oldmanfan

Shady needs to be a third down back

Good response after the pick 6

Good throw and catch

Agree with Beurlein. Allen has to be pushed this off season on those short throws.

Rookie mistake. Snookered by a veteran DB

That doesn't look good for Tre

Add a punter to the offseason list.

Rookie QB mistake. Makes it exciting though

Not a very good pass but finally a WR makes a tough catch!

I hate in when he throws back into the middle of the field. Worked there though

Go back and read then. It's ignorant to argue when you have not even read what I and others have written about the potential problems with the PFF analysis.

Why don't you for once stop with your nonsense? No one is saying the kid has arrived. He obviously has more to learn and more to improve on, and any cursory view of posts around here will show that. What people do see though is the potential to become the guy. When the only thing you can do is to deliberately lie about what people say it shows your ignorance. Yes. Go back and read what I and others have discussed about the difficulties in such analyses. But you won't because you have what is called confirmation bias. You want Allen to fail therefore anything that says he will you suck up to and anything that challenges it you won't read. Just as well; you likely wouldn't be able to understand it anyway.

No one set the edge all game long

Yes I did and have commented on it extensively herein as to the difficulties in such analyses. Some of us don't blindly take numbers someone throws out there to support a set conviction as you have done.

Such ignorance around here

Good points. I don't know if he makes it or not. What I have a problem with in this and other threads are: 1. Reactive belief of stats without a true understanding of what they may or may not mean 2. Folks claiming some Nostradamus-like insight as to the future of this kid without any real idea what they're talking about, confusing their opinion with fact. All rookie QBs go through growth periods, some longer than others. Some have better teams around them, some not. The last and maybe only rookie QB I can think of that had "it" from day one was Marino. All others had ups and downs as they figured things out. Let Allen play, let him learn. Quit dissecting every single pass as if that definitively makes him great or terrible.

Winston too. The guy who you have traded an entire draft for. But we should bow down at your wisdom.

You're responding to someone who felt Winston was going to be the God of QBs and stated he'd trade an entire draft for him so keep that in mind. I'm afraid you've hit the nail on the head. There are some who have confirmation bias; they said Allen would not work and will hang onto anything to support that because they would rather brag about being right than see the kid succeed. Of course you also have the other extreme, and equally invalid. I think any objective appraisal of Allen would say a couple things. One, he has work to do to become a consistent NFL QB. Second, he's shown more that many thought he would as a rookie. Third, he needs more help around him to reach his potential. I think history tells us first round QBs have around a 50% chance of success. Allen is no exception.

If I approach my interpretation of the PFF data as I would reviewing a scientific manuscript, I would ask a couple questions. Hapless has already mentioned one: a more complete description of their methods. I would also ask about how many people they have reviewing each QB. Do they have one person doing the analysis of each QB? Several? How well do individual observers agree on their ratings (measurement error)? Do they average results from several observers? As one who has the responsibility of quality control in a lab, I have to deal with these type things on a regular basis and can tell you there can be significant inter and intraobserver variability. I think there is probably some useful info in the PFF material. I just don't know how much or how useful because I don't know enough about how they did the analysis. Again, says the guy who wanted to trade an entire draft for Winston but pretends he's a QB savant. He can have another year? How generous of you given you have absolutely no say in it.

If the stats mean much. Read Hapless above; he describes the issues very well.

Thanks for this reply. I am not biased for or against Allen; I just want apples compared to apples. As I pointed out I was intrigued by the article but would like to sit with the PFF guys to see how they break down misses, tight coverage etc. Hapless points out reasons why their analysis could be skewed and why O linemen hate their analysis. Ultimately their analysis tries to put objective measures on their subjective calls on things.

You don't like it when people like me who have an understanding of terms such as accuracy and precision try to help you out. Don't know why, but you don't. When Allen misses guys by a mile, he is both inaccurate and imprecise. As would any QB. But that is rarely the case. He could stand to be more precise for sure. You are not the only one who confuses these, but it is an important distinction. QBs have to be accurate or they would never make it to an NFL level. The great ones have high precision to go with accuracy. I read the article and it was intriguing, but I would have loved to sit with the guys doing their analysis and see how much we agreed on what would constitute a dropped pass, or what they considered tight coverage as that is one of the measurable they used. And so on. I'm sure this will infuriate you more, and I'm sorry if it does, but another statistical term that is useful in this whole Allen dialog is confirmation bias. I think that is at play with many when talking about Allen. They decided he will not work out in the NFL, and thus any data that tends to support that view gets accepted without any sort of critical analysis because it confirms what you want to believe. I review a ton of scientific papers and it's the biggest reason for rejection. And the second is improper use of statistics. Allen is certainly making progress but he has a ways to go as a passer. And, again, we can debunk the idea that accuracy (really precision) is innate and cannot be improved with practice. Any physical ability can be improved by correct repetition. Recall that it isn't practice that makes perfect, it's that perfect practice makes perfect. He can continue to work on things, work on film study, hopefully get some more talent around him. And we'll see where it takes him. He's a rookie. He has things to learn and things to improve. Give him time to do so before throwing him to the sharks.

If truly great, yes. But what is great? I'd say a HOF type. And out of hundreds of guys playing the position in the modern area there's about 30 in the Hall. Or to out it another way, to pay a guy like Cousins a guaranteed 80 some million is insane.

Hope you're right. Maybe he'll be like Moulds - took him a while to catch on.

It is not just vocabulary and not just pedantic though. There is a real difference between accuracy and precision. Allen is pretty accurate, but he needs to be accurate AND precise, and at times he's not as precise as he could be. The best QBs have both; not only are they accurate in that they put the ball in the catchable radius for their receiver, but they put it is a precise spot where, say, they can continue with run after the catch and not have to reach back for a ball and thus not gain as many YAC. That is why I don't think completion percentage means much, and why I'd love to be sitting with these guys from PFF when they do their advanced stats. Because I think they confuse the two terms. Granted I come from a lab background and it skews my thinking on this. If you get lab tests that are accurate but not precise or vice versa you can wind up in trouble. I do agree with experience he'll see the field better, and make better choices.