The Pro Football Focus Top 101 Players of 2011

[Bixby (Thumper)]

Mathis is overrated, very overrated.

[Monomach]

Originally Posted by eaglesalltheway

I'd wager a bet he (Mathis) was penalized more than any of our O-linemen last season (ok, at least as much as Peters) both in the run and pass game. It was extrememly frustrating, and those ten yard holding penalties that he had usually stalled out our drives.

Week 1:
Peters- holding
Kelce- False Start
DeVan- Ineligible downfield receiver, Holding

Week 2:
Peters- False Start

Week 3:
Peters- False Start
DeVan- False Start
Kelce- False Start
Herreman- False Start

Week 4:
Peters- False Start
Mathis- Holding
DeVan- Holding, Holding

Week 5:
Watkins- Illegal Use of Hands

Week 6:
Herremans- False Start, Holding

Week 7:
BYE

Week 8:
Peters- Holding
Kelce- False Start

Week 9:
Watkins- False Start

Week 10:
Kelce- False Start
Peters- Illegal Use of Hands

Week 11:
Herremans- False Start

Week 12:
Mathis- Holding (Declined)
Watkins- False Start, Holding (offset)
Herremans- Holding

Week 13:
Watkins- False Start

Week 14:
Herremans- Holding
Peters- False Start
Watkins- False Start

Week 15:
Mathis- Unecessary Roughness

Week 16:
Kelce- Holding

Week 17:
Herremans- Holding
Mathis- Ineligible downfield receiver


-His W4 Holding call resulted in a loss of 10 yards. The drive ended with an easy field goal being missed (33 yards), so he didn't stop it.
-His W15 unecessary roughness call was a loss of 15 yards. The drive ended in a punt, but even then, two other Eagles had penalties on the same drive.
-His ineligible downfield receiver penalty in W17 was a loss of 5 yards, but the drive resulted in a TD, anyway.

Final tally:
Jason Peters: 7
Todd Herremans: 6
Danny Watkins: 6
Jason Kelce: 5
Kyle DeVan: 5
Evan Mathis: 4 penalties, 1 declined, total loss of 30 yards and one drive stalled.

I didn't look for anyone else because they didn't play enough snaps to matter.

So here we have a case of perception not being reality. He was, in fact, penalized less than all other starters on your line and only stalled one drive. His "usual" ten yard penalty only happened one time all season.

Everything else is an assessment based on the "eye test," which is, of course, a very poor way to evaluate someone's performance.

So...How much was it you wanted to wager?

[Bixby (Thumper)]

Note to self: ProFootballFocus is Monomach's bible.

Evan Mathis is overrated. He'll likely be surpassed by Danny Watkins next year and Todd Herremans is a better left guard as well. Evan Mathis is just a guy, he's good enough to get the job done. He's smart and he functions well as a singular piece of a larger unit but he doesn't dominate people in the run game (and PFF has him rated as the best run blocking lineman in the NFL!) and he struggles to create movement inline.

[Gay Ork Wang]

it is. he always cites it when he hates on guys.

[Monomach]

It's not my bible, but I recognize it as a valuable resource with sound methodology. I'll take 3 unbiased people who are not fans of the teams playing spending 8 hours each watching every snap of a game multiple times before averaging and normalizing their grades over what homers who watched a game once in real-time think. 24 unbiased man-hours > 3 biased man-hours.

It's a no-brainer. What they have to say is better-informed than what we have to say. I've seen them be right enough times in spite of public opinion to buy into it.

...and no, I do note cite them that often. Usually, I use simple stats when hating on a bad player because I know that most forum posters are a) too homerfied to accept the word of an outside source as having any weight at all and b) too confused by advanced statistics to study and accept them. The simpleminded thinking is so crazy around here that even the basic stats like QB pressures and penalties are blown off as advanced metric mumbo-jumbo.

Look a little further back. We go from "Evan Mathis is super overrated" with "I bet he had more penalties to all of our other linemen" as a supporting statement to finding out that he actually had fewer penalties than any other starting lineman on the team. This is why people should not be allowed to evaluate their own players without support from an outside source.

[Sloopy]

Originally Posted by Monomach

It's not my bible, but I recognize it as a valuable resource with sound methodology. I'll take 3 unbiased people who are not fans of the teams playing spending 8 hours each watching every snap of a game multiple times before averaging and normalizing their grades over what homers who watched a game once in real-time think. 24 unbiased man-hours > 3 biased man-hours.

It's a no-brainer. What they have to say is better-informed than what we have to say. I've seen them be right enough times in spite of public opinion to buy into it.

...and no, I do note cite them that often. Usually, I use simple stats when hating on a bad player because I know that most forum posters are a) too homerfied to accept the word of an outside source as having any weight at all and b) too confused by advanced statistics to study and accept them. The simpleminded thinking is so crazy around here that even the basic stats like QB pressures and penalties are blown off as advanced metric mumbo-jumbo.

Look a little further back. We go from "Evan Mathis is super overrated" with "I bet he had more penalties to all of our other linemen" as a supporting statement to finding out that he actually had fewer penalties than any other starting lineman on the team. This is why people should not be allowed to evaluate their own players without support from an outside source.

I get what your saying, and they certainly do a very good job of creating metrics for certain positions... but they can only be so good.

As I stated before: I always look at their OL rankings as this is far and away their best category and no one else comes even close in terms of measurements for OL.

However, there DB ratings are pretty god awful. I wish I could find the quote but essentially when they award a completion against to a DB, they use the DB who is closest to the player at the time of the throw or completion (can't remember which).

Furthermore, they lack context. Stats are great but they can't factor in the rookie CB on the all pro WR with a top 10 QB who's line gives him 7 seconds to make the throw against a weak front 7 generating no pass rush.

At the end of the day, the biggest problem is the idiots like the former JBCX who used it as their sole argument

[ChiFan24]

Originally Posted by Bixby

Note to self: ProFootballFocus is Monomach's bible

Yeah, I hate it when someone makes me look like an idiot too.

[Bixby (Thumper)]

Originally Posted by Monomach

It's not my bible, but I recognize it as a valuable resource with sound methodology. I'll take 3 unbiased people who are not fans of the teams playing spending 8 hours each watching every snap of a game multiple times before averaging and normalizing their grades over what homers who watched a game once in real-time think. 24 unbiased man-hours > 3 biased man-hours.

It's a no-brainer. What they have to say is better-informed than what we have to say. I've seen them be right enough times in spite of public opinion to buy into it.

...and no, I do note cite them that often. Usually, I use simple stats when hating on a bad player because I know that most forum posters are a) too homerfied to accept the word of an outside source as having any weight at all and b) too confused by advanced statistics to study and accept them. The simpleminded thinking is so crazy around here that even the basic stats like QB pressures and penalties are blown off as advanced metric mumbo-jumbo.

Sound methodology? To me it all appears to be arbitrary numbers. What is the difference between a .5 score and 1.0 score in run blocking? How do they determine what number they're giving a player? I don't see any clear methodology at all. Do they do it based on feelings? Because they're biased as all hell; they've got a hard on for Evan Mathis. People like you who think ProFootballFocus is a substitute for actually watching games are the real problem here.

I can tell you they have no idea what they're watching. They don't know who's assignment was who's. They don't know what route the wide receivers and tight ends are supposed to run. They don't have any clue about ANYTHING zone coverage related. For example, in the 49ers game Asante Samuel let Josh Morgan cross his face without being touched and Asante didn't pick him up because he was waiting to jump a route in front of him but Smith threw it to Morgan who was then being covered by Brian Rolle. Thats on Samuel, not Rolle but they attributed it to Rolle. Or the Arizona Cardinals game when Asante jumped a route and left Jaiquawn Jarrett one on one with Larry Fitzgerald and Fitz scored, thats Asante's fault. And they're not watching coaching tape, they're watching TV broadcasts just like you and I. They've got useful snap data and some of their coverage date is okay even though they don't know what they're doing. But their rankings are ****.

There is a reason they're taking a lot of heat from media types and football scouts, they're not the go-to, 100% accurate football data site that they present themselves as. Once again, their rankings are ****. Do you honestly believe Evan Mathis is the best run blocker in football? Is Michael Crabtree really the 17th best WR in the NFL? Is Malcolm Floyd the 8th best WR in the NFL? Is DeSean Jackson the 63rd best WR in the NFL? Is Zach Streif a better player than Joe Thomas? Is Michael Bennett a better DE than Jason Babin, Chris Clemons, Chris Long and Elvis Dumervil? And they say Nnamdi is the 90th best CB in the NFL. ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?

Again, ProFootballFocus is not a substitute for watching games. Stop pretending it is. It's not 100% accurate. And you act like it's scientific. "I don't trust homers who judge based on their eyes", WHAT THE HELL DO YOU THINK THEY'RE WATCHING GAMES WITH? They're throwing out arbitrary numbers for player they think did well on a certain play. And some things are weighted FAR too much. Like run blocking for a WR or run support for a corner. Sure you want those things but on the list of attributes you want, those things aren't very high in comparison to others.

[Bixby (Thumper)]

Originally Posted by ChiFan24

Yeah, I hate it when someone makes me look like an idiot too.

LOL, no. ProFootballFocus is not a substitute for actually watching games. K?

[Caddy]

Originally Posted by Bixby

Sound methodology? To me it all appears to be arbitrary numbers. What is the difference between a .5 score and 1.0 score in run blocking? How do they determine what number they're giving a player? I don't see any clear methodology at all. Do they do it based on feelings? Because they're biased as all hell; they've got a hard on for Evan Mathis. People like you who think ProFootballFocus is a substitute for actually watching games are the real problem here.

I can tell you they have no idea what they're watching. They don't know who's assignment was who's. They don't know what route the wide receivers and tight ends are supposed to run. They don't have any clue about ANYTHING zone coverage related. For example, in the 49ers game Asante Samuel let Josh Morgan cross his face without being touched and Asante didn't pick him up because he was waiting to jump a route in front of him but Smith threw it to Morgan who was then being covered by Brian Rolle. Thats on Samuel, not Rolle but they attributed it to Rolle. Or the Arizona Cardinals game when Asante jumped a route and left Jaiquawn Jarrett one on one with Larry Fitzgerald and Fitz scored, thats Asante's fault. And they're not watching coaching tape, they're watching TV broadcasts just like you and I. They've got useful snap data and some of their coverage date is okay even though they don't know what they're doing. But their rankings are ****.

There is a reason they're taking a lot of heat from media types and football scouts, they're not the go-to, 100% accurate football data site that they present themselves as. Once again, their rankings are ****. Do you honestly believe Evan Mathis is the best run blocker in football? Is Michael Crabtree really the 17th best WR in the NFL? Is Malcolm Floyd the 8th best WR in the NFL? Is DeSean Jackson the 63rd best WR in the NFL? Is Zach Streif a better player than Joe Thomas? Is Michael Bennett a better DE than Jason Babin, Chris Clemons, Chris Long and Elvis Dumervil? And they say Nnamdi is the 90th best CB in the NFL. ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?

Again, ProFootballFocus is not a substitute for watching games. Stop pretending it is. It's not 100% accurate. And you act like it's scientific. "I don't trust homers who judge based on their eyes", WHAT THE HELL DO YOU THINK THEY'RE WATCHING GAMES WITH? They're throwing out arbitrary numbers for player they think did well on a certain play. And some things are weighted FAR too much. Like run blocking for a WR or run support for a corner. Sure you want those things but on the list of attributes you want, those things aren't as high others.

Yes. Yes he is. =D

[WCH]

Originally Posted by Caddy

Not enough Kuhn.

Kuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuhn!!!!!!!!!!

Also, PFF gets way too much hate on this board. There's a lot of value in what they do, even if it spits out some unconventional results from time to time. The Packers have indicated that they do similar game-charting, and I'm sure that other teams do too. They probably should have gone the advertising revenue route, though, instead of the "premium content" route. Most people won't pay for that stuff, and that's why the FootballOutsiders game-charting projects have never broken into the mainstream.

[Bixby (Thumper)]

Originally Posted by Caddy

Yes. Yes he is. =D

[Rosebud]

PFF is totally worth checking out...but they're so far from a be all end all that the people that turn people on this board off from PFF use it as. Their rankings, as Bixby points out, are pretty ******. Interesting, but way too many flaws, mistakes and exceptions to make it the gospel that people who fall back on it treat it as. That's why I love JBCX so much, he treated it like gospel even when the results it was spitting out where inconsistent with reality, a la JPP.

[Caddy]

Originally Posted by Bixby

Don't be butthurt because Bennett is better than Babin

[ChiFan24]

Originally Posted by Bixby

LOL, no. ProFootballFocus is not a substitute for actually watching games. K?

No one ever said it was. I just think it's great that you made a totally false statement that was proven wrong and then immediately went into defense mode. Fun to watch.

[Bixby (Thumper)]

Originally Posted by ChiFan24

No one ever said it was. I just think it's great that you made a totally false statement that was proven wrong and then immediately went into defense mode. Fun to watch.

What did I say that was false? You may be confusing me with another Eagles fan. :)

[bigbluedefense]

PFF is good if you're able to take it with a grain of salt. Take it for what it is, another method to evaluate players. But that's all it is. It can help you evaluate guys, but it shouldn't be the be all end all of player evaluation.

This list isn't that bad, based off production from 2011 it's pretty accurate. Their oline evaluations are actually their best ones, but overall I'm not a huge PFF fan.

Bc they focus too much on production and not enough on circumstances. But if you're able to take them for what they are, and use it as a tool and nothing more, then they're tolerable.

[Ness]

Originally Posted by bigbluedefense

PFF is good if you're able to take it with a grain of salt. Take it for what it is, another method to evaluate players. But that's all it is. It can help you evaluate guys, but it shouldn't be the be all end all of player evaluation.

This list isn't that bad, based off production from 2011 it's pretty accurate. Their oline evaluations are actually their best ones, but overall I'm not a huge PFF fan.

Bc they focus too much on production and not enough on circumstances. But if you're able to take them for what they are, and use it as a tool and nothing more, then they're tolerable.

Football rankings in generally aren't very encouraging. There are just too many variables to deal with.

[ChiFan24]

Originally Posted by Bixby

What did I say that was false? You may be confusing me with another Eagles fan. :)

Oh, yeah I suppose I am. But whatever, **** Philadelphia and their fans (especially 76er fans).

[Saints-Tigers]

Originally Posted by bigbluedefense

PFF is good if you're able to take it with a grain of salt. Take it for what it is, another method to evaluate players. But that's all it is. It can help you evaluate guys, but it shouldn't be the be all end all of player evaluation.

This list isn't that bad, based off production from 2011 it's pretty accurate. Their oline evaluations are actually their best ones, but overall I'm not a huge PFF fan.

Bc they focus too much on production and not enough on circumstances. But if you're able to take them for what they are, and use it as a tool and nothing more, then they're tolerable.

That's the point people here are missing. "Omg, this guy is rated to low!!"

I bet the "production" side of it is fairly accurate, all things considered... it's up to the reader to put into context how much of that is due to circumstance.

It seems that based on this thread, that it's hard for people to believe a player can have a better year than a superior player.

[bigbluedefense]

Originally Posted by Saints-Tigers

That's the point people here are missing. "Omg, this guy is rated to low!!"

I bet the "production" side of it is fairly accurate, all things considered... it's up to the reader to put into context how much of that is due to circumstance.

It seems that based on this thread, that it's hard for people to believe a player can have a better year than a superior player.

Yup. Which is why context is so important when evaluating their material.

The bottom line: people don't read...

[Saints-Tigers]

Also, people have to consider sample size, and the GAP statistically. The NFL season is such a small sample size, one really good or bad game can sway things HUGELY.

Also, I'll use the "Nmandi is the 90th best DB?" statement, but you have to see how big the gap is too. If Nmandi had a really rough year by his own standards, and was 90th, but the gap between say 90 and 25 is very small, it could just be statistical noise.

I bet if you do PFF rankings for like a 7-8 year period(which would still be a small sample size, little more than a year of NBA data), you'll have a much clearer picture, and all the anomalies will probably be out.

Sometimes a guy will STILL be ranked very oddly, and maybe we just overrate/underrate a lot of guys IMMENSELY because football is so intricate and complicated.

PS: I don't really read PFF often, but I do think their work is very ambitious and good for hardcore fans like us.

[The Alex]

Who the hell is JBCX?

[Sloopy]

Originally Posted by The Alex

Who the hell is JBCX?

You don't want to know, but he got the ban hammer after an ill advised bet on one of his ridiculous predictions.

[Raiderz4Life]

Originally Posted by Sloopy

You don't want to know, but he got the ban hammer after an ill advised bet on one of his ridiculous predictions.

It was hilarious too...can't believe I got him to take the bet without having me put anything on the line. Guess having him stick around if I lost was punishment enough :/

My hatred of PFF deepened to an unrepairable level with JBCX.