is not grading a Quarterbacks ability to do this. Rodgers is also penalized by not throwing to the difficult route and into coverages that are harder to complete. He is moving around and making these throws easier instead of standing in the pocket like Carson Palmer. PFF did a great job with their metric in this game against the chiefs. The PFF grade is highlighting Rodgers mastery of his offense by showing that Rodgers accomplished everything he did by making average difficulty throws. PFFs metric is elementary. It was created to basically give colledge quarterbacks a Madden rating for arm strength and accuracy. Rodgers did this with his Madden awareness, play recognition, and throw on the run accuracy ratings

0 points
0
0
jh9's picture

October 02, 2015 at 05:04 am

You keep saying that Aaron Rodgers' PFF -0.8 grade really shows how great he played. Okay... so if I see any quarterback rated by PFF at -0.8 I'll know he played a great game? Is that what you're saying? Or must I watch the game the quarterback played to interpret what that -0.8 is? If that's the case then the grade doesn't mean anything by itself. It's useless.

I don't know who you are, Nicholas, but from your twisted logic and defense of PFF I suspect you work for them and are acting as a "spin doctor" for this embarrassment of a grade you guys gave Aaron Rodgers.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

October 01, 2015 at 07:23 am

When a QB has 5 TD passes, no picks, 300 plus yards, completed 66% of his passes and his team won the game I don't need PFF to tell me that the QB played very well if not in fact exceptionally. AS I've mentioned in the past PFF is irrelevant. They have created an arbitrary system which they have successfully marketed to fans who don't know what they are watching so they can sell subscriptions. They are in the subscription business not the information business. When they measure defenses they measure yards allowed, who cares? Points are the most important statistic in a game, measure points allowed. What matters is when a defense makes a stop not how many yards they allow, especially in garbage time. Only 3 stats matter for evaluating a QBs performance, Wins, TDs thrown and interceptions. You could add completion %. The rest doesn't matter. Those 4 stats tell you how a well a QB played and tell you about his decision making. The rest is window dressing. If you watch Aaron Rodgers play you realize that his play is the greatest evolution in QB play since Johnny Unitas created the modern QB position which we have known up until Aaron Rodgers. If Rodgers stays healthy and plays at this level or higher for another 3-5 years, he will become the model for future QBs to follow just like Unitas has been the model for QBs to follow since the '60s. Go Pack! Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 07:40 am

Again, another person who doesnt understand what PFF is doing. All it is saying is Rodgers compiled those stats while completing average difficulty throws. That is the message here, which is amazing and a topic worth discussing if you can get over being offended by the low grade. Why dont you talk about that instead of complaining about the grade you dont understand. What kind of a command Aaron must have over his offense to compile those stats without having to force difficult passes. Because it is truly remarkable

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 07:47 am

If we didnt have PFF breaking this down for us, how many of us could walk away from watching that game and honestly say. Aaron Rodgers did that to the chiefs by only completing averge difficulty passes. Its a cool metric and its accurate. And it illustrates how remarkable Aaron truly is.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

October 01, 2015 at 08:25 am

Let me understand this? You think it is a cool metric and that it is accurate to have a negative grade for a QB who played brilliantly against a very good defense because of PFFs idea of an average difficult pass? If that is such a good thing then the PFF grade should be to the plus side.
This is why serious football people can't take PFF seriously.
Like I said, 5 TDs, 0 Ints, +300 yards, 66% completed against the Chiefs is a great game. The Chiefs were beat before they stepped on the field. And yes, I could honestly walk away from watching that game knowing how brilliantly Aaron played without PFF breaking it down. It's really not that hard. You may not realize this but before PFF existed we could tell who the truly great QBs were without PFFs breakdowns and their average difficult throw. If you told Johnny Unitas that he played a great game because he won with average difficult throws he would have said to you, "Son, you've got to be f---ing kidding me!" Thanks, Since "61

0 points
0
0
Jay Hodgson's picture

October 01, 2015 at 08:30 am

Ignore Nicholas. He's posted 8 times already and has gone ad hominem. He has some personal agenda against this article, and maybe even me, so it's best to just let him have his tantrum and move on.

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 08:37 am

I have nothing against you personally. I do not like your article and do not like it when someone tries to trash something they dont understand. Especially when its clear they didnt research what the PFF score is. Before you wrote this, you should have started there.

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 08:43 am

Do you have something against the creators of PFF for going on your rant about why you disagree with them? Ive been here for many years. Ive just never posted before. Im here to discuss football. I think the PFF score shows just how remarkable Aaron Rodgers talent is. And i dont think your article was a fair way to discredit there metric.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

October 01, 2015 at 12:20 pm

He may work for PFF. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
murphy's picture

October 01, 2015 at 12:30 pm

Or is trying to justify his paid subscription.

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 12:33 pm

I dont. Im a fan of football and dont want this blog filled with ignorant people posting incorrect statements because they cant understand something.

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

October 01, 2015 at 03:46 pm

"I dont. Im a fan of football and dont want this blog filled with ignorant people posting incorrect statements because they cant understand something."

Then you should probably leave.

0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

October 01, 2015 at 03:31 pm

It's not a "cool" metric. It's an incomplete one.

This entire episode has exposed how completely useless their quarterback grades are.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

October 01, 2015 at 08:12 am

OK, so who determines or defines what a difficult throw is? I certainly don't think that PFF can determine what a difficult throw is. What is an easy throw for one QB may be difficult for another. And besides who cares? If you read my post rather than trying to find reasons for insulting me, someone you never met or know anything about, you would have noticed that I posted that Aaron Rodgers is the next evolution of QB play. If you posted here more often than for this article you would know that I am an enormous supporter of Aaron Rodgers and have been saying since 2011 that he is taking QB play to a level that we have not seen before. I am not in the least offended by PFFs grades low or high because I know that PFFS rating are as meaningless as the score of a pre-season game. As for Aaron Rodgers command of the offense, as I have said all you have to do is watch him play. I have been watching QBs play for over 50 years. Who do you think you are to call me out about my understanding about PFF because you interpret PFFs ratings are based on"average difficulty throws". Can you define what an average difficult throw is? And who has decided what an "average difficult throw is? As I said in a post earlier this week when the PFF story first came out, which obviously you didn't read, "I don't care what PFFs rating are, they can do what they want, I will take Aaron Rodgers MNF performance every game for the rest of the regular season, through the post-season and right into the SB thank you very much". I don't care if the stupid PFF rating is minus 50 when they are handing the Lombardi trophy and SB MVP award to Aaron Rodgers. Wins, TDs, Picks are all we need to know whether they are average difficult throws decided by someone who has never seen a football or not Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 08:30 am

If you think I insulted you. You are clearly over sensative. You dont understand what the PFF grade scale is. Big deal. Most people dont. Including the author. Just because I suggested you dont understand it doesnt mean im trying to put you down in any way. Nobody knows it all. Its ok to not know everything, dont feel bad about it. And yes, some throws are more difficult than others. There is alot of money made by scouts, GMs and quarterbacks because of this fact. Alot of time and effort is put into determining who can make the whole 9. PFF is one of the tools used to grade those throws, and they do an excellent job of it. You say you dont care about PFF score, then an article taking a closer look at Aaron Rodgers PFF score is probably not a place where you can add value to the discussion. Especially since your so sensative.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

October 01, 2015 at 08:53 am

I'm don't feel bad about it , I'm just waiting for a legitimate definition of an average difficult throw. I agree that PFF does an excellent job of making up arbitrary measures, that doesn't mean that I don't understand them. Since you claim to understand it what are their underlying assumptions for average difficult throws? Maybe you are the one who is overly defensive. Thanks., Since '61

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 09:23 am

Ok....now that we established your no longer offended. Ill try to explain the PFF score that you dont care about to you, since you asked so nicely. PFF grades quarterbacks on how difficult the passes they attempt are. Just because there is a minus sign next to his grade, doesnt mean it was a poor grade or that he performed poorly. His score fell within an average game for him. He was average in his efficiency completing difficult to complete passes. If Rodgers would have thrown more difficult passes, he would have recieved a higher score. The fact that he didnt need to speaks volumes of his talent. To have a game like that and make it look easy, or throw average passes, is a testimony of his ability to read a defense and put himself in a position to not have to force passes.

0 points
0
0
SpudRapids's picture

October 01, 2015 at 12:48 pm

I agree with both sides but here is my two sense.

PFF's problem is the tagline right at the top of this linK:

https://www.profootballfocus.com/about/how-we-grade/

"96,000 HOURS OF GRADING TAPE FOR ONE DEFINITIVE RATING"

It's not a definitive rating and ultimately it's still subjective in that some person is rating the difficulty of the throws. It don't believe they add in the covariance of the WR receivers PFF score on each play which would maybe change the way they grade. Also, if a receiver runs the wrong route the throw may look horrible but if the receiver breaks correctly it's spot on. The limitations of it's measure are too great for me to support the score.

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

October 01, 2015 at 03:57 pm

So they think Rodgers makes football look easy. That should automatically bump up the + ratings. A guy who makes playing the toughest position in sports makes it look easy. PFF doesn't get it IMO.

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 07:29 am

No offense to the author, but this article is ridiculous. Pretty much a worthless explanation if you can even call it that. If you do not have a problem criticizing PFF, you should not be offended by my criticism of your moronic article. You illustrated that the PFF grade and eyeball test of Aarons performance seem to counteract, but you are clueless as to how or why. I find PFF to be a useful tool if used in the correct way, and I want to stand up for them while you try to bash them. First, it is clear that you have no comprehension of what PFF is grading. Next time you write an article criticizing something, research what exactly your criticizing before you go on to babble on cluelessly about something you dont understand. You dont even give a clear explanation of what the metric is before you go on to slander the metric. Second your criticism makes absolutely no sense. Other than stating that you think PFF gave a low grade to Aaron for his performance and you disagree, you basically say nothing else useful and look like a complete fool. Ill say it again, PFF is a metric used to grade a quarterbacks efficiency in completing difficult throws. It should not be used as a grade for a quarterbacks complete performance. You also make up a formula you use to bash the metric, and the formula does not even work!!! Seriously man, what are you doing there. That was pathetic. Yes, you are correct in saying that a lower qbr equals a lower pff grade and a higher qbr equals a higher pff grade. All i can say to that is......DUH!!! There is no formula, a qbr and pff grade are two completely different metrics and they are impossible to link together mathematically. You shouldnt have even attempted that. Then theres this. So, how does Aaron Rodgers' 138.5 rating against the Chiefs from Monday night fare when using the predictive equation? It should be 3.9. This is idiotic. Please do not trash PFF with your idiotic articles again. I respect PFF and i respect cheeseheadtv and dont want to see some garbage article trashing a respectable metric on a respectable site using some made up moronic equation that clearly does not work written by an author who has no idea how the pff grading metric works or what exactly its grading in idiotic fashion with a poorly thought out article. Research what your trashing before you make a poor attempt to trash it and look like a complete moron while doing it.

0 points
0
0
Jay Hodgson's picture

October 01, 2015 at 08:05 am

Thank you for the kind words.

Two things:

1) It's called a regression analysis. Y = mx + b. Standard high school stuff.

2) You're vs. your. May want to master those.

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 08:33 am

1. Your regression analysis stunk.
2. I dont proof read my blog posts

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

October 01, 2015 at 08:43 am

Does PFF have a rating for not proof reading your average difficult posts? Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 08:53 am

Lol. No.....clearly not. They have a rating that demonstrated how Aaron Rodgers tore up the Kansas City Chiefs and didnt even have to attempt difficult to complete passes. Im just informing the cheeseheadtv community of that. The author of this article tries to discredit a respected metric that shows that. I would rather discuss what the grade proves than watch someone discredit something he doesnt understand.

0 points
0
0
egbertsouse's picture

October 01, 2015 at 08:54 am

Better start proofing. Also, it's "sensitive" not "sensative."

By about the 10th post you're beginning to look like a douche so I would think that you would want to look like an intelligent one.

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 09:27 am

Your on a football blog criticizing someone mispelling a word. And calling HIM a douche.....think about that.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

October 01, 2015 at 08:41 am

At the least you should apologize to Jay and to all of the contributors here. At best you should go away and never be heard from again. Maybe you should do some of your own research and you would realize that the article contributors here are not paid which is why we don't have to pay to subscribe and participate in the blog. The writers here give their own time to provide a forum where we as Packer fans, not PFF fans, can share our thoughts and exchange comments about issues relating to Packers football. AND THEY DO A GREAT JOB!!! In fact none of us here need to do this. Therefore none of us here need to be subjected to your insults and calumny over an irrelevant metric system when with our own eyes we can see that Rodgers is playing the QB position at a level we have never seen before. You need PFF to validate how you feel Rodgers plays that's fine. You are entitled to that and you are entitled to say it but I don't think it's fair to say it while simultaneously bashing the author or the bloggers here. Don't waste my time with a reply, because I'm done. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 08:45 am

If a writer can post an article clearly trying to discredit a widely used metric, dont be offended when that article is met with the same criticism.

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 08:45 am

If a writer can post an article clearly trying to discredit a widely used metric, dont be offended when that article is met with the same criticism.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

October 01, 2015 at 08:57 am

Criticism is fine, insults are unnecessary. Since '61

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 09:37 am

I think the article was garbage. The author tried to discredit the metric because he didnt understand it. He didnt research what it means, instead of learning more about it he made up equations that didnt work to back up his reasons for not liking it. He made a foolish attempt to convince this community about why the metric is bad, without first learning what the metric means. This is idiotic. I stand by what i said.

0 points
0
0
JerseyAl's picture

October 01, 2015 at 12:30 pm

Nicholas, you were ok until you start attacking the author. No reason for that. You made some cogent points at first, but then resort to lashing out. Garbage, ridiculous, moronic - you crossed the line and it's not appreciated.

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 12:54 pm

I attacked the article. I stand by that. It was garbage. He labeled the article a closer look at pff. Nowhere does he give any explanation of what pff is. Instead he rambles on and on like the girl in the video he posted, without saying much at all. Other than he disagrees. He thought rodgers played a good game, then attacks a metric that is revered by nfl scouts. There is nothing wrong with challanging an article that attacks an established tool,with first understanding what the tool is, or explaining what the tool is to the audience. Writing an article attacking a prestigious football metric wrecklessly is moronic, idiotic, and foolish.

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 01:05 pm

Those words explain his article perfectly. I disagree that using those words crosses a line. We are all adults here. There is no reason to be offended by that.

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 01:15 pm

My assessment of this article is valid. And g-rated. If you dont like articles being challenged on this site. Write better articles.

0 points
0
0
JerseyAl's picture

October 01, 2015 at 02:04 pm

I like articles being challenged without being a prick about it. You started off just fine, and then veered into name calling. Why was that necessary? Your initial comment or two were very good, but you screwed it all up from there. And now you're continuing to be pricky about it. How about you just let it go now and move on to the next thing?

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 02:47 pm

Al, read that ridiculous article again. The author tries to make an equation correlating qbr to pff. Then tries to use his equation to give a pff grade he thinks rodgers should get. That is moronic. And im being nice. You have authors on this site who write an article about something they have ZERO kniwledge of and its obvious. Cheeseheadtv should be EMBARASSED to put that trash on this site fir any knowledgeable fan to read. This is the worse article I have ever read on this site. You want to call me a prick?!?! This article is an absolute joke. Filled with nothing but bullshit some amatuer author thinks he can pass off as football knowledge. Where the hell do you get off putting that trash up here then calling someone a prick for not accepting that nonsense. Go post this trash on any credible website and they will laugh your ass off their site. This article was a joke and cheeseheadtv is losing credibility for having it on here. YOUR losing credibility for defending an article that was filled with absolute nonsense. I feel bad for the community of cheeseheadtv for reading that, and anyone who believed anything that jackass hack wrote!!!

0 points
0
0
JerseyAl's picture

October 01, 2015 at 06:45 pm

And you continue...

You're more than entitled to feel how you do, but notice that you are the only person reacting this way - and newsflash, this site isn't just for you and your opinion. If you're not happy, we'll gladly refund your subscription fee, oh wait...

if you got a free cup of coffee at Starbucks every day and didn't like one, would you yell at the barista's and call him a moron for making the worst cup of coffee you've ever had?

While we all admire your valor in willing to raise your sword and fight to save the internet from this terrible horror, we don't need your drama.

You didn't like the article, you made some decent points, but that wasn't enough for you. You had to be belligerent. I don't judge what your opinion is, I only judge how you expressed it.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

October 01, 2015 at 07:59 pm

Excellent Al! It's one thing to disagree with other bloggers but another to abuse you and the writers who spend so much time to make this the best Packer's blog there is. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Kelly's picture

October 01, 2015 at 08:10 pm

Considering that the author uses statistics in his career, I hardly consider him a jackass. He tried to create a subjective (i.e., math based) model to show that the Rodgers score was truly rooted in nonsense.

All you have countered is the author has stupid hair, or some other equally absurd nonsense. That's when everyone stopped taking you seriously and you earned the prick moniker.

PFF lost a lot of credibility with this, especially when the score changed multiple times and they added CLICK HERE so everyone would read the clickbait article trying to explain the back pedal.

The author didn't attack PFF, he would've said their metrics were comprised of a drunk kid, a blindfold and a dartboard.

Now stop being a prick and move on.

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

October 01, 2015 at 05:45 pm

Simple, their metric is wrong and needs to be revised.

0 points
0
0
Kelly's picture

October 01, 2015 at 05:18 pm

Oh yes, ad hominem attack on the author. That's totally going to work in an argument.

0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

October 01, 2015 at 09:59 am

I like to wear Hanes "Comfort Flex" white cotton briefs.

I find that it keeps me from getting my undies in a bundle whenever some dude decides to go all "Skip Bayless" in his assessment of ARod's QB play.

0 points
0
0
ray nichkee's picture

October 02, 2015 at 10:21 am

I prefer boxers, they keep my becoming a douchebag to a minimum.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

October 01, 2015 at 09:47 am

I like the article Jeff.

I completely agree with what you said in it. I think PFF does a good job in general in their grades, and does provide a different look at how players actually performed compared to how we thought they did.

But lets be honest, they were way off in Rodgers grade. I have heard from 3 members of PFF on 3 different radio shows I listen to, and they tried to explain their grade. Basically they were doing a lot of back tracking.

Their explanation was mostly that they gave the WR's credit for 3 TD's and didn't give Rodgers any because they were throws at or before the LOS. I understand that is an easier throw to make, but don't they factor in what the smart play is? Why should a QB be discredited for taking the smart play and taking a higher percentage play, vs looking for a harder play to make.
Also they grade the throw but apparently don't on how accurate it is? If the player is hit in stride and doesn't have to stop their momentum, no matter where the throw is shouldn't the QB should be given some positive credit for that? According to them they get no credit based on how close to the play is to the LOS.

I agree that they need to change their grading system if they want to be taken seriously. If anyone thinks Rodgers was 'average' in this game (like PFF claims) they obviously don't appreciate greatness.
If this was an average game for Rodgers, I can't wait to see what is a great game for him.

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 10:22 am

Rodgers grade was average because the grade is about how dufficult it is to complete the pass. Throws at the los are not difficult to complete. Hence the average score. The grade isnt grading his mastery of the offense or decision making. A higher score would be for a touchdown where he drops the ball perfectly between a high safety and an underneath corner. He doesnt get points for making the right decision because the grade isnt about making decisions. Its about making throws. Its not a total performance grade. Its about if a quarterback can make all the throws. Rodgers had an average game making all the throws. Thats what the grade is about and its accurate. It shows us that rodgers lit up the chiefs with his decision making. Not by making tough throws. It doesnt need changed. It needs to be understood. Writing an articke trashing it just causes confusion. PFF gave Rodgers the correct grade.

0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

October 01, 2015 at 11:12 am

I understand that throws made closer to the LOS are easier to make. Thats common sense. And I sort of agree that QB's shouldn't get all the credit for a play if they throw a bubble screen and the WR runs 80 yards breaking 5 tackles for a TD. But he shouldn't be discredited for the play either. If a QB hits a WR accurately and in stride and it gains 20 yards after the catch, the QB should be credited for leading the WR to run after the catch. Where as if a QB throws behind the receiver forcing him to stop and lose momentum, he should be discredited for it.

If your right and they don't grade decision making then they have an even bigger fundamental flaw in their grading system. Decision making is one of the biggest key factors in making a QB good or bad. I don't know how you don't grade a QB without included decision making. If a RB runs the ball and decides to stop change directions and loses 6 yards doesn't he get discredited for his bad decision?
If a QB decides to throw at a receiver and is covered by 3 people and gets broken up or intercepted, when he has a WR on the other side of the field wide open, that is a bad decision and the QB should be graded on that. Just like if a QB decides to throw a checkdown vs taking a sack or attempting to throw the ball into coverage down the field, he should be credited for that.
As far as the grading of the throw from the 3 interviews I listened to, they credited Rodgers for his throw to James Jones TD against Chicago, where Jones basically made one hell of a catch. So how does he get credit for a play in which Jones made the play, and not get credit for a perfectly thrown ball to a WR who scores a TD. Just because the ball went 2 yards vs 25 shouldn't make a difference as far as grading the throw.
Grading the throw should be judged on the throw itself whether its 2 yards or 20.

Also, didn't PFF grade Rodgers on his ability to avoid sacks? How many times did he escape a tremendous pass rush. He deserved a much higher grade.

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 12:04 pm

Ill break this down for you the way the author SHOULD have before he went on his rant about how the metric stinks.

The PFF grading system has been around for years. It was made for scouts to analyze college quarterbacks ability to make throws. All the throws. It is not a comprehensive analysis of the quarterbacks overall performance. It does not take decision making into consideration. Just the throw; how difficult of a throw it is, how accurate it is, where it was placed, etc etc. This metric has been used for a long time and is held in high regard by many NFL scouts. Just because Aaron Rodgers had a hell of a ball game and his score in this metric is "average" doesnt mean people need to start writing idiotic articles to discredit the metric. It is a great tool, it is held in high regard, it is used all around the league.

Heres a real, better look at the PFF grade. I wont make up equations to baffle people with b.s. here. Its simple. During the chiefs game, the throws Aaron Rodgers made were "average". They were not difficult. We didnt see Aaron droppin dimes between corners and safetys on post routes for 60 yards. The reason we didnt see that is because we didnt have to. Aaron was killing the chiefs with his presnap reads, audibles, awareness, pocket presence, and throw on the run ability. That is Aarons game. He doesnt have to make those throws because the rest of his game is so incredible, he can kill defenses with "average" throws.

The "average" grade given to Aaron is not a knock on him in any way. It shouldnt have been recieved as a knock on him. And people should not be writing articles bashing the metric, this only further established that PFF thinks Aaron played a poor game. This is not true. What is true, is Aaron was asked to make throws that were "Average" as it pertains to degree of difficulty. That is all.

Now, for great discussion, how incredible is it that Aaron can play against one of the best defenses in the NFL and thoroughly destroy them without being in a position where he is required to make a throw that is more dificult than "average"?

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

October 01, 2015 at 10:48 pm

I agree with the gist of your post, RC. The James Jones catch in Chicago was all Rodgers. The ball hit Jones' shoulder. Jones did not pluck the ball out of the air or take it away from the defender.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

October 01, 2015 at 12:07 pm

Nicholas -believe it or not I understand exactly what you are saying. The part that I believe is flawed with the PFF system is that it is easier to complete passes at the LOS. Why? Because while the ball may be caught at the LOS the QB is still throwing the ball 12 - 15 yards across the LOS. So if we look at the time and distance that the ball is in the air the throw still requires at least a similar amount of physical effort as throwing the ball 12 - 15 yards down the field to a TE or WR in the middle of the field. The fact that Rodgers makes both of those throws look easy is a testament to his reading defenses, decision making and to his athletic abilities, no doubt. However, I don't know if it's fair to a QB to say that a 12 yards pass down the LOS is an easier pass to throw than a 12 yard pass over the middle, especially if both receivers are equally open. Both passes require good footwork, proper throwing form, and accuracy to be complete. If the distance of the pass down the field is one of the underlying assumptions for difficulty than the distance should be measured whether the pass is thrown laterally (in relation to the LOS) or down the field. To me an example of a difficult pass is the TD pass that Rodgers threw to J Jones during the Seattle game against Sherman where Rodgers was running left and threw a perfect strike to Jones ahead of Sherman with the ball about 35 yards in the air. Of course, Rodgers made that look easy also. My point is that the metric is flawed if the underlying assumptions for the metric are flawed and my problem with PFF is that I understand their metric but it appears to me that some of their assumptions which the metrics are based upon are flawed. Enough said. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 12:11 pm

There is alot more to it than that. The route the reciever is running, the coverage the defense is in. There is much more than just how far the ball traveled. And wether you believe its flawed or not is your opinion. But i would check into exactly what the metric is befire you deem it flawed. Understand this tool is used by every front office in the nfl, i dont think ted thompson needs your stamp of approval on it to determine if it is flawed or not. No GM gives a damn what you think about the PFF. They use it and hold it in high regard.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

October 01, 2015 at 12:47 pm

If I may borrow a line from the movie Cool Hand Luke, "I think what we have here is a failure to communicate." You have justified PFF ratings by stating they measure difficult throws, average throws, etc.. , now you are stating that it also includes the receivers route and the defensive coverage. And finally that all GMs use it and TT and his fellow GMs don't care what I think about it but they all use it so it must be good. That's all fine. You have also included in your posts that you understand it and that it is a good metric. All I have been saying all this time is that it's flawed because I still don't know from you or anyone else what the basis for easy, average and difficult throws. Do the criteria exist or are they made up? The answer seems to be I don't know, Third Base. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 12:57 pm

The answer is.......Nobody knows. Except for pff. But with scouts and G.M.s using it. I trust that it is accurate.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

October 01, 2015 at 02:27 pm

Nobody knows, OK. I hope for your sake that GMs and scouts do not begin believing that jumping off of cliffs is a good idea. Plenty of allegedly smart people thought that selling blocks of mortgage debt and relying on default credit swaps was a good approach also and then in 2008 they heard an enormous flushing sound. That flushing sound was the U.S. economy. I would love to know how many GMs and scouts actually understand PFF.
"And the people bowed and prayed to the Neon God they made".
I rest my case. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 03:13 pm

Your as clueless on this topic as the author who wrote it. You have a big ego and your dead wrong. You know nothing about it so why are you pretending to be an authority on it. You are an idiot. Go learn football in a corner somewhere with the author of this joke of an article. Ive tried to explain this simple concept to you numerous times. You will never get it. You have not offered anything of value to a kiddie amatuer article. You stay here in the amatuer section. Im going to discuss big boy football on another blog with grown ups who can comprehend simple concepts and discuss football without acting like a jackasd

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 10:22 am

Rodgers grade was average because the grade is about how dufficult it is to complete the pass. Throws at the los are not difficult to complete. Hence the average score. The grade isnt grading his mastery of the offense or decision making. A higher score would be for a touchdown where he drops the ball perfectly between a high safety and an underneath corner. He doesnt get points for making the right decision because the grade isnt about making decisions. Its about making throws. Its not a total performance grade. Its about if a quarterback can make all the throws. Rodgers had an average game making all the throws. Thats what the grade is about and its accurate. It shows us that rodgers lit up the chiefs with his decision making. Not by making tough throws. It doesnt need changed. It needs to be understood. Writing an articke trashing it just causes confusion. PFF gave Rodgers the correct grade.

0 points
0
0
JerseyAl's picture

October 01, 2015 at 12:38 pm

He didn't have an average game making all the throws, he had a game where he didn't have to make a lot of difficult throws. There's a real difference there. And there's no rea; way to account for that in a metric. Also, he did have to make SOME tough throws, he dropped one in to Jones on the sideline that would have been impossible for anyone on the planet to place better.

PFF can be a very useful metric, but by no means does it tell the whole story.

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 12:41 pm

Correct

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

October 01, 2015 at 10:08 am

Stats and Trix cereal---both are for kids...don't care what goes into them....they just eat them up.

0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

October 01, 2015 at 10:36 am

Final scores are stats. So are win-loss records.

Careful... there's a baby in that bathwater.

0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

October 01, 2015 at 10:40 am

"Final scores are stats. So are win-loss records."

But not QB stats.

0 points
0
0
TarynsEyes's picture

October 01, 2015 at 10:50 am

Those are totals of an outcome but the how derived/achieved is the argument...perhaps a viewing of the Abbott and Costello math is in order.

https://youtu.be/QxjVW8iLMdU

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

October 01, 2015 at 11:40 am

Brilliant as usual! Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0
Evan's picture

October 01, 2015 at 10:14 am

I'm just all....¯\_(ツ)_/¯

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

October 01, 2015 at 03:59 pm

good one

0 points
0
0
hobbes's picture

October 01, 2015 at 11:29 am

Two questions: what's the correlation between Rodgers QB rating and PFF score?

Also, would it be better to use Rodger's QBR rating rather than his QB rating? While I don't know (nor does anyone else), exactly how PFF does their grading, it seems to me that PFF does care about context (i.e. like Rodgers getting a 0 grade for all 3 Cobb touchdowns) and QBR would then in this case be more appropriate

0 points
0
0
Jay Hodgson's picture

October 01, 2015 at 11:41 am

r = 0.58, p = 0.0052. Significant.

0 points
0
0
toolkien's picture

October 01, 2015 at 11:29 am

1) PFF has the "intangibles" escape hatch built in, so take their metric with a grain of salt.

2) The real take away is the Packers DID start the game with a pretty simple game plan, the Chiefs largely couldn't stop it, so the Packers kept running to the tune of 38 points. There was no cause to fix what wasn't broken to start running up PFF rating points. If the Chiefs had been stopping the offense, I'm sure trickier and riskier plays the PFF metric apparently thinks are important would have manifested themselves. In short, the Chiefs defense was injured and played poorly, and Rodgers jabbed them to death and hardly had a mark on him with the footwork.

0 points
0
0
toolkien's picture

October 01, 2015 at 11:36 am

Also, to me if there was a blemish for Rodgers, it was the pass to Quarless that got him hurt. He was pretty much a sitting duck. It doesn't seem Rodgers puts guys in such prone positions very often. It's probably because the Packers are dictating what's going on on the field that's not often it ever comes up, but that was one of the rare passes I can remember where my gut tightened up and sure enough - out for a month.

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

October 01, 2015 at 04:02 pm

Quarless got hurt because guys go low now. Fines , suhspensions, and penalties for hitting high, Nothing to get here.VVVVVV

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

October 01, 2015 at 05:58 pm

Then why didn't Quarless run a different route? So a QB is supposed to see a defensive back breaking on a play when he sees a TE opened? It wasn't like he threw it high over he middle.

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 12:22 pm

Finally....someone who gets it!

0 points
0
0
Chris Scoggins's picture

October 01, 2015 at 11:33 am

It's unreasonable to state that they need to change their system without understanding what goes into it. From what I understand it is a cumulative score. Every play is plus, minus or zero. What plays did they screw up on? Were those plays that can be measured (mostly) objectively from game to game from person to person? Sometimes Rodgers makes things look so easy that you know it is all about him - is that true for every similar situation? I'm skeptical.

I think the fact that Rodgers can have such a remarkable performance and make it look easy is a testament to Rodgers - not a fault of their scoring system.

0 points
0
0
toolkien's picture

October 01, 2015 at 11:40 am

The problem probably comes from the headline that was there (don't know if they changed it) making out like it was nothing special actually. Any of these metric people can display some pomposity with their creations, and I think much of the blow back starts with that.

0 points
0
0
JohnnyLogan's picture

October 01, 2015 at 12:24 pm

If, as Nicholas says, PFF is only about grading difficulty of throws... where is that stated? Is that on their website? Do they acknowledge that?... because as far as I know, never having logged into PFF, it is used by most people as a metric for judging a QB's performance.

Nicholas, you say that's not the case, it's not his performance, it's the difficulty of the throws. So why isn't it headlined as a "difficulty of throw" metric?

0 points
0
0
Nicholas's picture

October 01, 2015 at 12:40 pm

Because its pro football focus

0 points
0
0
phillythedane's picture

October 01, 2015 at 12:48 pm

Okay, okay. We're agreed then. More maps for everyone.

0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

October 01, 2015 at 06:09 pm

What I don't get is why someone could be so critical over this article. I stayed up and watched all the post game shows ,and former players and all the so called experts heaped praise on Rodgers. Guys that played the game. I've watched football my whole life and know a good player when I see one. I'M OVER 40, I'M A MAN. (that line always cracks me up). So now thanks to PFF, we may only get a 5th or 6th round pick if we trade Rodgers, SOB! After all the GM's are aware. Lets ask what MM and TT what they think of the grade. I don't need some nerd at a computer telling me who is good or who isn't or average. I'll watch for my self, the eyes don't lie.

0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

October 02, 2015 at 12:28 am

Spud had it right. PFF's headline is "96,000 hours of grading tape for one DEFINITIVE rating." (Buy our subscription.) In the fine print, PFF admits that many factors that actually affect play are not and cannot be considered. Thus, it is not definitive.

Nicholas asserts that he understands PFF ("PFF is grading a quarterbacks ability to make difficult throws. Nothing more, nothing less. Its kind of a cool grading system in its own right by judging a passers pure arm strength and accuracy") and claims that someone else does not understand PFF. But he eventually admits that he doesn't really understand PFF either: "The answer is.......Nobody knows. Except for pff. But with scouts and G.M.s using it. I trust that it is accurate." PFF states that 3 employees review tape on each game. One can presume that either these 3 guys of whom we know nothing either aren't good enough to work for teams as scouts or PFF pays more.

The assertion that GMs rely on PFF is ludicrous. Teams hire scouts to evaluate the players of other teams. Little to no reason to do so if those GMs could just subcontract out to PFF. If Nicholas can quote a single GM saying that he relies on PFF, he should post that link. That said, I'd not be surprised if every team subscribes to PFF, Football Outsiders and the like in an effort at due diligence.

The whole selling point for PFF is as a way for fans to see how well each player actually played. If fans can't really rely on that, PFF becomes problematic. PFF by assigning a -.8 grade to Rodgers is proclaiming that any slightly below average QB would have equaled Rodgers' performance. That is wrong, imo, and even Nicholas appears to agree. Thus, the grade is useless.

I've always said that 90% of what makes for a good QB is between the ears. One could argue for 70% or some other #, of course. Fact is that PFF admits that it can't grade that 90%. Thus, PFF should be viewed as a tool that might be of use for some positions (but still taken with a grain of salt) and of little to no relevance for other positions, including QB.

PFF tried to offer a defense, but refuses to release its grade for each play. I think that PFF should consider giving a small positive value - perhaps .25 - for properly executing those fairly easy throws. Reading their site, they seem to limit themselves to grades in .5 increments. I have no idea what makes a pass worthy of a +.5, versus a +1.0, etc.

0 points
0
0
JerseyAl's picture

October 02, 2015 at 08:21 am

Well said. You hit the nail on the head in terms of how teams might use PFF. I do know for a fact that teams hire outside consultants to supplement their own scouting department (I have regular conversations with one of these consultants). It's a continual effort to collect as much information as possible on every player. If they use something like PFF, it's only to look for things their scouts may have missed and add it as a part of the equation in making their final evaluation.

0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

October 02, 2015 at 08:45 am

Reynoldo - great post as usual! You have summed up PFF and yesterday's discussions perfectly. Well done. Like you I still don't know the criteria for a +0.5 or +1.0 pass or -0.5 pass. Thanks, Since '61

0 points
0
0