Week 2: Bears (0-1 wtf) @ 49ers (1-0) Sun Night 7:30 PM NBC

[minnesotacubsfan]

I ......................... was sarcastically commenting on his play quite a bit.

 

huh, I cant picture that

[jersey cubs fan]

I ......................... was sarcastically commenting on his play quite a bit.

 

huh, I cant picture that

 

nice post shea.

 

 

 

 

^^^^^^^^^

It was like that

[minnesotacubsfan]

hahaha that made me chuckle

[UMFan83]

Allen wasn't very good yesterday. The forced fumble was a really good play. But other than that, he didn't do much. Looked like he crashed on read option and LBs had contain for the most part but on the plays I thought it was clear he had contain, he didn't keep it very well. His pash rushing was below average IMO, and he only was a factor when cleaning up the end of Shea's sack (heh) of Kapernick.

 

I confused his skinny ass for Shea on a couple plays and was sarcastically commenting on his play quite a bit.

 

I'm glad I'm not the only one that did this. Especially on the play where Kaepernick first got by Vereen and then danced by Allen. I thought for sure that was Shea.

[Soul]

I appreciate what PFF is trying to do, but I really disagree with a lot of what I've seen so far this year from them.

 

jw which ones you're taking issue with

 

the only one that seemed off to me based on the eye test was allen but they probably know better than me

 

Cutler, Bennett (maybe blocking issues?), and Allen.

 

Had issues with last week too, but I'm not going back to look a that.

 

Perry is a complete dog. How is he only -.01?

 

Also don't understand the Cutler grade. Or Bennett.

 

There are probably others but generally I'm in agreement with Banedon. I don't understand the grading system they are using, and I don't understand why anyone should prefer it over any other system.

 

It feels completely -- or significantly -- arbitrary.

[jersey cubs fan]

I appreciate what PFF is trying to do, but I really disagree with a lot of what I've seen so far this year from them.

 

jw which ones you're taking issue with

 

the only one that seemed off to me based on the eye test was allen but they probably know better than me

 

Cutler, Bennett (maybe blocking issues?), and Allen.

 

Had issues with last week too, but I'm not going back to look a that.

 

Perry is a complete dog. How is he only -.01?

 

Also don't understand the Cutler grade. Or Bennett.

 

There are probably others but generally I'm in agreement with Banedon. I don't understand the grading system they are using, and I don't understand why anyone should prefer it over any other system.

 

It feels completely -- or significantly -- arbitrary.

 

Well, for one, it's kind of the only actual system. That is unless you count beat writers reiterating quotes from the coaches and players about who played well in the game.

[jersey cubs fan]

Allen wasn't very good yesterday. The forced fumble was a really good play. But other than that, he didn't do much. Looked like he crashed on read option and LBs had contain for the most part but on the plays I thought it was clear he had contain, he didn't keep it very well. His pash rushing was below average IMO, and he only was a factor when cleaning up the end of Shea's sack (heh) of Kapernick.

 

I confused his skinny ass for Shea on a couple plays and was sarcastically commenting on his play quite a bit.

 

I'm glad I'm not the only one that did this. Especially on the play where Kaepernick first got by Vereen and then danced by Allen. I thought for sure that was Shea.

 

After the replay I thought, "huh, I didn't know that both Allen and She made the same diving miss on that play." But that may have been booze related. It was a long and very wet day.

[Guest]

 

Perry is a complete dog. How is he only -.01?

 

Also don't understand the Cutler grade. Or Bennett.

 

There are probably others but generally I'm in agreement with Banedon. I don't understand the grading system they are using, and I don't understand why anyone should prefer it over any other system.

 

It feels completely -- or significantly -- arbitrary.

 

Cutler's makes sense just fine. It's not like he was slinging the ball around and creating points all game. He picked it up in the second half, completed some shorter to midrange throws and was dealt a couple of short fields and made the most of it.

 

You shouldn't pay much attention to a guy like Perry who is in for 4-5 plays total.

[Soul]

Well, for one, it's kind of the only actual system. That is unless you count beat writers reiterating quotes from the coaches and players about who played well in the game.

 

So it's a little better than the eye test. I don't knock them for the attempt at putting this together. I just think, like every other attempt, it's not going to really be foolproof. So it needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

 

Part of my response is that I think we are putting a little too much stock in it around here...

[jersey cubs fan]

I think we are putting a little too much stock in it around here...

 

you got a mouse in your pocket?

[Soul]

 

Perry is a complete dog. How is he only -.01?

 

Also don't understand the Cutler grade. Or Bennett.

 

There are probably others but generally I'm in agreement with Banedon. I don't understand the grading system they are using, and I don't understand why anyone should prefer it over any other system.

 

It feels completely -- or significantly -- arbitrary.

 

Cutler's makes sense just fine. It's not like he was slinging the ball around and creating points all game. He picked it up in the second half, completed some shorter to midrange throws and was dealt a couple of short fields and made the most of it.

 

You shouldn't pay much attention to a guy like Perry who is in for 4-5 plays total.

 

Cutler and Marshall loaded the team up on their shoulders and won that game from 17 points down. If that only gets him a .8, then I'm not going to put a whole lot into that system.

[Sammy Sofa]

It's not like most of the first half doesn't count.

[jersey cubs fan]

 

Perry is a complete dog. How is he only -.01?

 

Also don't understand the Cutler grade. Or Bennett.

 

There are probably others but generally I'm in agreement with Banedon. I don't understand the grading system they are using, and I don't understand why anyone should prefer it over any other system.

 

It feels completely -- or significantly -- arbitrary.

 

Cutler's makes sense just fine. It's not like he was slinging the ball around and creating points all game. He picked it up in the second half, completed some shorter to midrange throws and was dealt a couple of short fields and made the most of it.

 

You shouldn't pay much attention to a guy like Perry who is in for 4-5 plays total.

 

Cutler and Marshall loaded the team up on their shoulders and won that game from 17 points down. If that only gets him a .8, then I'm not going to put a whole lot into that system.

 

Fuller did more shouldering than they did.

[Soul]

I think we are putting a little too much stock in it around here...

 

you got a mouse in your pocket?

 

I don't get it.

[Guest]

Well, for one, it's kind of the only actual system. That is unless you count beat writers reiterating quotes from the coaches and players about who played well in the game.

 

So it's a little better than the eye test. I don't knock them for the attempt at putting this together. I just think, like every other attempt, it's not going to really be foolproof. So it needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

 

Part of my response is that I think we are putting a little too much stock in it around here...

 

It is basically the eye test. It's just a recorded on every play version of the eye test.

 

When it comes to football, that makes more sense than a lot of football stats that can be impacted hugely by teammates/scheme and football stuff in general.

 

I buy into boiling it to down to numbers for entire teams/units (like team DVOA on offense, defense, special teams) but I think for individual players those types of systems are highly flawed (i.e. Cutler's individual DVOA in the early Bears years would suffer because of the talent and scheme around him).

 

PFF grading each individual's performance on each play at least boils it down to the individual, even if it is really just attempting to objectively measure the subjective (and i'm sure it's still impacted by those other contextual factors...just seemingly less so).

 

Hope that sort of made sense. I'm not even sure if it does to me.

Edited September 15, 2014 by David

[jersey cubs fan]

I think we are putting a little too much stock in it around here...

 

you got a mouse in your pocket?

 

I don't get it.

 

It is a phrase responding to your use of "we".

[Soul]

Cutler and Marshall loaded the team up on their shoulders and won that game from 17 points down. If that only gets him a .8, then I'm not going to put a whole lot into that system.

 

Fuller did more shouldering than they did.

 

Sure, so his rank makes sense.

 

Cutler had 4 TD passes and 0 INTs. I'm just going to think more of him than PFF does in that case.

[Guest]

Cutler and Marshall loaded the team up on their shoulders and won that game from 17 points down. If that only gets him a .8, then I'm not going to put a whole lot into that system.

 

Fuller did more shouldering than they did.

 

Sure, so his rank makes sense.

 

Cutler had 4 TD passes and 0 INTs. I'm just going to think more of him than PFF does in that case.

 

And that's a flaw in those traditional numbers and the way you're attempting to evaluate them, IMO.

[jersey cubs fan]

Cutler and Marshall loaded the team up on their shoulders and won that game from 17 points down. If that only gets him a .8, then I'm not going to put a whole lot into that system.

 

Fuller did more shouldering than they did.

 

Sure, so his rank makes sense.

 

Cutler had 4 TD passes and 0 INTs. I'm just going to think more of him than PFF does in that case.

 

I hate myself for attempting to do this but if you compare it to baseball think of it like Cutler having 4 HR over 10 games but a really low AVG and OBP with lots of strikeouts as well. He had "clutch" plays but his overall numbers were not that impressive outside the HR that were admittedly awesome.

[Soul]

Well, for one, it's kind of the only actual system. That is unless you count beat writers reiterating quotes from the coaches and players about who played well in the game.

 

So it's a little better than the eye test. I don't knock them for the attempt at putting this together. I just think, like every other attempt, it's not going to really be foolproof. So it needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

 

Part of my response is that I think we are putting a little too much stock in it around here...

 

It is basically the eye test. It's just a recorded on every play version of the eye test.

 

When it comes to football, that makes more sense than a lot of football stats that can be impacted hugely by teammates/scheme and football stuff in general.

 

I buy into boiling it to down to numbers for entire teams (like team DVOA on offense, defense, special teams) but I think for individual players those types of systems are highly flawed (i.e. Cutler's individual DVOA would suffer because of the talent and scheme around him).

 

PFF grading each individual's performance on each play at least boils it down to the individual, even if it is really just attempting to objectively measure the subjective (and i'm sure it's still impacted by those other contextual factors...just seemingly less so).

 

Hope that sort of made sense. I'm not even sure if it does to me.

 

Yeah, I think it does make sense. I'm not saying I don't look at them at all. I do, but over time I'm starting to look at some of these grades and disagree a little more.

[Soul]

Cutler and Marshall loaded the team up on their shoulders and won that game from 17 points down. If that only gets him a .8, then I'm not going to put a whole lot into that system.

 

Fuller did more shouldering than they did.

 

Sure, so his rank makes sense.

 

Cutler had 4 TD passes and 0 INTs. I'm just going to think more of him than PFF does in that case.

 

And that's a flaw in those traditional numbers and the way you're attempting to evaluate them, IMO.

 

Yeah. I just know how hard it is for a lot of QBs to put it in the end zone. Especially in Bears' history.

 

When I see a Bear QB just dealing the TDs I put an awful lot of value on that.

[Soul]

One last comment on this game -- then it's time to move on.

 

If anyone would like a good chuckle this afternoon, go and watch the Harbaugh post-game presser.

[Brian]

Where does it rate on the Dennis Green scale?

[Sammy Sofa]

One last comment on this game -- then it's time to move on.

 

Whut.

[Guest]

One last comment on this game -- then it's time to move on.

 

Whut.

 

Yeah, I'm not moving on from this game for at least a week.