Program Defines the Standard
Coaches establish how assignments, execution, matchups, effectiveness, and impact are evaluated.
PLAYERREPO EVALUATION FRAMEWORK
Play-by-Play Impact
PPI
O.S
A coach-controlled framework for evaluating every player, every assignment, and every rep through one consistent structure.
How PPI Works
Players Participate Through Snap!Grade
Players contribute structured film-study information without taking control away from the coaching staff.
Coaches Review and Control
Coaches correct, approve, reject, and add feedback before the evaluation becomes part of the system.
The Evaluation System Builds
Every reviewed rep strengthens the player film library, roster comparisons, leaderboards, and development history.
THE PURPOSE
One Evaluation Language Across the Program.
PPI gives coaching staffs a structured way to describe what happened on a play, why it mattered, and how that rep should affect the player’s evaluation.Coach Controlled
Player participation reduces staff workload, but the coach remains the authority over grades, corrections, feedback, and final evaluation.
Rep-Level Evidence
Every evaluation is attached to the exact play, player, assignment, and film context that produced it.
One Shared Framework
Players across positions are evaluated through the same major categories, creating a more organized and defensible comparison system.
Automatic Organization
The same evaluated reps build searchable film libraries, feedback histories, highlights, rankings, and leaderboards.
THE CORE FRAMEWORK
Ten Categories Describe the Rep.
PPI separates assignment execution, matchup outcomes, effectiveness, and momentum impact so coaching staffs can evaluate the entire play—not only the result.Pre-Snap Success
The player aligned correctly, recognized the situation, and completed the required responsibility before the snap.
Pre-Snap Failure
The player misaligned, missed communication, or failed to execute a required pre-snap responsibility.
Post-Snap Success
The player executed the assigned responsibility correctly after the snap.
Post-Snap Failure
The player missed the assignment, read, technique, fit, route, or responsibility.
Matchup Win
The player won the direct competitive battle within the play.
Matchup Loss
The player was defeated by the direct opponent in the competitive exchange.
Elite Play
The player produced execution or impact that clearly exceeded the expected standard.
Deficient Play
The player produced a critical error or execution clearly below the program standard.
Positive Momentum Impact
The rep extended a drive, changed field position, created an explosive result, or improved the game state.
Negative Momentum Impact
The rep damaged the drive or game state through a penalty, turnover, missed opportunity, or critical breakdown.
70+
Detailed Outcome Criteria
The core categories are supported by more than 70 specific football outcomes, including alignment, assignment, blocks, coverage, tackling, explosive gains, drive-extending execution, and critical errors.
DETAILED CRITERIA LIBRARY
Explore How the Framework Is Applied.
The sections below show the detailed criteria used to describe execution, competitive outcomes, effectiveness, and momentum impact.01
ASSIGNMENT EXECUTION
Pre-Snap Execution
Alignment, communication, recognition, motion, and responsibility before the snap.02
ASSIGNMENT EXECUTION
Post-Snap Execution
The player’s ability to execute the assigned responsibility after the snap.03
PROGRAM EVALUATION CRITERIA
Play Effectiveness
Evaluates the quality and consequence of the player’s execution, including elite performance and critical deficiencies.04
PROGRAM EVALUATION CRITERIA
Play Match-up
Evaluates whether the player won or lost the direct competitive battle, including blocking, tackling, route, coverage, and space-based matchups.05
PROGRAM EVALUATION CRITERIA
Play Momentum Impact
Identifies whether the player’s action improved or damaged the drive, field position, scoring opportunity, or overall game state.PROGRAM GOVERNANCE
The Framework Supports the Staff. It Does Not Replace the Staff.
PPI organizes evaluation evidence and creates consistency, but coaching judgment remains central to the process.Snap!Grade submissions are designed to save time and accelerate feedback, not bypass the coaching staff.
Each organization can apply the framework within its own scheme, terminology, expectations, and player-development model.
Grades, feedback, rankings, and comparisons remain connected to the exact player and play that created them.