cr8f
Footballguy
Most are based in the UK?
http://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/2009/
FF: I don’t think we’ll ever get a full view on secondary or WR play until the NFL allow us access to game film so we can actually grade each player on each play (I’m led to believe hell will be freezing over shortly so we should be OK). I think until then everything is a fudge to some degree, regardless of the scheme.
That said I think we do more than anyone else with equal access. Most people who delve into advanced type stats will just note down whose in coverage on a play. While we also compile the base stats for coverage we do it more for completeness than anything else. The truth of the matter is we try to use a combination of factors when rating CBs but go more off our grading than anything. The base statistics can tell a lot of lies regardless of whether the coverage is zone, man or some combination. Let me give you a few examples:
· A team run a WR screen at a CB who is in man coverage. The CB is double-teamed by screen blocks and can do nothing but because of missed tackles by other players the screen goes for 80 yards and a TD. The CB was clearly in coverage and hence the yardage goes against him.
· A CB is beaten badly for a reception but the WR then drops the ball.
· Another CB is beaten badly and gives up a 70 yard TD by peeking in the backfield (Chris McAlister has patent pending on this) but the play is called back on a holding call
In the first of these the CB has done nothing wrong and is penalised by having 80 yards and a TD logged against him. In the latter two the CB has been poor but is rewarded with incomplete passes to his credit. Obviously in our grading the CB would not be penalised in the first but marked down significantly in the others....-football-focus://http://www.behindthesteelcurtain.co...-football-focus
http://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/2009/
FF: I don’t think we’ll ever get a full view on secondary or WR play until the NFL allow us access to game film so we can actually grade each player on each play (I’m led to believe hell will be freezing over shortly so we should be OK). I think until then everything is a fudge to some degree, regardless of the scheme.
That said I think we do more than anyone else with equal access. Most people who delve into advanced type stats will just note down whose in coverage on a play. While we also compile the base stats for coverage we do it more for completeness than anything else. The truth of the matter is we try to use a combination of factors when rating CBs but go more off our grading than anything. The base statistics can tell a lot of lies regardless of whether the coverage is zone, man or some combination. Let me give you a few examples:
· A team run a WR screen at a CB who is in man coverage. The CB is double-teamed by screen blocks and can do nothing but because of missed tackles by other players the screen goes for 80 yards and a TD. The CB was clearly in coverage and hence the yardage goes against him.
· A CB is beaten badly for a reception but the WR then drops the ball.
· Another CB is beaten badly and gives up a 70 yard TD by peeking in the backfield (Chris McAlister has patent pending on this) but the play is called back on a holding call
In the first of these the CB has done nothing wrong and is penalised by having 80 yards and a TD logged against him. In the latter two the CB has been poor but is rewarded with incomplete passes to his credit. Obviously in our grading the CB would not be penalised in the first but marked down significantly in the others....-football-focus://http://www.behindthesteelcurtain.co...-football-focus
Last edited by a moderator:
