forums

PFF is the Miami of Football Metrics

Advertisement
1mg of Epi said:
They don’t account for competition when rating players.
Click to expand...
Most every problem with any kind of analytic/metric/KPI squarely falls into the "doesn't account for" category.

But if PFF is trying to be accepted as respectable, they might want to try a little harder.
 
JD08 said:
Most every problem with any kind of analytic/metric/KPI squarely falls into the "doesn't account for" category.

But if PFF is trying to be accepted as respectable, they might want to try a little harder.
Click to expand...

Right - and the biggest aspect they cannot account for is the call. They don’t know which play call or defensive call is made - so how do they know who was supposed to block who, which gap each player was responsible for, etc. someone could make a good play by chance but actually blow their assignment while another guy could handle his responsibility 100% correct but look bad bc someone else blew theirs. The only people who can accurately rate each play are the coaches of those teams. I look less at outcomes and more at individual performance within the play and try to understand what I think each person was responsible for.
 
Hall was third team? Safety play in the ACC must be really ******* bad. 4th and 17.. multiple missed tackles per game. For me he was the most disappointing player on the defense.
 
My biggest problem with PFF is total lack of context. Say you have a blind side OT who gets beat virtually every time on a 3rd down drop back pass and this leads to a plethora of sacks. At the same time, that OT nails every one of his blocks on other downs. PFF might have him as man of the match when in reality he is costing the team severely in key situations.
 
PFF is far from perfect.

But at least it has the benefit of being Analytic + Subjective, whereas the All-ACC voting by coaches & media is purely subjective.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top