Chiefs O line fail...

[OldSchool]

Originally Posted by Sandy Cheeks

wow, no shit. Factored in is some ugly pass pro fails.. but his run rating should be so much better. Have to wonder what they are doing on that.

Fumble? Not many broken tackles for a big guy? Idk. Sometimes I understand the rating they give, other times it's just kind of out there and just does not match what happened on the field.

[Sandy Vagina]

Originally Posted by OldSchool

Fumble? Not many broken tackles for a big guy? Idk. Sometimes I understand the rating they give, other times it's just kind of out there and just does not match what happened on the field.

Fumbles and break-tackles would be factored in, yeah. Still.. not a good enough or fair rating.

[Ragged Robin]

Originally Posted by Sandy Cheeks

Fumbles and break-tackles would be factored in, yeah. Still.. not a good enough or fair rating.

he also dropped the ball on a pass play and didn't record a single reception, he needs to learn how to be a well-rounded back

[EyePod]

Originally Posted by Sandy Cheeks

Fumbles and break-tackles would be factored in, yeah. Still.. not a good enough or fair rating.

I dunno, would an NFL average back have done any better? I bet we could have had Cyrus Gray running the whole time on Sunday and faired just as well. I wasn't as impressed with Kniles as I was with our line's run blocking. JC could have had >200 yards easy with our line playing that well (obviously ignoring the pass blocking). The hard thing is that Reid would try to be extra fancy when we've seen JC put up crazy numbers with no QB and the defense knowing "he's going to be running the ball."

So long story short, I don't think PFF should grade his day as extraordinary. League average back would get about 4 ypc +/- a few. The fact that they gave him the ball so many times just leads to more yards. The fumble could have easily cost us the game. Imagine that happening against NE. They're trying to get stats that are somewhat independent (similar to baseballs sabremetrics). i.e. a fumble at this spot in general leads to a terrible situation even if it didn't this one time.

[Kman34]

Originally Posted by EyePod

I dunno, would an NFL average back have done any better? I bet we could have had Cyrus Gray running the whole time on Sunday and faired just as well. I wasn't as impressed with Kniles as I was with our line's run blocking. JC could have had >200 yards easy with our line playing that well (obviously ignoring the pass blocking). The hard thing is that Reid would try to be extra fancy when we've seen JC put up crazy numbers with no QB and the defense knowing "he's going to be running the ball."

So long story short, I don't think PFF should grade his day as extraordinary. League average back would get about 4 ypc +/- a few. The fact that they gave him the ball so many times just leads to more yards. The fumble could have easily cost us the game. Imagine that happening against NE. They're trying to get stats that are somewhat independent (similar to baseballs sabremetrics). i.e. a fumble at this spot in general leads to a terrible situation even if it didn't this one time.

Fumbles happen...I think Jamaal fumbles too with that rip move the tackler made on Davis..

[Sandy Vagina]

Originally Posted by EyePod

I dunno, would an NFL average back have done any better? I bet we could have had Cyrus Gray running the whole time on Sunday and faired just as well. I wasn't as impressed with Kniles as I was with our line's run blocking. JC could have had >200 yards easy with our line playing that well (obviously ignoring the pass blocking). The hard thing is that Reid would try to be extra fancy when we've seen JC put up crazy numbers with no QB and the defense knowing "he's going to be running the ball."

So long story short, I don't think PFF should grade his day as extraordinary. League average back would get about 4 ypc +/- a few. The fact that they gave him the ball so many times just leads to more yards. The fumble could have easily cost us the game. Imagine that happening against NE. They're trying to get stats that are somewhat independent (similar to baseballs sabremetrics). i.e. a fumble at this spot in general leads to a terrible situation even if it didn't this one time.

I wouldn't say extraordinary either.

There were a few plays that most backs would have gained good yards from. On many others, however, he had to generate on his own through vision and breaking weak tackle attempts. 4 out of our 5 lineman had negative run block grades. Hudson barely broke out in the positive.

I'm not saying Davis was incredible.. or is incredible... just that a -3.2 grade in running seems a bit harsh and inaccurate.

[Three7s]

Originally Posted by Sandy Cheeks

I wouldn't say extraordinary either.

There were a few plays that most backs would have gained good yards from. On many others, however, he had to generate on his own through vision and breaking weak tackle attempts. 4 out of our 5 lineman had negative run block grades. Hudson barely broke out in the positive.

I'm not saying Davis was incredible.. or is incredible... just that a -3.2 grade in running seems a bit harsh and inaccurate.

Remember, technically, he fumbled twice. One of them he lost, but there was another that he managed to recover. I'm guessing PFF decided to take that into account.

[Sandy Vagina]

Originally Posted by Three7s

Remember, technically, he fumbled twice. One of them he lost, but there was another that he managed to recover. I'm guessing PFF decided to take that into account.

ah, true that.

[EyePod]

Originally Posted by Three7s

Remember, technically, he fumbled twice. One of them he lost, but there was another that he managed to recover. I'm guessing PFF decided to take that into account.

And (I don't remember where I read this) but fumble recovery is basically a coin flip in the long run.

[penbrook]

Originally Posted by Sandy Cheeks

I wouldn't say extraordinary either.

There were a few plays that most backs would have gained good yards from. On many others, however, he had to generate on his own through vision and breaking weak tackle attempts. 4 out of our 5 lineman had negative run block grades. Hudson barely broke out in the positive.

I'm not saying Davis was incredible.. or is incredible... just that a -3.2 grade in running seems a bit harsh and inaccurate.

It was -7.2 not -3.2

[Sandy Vagina]

Originally Posted by penbook

It was -7.2 not -3.2

I was specifying his run rating.. not the sum of the other aspects.