Peyton could lose his passing yardage record.

[southwest1]

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.

I don't give a crap about Gronk who cares? I also don't care about lateral passes vs TDs that's semantics with no precedence whatsoever. I care about 1 game in this case: The Broncos vs the Raiders. This isn't an NFL statistical documentation course for college credit. 

 

You're still addressing my point of no recourse on the part of the QB & fiber optic technology with multiple HD cameras that failed to ascertain a lateral pass from a forward pass beyond the naked eye in a 3 hour window. Why should Peyton be stripped of the 2013 passing title for that. Funny how you keep dodging that question actually. 

 

And you election recount analogy holds zero credibility either Warhawk. 

[Warhawk]

I don't give a crap about Gronk who cares? I also don't care about lateral passes vs TDs that's semantics with no precedence whatsoever. I care about 1 game in this case: The Broncos vs the Raiders. This isn't an NFL statistical documentation course for college credit. 

 

You should care about Gronk because it's a similar situation.  Otherwise you're just arguing that Manning should be treated differently from everyone else just because he's Peyton Manning.

[Fx Stryker]

I bet the league comes out and says, or whoever does the stats, that there isn't enough evidence to change it.

It really doesn't matter. I would honestly rather Peyton to say take the yards away, but he truly doesn't care either way.

[southwest1]

You should care about Gronk because it's a similar situation.  Otherwise you're just arguing that Manning should be treated differently from everyone else just because he's Peyton Manning.

Clearly, we do not see eye to eye on this situation, which is perfectly fine. I didn't answer your Gronk question & you didn't answer my fiber optics technology, time constraints question. A stale mate then? 

 

Just where are you getting the idea of preferential treatment here BTW? Yes, I acknowledged I "was loyal to Peyton to a fault." I will admit that. SO what? Certain players get the benefit of the doubt all the time. That's certainly no secret now is it? It's how the NFL works. Manning, Brees, Brady, & Rogers will get afforded luxuries say Andy Dalton won't. Stop the presses! [sarcasm intended.] 

 

You seem to be arguing objectivity toward all players been applied equally & I am arguing that if superior technology can't detect the incident in a 3 hour window then no retro active standard should be universally applied. It's not just entering the lateral pass wrong in a stat; it's using every tool at your disposal to eliminate mistakes & correct them in a reasonable timeframe for the benefit of the affected player in question. 

 

We also differ over what is considered "a reasonable timeframe." 

[southwest1]

I bet the league comes out and says, or whoever does the stats, that there isn't enough evidence to change it. It really doesn't matter. I would honestly rather Peyton to say take the yards away, but he truly doesn't care either way.

You're probably right FX. I will also admit that elite QBs like Manning get more room for raising a fuss than say a LB or DE would over whether a statistical record should stand or not. It's not fair or universal, but life isn't fair either. Besides, it's an offensive driven league now anyway.

 

Peyton will be dignified in his response no matter what Roger Goodell decides to do here. I do wonder though just for hypothetical purposes....Say you had a QB up for his 3 ballot to get inducted into the NFL HOF. He didn't have tremendous overflowing stats & the league decided to take a few impressive milestones away due to faulty record keeping & that QB was declined again & never received a yellow jacket...Would this scenario matter? Is it relevant to a good QB right on the verge of being accepted into Canton, Ohio not named Peyton Manning?

 

I care about HOF candidates not deemed elite. That's when sloppy statistical record keeping matters...To guys right on the cusp of acceptance & denial...like WR Cris Carter was for years...

 

I didn't expect a response my friend. I just think a lot about the exposure & press a star athlete gets now vs 10 years ago without social media & the NFL Network 24/7...Art Monk's induction took forever man. 

 

Put Charles Haley in already! 5 Rings is 5 Rings. Okay, SW1 will shut up now. LOL! 

[Narcosys]

He should have just merc'd that record.

[MAC]

Don't worry your pretty little head about that.

 

I appreciate the fact that you were in the midst of a frustrating conversation, and I acknowledge that you are amongst the most patient posters on here, but if someone said the above to me I'd probably put my head through the monitor in my eagerness to respond. Maybe you should give yourself a warning point. ;)

 

By the way, I think that somewhere in SWs argument is frustration over the fact that Manning clearly kept playing JUST until he had broken the record. So the question becomes - according to who? Do the coaches keep little scraps of paper on the sidelines jotting down numbers, or does the league sanction statisticians to provide relevant updates? If the later, stripping him of the record when he clearly could have broken it by 250 if he'd chosen to is pretty darn petty.

 

The thing is, if the play is so obvious to anyone watching now, why wasn't a word said about it on game day? A phone call from ANYONE before the end of half-time suggesting that a play might be in question would have given them the opportunity to make an informed decision. It's a major record, and millions were waiting for it. Were no concerned league officials among them? No-one at Elias's office thinking "uhhhhhh, we might have a problem here"? Just happy obliviousness until an after-the-fact micro-analysis suggests that - by virtue of the fact that an overhand 10+ yards through the air pass to a wide receiver might have taken a 1 degree turn to the south (depending on what camera angle you are watching) - Peyton might not actually have deserved the record. I'm familiar with the concept of lateral, but this is just another example of how the game has changed. A lateral is a running back tossing the ball back to the QB so he can pass, or a QB turning and pitching the ball underhand to a sweeping running back, or a kick returner trying to keep a play alive. What Peyton threw was a SCREEN PASS. Classifying it as a hand-off based on a tiny differentiation of the receivers position is a technical absurdity worthy of the tuck rule.

 

More to the point, every article states that other camera angles are inconclusive. If there is ANY doubt about the ruling the most reasonable thing for the league to do is to let it stand. Just how much effort should they expend just to put a trivial ding in such an overwhelming statistical season. This takes an OCD like "well, but it's accurate" concern with minutia that ignores the larger reality of what Peyton accomplished.

 

He didn't chase this down until 14:59 of OT, it was his to have at his leisure. While "tainted" records just become fodder for years of more inane arguments that nobody wants, I'd make the argument that the record is tainted either way. Will Bree's be sticking his chest out in pride over still holding the record - knowing that Manning had the opportunity to crush it but chose not to? There's no pride of accomplishment in that. While some say that Manning should step up and tell them to take the yards away, if I was Bree's I'd step up and tell them to keep it. He should be embarrassed to cling to a record under such absurd circumstances.

[Rice Eater]

Funny, I thought us Manning fans was going to retire the "he would(previous version adds the word "still" in this part) have had the record if only he finished the game/played longer" argument after he smashed the TD record this year. But it looks like we're going to get a little more mileage out of this baby. 

[Guest vanqos]

I don't understand the fuss over the record.  It's going to get re-broken anyway by Brees or Stafford, maybe even next year.   The bigger hit on his legacy, rightly or wrongly, is if he loses in the playoffs this year.

[bayone]

I appreciate the fact that you were in the midst of a frustrating conversation, and I acknowledge that you are amongst the most patient posters on here, but if someone said the above to me I'd probably put my head through the monitor in my eagerness to respond. Maybe you should give yourself a warning point. ;)

 

By the way, I think that somewhere in SWs argument is frustration over the fact that Manning clearly kept playing JUST until he had broken the record. So the question becomes - according to who? Do the coaches keep little scraps of paper on the sidelines jotting down numbers, or does the league sanction statisticians to provide relevant updates? If the later, stripping him of the record when he clearly could have broken it by 250 if he'd chosen to is pretty darn petty.

 

The thing is, if the play is so obvious to anyone watching now, why wasn't a word said about it on game day? A phone call from ANYONE before the end of half-time suggesting that a play might be in question would have given them the opportunity to make an informed decision. It's a major record, and millions were waiting for it. Were no concerned league officials among them? No-one at Elias's office thinking "uhhhhhh, we might have a problem here"? Just happy obliviousness until an after-the-fact micro-analysis suggests that - by virtue of the fact that an overhand 10+ yards through the air pass to a wide receiver might have taken a 1 degree turn to the south (depending on what camera angle you are watching) - Peyton might not actually have deserved the record. I'm familiar with the concept of lateral, but this is just another example of how the game has changed. A lateral is a running back tossing the ball back to the QB so he can pass, or a QB turning and pitching the ball underhand to a sweeping running back, or a kick returner trying to keep a play alive. What Peyton threw was a SCREEN PASS. Classifying it as a hand-off based on a tiny differentiation of the receivers position is a technical absurdity worthy of the tuck rule.

 

More to the point, every article states that other camera angles are inconclusive. If there is ANY doubt about the ruling the most reasonable thing for the league to do is to let it stand. Just how much effort should they expend just to put a trivial ding in such an overwhelming statistical season. This takes an OCD like "well, but it's accurate" concern with minutia that ignores the larger reality of what Peyton accomplished.

 

He didn't chase this down until 14:59 of OT, it was his to have at his leisure. While "tainted" records just become fodder for years of more inane arguments that nobody wants, I'd make the argument that the record is tainted either way. Will Bree's be sticking his chest out in pride over still holding the record - knowing that Manning had the opportunity to crush it but chose not to? There's no pride of accomplishment in that. While some say that Manning should step up and tell them to take the yards away, if I was Bree's I'd step up and tell them to keep it. He should be embarrassed to cling to a record under such absurd circumstances.

 

 

He should have just merc'd that record.

 

 

I bet the league comes out and says, or whoever does the stats, that there isn't enough evidence to change it. It really doesn't matter. I would honestly rather Peyton to say take the yards away, but he truly doesn't care either way.

 

 

 

 I am arguing that if superior technology can't detect the incident in a 3 hour window then no retro active standard should be universally applied. It's not just entering the lateral pass wrong in a stat; it's using every tool at your disposal to eliminate mistakes & correct them in a reasonable timeframe for the benefit of the affected player in question. 

 

We also differ over what is considered "a reasonable timeframe." 

 

 

what I also love about the record is how the announcers said fittingly he gets it with a TD

 

& of course he could have obliterated it in 2nd half, he did want to go in, i commented before Fox said it was his decision not to let peyton play the 2nd half over Peyton wanting to start it at least

 

I wanted 1 more series as commented before because

 

  I thought rounds #'s like 55 TDs & 5500 yards sounded nice , only needed 23 yards , & they scored on ever drive so 1 series would of hopefully done it and also erases any consequences of a 7 yard removal if indeed that does happen

 

I also am of the opinion if any comment comes out, not enough evidence to overrule

 

Mac , all game the announcers were posting the yardage needed,, it was like a countdown to a rocket launch ,u know they and the NFL were surely eyeing this record, not one announcer questioned the play at the time if I remember right 

 

It wouldn't of surprised me if before the game the NFL refs were told to make sure of everything as  it just may be history making & we want it right, then again am sure all games with playoff implications were told same and look at charger game for 1 serious mistaken call , if not 2 that ended with playioff denied to Pit

[MAC]

what I also love about the record is how the announcers said fittingly he gets it with a TD

 

& of course he could have obliterated it in 2nd half, he did want to go in, i commented before Fox said it was his decision not to let peyton play the 2nd half over Peyton wanting to start it at least

 

I wanted 1 more series as commented before because

 

  I thought rounds #'s like 55 TDs & 5500 yards sounded nice , only needed 23 yards , & they scored on ever drive so 1 series would of hopefully done it and also erases any consequences of a 7 yard removal if indeed that does happen

 

I also am of the opinion if any comment comes out, not enough evidence to overrule

 

Mac , all game the announcers were posting the yardage needed,, it was like a countdown to a rocket launch ,u know they and the NFL were surely eyeing this record, not one announcer questioned the play at the time if I remember right 

I could only listen on the radio and so had no clue. The Denver announcers didn't say a word at any point well through the post game.

 

I agree that your round numbers would have been memorable, and I frankly hoped that he would come out in the second half simply because one yard sounded too close for comfort. But of course if had gotten hurt on that drive I would have been jumping around and yelling. All of this is the luxury born of a very special season. Lets hope it continues.

[Susie Q]

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.

I would say that SW isn't the only one that has worked them self up on this topic. You have done a pretty good job yourself.

It's a shame because Peyton could have played a little while longer but the TD record can't be taken away and that is the most important record because it breaks Bradys record.    It might take a while to break that one.

[bayone]

I could only listen on the radio and so had no clue. The Denver announcers didn't say a word at any point well through the post game.

 

I agree that your round numbers would have been memorable, and I frankly hoped that he would come out in the second half simply because one yard sounded too close for comfort. But of course if had gotten hurt on that drive I would have been jumping around and yelling. All of this is the luxury born of a very special season. Lets hope it continues.

 

My friend here is a 40 second clip, listen to the ends and  announcer says ther 's the record and appropriately he does it with a td, or something to that effect

 

Wk 17 cant miss play  , listen from 15 to 25 seconds

 

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap2000000305800/WK-17-Can-t-Miss-Play-Manning-breaks-pass-yards-record

 

Have to leave take care

[Guest vanqos]

The only thing that ultimately matters is if he wins 3 games in the playoffs.  Any less and this will just be like 2004 for Manning, 2007 for Brady, or 2011 for Rodgers. 

[Yehoodi]

I don't give a crap about Gronk who cares? I also don't care about lateral passes vs TDs that's semantics with no precedence whatsoever. I care about 1 game in this case: The Broncos vs the Raiders. This isn't an NFL statistical documentation course for college credit. 

 

You're still addressing my point of no recourse on the part of the QB & fiber optic technology with multiple HD cameras that failed to ascertain a lateral pass from a forward pass beyond the naked eye in a 3 hour window. Why should Peyton be stripped of the 2013 passing title for that. Funny how you keep dodging that question actually. 

 

And you election recount analogy holds zero credibility either Warhawk. 

 

As a pats fan I just want to jump in here and talk about the Gronk TD, passing to rushing TD change from a few years ago . . . the passing TD that happened broke a record for TD caught by a TE, and it was changed the following day . . . so as of Sunday night Gronk had the record, then come Monday afternoon he does not have the record for TD's caught, . . . true it was not the last game, but there was no guarantee that he would catch another one in the last game or two, he could get injured or others would be involved in the TD gaining . . .

 

So basically all that you have is the following:

 

1) A team makes a play in which yardage is gained and TD 

2) A decision was make to record item one in a passing or rushing category

3) In game is was recorded in the passing category

4) A player broke a record because of decision 3

5) The next day the NFL realizes decision 3 was incorrect and put it in the rushing category

6) the Player in item 4 losses his record . .  .

 

it does not matter the name of the person, jersey or what not, but that is what happened and it also has been done to remove a record that was in the books . . . so if the NFL takes changes Peyton's pass to be a handoff, it will doing the exact same thing to Peyton is it did to Gronk, the point of the earlier poster . . .

 

true it would be sad for Manning as had he known he would of stayed in the game, so perhaps the NFL will take that into consideration, however that would open the door for them not acting like the lady of justice, who is blind to the results of a decision . . .

 

as some have said it they would not take a score away, like Decker's TD, as that would be changing a result of the game for the team, but moving 7 yards from one side of the ledger to the other does not and has been done before

 

it would be a hard decision to reverse though, and I can see support on both sides . . . being consistent and reversing it, or keeping in the same realizing that had he known he would of broke it eventually early in the 2nd half . .

 

I heard yah Southwest and you are frustrated and coming from the angle of "if he only known he could of corrected it" which falls in second category, it is just that other here are saying that the NFL has and could now (even tho it would be harsh) acted like the lady of justice in the past . . .  

[amfootball]

I am not sure what there is so much debate on this. I get the Manning loyalists on this but really it is a simple case if it is ruled a lateral. And if you want to argue for Manning what about Brees? As much as I wanted Manning to crush his record, he does deserve to keep it if that pass was a lateral. I am sure if it was Brees trying to break Manning's yardage record the same folks here would be arguing the exact opposite side of this debate.

[jjcolts]

I am sure if Manning cared enough..he would have said let me play another snap.  Perhaps he just doesn't care, as he know in his mind he would have obliterated the record.  Just speculating.

 

I mean there is no "do over" in the NFL...LOL.  

 

When do we know if the record breaking stand or not.

[Blue Horseshoe]

Easy problem to fix.  Just throw for 6000 next year.

[OffensivelyPC]

He didn't chase this down until 14:59 of OT, it was his to have at his leisure. While "tainted" records just become fodder for years of more inane arguments that nobody wants, I'd make the argument that the record is tainted either way. Will Bree's be sticking his chest out in pride over still holding the record - knowing that Manning had the opportunity to crush it but chose not to? There's no pride of accomplishment in that. While some say that Manning should step up and tell them to take the yards away, if I was Bree's I'd step up and tell them to keep it. He should be embarrassed to cling to a record under such absurd circumstances.

I get what you are arguing, and to a large degree, I agree with you, especially about the record being "tainted" no matter what the league does. But in all fairness, there isn't really a good reason to treat Manning differently if the league thought, conclusively, that it was a lateral.  Yeah, we all know Manning COULD have broken the record, but if we're speaking purely from an accuracy standpoint, he didn't - depending of course on what the league's final ruling was. 

 

That being said, very much doubt Brees would be hoisting the record as if it was unquestionably his.  I think he knows for a fact that the record ultimately would have been broken if Manning chose to do so.  But I don't think that there's any reason to criticize Brees, should he choose not to go to bat for Manning and request the league to find the play to be a pass for 7 yards.  The record is his, and if manning really wanted to rbeak the record, he should have, in light of the fact that it would have been easily done if he played the second half. 

 

As you said, the record is "tainted" one way or the other, and you could make arguements one way or the other.  But I'd prefer to be accurate statistically than be have to argue that the record would have been broken if Manning had finished the game, another drive, etc. 

[Gramz]

Taking a Sabbatical from the Forum until after the Super Bowl. I want to watch the game, celebrate the accomplishments and Wins and not have to read any garbage along the way.

Happy Playoff Season Everyone. Enjoy the Games.

[T Y Goodbye]

This play was not a lateral, but a forward pass, and it was let go...basically the same thing in question as this is..the question of whether or not it was a forward pass..

 

Anyone remember this play?..

 

http://www.nfl.com/videos/tennessee-titans/09000d5d81d991bc/Music-City-Miracle

[Superman]

I would say that SW isn't the only one that has worked them self up on this topic. You have done a pretty good job yourself.

It's a shame because Peyton could have played a little while longer but the TD record can't be taken away and that is the most important record because it breaks Bradys record.    It might take a while to break that one.

 

I'm not worked up at all. Or are you saying I worked SW up?

 

Thing is, I think it would be awesome for Manning to have this record, however briefly. But I think the people who make this determination should do so on the basis of what actually happened, not what could or should have happened, and certainly not based on what it means for the player involved. That's the way they've always handled it, and assuming it's a lateral, they should do that here.

 

Doesn't mean I like it. But it seems inevitable.

[Superman]

This play was not a lateral, but a forward pass, and it was let go...basically the same thing in question as this is..the question of whether or not it was a forward pass..

 

Anyone remember this play?..

 

http://www.nfl.com/videos/tennessee-titans/09000d5d81d991bc/Music-City-Miracle

 

That's actually an officiating issue, not a stat-keeping issue. 

[GoPats]

Seriously? The Mannings are the 1st Family Of Football. Peyton isn't losing the passing record. No way. That is so lame it's laughable. Roger Goodell is not that foolish. Avoid the public relations nightmare. Give it to 18 & be done with it. 

 

I put zero stock in this crazy theory whatsoever. Peyton Manning is the figure head of the Natl. Football League right now. Don't open this pandora's box. Otherwise, there will be consequences...

 

If the zebras didn't raise a fuss about it at the game right then & there, then the NFL has no right now to second guess a call that was never pointed out LIVE during the game. JMO. 

 

And before anybody gives me a line about honesty & fairness, let me say this: Is it fair to penalize Peyton after the game is over? Hades no. Had it been called during the game, Peyton would have had ample time to score more points & break Drew Brees's passing record for a single season. Facts are facts. You can't penalize 18 after the fact, it's unethical with no time to remedy the situation. 

 

Did Green Bay get awarded that game against Seattle hours after the game had concluded last season? Nope. 

 

You're always a good guy but I have to respectfully say you're dead wrong on this one. I have no dog in this fight... it wasn't Brady's yardage record that Manning was trying to break. 

 

The Mannings aren't the Sopranos. 

 

If the NFL wants to maintain its integrity, the league will shortly announce this as a stat correction and Brees will retain the yardage record. For now. But not likely for very long, with the way NFL offenses are playing these days. 

 

 

This is 150% on John Fox

 

Some of it, maybe... but you don't think Manning has at least a little influence on how long he stays in a game like this one? 

 

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. 

 

How is it no fault of his own? For one, he could have easily racked up a ton of yards if he stayed in, and secondly, on that particular pass, he threw it backwards. So obviously a lateral, almost textbook. 

 

 

 

This is so not a big deal, overall. The TD record may hang in there for a while but the yardage record is less likely to. 

[chad72]

Peyton and Brees are too classy to care. Besides, each have their postseason woes they are trying to fix to care much about this anyway.

[Superman]

I appreciate the fact that you were in the midst of a frustrating conversation, and I acknowledge that you are amongst the most patient posters on here, but if someone said the above to me I'd probably put my head through the monitor in my eagerness to respond. Maybe you should give yourself a warning point. ;)

 

By the way, I think that somewhere in SWs argument is frustration over the fact that Manning clearly kept playing JUST until he had broken the record. So the question becomes - according to who? Do the coaches keep little scraps of paper on the sidelines jotting down numbers, or does the league sanction statisticians to provide relevant updates? If the later, stripping him of the record when he clearly could have broken it by 250 if he'd chosen to is pretty darn petty.

 

The thing is, if the play is so obvious to anyone watching now, why wasn't a word said about it on game day? A phone call from ANYONE before the end of half-time suggesting that a play might be in question would have given them the opportunity to make an informed decision. It's a major record, and millions were waiting for it. Were no concerned league officials among them? No-one at Elias's office thinking "uhhhhhh, we might have a problem here"? Just happy obliviousness until an after-the-fact micro-analysis suggests that - by virtue of the fact that an overhand 10+ yards through the air pass to a wide receiver might have taken a 1 degree turn to the south (depending on what camera angle you are watching) - Peyton might not actually have deserved the record. I'm familiar with the concept of lateral, but this is just another example of how the game has changed. A lateral is a running back tossing the ball back to the QB so he can pass, or a QB turning and pitching the ball underhand to a sweeping running back, or a kick returner trying to keep a play alive. What Peyton threw was a SCREEN PASS. Classifying it as a hand-off based on a tiny differentiation of the receivers position is a technical absurdity worthy of the tuck rule.

 

More to the point, every article states that other camera angles are inconclusive. If there is ANY doubt about the ruling the most reasonable thing for the league to do is to let it stand. Just how much effort should they expend just to put a trivial ding in such an overwhelming statistical season. This takes an OCD like "well, but it's accurate" concern with minutia that ignores the larger reality of what Peyton accomplished.

 

He didn't chase this down until 14:59 of OT, it was his to have at his leisure. While "tainted" records just become fodder for years of more inane arguments that nobody wants, I'd make the argument that the record is tainted either way. Will Bree's be sticking his chest out in pride over still holding the record - knowing that Manning had the opportunity to crush it but chose not to? There's no pride of accomplishment in that. While some say that Manning should step up and tell them to take the yards away, if I was Bree's I'd step up and tell them to keep it. He should be embarrassed to cling to a record under such absurd circumstances.

 

You make good points. If Manning really wanted this record, he could have nailed it down conclusively. Everyone knows that. And I doubt that Brees will go around thumping his chest about this record if the change is made (I doubt he would in any event, to be honest). Everyone knows that there was nothing standing between Manning and 5,500 yards (or more). For anyone to argue about this record is silliness. 

 

As for the question about stat-keeping, there are people keeping track of numbers at the game for both teams. Their numbers aren't official. The NFL uses Elias to keep official numbers, and when Elias watches all the games after the fact, they send their numbers in, and everyone else reconciles with Elias' numbers. I can't imagine any circumstance where Elias would be watching the game and would call to the stadium to inform a team that they didn't actually break the record they thought they broke, so go try again.

 

The difference between a pass and a lateral is well established. I know what you're saying, but I disagree. It's not about the orientation of the pass, it's about whether the ball goes forward from the passer or not. It's why a shovel pass is a forward pass, but an overhand pass backward is a lateral. No one is suggesting that Manning's shovel passes be ruled laterals or pitches; that would have cost him the record in 2004, and it would reduce his 2013 total by at least 1 that I can think of.

 

If, however, this is inconclusive, that's a different story. I saw the one angle posted in this thread, and I think that angle is pretty conclusive. But I just read the ESPN story, and evidently there's an angle that makes it seem like the ball went forward. If that's true, and there are conflicting angles, then I could see Elias calling this a pass and not a lateral. But again, that would be on the basis of what actually happened, not because of the gravity of the situation.

 

As for the warning point, I don't think SW would take my comment as an offense. It's a colloquialism. I apologize if anyone thought it to be inappropriate.

[amfootball]

Peyton and Brees are too classy to care. Besides, each have their postseason woes they are trying to fix to care much about this anyway.

I respectfully disagree. Brees jumped around like he won the Super Bowl when he broke the yardage and he made sure he put up big numbers in that final game as Brady was on his heels by 200 yards. And when Payton was suspended for bounty-gate, Brees petitioned the league for him to come and attend his 49 TD pass game so Payton could see him break Unitas' record.

[JerodMayo51]

Who honestly cares at all about passing yardage record?  That record is a joke, passing yards are the least impressive stat of a QB and the least important.. especially when you take into account YAC.

 

Never seen so much crying before.. Manning sets the TD and points record against a pitiful Oakland team and everyone is up in arms because the stat correctors did their jobs like they do all year and adjusted a pass to a run play (because it WAS a run play) and people act like the sky is falling and how the NFL should change how they conduct business and go against all of their rules just for little old Peyton Manning.

 

If he doesn't raise a Lombardi trophy at the end of this year, no one is going to care even a little bit about his records, most of which will be broken within the next 3-5 years.

 

Get over it.. Manning didn't break the yardage record, but that record isn't going to be around for more than a year or two at most anyways.  Manning should be worrying about fixing his little one and done in the playoffs problem, rather than worrying about a worthless yardage record.

[bozo]

as a fantasy football player, official stats come in Thursday morning.  stat changes happen every week.  if its a lateral he shouldn't have the record.  i still don't know how they let Strahan keep the sack title when on that play they said Favre should have been charged with a QB run.  so just gonna have to wait.  heck, MLB is still adjusting on stats from 90 years ago.  

[Kyle]

Funny, I thought us Manning fans was going to retire the "he would(previous version adds the word "still" in this part) have had the record if only he finished the game/played longer" argument after he smashed the TD record this year. But it looks like we're going to get a little more mileage out of this baby. 

not sure what you were trying to say here..... 

 

but it was a FAIL!!!!

[bayone]

I am sure if Manning cared enough..he would have said let me play another snap.  Perhaps he just doesn't care, as he know in his mind he would have obliterated the record.  Just speculating.

 

I mean there is no "do over" in the NFL...LOL.  

 

When do we know if the record breaking stand or not.

 

I get what you are arguing, and to a large degree, I agree with you, especially about the record being "tainted" no matter what the league does. But in all fairness, there isn't really a good reason to treat Manning differently if the league thought, conclusively, that it was a lateral.  Yeah, we all know Manning COULD have broken the record, but if we're speaking purely from an accuracy standpoint, he didn't - depending of course on what the league's final ruling was. 

 

 The record is his, and if manning really wanted to rbeak the record, he should have, in light of the fact that it would have been easily done if he played the second half. 

 

As you said, the record is "tainted" one way or the other, and you could make arguements one way or the other.  But I'd prefer to be accurate statistically than be have to argue that the record would have been broken if Manning had finished the game, another drive, etc. 

 

BTW as i noted before Peyton wanted to play in second half, Fox said no, also if Peyton played and got hurt then what would we be saying

 

am hoping not enough evidence as someone said the varying angles avaliable were confusing for a definitive ruling

 

I am also sure Peyton is more concerned about the SB trophy than a record, but my biaas shows & hope its not ruled as definitive conclusion trop overturn, if is is overturned, well only option is burn the ref in efigy  for not getting it right for Fox to know and let Peyton stay in 

 

The refs for all their mistakes should be burned in effigy anyway

[MAC]

I'm sure if it was Brees trying to break Manning's yardage record the same folks here would be arguing the exact opposite side of this debate.

Not me. If it was Manning clinging to the record I would feel that it wasn't quite legitimate. I couldn't mention it to anyone without the 10 second qualifier about the circumstances - similar to the home run record in baseball. Just annoying to all concerned.

 

Of course there are a lot of records that should be treated that way. ANY single season record should involve clarification about how long the season was at the time - as if the books need to be completely re-written with each modification. Example: OJ Simpson's single season rushing mark is more impressive than than any of those who have passed him. How can anyone say "Eric Dickerson is the blah blah blah" without adding "for a 16 game season. But you wouldn't believe what that deranged killer out in CA did back in 73".

 

Another example - I was literally embarrassed back in Buffalo in 2009 when Peyton dinked 12 passes in a blizzard to Wayne and Clark just to get them each to 100 receptions - whereupon the three of them sat down. He was doing them a favor, but considering that each pass traveled about 2 yards and all I could think about was the fear that someone would get hurt, it wasn't exactly a point of pride. Why any of them would be thrilled with that "accomplishment" is beyond me. Just ridiculous.

 

Whatever happens with this, there won't be a clear answer until it gets broken again.

[amfootball]

Not me. If it was Manning clinging to the record I would feel that it wasn't quite legitimate. I couldn't mention it to anyone without the 10 second qualifier about the circumstances - similar to the home run record in baseball. Just annoying to all concerned.

 

Of course there are a lot of records that should be treated that way. ANY single season record should involve clarification about how long the season was at the time - as if the books need to be completely re-written with each modification. Example: OJ Simpson's single season rushing mark is more impressive than than any of those who have passed him. How can anyone say "Eric Dickerson is the blah blah blah" without adding "for a 16 game season. But you wouldn't believe what that deranged killer out in CA did back in 73".

 

Another example - I was literally embarrassed back in Buffalo in 2009 when Peyton dinked 12 passes in a blizzard to Wayne and Clark just to get them each to 100 receptions - whereupon the three of them sat down. He was doing them a favor, but considering that each pass traveled about 2 yards and all I could think about was the fear that someone would get hurt, it wasn't exactly a point of pride. Why any of them would be thrilled with that "accomplishment" is beyond me. Just ridiculous.

 

Whatever happens with this, there won't be a clear answer until it gets broken again.

I hear you on this. That is why I just wish Manning stayed in the game and threw a few more passes.

[bayone]

 

  But I just read the ESPN story, and evidently there's an angle that makes it seem like the ball went forward. If that's true, and there are conflicting angles, then I could see Elias calling this a pass and not a lateral. But again, that would be on the basis of what actually happened, not because of the gravity of the situation.

 

As for the warning point, I don't think SW would take my comment as an offense. It's a colloquialism. I apologize if anyone thought it to be inappropriate.

 

if u have a link to it please quote  this   so can read it, thanks, Barry

 

was it this ?? I just found

 

In one camera angle, the pass to Decker looks like a lateral, which would make it a running play. Another angle, from above, shows Decker receiving the ball at the Broncos' 48-yard line, with Manning slightly deeper than that.

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2013/story/_/id/10217919/peyton-manning-denver-broncos-lose-passing-yards-record

[Superman]

if u have a link to it please quote  this   so can read it, thanks, Barry

 

was it this ?? I just found

 

In one camera angle, the pass to Decker looks like a lateral, which would make it a running play. Another angle, from above, shows Decker receiving the ball at the Broncos' 48-yard line, with Manning slightly deeper than that.

 

http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2013/story/_/id/10217919/peyton-manning-denver-broncos-lose-passing-yards-record

 

Yeah, that's it.

[Superman]

Not me. If it was Manning clinging to the record I would feel that it wasn't quite legitimate. I couldn't mention it to anyone without the 10 second qualifier about the circumstances - similar to the home run record in baseball. Just annoying to all concerned.

 

Of course there are a lot of records that should be treated that way. ANY single season record should involve clarification about how long the season was at the time - as if the books need to be completely re-written with each modification. Example: OJ Simpson's single season rushing mark is more impressive than than any of those who have passed him. How can anyone say "Eric Dickerson is the blah blah blah" without adding "for a 16 game season. But you wouldn't believe what that deranged killer out in CA did back in 73".

 

Another example - I was literally embarrassed back in Buffalo in 2009 when Peyton dinked 12 passes in a blizzard to Wayne and Clark just to get them each to 100 receptions - whereupon the three of them sat down. He was doing them a favor, but considering that each pass traveled about 2 yards and all I could think about was the fear that someone would get hurt, it wasn't exactly a point of pride. Why any of them would be thrilled with that "accomplishment" is beyond me. Just ridiculous.

 

Whatever happens with this, there won't be a clear answer until it gets broken again.

 

To the bolded, that's where SW's concern about HOF credentials comes into play. Clark is obviously not going to be a HOFer, so we don't really have to discuss him. But those single season achievements have an impact on player's credentials when all is said and done. I don't think any of them were necessarily thrilled with the accomplishment; they didn't sit down and high five each other with big stupid grins on their faces. I think they were just within striking distance, and the team made a decision to get them there as quickly as possible and then pull them.

 

The merits are debatable, so carry on. I just think it's a different kind of situation.

[bayone]

Yeah, that's it.

 

Thanks, what does it mean Manning slightly deeper than that , is it   meaning he threw it standing  before the 48 yard line where they say decker caught it, that he threw it standing  closer to the denver 47 & if caught at the 48 it a foirward pass, call me stupid

[Superman]

Thanks, what does it mean Manning slightly deeper than that , is it   meaning he threw it standing  before the 48 yard line where they say decker caught it, that he threw it standing  closer to the denver 47 & if caught at the 48 it a foirward pass, call me stupid

 

It means Manning appeared to be standing behind Decker, which would indicate that he didn't throw the ball backward, and it's not a lateral.

[Dustin]

It only matters where the ball is when it was thrown. Not where Manning is standing.

[bayone]

It means Manning appeared to be standing behind Decker, which would indicate that he didn't throw the ball backward, and it's not a lateral.

 

I appreciate u following up, have a happy New Year