I get it. O-Line is much easier to grade out than many positions, so I don't doubt that they'd have him high. They were way off last year when the guy from England had their O-Line as "top 3 in the league."like_that;1873453 wrote:Their QB ratings do make me o_O sometimes, but that’s because TDs/INT ratio, moving the chains, and leading teams to wins are more important to us when it comes to QBs. They are graded on every play, and none of us are truly going to give a fuck about that one good play the QB made, because he threw the ball out of bounds. Coming up with a rating system for the QB position isn’t easy and will always be criticized (I.e qb rating and qbr). There are a lot of variables that play into what we all could consider a good performance for a QB.
I can understand the criticism for their QB ratings, but if that is your entire argument against PFF, it is weak at best. It’s a very good tool for grading every other position. They watch every play and they have a lot of football guys (the British guy isn’t the only guy grading them) grading out the plays. They average out everyone’s grades, so it’s not like they have one guy per team grading out the games. This is the same grading system that many NFL, college, and even high school teams to a lower extent use. The teams that don’t use the same grading system, use something very similar.
Come on BR, you played football. Your coaches didn’t grade you out every week? There were plenty of times where I thought I had good games (made some good/important plays) and then I would come in for film session to get my ass chewed out with my average grade.
You're right about their QB rating though. We'll likely agree to disagree but they're absolutely horrible.
As far as getting my ass chewed out for how I graded out in HS? Wouldn't know much about that because I still hold the highest blocking efficiency rating in the history of the school.