Larry Foote sucks ? well really , does he ??

[BigNastyDefense]

Nothing new here. Foote is OK but not great; we all know that. For a $1.75M a year starter, you won't do much better, though.

Not everyone can be a flashy playmaker who commands $10M a year, which is why we need guys like Foote, and incidentally also why our CB situation always makes people unhappy.

This is where I come in. I agree with your comments.

Steelers fans always want all their players to be $10M+ a year players, and that's not gonna happen. The NFL has this thing called a salary cap. It's just not a possibility.

Is Foote ideal? No, he doesn't have the talent that a guy like Timmons has. He's not James Farrior either. But he's better than some street free agent. I think the Steelers wanted Sean Spence to be the one to replace Foote, but due to a gruesome knee injury, that may not happen as quickly as they wanted, if at all. But I'd rather have Foote in there currently than someone who we don't know anything about...and no, I don't want them signing Te'o to become his replacement.

[GBMelBlount]

But I'd rather have Foote in there currently than someone who we don't know anything about...and no, I don't want them signing Te'o to become his replacement.

[SteelerFanInStl]

Foote is basically "old reliable". I don't have a problem with bringing him back but we need a young guy that can eventually replace him. With Spence's injury, I don't know if he's capable of being that guy.

[Dwinsgames]

Foote is basically "old reliable". I don't have a problem with bringing him back but we need a young guy that can eventually replace him. With Spence's injury, I don't know if he's capable of being that guy.

I do not disagree , I just felt that Foote takes more than his fair share of the heat around here when clearly he is a bargain , and then when you look at his stats side by side with Timmons stats it only confirms the fact ... yet Timmons gets over the top praise

[SteelerFanInStl]

I do not disagree , I just felt that Foote takes more than his fair share of the heat around here when clearly he is a bargain , and then when you look at his stats side by side with Timmons stats it only confirms the fact ... yet Timmons gets over the top praise

I don't think that you can compare him with Timmons. They're different types of players. Larry will never make spectacular plays but he'll make a lot of tackles.

I'm OK with Larry for now but we need a plan for his replacement.

[katmandu]

HEBRON FANGUPO

[shutdown]

I do not disagree , I just felt that Foote takes more than his fair share of the heat around here when clearly he is a bargain , and then when you look at his stats side by side with Timmons stats it only confirms the fact ... yet Timmons gets over the top praise

Not really:

Larry Foote ranked overall 46th out of 53 ILB who played 25% or more of their defensive snaps last season. (Timmons ranked 5th)

Larry Foote ranked 46th out of those 53 ILB in plays where he was rushing the QB. (Timmons ranked 2nd)

Larry Foote ranked 35th out of those 53 ILB in plays where he was in coverage. (Timmons ranked 4th)

Larry Foote ranked 47th out of those 53 ILB in plays where he was in run defense. (Timmons ranked 19th)

Larry Foote led all Steelers LB's in missed tackles, had a QB rating of 121.6 when "attempting" to cover anyone, and on an overall level was ranked the worst LB on our team last season (and one of the worst in the NFL).


I am fine with keeping him on the team this year. He's the only guy who knows the position and can execute it properly. It's one of the hardest positions to learn on our defense. But he didn't have a great year last season, and he was nothing compared to Timmons.

[Dwinsgames]

Not really:

Larry Foote ranked overall 46th out of 53 ILB who played 25% or more of their defensive snaps last season. (Timmons ranked 5th)

Larry Foote ranked 46th out of those 53 ILB in plays where he was rushing the QB. (Timmons ranked 2nd)

Larry Foote ranked 35th out of those 53 ILB in plays where he was in coverage. (Timmons ranked 4th)

Larry Foote ranked 47th out of those 53 ILB in plays where he was in run defense. (Timmons ranked 19th)

Larry Foote led all Steelers LB's in missed tackles, had a QB rating of 121.6 when "attempting" to cover anyone, and on an overall level was ranked the worst LB on our team last season (and one of the worst in the NFL).


I am fine with keeping him on the team this year. He's the only guy who knows the position and can execute it properly. It's one of the hardest positions to learn on our defense. But he didn't have a great year last season, and he was nothing compared to Timmons.

Bullshit .

I have no clue how they determine those percentages above the end of the day / season statistics tell a completely different story ...

if you took Farriors best years and Footes season stats from last year tossed them in a hat shuffled them around and presented them here MOST would not know the difference ( and they could be mixed up or correct ) so claiming Foote is one of the worst is saying Farrior sucked too statistically speaking ... below are the two best seasons James Farrior produced as a Steeler and Footes 2012 season .... Farrior played that spot for 10 years to come up with those 2 seasons worth of stats ... Foote just 1 ... if you look at it closer and do a season by season comparison statistically Farrior only out produced Foote 3 times in his 10 years here in Pittsburgh and Foote has only manned that spot on the def 1 season ... in conclusion Larry Foote is just easy to pick on for whatever reason ... he is a solid player in this system and a fantastic bargain

Pos	No.	G	GS	Sk	Int	Yds	TD	Lng	PD	FF	Fmb	FR	Yds	TD	Tkl	Ast	Sfty	AV

LILB

50

16

16

4.0

0

0

0

0

2

2

0

2

0

0

75

38

10

LILB

51

16

16

6.0

0

0

0

0

5

1

0

1

8

0

80

29

10

LILB

51

16

16

6.5

1

0

0

0

7

2

0

0

0

0

64

30

9

http://www.pro-football-reference.co...F/FarrJa99.htm

http://www.pro-football-reference.co...F/FootLa20.htm

[shutdown]

Are you serious?

So you're looking at vague numbers and using it as your only grounds as to what Foote was good? Because Foote had as many tackles and or sacks, they're equal players?

How did Foote fair in pass coverage?
How many times was he targeted?
How many receptions did he allow?
What was his completion %?
What was his QB rating when in coverage?
How many QB pressures did he have?
How many QB hits did he have?
How many missed tackles did he have?
How many plays was he involved in that led to offensive failure?
How did Foote fair in run plays where he didnt make the tackle?
How did Foote do in ALL plays where he was rushing the QB?

Your tackles and sack stats don't tell me anything in regards to those questions. Again, you're looking at cookie cutter stats and trying to make a detailed analysis on a player. That's bullshit.

Telling me Foote had X amount of tackles and Y amount of sacks doesn't tell me anything.

There are other sites that watch a player for every play of every game. Everytime Foote rushed the QB, whether he made it or not he was graded. Everytime Foote was defending the run, whether he made the tackle or not, he was graded. All you're doing is saying "Foote made a tackle, must of been a good tackle". Crediting him for each tackle or sack like that is bullshit.

[GBMelBlount]

I am curious why you did not present your opinion and then share these statistics you mention to support your opinion?

[shutdown]

I am curious why you did not present your opinion and then share these statistics you mention to support your opinion?

Sure:

Stats based off ILB who played at least 25% of their defensive snaps:

Out of 53 ILB's:

How did Foote fair in pass coverage? Graded -1.8 (35th overall) Timmons graded a 4.2 (4th overall)
How many times was he targeted? 46 times
How many receptions did he allow? 34 allowed
What was his completion %? 73.9%
What was his QB rating when in coverage? 121.6
How many QB pressures did he have? 8
How many QB hits did he have? 5
How many missed tackles did he have? 10
How many plays was he involved in that led to offensive failure? 47
How did Foote fair in ALL run plays even when he didnt make the tackle? Graded a -9.0 (47th overall) Timmons graded a 2.5 (19th overall)
How did Foote do in ALL plays where he was rushing the QB? Graded a -2.2 (46th overall) Timmons graded a 4.9 (2nd overall)

I did present my opinion:

I am fine with keeping him on the team this year. He's the only guy who knows the position and can execute it properly. It's one of the hardest positions to learn on our defense. But he didn't have a great year last season, and he was nothing compared to Timmons.

[Dwinsgames]

Sure:



I did present my opinion:


[/COLOR]

I am fine with keeping him on the team this year. He's the only guy who knows the position and can execute it properly. It's one of the hardest positions to learn on our defense. But he didn't have a great year last season, and he was nothing compared to Timmons.

surely if he is as bad as you proclaim he is , why would you be " FINE" with him on the team this year or any year ? would someone not familiar with the scheme do just as well as the bottom feeder you make Foote out to be would / could / will do ?

I mean really ....

[shutdown]

He is our best option available at this point in time given all the circumstances and state of the team.

I am fine with resigning our best option available to us, its the right move, especially at that price tag.

But I am not going to oversell this move and make up things that are not true. Foote didn't have a great season last year. As others have said here, it was average at best.

[Dwinsgames]

He is our best option available at this point in time given all the circumstances and state of the team.

I am fine with resigning our best option available to us, its the right move, especially at that price tag.

But I am not going to oversell this move and make up things that are not true. Foote didn't have a great season last year. As others have said here, it was average at best.

I for one disagree , I am all but certain I am not alone ...

the eyeball test is the most important test of all and Foote may not have gotten an A with it but it was certainly passable and one could argue it was B worthy ... that being said he was a factor on the field and he often put pressure on the opposing QB and had his fair share of hits on the QBs as well ...

you are entitled to your opinion but it is just that an opinion ..

who made ANYTHING up ?

to take a line from James Harrison is not a quarter of the truth or even half the truth still a lie ?

[Mojouw]

I'm just interested in where those ranking stats came from. Would like to check it out for myself...

[zulater]

I'm just interested in where those ranking stats came from. Would like to check it out for myself...

profootballfocus. Can't link it, because anything worth seeing you need to subscribe for.

[Mojouw]

profootballfocus. Can't link it, because anything worth seeing you need to subscribe for.

Thanks, zu.

[Dwinsgames]

profootballfocus. Can't link it, because anything worth seeing you need to subscribe for.

I would be interested in knowing what formula is being used , I remember not that long ago a formula used by James Lofton to evaluate opposing QBs that made Ben look like a trash heap project ... a formula is only as good as its basis and only works if the results show a true evaluation of performance ....

some of the formulas force you to look at 1+1+1 = 4 as a truth when it simply is not ...

just saying without an accurate baseline you have nothing

[GBMelBlount]

So we are debating if Foote is "C" Satisfactory or "B" Good or somewhere in between.

I really don't think most opinions are really be that far apart.*

(*-excluding Steeldude )

[shutdown]

I would be interested in knowing what formula is being used , I remember not that long ago a formula used by James Lofton to evaluate opposing QBs that made Ben look like a trash heap project ... a formula is only as good as its basis and only works if the results show a true evaluation of performance ....

some of the formulas force you to look at 1+1+1 = 4 as a truth when it simply is not ...

just saying without an accurate baseline you have nothing

This has already been clarified:

There are other sites that watch a player for every play of every game. Everytime Foote rushed the QB, whether he made it or not he was graded. Everytime Foote was defending the run, whether he made the tackle or not, he was graded.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhnY_upwDuo

There is no "formula". They're not taking numbers and coming up with some neat algorithm. It is not a magic bullet, just plain ol watching the tape and grading the player. The way it's always been done.

They grade each player for every snap they take on the field. If Larry Foote tried to rush the passer on 1 play and gets pancaked, he gets a bad grade for that play. If Larry Foote blows up his guy and makes a great play, he gets a positive grade for that play.

This goes above and beyond your little "tackles and sacks" analysis and actually compares a player of every play for an entire season. Like its been stated a few times in this thread, some tackles are better than others. Some plays are better than others. Timmons blowing through a gap to blow someone up on the LOS is a much better tackle than Larry Foote reading the wrong hole and letting the guy gain 5-6 yards before bringing him down. According to you those are both GREAT tackles and should be looked upon equally when comparing the "numbers". But I disagree.

[Mojouw]

This has already been clarified:



There is no "formula". They're not taking numbers and coming up with some neat algorithm. It is not a magic bullet, just plain ol watching the tape and grading the player. The way it's always been done.

They grade each player for every snap they take on the field. If Larry Foote tried to rush the passer on 1 play and gets pancaked, he gets a bad grade for that play. If Larry Foote blows up his guy and makes a great play, he gets a positive grade for that play.

This goes above and beyond your little "tackles and sacks" analysis and actually compares a player of every play for an entire season. Like its been stated a few times in this thread, some tackles are better than others. Some plays are better than others. Timmons blowing through a gap to blow someone up on the LOS is a much better tackle than Larry Foote reading the wrong hole and letting the guy gain 5-6 yards before bringing him down. According to you those are both GREAT tackles and should be looked upon equally when comparing the "numbers". But I disagree.

It would still be nice to know their methodology. For instance, how do they know on a given play what each player's assignment was? If Foote was assigned to cover an inside zone to protect against a potential pass, then tackles the RB several yards downfield by making a sight adjustment and running the play down....what the heck is the grade on the play?

Not saying that just tackles and sacks are the way to go either, but it would be nice if each site was more specific in outlining how they determine their ratings and rankings. Perhaps now that the All-22 film is more widely available this type of analysis will become more widespread and transparent.

Oh yeah...I don't care how you want to look at it, Timmons is a far better player than Foote. Foote is a replacement level player -- league average. Not too bad.

[Dwinsgames]

This has already been clarified:



There is no "formula". They're not taking numbers and coming up with some neat algorithm. It is not a magic bullet, just plain ol watching the tape and grading the player. The way it's always been done.

They grade each player for every snap they take on the field. If Larry Foote tried to rush the passer on 1 play and gets pancaked, he gets a bad grade for that play. If Larry Foote blows up his guy and makes a great play, he gets a positive grade for that play.

This goes above and beyond your little "tackles and sacks" analysis and actually compares a player of every play for an entire season. Like its been stated a few times in this thread, some tackles are better than others. Some plays are better than others. Timmons blowing through a gap to blow someone up on the LOS is a much better tackle than Larry Foote reading the wrong hole and letting the guy gain 5-6 yards before bringing him down. According to you those are both GREAT tackles and should be looked upon equally when comparing the "numbers". But I disagree.

then they are doing the same thing you or I do watching the game ( re-watching on tivo ) rewinding watching again etc ...

the eyeball test as I call it ....

it is subjective ...

I prefer my own eyes , my own diagnosis of what I seen ...

Michael Turner was a 5th round draft pick 32 teams passed on him 4 times some passed 5 times .... I had him rated as a mid 3rd round pick ( some here can attest to just that ) my eyeballs seen something different than most GMs in the league , what he was able to do as a starter is telling on who was correct about where he should have been drafted .. as a player Turner more than proved his worth and should have been drafted higher ...

Not that I am tooting my own horn ( sounds like it I know but it is not the intent ) it just goes to show you evaluations based on the eyeball test are subjective regardless of how big or small of a football background you come from ... I am not an NFL GM or scout but in this instance I was more correct than they where ( it happens all the time though not just with Turner and in some cases I am dead wrong so it is not that I am trying to say I am always right because I am not )

so here I am now still trying to explain this and the more I say the more it looks like I am trying to say I know more than you or anyone else and the simple fact is I am not trying to say that at all ... just trying to explain how I see it and how subjective evaluations can be

[shutdown]

It would still be nice to know their methodology. For instance, how do they know on a given play what each player's assignment was? If Foote was assigned to cover an inside zone to protect against a potential pass, then tackles the RB several yards downfield by making a sight adjustment and running the play down....what the heck is the grade on the play?

Not saying that just tackles and sacks are the way to go either, but it would be nice if each site was more specific in outlining how they determine their ratings and rankings. Perhaps now that the All-22 film is more widely available this type of analysis will become more widespread and transparent.

Oh yeah...I don't care how you want to look at it, Timmons is a far better player than Foote. Foote is a replacement level player -- league average. Not too bad.

The clarify that here: https://www.profootballfocus.com/about/grading/

They don't guess. They don't pretend to know the defensive schemes.

They actually specify key things they'll grade on that you don't need to know the scheme or coverage type like getting blown off the ball, bad angles, drops, unable to shed your blocker, etc...

Been a member of this site since the very beginning and its been fun to watch them grow. They are now frequently cited by all major sports media outlets and have a majority of NFL teams subscribing to their data.

[shutdown]

so here I am now still trying to explain this and the more I say the more it looks like I am trying to say I know more than you or anyone else and the simple fact is I am not trying to say that at all ... just trying to explain how I see it and how subjective evaluations can be

You won't get very far when your original point was "tackles and sacks! tackles and sacks!" and "the numbers speak for themselves". Because that doesn't fly and the numbers really don't.

If you believe you see something most people don't, than just say that.... most of us are pretty optimistic when it comes to the team so we'll want to buy into it.

[Mojouw]

The clarify that here: https://www.profootballfocus.com/about/grading/

They don't guess. They don't pretend to know the defensive schemes.

They actually specify key things they'll grade on that you don't need to know the scheme or coverage type like getting blown off the ball, bad angles, drops, unable to shed your blocker, etc...

Been a member of this site since the very beginning and its been fun to watch them grow. They are now frequently cited by all major sports media outlets and have a majority of NFL teams subscribing to their data.

Cool. I guess I should've read a little bit closer.

[jb500ex]

those stats are a joke . timmons was near the top 19 in rushing plays justr watch the games its obvious he's one of the owrst ilbs in the league. always get run out of the play and is king of circling the play. he is also way over rated in coverage. when he was a complete no show the first 3 games of the year foote was our best defensive player in those games. then timmons had 3 really good games all year and was his normal getting owned by little rb's on the pass rush on all other games. timmons is by far the most overrated player on the team and if they have him ranked 5th he's the most overrated player in the league. hes a average ilb thats it

[zulater]

those stats are a joke . timmons was near the top 19 in rushing plays justr watch the games its obvious he's one of the owrst ilbs in the league. always get run out of the play and is king of circling the play. he is also way over rated in coverage. when he was a complete no show the first 3 games of the year foote was our best defensive player in those games. then timmons had 3 really good games all year and was his normal getting owned by little rb's on the pass rush on all other games. timmons is by far the most overrated player on the team and if they have him ranked 5th he's the most overrated player in the league. hes a average ilb thats it

Your football IQ and typing skills and snytax are all equal matches.

[Austin87]

A very good discussion going on, I have to agree with shutdown here. Foote is not a good player, he is average at best.

[Seven]

those stats are a joke . timmons was near the top 19 in rushing plays justr watch the games its obvious he's one of the owrst ilbs in the league. always get run out of the play and is king of circling the play. he is also way over rated in coverage. when he was a complete no show the first 3 games of the year foote was our best defensive player in those games. then timmons had 3 really good games all year and was his normal getting owned by little rb's on the pass rush on all other games. timmons is by far the most overrated player on the team and if they have him ranked 5th he's the most overrated player in the league. hes a average ilb thats it

I've seen you post something similar to this two or three times before, and you never return to the thread to back up your ridiculous claims so I'm not going to waste my time by addressing this incorrect statement yet again beyond saying you are painfully wrong.

[Dwinsgames]

he was correct in saying Timmons was the 2012 version of " The Invisible Man " weeks 1 -3 ..he picked it up after that but that is 1/5 of the season .... at the end of the day Larry Foote is the biggest bargain on this team on the def side of the football