Royale with Cheese

Scoring a TD on 40% of your catches is something you tell a girl a bar trying to impress her.

“PFF is scientifically sound and valid” lol

lol this isn’t the same as Customer Satisfaction survey to see if people prefer Coke over Pepsi. Geezus dude.

Not in a player evaluation grade lol. A player evaluation is a subjective analysis/observation. Its why not every teams Draft Big Board is the same lol. Remember when you said “just because you play football doesn’t mean you know football?” I starting to think just because you have an Engineering degree….

Great. Just because he has a degree is Science doesn’t mean it can be applied to a game of football lol.

🤣PFF follows a scientific process. Dude come on. I did go to college and received a secondary education degree and was certified in Middle Grades and Secondary Science. He’s doubling down on his statement too.

PFF is scientifically valid😂 Geezus lol

I'm watching this now. Is that how scientists view black holes?

I think we've been pretty good in the slot when we had Beasley 2019-2021. Last year that was a big issue without him.

IMO, he was supposed to do more or they wanted more out of him. He was replacing Beasley and was supposed to give us that more athletic slot guy and can get a little more YAC. That type of production is something that's not totally hard to replace.

Richard Noggin sent you this. You only replied to have his quote...for a specific reason. So I guess football disagrees with Greg Cossell as well. He basically said the same thing as Lang but used the word "difficult" instead of "impossible". I've already put Kelce's quote which is the same thing. So basically any NFL Player who says unflattering things about PFF potentially doesn't have the knowledge of scope of the full game. You cherry pick your stats as well. Only using PFF when it says what you want it to say. Greg Cosell (a broadly respected pro), on the other hand, continually reminds Schopp and the Bulldog that there are NUANCES WE CANNOT KNOW when watching film. And this has been his credentialed day job for a long time. He will offer his best educated guesses and opinions, and be repeatedly (maybe evasively) insistent that the scheme-specific and even play-specific nuances in overall design, individual techniques, pre- and post-snap checks, calls, and reads, etc., are difficult to know for sure, especially in the cases of breakdowns and missed assignments. It's actually fascinating to explore and acknowledge these possibilities. But it won't get the same online engagement, most likely...

You're acting like this evaluation and system is flawless lol. Yeah it's theirs but that means the players should agree with it? They clearly think it's *****.

Lang covers that. "If a guy clearly gets beat, that's one thing. But if you're going to say, 'This guy didn't pick up the linebacker, this guy missed a blitz,' there's no possible way that you can know that unless you know what the offensive linemen's responsibilities are. And nobody else knows that," Lang said. "I don't know what Arizona's offensive line does. They might do something completely different than what we do."

This is just stupid...geezus. TJ Lang played for multiple schemes...I guess he's full of ***** too. I think some positions are easier to grade. If you see a quarterback make a bad decision, that's obviously easy to grade. But when it comes to offensive and defensive line play," he said, "there's just so much scheme that goes into what we do up front that nobody else outside of the building can possibly know what we're supposed to do. "But you're trying to grade guys negatively and give guys bad reputations. You're throwing out, 'This guy missed an assignment here.' You don't know what the assignment is, so you have no qualification to say that in the first place. All it does it make guys look bad because now a lot of media outlets are quoting PFF and using their grades." The appeal of PFF is that it doesn't grade a player's performance in a vacuum. (All interceptions aren't created the same.) It considers context as much as outcome -- Lang just believes that context is beyond the evaluators' reach. "If a guy clearly gets beat, that's one thing. But if you're going to say, 'This guy didn't pick up the linebacker, this guy missed a blitz,' there's no possible way that you can know that unless you know what the offensive linemen's responsibilities are. And nobody else knows that," Lang said. "I don't know what Arizona's offensive line does. They might do something completely different than what we do. "Especially a guy sitting on the outside behind his computer looking at the game, there's no way he knows what the hell's going on either. It's a total joke, in my opinion, as far as it goes grading offensive linemen." Lang will appear on the Valenti Show on 97.1 The Ticket this season every Tuesday from 5 to 6.

I understand there is a difference but how does that mean that PFF know more about the player responsibilities more than the player himself? So if a PFF guy and Travis Kelce are watching film breakdown of the Chiefs OL play. The PFF guy is going to be able to evaluate Kelce better than Kelce? This is their gripe and it's not legitimate? This is what Kelce, Wood and Lang said...they aren't going to know all of my objective.

I don’t hate everything PFF is. I just don’t think highly of their grading system for players. My reasons I have provided and its the same reasons as other professional players. Its a discussion topic. This entire PFF discussion came up because Connor McGovern didn’t grade well at PFF. One poster in particular is saying that it’s basically proof he’s not that good. I also find it funny how there are posters who are treating their evaluations like gospel. To the point where Einstein says “in no universe is Andy Reid a good offensive line evaluator”. Well, PFF he’s actually rated him well in that particular area. So there are times we can use PFF grades and apparently not…cherry pick which time to use it. Yeah, obviously its two different scales. But why have two different scales for one overall player evaluation and not specify it to the reader? But not to mention, regardless of two different scales, one had Rodgers graded negatively.

Lol OMG PFF guys can evaluate offensive line play better on film than Eric Wood and Travis Kelce because they only played for one professional team. And you’re calling me ignorant?

Who packed and smoked a bowl in a Teams Meeting and forgot to turn off his camera.

He's not. He was supposed to be but he wasn't. I wanted him to be that guy.

I didn't use the word "better" performance. I said they rated Rodgers lower than Fitz which they clearly did. I also said that's where my problem lies and you clearly agreed. If there system is based on evaluating every play and grading it positive, negative and neutral.....Rodgers was graded to have more negatives in that game.

Isn't there a theory where the universe is collapsing and expanding at the same time?

I guess I was confused thinking -0.8 was smaller than 21.4? If you can decipher this....let me know. https://www.pff.com/news/why-aaron-rodgers-earned-a-slightly-negative-grade Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers ended last night’s game with a -0.8 grade overall. This isn’t a bad game, just because the number begins with a minus, but it is an average grade very close to zero for a player who threw five touchdown passes, which seems crazy on the face of it. It’s not.

Are TJ Lang, Eric Wood, Greg Cossell and the Kelce's "Johnny NFL Takes?" Because they are saying the exact opposite. I tend to believe them more than you. It's just funny how you won't take their opinion into consideration at all but a PFF guy is "scientifically sound" in his evaluation. WTF. Explain to me how the Kelce's and Lang are wrong. “I think some positions are easier to grade. If you see a quarterback make a bad decision, that’s obviously easy to grade," Lang told Valenti. "But when it comes to offensive and defensive line play, there’s just so much scheme that goes into what we do up front that nobody else outside of the building can possibly know what we’re supposed to do." “The thing is that these PFF graders are grading off of what they think the play should be,” Travis Kelce said. “Whereas we might have a specific fundamental or we might have a specific call that takes us into something else and the play doesn’t work. … The graders don’t necessarily know the objective of the play and the fundamentals that we’re being taught.”

I do too. That is interesting...time as far as a measurement is a mankind invention or discovery. This is the only time we know. Here's a simpler aspect of it.