Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

PFF Scores week 3


Solid84

Recommended Posts

Just some clarification first.

 

  1. Player grades are for game 3 against Baltimore alone - not the cumulative scores for the season.
  2. Player grades are the Overall grades for the players. I'll make comments on other grades without posting them.

 

For reference the baseline grade is 60.0 - the average.

 

I'll try to rank non-overall Player grades as follows:

  • Elite
  • Great
  • Good
  • Above Average
  • Average
  • Below average
  • Bad

Fewer grades under average because once you get into that area under "Below average" there's not much point in grading it - it's just not good enough.

 

Hope this is okay @w87r. Otherwise let me know and I'll change it. :thmup:

 

                                                                                                                                           

 

Grades for Offense, Defense and ST

 

Offense -  week 3 (week2/week 1)

  • 55.2 (74.7/53.1) - Overall Offense 
  • 49.3 (80.6/49.2) - Passing
  • 65.3 (70.9/68.3) - Pass blocking 
  • 62.3 (63.2/57.1) - Reciever routes 
  • 61.4 (67.4/38.8) - Run game
  • 45.4 (82.9/62.3) - Run blocking

 

Overall worse especially in the passing department. Not really a surprise considering the opponent and the weather. Interestingly the Run game "out ran" the Run blocking.

 

Defense -  week 3 (week2/week 1)

  • 57.7 (62.3/78.9) - Overall Defense 
  • 43.1 (74.4/83.4) - Run defense 
  • 39.0 (51.8/66.4) - Tackling 
  • 67.4 (72.5/73.3) - Passrush
  • 62.1 (50.0/66.2) - Coverage 

 

Overall worse especially Tackling is a concern in my opinion. Coverage went up with Brents taking over for Baker.

 

Special Teams - week 3 (week2/week 1)

  • 54.7 (69.8/78.3) - Special Teams 

 

                                                                                                                                           

 

Overall grades for Players with some commentary.

 

 

Offense

QB 

  • Minshew - Not much to say. A tough outing, but I think he did as well as could be expect. A good backup.

 

Oline

  • Raimann - Great pass blocking from Raimann. He's actually improved each week from week 1. Average run blocking this game. No penalties
  • Nelson  - Great pass blocking. Between Raimann and Nelson the weak side is locked down tight. Run blocking just barely dipped into bad this game. He was below average last week. I'm not sure about this grade - it seems whenever we NEED the short yardage we run behind Q. Doesn't really add up with his grade? 1 penalty - Was that on a run play? Might be the reason for his low grade.
  • French  - Average pass blocking and bad run blocking. Definitely a weak spot on the Oline.
  • Fries  - Great pass blocking and bad run blocking. A lot like Nelson's grade last week. What's interesting is that run blocking seems to affect the overall score for a lineman a lot more than the pass blocking. 1 penalty.
  • Sills - Only had 18 snaps, but his pass blocking was bad and his run blocking below average. No penalties.
  • Smith - Bad pass blocking and below average run blocking. Just a bad game from Smith really. 2 penalties.

 

WR - Hands comments are based on grades for catchable throws caught and ball security. 

  • Downs  - Good hands and bad run blocking.
  • McKenzie  - Limited snaps (1).
  • Pierce  - Average hands. Our best run blocking receiver this year.
  • Pittman  - Good hands this game. His run blocking has been bad all year.

 

TE - Hands comments are based on grades for catchable throws caught and ball security. 

  • Cox - Average hands and bad pass blocking. Average run blocking.
  • Granson - Bad hands mainly driven by not catching catchable throws and he's credited with a drop. Average run blocking.
  • Ogletree - Good hands and good pass blocking. Average run blocking.

 

RB - Hands comments are based on grades for catchable throws caught and ball security. 

  • Moss  - Bad performance in the passing game, but average as a runner. Great hands - took care of the ball in traffic. I thought he did well this game.
  • Sermon  - Mainly knocked for his performance in the passing game. Was an average runner and great in pass protection. Limited snaps (5).

 

Smith had a bad game. Raimann, Nelson and Fries were great in pass blocking. French was a weak spot in general. Overall a bad game for run blocking. Besides Pittman our WRs were pretty forgettable this game and so were our TEs. I thought Moss played better than his grade suggests.

 

 

Defense

DI

  • Buckner  - Average passrush otherwise bad grades across the line. His tackling was especially bad this game.
  • Stewart - Above average run defense and good tackling. average passrush and coverage.
  • Bryan - Average run defense but good tackling and passrush. Has improved each week overall.
  • Johnson - Just bad this week.

 

ED

  • Martin - Below average to bad. Limited snaps though (8).
  • Paye  - Bad run defense and tackling. Average passrush.
  • Ebukam  - Good run defense and great passrush. Bad tackling though.
  • Lewis - Good run defense and tackling but below average passrush. Limited snaps (12).
  • Odeyingbo  - Average run defense and passrush but good tackling.

 

LB

  • Speed  - Bad run defense and coverage. Below average tackling and passrush. That's two bad games in a row for Speed.
  • Franklin - Below average to bad run defense, tackling AND coverage. Above average passrush. Not really a good game for him.
  • Leonard  - Bad run defense and coverage. Below average passrush. Great tackling.
  • Stuard  - Limited snaps (3).

 

CB

  • Moore  - Average run defense. Bad tackling. Below average passrush. Good coverage.
  • Flowers - Good run defense, tackling AND coverage.
  • Brents - Average run defense and tackling but elite coverage.

 

S

  • Blackmon  - Average run defense and coverage. Bad tackling and passrush.
  • Cross  - Limited snaps (3).
  • Thomas  - Bad run defense and tackling. Below average coverage. Not a good game for Thomas.

 

Overall tackling was pretty bad for our defense. Something to work on for our guys. Our CBs were good+ in coverage - good job from our young guys this game. Our LBs had problems with both tackling and coverage.

 

 

 

 

*****Mod Edited out PFF grades 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Hawkeyecolt said:

How do they give Leonard good tackling?😂 He had two solos and was on skates all day. Basically fell on some assists. 

Sorry but he gave him great tackling. I agree with you with you the great tackling doesn't make sense to  go along with " Bad run defense and coverage. Below average pass rush." He ended up with 2 solos.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Hawkeyecolt said:

How do they give Leonard good tackling?😂 He had two solos and was on skates all day. Basically fell on some assists. 

 

5 minutes ago, hoosierhawk said:

Sorry but he gave him great tackling. I agree with you with you the great tackling doesn't make sense to  go along with " Bad run defense and coverage. Below average pass rush." He ended up with 2 solos.

Based on PFF's grades. Leonard had 3 Tackles and 3 Assists. 0 Missed tackles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, hoosierhawk said:

 

According Bleacher Report he had 2 solos and 5 assists. Maybe that extra solo made him great.

Sure, but PFF grades based on their own observations, so...

 

The grade for tackles is solely based on his tackling - when he has the opportunity to tackle, does he make the tackle?

 

Run defense is among other things based on if he's a factor in a run play - does he close off running lanes etc?

 

Coverage is based on his ability to nullify plays without the receiver actually getting the ball. He was targeted 5 times for 5 catches and 57 yards.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

Interestingly the Run game "out ran" the Run blocking.

Moss. 

 

He's a quality RB.  What he lacks in the more popular athletic traits I think he makes up for with vision and balance.  Body control to avoid getting a direct hit, and he was able to make that catch.   I thought he was a good RB in BUF, but I think they got tired of him getting hurt and being unavailable. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Solid84 said:

Raimann 73.3 - Great pass blocking from Raimann. He's actually improved each week from week 1. Average run blocking this game. No penalties

This has pretty much been his grades for all three games.  And better PB than RB.  He's been grading out as our best Olineman?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Moss. 

 

He's a quality RB.  What he lacks in the more popular athletic traits I think he makes up for with vision and balance.  Body control to avoid getting a direct hit, and he was able to make that catch.   I thought he was a good RB in BUF, but I think they got tired of him getting hurt and being unavailable. 

 

Did you see the play near the left sideline where Moss got mauled about 5 yds behind the LOS. He stayed on his feet running backwards back to the LOS, turns around and runs strait for a 5 yd gain....IMO he played a great game.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, DougDew said:

This has pretty much been his grades for all three games.  And better PB than RB.  He's been grading out as our best Olineman?

I think across all 3 games he's been our best Olineman, yes.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Moss. 

 

He's a quality RB.  What he lacks in the more popular athletic traits I think he makes up for with vision and balance.  Body control to avoid getting a direct hit, and he was able to make that catch.   I thought he was a good RB in BUF, but I think they got tired of him getting hurt and being unavailable. 


Maybe Buffalo wasn’t tired of Moss at all.  Maybe Buffalo liked Moss.   Maybe they traded a good player that they liked to acquire another good player that they wanted.   You know, the Colts player you never liked….   Nyheim Hines.   
 

Isn’t that possible?   

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, NewColtsFan said:


Maybe Buffalo wasn’t tired of Moss at all.  Maybe Buffalo liked Moss.   Maybe they traded a good player that they liked to acquire another good player that they wanted.   You know, the Colts player you never liked….   Nyheim Hines.   
 

Isn’t that possible?   

Very possible. As the saying goes, “in order for something to be gained, something must be lost”. I think they liked Hines’ pass catching skills as a good pairing with Allen. Probably would’ve worked out well this year if it weren’t for the injury…

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Solid84 said:

Hope this is okay @w87r. Otherwise let me know and I'll change it. :thmup:

Weekly grades are premium(paid) content. Appreciate the work, but we can't post this. PFF charges $120 a year for their premium content and you are giving it away by posting it here.

 

 

The only free grades, are the season cumulative totals, and top positional graded players (ie, all Kelly's grades last week were posted because he ranked #1)

 

 

Sometimes some other outlets post like top/worse grades for the the week, or some other random tweets. It's fine to use those post to highlight a few players weekly scores, but we can't be posting all these.

 

Again though, you can't just give away the premium (paid) content.

 

 

Sorry everyone, trust me I like to see them as well, but I, like you, have the option and going to pay for them if I want the premium grades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


Maybe Buffalo wasn’t tired of Moss at all.  Maybe Buffalo liked Moss.   Maybe they traded a good player that they liked to acquire another good player that they wanted.   You know, the Colts player you never liked….   Nyheim Hines.   
 

Isn’t that possible?   

No, it isn't possible.  BUF traded a guy who wasn't playing for them, plus a draft pick, for a player that is good for kickoffs and being able to make an occasional big play because of speed. 

 

Moss is showing you what a backup RB should be, which is why I was always correct in not liking Hines, and so many others got it wrong.  Ballard finally figured it out, and some fans are starting to as well.

 

BTW, its nice to see how our LT play is elevating the entire oline success.  You know, because LT is the only oline position that, by itself, is impactful.  So when we had AC the line was good.  When he left, it sucked.  Now we have a LT who gets better grades than the LG position, and the line is pretty good again.  Its almost as if the LT play is the key to the oline and LG can be journeyman quality....almost.  Go figure. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Always liked the Taven Bryan signing, started 16 games last season and allows our bigs in the middle some rest with out much fall off in production. He's on pace for double digit sacks.

 

Ebukum with very impressive numbers.

 

If Thomas doesnt pick up his numbers we may see Nick Cross getting his shot sooner rather then later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, w87r said:

Weekly grades are premium(paid) content. Appreciate the work, but we can't post this. PFF charges $120 a year for their premium content and you are giving it away by posting it here.

 

 

The only free grades, are the season cumulative totals, and top positional graded players (ie, all Kelly's grades last week were posted because he ranked #1)

 

 

Sometimes some other outlets post like top/worse grades for the the week, or some other random tweets. It's fine to use those post to highlight a few players weekly scores, but we can't be posting all these.

 

Again though, you can't just give away the premium (paid) content.

 

 

Sorry everyone, trust me I like to see them as well, but I, like you, have the option and going to pay for them if I want the premium grades.

Is that the cumulative totals for the team AND the players or just one of them?

 

As I'll edit the OP if I can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, DougDew said:

No, it isn't possible.  BUF traded a guy who wasn't playing for them, plus a draft pick, for a player that is good for kickoffs and being able to make an occasional big play because of speed. 

 

Moss is showing you what a backup RB should be, which is why I was always correct in not liking Hines, and so many others got it wrong.  Ballard finally figured it out, and some fans are starting to as well.

 

BTW, its nice to see how our LT play is elevating the entire oline success.  You know, because LT is the only oline position that, by itself, is impactful.  So when we had AC the line was good.  When he left, it sucked.  Now we have a LT who gets better grades than the LG position, and the line is pretty good again.  Its almost as if the LT play is the key to the oline and LG can be journeyman quality....almost.  Go figure. 

 

 


Are you serious?   
 

You lost me at the first sentence.   “No, it’s not possible.”

 

 Sorry, but even for that response is astonishing.   But since you’re all 100 percent adamant that you have this aced, I’ll stop here.   Not point going any further, there’s literally nothing to agree on. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Solid84 said:

Is that the cumulative totals for the team AND the players or just one of them?

 

As I'll edit the OP if I can.

Just hold off for now.

 

I'm having it looked at for confirmation.

 

 

I was referring to cumulative player totals. You may be able to see the team cumulative as well, IDK? Never looked, but essentially if you can't go to PFF and see a players grade, it is premium. If it has a lock on it, it is premium.

 

 

Anyone can go to PFF right now and see a cumulative players grade(although week 3 not updated till tomorrow, I believe), without having to sign into an account or anything. So that is free to the public information.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:


Are you serious?   
 

You lost me at the first sentence.   “No, it’s not possible.”

 

 Sorry, but even for that response is astonishing.   But since you’re all 100 percent adamant that you have this aced, I’ll stop here.   Not point going any further, there’s literally nothing to agree on. 

You attack me out of the blue.  I swat it away.  And now you pretend you didn't read it.   You wrote your post like you were not planning on agreeing with anything I said.  LOL

 

Moss and Hines are two different players.  Moss is a backup RB, and Hines is a player that makes big plays when the defense is spread out, but he kinda sucks when it isn't.  Allen's running ability and arm talent makes the defense spread out.  To BUF, Hines has more value to them than a backup part time chain mover.    BUF got two great kick returns when they needed big plays.  And gave up a guy who didn't add much to their kind of offense.

 

And during a SB run, a team always pays a more expensive price, so the Colts got more than we gave.  It was a great trade for both teams.  Both teams knew exactly what they were getting in each player.  The trade makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree these numbers do not all seem to reflect the game. We did only score 1 TD and left many points on the table. Like I said in an another post Minshew was just awful at times but he toughed it out and made enough plays to win. As coach said AR is our starting QB and Minshew is the back up 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, DougDew said:

You attack me out of the blue.  I swat it away.  And now you pretend you didn't read it.   You wrote your post like you were not planning on agreeing with anything I said.  LOL

 

Moss and Hines are two different players.  Moss is a backup RB, and Hines is a player that makes big plays when the defense is spread out, but he kinda sucks when it isn't.  Allen's running ability and arm talent makes the defense spread out.  To BUF, Hines has more value to them than a backup part time chain mover.    BUF got two great kick returns when they needed big plays.  And gave up a guy who didn't add much to their kind of offense.

 

And during a SB run, a team always pays a more expensive price, so the Colts got more than we gave.  It was a great trade for both teams.  Both teams knew exactly what they were getting in each player.  The trade makes sense.


Doug….   I read the entire post.   I’m not pretending anything.   But when your first sentence was “No, it’s not possible” that was the moment your argument failed.   The first sentence.   But I read the entire list, which was more like a rant.  
 

You offered up that LT is the only position that impacts the level of play for the entire line.   Apparently you forgot 2018, 19 and 20, when Quenton Nelson was arguably the best lineman in football, certainly the best guard in football and clearly and obviously impacted the quality of the Colts line.   But not according to you.  
 

If you write something to me, I read it.  In this case you’re 100 percent certain of your view, so there was no point in responding point by point.   There was nothing to discuss.   Why waste our time.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, DougDew said:

You attack me out of the blue.  I swat it away.  And now you pretend you didn't read it.   You wrote your post like you were not planning on agreeing with anything I said.  LOL

 

Moss and Hines are two different players.  Moss is a backup RB, and Hines is a player that makes big plays when the defense is spread out, but he kinda sucks when it isn't.  Allen's running ability and arm talent makes the defense spread out.  To BUF, Hines has more value to them than a backup part time chain mover.    BUF got two great kick returns when they needed big plays.  And gave up a guy who didn't add much to their kind of offense.

 

And during a SB run, a team always pays a more expensive price, so the Colts got more than we gave.  It was a great trade for both teams.  Both teams knew exactly what they were getting in each player.  The trade makes sense.

 
 

By the way, the idea that I “attacked you out of the blue” is also pretty stunning.   All I asked was it not possible to have another view of the trade, another perspective.    To you, that was an attack.  
 

There simply isn’t much to discuss. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:


Are you serious?   
 

You lost me at the first sentence.   “No, it’s not possible.”

 

 Sorry, but even for that response is astonishing.   But since you’re all 100 percent adamant that you have this aced, I’ll stop here.   Not point going any further, there’s literally nothing to agree on. 

Doug chuckling homer simpson GIF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 
 

By the way, the idea that I “attacked you out of the blue” is also pretty stunning.   All I asked was it not possible to have another view of the trade, another perspective.    To you, that was an attack.  
 

There simply isn’t much to discuss. 

Sorry.  Yes, there is another perspective to have.  It would be called the wrong perspective.  

 

Two players.  The big play maker has value in open spaces created by a QB and Diggs having to be defended all over the field.  As opposed to being useless on a team with a statue and no receiving threats going against a stacked box. 

 

The other guy is much better at being a backup RB. 

 

GMs know this stuff and make equitable trades between teams.  OTOH, fans might think that one fleeced the other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Sorry.  Yes, there is another perspective to have.  It would be called the wrong perspective.  

 

Two players.  The big play maker has value in open spaces created by a QB and Diggs having to be defended all over the field.  As opposed to being useless on a team with a statue and no receiving threats going against a stacked box. 

 

The other guy is much better at being a backup RB. 

 

GMs know this stuff and make equitable trades between teams.  OTOH, fans might think that one fleeced the other.

Which GM thinks they were fleeced in the Hines Moss trade?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, w87r said:

Weekly grades are premium(paid) content. Appreciate the work, but we can't post this. PFF charges $120 a year for their premium content and you are giving it away by posting it here.

 

FYI, I was offered a 40% off annual subscription before draft time this year.  I think the full annual subscription price is $80.  Probably $120 if you go monthly for the entire year (unless there is another more premium tier that I'm unaware of).

 

I subscribed and was charged $48 for the yearly subscription (April 2023 - April 2024).  Just FYI for those who might be interested.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DougDew said:

No, it isn't possible.  BUF traded a guy who wasn't playing for them, plus a draft pick, for a player that is good for kickoffs and being able to make an occasional big play because of speed. 

 

Moss is showing you what a backup RB should be, which is why I was always correct in not liking Hines, and so many others got it wrong.  Ballard finally figured it out, and some fans are starting to as well.

 

BTW, its nice to see how our LT play is elevating the entire oline success.  You know, because LT is the only oline position that, by itself, is impactful.  So when we had AC the line was good.  When he left, it sucked.  Now we have a LT who gets better grades than the LG position, and the line is pretty good again.  Its almost as if the LT play is the key to the oline and LG can be journeyman quality....almost.  Go figure. 

 

 

Wow.  It's always amazing reading your bad takes.    I think Hines could have been really good here,  but moss is better .  

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, #12. said:

In giving up only 19 points, those are the worst defensive grades I've ever seen.

 

Do you follow PFF closely? These defensive grades are actually pretty decent. We had 2 elite graded players (super rare), 5 good/great, 5 average.

 

I can't say for sure but I'd be willing to bet that Juju set the highest PFF grade for a rookie CB in his first game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Solid84 said:

Just some clarification first.

 

  1. Player grades are for game 3 against Baltimore alone - not the cumulative scores for the season.
  2. Player grades are the Overall grades for the players. I'll make comments on other grades without posting them.

 

For reference the baseline grade is 60.0 - the average.

 

I'll try to rank non-overall Player grades as follows:

  • Elite
  • Great
  • Good
  • Above Average
  • Average
  • Below average
  • Bad

Fewer grades under average because once you get into that area under "Below average" there's not much point in grading it - it's just not good enough.

 

Hope this is okay @w87r. Otherwise let me know and I'll change it. :thmup:

 

                                                                                                                                           

 

Grades for Offense, Defense and ST

 

Offense -  week 3 (week2/week 1)

  • 55.2 (74.7/53.1) - Overall Offense 
  • 49.3 (80.6/49.2) - Passing
  • 65.3 (70.9/68.3) - Pass blocking 
  • 62.3 (63.2/57.1) - Reciever routes 
  • 61.4 (67.4/38.8) - Run game
  • 45.4 (82.9/62.3) - Run blocking

 

Overall worse especially in the passing department. Not really a surprise considering the opponent and the weather. Interestingly the Run game "out ran" the Run blocking.

 

Defense -  week 3 (week2/week 1)

  • 57.7 (62.3/78.9) - Overall Defense 
  • 43.1 (74.4/83.4) - Run defense 
  • 39.0 (51.8/66.4) - Tackling 
  • 67.4 (72.5/73.3) - Passrush
  • 62.1 (50.0/66.2) - Coverage 

 

Overall worse especially Tackling is a concern in my opinion. Coverage went up with Brents taking over for Baker.

 

Special Teams - week 3 (week2/week 1)

  • 54.7 (69.8/78.3) - Special Teams 

 

                                                                                                                                           

 

Overall grades for Players with some commentary.

 

 

Offense

QB 

  • Minshew 49.8 - Not much to say. A tough outing, but I think he did as well as could be expect. A good backup.

 

Oline

  • Raimann 73.3 - Great pass blocking from Raimann. He's actually improved each week from week 1. Average run blocking this game. No penalties
  • Nelson 54.5 - Great pass blocking. Between Raimann and Nelson the weak side is locked down tight. Run blocking just barely dipped into bad this game. He was below average last week. I'm not sure about this grade - it seems whenever we NEED the short yardage we run behind Q. Doesn't really add up with his grade? 1 penalty - Was that on a run play? Might be the reason for his low grade.
  • French 47.0 - Average pass blocking and bad run blocking. Definitely a weak spot on the Oline.
  • Fries 50.0 - Great pass blocking and bad run blocking. A lot like Nelson's grade last week. What's interesting is that run blocking seems to affect the overall score for a lineman a lot more than the pass blocking. 1 penalty.
  • Sills 48.4 - Only had 18 snaps, but his pass blocking was bad and his run blocking below average. No penalties.
  • Smith 45.6 - Bad pass blocking and below average run blocking. Just a bad game from Smith really. 2 penalties.

 

WR - Hands comments are based on grades for catchable throws caught and ball security. 

  • Downs 64.3 - Good hands and bad run blocking.
  • McKenzie 58.8 - Limited snaps (1).
  • Pierce 61.1 - Average hands. Our best run blocking receiver this year.
  • Pittman 71.8 - Good hands this game. His run blocking has been bad all year.

 

TE - Hands comments are based on grades for catchable throws caught and ball security. 

  • Cox 49.8 - Average hands and bad pass blocking. Average run blocking.
  • Granson 46.1 - Bad hands mainly driven by not catching catchable throws and he's credited with a drop. Average run blocking.
  • Ogletree 65.6 - Good hands and good pass blocking. Average run blocking.

 

RB - Hands comments are based on grades for catchable throws caught and ball security. 

  • Moss 60.1 - Bad performance in the passing game, but average as a runner. Great hands - took care of the ball in traffic. I thought he did well this game.
  • Sermon 49.0 - Mainly knocked for his performance in the passing game. Was an average runner and great in pass protection. Limited snaps (5).

 

Smith had a bad game. Raimann, Nelson and Fries were great in pass blocking. French was a weak spot in general. Overall a bad game for run blocking. Besides Pittman our WRs were pretty forgettable this game and so were our TEs. I thought Moss played better than his grade suggests.

 

 

Defense

DI

  • Buckner 46.8 - Average passrush otherwise bad grades across the line. His tackling was especially bad this game.
  • Stewart 71.0 - Above average run defense and good tackling. average passrush and coverage.
  • Bryan 70.0 - Average run defense but good tackling and passrush. Has improved each week overall.
  • Johnson 35.0 - Just bad this week.

 

ED

  • Martin 44.9 - Below average to bad. Limited snaps though (8).
  • Paye 55.5 - Bad run defense and tackling. Average passrush.
  • Ebukam 84.3 - Good run defense and great passrush. Bad tackling though.
  • Lewis 68.3 - Good run defense and tackling but below average passrush. Limited snaps (12).
  • Odeyingbo 60.5 - Average run defense and passrush but good tackling.

 

LB

  • Speed 28.6 - Bad run defense and coverage. Below average tackling and passrush. That's two bad games in a row for Speed.
  • Franklin 44.4 - Below average to bad run defense, tackling AND coverage. Above average passrush. Not really a good game for him.
  • Leonard 33.4 - Bad run defense and coverage. Below average passrush. Great tackling.
  • Stuard 58.4 - Limited snaps (3).

 

CB

  • Moore 73.2 - Average run defense. Bad tackling. Below average passrush. Good coverage.
  • Flowers 73.3 - Good run defense, tackling AND coverage.
  • Brents 87.6 - Average run defense and tackling but elite coverage.

 

S

  • Blackmon 60.9 - Average run defense and coverage. Bad tackling and passrush.
  • Cross 60.5 - Limited snaps (3).
  • Thomas 42.7 - Bad run defense and tackling. Below average coverage. Not a good game for Thomas.

 

Overall tackling was pretty bad for our defense. Something to work on for our guys. Our CBs were good+ in coverage - good job from our young guys this game. Our LBs had problems with both tackling and coverage.

I knew Brents passed the eye test. 

 

Also, thanks a lot for putting this together 84, much appreciated. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DougDew said:

No, it isn't possible.  BUF traded a guy who wasn't playing for them, plus a draft pick, for a player that is good for kickoffs and being able to make an occasional big play because of speed. 

 

Moss is showing you what a backup RB should be, which is why I was always correct in not liking Hines, and so many others got it wrong.  Ballard finally figured it out, and some fans are starting to as well.

 

BTW, its nice to see how our LT play is elevating the entire oline success.  You know, because LT is the only oline position that, by itself, is impactful.  So when we had AC the line was good.  When he left, it sucked.  Now we have a LT who gets better grades than the LG position, and the line is pretty good again.  Its almost as if the LT play is the key to the oline and LG can be journeyman quality....almost.  Go figure. 

 

 

But, I was told Q was the reason for the success of the Oline? U know many hear said u could put an okay LT beside him and he could hide the warts? Oh well,, money well spend to guess lol.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Moosejawcolt said:

But, I was told Q was the reason for the success of the Oline? U know many hear said u could put an okay LT beside him and he could hide the warts? Oh well,, money well spend to guess lol.

Its nice to see Raimann grade in the 70s...I think its been each game.  Consistently higher pass blocking grade than run blocking too.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, #12. said:

In giving up only 19 points, those are the worst defensive grades I've ever seen.

 

I would think a great deal of the poor tackling grades were due to chasing a very elusive QB . Pretty tough guy to defend...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, DougDew said:

Its nice to see Raimann grade in the 70s...I think its been each game.  Consistently higher pass blocking grade than run blocking too.  

Take PFF with a train a salt. Oh and it is not scheme related . Fields sucks much have been saying it for over acuear but once again I got bashed lol.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These PFF grades don't make a lot of sense most of the time, and this is one of them.

 

Raimann played excellent! 

 

I thought Moss played much better than the grade he got. He seldom went down on first contact. Plus that TD pass was fantastic. 

 

I want Pierce to be great, but he's not playing all that great yet. I hope he turns on a switch soon. I wouldn't be upset if McKenzie stole some of his reps. 

 

I know everyone will defend him, but Leonard is a former shell of himself. He's lost a few steps and he's rarely around the ball until after the play is dead. His play is concerning, and this many games in, the "cobwebs" should be gone. 

 

Here's hoping the duo of French Fries isn't on the field very often. I still can't believe RG is a problem. French plays better when Fries isn't in there. 

 

Did Smith get dinged for those 3 unblocked sacks? 

 

Pittmann should get extra points for being hard as nails. 

 

Matt Gay should be at 110 grade! 

 

Brents comes in first NFL play and forces a fumble and then recovers it. That dude is legit! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...