Some miscellaneous stuff

[Manster7588]

Not sure how this system works, but either I am way to hard on our LBers (LVE & Jaylon) or there is a flaw in this system.

That and IMO Diggs seems a little low.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

That and IMO Diggs seems a little low.

I just took that as he is injured so they will fall in rankings (unless it is RTK's rankings)

 

[Manster7588]

I just took that as he is injured so they will fall in rankings (unless it is RTK's rankings)

It's about as useful as RTK's list.

 

[jarntt]

Not sure how this system works, but either I am way to hard on our LBers (LVE & Jaylon) or there is a flaw in this system.

IMO there are definitely flaws in the system, but those are not good rankings for starting LBs. The ranking probably looks better because I don't think it counts 3-4 OLBs, so less of them in the ranking. A grade in the 50's for a vet starter is I think pretty bad. Look at a comparably graded CB that is ranked #83.

 

[jarntt]

That and IMO Diggs seems a little low.

Diggs got beat a lot so that keeps his ranking a little lower. I'd guess that a grade of 60 for a rookie CB in his first half season is pretty good. If he is ranked #61 and each of the 32 teams plays 2 or 3 CBs regularly I think that is about where he should be. If he didn't get hurt he probably would have crept up as the year went on and he got more experience.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

IMO there are definitely flaws in the system, but those are not good rankings for starting LBs. The ranking probably looks better because I don't think it counts 3-4 OLBs, so less of them in the ranking. A grade in the 50's for a vet starter is I think pretty bad. Look at a comparably graded CB that is ranked #83.

Yeah I have no clue how it works.
I just looked at it as about 100 starting LBs (3+ per team) while yes those arent great for a starter. I figured as bad as they have played they would have been closer to that 100 mark than the 30 mark. Like I said. Maybe I am too hard on them or it is flawed. or as whyever you are claiming 3-4 LBs dont count. maybe I am not understanding who or how many are in their ranking system? But since we play both 3-4 & 4-3 & sometimes only 2 LBs. Why wouldnt 3-4 LBs be counted?

 

[jarntt]

Yeah I have no clue how it works.
I just looked at it as about 100 starting LBs (3+ per team) while yes those arent great for a starter. I figured as bad as they have played they would have been closer to that 100 mark than the 30 mark. Like I said. Maybe I am too hard on them or it is flawed. or as whyever you are claiming 3-4 LBs dont count. maybe I am not understanding who or how many are in their ranking system? But since we play both 3-4 & 4-3 & sometimes only 2 LBs. Why wouldnt 3-4 LBs be counted?

I'm not really sure but I assume 3-4 ILB would be counted but 3-4 OLBs would be counted as edge guys like 4-3 DEs (mostly guessing)? Again don't hold me to it. I guess we need to see the whole ranking to figure it out and while I am now intrigued, I'm not paying for it because I don't care that much about their rankings. But, like I said, even though I don't think they are without flaws I do think it gives you a general idea of how guys played.

On the two LBs, I think PFF grades you on every single play and while they wouldn't get an A grade (or whatever the best is) very often they may get a C grade for making a tackle 7 yards down field. I think most of us know that when a LB misreads the gap or gets stuck on a OG and then chases a play and makes the tackle 7 yards downfield on let's say, 3rd and 2, it's a shitty play = let's call it the Bradie James special. Maybe that's why our eyes are telling us they suck while this ranking says they are average?

 

[PDay8810]

Hell....it's a coin flip each week as to which Dallas LB sucks more. Thomas would be smart to leave this team this coming offseason, nothing worse than not playing the best players

One would like to think Dallas would play three this week against SF. Sadly this is not likely with this ass hat defensive coaching staff

 

[ArlingtonCowboys100]

Copied and pasted from another board. I can only assume it is accurate. I'm not a huge fan of PFF rankings and any ranking that puts, for example, Steele over Knight I question. But, they are of course at least in the ball park - it's not like a guy ranked 100th is really playing at a top 10 level obviously. These are pretty crappy

Grades and rankings are updated after week 14. These are total grades and rankings for the year.

QB: Dak Prescott- 85.2 (9th) Passing grade 80.4 (10th)
Garrett Gilbert- 66.4 not enough snaps to rank
Andy Dalton- 70.1 (25th)
B. Dinucci- 25.6 not enough snaps to rank. 1 spot ahead of Kendall Hinton lol

RB: Zeke- 62.7 (51st)
T. Pollard- 68.6 (35th)
R. Dowdle- 73.5 not enough snaps to rank

WR: Amari- 78.9 (23rd)
MG- 63.4 (90th)
Ceedee- 70.5 (57th)
N Brown- 68.7 not enough snaps to rank
C Wilson- 62.9 not enough snaps to rank

TE: Schultz- 65.5 (32nd)
B. Bell- 61.6 (48th)
S. Mckeon- 55.7 not enough snaps to rank

Center: Looney- 54.5 (32nd)
Biadasz- 53.3 (33rd)

Guard: Martin- 91.3 (2nd behind Wyatt Teller of CLE)
Williams- 68.6 (22nd)
Mcgovern- 67.5 (26th)

Tackle: Tyron Smith- 67.8 not enough snaps to rank
Steele- 49.6 (79th)
B. Knight- 48.0 (83rd worst graded tackle)
C. Erving- 58.0 (72nd)

DT: J. Hamilton- 43.0 not enough snaps to rank
A. Woods- 58.4 (83rd)
Hill- 33.6 (124th)
Ty Craw- 51.6 (99th)
Gallimore- 51.6 (99th)

*D. Poe- 56.8 (85th)

DE: A. Smith- 65.3 (49th)
DLaw- 88.5 (5th)
Armstrong- 56.3 (84th)
B. Anae- 85.2 not enough snaps to rank
R. Gregory- 68.2 not enough snaps to rank

*Griffen- 64.8 (48th)

LB: Joe Thomas- 46.5 (67th)
Vander Esch- 56.1 (40th)
Jaylon- 59.0 (36th)
Bernard- 67.1 not enough snaps to rank
Gifford- 58.6 not enough snaps to rank
Snake- 34.4 not enough snaps to rank

CB: Chido- 54.7 (83rd)
T. Diggs- 60.0 (61st)
AB- 47.8 (111th)
J Lew- 49.2 (105th)
Goodwin- 74.1 relax he only had 2 snaps
Rashard Robinson- 60.3 not enough snaps to rank
Deante Burton- 62.2 not enough snaps to rank
Saivion Smith- 52.1 not enough snaps to rank

*Worley- 47.9 (110th)


Safety: X Woods- 64.2 (47th)
D. Thompson- 42.8 (85th)
Brandon Carr- 54.4 not enough snaps to rank
D. Wilson- 66.3 (37th)
S. Parker- 60.1 not enough snaps to rank

The fact that Anae rots away on the bench is enough in itself for me to not like the defensive coaches. Sometimes you need more than speed and long arms to get to the QB Armstrong is getting lots of snaps and I see very little pressure being generated. Anae uses technique and brains to get to the QB. Anae has lots of pass rush moves and the only guy that seemed to slow him down in College was Sewell.

IMO there are definitely flaws in the system, but those are not good rankings for starting LBs. The ranking probably looks better because I don't think it counts 3-4 OLBs, so less of them in the ranking. A grade in the 50's for a vet starter is I think pretty bad. Look at a comparably graded CB that is ranked #83.

I think another issue is always being in nickel instead of using 3 linebackers. They need to give snaps to Gifford and Bernard. Jaylon Smith looks clueless out on the field. The scheme blows.

 

[Manster7588]

Patriots' 8th Loss Keeps Record Standing for Tom Landry's Cowboys

[Dec 21, 2020] The New England Patriots have been the gold standard for success in the NFL and perhaps all American team sports for the last two decades.

insidethestar.com

 

[PDay8810]

Patriots' 8th Loss Keeps Record Standing for Tom Landry's Cowboys

[Dec 21, 2020] The New England Patriots have been the gold standard for success in the NFL and perhaps all American team sports for the last two decades.

insidethestar.com

YEP....Landry's 20 consecutive years lives on

 

[jarntt]

I think another issue is always being in nickel instead of using 3 linebackers. They need to give snaps to Gifford and Bernard. Jaylon Smith looks clueless out on the field. The scheme blows.

Absolutely. How a professional coach can watch his team get run all over all game every game and not realize that maybe going with a 3rd LB, like pretty much every team ever, on early downs is a good idea is mind boggling.

 

[jarntt]

Would be great if this happens next year and not just because it would get him off the field as a player

 

[ArlingtonCowboys100]

I see Kellen Moore could be a candidate to be the coach of Boise State. I know a lot of people dont like Moore as our OC. I thought Dak was much better with Moore as OC than Vanillahan.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

I see Kellen Moore could be a candidate to be the coach of Boise State. I know a lot of people dont like Moore as our OC. I thought Dak was much better with Moore as OC than Vanillahan.

I like Moore as our OC.

 

[tomodach10]

I like Moore as our OC.

He can go. Not a fan.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

He can go. Not a fan.

to each his own.
but we were the #1 offense before Dak went down. Even with all of the O-line injuries.

 

[Manster7588]

to each his own.
but we were the #1 offense before Dak went down. Even with all of the O-line injuries.

IMO thats more about the players than Moore. I say good luck in Boise.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

IMO thats more about the players than Moore. I say good luck in Boise.

sure we have good players on offense.
but we still improved when he took over. Then got better the next year.

 

[Manster7588]

sure we have good players on offense.
but we still improved when he took over. Then got better the next year.

IMO I see too many sandlot plays from him.
Maybe I'm just being judgmental because I never liked him being the QB coach.

 

[ArlingtonCowboys100]

IMO I see too many sandlot plays from him.
Maybe I'm just being judgmental because I never liked him being the QB coach.

I agree with the sandlot plays. Those reverses and trick plays are not working cause the OL sucks. I do see fewer of them being called lately, but still too many..