mgscott wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 8:04 am
All we are doing here is speculating, including what PFF is doing on that stat. What do you or PFF have to validate that all of those passes were inaccurate? Just the fact that the ball was incomplete and that Jeudy wasn't where the ball was? Unless PFF is getting direct info from the actual teams as to what the play was and how the route was supposed to be run, they are just guessing too. On your example above where Lock has a clean pocket and can wait for Jeudy to get open. Maybe the play was supposed to be delayed like that or maybe he fortunately had a clean pocket so he could wait for Jeudy to finally get open and throw the pass. We don't know. But if the pocket wasn't clean and he had pressure, he likely can't wait that long for Jeudy to do his 8 step dance to run the slant. We don't know.
I am certainly mocking him here some, but I find it curious why you don't seem able to even acknowledge the possibility that Jeudy may take too much time or excessive movements to run some routes. It all is apparently by design and he is the best route running WR of his class. I guess we'll just agree to disagree.
I think we have different definitions of speculation.
Saying that a WR is running the wrong release with a route and slowing an entire offense down without anything to support it would be speculation. You're using a lot of "maybe" "possibly" "it could've been" without anything to really support a stance.
PFF watches All-22 and grades plays in detail. They aren't 100% factual of course, but what they're doing is a lot closer to a factual conclusion than a hunch. The article has plenty of data to support its stance.
I'm simply asking you for some level of proof of what the slot WR is supposed to do on that play and what Jeudy is supposed to be doing on the plays he's slowing the offense down. A lot of things are possible, but responding to an article that actually has tangible proof with hunches doesn't really do anything.