Quote
zn
Quote
dzrams
Quote
zn
Quote
dzrams
I don't know exactly their formula on how they get 3rd but if you factor everything in, I think I see the path. Short answer is, if you have a top 15 O'linemen at every position, the sum of the parts is greater than the whole.
But their individual grades don't add up either. Except for Whitworth they are all anywhere from woeful to just adequate at pass protection.
I have always had issues with PFF OL rankings at least when it comes to the Rams. Last year I argued that 31st didn't make sense either. Usually I say I take a PFF grade as ballpark, but I can't take either 3rd or 31st as ballpark.
And it's not just that they were inconsistent. The way to attack the Rams if you could was to dominate the OL with your DL. The Jets did it, SF did it twice, Green Bay did it.
Yeah, they had a distinctive weakness of being overwhelmed in the interior by some DLs. And that weakness aligned with Goff's weakness of struggling most with interior pressure.
But even acknowledging this, you have four games out of 18 where that happened. And I don't count the Jets game as dominating the entire OL because both OTs did pretty well.
If you take PFF and FO together as a ballpark you still are talking about a top 10ish OL. It sounds like we agree that it certainly wasn't a poor one.
And besides, Outsiders is no longer allowing access to their OL stats so I have no idea how they rank them in pass pro. In years past though they would try to do that simply by counting sacks, which is not a real guideline.
I think it's more the case that for whatever reason you need to/want to believe this OL is top 10 than it is the case that you can make a valid argument supporting seeing them that way. No good OL watcher--and PFF has never been that---would claim that. It's just not top 10. You can tell by watching.
You brought Goff up--and he was productive and without turnovers against that kind of D a couple of times in spite of the OL. Like against the Jets in the 2nd half and against Green Bay. So I wouldn't call it "a weakness" just to keep a mantra going ("it's goff it's goff" ).
And in the games where opposing defenses could play them that way and they lost, it was never just the qb or the OL...it was always something else too. Defense did not come to play in the Jets game. Defense got owned in the Packers game. Defense could not hang on and prevent two late scores in the 2nd SF game. Etc.
....
Well, if there were more than two stat sites we would have their info but I don't know of any others with metrics that measure OL effectiveness.
I don't buy into the idea that one can just look at the OL and make a determination of where it ranks in the league. It falls flat to me to see the goal line situation and say top 10 OLs don't do that. Really? Have you studied in depth all 32 OLs? Cause if not, that's way to subjective for me.
I subscribe to FO and already told you how they ranked the line. The Adjusted Line Yards relates to the run blocking and we ranked 7th. The Adjusted Sack Rate obviously relates to pass pro and we ranked 2nd.
I already made a valid argument why the OL was top 10 and supported it with metrics from sites which you've already acknowledged that you accept as being in the ball park. Unless of course you want to subjectively toss out their metrics when it doesn't fit your narrative. I've seen you routinely use PFF and FO in support of positions when it aligns with your position. Don't play both sides of the fence.
OTOH, you've provided the weakest of arguments. 'It's just not top 10. You can tell by watching' is not an argument and it's certainly not evidence. The only evidence you provide is pointing to two goal line failures with a bogus and unsubstantiated statement that top OLs don't do that.
What you have provided just doesn't stack up against objective metrics from two reliable sources that evaluate every play, from every team (something that you don't do even for one team.)
I think it's more the case that for whatever reason you need to/want to believe this OL was bad because it conveniently fits your narrative of 'it's everyone else but Goff that is the problem.' It's alright. We don't have to agree so keep on believing that. Just don't be surprised if moves are made at QB.