the problem with PFF on Tavon

PFF: “Tavon Austin would be a nice third piece on a team with two stud receivers, but it’s become abundantly clear at this point that he shouldn’t be a first or second option. Austin is averaging only 9.1 yards per reception, and has seven drops on 51 opportunities.”

They’re assuming he should be a pure receiver AND that his time with Keenum is indicative.

I don’t think either thing is true.

He’s not and never will be a pure receiver and therefore judging him as one just distorts the story. And PFF has no pre-set category for determining that. They just go “uh okay, receiver, and, here’s his grade as such.” Which to me isn’t the real story.

He’s a multiple weapon type, and so what you look for is combined yards. Last year for example he had as many runs as catches. He also had a lower drop percentage (3.5% in 2015 v. 6.3% in 2016).

PFF being PFF does not know the Rams as well as an informed fan, so they don’t know to compare years when assessing the guy, and they also don’t know any better when it comes to regarding him as a pure receiver.

He’s not a pure receiver. He IS a combined yardage guy who functions as a receiver, runner, decoy, and returner.

It’s also the case that Keenum on and off struggled hitting him. The last game, for example, with Goff as the starter, Tavon was 4 catches on 4 targets for 45 yards and a TD. I just think Goff, with more height and more arm, will struggle less hitting TA than Keenum did. I think that’s already evident. CK could never have thrown that TD pass to TA, and TA basically had it dropped right into his hands. (TA not being a pure receiver type is never going to rescue the qb with “difficult catches.” The pass has to do most of the work with him–which IMO is okay because again he’s NOT a pure receiver and therefore it doesn’t work to judge him as one.)

(I do wish, this year, they used him more in the multiple weapon role. But still, he ought to be a much better outside threat with JG than with CK.)

And of course PFF can’t add info and insight like that. They’re basically just stuck with limited observations which they then report as if it covered all the issues involved, when it doesn’t work that way.