"Overall grade" - If you have a couple of bad plays but several good plays they can average out differently. Also Shelton's grade is bad regardless of how the article frames it.
Davis appears to have been benched for a couple of bad plays. If he was otherwise doing his job his overall score isn't going to be as bad. He also wasn't in the game that long. So the sample size is small.
Anything below a 70 for PFF is not good. So according to PFF the only OL who had a good day was Wright and that was just barely.
This is where we won't agree, there wasn't enough good plays to neutralize the overabundance of bad ones. Barely below good is way to good for how any of them played.
Davis was getting bulldozed not just a few times and took plays off. Sheldon got decleated, literally off his feet multiple times, Jenkins only positive was a fumble recovery. Wright and Jones multiple times just got bum rushed collapsing the pocket. It was a terrible day for the entire group. Anything short of near failing was an extremely kind grade; and I'm not at all surprised that PFF claimed it wasn't as bad as it looked; b/c on further review it was every bit as bad as it looked, and in some cases worse.
Tenn looked at the Bears OL group and said we are going to have all pro days against his PoS lineup; and they did. The rest of the league is going to mimmick what Tenn did, just bum rush whatever 5 they put out there, and confuse the IOL after they've been flustered.
I think you're making my point. You said "multiple times." Was it every play? Every other play? It was like 3 or 4 times from what I've seen (which is still bad). But they were 53 offensive plays. Bates and Davis split time but everyone else played for each of those snaps. If they're doing their job on those other plays then that's going to lift their overall score despite the bad plays.
And again those PFF scores are not great. So the article's point that the Bear's line was not the problem according to PFF don't actually understand what the score means.
This is where we won't agree, there wasn't enough good plays to neutralize the overabundance of bad ones. Barely below good is way to good for how any of them played.
Davis was getting bulldozed not just a few times and took plays off. Sheldon got decleated, literally off his feet multiple times, Jenkins only positive was a fumble recovery. Wright and Jones multiple times just got bum rushed collapsing the pocket. It was a terrible day for the entire group. Anything short of near failing was an extremely kind grade; and I'm not at all surprised that PFF claimed it wasn't as bad as it looked; b/c on further review it was every bit as bad as it looked, and in some cases worse.
Tenn looked at the Bears OL group and said we are going to have all pro days against his PoS lineup; and they did. The rest of the league is going to mimmick what Tenn did, just bum rush whatever 5 they put out there, and confuse the IOL after they've been flustered.
I think you're making my point. You said "multiple times." Was it every play? Every other play? It was like 3 or 4 times from what I've seen (which is still bad). But they were 53 offensive plays. Bates and Davis split time but everyone else played for each of those snaps. If they're doing their job on those other plays then that's going to lift their overall score despite the bad plays.
And again those PFF scores are not great. So the article's point that the Bear's line was not the problem according to PFF don't actually understand what the score means.
They all had more bad then good does that help? they are closer to 3-4 good plays then the other. Make no mistake, there was very little good by that OL, it was an absolute joke.
The problem isn't that the PFF scores were great or good, they weren't bad enough. The OL was an absolute travesty.