8 hours ago, EazyEaglez said:

The PFF style is based on individuals looking at a play and making a judgment call on what is good or bad. It’s like an umpire calling balls and strikes. Different evaluators bring different viewpoints to the same scenarios. There is a far greater chance of human error than people want to admit.

That's true of any ranking or performance based criteria. Unlike people using their "eyes" at least PFF/ESPN/NFL.com etc have consistent data they collect and compare it across all games. Most fans, just watch a few games (watch is a loose term as they don't see what every player is doing on every snap) and jump to conclusions. Ranking services are not perfect but they are standardized enough to make legitimate comparisons that go beyond fans' ability from watch games on TV.

6 hours ago, brkmsn said:

It's analytics. It's no different than: https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/34536376/2022-nfl-pass-rushing-run-stopping-blocking-leaderboard-win-rate-rankings-top-players-teams,

When you put a product out there, it has to be desirable if you want people to use it. If PFF and ESPN are just making crap up, they wouldn't have customers or repeat customers. It's in their best interest to be as accurate as possible. There would be no benefit to bias either --- for them or the players / teams. 

Here we are discussing PFF not because anyone is enamored with their analytics, rather it is about how they barely put in the top ten the guy who threw them most touchdowns last week, because according to their bs rules he threw negative throws. This is less about PFF getting it right and more about PFF getting publicity. Publicity is far more important to them than integrity. Heck I’d say the people who make Madden games do a better job than PFF in evaluating talent.  

1 hour ago, kentwo said:

That's true of any ranking or performance based criteria. Unlike people using their "eyes" at least PFF/ESPN/NFL.com etc have consistent data they collect and compare it across all games. Most fans, just watch a few games (watch is a loose term as they don't see what every player is doing on every snap) and jump to conclusions. Ranking services are not perfect but they are standardized enough to make legitimate comparisons that go beyond fans' ability from watch games on TV.

Yeah I don’t see how PFF saying a throw is good or bad is based on anything other than their own view point. That is nowhere near the same as say passer rating that is based on statistical outcomes. They’re not remotely the same. 

There were times during the Brandon Graham is one of the best if not the best pass rushers in football phase of PFF when he didn’t even register a tackle for multiple weeks. Nevertheless the PFF people said he’s the best even though Graham himself never once thought that. The PFF minions (who always seem to praise them, but claim to never pay 🙄) just went with the entire philosophy based on little to no evidence. I remember the (pressures are better than sacks) arguments from the previous board even if some of you don’t. 

Using PFF to make any professional argument is like using Wikipedia to make a college repot. Can you imagine if Jalen Hurts agent tried to use PFF as the reason his client should be paid better than Pat Mahomes? 😂🤣😂

23 minutes ago, EazyEaglez said:

Yeah I don’t see how PFF saying a throw is good or bad is based on anything other than their own view point. 

Yep, they have Hurts rated higher than Mahomes week 1.  I guarantee if you watch both games, you will say WOW 5-10 times watching Mahomes, maybe once watching Hurts.

1 hour ago, EazyEaglez said:

Using PFF to make any professional argument is like using Wikipedia to make a college repot. Can you imagine if Jalen Hurts agent tried to use PFF as the reason his client should be paid better than Pat Mahomes? 😂🤣😂

Hey now, PFF says that Josh Sweat wins his matchups more than like every DE in football. We can tell by his average sack numbers and low QB hits.

Wow you're still discussing the pff rating?

7 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

Wow you're still discussing the pff rating?

Shut up Buzz Killington

4 hours ago, downundermike said:

Yep, they have Hurts rated higher than Mahomes week 1.  I guarantee if you watch both games, you will say WOW 5-10 times watching Mahomes, maybe once watching Hurts.

This is what I hate most about PFF I feel. It’s cause their insanely bad arbitrary opinions force me to feel like I have to bring down Eagles players. I like Brandon Graham, but it seems like I don’t because I don’t agree with their nonsense. 

 

58 minutes ago, EazyEaglez said:

This is what I hate most about PFF I feel. It’s cause their insanely bad arbitrary opinions force me to feel like I have to bring down Eagles players. I like Brandon Graham, but it seems like I don’t because I don’t agree with their nonsense. 

You know you love pressuurreeezzz

3 minutes ago, Bwestbrook36 said:

You know you love pressuurreeezzz

About as much as I love the Chippah! 😂

Looked great on that drive

I don't care what happens I can't stand that cocky sob. Fools Gold anyway. 

This thread is an embarrassment.

Eat $hit, haters, lmfao.

45 minutes ago, Diehardfan said:

I don't care what happens I can't stand that cocky sob. Fools Gold anyway. 

Tell us without saying it out loud. 

So far so good. 1st half was an A+ performance by Hurts.

Hurts looks great.

Good work.

Keep it up.

55 minutes ago, Diehardfan said:

I don't care what happens I can't stand that cocky sob. Fools Gold anyway. 

What the F are you talking about ?

7 minutes ago, Joe Shades 73 said:

What the F are you talking about ?

I think he’s talking about Joe Buck. 

How come nobody gave the vikings the "blueprint" to stopping Hurts?

Hurts has been seriously impressive tonight. Looks in complete control. Must have a high completion % too?

32 minutes ago, Joe Shades 73 said:

What the F are you talking about ?

Hurts is a cocky SOB and I can't stand him. Plus this is BS. His lovers will talk crap after this game and he will go right back to sucking again against good teams because that's who he is.