Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Sayin really impressed me. looks like a young QB just getting better every week.

Yeah- Washington was dropping 7 or 8 on D pretty much the entire game, with the intent being to not give up any long passes.

Sayin took what was there.  Kid knows when to throw the ball away and when to just take a sack. Plus, he throws a beautiful ball. Very accurate and leads  the receiver. Nobody watched him against Grambling for good reason, but the kid throws a beautiful deep ball as well

I'm very impressed with him. only weakness I see from him is lack of size, athleticism, and overall horsepower in his arm. first two are bigger issues than the last imo- as arm strength is far less important than accuracy/ball placement/timing- which he seems to have all of that in spades. i'd much rather my QB have all that than a howitzer with none of that. first two might be problems- he's pretty small and he gives you nothing in the QB run game and cannot escape pressure and extend plays and make something out of nothing- he's a pure drop back passer with like 43 speed on Madden. if his protection isn't there/he gets moved off his spot- it's a dead play.

PFF is looking more and more like clickbait and not the Almanac/Encyclopedia it attempts to portray itself up as.I'm not an anti-analytics guy, but I am becoming convinced that these people arent actually watching the games and rely solely on obscure metrics to dictate their grades/approval. But these findings are tough to defend

For instance - Brandon Inniss fumbled and lost the ball but scored a 74.2 with 0 yds. Meanwhile, Julian Sayin completed over 75 % of his passes,completing 22 of 28 passes for 208 yards and two touchdowns. His efforts earned him a Pro Football Focus grade of 59.9?Really - make it make sense.I asked AI for the boxscore and PFF clearly highlighted boxscore.They gave the score,the spread,the betting odds & the scoring plays but no boxscore(CBS produced one immediatelyby comparison).

 Here are some of the collective concerns 

- Front Office Sports reports that PFF has lost significant talent, which could impact its ability to stay competitive.

- subjectivity and potential bias of its grading system, a lack of contextual understanding of schemes and assignments, questions about the expertise of some graders, and the perceived inaccuracy or lack of nuance in their ratings compared to coaches' evaluations.

- Qualitative vs. Quantitative Data: Unlike purely statistical analyses, PFF's 0-100 grades are based on qualitative, opinion-driven evaluations of each play, which can be prone to bias and subjective interpretation.

- Mismatch with Reality: Players sometimes find PFF grades to be at odds with their coaches' evaluations or what they believe actually happened on the field, leading to frustration and skepticism.

- Misleading Metrics: The focus on detailed, micro-metrics can sometimes devalue a player's overall performance, such as focusing on pressures for a defensive lineman rather than the more impactful sack.

 Maybe it's me but that doesn't exactly sound like a ringing endorsement - PFF are some slappies in a decked out basement rec-room pouring themselves cold ones & hoping those less insightful than themselves swallow this bilge whole while they make bank

Blood shot but not blind like those rocks of journalism.Those frat boys need to finish the week end keg and maybe report back wednesday

The crossesyou must bare