Aaron Rodgers (-0.8) received a lower grade for week three than Eli Manning (2.4), Blake Bortles (-0.7) and Nick Foles (0.8).

they have gone straight into shock and awe territory.

Way too many variables that aren't quantified in order to have a true assessment. The explanation about the Cobb throws in particular stands out to me...on two of those TD's, he checked to that play based on the man-look he saw pre-snap yet they were graded as a 0 because the throw was an easy one. That throw would never have happened if he doesn't check to that call. That's just one example and it applies on so many plays for multiple quarterbacks.

as you mentioned, all the grading is highly subjective but due to them assigning number grades, has been interpreted as objective fact. my biggest issues:

1.) they grade the TV broadcast -- now, they say the watch all-22 later in the week and make adjustments, but it's hard to overcome initial bias. how you grade anybody in pass coverage and most quarterbacks without all-22 tape is beyond me, because you can't. not to the level of specificity they claim. this is actually a near-fatal detriment.

2.) grades swing wildly based on plays with unknown assignments -- the only people that know what the coverage call was are the players and coaches. just because a defensive back looks like he should've rotated over, or looks like he was in man coverage the entire way, doesn't mean there wasn't a bust somewhere else that put him in a bad spot. and if they blame the wrong guy for a 40-yard gain, that puts a huge negative on his grade, possibly for the entire season. same thing goes for quarterbacks who throw to a defender -- was he reading the coverage wrong, or did his receiver run the wrong route?

3.) the mistakes roll downhill -- even their staff admits that a couple bad plays in a few games can turn a decent grade into a negative for the whole year. all this subjectivity is piling on top of each other for better and worse.

I really like the idea of scouting every player for every game, because football is an extremely hard game to quantify (unlike baseball or basketball). but for the past few years the media and fans have been spouting off PFF grades like absolute truths, when they really are as subjective as your or my opinions.

>as you mentioned, all the grading is highly subjective but
>due to them assigning number grades, has been interpreted as
>objective fact. my biggest issues:
>
>1.) they grade the TV broadcast -- now, they say the watch
>all-22 later in the week and make adjustments, but it's hard
>to overcome initial bias. how you grade anybody in pass
>coverage and most quarterbacks without all-22 tape is beyond
>me, because you can't. not to the level of specificity they
>claim. this is actually a near-fatal detriment.

Yeh, this never made any sense to me...it's mind-numblingly stupid to use tv tape to grade a secondary and QBs, as you said.

>
>2.) grades swing wildly based on plays with unknown
>assignments -- the only people that know what the coverage
>call was are the players and coaches. just because a defensive
>back looks like he should've rotated over, or looks like he
>was in man coverage the entire way, doesn't mean there wasn't
>a bust somewhere else that put him in a bad spot. and if they
>blame the wrong guy for a 40-yard gain, that puts a huge
>negative on his grade, possibly for the entire season. same
>thing goes for quarterbacks who throw to a defender -- was he
>reading the coverage wrong, or did his receiver run the wrong
>route?

Yup, more subjective assumptions without any evidence/confirmation to support them.

>3.) the mistakes roll downhill -- even their staff admits that
>a couple bad plays in a few games can turn a decent grade into
>a negative for the whole year. all this subjectivity is piling
>on top of each other for better and worse.

Well-said

>I really like the idea of scouting every player for every
>game, because football is an extremely hard game to quantify
>(unlike baseball or basketball). but for the past few years
>the media and fans have been spouting off PFF grades like
>absolute truths, when they really are as subjective as your or
>my opinions.

And that's really the problem...the perception of PFF as "definitive" because lets face it, most media and fans don't understand the game enough to make any criticisms of it. Of course PFF, from a pure business perspective, isn't going to bring up these problems.

This latest rating really highlights a serious issue with PFF in how it grades QBs as it is rating QB throws without any understanding of why those throws were made in the first place. The AR throw to Ty was rated higher than either of his quick out throws to Cobb but in reality the throws to Cobb (easy throw to achieve your purpose) which were created on his pre-snap read are the ideal....low-risk, all-reward...and based on the QB preparation. If you're penalizing QBs for knowing coverage and adapting as such in order to make the game easier, that goes against common sense to the point of sheer stupidity.

that nickname is so stupid but good.

Perfect for garbage time TDs.

getting married soon aren't you?

because that was the least impressive big-stat performance I have ever seen. I thought Rodgers was lethal as usual last night.
______________________________
http://i.imgur.com/Gj5Wy56.jpg

peace & blessings,

x.

www.twitter.com/poetx

=========================================
I'm an advocate for working smarter, not harder. If you just
focus on working hard you end up making someone else rich and
not having much to show for it. (c) mad