PFF just can’t stay out of their own way. I’m not sure if their evaluators are unfit for the job, or if it’s just a flawed system in general.
You can make a strong argument that Clark played a significant role in 3 of Rivers’ 4 interceptions with the way he forced Rivers to move in the pocket. On top of the sack and run stops.
If he doesn’t qualify as the best defensive player Monday night, you’re doing something wrong. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Pitt Gorilla:
Yeah, but does it pass the eye test?
Would you argue that it doesn't?
Hell yes it does - that is a fast, aggressive play. That's my point. That's exactly the kind of shit I've been looking for out of him and it hasn't been there.
Do THAT kind of stuff against Oakland and I'll chill out on him. But he hasn't been doing it. He's been 'just doing his job' while hovering out on the outside and you folks have been defending him for getting chipped or some other such nonsense.
This idea that "well you just never notice that kind of stuff...." is shit you sell to the idiot fans that don't spend the kind of time/resources on this stuff that we do. For many of us here, we're not counting sacks when we're shitting on Frank Clark, we're saying "man, where the hell was THAT play for 10 weeks..."
Yeah, that absolutely covers the eye test - it's a hell of a demonstration of what we needed from him all along. Now we need to hope it stays. [Reply]
Originally Posted by pugsnotdrugs19:
PFF just can’t stay out of their own way. I’m not sure if their evaluators are unfit for the job, or if it’s just a flawed system in general.
You can make a strong argument that Clark played a significant role in 3 of Rivers’ 4 interceptions with the way he forced Rivers to move in the pocket. On top of the sack and run stops.
If he doesn’t qualify as the best defensive player Monday night, you’re doing something wrong.
This is exactly why you really can't take PFF with too much weight. Anyone with a brain would realize Clark had far more of an impact on that game than any other defender on the field for both teams. The issue is not all of it shows in the stat sheet. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
Would you argue that it doesn't?
Hell yes it does - that is a fast, aggressive play. That's my point. That's exactly the kind of shit I've been looking for out of him and it hasn't been there.
Do THAT kind of stuff against Oakland and I'll chill out on him. But he hasn't been doing it. He's been 'just doing his job' while hovering out on the outside and you folks have been defending him for getting chipped or some other such nonsense.
This idea that "well you just never notice that kind of stuff...." is shit you sell to the idiot fans that don't spend the kind of time/resources on this stuff that we do. For many of us here, we're not counting sacks when we're shitting on Frank Clark, we're saying "man, where the hell was THAT play for 10 weeks..."
Yeah, that absolutely covers the eye test - it's a hell of a demonstration of what we needed from him all along. Now we need to hope it stays.
It was more convenient for people to label critics of Clark’s play as “people who only care about teh sax!!!!!” [Reply]
Originally Posted by MAHOMO 4 LIFE!:
Damn you actually nailed this one lol
So let me get this straight.
1. You were a douche canoe
2. Mods revoked your thread privs.
3. You are upset about that.
4. You devise a master plan to be a douche canoe thinking that will get your thread privs back.
Originally Posted by Buehler445:
So let me get this straight.
1. You were a douche canoe
2. Mods revoked your thread privs.
3. You are upset about that.
4. You devise a master plan to be a douche canoe thinking that will get your thread privs back.