Buffalo News: PFF Breaks Down Josh Allen's Accuracy "Issue"

[oldmanfan]

9 hours ago, VW82 said:

 

I'm more than fine with posters, including yourself, questioning what I or anyone else writes/posts, including articles from places like PFF. This is a public online forum. It's meant for this kind of discussion. The part I find frustrating is even after your point (i.e. my alleged confusion of the terms accuracy and precision) is addressed in painstaking detail, including definitions, examples, and diagrams to show you I (and many others here) do in fact have a full understanding of their meanings, you continue to pretend as though they are being confused, and you do it in a condescending and dismissive manner meant to insult rather than inform. I feel like I'm talking to a wall here. 

 

I disagree that Allen rarely misses the bulls eye by a lot (though again, he's been much better in recent weeks). The vast majority of people who are paid to write about football for a living, people who are generally not involved with the Bills in any capacity and would presumably be unlikely to be biased one way or the other, seem to agree with me. You, a strident fan who strongly supports Allen, believe that all these unrelated, seemingly objective third parties are in fact biased against him or just don't understand the terms they are using. Everyone else is an idiot but you? You are exhibiting far more tell tale signs of cognitive bias than I my friend. Perhaps you might at least point us toward the smoking gun which suggests PFF (or I FTM) is confusing the terms to the point of needing to throw out the baby with the bath water as you seem to be suggesting. 

 

Again, feel free to question whether the analysis done by PFF would meet the standards of a scientific journal. Perhaps it wouldn't, but you don't know that and neither do I. Either way, it doesn't mean their findings are completely useless, especially when you consider them alongside all the other available quantitative and qualitative evidence (most of which points to Josh being inaccurate).    

 

To be clear, I have not decided that Allen will fail, and I don't believe his accuracy issues are entirely innate and/or cannot be fixed. I don't even believe they're his biggest issue. Again, we've already seen some improvement in that regard. I read this forum weekly and I just don't find there are that many here with that alleged POV; rather, it would seem to be a small (and loud) minority that gave up right away with no hope of redemption, hellbent on convincing the rest of us. Most are now somewhere between cautiously optimistic (me) and having full on blind faith that Allen will become a star, which makes sense because this is Two Bills Drive after all. 

 

 

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.  

[Trogdor]

13 hours ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

Inaccuracy is far from Allen's biggest issue.  

 

What IS his biggest issue right now is reading defenses.  He leaves TONS of yards on the field because he fails to see an open man.  That's the single biggest thing I've noticed.  

 

The best QBs, franchise QBs, simply do not do that.  But that comes from properly pre and post reading defenses, which frankly, he's not good at.  

 

This is what plagues him in the Red Zone.  I think it's Football Outsiders that tracks "Average Yards to the Sticks" which is a measure of where the QB throws the ball in relation to where the 1st-down marker is.  Between that and Allen owning the longest "in the air" throw this season, and Allen ranks 1st in the former, we need to reconcile why his play otherwise isn't good.  Because he's clearly going deeper than everyone else.  So then why are his averages in terms of yards the worst in the league.  There has to be some reconciliation there.  

 

I noticed that some very good and prominent QBs are below zero on "Average Yards to the Sticks."  Brady's great at that.  That's because they read the D and see that they can get 15 yards with a dumpoff to a RB on a short sideline route rather than go OTM or elsewhere.  Allen's simply missing those, and other, open receivers and clearly failing to process the overall chances of getting the most yards on a play.  That's not good.  

 

Here's some insight, ... here are the Red Zone Ratings of the 1st-round QBs this season:  

 

Mayfield:  119  (he leads the league)  

Darnold:  95.6

Rosen:  94.5

Jackson:  89.9 

Allen:  81.3

 

Allen is ranked ahead of only 3 starters in the entire league in the red zone for rating.  Two of those are Bortles and Keenum.  

 

That's a problem.  He's the only one of the 2018 class that seems to have difficulty throwing TDs in the red zone.  Again, that short-medium game.  

 

It is what it is.  Hope he fixes it, post-haste.  

pairs well with the defense that is very poor in the red zone. 

[CincyBillsFan]

43 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said:

I've read most of the replies and obvious that there are some who have hated Allen from day 1 and regardless of what he does will deride him.  Have they watched the other rookies play and noted All22 analysis and whether they miss open receivers or make bad decisions?  Doubt it, but Allen is under a microscope.

 

A perfect example that was brought up was the Detroit game.  Stafford graded better throwing dinks & dunks and having receivers winning 1 on 1 battles.  However anyone who watched the game knows Allen was much better.

 

Compare him to Lamar Jackson, who was not great vs. LA, but threw a nice TD, which should have been a 25 yard pass (missed tackles turned it into a 70 yard TD).  I see way more bad passes from Lamar, but according to PFF a better rating.

 

Has Allen thrown a shovel pass for a big gain?

 

The stats say so little as running is not included.  The redzone stat doesn't account for Allen's running, which has been crucial.  The Bills receivers are incapable of winning battles or finding open space in tight areas too.  Shady his best receiver has been nicked up too and that has affected Allen's rating.

 

And playcalling is terrible too.

 

Allen has a lot to learn and needs to have some simpler plays designed that are quick hits right at the snap.

 

Wonder how much the narrative & #'s change if Allen completes just two passes: the pass to Clay vs. Miami (100% on Clay) and that bomb to Foster last week.

 

 

      

I second this opinion. 

 

In fact I'll go a step further and say the analytics these folks are pushing are full of dog poop.  The variability that exists for EVERY SINGLE NFL pass renders their attempts to use statistical analysis  to define a QB's play a fools errand.  Think about ALL the factors that can influence a single pass play:  officiating (do they see that hold or not), the snap (high, low or perfect), the QB pre-snap read, the O-line pre-snap read, the signals coming in from the bench, do all the players see the signals coming in from the bench, the routes run by the receivers, the QB fake, the RB fake, QB mobility, pass protection, receiver play on the ball, DB play on the ball, blitz pickup by the back, quality of catch, ..............you get the picture. 

 

The only place analytics MIGHT provide useful information in the NFL is when considering veteran QB's who have been on the same team for a prolong period of time.  Then and  only then would I expect the number crunching to yield insightful info.  For rookie QB's in vastly different circumstances - ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME!?

[Trogdor]

52 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said:

I've read most of the replies and obvious that there are some who have hated Allen from day 1 and regardless of what he does will deride him.  Have they watched the other rookies play and noted All22 analysis and whether they miss open receivers or make bad decisions?  Doubt it, but Allen is under a microscope.

 

A perfect example that was brought up was the Detroit game.  Stafford graded better throwing dinks & dunks and having receivers winning 1 on 1 battles.  However anyone who watched the game knows Allen was much better.

 

Compare him to Lamar Jackson, who was not great vs. LA, but threw a nice TD, which should have been a 25 yard pass (missed tackles turned it into a 70 yard TD).  I see way more bad passes from Lamar, but according to PFF a better rating.

 

Has Allen thrown a shovel pass for a big gain?

 

The stats say so little as running is not included.  The redzone stat doesn't account for Allen's running, which has been crucial.  The Bills receivers are incapable of winning battles or finding open space in tight areas too.  Shady his best receiver has been nicked up too and that has affected Allen's rating.

 

And playcalling is terrible too.

 

Allen has a lot to learn and needs to have some simpler plays designed that are quick hits right at the snap.

 

Wonder how much the narrative & #'s change if Allen completes just two passes: the pass to Clay vs. Miami (100% on Clay) and that bomb to Foster last week.

 

 

      

It wasn't a great throw. Could have been caught, but not a sure thing. I think that in and of itself is a narrative that is getting pushed a lot around here. The Bills aren't the worst team for drops either even though that seems to be a favorite talking point around here. It also makes sense that the Bills QB is under a microscope on the Bills message board. I watched the Detroit game and would never say Allen was much better. Dinks and dunks are a legitimate tool that he can't seem to grasp, but don't fault other teams for utilizing them correctly. 

Edited December 29, 2018 by Trogdor

[Hapless Bills Fan]

10 hours ago, Ayjent said:

Look I’m not going to break down the statistics, or look them up because I’m sure I can find them to support what I’m saying with respect  Allen being better compared to Darnold and Rosen. 

 

Just realize this is Weak Sauce around here. 

 

If you want to say "I think Allen is better because I've watched Allen, Darnold, and Rosen and I think Allen looks better", you'll still be asked in what way your eyeballs think Allen looks better.

 

But if you feel he's better in some quantifiable way, you really need to 'stand and deliver' and justify your take - or prepare to be (civilly) mocked and memed.
 

[GoBills808]

People really trying to say the Browns don’t have a good offensive line?

[jrober38]

No surprises here.

 

Allen has always struggled with accuracy. He's exactly as advertised coming out of college and has miles to go before he'll be a successful franchise QB. 

 

Allen is a great athlete with an elite arm, but he's not a very good quarterback yet, and struggles as a passer relative to other NFL QBs. 

 

Hopefully they can add some weapons and he takes a big step as a passer next season. 

Edited December 29, 2018 by jrober38

[CincyBillsFan]

2 minutes ago, Trogdor said:

It wasn't a great throw. Could have been caught, but not a sure thing. I think that in and of itself is a narrative that is getting pushed a lot around here. The Bills aren't the worst team for drops either even though that seems to be a favorite talking point around here. 

This is the problem with all these "stats":

 

*  what constitutes a dropped ball?  According to the stats there was only one in the NE game.  This begs the question of whether the criteria for dropped balls is to narrow.  How about a stat that looks at catchable balls?

 

*  But I'll grant you that EVERY QB is the victim of dropped passes - it comes with the game.  But if a QB is the victim of 2 dropped passes in a game but benefits from a couple of GREAT catches it tends to balance out. Allen sure experiences the dropped passes but how many truly GREAT catches have his receivers made to cancel those out?  A great example of this involves the Jets/GB game.  Near the goal line Darnold throws a ball that should have been intercepted but instead is completed for a 15 yard gain because his receiver made a spectacular one handed catch.  Watch the clip if you don't believe me. 

 

As previously posted on this thread folks who were negative about Allen from day 1 are using these flawed analytics to confirm their bias.  I'm using the eye test which shows me that Allen has improved substantially over the course of the season.  This is my criteria for whether a young QB will or will not be a bust.   

 

 

[Trogdor]

Just now, CincyBillsFan said:

This is the problem with all these "stats":

 

*  what constitutes a dropped ball?  According to the stats there was only one in the NE game.  This begs the question of whether the criteria for dropped balls is to narrow.  How about a stat that looks at catchable balls?

 

*  But I'll grant you that EVERY QB is the victim of dropped passes - it comes with the game.  But if a QB is the victim of 2 dropped passes in a game but benefits from a couple of GREAT catches it tends to balance out. Allen sure experiences the dropped passes but how many truly GREAT catches have his receivers made to cancel those out?  A great example of this involves the Jets/GB game.  Near the goal line Darnold throws a ball that should have been intercepted but instead is completed for a 15 yard gain because his receiver made a spectacular one handed catch.  Watch the clip if you don't believe me. 

 

As previously posted on this thread folks who were negative about Allen from day 1 are using these flawed analytics to confirm their bias.  I'm using the eye test which shows me that Allen has improved substantially over the course of the season.  This is my criteria for whether a young QB will or will not be a bust.   

 

 

I don't see any improvement in footwork, which was important for his progression. His decision making is coming along very slowly, but he has yet to stop trying to make the big play over the right play. I'm sure his velocity also makes near catches quite a bit more difficult. That being said, the WR corp is terrible. Even easy catches are missed because they try to catch with their body more often than not. All around it's a cluster. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

10 hours ago, VW82 said:

I disagree that Allen rarely misses the bulls eye by a lot (though again, he's been much better in recent weeks). The vast majority of people who are paid to write about football for a living, people who are generally not involved with the Bills in any capacity and would presumably be unlikely to be biased one way or the other, seem to agree with me. You, a strident fan who strongly supports Allen, believe that all these unrelated, seemingly objective third parties are in fact biased against him or just don't understand the terms they are using. Everyone else is an idiot but you? You are exhibiting far more tell tale signs of cognitive bias than I my friend. Perhaps you might at least point us toward the smoking gun which suggests PFF (or I FTM) is confusing the terms to the point of needing to throw out the baby with the bath water as you seem to be suggesting. 

 

Again, feel free to question whether the analysis done by PFF would meet the standards of a scientific journal. Perhaps it wouldn't, but you don't know that and neither do I. Either way, it doesn't mean their findings are completely useless, especially when you consider them alongside all the other available quantitative and qualitative evidence (most of which points to Josh being inaccurate).   

 

OK, I'll weigh in here.  We know that, and you can too.  The analysis done by PFF would NOT meet the standards of any self respecting scientific journal.  The reason is that PFF does not sufficiently disclose their methodology for the decisions upon which their data analysis rests.  A standard principle of publication in a scientific journal is that the authors must disclose their methods in sufficient detail to enable an independent researcher to duplicate their work.

Let's start with one of the most straightforward metrics - "adjusted completion percentage".  On the surface, it's logical and straightforward - correct a guy's completion percentage for throw-aways, spikes etc.  But let's look at what they say: " At PFF, one of our advanced metrics of tracking quarterback play is called adjusted completion percentage, which accounts for drops, throwaways, spikes, batted passes and throws where the QB is hit on his release."  Right away, we see one clearly subjective metric.  Drops aren't an official NFL stat because what constitutes a drop is considered so subjective.  The guys who do track drops, do so with Mark I eyeballs.  They watch the placement of a ball, and decide whether or not a WR could have caught it with average effort.  As I understand it (but try to find this information!  and let me know if you do!) the ball has to hit a WR's hands within a rectangle from his thighs to just above his head and just wider than his shoulders to be called a drop.  But week in, week out, we see many WR on many teams routinely haul in balls that don't meet those criteria, and good QB routinely place balls outside those criteria in order to put the ball where their guy has a shot and the defender doesn't. 

People in this thread are asking a good question - is PFF dinging other QB when they throw a completion that wouldn't count as a drop if incomplete because the WR had to leap or dive or one-hand it, but they have more talented WR who haul it in?

Now let's move on to PFF's Big Black Box - their accuracy scoring.  " In addition to adjusted completion percentage, one of our more advanced quarterback statistics at PFF involved a process in which we chart every throw for accuracy, allowing us to further break down a QBs ball placement beyond completion percentage to see who’s placing the ball accurately – hitting receivers in stride, leading them away from defenders – compared to passers who are getting catchable balls to their playmakers – making a receiver reach back across his body to catch a ball, taking away YAC opportunities – and those who are throwing uncatchable balls. "

 

To meet the standards of a scientific journal, the details of the charting process would need to be disclosed.    But just generally, there's a problem with the accuracy thing.  The observer, who doesn't know the playcalls, is deciding whether or not the WR ran the correct route, as it was supposed to be run against that defensive coverage, and then whether the QB threw the ball into the correct place.  Without the play list, there's a huge element of subjectivity there.  When Allen throws too far out in front of Clay or Jones and they don't make the catch, is that an accurate throw where the receiver got jammed up on release or ran some detail of the route wrong, having them behind where they should have been?  Or did Allen rush the throw because of pressure (even though PFF might not score it as such) and just pray they'd turn on the burners and get there?  Or did he throw it inaccurately?  Allen knows, and the WR know, and Daboll and Culley know, but we don't and PFF doesn't.

 

So now you have a statistic with a huge subjective element (drops) being further processed to decide if the throws were 'accurate', by an undisclosed methodology.

 

No, that would not meet the standards of a decent scientific journal, and I know that, and you can too.  It doesn't mean PFF's assesment is valueless - as others have pointed out, whatever it is, they are applying it equally to all QB across the league.  But it does need to be interpreted with the understanding that there are subjective elements and what they are.

[JaCrispy]

12 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

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.

People can argue semantics til they are blue in the face, but one thing still remains- Josh Allen is one of the worst QBs, statistically, when compared to the rest of QBs in the league...period.

[Ronin]

10 hours ago, Ayjent said:

Look I’m not going to break down the statistics, or look them up because I’m sure I can find them to support what I’m saying with respect  Allen being better compared to Darnold and Rosen.  Do I think Allen is perfect?  Not even close, and he has a long way to go to be a long term starter.  I see a guy with the physical tools, which no one doubted, but I’ve also seen him making a ton of progress on things that looked pretty bad at the start of the season (e.g., questionable pocket presence that has gotten better, knowing where to go with the ball more frequently, extending plays) and how he is displaying leadership and the team around him has responded.   He doesn’t played scared and the game doesn’t seem too big.  His passing stats aren’t that impressive, but he is pushing the ball downfield and making some back shoulder throws that are well placed just not completed.  

 

Ive watched Darnold and Rosen and I just don’t see the same level of talent and I would’ve been happier with either guy over Allen when the draft occurred - I see guys that are hitting the easier plays more consistently with them but I don’t see a whole lot of growth potential and I wonder if those two have a whole lot more to offer in the progression of their level of play.  And there is a valid concern Allen may always be this way too - elite physical talent that just never reaches the ultimate potential.  But the leadership, ballsiness, progress and physical talent make me a lot more comfortable about Allen than the story PFF statistics tell. I liked Tyrod, but the stats always said he was a better QB than he was, because he didn’t turn it over and had a pretty good completion percentage - Bill Barnwell always liked him because of his stats.  But we all knew the Bills needed to try to upgrade - I don’t think they needed to get rid of him because they had no known commodity at the position,  but I digress. 

 

Allen after coming back seemed way more comfortable and in control of the offense and seemed to be making the right play most of the time, except for trying to make too much happen on occasion.  

 

As for the the red zone.  The most effective red zone offense has been Allen running, and that is a big part of the story.  I think that’s a dangerous way to play your starting QB, but his running ability  is simply the most effective red zone  weapon.  The other part of the story is a poor screen game, no real running ability with the RBs, and inconsistent receiving  targets that aren’t really good at making plays in tight areas of the field - the Bills have had a lot of end zone drops and very few nice catches in the end zone.  Allen may be missing targets there, but whose the playmaker he should go to?  I’m not sure about Daboll either.  

 

You're confusing athleticism with passing talent.  A whole lot of people are doing that, it's a common thing.  

[oldmanfan]

23 minutes ago, JaCrispy said:

People can argue semantics til they are blue in the face, but one thing still remains- Josh Allen is one of the worst QBs, statistically, when compared to the rest of QBs in the league...period.

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

[Ronin]

10 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Most rookies aren't good at that.  It's one reason why a rookie QB's best friend is an effective run game.  And it's harder for a rookie when the OL is questionable as well.  Part of this comes down to how well the coaches succeed in breaking the play down, linking 1 or 2 simple defensive reads to 2 alternative decisions.  See this -> throw here or here.  See that -> throw there or there.  My gestalt is that it may not have been a strength of our OC or QB coaching staff.  It may be something Anderson and/or Barkley have helped Allen with.

 

The point you make about red zone issues is interesting.  I've noted that Allen historically has struggled with accuracy in the short/medium passing game but I never (duh!) made the connection to the red zone as, essentially, a forced short/medium passing game.

 

Thanks!

 

Maybe, but consider, Rosen, Darnold, and Jackson don't have significantly better rushing games and their numbers in that regard are much higher.  

 

Bills 1,235 other than Allen and Peterman 

Ravens 1,495 other than Jackson and Flacco

Jets 1,376 other than Darnold and McCown

Arizona 1,112 other than Rosen and Bradford 

 

Again, not to compare Allen with others in his draft-class, it's not a race among them.  All can succeed, all can fail, and anything in between.  The success of one is not hinged, in any way, shape, or form, to the others.  

 

Point is, and notwithstanding any potential reasons, Allen's performance in that way absolutely must improve or he's simply not the one.  And traditionally/historically, that's a very difficult thing to correct for coaches because it doesn't involve technique or method that a coach can see and attempt to right, rather it's a mental thing that's difficult for a coach to see, namely what a player is actually thinking.  So most of this if not all of it is on Allen.  Again, this is also something he was not good at and criticized for at Wyoming.  Expecting him to be able to correct this in the NFL, and when he was so poor at it against collegiate competition that made it to the NFL, is a tall order.  

 

We will know more by midseason next year.  

[Dr. Who]

6 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

You're confusing athleticism with passing talent.  A whole lot of people are doing that, it's a common thing.  

I think you're dismissing a pretty cogent argument with facile generalization that simply ignores and thus leaves unaddressed the reasonable points offered. 

[LSHMEAB]

26 minutes ago, JaCrispy said:

People can argue semantics til they are blue in the face, but one thing still remains- Josh Allen is one of the worst QBs, statistically, when compared to the rest of QBs in the league...period.

Then we get back to everyone else on the team sucks! It's circular logic that never advances the conversation. My guess is that if Allen improves and sites like PFF grade him higher, it will suddenly become a terrific measure of a QB's efficacy. 

 

I respect the time people have taken to quibble with some of PFF's methodology but still find it to be a valuable assessment tool. That's just me.

[jrober38]

28 minutes ago, JaCrispy said:

People can argue semantics til they are blue in the face, but one thing still remains- Josh Allen is one of the worst QBs, statistically, when compared to the rest of QBs in the league...period.

 

Exactly. He's at the bottom or very close to the bottom of every statistically category associated with QBs. 

 

When I watch him I question his accuracy. He misses easy throws and often makes things more difficult on his receiver than they need to be. When under pressure, he's not very good unless he's running around breaking contain of the pocket. He regularly misses deep balls to wide open receivers. All of this is backed up by this "study". As I've said all year; every QB has receivers who drop the ball, and every QB throws the ball away. The notion that Allen's completion percentage would be closer to other QBs when factoring in these throws was something that never made any sense. No matter how you slice it, he's one of the least accurate QBs in the league. 

 

Allen is currently a bad NFL quarterback. Hopefully he gets a heck of a lot better next year. 

[Ronin]

2 minutes ago, Dr. Who said:

I think you're dismissing a pretty cogent argument with facile generalization that simply ignores and thus leaves unaddressed the reasonable points offered. 

 

Actually, I provided quite a few facts and data that are consistent with the historical success of franchise QBs,  Very consistent.  

 

The post that I cited is pretty much entirely opinion without any factual information or data, apart from the semi-factual notion that Allen's red zone performance also involves his rushing, and at least implies the danger/risks therein.  But again, I didn't read ANYTHING upon drafting Allen as to how the team was going to expect his primary contribution to be running the ball.  Neither did you if you're going to be honest here.  

 

They drafted him for his "strong-arm" and because he was "their guy."  

 

At some point, A, that rushing is going to be stopped by opponents, B, he's going to get himself seriously injured, there have already been a few hits that were concerning, but C, and most importantly, he'll never achieve franchise QB status based upon his rushing.  That's just the way it is.  Now I don't know, perhaps he'll "reinvent" the game and bring back the days of yore of rushing QBs that lead their teams running the ball, but I don't see that happening in the modern NFL, do you?  I didn't think so.  

 

Allen's career is going to be a short one in today's NFL if he's going to post 135 carries every season, the pace that he's on over the past five games.  Argue as you may.  

 

Hence, we must turn to his passing game in order to determine how good he'll be.  Progress on the season aside, and I've used only his last five games in my analyses (did you realize that?), he's still bottom-dwelling.  So I'm not sure what point you're attempting to make, but if it's that the indicators currently are the he'll be fine, you're quite incorrect.  

 

 

 

11 minutes ago, LSHMEAB said:

I respect the time people have taken to quibble with some of PFF's methodology but still find it to be a valuable assessment tool. That's just me.

 

It is a valuable assessment tool, but the people taking issue with it approach it as if PFF deliberately skewed their rating system to screw Allen over.  Which is an absurd proposition.  

[LSHMEAB]

3 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

Actually, I provided quite a few facts and data that are consistent with the historical success of franchise QBs,  Very consistent.  

 

The post that I cited is pretty much entirely opinion without any factual information or data, apart from the semi-factual notion that Allen's red zone performance also involves his rushing, and at least implies the danger/risks therein.  But again, I didn't read ANYTHING upon drafting Allen as to how the team was going to expect his primary contribution to be running the ball.  Neither did you if you're going to be honest here.  

 

They drafted him for his "strong-arm" and because he was "their guy."  

 

At some point, A, that rushing is going to be stopped by opponents, B, he's going to get himself seriously injured, there have already been a few hits that were concerning, but C, and most importantly, he'll never achieve franchise QB status based upon his rushing.  That's just the way it is.  Now I don't know, perhaps he'll "reinvent" the game and bring back the days of yore of rushing QBs that lead their teams running the ball, but I don't see that happening in the modern NFL, do you?  I didn't think so.  

 

Allen's career is going to be a short one in today's NFL if he's going to post 135 carries every season, the pace that he's on over the past five games.  Argue as you may.  

 

Hence, we must turn to his passing game in order to determine how good he'll be.  Progress on the season aside, and I've used only his last five games in my analyses (did you realize that?), he's still bottom-dwelling.  So I'm not sure what point you're attempting to make, but if it's that the indicators currently are the he'll be fine, you're quite incorrect.  

 

 

 

 

It is a valuable assessment tool, but the people taking issue with it approach it as if PFF deliberately skewed their rating system to screw Allen over.  Which is an absurd proposition.  

Trubisky has really given me some hope. He's far and the way the closest comparison to Allen in terms of recent draftees. Would love to see that kind of second year jump for JA. Nagy has obviously made a world of difference in Chicago, but hey, Daboll is a hot HC candidate so who knows? My biggest fear is another Ryan Tannehill. A guy who lingers for years because he does just enough right to make people think he's the guy. Time will tell.

[Dr. Who]

8 minutes ago, TaskersGhost said:

 

Actually, I provided quite a few facts and data that are consistent with the historical success of franchise QBs,  Very consistent.  

 

The post that I cited is pretty much entirely opinion without any factual information or data, apart from the semi-factual notion that Allen's red zone performance also involves his rushing, and at least implies the danger/risks therein.  But again, I didn't read ANYTHING upon drafting Allen as to how the team was going to expect his primary contribution to be running the ball.  Neither did you if you're going to be honest here.  

 

They drafted him for his "strong-arm" and because he was "their guy."  

 

At some point, A, that rushing is going to be stopped by opponents, B, he's going to get himself seriously injured, there have already been a few hits that were concerning, but C, and most importantly, he'll never achieve franchise QB status based upon his rushing.  That's just the way it is.  Now I don't know, perhaps he'll "reinvent" the game and bring back the days of yore of rushing QBs that lead their teams running the ball, but I don't see that happening in the modern NFL, do you?  I didn't think so.  

 

Allen's career is going to be a short one in today's NFL if he's going to post 135 carries every season, the pace that he's on over the past five games.  Argue as you may.  

 

Hence, we must turn to his passing game in order to determine how good he'll be.  Progress on the season aside, and I've used only his last five games in my analyses (did you realize that?), he's still bottom-dwelling.  So I'm not sure what point you're attempting to make, but if it's that the indicators currently are the he'll be fine, you're quite incorrect.  

 

 

 

I thought your response to what appeared to me a rather thoughtful post was pithy and dismissive. It's just easy to respond to a long post with a brief pejorative. Possibly you didn't intend that. I think Allen's performance is not properly gauged by statistics. I think that was the main point of the other fella's post. I'm personally not bothered by "bottom-dwelling" because I believe much of that is due to surrounding talent and a rookie qb who is still learning to read NFL defenses. No doubt, Allen has to improve. I think it is likely he will and you don't. I am not an analytics guy and maybe your pessimism will prove correct. I think the team believes in Allen. I think they think he's going to be a good one and probaby have a better feel than what the numbers are saying right now.

Edited December 29, 2018 by Dr. Who