Elias Sports Bureau removes sack from JJ

[ObsiWan]

Originally Posted by gwallaia

Looks like the Dolphin's center should be credited with the sack.
Video: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100...headline_stack

Yeah... after looking at this vid, the QB was going back to hand the ball off so J.J. should get a "tackle-for-loss" added to his stat sheet in place of that incorrect sack..

[hookinreds]

Idiots...it's still a sack. What if it was play action...how about every interception that is throw, do they go back and say....I meant to run the ball, or he meant to throw a TD? Since when did intent get in the way of facts? So now if the QB is in a bootleg and is tackled from behind before he sets up to throw, do they go back to the team and ask it was a designed run?

This isn't about JJ's stat sheet. This is total revisionistic BS.

[2012Champs]

Originally Posted by hookinreds

Idiots...it's still a sack. What if it was play action...how about every interception that is throw, do they go back and say....I meant to run the ball, or he meant to throw a TD? Since when did intent get in the way of facts? So now if the QB is in a bootleg and is tackled from behind before he sets up to throw, do they go back to the team and ask it was a designed run?

This isn't about JJ's stat sheet. This is total revisionistic BS.

this isnt about an interception vs non. It should be a tackle for a loss vs a sack

[hookinreds]

Originally Posted by 2012Champs

this isnt about an interception vs non. It should be a tackle for a loss vs a sack

I was providing hypothetical "what ifs" as examples. This particular isntance isn't about interceptions or not, that was sarcasm, but the issue remains is this ruling was changed on "intent". Facts are the QB was tackled behind the line of scrimmage.

[2012Champs]

Originally Posted by hookinreds

I was providing hypothetical "what ifs" as examples. This particular isntance isn't about interceptions or not, that was sarcasm, but the issue remains is this ruling was changed on "intent". Facts are the QB was tackled behind the line of scrimmage.

And the fact is if the QB was acting as rusher its should be a tackle for a loss, if not its a sack

[hookinreds]

Originally Posted by 2012Champs

And the fact is if the QB was acting as rusher its should be a tackle for a loss, if not its a sack

At what point in this video does the QB act as a rusher? I see him extend his arm out with the ball after taking the snap, was his intent to hand off, or play action pass? Dolphins say it was a called running play...weather it was or not, it makes their quarterback look better by having one less sack. What the video shows is a sack. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100...cal-correction

[2012Champs]

Originally Posted by hookinreds

At what point in this video does the QB act as a rusher? I see him extend his arm out with the ball after taking the snap, was his intent to hand off, or play action pass? Dolphins say it was a called running play...weather it was or not, it makes their quarterback look better by having one less sack. What the video shows is a sack. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100...cal-correction

I actually found the nfl definition


Definition of Sack
The league defines a sack as tackling the quarterback behind the line of scrimmage while he is attempting to pass. All three elements must be present. It has to be the quarterback, not another player taking a handoff or pitch and throwing an option pass. It has to be behind the line of scrimmage; a quarterback who is chased across the line is credited with run yardage. And the quarterback must be trying to pass; designed run plays that are stopped behind the line of scrimmage are not considered sacks.



Read more: Sack Rules of the NFL | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/list_6736379_sac...#ixzz2914CXMZE

[Errant Hothy]

If Favre laying down for Strahan was a sack, than the play in question should also be a sack.

[noxiousdog]

Tackles for loss are more coming into vogue anyway. They should just use that and hurries as the "it" stats for front 7.

[infantrycak]

Originally Posted by Señor Stan

I was kinda ticked at this until I watched the video...

Courtesy of TexanstalkTube

If you haven't seen the TexansTalkTube thread Check it out!

at the 2:56 point in the video (8:07 on the game clock) Tannehill trips on his way to hand off the ball and JJ falls on him for the sack.

Originally Posted by ObsiWan

Yeah... after looking at this vid, the QB was going back to hand the ball off so J.J. should get a "tackle-for-loss" added to his stat sheet in place of that incorrect sack..

I don't see how anyone can look at that and say he was about to hand off. He is tripped by the center on his very first step back. Especially don't understand this from Texans fans - our offense is predicated on making our passing plays look like running plays far longer than that.

Originally Posted by 2012Champs

And the fact is if the QB was acting as rusher its should be a tackle for a loss, if not its a sack

Why bring that up? - he clearly was not acting as a rusher.

[Playoffs]

John McClain ‏@McClain_on_NFL

Wade Phillips on Elias taking away sack from Watt: "Why didn't they take away Strahan's when he set record?"

[2012Champs]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

Why bring that up? - he clearly was not acting as a rusher.

I was incorrect about the definition and posted it right after that. Based on the definition of a sack I can see how they overturned the stat

[infantrycak]

Originally Posted by 2012Champs

I was incorrect about the definition and posted it right after that. Based on the definition of a sack I can see how they overturned the stat

I don't. There is nothing in the video to prove it was a running play and every team in the league runs play action plays. You simply cannot tell one step into a play what it is going to be other than a QB sneak.

[dream_team]

Originally Posted by 2012Champs

I was incorrect about the definition and posted it right after that. Based on the definition of a sack I can see how they overturned the stat

Thanks for posting the definition. So the stupid part of the definition is that it is based on "intent". Dolphins could have easily called a playaction pass, but I guess we'll never know. We should take some sacks on Scahub back by claiming it was a draw play.

[gtexan02]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

I don't. There is nothing in the video to prove it was a running play and every team in the league runs play action plays. You simply cannot tell one step into a play what it is going to be other than a QB sneak.

This is a great point.

Possibilities:

1. The Dolphins were running a playaction pass and therefore JJ should get credit for the sack.

2. The quarterback had called a pass play but upon tripping on the center, tried an emergency handoff. You see this all the time on busted plays. In this case JJ should get credit for the sack.

3. The quarterback had called a running play and it was a busted play. In this case it should be a tackle for a loss.

How is it possible to know which of the 3 choices it was? And why should we take the Dolphins word for it when they have a vested interest in trying to show limited sack numbers for player performance?

[CloakNNNdagger]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

I don't. There is nothing in the video to prove it was a running play and every team in the league runs play action plays. You simply cannot tell one step into a play what it is going to be other than a QB sneak.

But don't you understand, the Dolphins thought about it for 4 weeks and just had to correct a great injustice done to their QB. They were forced to clarify that the play was a run by design........and everyone knows that a fish is too stupid to lie.

[Señor Stan]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

I don't see how anyone can look at that and say he was about to hand off. He is tripped by the center on his very first step back. Especially don't understand this from Texans fans - our offense is predicated on making our passing plays look like running plays far longer than that.

.

If you look at the O-line they are run blocking and push well beyond the LOS.

In this clip you can see one of their designed bootlegs and the linemen never of beyond the LOS.

I think it was a run play, but can't fathom why they would want to go back and adjust the sack stat.

[2012Champs]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

I don't. There is nothing in the video to prove it was a running play and every team in the league runs play action plays. You simply cannot tell one step into a play what it is going to be other than a QB sneak.

There is nothing to prove it was a play action play either. Miami wrote in and got it changed and Id say based of the definition there was no attempted pass nor was he even attempting to pass so the stat gets changed

[2012Champs]

Originally Posted by gtexan02

This is a great point.

Possibilities:

1. The Dolphins were running a playaction pass and therefore JJ should get credit for the sack.

2. The quarterback had called a pass play but upon tripping on the center, tried an emergency handoff. You see this all the time on busted plays. In this case JJ should get credit for the sack.

3. The quarterback had called a running play and it was a busted play. In this case it should be a tackle for a loss.

How is it possible to know which of the 3 choices it was? And why should we take the Dolphins word for it when they have a vested interest in trying to show limited sack numbers for player performance?

I think Miami is silly for getting it changed and its almost as silly to get mad about the change.

[Perki-Perk]

Originally Posted by infantrycak

I don't. There is nothing in the video to prove it was a running play and every team in the league runs play action plays. You simply cannot tell one step into a play what it is going to be other than a QB sneak.

This is the part I think people are getting confused on, "while he is attempting to pass". If the QB is in a handoff motion until passing the running back and going into passing stance, is he not in something that appears to be a running play. Doesn't matter until he drops back. Same thing with Shaub, if he runs a bootleg to foster, then he is not "attempting to pass" until he turns his eyes back around toward the field to find a receiver. You cannot do no look passes while looking in completely the opposite direction, at least not with much success. They are a very high degree of difficulty. Hope this helps. I would rather credit be done properly. Last thing we need are astericks next to JJ Watt as the NFL sack leader when there are stats in question.