mattjames2010
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 21,634
- Reaction score
- 20,422
At some point you need to realize spamming this just shows you really have no counter argument.
True, but Einstein never went to space yet was able to figure out many things about space, time and the forces of the universe. I've seen people petting full grown lions. I've never been upclose & personal with a lion but I am able to figure out it isn't a good idea without a whole lot of steel or glass between us regardless of what someone who has petted one might tell me.Or coached an NFL team..... or built and NFL roster ..... or owned an NFL team.... etc... etc...
PFF is a bunch of dudes who have never played football grading people who play football... Not my cup of tea but hey to each their own.
True, but Einstein never went to space yet was able to figure out many things about space, time and the forces of the universe. I've seen people petting full grown lions. I've never been upclose & personal with a lion but I am able to figure out it isn't a good idea without a whole lot of steel or glass between us regardless of what someone who has petted one might tell me.
Point is, its more important to be able to weed out psuedo facts from real facts and then make logical conclusions from those facts. PFF makes an article out of a mix of psuedo facts and facts and hey it sounds reasonable until you balance it against reality. Zeke was ranked by his peers as the 7th best player in the league after his rookie season. 54th after the suspension shortened sophomore season. And i would suspect somewhere between those two spots when the next rankings are revealed. He has led the league in rushing two of the three years & likely would have or been very close in his 2nd season if not for the suspension bull crap. You don't do those things in the NFL as the 30th best back. He is universally regarded as a top 3 RB and many would argue that he is the best all around back. To rank him 30th among running backs is a demonstration as to why PFF has lost credibility.
“Sure Emmitt’s good, but let me tell you why Charlie Garner is better”I get the feeling they would have ranked Emmitt Smith in his prime as low as they rank Elliott because of the argument that he should get more yards because of his offensive line.
Emmit was not a tackle breaker and often when down on first contact and was not a long HR threat at all.I get the feeling they would have ranked Emmitt Smith in his prime as low as they rank Elliott because of the argument that he should get more yards because of his offensive line.
For the record, I do think he’s top 3, maybe even top 2 with Barkley being 1. Obviously that can change year to year based on several factors.I have no problem with your opinion. But I will find fault with anyone who excludes Zeke as one of the best. If he is not in the discussion there is a problem with whatever formula your using, that was my point.
Saquon had many, many more receptions than Zeke so it could be argued he actually had a higher workload and our injured O line was still light years better then the Giants starting O line. They also had a middling passing game since Odiva was out a good portion of the season.
What happens is that people largely would agree with PFF rankings but focus on outliers.I'm just guessing, but it seems like we ran out of "11" personnel more often later in the season, which would bring down the percentage of total runs with 8+ in the box.
The difference is that I'd at least try to make sense. But then, I'm not rushing to put out product.
https://cowboyszone.com/threads/pffs-top-rated-qbs-through-2-weeks.357474/page-2#post-6839142
https://cowboyszone.com/threads/pffs-top-rated-qbs-through-2-weeks.357474/page-2#post-6841335
What happens is that people largely would agree with PFF rankings but focus on outliers.
Also you can have a great traditional passer rating and play poorly. Just this past year on Monday night Mariota had a "perfect" passer rating. If you watched that game and thought he played well I have a bridge to sell you.
But fundamentally at odds is to state "PFF is great data collection but terrible player rankings."
Given that PFF's data collection is inherently qualitative...what was a pressure....what was catchable....what was accurate....was that a good run block...etc....trusting them to get that qualitative data correct but then to somehow be "oh em gee so worthless" in their rankings is intellectually inconsistent.
Ok, not “many, many more receptions” but still more. So what’s your point? Barkley still had more all purpose yards.Zeke: 304 rushes, 77 catches, 381 total touches
Saquon: 261 rushes, 91 catches, 352 total touches.
Zeke had about an extra game and a half worth of touches versus Barkley.
The fact that teams specifically game planned towards making stopping him their top priority.Zeke had 50+ more carries than the RB behind him. That's why he led the league in rushing - if Barkley had similar carries, he would have topped Zeke.
And when did 1,400 rushing yards become spectacular? When did getting 6 rushing TDs on 300+ TDs become anything more than mediocre?
What exactly did Zeke do in 2018 that makes you think he was anything more than just a good RB with large amount of carries?
Ok, not “many, many more receptions” but still more. So what’s your point? Barkley still had more all purpose yards.
The fact that teams specifically game planned towards making stopping him their top priority.
The fact that this article has to explain their rating pretty much sums up their fears of what we might think about them as a whole. It shows their system is flawed and judging by the tone of the writer, they know it too.
Zeke Elliott has led the NFL 2 out of 3 years. The year he didn't was due to a suspension and has done so with an erratic qb. Some of you claiming "we shouldn't sign him again" will get a reality check when he leaves and this becomes Prescott's team. I could make a case that Elliott deserves a contract extension more than any other person this offseason.