c_hawkbob wrote:I'm surprised at that low a score for Gabe, he eyeballed better than that, at least late in the season.
NorthHawk wrote:I think you have to take these types of rankings with a grain of salt. Apparently Mark Glowinski out performed Quentin Nelson on the Colts. That's kind of hard to believe.
RiverDog wrote:It's also worth noting Creed Humphrey's grade, one of the players we passed over when we took Dee Eskridge as our first selection in the draft last season.
tarlhawk wrote:These reflect the whole season when Kyle Fuller "played center" and Damien was adapting to Left Guard...Duane Brown also got better as the season wore on...in the Cardinals game you can see him "man handle" Chandler Jones. The Chandler strip sack came from the strong side of the field as if Jones was untouched.
RiverDog wrote:It's also worth noting Creed Humphrey's grade, one of the players we passed over when we took Dee Eskridge as our first selection in the draft last season.
tarlhawk wrote:Continuing to note the regret of not having drafted Creed Humphrey is like forever agonizing the loss of Max Unger in the Jimmy Grahm trade...it serves no healthy purpose...can our team go back in time?
NorthHawk wrote:I have to wonder how much of the writers personal opinions influence the ratings. It's human nature when ranking things even if that person or people aren't aware of it.
RiverDog wrote:But whatever the case may be, you simply can't spin that evaluation to show that we've seen an improvement in our offensive line, especially when it corresponds with the team sinking from a 12-4 record to 7-10.
RiverDog wrote:Why even bother with a forum if we aren't going to revisit our past successes and failures? Besides, I offered no editorial comment other than saying that it was worth noting Humphrey's grade.
I haven't a clue as to how PFF does their rankings. All I know is that it's widely used by people that know a helluva lot more about football than any of us in here, so it seems likely that it's as objective as one can devise. Do you have a source that you feel is more accurate?
Old but Slow wrote:The Jackson acquisition was another example of the team trying to fix the O-line on the cheap. He was cut by the Raiders, and then resigned so they could trade him to Seattle. He did not play in the final Arizona game. Lewis played better at RG than he did at LG, but the veteran Jackson could only play on the right? How is it an easier transition for a fairly successful rookie, than a veteran? When Haynes filled in for Lewis in the Detroit game he was the highest graded O-lineman for Seattle in the game; and then he subbed for Jackson and played well. Who is steering this ship? Coaching is more than teaching, it is also evaluating, and placing resources where they work best.
Personally, I favor getting an entirely different coaching staff, from the top down. Might give the OC a pass, because it is difficult to determine if he had any say at all. A coaching staff of sycophants is not a good thing.
Old but Slow wrote:The Jackson acquisition was another example of the team trying to fix the O-line on the cheap. He was cut by the Raiders, and then resigned so they could trade him to Seattle. He did not play in the final Arizona game. Lewis played better at RG than he did at LG, but the veteran Jackson could only play on the right? How is it an easier transition for a fairly successful rookie, than a veteran? When Haynes filled in for Lewis in the Detroit game he was the highest graded O-lineman for Seattle in the game; and then he subbed for Jackson and played well. Who is steering this ship? Coaching is more than teaching, it is also evaluating, and placing resources where they work best.
Personally, I favor getting an entirely different coaching staff, from the top down. Might give the OC a pass, because it is difficult to determine if he had any say at all. A coaching staff of sycophants is not a good thing.
NorthHawk wrote:Screwing up the Offensive Line is par for the course with this regime.
After 10 years it’s clearly obvious that Pete doesn’t know how to build an Offensive Line. Some of us knew it after
year 4, but it should be clear to even those who don’t want to see.
I see PFF as a basic way to compare NFL players and an easy tool to draw a quick conclusion...but not as a final resource to criticize or make a strong opinion on.
c_hawkbob wrote:An attempt to quantify a subjective evaluation. Same as the QBR or Passer Rating. Limited in scope but not invalid. They actually do a fair job, you just have to take it for what it is. If you really want to know all their evaluation criteria it's available on their website.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 48 guests