3 Players graded top 25 by position

[PAcuse]

Pro Football Focus grades out college players each, I enjoy looking over the list as it might spotlight a player I don't know much about and also gives me an idea oh good my Orangemen where.
(Syracuse.com does an article each week as well)

Bennett 21st for ILB graded at 86.5
Dungey 8th for QB graded at 85.4 (most will say he wasted crisp on a lot of passes and still graded out top 10)
Martin 24th for SS graded at 78.3, credit goes to pacusewife for pointing out Martin multiple times during the Pitt game to me. He had a very good game in my eyes

Now from time to time grades will be odd take Ravian Pierce this week he was graded out at 46.4. He did have a drop and then drop the shuffle pass that was thrown at his shoulder on the final drive, I guess that countered out his 9 catches for 99 yards.

Oline had it's good and bad. Glad to McGloster putting to a solid season, really worried about the left side of the line as they continue to have issues:

Adams 77.9
McGloster 75.1
Heckel 45.7
Servais 46.3

 

[LeMoyneCuse]

We really didn't grade out that well. Interesting that we can suddenly win playing mediocre against mediocre competition.

 

[TheCusian]

We really didn't grade out that well. Interesting that we can suddenly win playing mediocre against mediocre competition.

tempo + improving D = more chances to win

 

[PAcuse]

tempo + improving D = more chances to win

That's why this offense will work here. The talent is not here yet, but man when it does show up...

 

[rrlbees]

that's like the 4th time dungey has been recognized by someone. I heard he wasn't very good.

 

[Entropic]

that's like the 4th time dungey has been recognized by someone. I heard he wasn't very good.

I don't think he is even near his potential yet. He doesn't have a full year in this system. He needs to develop pocket awareness and get better going through his reads. He can make the throws and is obviously a dynamic runner. Still room to grow with him.

 

[texascpa]

We got some props on Mark Packers show as well by some ACC analyst - forgot who it was but he was at the Pitt game. Mentioned Dungey's fearlessness, Bennett and Franklin, along with some guys on the D line that can get to you. Still didn't think we have a chance and interestingly thought Clemson's D would not be impacted by our up-tempo O.

 

[upperdeck]

if we can get 7-8-9 play drives going the tempo will cause issues.. i dont think 3 and outs like last year worry them too much

 

[orangenauburn]

They are not worried because cramp-itis will be plentiful on Friday

 

[Tobias Funke]

that's like the 4th time dungey has been recognized by someone. I heard he wasn't very good.

Luckily #Done-gy didn't catch on like one poster wanted.

 

[nzm136]

That's why this offense will work here. The talent is not here yet, but man when it does show up...

Tempo + talent deficiency = big loss

Tempo + talent advantage = big win

Tempo isn't good in and of itself. It leads to more points/yards, but that's not always good. Fewer points on far fewer drives is way better than more points on way more drives.

Our system works well if it leads to recruits. It's horrible if it doesn't.

 

[NineOneSeven]

that's like the 4th time dungey has been recognized by someone. I heard he wasn't very good.

I love it. Even knowledgeable football guys have said it. It's weird. People must have forgotten some of the qbs we've had out there.

Does he miss some throws? For sure. Usually early on. But also hoW many attempted throws does he have a game? ALOT. It'll happen. Just like drops will happen when a guy gets the ball slung at him 15+ times.

And his running is absolutely a massive weapon. His intensity wins us games.

People clamoring for Devito or claiming he will be better option even next year need to stop embarassing themselves, imo.

 

[SoBeCuse]

We got some props on Mark Packers show as well by some ACC analyst - forgot who it was but he was at the Pitt game. Mentioned Dungey's fearlessness, Bennett and Franklin, along with some guys on the D line that can get to you. Still didn't think we have a chance and interestingly thought Clemson's D would not be impacted by our up-tempo O.

Wish I had heard that. Big fan of Packer and the coverage on Ch. 84. Good stuff.

 

[nzm136]

I love it. Even knowledgeable football guys have said it. It's weird. People must have forgotten some of the qbs we've had out there.

Does he miss some throws? For sure. Usually early on. But also hoW many attempted throws does he have a game? ALOT. It'll happen. Just like drops will happen when a guy gets the ball slung at him 15+ times.

And his running is absolutely a massive weapon. His intensity wins us games.

People clamoring for Devito or claiming he will be better option even next year need to stop embarassing themselves, imo.

IMHO, Dungey's issue is concussion-related injuries.

He's a great QB when he plays, and he would be an amazing option QB if he had better luck w/ injuries.

I've never really understood all the negativity about him.

 

[rrlbees]

 

[TheCusian]

Tempo + talent deficiency = big loss

Tempo + talent advantage = big win

Tempo isn't good in and of itself. It leads to more points/yards, but that's not always good. Fewer points on far fewer drives is way better than more points on way more drives.

Our system works well if it leads to recruits. It's horrible if it doesn't.

What?!

More points and yards ARE ALWAYS good - especially if your D is improving. It’s good because you don’t have to be perfect on every drive to win.

 

[nzm136]

What?!

More points and yards ARE ALWAYS good - especially if your D is improving. It’s good because you don’t have to be perfect on every drive to win.

Wrong.

More points *per drive* is always good. More points at the expense of giving the opposition way more chances to score is a terrible strategy.

 

[hungrychuck]

I love it. Even knowledgeable football guys have said it. It's weird. People must have forgotten some of the qbs we've had out there.

Does he miss some throws? For sure. Usually early on. But also hoW many attempted throws does he have a game? ALOT. It'll happen. Just like drops will happen when a guy gets the ball slung at him 15+ times.

And his running is absolutely a massive weapon. His intensity wins us games.

People clamoring for Devito or claiming he will be better option even next year need to stop embarassing themselves, imo.

I certainly don't think he had his best game Saturday, but as I've said previously, I think he is emerging as a Top 25 type QB nationally, especially considering the lack of weapons surrounding him.

Anyone suggesting he's not the best quarterback on the roster, or that there isn't a huge drop-off to who's next at this point, seriously needs to think harder.

 

[TheCusian]

Wrong.

More points *per drive* is always good. More points at the expense of giving the opposition way more chances to score is a terrible strategy.

Well, of course. That’s the goal. But that’s not what you said.

Given the choice between:

A) tempo with more yards and points with this year’s D

B) no tempo with less yards and points and this year’s D

“A” gives you more opportunities to win. That’s why we’ve been in every game we’ve played in the 4thQ.

 

[PhatOrange]

We got some props on Mark Packers show as well by some ACC analyst - forgot who it was but he was at the Pitt game. Mentioned Dungey's fearlessness, Bennett and Franklin, along with some guys on the D line that can get to you. Still didn't think we have a chance and interestingly thought Clemson's D would not be impacted by our up-tempo O.

I heard this yesterday to. He mentioned Dungey as fearless and us having 2 great linebackers in Parris and Franklin. He thought we'd have some "pop plays" against Clemson and give them fits here and there but obviously overall we don't have the horses. The tone was that he didn't think we'd get wiped off the carpet though. Complimentary of Babers and liked the direction this thing was going.

 

[nzm136]

Well, of course. That’s the goal. But that’s not what you said.

Given the choice between:

A) tempo with more yards and points with this year’s D

B) no tempo with less yards and points and this year’s D

“A” gives you more opportunities to win. That’s why we’ve been in every game we’ve played in the 4thQ.

No. I said, "more points on way more drives is bad." There is a very strong correlation between your drives and your opponent's drives, and each of their drives is a chance to score. The converse is fewer points on way fewer drives is a good thing. It means you aren't scoring as much, but your opponent has far fewer chances to score.

Pace is just an amplifier that punishes teams at a talent disadvantage because A) it leads to injuries and fatigue (mostly of your team because it leads to a smaller time of possession if the other team isn't fast paced), and B) because it minimizes the role of luck, which ignores talent.

Tempo isn't good in and of itself, and failing to recognize that is dumb football.

 

[rrlbees]

No. I said, "more points on way more drives is bad." There is a very strong correlation between your drives and your opponent's drives, and each of their drives is a chance to score. The converse is fewer points on way fewer drives is a good thing. It means you aren't scoring as much, but your opponent has far fewer chances to score.

Pace is just an amplifier that punishes teams at a talent disadvantage because A) it leads to injuries and fatigue (mostly of your team because it leads to a smaller time of possession if the other team isn't fast paced), and B) because it minimizes the role of luck, which ignores talent.

Tempo isn't good in and of itself, and failing to recognize that is dumb football.

You're ignoring the whole intent of "playing fast" with increased tempo. It's two fold. One, it doesn't give the defense a chance to adjust personnel situationally and two, it wears down the defense over time. We practice at that speed so are used to it, the defense not so much.

 

[nzm136]

You're ignoring the whole intent of "playing fast" with increased tempo. It's two fold. One, it doesn't give the defense a chance to adjust personnel situationally and two, it wears down the defense over time. We practice at that speed so are used to it, the defense not so much.

The problem is that it doesn't wear the defense down over time vis-a-vis our defense. And removing the opposition's ability to adjust situationally only matters to a great degree to the extent that it impacts the score, which is coveted by my "more points on way more drives" statement.

 

[nzm136]

I know this isn't a popular sentiment on this site, but our system is actually terrible at winning games w/ a talent disadvantage.

It is, however, fantastic for recruiting, and it's good at winning w/ a talent advantage. That's why our recruiting is so vital this season.

We're winning because of a combination of our talent (we're better than we think we are), and our coaching (which is something separate from our system).

 

[LeMoyneCuse]

The problem is that it doesn't wear the defense down over time vis-a-vis our defense. And removing the opposition's ability to adjust situationally only matters to a great degree to the extent that it impacts the score, which is coveted by my "more points on way more drives" statement.

If you look at the PFF articles that come out every week, our defense seems to be on the field for roughly 60 snaps a game. Our lack of explosiveness means more ball control, which means the defense isn't facing more plays.