Nick Cross

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by dj43:
...and the eyes of professional analysts who do it for a living, say your eyes are deceiving you.

JJ Watt thinks its b******t aswell.

"I've literally sat in a meeting room with coaches and put the grades side by side..

A coaches grade and a PFF grade and they're not even close" ~ @JJWatt #PMSLive pic.twitter.com/NzqZy5JObb

— Pat McAfee (@PatMcAfeeShow) January 17, 2024

PFF is one of the tools used by every journalist and NFL pundit you read. It gives a good overall assessment of the player in 2-3 basic categories. Since all within a position are graded the same way, it is a useful comparison tool. Disregard it if you want but don't argue against it just for the sake of argument, which is what you appear to be doing.

I value the opinion of a guy like Watt and actual coaches and my very own eyes over journalists & pundits by a country mile.

If the criteria they are using to rate players lacks context how is it useful in the least?

What are you basing your claim that I'm arguing simply for the sake of arguing on exactly?

I gave you the reason that so many find it helpful, though not their only source, for comparing players. You're free to hold your own opinion. Just know your eyes do not trump the opinion of others just because they are yours.

You actually gave me nothing other than that "expert" analysts that developed a system that lacks context that is regularly contradicted by what you see on the actual playing field knows better than everyone else including players & coaches.

So you should be well aware that,that applies to your opinion aswell,you know what they say about opinions don't you?

You missed my entire point. I suggested Basic PFF is helpful in comparing players since they use the same criteria for every player in a certain position. (They also have a Premium level that deals in a lot of detail.)

I respectfully disagree with your suggestion that its helpful in anyway, And of course they have a premium level because its all about the Benjamins.

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by dj43:
...and the eyes of professional analysts who do it for a living, say your eyes are deceiving you.

JJ Watt thinks its b******t aswell.

"I've literally sat in a meeting room with coaches and put the grades side by side..

A coaches grade and a PFF grade and they're not even close" ~ @JJWatt #PMSLive pic.twitter.com/NzqZy5JObb

— Pat McAfee (@PatMcAfeeShow) January 17, 2024

PFF is one of the tools used by every journalist and NFL pundit you read. It gives a good overall assessment of the player in 2-3 basic categories. Since all within a position are graded the same way, it is a useful comparison tool. Disregard it if you want but don't argue against it just for the sake of argument, which is what you appear to be doing.

I value the opinion of a guy like Watt and actual coaches and my very own eyes over journalists & pundits by a country mile.

If the criteria they are using to rate players lacks context how is it useful in the least?

What are you basing your claim that I'm arguing simply for the sake of arguing on exactly?

I gave you the reason that so many find it helpful, though not their only source, for comparing players. You're free to hold your own opinion. Just know your eyes do not trump the opinion of others just because they are yours.

You actually gave me nothing other than that "expert" analysts that developed a system that lacks context that is regularly contradicted by what you see on the actual playing field knows better than everyone else including players & coaches.

So you should be well aware that,that applies to your opinion aswell,you know what they say about opinions don't you?

You missed my entire point. I suggested Basic PFF is helpful in comparing players since they use the same criteria for every player in a certain position. (They also have a Premium level that deals in a lot of detail.)

I respectfully disagree with your suggestion that its helpful in anyway, And of course they have a premium level because its all about the Benjamins.

OK.

So, just conversationally, how would you suggest the average fan assess the relative value of players that they are not able to watch on a regular basis?

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by dj43:
...and the eyes of professional analysts who do it for a living, say your eyes are deceiving you.

JJ Watt thinks its b******t aswell.

"I've literally sat in a meeting room with coaches and put the grades side by side..

A coaches grade and a PFF grade and they're not even close" ~ @JJWatt #PMSLive pic.twitter.com/NzqZy5JObb

— Pat McAfee (@PatMcAfeeShow) January 17, 2024

PFF is one of the tools used by every journalist and NFL pundit you read. It gives a good overall assessment of the player in 2-3 basic categories. Since all within a position are graded the same way, it is a useful comparison tool. Disregard it if you want but don't argue against it just for the sake of argument, which is what you appear to be doing.

I value the opinion of a guy like Watt and actual coaches and my very own eyes over journalists & pundits by a country mile.

If the criteria they are using to rate players lacks context how is it useful in the least?

What are you basing your claim that I'm arguing simply for the sake of arguing on exactly?

I gave you the reason that so many find it helpful, though not their only source, for comparing players. You're free to hold your own opinion. Just know your eyes do not trump the opinion of others just because they are yours.

You actually gave me nothing other than that "expert" analysts that developed a system that lacks context that is regularly contradicted by what you see on the actual playing field knows better than everyone else including players & coaches.

So you should be well aware that,that applies to your opinion aswell,you know what they say about opinions don't you?

You missed my entire point. I suggested Basic PFF is helpful in comparing players since they use the same criteria for every player in a certain position. (They also have a Premium level that deals in a lot of detail.)

I respectfully disagree with your suggestion that its helpful in anyway, And of course they have a premium level because its all about the Benjamins.

OK.

So, just conversationally, how would you suggest the average fan assess the relative value of players that they are not able to watch on a regular basis?

How did the average fan asses the relative value of players that they weren't able to watch on a regular basis in the past before PFF existed?

I assume theres still credible pundits out there that actually watch film and don't rely on PFF when evaluating players.

Plenty of knowledgeable people on this forum that actually put in time and effort that add way more value than anything PFF adds.

Just because Brown is mega ass doesnt mean players like Brisker and Cross aren't ass.

We'll be yelling at them through the screen when they give up a big play all the same.

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by dj43:
...and the eyes of professional analysts who do it for a living, say your eyes are deceiving you.

JJ Watt thinks its b******t aswell.

"I've literally sat in a meeting room with coaches and put the grades side by side..

A coaches grade and a PFF grade and they're not even close" ~ @JJWatt #PMSLive pic.twitter.com/NzqZy5JObb

— Pat McAfee (@PatMcAfeeShow) January 17, 2024

PFF is one of the tools used by every journalist and NFL pundit you read. It gives a good overall assessment of the player in 2-3 basic categories. Since all within a position are graded the same way, it is a useful comparison tool. Disregard it if you want but don't argue against it just for the sake of argument, which is what you appear to be doing.

I value the opinion of a guy like Watt and actual coaches and my very own eyes over journalists & pundits by a country mile.

If the criteria they are using to rate players lacks context how is it useful in the least?

What are you basing your claim that I'm arguing simply for the sake of arguing on exactly?

I gave you the reason that so many find it helpful, though not their only source, for comparing players. You're free to hold your own opinion. Just know your eyes do not trump the opinion of others just because they are yours.

You actually gave me nothing other than that "expert" analysts that developed a system that lacks context that is regularly contradicted by what you see on the actual playing field knows better than everyone else including players & coaches.

So you should be well aware that,that applies to your opinion aswell,you know what they say about opinions don't you?

You missed my entire point. I suggested Basic PFF is helpful in comparing players since they use the same criteria for every player in a certain position. (They also have a Premium level that deals in a lot of detail.)

I respectfully disagree with your suggestion that its helpful in anyway, And of course they have a premium level because its all about the Benjamins.

OK.

So, just conversationally, how would you suggest the average fan assess the relative value of players that they are not able to watch on a regular basis?

How did the average fan asses the relative value of players that they weren't able to watch on a regular basis in the past before PFF existed?

I assume theres still credible pundits out there that actually watch film and don't rely on PFF when evaluating players.

Plenty of knowledgeable people on this forum that actually put in time and effort that add way more value than anything PFF adds.

The average fan couldn't. That's why PFF exists. If it was a bad as you assert, they would not have been acquired by Teamworks for an estimated $160,000,000.

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by DaleGribble:

Originally posted by dj43:
...and the eyes of professional analysts who do it for a living, say your eyes are deceiving you.

JJ Watt thinks its b******t aswell.

"I've literally sat in a meeting room with coaches and put the grades side by side..

A coaches grade and a PFF grade and they're not even close" ~ @JJWatt #PMSLive pic.twitter.com/NzqZy5JObb

— Pat McAfee (@PatMcAfeeShow) January 17, 2024

PFF is one of the tools used by every journalist and NFL pundit you read. It gives a good overall assessment of the player in 2-3 basic categories. Since all within a position are graded the same way, it is a useful comparison tool. Disregard it if you want but don't argue against it just for the sake of argument, which is what you appear to be doing.

I value the opinion of a guy like Watt and actual coaches and my very own eyes over journalists & pundits by a country mile.

If the criteria they are using to rate players lacks context how is it useful in the least?

What are you basing your claim that I'm arguing simply for the sake of arguing on exactly?

I gave you the reason that so many find it helpful, though not their only source, for comparing players. You're free to hold your own opinion. Just know your eyes do not trump the opinion of others just because they are yours.

You actually gave me nothing other than that "expert" analysts that developed a system that lacks context that is regularly contradicted by what you see on the actual playing field knows better than everyone else including players & coaches.

So you should be well aware that,that applies to your opinion aswell,you know what they say about opinions don't you?

You missed my entire point. I suggested Basic PFF is helpful in comparing players since they use the same criteria for every player in a certain position. (They also have a Premium level that deals in a lot of detail.)

I respectfully disagree with your suggestion that its helpful in anyway, And of course they have a premium level because its all about the Benjamins.

OK.

So, just conversationally, how would you suggest the average fan assess the relative value of players that they are not able to watch on a regular basis?

How did the average fan asses the relative value of players that they weren't able to watch on a regular basis in the past before PFF existed?

I assume theres still credible pundits out there that actually watch film and don't rely on PFF when evaluating players.

Plenty of knowledgeable people on this forum that actually put in time and effort that add way more value than anything PFF adds.

The average fan couldn't. That's why PFF exists. If it was a bad as you assert, they would not have been acquired by Teamworks for an estimated $160,000,000.

PFF exists because it makes money its as simple as that its a scam to take advantage of football nerds,the fact the a company invested in whats proven to be a money maker lends no credibility to its quality.

Originally posted by adrianlesnar:
Just because Brown is mega ass doesnt mean players like Brisker and Cross aren't ass.

We'll be yelling at them through the screen when they give up a big play all the same.

I'd take Brisker in a heartbeat cause his college tape was really good. I haven't watched every snap of him in Chicago but we have seen players have a new start excel with new surroundings.

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by adrianlesnar:
Just because Brown is mega ass doesnt mean players like Brisker and Cross aren't ass.

We'll be yelling at them through the screen when they give up a big play all the same.

I'd take Brisker in a heartbeat cause his college tape was really good. I haven't watched every snap of him in Chicago but we have seen players have a new start excel with new surroundings.

some here said Brisker coverage is a lot worse than Browns?

and they had a good point on keeping Brown instead of overpaying for Brisker to get equal or worse results

The other side is Brisker could be victim of bad coaching

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by adrianlesnar:
Just because Brown is mega ass doesnt mean players like Brisker and Cross aren't ass.

We'll be yelling at them through the screen when they give up a big play all the same.

I'd take Brisker in a heartbeat cause his college tape was really good. I haven't watched every snap of him in Chicago but we have seen players have a new start excel with new surroundings.

some here said Brisker coverage is a lot worse than Browns?

and they had a good point on keeping Brown instead of overpaying for Brisker to get equal or worse results

The other side is Brisker could be victim of bad coaching

I'd be real interested to see the reps where Brisker is worst than Brown in coverage. My guess it's looking at PFF grades and being okay with their assessment and if that's the case we should extend Brendel cause he's one of the best Centers in the league. PFF grades when it comes to DBs is so bad they have no clue what the assignments are if it was match, sky or mable in cover 3. They just assign a negative grade on a player without any knowledge. Or when the pass rush takes 5+ seconds to even get pressure on the QB and they eventually get beat it's still negative on the DB.

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by adrianlesnar:
Just because Brown is mega ass doesnt mean players like Brisker and Cross aren't ass.

We'll be yelling at them through the screen when they give up a big play all the same.

I'd take Brisker in a heartbeat cause his college tape was really good. I haven't watched every snap of him in Chicago but we have seen players have a new start excel with new surroundings.

some here said Brisker coverage is a lot worse than Browns?

and they had a good point on keeping Brown instead of overpaying for Brisker to get equal or worse results

The other side is Brisker could be victim of bad coaching

I'd be real interested to see the reps where Brisker is worst than Brown in coverage. My guess it's looking at PFF grades and being okay with their assessment and if that's the case we should extend Brendel cause he's one of the best Centers in the league. PFF grades when it comes to DBs is so bad they have no clue what the assignments are if it was match, sky or mable in cover 3. They just assign a negative grade on a player without any knowledge. Or when the pass rush takes 5+ seconds to even get pressure on the QB and they eventually get beat it's still negative on the DB.

true.. can't trust anyone's analysis anymore

Originally posted by adrianlesnar:
Just because Brown is mega ass doesnt mean players like Brisker and Cross aren't ass.

We'll be yelling at them through the screen when they give up a big play all the same.

That 7th round pick for Minkah Fitzpatrick was looking pretty damn good!!!

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by adrianlesnar:
Just because Brown is mega ass doesnt mean players like Brisker and Cross aren't ass.

We'll be yelling at them through the screen when they give up a big play all the same.

I'd take Brisker in a heartbeat cause his college tape was really good. I haven't watched every snap of him in Chicago but we have seen players have a new start excel with new surroundings.

some here said Brisker coverage is a lot worse than Browns?

and they had a good point on keeping Brown instead of overpaying for Brisker to get equal or worse results

The other side is Brisker could be victim of bad coaching

I'd be real interested to see the reps where Brisker is worst than Brown in coverage. My guess it's looking at PFF grades and being okay with their assessment and if that's the case we should extend Brendel cause he's one of the best Centers in the league. PFF grades when it comes to DBs is so bad they have no clue what the assignments are if it was match, sky or mable in cover 3. They just assign a negative grade on a player without any knowledge. Or when the pass rush takes 5+ seconds to even get pressure on the QB and they eventually get beat it's still negative on the DB.

I agree with everything you said. However, for whatever flaws it may have, PFF judges everyone by the same metric. Hence, it is a decent basis for comparison.

Originally posted by dj43:

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by 49AllTheTime:

Originally posted by Hysterikal:

Originally posted by adrianlesnar:
Just because Brown is mega ass doesnt mean players like Brisker and Cross aren't ass.

We'll be yelling at them through the screen when they give up a big play all the same.

I'd take Brisker in a heartbeat cause his college tape was really good. I haven't watched every snap of him in Chicago but we have seen players have a new start excel with new surroundings.

some here said Brisker coverage is a lot worse than Browns?

and they had a good point on keeping Brown instead of overpaying for Brisker to get equal or worse results

The other side is Brisker could be victim of bad coaching

I'd be real interested to see the reps where Brisker is worst than Brown in coverage. My guess it's looking at PFF grades and being okay with their assessment and if that's the case we should extend Brendel cause he's one of the best Centers in the league. PFF grades when it comes to DBs is so bad they have no clue what the assignments are if it was match, sky or mable in cover 3. They just assign a negative grade on a player without any knowledge. Or when the pass rush takes 5+ seconds to even get pressure on the QB and they eventually get beat it's still negative on the DB.

I agree with everything you said. However, for whatever flaws it may have, PFF judges everyone by the same metric. Hence, it is a decent basis for comparison.

That's a fair point.

Originally posted by Hysterikal:
I'd be real interested to see the reps where Brisker is worst than Brown in coverage. My guess it's looking at PFF grades and being okay with their assessment and if that's the case we should extend Brendel cause he's one of the best Centers in the league. PFF grades when it comes to DBs is so bad they have no clue what the assignments are if it was match, sky or mable in cover 3. They just assign a negative grade on a player without any knowledge. Or when the pass rush takes 5+ seconds to even get pressure on the QB and they eventually get beat it's still negative on the DB.

I love you

Originally posted by Kolohe:
That 7th round pick for Minkah Fitzpatrick was looking pretty damn good!!!

That pissed me off

Originally posted by dj43:
I agree with everything you said. However, for whatever flaws it may have, PFF judges everyone by the same metric. Hence, it is a decent basis for comparison.

This right here is what you should always say to those who give you grief about PFF dj. Now I'm not a PFF is gospel person, but when everyone is judged by the same metric, kinda hard to argue that.