OT: PFF loses ALL credibility

[Wild_x_Card]

PFF is also issuing grading that they forward as meaning SOMETHING when they admit they can't take into account all the things that Rodgers does great to play the defense like a fiddle to get guys like Cobb, Jones, (insert bum here) so open that the throws are "easy".

Just looking at the result of the play and not taking into account what lead to that result from pre-snap, especially in this day and age of football, is idiotic.

Exactly. It reminds me of when guys like Matt Walden breakdown film on college prospects. He can go as far as breakdown the pre & post snap offensive & defensive looks and zero In on player assignments. He can even go as far as to give insight on how a position coach for a particular team teaches his players different techniques for different situations. However, he'll be the first to tell you. His final grades should be taken with a grain of salt because he can't account for all the different factors & variables. Therefore, there is no Absolute in his final grade.

Stats are fun, but should never be looked at in a vacuum. While PFF tries their damndest to steer clear of the vacuum. It's virtually impossible.

 

[Run the ball]

Matt Waldman

 

[TheBossSashaBanks]

I read the article and it makes a lot of sense to me now. Basically Ben Stockwell (author of the article) said that the specific formula they use does not include the intangibles. This means that Rodgers' entire performance isn't being graded and they use a specific system where despite he played well his grade doesn't look good. Also, the touchdown passes thrown short in the endzone does not count on the grade so what brought his grade down was his fumble and the dropped interception. There are a lot of other factors that go into his grade and overall despite the fact that he ended up with a minus grade did not mean they come to the conclusion that he had a bad game.

 

[The Hawk]

I read the article and it makes a lot of sense to me now. Basically Ben Stockwell (author of the article) said that the specific formula they use does not include the intangibles. This means that Rodgers' entire performance isn't being graded and they use a specific system where despite he played well his grade doesn't look good. Also, the touchdown passes thrown short in the endzone does not count on the grade so what brought his grade down was his fumble and the dropped interception. There are a lot of other factors that go into his grade and overall despite the fact that he ended up with a minus grade did not mean they come to the conclusion that he had a bad game.

No way this makes any sense, The fallacy of all of these "ratings" is that they are based on subjective information that is really tainted to begin with. First of all, we have people who never played the game makes ratings on a particular player. How? What gives this person some cred to rate any player? First of all, they do not know the assignment of the player. Second sometimes one players performance is greatly influenced by another persons assignment carried or not carried. I could go on and on about what happens in an actual football game. When the QB releases a pass and it is broken up or intercepted, was the receiver running the correct route in the first place? Did the ball get tipped or the Qb's arm hit because one of the linemen or back missed a block?

This shit is ridiculous. Statistics is only as good as the truth of the data itself. You can throw out all of the fucking numbers that you want to and "prove your case "statistically but it may be totally bullshit and this is the case with PFF entirely. IF they want to objectively rate a person's performance, then they should hire and pay people to rate players after hearing what the call of the play was and how the player reacted. I'd put credence on that, not having guys like me or whoever trying to judge objectively what a guy did on a given play.

 

[Warrior Spirit]

No way this makes any sense, The fallacy of all of these "ratings" is that they are based on subjective information that is really tainted to begin with. First of all, we have people who never played the game makes ratings on a particular player. How? What gives this person some cred to rate any player? First of all, they do not know the assignment of the player. Second sometimes one players performance is greatly influenced by another persons assignment carried or not carried. I could go on and on about what happens in an actual football game. When the QB releases a pass and it is broken up or intercepted, was the receiver running the correct route in the first place? Did the ball get tipped or the Qb's arm hit because one of the linemen or back missed a block?

This shit is ridiculous. Statistics is only as good as the truth of the data itself. You can throw out all of the fucking numbers that you want to and "prove your case "statistically but it may be totally bullshit and this is the case with PFF entirely. IF they want to objectively rate a person's performance, then they should hire and pay people to rate players after hearing what the call of the play was and how the player reacted. I'd put credence on that, not having guys like me or whoever trying to judge objectively what a guy did on a given play.

The object is simply to remove all other variables and grade the player's performance alone. If a QB hits a receiver with a perfect in stride pass 40 yards downfield, the QB will get credit for that. Even if the receiver drops that perfect pass, the QB will still get the same amount of credit for making that perfect pass. Taking a look at one of your scenarios, if a QB throws an int cause a receiver ran a wrong route and it's obvious he ran the wrong route, the QB wouldn't take a big hit for that. If it's not obvious who was at fault, that play might just go unscored.

You saying we have players who have never played the game grading players is not exactly true but don't we have people reffing every game who have never played? In fact, every play is graded by one analyst and then that rating is reviewed by another analyst and then that grade is reviewed by a 3rd analyst. That grade is then verified by the Pro Coach Network.

Where people confuse themselves is they mistake grades for ratings. PFF has 2 type stats, the grades and signature stats. The signature stats are more your ratings type thing while the grades are on going evaluations of every play and every game. Still, by the end of the year the cream always seems to rise to the top even with the grades as you'll see the best players grade the highest in the end.

 

[JDB_219]

Yeah, this was classic. Manning has an NFL record setting performance and the intelligentsia at PFF rating system somehow graded him out worse than Cutler's 21-33 242 yard 2 TD and 1 INT day. Good system they have there.

Shit like PFF and ESPN's QBR are a fucking joke.

QBR always makes sense and correlates to the eye test. It shouldn't be painted with the same brush as PFF.

 

[Warrior Spirit]

QBR always makes sense and correlates to the eye test. It shouldn't be painted with the same brush as PFF.

You couldn't be more wrong which is why PFF is used throughout the NFL and college football while nobody gives a damn about ESPN's made for TV joke of a ratings system.

 

[roadwarrior_joe]

who cares about arron rogers

 

[FirstTimer]

The object is simply to remove all other variables and grade the player's performance alone.

Which you can't do with football.

Again. PFF is fucking trash of the highest order.

 

[FirstTimer]

QBR always makes sense and correlates to the eye test. It shouldn't be painted with the same brush as PFF.

No, ESPN's QBR is fucking garbage.

 

[The Hawk]

The object is simply to remove all other variables and grade the player's performance alone. If a QB hits a receiver with a perfect in stride pass 40 yards downfield, the QB will get credit for that. Even if the receiver drops that perfect pass, the QB will still get the same amount of credit for making that perfect pass. Taking a look at one of your scenarios, if a QB throws an int cause a receiver ran a wrong route and it's obvious he ran the wrong route, the QB wouldn't take a big hit for that. If it's not obvious who was at fault, that play might just go unscored.

You saying we have players who have never played the game grading players is not exactly true but don't we have people reffing every game who have never played? In fact, every play is graded by one analyst and then that rating is reviewed by another analyst and then that grade is reviewed by a 3rd analyst. That grade is then verified by the Pro Coach Network.

Where people confuse themselves is they mistake grades for ratings. PFF has 2 type stats, the grades and signature stats. The signature stats are more your ratings type thing while the grades are on going evaluations of every play and every game. Still, by the end of the year the cream always seems to rise to the top even with the grades as you'll see the best players grade the highest in the end.

How would someone that doesn't know what the receiver was supposed to do, figure out that he ran the wrong route? How does the rater figure out that he obviously ran the wrong route? Its subjective and its subject to interpretation through every step that you have identified. The same holds true in blocking assignments.
All I can see the somewhat value of PFF is as one grading used in contract negotiations.

But I still cannot fathom a bunch of stiffs rating pro football player performance on the field. Referees in football do not have to judge player performance. ALl they need to do is to know the rules of what is or isn't a penalty. ANd they are tested on that knowledge. Different story on the raters of PFF.

 

[JDB_219]

No, ESPN's QBR is fucking garbage.

But do you disagree with my premise?

 

[Wild_x_Card]

Original QBR >>>>all.

 

[FirstTimer]

But do you disagree with my premise?

Yes. Both ESPN QBR and PFF are in the same trash pile. Burn them all.

 

[Packer Fan]

I don't know why but I actually clicked on the "how we grade" tab.

Ok, so the worst grade for a play (-2) is given the example of, NFC Championship, tie game, in FG range and Brett Favre throwing across his body for an interception.

Now fine. But the example of a (+0.5) play is a good short pass. So 4 random "good short passes" cancel a backbreaking forced interception in a tie NFC Championship game when in FG range? Not that it should matter if it is the NFC Championship game.

lol. PFF angers me now.

 

[Pegger]

But do you disagree with my premise?

QBR is equally inaccurate as QB Rating, but it's new, so some people just don't know if it's drawbacks.

It's simpily reinventing the wheel because ESPN wants to use it's own trademarked stat.

 

[ClydeLee]

QBR is equally inaccurate as QB Rating, but it's new, so some people just don't know if it's drawbacks.

It's simpily reinventing the wheel because ESPN wants to use it's own trademarked stat.

I think the opposite is the case. People just respect the QB rating despite it's major drawbacks because it's what they know and accept. I don't see hardly a person not knowing the espn QBR drawbacks and thinking it's good because they stated out in articles and have it listed on the site what it all is calculated on still.

I know people are gonna be angry at it attempted to judge value systems more based on close games. It's how other sports use advance metric situations too based on close scores, so Peytons 2013 later tds didn't count nearly as much as a 4th quarter comeback touchdown based on a system hyping a situation. People rip that but then also rip PFF for have absolutely no situation relevance to how they grade a play. They are on opposite sides of the spectrum.

 

[FirstTimer]

QBR is equally inaccurate as QB Rating, but it's new, so some people just don't know if it's drawbacks.

It's simply reinventing the wheel because ESPN wants to use it's own trademarked stat.

Passer rating is pretty accurate. With as homogenzied at the game has become now it's a pretty fair universal efficiency rating.

 

[JDB_219]

Passer rating is pretty accurate. With as homogenzied at the game has become now it's a pretty fair universal efficiency rating.

No it isn't. You can have a good rating while doing little to help the team win.

 

[Trump32]

No, ESPN's QBR is fucking garbage.

QBR grades out at a -5, but PFF grades out at -8.


A minus eight! That does not happen!