I just cast my votes for the pro bowl, and I realized something. I have no idea how to rank offensive/defensive linemen.
How do you know a good center from a bad center?
How do you know if this guard is better at opening a hole for the running back than that guard? Do you look at which quarter back had the fewest sacks/hurries/knock downs and combine with yards from scrimmage for running backs?
If a defensive lineman is so good the opponent always double teams him, leaving his teammate a single team, how do you measure that? Fewest rushing yards allowed combined with most sacks/hurries/knock downs?
I probably didn’t vote for the actual best players in their positions, I voted for my team when I had no idea how to measure actual performance.
You don’t, usually. The only way to really tell is to watch plays, usually in slo-mo, often multiple times, focusing on those specific players, and having some knowledge of what their assignments are.
99% of the time when fans give strong opinions on things like which guard is better, they’re either responding to a handful of splashy plays (holding call, etc.), or just repeating what they read in the paper. And the reporters are often just repeating what they hear (or praising the guys who give them off-the-record quotes, etc.).
I volunteered as a game charter this year for a website, and did exactly that kind of film study with a bunch of games this year, and while I developed opinions of guys that I saw a lot of (e.g. Sean Lauvao is bad, Chris Baker is good), I couldn’t give an intelligent opinion about how good/bad they are compared to someone else unless I watched several games of the other guy, too.
And what about the Hall of Fame voters? Every so often, an old-time offensive lineman like Bob Kuechenberg or Jerry Kramer is up for consideration again. How the heck does a modern sportswriter judge whether those guys are deserving?
I think the pro bowl lost all credibility when the fans vote got involved. Inthe past it was the players doing the voting and it wasn’t a popularity contest but an acknowledgement of a job well done by your peers.
I find Pro Football Focus to be a handy reference for that kind of in depth analysis, saving me time from having to do it myself. They even have a Pro Bowl cheat sheet based on their grades.
If they’re doing their job right, they can look at things like pro bowl appearances and what contemporaries said. But even there, it’s still basically a popularity contest, just by proxy (which contemporaries do you ask?).
IMO no small amout of it is: “Did he play on famous/winning teams” (hmmm… why are Kuechenberg and Kramer always coming up?), and “how did he treat the media” and “do I like him personally.”
I think it’s a given that not everyone has first hand knowledge of every NFL player, including coaches, GM’s, and “experts”.
But their opinion is based on a detailed review of every player, every play. It’s not just some local newspaper guy who watches the home games and ESPN highlights to make up their mind.
No, each coach/GM don’t have an informed opinion about each of the ~2000 players. But I’d bet most of them have well-informed opinions about most of the players. They get paid to watch hours upon hours of film each week, and they have thousands of hours of film work in the past to compare it to.
“Experts” are a mixed bag: I think Ron Jaworski really does watch a crapload of film, especially of QBs, I think Ben Muth really does watch a crapload of O-line play, and both operate from a huge body of knowledge in doing so. I think Peter King repeats what people tell him, and that Michael Irvin and Phil Simms spout opinions based on what they just saw happen and what will make them sound smart.
Correct: they are a more knowledgeable, better class of sportswriter than the typical columnist or beat guy writing for the city daily (or, to be fair, they have different audiences and different assignments). So are the guys here and here. But they’re still sportwriters, and it’s still an opinion. (If they’re charting events, e.g. “blocks missed,” it gets a bit more objective, but even there it’s not always obvious and opinions do creep in.)
But the OP is asking how fans can know, themselves, about how the various guards and defensive tackles stack up, and I’m saying that unless you have hours upon hours to invest, you can’t, and will have to rely on people who get paid to do that.
Players are certainly more knowledgeable than I am, but…
To use one crude example, does Eli Manning have any way of knowing how good a blocker Joe Thomas is? The Giants play the Browns, at most, every three years. And since they don’t face off against each other (they’re both on offense) , Eli never even looks at film of the Browns’ offensive line.
Eli knows a lot more about football than I do, but is he qualified to judge whether Joe Thomas is a worthy All-Pro? I doubt it.
It’s like the coaches’ poll in college. All college coaches know far more about football than I do. But has Nick Saban been watching film on Baylor or TCU this year? Of course not! Why would he? Has he been watching film on Wisconsin or Arizona? Again, why would he? So even if he did his own voting (he probably doesn’t- he probably doesn’t have time, and just hands his ballot to Alabama’s PR director), he wouldn’t be qualified to judge how good any of those teams were! He’d be like the average fan, moving winning teams up a few notches, moving losing teams down a few notches.
I’d let Nick Saban rank the SEC, because he knows it inside out. But what does he know about the PAC-12 or the ACC?
