Rat
Well-known member
Good thing Cable is so great.
Smellyman":2vh8thgr said:and quit saying this was the best OL perfromance.
RW was still getting drilled and couldn't run the ball.
Smellyman":wvh3y9jv said:and quit saying this was the best OL perfromance.
RW was still getting drilled and couldn't run the ball.
Cartire":1i2k2isg said:Smellyman":1i2k2isg said:and quit saying this was the best OL perfromance.
RW was still getting drilled and couldn't run the ball.
He wasnt sacked once.
LymonHawk":1zwup3zh said:Well, if you agree with their rankings for OL, shouldn't you also agree with their QB rankings? Or do you just get to cherry pick what you like and disregard what you don't?
Anyone want to answer that one?
hawknation2015":2gja3n49 said:LymonHawk":2gja3n49 said:Well, if you agree with their rankings for OL, shouldn't you also agree with their QB rankings? Or do you just get to cherry pick what you like and disregard what you don't?
Anyone want to answer that one?
All of PFF's grades have weaknesses. Their QB grades are probably the weakest of the weak because of how much goes into playing QB that is not included in their evaluations, i.e. pre-snap reads, protections, audibles, short throws to receivers in space, etc. They also make these evaluations before viewing the All-22, which means they are limited to viewing a small portion of the field.
LymonHawk":20woh868 said:hawknation2015":20woh868 said:LymonHawk":20woh868 said:Well, if you agree with their rankings for OL, shouldn't you also agree with their QB rankings? Or do you just get to cherry pick what you like and disregard what you don't?
Anyone want to answer that one?
All of PFF's grades have weaknesses. Their QB grades are probably the weakest of the weak because of how much goes into playing QB that is not included in their evaluations, i.e. pre-snap reads, protections, audibles, short throws to receivers in space, etc. They also make these evaluations before viewing the All-22, which means they are limited to viewing a small portion of the field.
Thanks, 2015.
So if we believe their grades have weaknesses, why do we put stock in them?
Personally, I don't believe in the grading thing. It's just another ruse to obtain clicks.
Anthony!":e0fet7o6 said:Hawkpower":e0fet7o6 said:iigakusei":e0fet7o6 said:That is the thing that is so frustrating - we don't even need a good OL let alone great. We just need a somewhat serviceable line. How hard can it be?
More challenging when you have large chunks of money in your QB, RB, Dline, Linebackers and Secondary.
You can make a legitimate argument that the oline is more important than some of these areas, but considering the players are now signed, locked and loaded, it is what it is for this year.
We either restructure the areas of the team next year so that you weaken one spot for the benefit of the line, or we hope to hit a homerun while bargain shopping.
But this is why some cringed when money was given out to certain individuals. The oline we now are stuck with is the consequence.
They had virtually nothing tied up in QB for the last 3 years so not much of an excuse. Nor should it have been why some cringed, They had 3+ years to fix the oline. They have no excuses at all.
NorthDallas40oz":3tubljsb said:You reap what you sow.
Dallas is #1 on the list, and 80% of their OL consists of three 1st-rounders and a fourth would-have-been 1st rounder (La'el Collins).
Seattle is dead last, and 80% of their OL consists of an undrafted college DT in the MAC conference who had never appeared in an NFL game, an undrafted college TE who was a part-time-starting OT as a senior and who didn't play any meaningful snaps as a rookie last season, a 7th round college DT who has been a middling OG thus far in his career, and a 2nd round pick who was a MAJOR reach that everyone else had graded as a 3rd day pick, and who was a disaster for the better part of his rookie season.
The OL has been neglected for years now, under a false belief that Tom Cable can turn water into wine. And now we're all paying the price for it.
mikeak":2puzkgef said:Funny how many times I and others were told to shut it and our o-line was fine since we had been to two superbowls....
NorthDallas40oz":q5rudvie said:You reap what you sow.
Dallas is #1 on the list, and 80% of their OL consists of three 1st-rounders and a fourth would-have-been 1st rounder (La'el Collins).
Seattle is dead last, and 80% of their OL consists of an undrafted college DT in the MAC conference who had never appeared in an NFL game, an undrafted college TE who was a part-time-starting OT as a senior and who didn't play any meaningful snaps as a rookie last season, a 7th round college DT who has been a middling OG thus far in his career, and a 2nd round pick who was a MAJOR reach that everyone else had graded as a 3rd day pick, and who was a disaster for the better part of his rookie season.
The OL has been neglected for years now, under a false belief that Tom Cable can turn water into wine. And now we're all paying the price for it.
Hawkpower":1553g7or said:mikeak":1553g7or said:Funny how many times I and others were told to shut it and our o-line was fine since we had been to two superbowls....
The comment I saw often was that our oline has not been good in this run, and yet we have gone to two superbowls.
Which is true.
Has something changed to prompt your comment?