Offense Preseason Awards

[AtlAppMan]

I want to see a strong running game due to great OL and RBs. I also want to see a lethal passing game due to a strong QB and many potent WRs (not just one guy). If OL provides great run blocking and doesn’t let defense touch QB and provides plenty of time for passing we can eat up defenses. That is how I assess Offense.

We know we have a great QB and excellent RBs and WRs so we need the OL to step up this year.

[Saint3333]

More likely than not this OL will be the difference in 1-2 wins this season. If we see a couple of games in which we are up on an opponent and we can run clock in the 4th that will be a clear indication of their success.

[mike87]

I want to see a Clemson defender blocked through their bench a 'la Tennessee. I'd like Dewerk be the blocker and I want a penalty flag. A plethora of penalty flags.

Then I want clean domination of their defensive line.

[AppStFan1]

Curious question for those picking the OL or members of the OL. How will you measure success?

Eye test, running stats, sacks allowed, conference awards.

If we don’t have at least 2 all-conference (regardless of team) OL, then it would be a disappointment.

Interesting criteria. I’ll be curious to see your assessment at the end of the season.

How would you measure OL success?

I can’t really say that there is a better way than what was described. However, if I’m being completely honest I don’t know that there is a correct way to judge it. The eye test is fair but very subjective toward recency bias; meaning a negative play can have a greater effect on one’s overall assessment than 10 good ones. Using statistical data is misleading as well because often times, a sack can be attributed to secondary coverage. The OL can’t be expected to hold a block forever. Last year the OL gave up a sack (21) on 4.4% of all pass attempts. In 2022, the OL gave up fewer sacks to a less mobile QB (18) but still gave up a sack on 5% of pass attempts. That number was 4.1% in 2021 and 7% in 2020. My point being is that the # of sacks allowed requires context. There is also the rotation factor in that are we judging guard play or each individual.

I’d be interested to see how folks on here would grade a performance each game versus what a service like PFF would. Like I said, I’m curious as to how it would be judged because I am curious.

I measure OL success by sacks allowed, missed blocks, knockdowns, how they move, are they able to do all the types of blocks, and do they at least give the QB 3-4 seconds of a clean pocket.

Has PFF ever said exactly how they grade OL?

[AppSt94]

Eye test, running stats, sacks allowed, conference awards.

If we don’t have at least 2 all-conference (regardless of team) OL, then it would be a disappointment.

Interesting criteria. I’ll be curious to see your assessment at the end of the season.

How would you measure OL success?

I can’t really say that there is a better way than what was described. However, if I’m being completely honest I don’t know that there is a correct way to judge it. The eye test is fair but very subjective toward recency bias; meaning a negative play can have a greater effect on one’s overall assessment than 10 good ones. Using statistical data is misleading as well because often times, a sack can be attributed to secondary coverage. The OL can’t be expected to hold a block forever. Last year the OL gave up a sack (21) on 4.4% of all pass attempts. In 2022, the OL gave up fewer sacks to a less mobile QB (18) but still gave up a sack on 5% of pass attempts. That number was 4.1% in 2021 and 7% in 2020. My point being is that the # of sacks allowed requires context. There is also the rotation factor in that are we judging guard play or each individual.

I’d be interested to see how folks on here would grade a performance each game versus what a service like PFF would. Like I said, I’m curious as to how it would be judged because I am curious.

I measure OL success by sacks allowed, missed blocks, knockdowns, how they move, are they able to do all the types of blocks, and do they at least give the QB 3-4 seconds of a clean pocket.

Has PFF ever said exactly how they grade OL?

I think all of the measurables that you and others have suggested are fair. To me, they all in some way add up to the eye test. My issue with using the eye test is that it draws conclusions from a fan lense and misinformation. Judgements and assessments are made in real time and conclusion are reached based on results. To gain a true picture, you have to watch the film of each individual and grade each rep objectively to gain a holistic picture. An example being not all INTs are the QB’s fault and not all sacks are the OL’s fault. It could look that way in real time and cause one to draw conclusions on opinions using the wrong information.

I honestly don’t know how PFF grades. But if it lines up similar to how Cummings does it then it would help with an assessment.

[AppStFan1]

Interesting criteria. I’ll be curious to see your assessment at the end of the season.

How would you measure OL success?

I can’t really say that there is a better way than what was described. However, if I’m being completely honest I don’t know that there is a correct way to judge it. The eye test is fair but very subjective toward recency bias; meaning a negative play can have a greater effect on one’s overall assessment than 10 good ones. Using statistical data is misleading as well because often times, a sack can be attributed to secondary coverage. The OL can’t be expected to hold a block forever. Last year the OL gave up a sack (21) on 4.4% of all pass attempts. In 2022, the OL gave up fewer sacks to a less mobile QB (18) but still gave up a sack on 5% of pass attempts. That number was 4.1% in 2021 and 7% in 2020. My point being is that the # of sacks allowed requires context. There is also the rotation factor in that are we judging guard play or each individual.

I’d be interested to see how folks on here would grade a performance each game versus what a service like PFF would. Like I said, I’m curious as to how it would be judged because I am curious.

I measure OL success by sacks allowed, missed blocks, knockdowns, how they move, are they able to do all the types of blocks, and do they at least give the QB 3-4 seconds of a clean pocket.

Has PFF ever said exactly how they grade OL?

I think all of the measurables that you and others have suggested are fair. To me, they all in some way add up to the eye test. My issue with using the eye test is that it draws conclusions from a fan lense and misinformation. Judgements and assessments are made in real time and conclusion are reached based on results. To gain a true picture, you have to watch the film of each individual and grade each rep objectively to gain a holistic picture. An example being not all INTs are the QB’s fault and not all sacks are the OL’s fault. It could look that way in real time and cause one to draw conclusions on opinions using the wrong information.

I honestly don’t know how PFF grades. But if it lines up similar to how Cummings does it then it would help with an assessment.

Of course you can't get the most accurate assessment until you watch the video. Even watching a TV copy is hard. You need to see coach's tape because they show the end zone and sideline view in full so you can see everything.

Yes, not all picks are the same like for a DB. He could have 7 picks on a season but if 3 of them are tips that he was just lucky to be there and 2 of them are really bad throws that anyway in the area could make but only 2 are by good ball skills then the 7 can be a little deceiving.

If an OL falls down 5 times in a game but all 5 were because his teammate kept getting put on the ground and he tripped over him then that is not his fault.

The one thing I know about PFF grades is they grade on missed assignments but the issue with that is they don't talk to every coach to know the assignment every play. One example I can point to is that a CB might appear to give up a TD because the WR he was in front of is 25 yards behind him down the field so they could point blame at him but the reality is the FS blew the play because he was suppose to come over the type toward that side to pick up the WR and he does not. It appears the CB gave up the TD but maybe it was really the FS based on that coverage call.

[t4pizza]

Curious question for those picking the OL or members of the OL. How will you measure success?

Late to the game with my response and it is somewhat similar to what the others have said but for me it really comes down to whether or not our line can allow us to run our offense successfully (regardless of any particular OL grade). So for our run game- can we open the holes that need to be opened and keep them open long enough for our RBs to get through. And in our passing game- can we give Joey enough time to get the throw off to his targets. Also important is keeping unnecessary penalties down to a minimum. If our OL can do those things, I think we have a very successful season and if not it could be a long one.

[AppSt94]

How would you measure OL success?

I can’t really say that there is a better way than what was described. However, if I’m being completely honest I don’t know that there is a correct way to judge it. The eye test is fair but very subjective toward recency bias; meaning a negative play can have a greater effect on one’s overall assessment than 10 good ones. Using statistical data is misleading as well because often times, a sack can be attributed to secondary coverage. The OL can’t be expected to hold a block forever. Last year the OL gave up a sack (21) on 4.4% of all pass attempts. In 2022, the OL gave up fewer sacks to a less mobile QB (18) but still gave up a sack on 5% of pass attempts. That number was 4.1% in 2021 and 7% in 2020. My point being is that the # of sacks allowed requires context. There is also the rotation factor in that are we judging guard play or each individual.

I’d be interested to see how folks on here would grade a performance each game versus what a service like PFF would. Like I said, I’m curious as to how it would be judged because I am curious.

I measure OL success by sacks allowed, missed blocks, knockdowns, how they move, are they able to do all the types of blocks, and do they at least give the QB 3-4 seconds of a clean pocket.

Has PFF ever said exactly how they grade OL?

I think all of the measurables that you and others have suggested are fair. To me, they all in some way add up to the eye test. My issue with using the eye test is that it draws conclusions from a fan lense and misinformation. Judgements and assessments are made in real time and conclusion are reached based on results. To gain a true picture, you have to watch the film of each individual and grade each rep objectively to gain a holistic picture. An example being not all INTs are the QB’s fault and not all sacks are the OL’s fault. It could look that way in real time and cause one to draw conclusions on opinions using the wrong information.

I honestly don’t know how PFF grades. But if it lines up similar to how Cummings does it then it would help with an assessment.

Of course you can't get the most accurate assessment until you watch the video. Even watching a TV copy is hard. You need to see coach's tape because they show the end zone and sideline view in full so you can see everything.

Yes, not all picks are the same like for a DB. He could have 7 picks on a season but if 3 of them are tips that he was just lucky to be there and 2 of them are really bad throws that anyway in the area could make but only 2 are by good ball skills then the 7 can be a little deceiving.

If an OL falls down 5 times in a game but all 5 were because his teammate kept getting put on the ground and he tripped over him then that is not his fault.

The one thing I know about PFF grades is they grade on missed assignments but the issue with that is they don't talk to every coach to know the assignment every play. One example I can point to is that a CB might appear to give up a TD because the WR he was in front of is 25 yards behind him down the field so they could point blame at him but the reality is the FS blew the play because he was suppose to come over the type toward that side to pick up the WR and he does not. It appears the CB gave up the TD but maybe it was really the FS based on that coverage call.

The bold is my whole point. It’s just hard to make an accurate assessment of player performance for this exact reason. People see what they see and interpret it based on a current emotion. There isn’t anything wrong with that. It’s basic human nature to do so.
But if a service that dedicates their time to grading each player is handicapped then how can a fan realistically be expected to make a rational assessment. There is just too much information to process from a fan perspective to make a proper assessment on a group or a player.

If you want to use statistics that’s fine. But last year’s much maligned OL gave up 21 sacks in 14 and allowed a sack on 4.4% of pass attempts. 21 sacks on 472 attempts.

The 2020 OL that had 2 NFL caliber players in Hodges and Nuezil, along with Garrison, Hannon and Baer Hunter gave up 21 sacks in 12 games and allowed a sack on 7% of all pass attempts. 21 sacks on 300 attempts.

[AppSt94]

Curious question for those picking the OL or members of the OL. How will you measure success?

Late to the game with my response and it is somewhat similar to what the others have said but for me it really comes down to whether or not our line can allow us to run our offense successfully (regardless of any particular OL grade). So for our run game- can we open the holes that need to be opened and keep them open long enough for our RBs to get through. And in our passing game- can we give Joey enough time to get the throw off to his targets. Also important is keeping unnecessary penalties down to a minimum. If our OL can do those things, I think we have a very successful season and if not it could be a long one.

Makes complete sense. How much of that can be unfairly attributed to the OL in negative situations? I’m not looking to push back with a counterpoint to everyone’s position. I’m genuinely curious as to how fans watch it because I don’t watch the game as a fan.

Running lanes can exist but if the RB can’t see it or a defender fills it, is that an OL problem? Could be a little bit on a few parties.

I was talking to Josh Thomas a couple weeks ago and I asked him, “as a fan, how can I see the game in front of me and determine who is controlling the game?” He told me to watch the QB. If the QB is standing in the pocket patting the ball, that’s a tell that the first options have been taken away by the secondary and he is scanning for an outlet. If the secondary can make them panic then it gives the defense time to get home because the OL can only hold up for so long. So my question becomes how much of an outcome is on a breakdown versus a good play by the opposition.

[Bigdaddyg1]

I am probably either dumb or simply in a minority but I have always thought sacks was an overrated stat. For me I compare it to turnovers in basketball. They are bad to commit/allow but it depends on what happens next. In basketball if you turn the ball over and allow points it’s a double bad thing. In football if you get a sack and the opponent has to punt it’s a double win. If you allow a sack for one yard it counts but isn’t a huge yard loss. If you convert the next play into a first down the sack was meaningless. Same for the defense. If you get a sack then allow a first down the sack was negated.

While sacks are a glorified stat I like to see TFL, hurries that result in missed passes, batted balls, etc. For our defense over the past 5 years or so how many sacks did we get that led to us getting the ball back? On offense what was the ratio of sacks allowed to us turning the ball back over? Conversely how many times did we allow a sack but still converted a first down or scored on the possession? One last aspect. How many yards have we lost due to sacks the past 5 years? I would suspect that during the CB years the total yards lost were lower as he wasn’t a scrambling QB.

[t4pizza]

Curious question for those picking the OL or members of the OL. How will you measure success?

Late to the game with my response and it is somewhat similar to what the others have said but for me it really comes down to whether or not our line can allow us to run our offense successfully (regardless of any particular OL grade). So for our run game- can we open the holes that need to be opened and keep them open long enough for our RBs to get through. And in our passing game- can we give Joey enough time to get the throw off to his targets. Also important is keeping unnecessary penalties down to a minimum. If our OL can do those things, I think we have a very successful season and if not it could be a long one.

Makes complete sense. How much of that can be unfairly attributed to the OL in negative situations? I’m not looking to push back with a counterpoint to everyone’s position. I’m genuinely curious as to how fans watch it because I don’t watch the game as a fan.

Running lanes can exist but if the RB can’t see it or a defender fills it, is that an OL problem? Could be a little bit on a few parties.

I was talking to Josh Thomas a couple weeks ago and I asked him, “as a fan, how can I see the game in front of me and determine who is controlling the game?” He told me to watch the QB. If the QB is standing in the pocket patting the ball, that’s a tell that the first options have been taken away by the secondary and he is scanning for an outlet. If the secondary can make them panic then it gives the defense time to get home because the OL can only hold up for so long. So my question becomes how much of an outcome is on a breakdown versus a good play by the opposition.

Clearly we as fans are never going to know everything that is supposed to be happening on a play, we usually just use our eye test. If we can see, either in live or on tv, that there is a hole made by the OL most of us will assume they did their job and there was some other breakdown. Likewise, if they keep blocks for 4 seconds or so on a pass but then the D gets through for a sack, most of us we realize that is a coverage sack and not blame the OL. Not know the plays, we judge by what we know our offense is supposed to look like based on previous years, games, etc. Most of us know when our offense is running on all cylinders without having to look at stats. If we are able to run our offense, the OL is doing their job. Again, with us it is mostly always going to be an eye test first and foremost.

[AppStFan1]

I can’t really say that there is a better way than what was described. However, if I’m being completely honest I don’t know that there is a correct way to judge it. The eye test is fair but very subjective toward recency bias; meaning a negative play can have a greater effect on one’s overall assessment than 10 good ones. Using statistical data is misleading as well because often times, a sack can be attributed to secondary coverage. The OL can’t be expected to hold a block forever. Last year the OL gave up a sack (21) on 4.4% of all pass attempts. In 2022, the OL gave up fewer sacks to a less mobile QB (18) but still gave up a sack on 5% of pass attempts. That number was 4.1% in 2021 and 7% in 2020. My point being is that the # of sacks allowed requires context. There is also the rotation factor in that are we judging guard play or each individual.

I’d be interested to see how folks on here would grade a performance each game versus what a service like PFF would. Like I said, I’m curious as to how it would be judged because I am curious.

I measure OL success by sacks allowed, missed blocks, knockdowns, how they move, are they able to do all the types of blocks, and do they at least give the QB 3-4 seconds of a clean pocket.

Has PFF ever said exactly how they grade OL?

I think all of the measurables that you and others have suggested are fair. To me, they all in some way add up to the eye test. My issue with using the eye test is that it draws conclusions from a fan lense and misinformation. Judgements and assessments are made in real time and conclusion are reached based on results. To gain a true picture, you have to watch the film of each individual and grade each rep objectively to gain a holistic picture. An example being not all INTs are the QB’s fault and not all sacks are the OL’s fault. It could look that way in real time and cause one to draw conclusions on opinions using the wrong information.

I honestly don’t know how PFF grades. But if it lines up similar to how Cummings does it then it would help with an assessment.

Of course you can't get the most accurate assessment until you watch the video. Even watching a TV copy is hard. You need to see coach's tape because they show the end zone and sideline view in full so you can see everything.

Yes, not all picks are the same like for a DB. He could have 7 picks on a season but if 3 of them are tips that he was just lucky to be there and 2 of them are really bad throws that anyway in the area could make but only 2 are by good ball skills then the 7 can be a little deceiving.

If an OL falls down 5 times in a game but all 5 were because his teammate kept getting put on the ground and he tripped over him then that is not his fault.

The one thing I know about PFF grades is they grade on missed assignments but the issue with that is they don't talk to every coach to know the assignment every play. One example I can point to is that a CB might appear to give up a TD because the WR he was in front of is 25 yards behind him down the field so they could point blame at him but the reality is the FS blew the play because he was suppose to come over the type toward that side to pick up the WR and he does not. It appears the CB gave up the TD but maybe it was really the FS based on that coverage call.

The bold is my whole point. It’s just hard to make an accurate assessment of player performance for this exact reason. People see what they see and interpret it based on a current emotion. There isn’t anything wrong with that. It’s basic human nature to do so.
But if a service that dedicates their time to grading each player is handicapped then how can a fan realistically be expected to make a rational assessment. There is just too much information to process from a fan perspective to make a proper assessment on a group or a player.

If you want to use statistics that’s fine. But last year’s much maligned OL gave up 21 sacks in 14 and allowed a sack on 4.4% of pass attempts. 21 sacks on 472 attempts.

The 2020 OL that had 2 NFL caliber players in Hodges and Nuezil, along with Garrison, Hannon and Baer Hunter gave up 21 sacks in 12 games and allowed a sack on 7% of all pass attempts. 21 sacks on 300 attempts.

That is a big beef I have with PFF because they are not grading the player in general and grading their performances in games but they don't really know in every case. They should be able to get it close but nobody is perfect. It is possible for a player to have NFL ability and miss several assignments so their coach grade is lower while another player does not have next level ability but they grade high by their coach for not missing assignments.

One thing about sacks is that a sack could be the fault of the QB for holding the ball way too long or the RB or TE in pass protection. You can't really say the OL gave up 21 by itself if we use a RB or TE in pass pro a lot.

Here are the sacks allowed numbers, according to PFF, for 2020:
Garrison- 4
Nuezil- 3
Peoples- 2
Pearson- 2
Hardy- 2
Gibbs- 1
Hunter- 1
Hannon- 1

They said that group gave up 16 sacks and if you remove the RB and TEs then the OL itself gave up 11 sacks. Garrison gave up 4 and was the worst of the group overall anyway. Hannon and Hodges were the two best based on college play. Hannon did not have the physical tools of Nuezil and Hodges but it does not take away how good he was for the Sun Belt.

If you compare to 2023, according to PFF, we gave up 14 sacks with Gentry and Murphy both giving up 3 each. Bucky was actually the best of that group and he gave up 1. Of that 14 though the RBs gave up 1 each so the OL only gave up 12 sacks, one more than the 2020 group.

This all assumes that PFF is correct in the amount of sacks but the numbers you gave don't match. If PFF is that wrong just on the actual sacks we gave up then imagine what else they are wrong about?

[AppSt94]

I measure OL success by sacks allowed, missed blocks, knockdowns, how they move, are they able to do all the types of blocks, and do they at least give the QB 3-4 seconds of a clean pocket.

Has PFF ever said exactly how they grade OL?

I think all of the measurables that you and others have suggested are fair. To me, they all in some way add up to the eye test. My issue with using the eye test is that it draws conclusions from a fan lense and misinformation. Judgements and assessments are made in real time and conclusion are reached based on results. To gain a true picture, you have to watch the film of each individual and grade each rep objectively to gain a holistic picture. An example being not all INTs are the QB’s fault and not all sacks are the OL’s fault. It could look that way in real time and cause one to draw conclusions on opinions using the wrong information.

I honestly don’t know how PFF grades. But if it lines up similar to how Cummings does it then it would help with an assessment.

Of course you can't get the most accurate assessment until you watch the video. Even watching a TV copy is hard. You need to see coach's tape because they show the end zone and sideline view in full so you can see everything.

Yes, not all picks are the same like for a DB. He could have 7 picks on a season but if 3 of them are tips that he was just lucky to be there and 2 of them are really bad throws that anyway in the area could make but only 2 are by good ball skills then the 7 can be a little deceiving.

If an OL falls down 5 times in a game but all 5 were because his teammate kept getting put on the ground and he tripped over him then that is not his fault.

The one thing I know about PFF grades is they grade on missed assignments but the issue with that is they don't talk to every coach to know the assignment every play. One example I can point to is that a CB might appear to give up a TD because the WR he was in front of is 25 yards behind him down the field so they could point blame at him but the reality is the FS blew the play because he was suppose to come over the type toward that side to pick up the WR and he does not. It appears the CB gave up the TD but maybe it was really the FS based on that coverage call.

The bold is my whole point. It’s just hard to make an accurate assessment of player performance for this exact reason. People see what they see and interpret it based on a current emotion. There isn’t anything wrong with that. It’s basic human nature to do so.
But if a service that dedicates their time to grading each player is handicapped then how can a fan realistically be expected to make a rational assessment. There is just too much information to process from a fan perspective to make a proper assessment on a group or a player.

If you want to use statistics that’s fine. But last year’s much maligned OL gave up 21 sacks in 14 and allowed a sack on 4.4% of pass attempts. 21 sacks on 472 attempts.

The 2020 OL that had 2 NFL caliber players in Hodges and Nuezil, along with Garrison, Hannon and Baer Hunter gave up 21 sacks in 12 games and allowed a sack on 7% of all pass attempts. 21 sacks on 300 attempts.

That is a big beef I have with PFF because they are not grading the player in general and grading their performances in games but they don't really know in every case. They should be able to get it close but nobody is perfect. It is possible for a player to have NFL ability and miss several assignments so their coach grade is lower while another player does not have next level ability but they grade high by their coach for not missing assignments.

One thing about sacks is that a sack could be the fault of the QB for holding the ball way too long or the RB or TE in pass protection. You can't really say the OL gave up 21 by itself if we use a RB or TE in pass pro a lot.

Here are the sacks allowed numbers, according to PFF, for 2020:
Garrison- 4
Nuezil- 3
Peoples- 2
Pearson- 2
Hardy- 2
Gibbs- 1
Hunter- 1
Hannon- 1

They said that group gave up 16 sacks and if you remove the RB and TEs then the OL itself gave up 11 sacks. Garrison gave up 4 and was the worst of the group overall anyway. Hannon and Hodges were the two best based on college play. Hannon did not have the physical tools of Nuezil and Hodges but it does not take away how good he was for the Sun Belt.

If you compare to 2023, according to PFF, we gave up 14 sacks with Gentry and Murphy both giving up 3 each. Bucky was actually the best of that group and he gave up 1. Of that 14 though the RBs gave up 1 each so the OL only gave up 12 sacks, one more than the 2020 group.

This all assumes that PFF is correct in the amount of sacks but the numbers you gave don't match. If PFF is that wrong just on the actual sacks we gave up then imagine what else they are wrong about?

I took my numbers from the team statistics on AppStateSports.com

[huskie3]

Eye test. I take into account field position, down distance, formation, personnel, defensive set, and time. I love my NEZ seats that generally allow me to see all this.
Only mitigating factor is if my wife wants to talk to me.

[AppSt94]

Eye test. I take into account field position, down distance, formation, personnel, defensive set, and time. I love my NEZ seats that generally allow me to see all this.
Only mitigating factor is if my wife wants to talk to me.

I love my NEZ seats for the same reason. My gf knows not to engage in small talk during the game.

[311neers]

MVP- Joey then Kanye
Breakout- Fowles
Under radar- Short

[AppStFan1]

I think all of the measurables that you and others have suggested are fair. To me, they all in some way add up to the eye test. My issue with using the eye test is that it draws conclusions from a fan lense and misinformation. Judgements and assessments are made in real time and conclusion are reached based on results. To gain a true picture, you have to watch the film of each individual and grade each rep objectively to gain a holistic picture. An example being not all INTs are the QB’s fault and not all sacks are the OL’s fault. It could look that way in real time and cause one to draw conclusions on opinions using the wrong information.

I honestly don’t know how PFF grades. But if it lines up similar to how Cummings does it then it would help with an assessment.

Of course you can't get the most accurate assessment until you watch the video. Even watching a TV copy is hard. You need to see coach's tape because they show the end zone and sideline view in full so you can see everything.

Yes, not all picks are the same like for a DB. He could have 7 picks on a season but if 3 of them are tips that he was just lucky to be there and 2 of them are really bad throws that anyway in the area could make but only 2 are by good ball skills then the 7 can be a little deceiving.

If an OL falls down 5 times in a game but all 5 were because his teammate kept getting put on the ground and he tripped over him then that is not his fault.

The one thing I know about PFF grades is they grade on missed assignments but the issue with that is they don't talk to every coach to know the assignment every play. One example I can point to is that a CB might appear to give up a TD because the WR he was in front of is 25 yards behind him down the field so they could point blame at him but the reality is the FS blew the play because he was suppose to come over the type toward that side to pick up the WR and he does not. It appears the CB gave up the TD but maybe it was really the FS based on that coverage call.

The bold is my whole point. It’s just hard to make an accurate assessment of player performance for this exact reason. People see what they see and interpret it based on a current emotion. There isn’t anything wrong with that. It’s basic human nature to do so.
But if a service that dedicates their time to grading each player is handicapped then how can a fan realistically be expected to make a rational assessment. There is just too much information to process from a fan perspective to make a proper assessment on a group or a player.

If you want to use statistics that’s fine. But last year’s much maligned OL gave up 21 sacks in 14 and allowed a sack on 4.4% of pass attempts. 21 sacks on 472 attempts.

The 2020 OL that had 2 NFL caliber players in Hodges and Nuezil, along with Garrison, Hannon and Baer Hunter gave up 21 sacks in 12 games and allowed a sack on 7% of all pass attempts. 21 sacks on 300 attempts.

That is a big beef I have with PFF because they are not grading the player in general and grading their performances in games but they don't really know in every case. They should be able to get it close but nobody is perfect. It is possible for a player to have NFL ability and miss several assignments so their coach grade is lower while another player does not have next level ability but they grade high by their coach for not missing assignments.

One thing about sacks is that a sack could be the fault of the QB for holding the ball way too long or the RB or TE in pass protection. You can't really say the OL gave up 21 by itself if we use a RB or TE in pass pro a lot.

Here are the sacks allowed numbers, according to PFF, for 2020:
Garrison- 4
Nuezil- 3
Peoples- 2
Pearson- 2
Hardy- 2
Gibbs- 1
Hunter- 1
Hannon- 1

They said that group gave up 16 sacks and if you remove the RB and TEs then the OL itself gave up 11 sacks. Garrison gave up 4 and was the worst of the group overall anyway. Hannon and Hodges were the two best based on college play. Hannon did not have the physical tools of Nuezil and Hodges but it does not take away how good he was for the Sun Belt.

If you compare to 2023, according to PFF, we gave up 14 sacks with Gentry and Murphy both giving up 3 each. Bucky was actually the best of that group and he gave up 1. Of that 14 though the RBs gave up 1 each so the OL only gave up 12 sacks, one more than the 2020 group.

This all assumes that PFF is correct in the amount of sacks but the numbers you gave don't match. If PFF is that wrong just on the actual sacks we gave up then imagine what else they are wrong about?

I took my numbers from the team statistics on AppStateSports.com

Another prime example where PFF stats are way off of the schools. Now, I do know some cases where schools are expected of padding stats with assisted tackles for a player but I would think the team sack numbers would be accurate.

[AppSt94]

MVP- Joey
Breakout- I am going to go a different direction with this and say Kaedin. My reasoning is that we are pretty deep with experience at all the skill positions and while I like Fowles, I think that he is an under the radar guy. As good as Kaedin has been outside. He is scary good at slot. I think that this move elevates his game to the point that you can call it a breakout season.
Under radar- Fowles

[ASUFan4863]

MVP- Joey
Breakout- I am going to go a different direction with this and say Kaedin. My reasoning is that we are pretty deep with experience at all the skill positions and while I like Fowles, I think that he is an under the radar guy. As good as Kaedin has been outside. He is scary good at slot. I think that this move elevates his game to the point that you can call it a breakout season.
Under radar- Fowles

Do you know which position Fowles will be at WR? I assume Hetzel/Lawson would be in the slot behind KRob?

[AppSt94]

MVP- Joey
Breakout- I am going to go a different direction with this and say Kaedin. My reasoning is that we are pretty deep with experience at all the skill positions and while I like Fowles, I think that he is an under the radar guy. As good as Kaedin has been outside. He is scary good at slot. I think that this move elevates his game to the point that you can call it a breakout season.
Under radar- Fowles

Do you know which position Fowles will be at WR? I assume Hetzel/Lawson would be in the slot behind KRob?

Definitely an outside guy. Not sure if he sees most of his action on the field side or boundary. He’s probably #4 behind Horn, Jackson, and Stroman.