Flacco #100 on PFF's Top 101 of 2012 (and why it's ridiculous)

Even more aggravating - Hensley rated AFC North QBs yesterday and ranked Ben first. After the last two years, I don't think you make that determination anymore. He cost them the playoffs last year with his performance and he can't hold up for a full schedule of games. He's old, breaking down and I think he's missing Arians. As a matter of fact, I've started to think that his and the Steelers success was largely attributable to Arians (Colts too, they'll miss him a lot) and the decline they'll suffer will be known as the Curse of the Bruce.

Same anti-PFF agenda.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saintmatthew

Even more aggravating - Hensley rated AFC North QBs yesterday and ranked Ben first. After the last two years, I don't think you make that determination anymore. He cost them the playoffs last year with his performance and he can't hold up for a full schedule of games. He's old, breaking down and I think he's missing Arians. As a matter of fact, I've started to think that his and the Steelers success was largely attributable to Arians (Colts too, they'll miss him a lot) and the decline they'll suffer will be known as the Curse of the Bruce.

---

At least putting Ben as the top QB in the North is defensible, to a degree.

Listing Flacco as the 100th best player in the NFL is something The Onion might do. It's beyond ridiculous, and if that site/publication/whatever-it-is is THAT far off-base, there's no point in even defending our guy. Whatever their system is, it's not very good.

PFF and other similar sites use a lot of subjective analysis. The stats you list are objective measures. It isn't a matter of PFF being unaware of the stats you mention, it is that they do not consider a TD pass, or any other objective stat, a standard unit of measurement with a constant value. This is also the case with the ESPN QBR stat (subjective analysis plays massive part in the stat, unlike traditional QB rating stat).

I don't see any real reason why these sites or experts would have a personal bias against Flacco, but I do agree that their subjective measures seem to penalize Flacco (and probably others) in some way, shape, or form. They tend to be more inclined to conclude that Flacco is taking what is given when he succeeds, and that Flacco is failing to take what is given when he fails; therefore they underweight his achievements (good games) and overweight his failures (bad games).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Haloti92

I don't see any real reason why these sites or experts would have a personal bias against Flacco

---

Follow their writes on Twitter. A few of them trash Flacco whenever they get the chance.

The fact that Bolden is the second highest Raven of last year tells you all you need to know about that list. It's a pile of crap.

Look at this hypocrisy....

63. Anquan Boldin, WR, Baltimore Ravens (Unranked)

There’s a lot of talk about Boldin being a guy that can’t get open. Be that as it may, he’s still a guy who (with defenders all over him) makes tough catches that move the chains. And it was that ability that was one of the key differences in why it was the Ravens, and no other team, that won the Super Bowl last year. Really stepped it up in the postseason and that’s why he makes the list.

So, he makes the list (and makes it 40 spots higher then Flacco) because he "stepped it up in post season". His regular season numbers were pedestrian. Now look at the bit under Flacco. Now they suddenly change the criteria for some reason.

100. Joe Flacco, QB, Baltimore Ravens (Unranked)

If this list were built solely on those four postseason games that culminated with the Ravens’ quarterback hoisting the Lombardi Trophy, then Joe Flacco would rank right at the very top. But it’s not, and there were 16 other games that can’t be discounted where Flacco struggled with accuracy for a Ravens team that stumbled into the playoffs. Flacco was truly special in the playoffs, showing the kind of poise and knack for the big play that was integral in his team winning it all.

H.Y.P.O.C.R.I.T.E.S

At least they got Matty Ice-cream at #17 :rolling:
real experts at that site for sure :jester:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paintballguy

Follow their writes on Twitter. A few of them trash Flacco whenever they get the chance.

---

I still don't see the reason. If "trashing him" means they say he isn't that good at QB, that isn't relevant to my question/point.

I am asking how/why a site like PFF or ESPN would go out of their way to 'punish' Flacco, specifically, in their rankings. "Because they don't think he is a good QB" begs the question.

I am looking for something along the lines of a) they benefit in some way by doing this, or b) they hold a personal grudge against Flacco for some reason. Maybe one or both of these reasons is the case, but I have my doubts.

Maybe there is even a more subtle third possibility. One where Flacco isn't singled out and punished, but rather, a whole lot of other less-deserving QBs are deemed "trendy" or "popular" or the "latest fad" and these other QBs are given a lot of extra, unearned credit in the subjective measurements, which would have the same effect as punishing Flacco relative to these other rankings.

I guess I could envision this latter possibility being the case. At least in the Kaepernick case mentioned above.

If there is any ranking that I take seriously, it's PFF's, as it is supported by in-depth statistical analysis.

With that said, who cares. We won the Super Bowl, was highly entertained during the process, and that's the only thing that matters.

I don't think PFF, PFT or ESPN have a personal vendetta against Flacco or any other athlete. I do think ,however, they're intentionally negative towards him and other certain players. Controversial or bash articles generate more hits on their site. Why do you think Tebow is still getting press? It has nothing to do with his ability. Everyone knows he's not a NFL QB (or at least a 1st string). It all has to do generating web hits and traffic. It's the internet version of why for years the "popular" teams or the teams with higher tv ratings get more prime time games and coverage. It's not a case of disliking a team or player. It's a simple business strategy. Higher TV ratings, or in this case, more traffic and hits on a site generate more revenue. It's why PFT and ESPN are more like TMZ then a sports site now. It's why more sports on-air personalities are more professional troll (like Skip Bayless) then an actual sports journalist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Haloti92

I still don't see the reason. If "trashing him" means they say he isn't that good at QB, that isn't relevant to my question/point.

I am asking how/why a site like PFF or ESPN would go out of their way to 'punish' Flacco, specifically, in their rankings. "Because they don't think he is a good QB" begs the question.

I am looking for something along the lines of a) they benefit in some way by doing this, or b) they hold a personal grudge against Flacco for some reason. Maybe one or both of these reasons is the case, but I have my doubts.

Maybe there is even a more subtle third possibility. One where Flacco isn't singled out and punished, but rather, a whole lot of other less-deserving QBs are deemed "trendy" or "popular" or the "latest fad" and these other QBs are given a lot of extra, unearned credit in the subjective measurements, which would have the same effect as punishing Flacco relative to these other rankings.

I guess I could envision this latter possibility being the case. At least in the Kaepernick case mentioned above.

---

Your question is not hard to answer. The media were sleeping on Flacco during the draft in 2008. They were slobbering all over Matt Ryan. The media harped on about how the Ravens reached to pick Flacco 18th overall. They harped on about how he makes mistakes. They latched onto the idea that he will never win a Super Bowl. They latched onto the idea that he can never carry his team past the likes of Ben Roethlisberger, Tom Brady, or Peyton Manning. They dissed him for being from a small school. They went all in on Matt Ryan, and they went full-on "Never gonna happen" about Flacco, and they are constantly being proven wrong as Flacco upstages Matt Ryan and accomplishes more in his career, and the media doesn't want to be wrong or have to eat crow, so they come up with their gobbledygook to convince the world they were still right that Flacco is a mediocre QB, never was a great prospect, never will be a great one, and that Ryan is better and will be one of the greatest of all time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by callahan09

Your question is not hard to answer. The media were sleeping on Flacco during the draft in 2008. They were slobbering all over Matt Ryan. The media harped on about how the Ravens reached to pick Flacco 18th overall. They harped on about how he makes mistakes. They latched onto the idea that he will never win a Super Bowl. They latched onto the idea that he can never carry his team past the likes of Ben Roethlisberger, Tom Brady, or Peyton Manning. They dissed him for being from a small school. They went all in on Matt Ryan, and they went full-on "Never gonna happen" about Flacco, and they are constantly being proven wrong as Flacco upstages Matt Ryan and accomplishes more in his career, and the media doesn't want to be wrong or have to eat crow, so they come up with their gobbledygook to convince the world they were still right that Flacco is a mediocre QB, never was a great prospect, never will be a great one, and that Ryan is better and will be one of the greatest of all time.

---

I am talking about PFF and other experts who have a vested interest in having their work product match reality. Unless you believe that your rankings can affect the player's performance, there is no reason to "lie" at this point.

I think that PFF experts generally believe what they are saying. You are claiming they know what they are saying is clearly wrong but are going out of their way to mislead. I see no purpose served by lying.

And I also don't recall the media harping or latching or dissing Flacco much at all when he was drafted. Not in any kind of massive or unified way like you suggest. I didn't see Flacco mocked anywhere lower than like the middle of the 2nd and most mocks had him late 1st - early 2nd. Plus we are talking about 5 years after the draft. There are tons of players that the media and draft experts were "wrong" on, who are doing well and being evaluated as such.

I absolutely agree the media loves Ryan, though, but I am not so sure that would lead anyone to punish Flacco in general (to what purpose?).