Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!

Elias Sports Bureau removes sack from JJ

EllisUnit

EllisUnit

Vote RED!!!
haha really they can go back and change something like that after it has alreayd happened, thats B.S. I say review all the games over the last 100 years and take away bad calls or TDs that werent TDs and see how many teams lose the lombardi trophy.

Thats the dumbest **** i have ever heard.
 
Texan_Bill

Texan_Bill

Hall of Fame


Meh... They claim that one of JJ's sacks was really a designed run play for Tannehill.

Good on them. Give JJ a little more inspiration for taking away our NFL's sack leader this week against Aaron Rodgers and the guy they gave the lead to, over some BS....


Watt 3:16 Says I just sacked your ass!!!!

I expect two Dikembe's and two salutes.
 
CloakNNNdagger

CloakNNNdagger

Hall of Fame
Stemp said:
Misprint. It's from week 1.

They said it was a called running play for the QB, thus not a sack.

It's horse****.
Click to expand...
EllisUnit said:
haha really they can go back and change something like that after it has alreayd happened, thats B.S. I say review all the games over the last 100 years and take away bad calls or TDs that werent TDs and see how many teams lose the lombardi trophy.

Thats the dumbest **** i have ever heard.
Click to expand...
Apparently that information (that it was actually a running play) was formally submitted by the Dolphins to the League office.



TEXANS FAN'S MESSAGE TO LEAGUE OFFICE:

 
GP

GP

Go Texans!
That's dumb.

If the QB is behind the LOS, it should be a sack 100% of the time.

They cannot just arbitrarily decide if the QB is going to throw or pass. Geez...
 
False Start

False Start

On # 69
Texan_Bill said:


Meh... They claim that one of JJ's sacks was really a designed run play for Tannehill.

Good on them. Give JJ a little more inspiration for taking away our NFL's sack leader this week against Aaron Rodgers and the guy they gave the lead to, over some BS....


Watt 3:16 Says I just sacked your ass!!!!

I expect two Dikembe's and two salutes.
Click to expand...
:stonecold:

What crock of sh!+. I have never heard of anything like this happening. JJ will just get 4 this upcoming game just to show them up. :wild:
 
D

dream_team

Hall of Fame
Can you tell these guys to re-watch the Jets game? The refs missed another sack by Watt. Watt wrapped up Sanchez and was bringing him down. As Sanchez was falling back, he just heaves the ball forward at no one. That should have been a sack, or at least intentional grounding. But of course, refs call it an incomplete pass.
 
NastyNate

NastyNate

I go kerplunk
dream_team said:
Can you tell these guys to re-watch the Jets game? The refs missed another sack by Watt. Watt wrapped up Sanchez and was bringing him down. As Sanchez was falling back, he just heaves the ball forward at no one. That should have been a sack, or at least intentional grounding. But of course, refs call it an incomplete pass.
Click to expand...
At a minimum that was intentional grounding. At best it's stop of forward progress and a sack.
 
L

Lambert

Waterboy
If there is a question, to determine if a tackle is a sack or a TFL, they look at the O line blocking to see if the blocking is pass blocking or run blocking.

Incidentally, Cushing was given a FF when it should have been Brooks Reed who striped the ball from Bell in the Jags game. They haven't caught that one yet.
 
ObsiWan

ObsiWan

Hall of Fame
Contributor's Club
GP said:
That's dumb.

If the QB is behind the LOS, it should be a sack 100% of the time.

They cannot just arbitrarily decide if the QB is going to throw or pass. Geez...
Click to expand...
"Oh crap... c'mon guys!! Why did you have to go and piss him off THIS week??" Why couldn't this have waited until he played the Bears or the damned Lions!?? Why THIS week?!?

Damn.

Signed, Aaron Rodgers
 
B

BullNation4Life

All Pro
ObsiWan said:
"Oh crap... c'mon guys!! Why did you have to go and piss him off THIS week??" Why couldn't this have waited until he played the Bears or the damned Lions!?? Why THIS week?!?

Damn.

Signed, Aaron Rodgers
Click to expand...
Exactly! They just pissed off the Bull and Rodgers is about to get the horns...

Thanks Elias!
 
2

2012Champs

Hall of Fame
EllisUnit said:
haha really they can go back and change something like that after it has alreayd happened, thats B.S. I say review all the games over the last 100 years and take away bad calls or TDs that werent TDs and see how many teams lose the lombardi trophy.

Thats the dumbest **** i have ever heard.
Click to expand...


Sure they can go back after the fact, it's not like they could change it before hand
 
Hervoyel

Hervoyel

BUENO!
Watt needs to locate the offices of this so-called "Sports Bureau" and sack a few folks there. Then maybe they'll change their minds.
 
Señor Stan

Señor Stan

El Guapo
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.

That being said, I've never heard of going back and altering stats....doesn't mean it hasn't happened, I've just never seen it.

btw... WTF do the Dolphins care about that anyway?
 
H

hobie

All Pro
Does it really matter?? I mean really, does it.. it is a sack, ok, good for his stats, but so what, if not a sack, then what, a TFL... I am ok with that. Either way is fine with me.. Did they not win the game anyway....
 
Dutchrudder

Dutchrudder

Hall of Fame
Señor Stan;2033694 said:
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.

That being said, I've never heard of going back and altering stats....doesn't mean it hasn't happened, I've just never seen it.

btw... WTF do the Dolphins care about that anyway?
Click to expand...
You can actually link directly to the time on the video that you want. Click the "Share" button below the video, then click options and check "start at" box. Then set the time to whatever you want, and copy the link above it.
http://youtu.be/t4FCITzQ4qQ?t=2m51s

I can't really argue against removing this sack though. It looks like Tannehill was going to hand it off to Bush. It's not that big of a deal though, we still won the game, and that's what counts.
 
D

dream_team

Hall of Fame
hobie said:
Does it really matter?? I mean really, does it.. it is a sack, ok, good for his stats, but so what, if not a sack, then what, a TFL... I am ok with that. Either way is fine with me.. Did they not win the game anyway....
Click to expand...
We all know it doesn't really matter. People are mainly commenting how dumb it is to go back all the way to a week 1 play and change stats. Especially on that play, because I guess someone from the Dolphins told them it was going to be a run play. Yes, it looks like a run play, but how do we know it wasn't going to be a play action fake? Also, does that mean if a run play is called, and somehow the defender tackles the QB before he hands off the ball, it's not a sack?

We know the stats don't really matter, but just multiple levels of dumb here.
 
2

2012Champs

Hall of Fame
dream_team said:
We all know it doesn't really matter. People are mainly commenting how dumb it is to go back all the way to a week 1 play and change stats. Especially on that play, because I guess someone from the Dolphins told them it was going to be a run play. Yes, it looks like a run play, but how do we know it wasn't going to be a play action fake? Also, does that mean if a run play is called, and somehow the defender tackles the QB before he hands off the ball, it's not a sack?

We know the stats don't really matter, but just multiple levels of dumb here.
Click to expand...


The dumb part is the move by the Dolphins not Elias. It didnt take Elias 4 weeks to go back to week one Im sure they didnt go back until they received the Dolphins request
 
utahmark

utahmark

markbeth
Dutchrudder said:
You can actually link directly to the time on the video that you want. Click the "Share" button below the video, then click options and check "start at" box. Then set the time to whatever you want, and copy the link above it.
http://youtu.be/t4FCITzQ4qQ?t=2m51s

I can't really argue against removing this sack though. It looks like Tannehill was going to hand it off to Bush. It's not that big of a deal though, we still won the game, and that's what counts.
Click to expand...
bootleg?
 
Double Barrel

Double Barrel

Texans Talk Admin
Staff member
Contributor's Club
gwallaia said:
I liked one of the comments left on the link I posted above. "Why can't they go back and change the Packer-Seahawk score?"
Click to expand...
QFT!!! If the NFL wants to get revisionist, then they should start with that bogus call that cost the Packers a game.
 
Double Barrel

Double Barrel

Texans Talk Admin
Staff member
Contributor's Club
2012Champs said:
The record changes but its not a decision the NFL makes and in no way could be connected to changing the f-up that occured in the packers game
Click to expand...
My point is that if the NFL can go back and change records, then they should rectify the most glaring mistake of the season so far.

The NFL's "decision" was purely a CYA public relations debacle to avoid the simple fact that they hired incompetent officials.

Understand my point is rhetorical in nature. I have absolutely no expectations for the NFL to actually do the right thing. I know better than to expect anything of the sort from this league.
 
hookinreds

hookinreds

Veteran
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.
 
2

2012Champs

Hall of Fame
hookinreds said:
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.
Click to expand...


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

hookinreds

Veteran
2012Champs said:
this isnt about an interception vs non. It should be a tackle for a loss vs a sack
Click to expand...
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.
 
2

2012Champs

Hall of Fame
hookinreds said:
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.
Click to expand...


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

hookinreds

Veteran
2012Champs said:
And the fact is if the QB was acting as rusher its should be a tackle for a loss, if not its a sack
Click to expand...
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/0ap1000000079268/article/jj-watt-loses-nfls-sack-lead-on-statistical-correction
 
2

2012Champs

Hall of Fame
hookinreds said:
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/0ap1000000079268/article/jj-watt-loses-nfls-sack-lead-on-statistical-correction
Click to expand...



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_sack-rules-nfl.html#ixzz2914CXMZE
 
infantrycak

infantrycak

Hall of Fame
Señor Stan;2033694 said:
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.
Click to expand...
ObsiWan said:
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..
Click to expand...
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.

2012Champs said:
And the fact is if the QB was acting as rusher its should be a tackle for a loss, if not its a sack
Click to expand...
Why bring that up? - he clearly was not acting as a rusher.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top