Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Panthers PFF Grades - Offense


Jeremy Igo
 Share

Recommended Posts

This isn't normal statistics though. I don't see how Olsen's pass catching impact could have been offset by his run blocking. I'm not doubting he wasn't good at blocking, I just doubt that his performance was equally as bad as his receiving was good. 

he probably didn't block much at all.  He was Cam's main target all game.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why PFF should be taken with a grain of salt... Olsen had a career day and is a .2

Olsen's 0.2 amuses me.

Who gives a poo how he blocked when he's going for 150 yards and two touchdowns 

I was thinking the same thing.

How was olsen downgraded so much due to pass blocking?

Olson must have missed an assignment or something, but he usually isnt used as a blocker.

I was wondering how much relevance should be put into these charts. I think maybe they are meant to help newbs who dont understand football because anyone watching the game knew that Olsen was the second best player on the field yesterday.

he probably didn't block much at all.  He was Cam's main target all game.  

He was in for 36 pass snaps and 29 run snaps, which means he's being asked to run block as half of his job.  If they run to his side on a third of those snaps and he's terrible, that means that 10 plays are potentially out the window.  Not an insignificant number.

That said he had a fatastic game as a receiver and it did not go unnoticed.  However, these ratings are on overall performance and we all mnow that Greg isn't a very good run blocker.  

  • Pie 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

He was in for 36 pass snaps and 29 run snaps, which means he's being asked to run block as half of his job.  If they run to his side on a third of those snaps and he's terrible, that means that 10 plays are potentially out the window.  Not an insignificant number.

That said he had a fatastic game as a receiver and it did not go unnoticed.  However, these ratings are on overall performance and we all mnow that Greg isn't a very good run blocker.  

We got Richie Brockel for the run blocking.    Oh wait a minute. . .what exactly do we keep broccoli for?

I seriously doubt this coaching staffs evaluation talents when they keep Brockel over Swole Bones. They both play STs both TEs. Except Swole can actually play ST and can catch and block.  Brockels  a wasted spot must be married to or kin to a Rivera or Richardson

PFF stuff with a grain of salt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

almost the whole Oline is in the positive yet we cant run the ball for poo. some of that has to fall on Stewart he seems to be slowing down in the whole. 

I think only a little bit is due to Stewart.   Like 1 in 3 runs for < 2 yard gain he might be missing a small hole he could have run through.  But for the most part it's just not there.  The line is just a big jumble of bodies with no real holes opening up.  Some RBs would bounce the ball outside every time they see that, and who knows...maybe that would be more successful for us right now.  But that's not Stewart's game and I don't think it's the game our coaching staff wants from their RBs.  That style requires good run blocking WRs (we don't have those), and gives you a much higher percentage of truly negative running plays.  Those are drive killers for this offense. 

Edited by Servant of Cthululelei
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why PFF should be taken with a grain of salt... Olsen had a career day and is a .2

This!  But obviously, he's got a strong positive grade for his receptions, it's his run blocking that negates it.  Anyway, I'll take lots more games like this from Greg, no matter how PFF rates him!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I’m not necessarily advocating sticking with Bryce. His highs show the ability is there, but there’s enough bad film out there to doubt that he can consistently enough play at a high enough level. But this video from Brett Kollman is a pretty good argument to give it a bit more time, whether that be rolling with Bryce just next year or picking up his 5th year option (not extending him).      The gist is that the structural (wider hashes) and rule (3 yd vs 1 yd thresholds for intelligible offensive lineman downfield penalties) differences in the college and NFL have led to wildly different play calling and scheme diets in college. There is much more shotgun and RPO calls in college and screen/quick throws. This simply doesn’t set up young QBs to be able to play under center, which is more preferred in the NFL due to RBs being able to more effectively run out of that formation.  They don’t know how to do it and have to learn. Yes, the NFL has trended more toward college style offense in the last decade or so, but it isn’t that pronounced and is more out of necessity than desire. And on top of all that, they ask the young QBs to do all this learning with coaching and other personnel churn going on around them.  Bad results lead to coaches getting fired and new ones with different ideas on scheme and footwork and different terminology and playbooks coming in. It makes it harder on those young QBs to learn.     So we may drop Bryce for a young QB starter in the draft and be in a similar situation. With a QB who is going to take years to learn how to operate in an NFL style offense and will struggle along the way.  So you have to weigh whether the struggles we see from Bryce are more due to this learning process vs solely physical limitations on his part. It’s almost undoubtedly a bit of both, but the answer to that question I think dictates your strategy at QB over the next few years. And of course, you have to consider what the alternatives available are.    I’m neither a Bryce hater or a Bryce Stan and I don’t have an answer to that question. But I do fear that if we move on from him, unless it’s for an established player, we’re just in for continued frustration on the QB front because it’s going to take a few years for a college QB to develop (Drake Maye’s don’t grow on trees). 
    • The defense has pulled that feat off this season though.  Multiple times. offense has not had a single good first half all season.  Only and good opening scripted drive paired with disappointing play.  defense has been the actual unit you can measure real and consistent improvement IMO.  Still holes and flaws to it that aren’t going away until new bodies get here but they really are the story of the season IMO
    • One thing about RB's and LB's is they are going to get hurt. It's inevitable. Having a fresh Chuba is not a bad thing.  My only criticism of this entire situation is that I wish our staff would adjust personnel to matchup a little better. I think Chuba is a lot better than Rico against the stacked boxes we've seen the last two weeks. They are very different backs with very different strengths, and I love them both. Rico is so good at identifying the hole early, and hitting it full speed early. He's much better at breaking the big run. Chuba is a much more patient back, and finds 3 yards when there's nothing there better than Rico.  It's in no way a criticism of either, but I think Chuba would have had more success than Rico the way the Saints and Falcons attacked us from a Defensive standpoint.  When you put 9 in the box, often times there is no hole to attack. 
×
×
  • Create New...