Peyton could lose his passing yardage record.

[Fx Stryker]

Did you miss the part where stat adjustments are made all the time?

Yea, but most of the time they don't strip records.

I get the point SW is making. Who do you upset in this situation? It's pretty much Peyton vs Brees. You take Peyton's away and it's everyone calling controversy. You keep it as is and you upset Brees, who Goodell doesn't really like. Besides Brees will break it next year.

[southwest1]

If I were advising Peyton, I would tell him to abdicate no title & relinquish nothing. Translation: If the League raises a fuss about this matter, dig your heels in & refuse to back down. You won that passing title fair & square. You earned it. You did nothing wrong. 

 

The referees messed up not you. It the principle that matters. It's not selfish to fight for the passing title you & the Broncos earned. "Not 1 step back" Yoda. Not 1 step back. 

[Dustin]

If I were advising Peyton, I would tell him to abdicate no title & relinquish nothing. Translation: If the League raises a fuss about this matter, dig your heels in & refuse to back down. You won that passing title fair & square. You earned it. You did nothing wrong. 

 

The referees messed up not you. It the principle that matters. It's not selfish to fight for the passing title you & the Broncos earned. "Not 1 step back" Yoda. Not 1 step back. 

 

That's not how it works. When they rule this a lateral (which will be correct) he doesn't have a choice in the matter. He loses 7 passing yards and thus the record. Nothing he can do about it. 

[Colts_Fan12]

This is 150% on John Fox

[southwest1]

The refs don't keep track of stats. We had an INT in the KC game that was later to changed to a Mathis sack. Stat adjustments occur frequently. 

As pathetic as zebra calling has been in recent weeks with blown calls or no calls this season, even if they could fix the situation, I don't have that much faith in them either TBH. My big thing is call the violation in the game or a symbolic statute of limitations washes the penalty away completely. 

 

Yes, records won't last long in the NFL especially if we go to an 18 regular season game schedule, but for 1 season at least the record stands. 

[Dustin]

As pathetic as zebra calling has been in recent weeks with blown calls or no calls this season, even if they could fix the situation, I don't have that much faith in them either TBH. My big thing is call the violation in the game or a symbolic statute of limitations washes the penalty away completely. 

 

Yes, records won't last long in the NFL especially if we go to an 18 regular season game schedule, but for 1 season at least the record stands. 

 

This doesn't have anything to do with the refs tho. This is that stat guys over at Elias just recording it wrong. 

[southwest1]

That's not how it works. When they rule this a lateral (which will be correct) he doesn't have a choice in the matter. He loses 7 passing yards and thus the record. Nothing he can do about it. 

Again, I don't give a darn. If the violation isn't directly witnessed during the duration of the game in question especially with instant replay, fiber optics, & multiple HD cameras, then the League just has to live with their mistake. 

 

You may be factually correct Dustin, but I detest this mode of conduct. This isn't something as simple as a leading with the crown of your helmet collision or a dirty hit fine wise to me. Call the penalty during the QTR it was committed in or forget about entirely. 

 

Does Matthew Hasselbeck get a 2005 SB ring as the Seahawks QB now because the zebras made horrible calls at Ford Field too? I'm not mad at you Dustin. I just despise taking records away after the fact. 

[southwest1]

This doesn't have anything to do with the refs tho. This is that stat guys over at Elias just recording it wrong. 

I appreciate your patience with me Dustin. I guess I am just loyal to Peyton to a fault. 

 

If 1 of my friends that I am loyal to gets slighted, I will go after the aggressor like a rabid pit bull. I've always been that way I guess.  I'm calmed down now. 

 

Yes, I realize that I don't know Peyton personally & no I am not experiencing any delusions of grandeur either. LOL! Gramz will probably meet his someday though I'll bet. 

[Superman]

Again, I don't give a darn. If the violation isn't directly witnessed during the duration of the game in question especially with instant replay, fiber optics, & multiple HD cameras, then the League just has to live with their mistake. 

 

You may be factually correct Dustin, but I detest this mode of conduct. This isn't something as simple as a leading with the crown of your helmet collision or a dirty hit fine wise to me. Call the penalty during the QTR it was committed in or forget about entirely. 

 

Does Matthew Hasselbeck get a 2005 SB ring as the Seahawks QB now because the zebras made horrible calls at Ford Field too? I'm not mad at you Dustin. I just despise taking records away after the fact. 

 

There's no penalty. There's no violation. That is entirely different, and the NFL wouldn't adjust stats after the fact based on a penalty that wasn't called properly or a mistake by the refs. This has nothing to do with the refs. (For instance, the TD to Decker last week that shouldn't have been a TD isn't taken away.)

 

All that happened is the stats guys gave Manning credit for a completion on a pass that traveled backward, and according to the rules, that's not a completion, it's a rushing attempt. So Manning should lose the completion and the yardage that came with it. It has no bearing on the outcome of the game, as it doesn't matter how you gain your yards, you get credit for them no matter how they come.

 

Again, this happens all the time. Stat adjustments are made every week.

[southwest1]

 This is that stat guys over at Elias just recording it wrong. 

I'm only asking because I don't know: If the League does strip Peyton Manning of the 2013 single season passing record, is there an asterisk or footnote in the Canton NFL record books at least claiming that 18 held the record for 24 hours at least? 

 

Do suits show up wearing dark shades & say sign this document & never speak of this controversy again like a non-disclosure binding law agreement like Keyser Söze ["The Usual Suspects" film joke] "Poof! The record is gone...    

[southwest1]

There's no penalty. There's no violation. That is entirely different, and the NFL wouldn't adjust stats after the fact based on a penalty that wasn't called properly or a mistake by the refs. This has nothing to do with the refs. (For instance, the TD to Decker last week that shouldn't have been a TD isn't taken away.)

 

All that happened is the stats guys gave Manning credit for a completion on a pass that traveled backward, and according to the rules, that's not a completion, it's a rushing attempt. So Manning should lose the completion and the yardage that came with it. It has no bearing on the outcome of the game, as it doesn't matter how you gain your yards, you get credit for them no matter how they come.

 

Again, this happens all the time. Stat adjustments are made every week.

Again just like FX Stryker so eloquently stated  earlier, "most of the time they don't strip records. "

[Superman]

Yea, but most of the time they don't strip records.

I get the point SW is making. Who do you upset in this situation? It's pretty much Peyton vs Brees. You take Peyton's away and it's everyone calling controversy. You keep it as is and you upset Brees, who Goodell doesn't really like. Besides Brees will break it next year.

 

Why do you think they review and adjust stats after the game? It's to get stuff like this right. 

 

This has nothing to do with Goodell. It's not even about the NFL, really. The league doesn't hand out awards to players when they break records. 

 

So the answer is simple. You fix the records to reflect what really happened. Manning's pass was a lateral, and should be reflected as such. Sucks for him, but it's the right thing to do.

[Superman]

Again just like FX Stryker so eloquently stated  earlier, "most of the time they don't strip records. "

 

That's irrelevant. Most of the time, records aren't set. 

[Warhawk]

I'm only asking because I don't know: If the League does strip Peyton Manning of the 2013 single season passing record, is there an asterisk or footnote in the Canton NFL record books at least claiming that 18 held the record for 24 hours at least? 

 

Do suits show up wearing dark shades & say sign this document & never speak of this controversy again like a non-disclosure binding law agreement like Keyser Söze ["The Usual Suspects" film joke] "Poof! The record is gone...    

 

 

This is silly.

 

It's a lateral.  It should count as rushing yardage for Decker.  They make adjustments to the statistics all the time to make sure they're accurate.  The statistics that are kept in real time have no temporal momentum.  If they change the stats later to correct a stat-keeping error, the old statistic doesn't retain any quality of legitimacy.  Nobody is being penalized, it's just a function of accurate statistical record-keeping.  That such an adjustment makes the difference in whether a player breaks a historical record shouldn't make a difference.

 

Plus, the idea that the league should just give Manning the record because of how popular Manning is is a bit absurd.

[southwest1]

That's irrelevant. Most of the time, records aren't set. 

Then why the hades does the NFL compile & keep track of so much statistical material to determine what players get enshrined into Canton, Ohio for?

 

Records get set, cataloged, & put down for posterity all the time. No, it isn't irrelevant. Also, the more records 1 player sets individually the faster then become 1st ballot Hall of Famers after they have been retired from the league for 4 or 5 years I think.

[Warhawk]

Then why the hades does the NFL compile & keep track of so much statistical material to determine what players get enshrined in Canton, Ohio for?

 

Records get set, cataloged, & put down for posterity all the time. No, it isn't irrelevant. 

 

It's irrelevant because you shouldn't correct some statistics to be more accurate after a game is over but not others solely based on how good you think a storyline is.

[southwest1]

This is silly.

 

It's a lateral.  It should count as rushing yardage for Decker.  They make adjustments to the statistics all the time to make sure they're accurate.  The statistics that are kept in real time have no temporal momentum.  If they change the stats later to correct a stat-keeping error, the old statistic doesn't retain any quality of legitimacy.  Nobody is being penalized, it's just a function of accurate statistical record-keeping.  That such an adjustment makes the difference in whether a player breaks a historical record shouldn't make a difference.

 

Plus, the idea that the league should just give Manning the record because of how popular Manning is is a bit absurd.

Again my central thesis is this: If you fail to catch the discrepancy during the game, then you shouldn't be able to retroactively strip any QB of their single season passing title. Popularity of any athlete is secondary to me. 

 

Can a police officer pull you over 2 weeks after running a red light & give you a ticket just because they feel like it too WarHawk? Interesting...Even video camera footage of license plates is time stamped & dated when the infraction occurred not several weeks later...

[Warhawk]

Again my central thesis is this: If you fail to catch the discrepancy during the game, then you shouldn't be able to retroactively strip any QB of their single season passing title. Popularity of any athlete is secondary to me. 

 

But why should that be any different than correcting any other inaccuracy in statkeeping?  If the same play happened with Andrew Luck and Griff Whalen last week, it would have been changed to a lateral + rush attempt.  In keeping statistics, shouldn't the NFL and Elias strive for the most accuracy possible, period, rather than the most accuracy possible without making anyone feel bad?  I mean, how trustworthy and reliable are the official NFL statistics if they fudge the numbers sometimes in order to give the players they like records that weren't earned?

[jameszeigler834]

If I were advising Peyton, I would tell him to abdicate no title & relinquish nothing. Translation: If the League raises a fuss about this matter, dig your heels in & refuse to back down. You won that passing title fair & square. You earned it. You did nothing wrong. 

 

The referees messed up not you. It the principle that matters. It's not selfish to fight for the passing title you & the Broncos earned. "Not 1 step back" Yoda. Not 1 step back. 

Why might he lose it.

[Guest vanqos]

Don't worry Manning fans, there's no way they'd take it away from him.

 

Btw, I don't understand the big deal about this.  For one thing, it's a regular season stat record, who cares?  For another thing, it's likely someone like Brees or Stafford will break it in a year or two anyway.

[southwest1]

But why should that be any different than correcting any other inaccuracy in statkeeping?  If the same play happened with Andrew Luck and Griff Whalen last week, it would have been changed to a lateral + rush attempt.  In keeping statistics, shouldn't the NFL and Elias strive for the most accuracy possible, period, rather than the most accuracy possible without making anyone feel bad?  I mean, how trustworthy and reliable are the official NFL statistics if they fudge the numbers sometimes in order to give the players they like records that weren't earned?

You are missing the point. The infraction itself is not the issue, but rather when it is acknowledged publicly & giving the QB is question the necessary time to overcome the circumstance within the window of the game when the record may or may not be broken. That's the reason why I mentioned the HD cameras & fiber optics technology. 

[shecolt]

Sometimes it seems to me like Peyton just can't catch a break. 

 

For years, we heard . . . yeah he's great, but he has prove it by winning the big one.

 

He no sooner than gets that monkey off his back before monkey #2 climbs on and some are saying . . . yeah he's great, but he has to win more than one SB to prove it. 

 

I often wonder . . . if the Colts had defeated the Saints, would monkey #3 now be on his back.

 

Then, he breaks the TD record . . . but, wait that wasn't really a TD.  Fortunately, he had another game left in the regular season.

 

Now, he breaks the passing yard record . . . but, wait that wasn't really a forward pass.  Sadly, he doesn't have another game left in the regular season.

 

If I were Peyton, I would probably tell them to take away the record myself because many will now put an asterisk behind it and the record will also probably soon be broken anyhow.

[Warhawk]

You are missing the point. The infraction itself is not the issue, but rather when it is acknowledged publicly & giving the QB is question the necessary time to overcome the circumstance within the window of the game when the record may or may not be broken. That's the reason why I mentioned the HD cameras & fiber optics technology. 

 

There's no "infraction" here.  Laterals aren't a penalty or anything like that.

[Guest TeamLoloJones]

Again my central thesis is this: If you fail to catch the discrepancy during the game, then you shouldn't be able to retroactively strip any QB of their single season passing title. Popularity of any athlete is secondary to me. 

 

Can a police officer pull you over 2 weeks after running a red light & give you a ticket just because they feel like it too WarHawk? Interesting...Even video camera footage of license plates is time stamped & dated when the infraction occurred not several weeks later...

If they didn't make any stat corrections, then Robert Mathis would not be the sack champion this year...

[Superman]

Then why the hades does the NFL compile & keep track of so much statistical material to determine what players get enshrined into Canton, Ohio for?

 

Records get set, cataloged, & put down for posterity all the time. No, it isn't irrelevant. Also, the more records 1 player sets individually the faster then become 1st ballot Hall of Famers after they have been retired from the league for 4 or 5 years I think.

 

Manning is a first ballot HOFer, with or without these 7 yards. Don't worry your pretty little head about that.

 

What you're not grasping is that Manning never set the record. The play in question wasn't a forward pass, it was a lateral. Just because they didn't mark it properly during the game doesn't mean they shouldn't go back and correct it. This happens every week. They're not going to ignore this particular correction just because a record would be be set if they don't make the correction, and I don't know why anyone would want them to do so.

[southwest1]

There's no "infraction" here.  Laterals aren't a penalty or anything like that.

If someone is about to take something away from you, a plateau that very few people reach in their occupation with no recourse at your disposal after the fact, would you be pleased Warhawk with no opportunity to resolve the matter? I highly doubt it sir. 

[Warhawk]

If someone is about to take something away from you, a plateau that very few people reach in their occupation with no recourse at your disposal after the fact, would you be please Warhawk with no opportunity to resolve the matter? I highly doubt it sir. 

 

And if you take the record away from Brees and give it to Manning even though Manning did not technically earn it, that's just fine and dandy?

 

The statistics are often adjusted to be as accurate as possible according to the rules of the game.  According to the rules of the game, Peyton Manning did not accumulate enough passing yards to break Brees' record.

 

If a close election is recounted and the other candidate wins, that does not mean that the first candidate had the victory "taken" from him.  He either won, or he didn't.  Manning either broke the record, or he didn't.  Unfortunately, he didn't.

[southwest1]

If they didn't make any stat corrections, then Robert Mathis would not be the sack champion this year...

The Green Bay Packers would have actually intercepted that Seahawks pass too last season TLJ. Did the League do that? Sadly no. 

[Superman]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/12/04/gronkowski-almost-sets-record-as-patriots-roll-over-colts/

 

The Patriots tight end appeared to break a tie with Vernon Davis and Antonio Gates for sole possession of the NFL record for most touchdowns caught by a tight end in a single season when he scored for the third time in the third quarter of Sunday’s 31-24 win over the Colts. Upon further review, though, the score was merely his 14th overall touchdown of the year because it was ruled a lateral, rather than a forward pass, from Tom Brady.

That means Gronkowski still needs one more score for the record and it means Brady is still tied with Warren Moon for sixth place on the touchdown pass list with 291 in his career. It might not seem like all that big a deal for either player. Given the way this season is playing out, it will just be a matter of time before they get their own space in the record books.

 

The only difference in these two situations is that yesterday's game was the last game of the season for Manning, and he can't go out and fix this next week. And that's too bad, but it's interesting to see people arguing that the correction shouldn't be made. I don't think anyone would have argued this way in favor of Gronkowski two years ago if that was the Patriots final game of the season.

[Warhawk]

The Green Bay Packers would have actually intercepted that Seahawks pass too last season TLJ. Did the League do that? Sadly no. 

 

That's actually a completely different issue.  Statistics that are adjusted are things like who make a tackle or a sack, or how much yardage was gained on a play as it will be reflected in the books, or whether a play was a pass or a lateral (as in this case).  All those things don't affect the course of play, since the tackle was still made, or the first down was picked up (or wasn't), or the yardage was gained anyway (just as a rush instead of a pass).

[Guest TeamLoloJones]

The Green Bay Packers would have actually intercepted that Seahawks pass too last season TLJ. Did the League do that? Sadly no. 

Because the statisticians can't change stats that would result in a different outcome of the play. 

[southwest1]

And if you take the record away from Brees and give it to Manning even though Manning did not technically earn it, that's just fine and dandy?

 

The statistics are often adjusted to be as accurate as possible according to the rules of the game.  According to the rules of the game, Peyton Manning did not accumulate enough passing yards to break Brees' record.

 

If a close election is recounted and the other candidate wins, that does not mean that the first candidate had the victory "taken" from him.  He either won, or he didn't.  Manning either broke the record, or he didn't.  Unfortunately, he didn't.

Your election analogy is irrelevant. Did I say anything about a recount? No, I did not. Also, are election ballots videotaped from multiple camera angles every time a ballot is cast & placed into a machine? Nope. Cite the infraction in the game window or act as though the infraction or statistical anomaly ever took place. 

 

Issuing fines is the only retro active penalty I would accept days after the fact. 

[Warhawk]

Your election analogy is irrelevant. Did I say anything about a recount? No, I did not. Cite the infraction in the game window or act as though the infraction or statistical anomaly ever took place. 

 

Issuing fines is the only retro active penalty I would accept days after the fact. 

 

Stop calling it an infraction.  It's NOT an infraction - there's no penalty, it's just changing the yardage from passing yardage to rushing yardage to reflect what actually happened on the field.  See the above reference example involving Gronkowski for comparison.  This is the same thing.  And bringing up fines, for god knows what reason, is way more irrelevant than anything I've said.

 

This is NOT a disciplinary incident.  It's purely a record-keeping formality.  The play was a rushing play, since the pass did not go in a forward direction.  It should be recorded as such, same as if the wrong player was credited for a tackle or a sack on a given play.

[southwest1]

Stop calling it an infraction.  It's NOT an infraction - there's no penalty, it's just changing the yardage from passing yardage to rushing yardage to reflect what actually happened on the field.  See the above reference example involving Gronkowski for comparison.  This is the same thing.  And bringing up fines, for god knows what reason, is way more irrelevant than anything I've said.

 

This is NOT a disciplinary incident.  It's purely a record-keeping formality.  The play was a rushing play, since the pass did not go in a forward direction.  It should be recorded as such, same as if the wrong player was credited for a tackle or a sack on a given play.

Peyton might be stripped of this achievement through no fault of his own...Tell me Warhawk if you were 18 would you capitulate so easily? The issue here is no recourse & the window in which the incident occurred plain & simple. 

[House]

I'm not sure I understand any argument for why he should keep the record. He didn't earn it. They made a mistake, and without some kind of intervention somehow explaining that into a forward pass, and they'll correct their mistake.

[Guest TeamLoloJones]

Peyton might be stripped of this achievement through no fault of his own...Tell me Warhawk if you were 18 would you capitulate so easily? The issue here is no recourse & the window in which the incident occurred plain & simple. 

You realize that they make corrections like this all the time right?  They even did it to Luck earlier this year.  Just because a record was broken in the process doesn't mean all of a sudden the stat keepers shouldn't do their jobs.

[Warhawk]

Peyton might be stripped of this achievement through no fault of his own...Tell me Warhawk if you were 18 would you capitulate so easily? The issue here is no recourse & the window in which the incident occurred plain & simple. 

 

You're still not addressing the Gronkowski example cited above, which is largely similar.  Just because this time it's likely to happen to Peyton Manning doesn't mean that we should drop the usual protocol just so that Manning's feelings aren't hurt.

 

And like I said, he can't be stripped of the achievement if he never actually attained that achievement, and if that's a lateral (and it looks pretty clear that it is), he didn't.  Those are rushing yards, not passing yards.

[Superman]

Peyton might be stripped of this achievement through no fault of his own...Tell me Warhawk if you were 18 would you capitulate so easily? The issue here is no recourse & the window in which the incident occurred plain & simple. 

 

Manning has no say in the matter. And when you break it down to the most basic, he never achieved this achievement. We only thought he did because a lateral looked like a pass.

 

SW, you've worked yourself up here. It's really simple, and there's a ton of precedent here that you're ignoring. It's too bad for Manning, but it's not hard to understand why he didn't set the record.

[Superman]

I'm not sure I understand any argument for why he should keep the record. He didn't earn it. They made a mistake, and without some kind of intervention somehow explaining that into a forward pass, and they'll correct their mistake.

 

And there's no explanation short of the earth's rotational force somehow sending a forward pass backward in midair, where it was caught by Decker. 

 

Long and short of it, it's a lateral. It's not that hard to understand, unless you don't want to understand it out of loyalty to Manning.

[Guest vanqos]

As a non Peyton fan but someone who has respect for his ability, it's not his regular season stats that make him great.  It's his ability as a passer and intelligence on the field.  If anything, the constant TD passes from the 3 yard line and obvious awareness of his stats are what rubs him the wrong way with some people.  He could have Russell Wilson type stats and he'd still be an all-time great.