Quick take, I think you were closer to home when you said "average" than when you said "below average". In this league, average starter actually means pretty good, and that's what Richie is. He's powerful, he's got athleticism, he moves people. He doesn't connect with defensive linemen particularly well but he does a good job. There are players that are no better than Richie Incognito that have ended up in the Pro Bowl in various circumstances. But he still gets too many damn penalties. I'm actually kind of intrigued with the system switch as he hasn't really played this system since the one year he learned it in college as Bill Callahan's center, before he got his own *** booted off the team. Everyone assumes he's not meant for it, because he's really only an average puller. But pulling is not the same as zone blocking and releasing to the second level. There are guys (Artis Hicks among them) who suck at pulling but look pretty good releasing out to the second level and getting on the move for zone blocks. When we do execute man blocking plays with pulling, you can bet Richie will be that puller most of the time, though.
I agree, of course what you say is true, and if someone lets them do their evals for them, then thats a mistake, but the fact that they are watching beginnings and the end of individual plays,and basically telling the outcome, is a bit different then scouting the payer, you know what I mean?
Ritchie is the new Channing. Nothing special but takes years to upgrade because your team usually has a half dozen other priorities.
For example, Pff does a study on how many pressures Cam Wake gets to the Qb, they find by watching every play that, he hit the Qb x amount of times, was held in route to the qb x amount of times, he hurried the Qb x amount of times..To me, you don't have to necessarily have a great eye for scouting talent to come to those conclusions, just have to do the legwork.
That's true but at the same time they're tallying a proprietary ratings system for Cam Wake's play, which is based on observation, and for that you do sort of have to be good at seeing things on a football field.
true, hmmm, I interpret what they do as surmising the play, not necessarily the player..I haven't read things like Cam Wake is the best in the Nfl at dipping his body almost horizontally to get around the corner, is probably pound for pound, the most explosive player in the Nfl, and timing his speed up against backs he's chasing in the flat or down the sideline, I'm guessing a 4.5 forty for the 245 lb player.What I do see and read is stuff like this...on 400 hundred defensive snaps, Cam wake sacked the qb 14 times, hurried the Qb into throwing a completion 22 times, caused a holding penalty 8 times, Hit the Qb 42 times. Your right about that people who are watching should sort of know what their seeing, but I just don't think you have to be as talented as someone like yourself to not only give us those conclusions, but for people like you to trust them somewhat to match up with your own conclusions..
By the way I appreciate the inside view on what PFF does to come up with their ratings and whatnot. I just disagree in that, in the end, the ratings you see are essentially a pair of eyes judging whether a player did something good on a football field or something bad, and it's hardly objective...very subjective.
Yes it is subjective, I agree but know what ? Besides our own indivdual evaluation, its the most reliable to go by. As someone said in this thread, lots of times players that are good as pro bowl players are overlooked. The people looking at the tape certainly probably miss stuff. But, I do not use it as a measuring stick but a lot of outlets do. Its information that they can access quickly and most times whatever is put up is taken as written in stone. I read it here a lot, and other places/outlets, where so and so was charged with a sack. BUT, myself included, if you do not know the play call or where the Olineman was to be, its almost impossible to make a sack call sometimes, responsibility wise. If you look hard, thats why the NFL does not put up FIRM sack stats for Oline. The person dong the review looks at where the Olineman was SUPPOSED TO BE, IN THE REVIWERS MIND and if there is a hole there and someone comes thru, its charged to that Oline when in reality, no one really knows if the Olineman was to slant backwards or to one side or another and someone else had the responsibility to fill that gap. Thats where it gets to be a crap shoot. By far, IMO, Oline are pretty hard to get a firm grade on just because unless we have the play book and know who had what responsibility, we have no clue who was to be in what hole. Know what I am trying to say / For the most part though, the site is pretty darn decent. They gto thru a lengthy process to make sure the person reviewing each postion for each team is not actually a die hard fan of said team.
Im not a stat guy, but one thing about RI, is that he is the only guy on the roster that can routinely stand next to Jake Long and not look like a midget
In my experience, it's really not very often you run into a situation where it's not clear who just gave up a sack. It happens. There are definitely gray area sacks. But not often. That's just my opinion.
Really ?????????? When was the last time a team was interested in Channing ? Channing, in short, was and still is a punk. If he went thru what Incognito did and still was signed as a starter for any team, CFL, indoor arena league , etc. I would give him some slight credit. But, as of this very moment, nobody or no team, has given him the slightest sniff. Difference between Crowder and Incognito ? Incognito can play the game. Channning can run his mouth and it ends there with Channing. Channing if you are reading this, shut your pie hole and put your money where your mouth is, if not, shut the F*&k up and go away. End of story As far as I know the PUNK just announced his retirement. I guess all those teams he mouthed off about being interested changed their minds eh, LMFAO. Dude was an all out punk waste product.
Serious ? Or you like them because their stats are in align with the way you think ? Lets put it this way. Point margins made by those that really count are not garnered from Football Outsiders. The name is exactly what they are, outsiders. They were lucky one guy with some bucks was willing to take a chance to start the site. If not, none of them would have found work because they are ALL cast offs from the better services. By years end the one that funded it to start with will shut it down due to the fact ? Its pretty bad. Please, if you are a working man do not ever follow their advice because that advice is what keeps the lights burning brightly on all the Casinos in Vegas.
Calm down, chief. First off, I find it a little strange that you seem to be inclined to jam PFF ratings down peoples' throats as the bible of how players are actually performing, but then all the sudden you're saying that Channing Crowder was awful. Pro Football Focus gave Channing high ratings when he was playing for Miami. They gave him a +16.9 in 2008 (ranked the #3 best ILB in the NFL out of 46 qualifiers) and a +12.4 in 2010 (ranked #18 out of 50 qualifiers). We really don't know which teams if any were interested in Channing Crowder. He said he had offers on the table but wanted to sit the year out rather than uproot his family when he's got his first child on the way close to being born. It was important to him that he have his family be together. That certainly seemed quite a rational line of reasoning for someone who has already made millions. He's retiring now, which isn't anything that he hasn't already talked about months ago, and according to him it's just his choice. He's lost the will for it. Now of course you're going to assume he's lying. I've certainly never known Channing to be an outright liar, to a fault. But that's your right to assume. Nonetheless I find it weird that you're holding PFF as this gold standard for Richie Incognito and then saying that their #3 rated ILB from 2008 is trash. Among the 27 inside linebackers that played in each of the same years Channing did (2008, 2009 and 2010), Channing ranked #11 of 27 in Overall rating and #6 of 27 against the Run.
No one ever said PFF is the " Gold Standard " but just the same, its a standard. Everything needs a benchmark and yes as I have said, IN MY OPINION, PFF is pretty decent. Anyone can google stats all they want. You could probably drag up about 100 stat sites. All I said is PFF is pretty reliable and yes, many people do use PFF as their standard and have used it for years. Like I said, just opinion but also as I said, find a better one because the NFL teams themselves do not actually assign sacks to individual players. They count sack totals, yes but good OL NFL relies on many outside sources for a lot of stats.
