Jonathan Martin sucks.....that is, according to PFF

My postion is that the line took a step back because of these things.
A] new blocking scheme
B] new offense line coach, never coached at the pro level
C] starting guards that do not fit the scheme, used for Zone Blocking
D] rookie tackle starting 16 games
E] best offensive lineman got injured


To be honest we are still installing the West Coast Offense and installing ZBS still, it's going to take more then 1 offseason to bring in the right personel. Rome was not built in one off season, we got a long way to go. Some how Philbin got us 7 wins, that saying a lot about the job his coaching staff did this past year.

 

No, I haven't gone through all the rankings to say one way or another. All I'm saying is that the process PFF uses to grade players is fundamentally flawed. I think this is true especially for OL, DBs, and WRs. If a WR is supposed to run a route based on certain reads, how does PFF know what his options were? How often do people watch football and say that a WR that wasn't thrown to ran the wrong route?

Not only are they blind to certain aspects of play, but they also have different people grading different teams. Thats obviously going to introduce certain biases.

I generally agree with your general sense about the OL. But this comes back to my original point - we aren't privy to a lot of pertinent information. Certainly most fans on this forum are smart enough to get a "general sense" of who is good or bad. But ultimately if you're trying to quantify some type or rating and then rank players accordingly, I'm not very inspired to believe that the quantification to have much accuracy.

 

I think that is where the following grading rule comes into play:

95% sure is a pretty high level of certainty. Assuming the graders follow the rules, those concerns about docking a WR based on a judgment call as to his reads/options are pretty limited.

While one can't rule out all possibility of bias, I think people who would take on the assignment of doing this kind fo grading are probably going to try to do it as objectively as possible.

Obviously, the PFF system isn't foolproof nor is it the gospel, but IMO it is several times more reliable than anything else out there in terms of which players systematically and consistently perform their jobs well and which ones don't.

 

"& center"? Since when is Pouncey's play subpar?

 

Google, it's a helluva tool.

 

Are you sure about this???????????????????

 

Oh sure. No coach ever taught zone blocking before Alex Gibbs.

 

Get a life dude. I am positive he was always directed in the proper direction but I am also postive the kid has lead a nice cushy life since he came out of the womb. The main thought of my post went right over your head. Its pretty evident this kid is soft and has about the same toughness as a Sea Sponge. Has talent ? probably but as I said in another post. These kids that went to larger programs have some of the best weight rooms and training available.

As a matter of fact I would say the larger D1 programs have better facilities for training then most NFL teams. They have better facilities for nutrition then most NFL teams. They have stricter guidelines for all of the above and those guidelines are watched a lot closer then they are watched in the NFL. Just because a guy is head strength trainer for an NFL teams does not mean he is at the top of the pile of strength trainers.

Ask Jake Long. Had knee surgery, rehabbed in Davie and had to have the knee cleaned up right when the lockout ended. Why ? It was rehabbed wrong and it created scar tissue that reflected in the pain he had. The last place Jake Long wants to rehab his current injury is in an NFL facility. I would even go out on a limb and say once he is ready he is going to rehab at Athletes Performance.

Back to Martin. Like I ssaid, the kid is soft and has zero kick anyones *** mentality. You cannot teach that. You cannot FORCE any NFL player to be dedicated in the weight room. They are given enough reps to keep them selves in shape, thats it. Nobody in any NFL training room pushes the players, nobody. There are ones that push themselves and continue to do it in the off season. Then there are ones that do exactly what they have to in order to satisfy the trainers and in the off season they do very little until its time for OTAs and even then, they do what they have to to get by. Look at Martins arms. Look like a skin care commercial for smooth skin with no muscle ripples.

 

Yes look it up, Gibbs is considered the father of ZBS. He also invented the internet and the Pet Rock. One of the three is a true statement.

http://sidelionreport.com/2011/05/27/offseason-education-the-basics-of-zone-blocking/

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-t...ms-rushers-and-the-best-line-play-from-week-5

http://www.tomahawknation.com/2009/6/9/900288/understanding-zone-blocking-and

http://www.fieldgulls.com/2012/8/2/3215058/alex-gibbs-teaches-the-zone-blocking-scheme

http://hawgtuff.net/yahoo_site_admin/assets/docs/Understanding_Zone_Blocking.186223832.pdf

 

How did my comment suggest a lack of a life? And why are you so testy about my one sentence question? Your comment didn't go over my head, it just struck me as pretty absurd and a gross stereotyping that I know to be untrue in many different cases. I don't personally know Jonathan Martin or how he was raised and it may be true in his case, but I do know with 100% certainty that not everyone who went to Harvard or similar schools coddles their kids, either academically or physically.

In any event, I don't think there is much evidence that Martin lacks toughness. He got into several scraps this season. And while his strength was hardly elite, he was only a few reps behind some pretty solid NFL tackles, such as Eric Winston, Duane Brown, Ryan Clady, etc. IMO Martin's functional "strength" issues have little to do with not spending enough time in the gym -- they have to do with balance, leverage and technique.

 

Howard Mudd was teaching it before Gibbs. You could make a strong case that Lombardi was teaching it before anyone.

Just because Gibbs brought it to prominence doesn't mean he invented it.

 

Also, the modern ZBS makes use of the cut block, which was brought into prominence by Bobb McKittrick.

 

Lombadi talked about zone blocking in one of his books, read it when I was child. That was the first I remember hearing of the term. But Alex Gibbs is considered the "Father" of the modern ZBS. His is the style people still try to copy still. By the way I'm a huge fan of zone blocking. Love to draft those 1 cut runner's in those systems in my Fantasy Fotball leagues.

That why I posted, what we are currently running looks nothing like the Seahawks or Texans running offense. Our personel does not fit it. We need guards with quick feet who can pull and trap. Rome was not built in a day, we will get there. Just hope Jim Turner turns out to be a excellent line coach.

 

I don't pay any attention to PFF's rankings. When a poster references their rankings as proof of something, it's as convincing to me as if they had just typed "blah, blah, blah..." IMO they're good for play counts and the like, but that's it.

 

In terms of convincingness, you could say that about 99.99% of the posts here (9,999 of every 10,000).

At least the PFF posts reference something systematic and objective, rather than a purportedly convincing personal opinion or appeal to authority.

 

Cable did nothing to make the Seattle Oline better. What made the Seattle Oline better is two things.
1 Their QB. Kid is as mobil as they get
2 Their running back, Lynch.

Give the Dolphins the same two people and the season would have been a lot different.

Know who Cables highest rated guard is ? Pat Mcquistans brother Paul who is ranked 59th overall among guards, he cannot pull to save his life and he played both LG and RB up there Moffit is also ranked 59th

Their next best is James Carpenter ranked 65 th, who again, cannot pull to save his life
Next is Carpenter at 65th.
Their guard postion is finished out with JR Sweezy ranked 72 second

Seattle guards blow. If they did not have the QB they have and Lynch running the ball with some legit receivers up there they would be no different then we are.

Like us, they have a good center, Unger ranked 3rd FYI, Pouncey finished 9th overall.

Their tackles Okung finished 16th and Giaocomini finished 70th

This bull crap of zone blocking scheme is insane on this board. This team in no way shape or form instituted zone blocking on a consistent basis this year. On certain mid direction plays yes but beyond that this scheme this year was man all the way. Pulling guards are a part of all blocking schemes and again, not sure what games people were watching but our LG Incognito pulls fine. See him chip block and hit lbers and half the plays. See him pull and when Martin was RT yes there was a hole for him to pull thru, with Garner there it was not there many times. Seen him pull great at last NE game and take out the DE on opposite side, see him downfield all the time. Jerry on the other hand has a load of crap in his drawers and still, he is ranked higher then any of Tom Cables guys at the guard position but pull ? No,John Jerry can barely move thats why I laugh when people want to try him at Tackle.

John Jerry is no way shape or form capable of being a starting NFL Tackle, Right or left.

Cut blocking is a HUGE part of Zone blocking and we have one guy that does it verywell. Our LG that all of a dozen people on this board want to replace. Long could not cut block to save his life. Pouncey is not half bad but cut blocking is used mainly by the guards and tackles. John Jerry cannot cut block and never will be able too. Martin never cut block in his life. Garner ? see Jake Long, cannot cut block to save his life.

Thats why this offense is not a zone blocking offense other then on certain mis direction of some sweeps, other then that ? Its been man to man all season.

I think some on this board read something from someone they believe knows all and regardless of what is really going on, they adhere to whatever is being thrown out there.

It ain't zone blocking, it hasn't been zone blocking and Seattles offensive line is no better then our offensvie line other then they do not have to protect a statue in the pocket and do not have to open holes for Bush who in no shape or form is a power runner like Lynch is.

Put Tannehill and Bush on Seattle and then put Wilson as our QB and Lynch as our RB this season and we would be in the playoffs, not Seattle.

 

Never mind the fact that the mass media and most teams have dropped STATS LLC and most look at PFF for something to use as a benchmark, NAH, PFF blows LOL

 

What do you pay attention to then ? And if you have a tried and true system how much of the media and how many teams use it.

 

Major zone blocking as the fathers thought it up has almost gone completely by the wayside. When Lombardi practiced it the forward pass was still a potential threat. Defenses lined up almost exactly the same every time and defensive ends were not 275 lbs and did not run 4.5 40s.

Ask any coach, any coach on any show and ask them how to run a zone blocking scheme against the likes of the Jets or Houston Defense or even Denvers hybrid defense. Their answer would be simple, its impossible as most of your Oline would be blocking air. This zone blocking scheme for Miami being thrown out is completely insane. Do we use it ? Yes, on occasion and on very RARE oocasion as this OC we have still believes Reggie Bush is a power runner that can go inbetween the tackles 25 times a game.

 

I rely on my eyes and coincidently that's the same thing the teams rely on. They use PFF as a tool to track play counts and formations, but their coaches analyze the players.

 

Great, tell me how many teams rely on your eyes and how much you make. PFF is a BENCHMARK my friend and a pretty decent one. You are correct, the coaches analyze players, not message board posters. I used to use STATS LLC as a benchmark but not anymore. PFF is pretty decent. Do not agree with all their grades but like I said, its still a benchmark.

 

It's not a benchmark for teams in terms of grades. That's the part I see as fundamentally flawed. That's the part that I see fans on message boards reference, ie. "Jonathan Martin sucks..." And that's the part that I say is useless.

And while it's been years since I worked as a scout, I can tell you that I would have been laughed at if I had referenced a source like PFF (PFF itself didn't exist back then) as a reason for signing a player.

 

Every Oline coach has his own way of grading. Some Oline coaches do not even assign a grade. Other Oline coaches have grading systems that would drive a sane man nuts.

Nobody ever said PFF is an exact science, even they state that they are not scouts. There is a lot they cannot grade. They do not know the blocking assignments but have to say, their system is pretty dam decent. For the media and general public its a good system. Do not even kid yourself if you do not think teams do not look at it, they most certainly do. Then they have the position coaches which each one has their own completely different system to judge players.

Take WR Brandon Marshal for instance. Performance wise, yes, he is a top 10 receiver this year. Coaching wise ? for whatever reason we did not want him. But, no one can deny he is a top receiver in the NFL. Lockeroom problems or not. Thats things PFF does not even touch.

But honest, respect your opinion as you are entitled to it but I will still use PFF as the benchmark and no, we do not run a zone blocking system and Martin may not suck but he has aloooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong way to go.

 

I don't think you understand what "tried and true" means in this context. Their system is neither tried or true.

 

I'm not sure PFF ratings are objective.

Does anyone remember that Chad Henne INT last preseason against Atlanta? The board was literally divided over whether the throw was accurate or not. How exactly did PFF grade that???

 

How can you even stand to stay around a forum with so many idiots insulting your great intelligence?

 

All grading is subjective. But some fans seem to think that if you add up a list of subjective grades, that somehow makes them objective.

I equate PFF's grades to one non-scout/non-coach on a message board saying, "I watched all the Dolphin's games this season and I give martin a grade of -3. My buddy who is also a non-scout/non-coach watched the Dallas games this year and he gave Doug Free a grade of 2, therefore Free is better than Martin." I don't give PFF's grades anymore validity than that.

 

I put people like you on ignore.

 

Until I have the time to watch every single play of every single player in every game, they serve a viable purpose IMO. Maybe you have the time to do that yourself though.
IMO, PFF has a lot more validity than you give them credit for.

 

Thanks, such an honor. Why don't you put your ignore count in your sig block like Slicky does? That is pretty cool.

 

Actually, in all seriousness, what I find "insulting to my intelligence" is the rather prevalent belief that someone's personal opinion should carry any weight at all in terms of convincing others of something.

It's fine to have a personal opinion, but realize its limitations, as well.

So who's more obnoxious, the one who has people like that on his ignore list, or the people like that themselves?

 

Be fair. We lost Bess during about the same stretch.. And Hartline had to play hurt down the stretch too. We also lacked a healthy Charles Clay.

It's not just Long.

 

Fasano hurt in that last game as well.

 

I don't believe any NFL personnel dept would use Pff to help them make any decisions on players, scary thought, I know They watch all their players plays, and practice plays, so it would be quite indicting if they did, doesn't mean I don't respect what PFF does..it's legit service for references on hunches and other teams players, I think theres a difference between grading a play positive or negative then making a prediction on a ceiling of a player, more talent comes into play in the latter.

 

PFF has issues with zone blocking rating by the way. I can't recall who brought it up first (CK maybe?) in pointing out a strong running game that was at the tops of the league last year....but their entire OL was graded low in run blocking.

 

The problem is that it's not one person who watches every game. It's different people applying their subjective opinion. Look at how much we argued here over whether a Henne INT was his fault or the receivers. We were all watching the same play and there were wildly different opinions as to who was most at fault. People like to think that if you provide a list of objective criteria that everybody will see the same things. That just doesn't happen. Look at tackle or drop statistics. They vary wildly depending on who does the counting. And those are relatively cut and dry things. The variation on something more subtle like whether an OL or RB blocked long enough or a QB held the ball too long or ran into a sack could easily be night and day depending on the subjective evaluator. Comparing what two grades two different evaluators gave is useless. Actually, it's worse than useless. It's useless while providing the illusion of objectivity.

 

I think that is a gross overstatement. As mentioned earlier in the thread, their rating system isn't entirely subjective and the raters are instructed not to guess at the assignment unless they are 95% sure. They aren't grading style or technique, just effectiveness, and the majority of plays are graded a 0, which is essentially a neutral grade. It is only the plays where someone clearly did something good or bad that really affect the grade. That isn't that hard to see. There are only 3 evaluators that do grades and they communicate with each other and provide some consistency and quality control. Saying grades are useless, or worse than useless, because they are not all done by the same person is hyperbole to the extreme.

 

With regard to PFF and other objective analyses of the game, I think you gain accuracy and objectivity by panning back and focusing on the molar rather than the molecular, using statistics everyone can agree on in terms of the accuracy and consistency (i.e., reliability) of their application.

For example, the "molecular" approach, which I think is largely susceptible to subjectivity and inaccuracy, would focus on how well Sean Smith did in coverage, i.e. the PFF stat, whereas the "molar" approach, which is more objective and accurate IMO, would focus on the frequency with which his receiver was targeted by the opposing QB, the frequency of his passes defensed, and number of interceptions he had, for example.

Of course nothing is going to be 100% objective and accurate, and lots of times there will be intervening variables that explain even the "molar" statistics, but I do think the very microscopic, "molecular" approach to evaluating the game leaves lots of room for subjectivity and inaccuracy. Some of PFF's stats suffer in this regard, while others are more molar and less problematic IMO.