Peyton could lose his passing yardage record.

[bayone]

If u think the comments here are exhausting u need to read those on mile high report

 

I posted one earlier

 

Took  a 2nd look and saw this one added , THis one was in GREEN Highlights I think it meant a serious # of recommendations, sort of our like system

======================================================

 

Know what the NFL should determine?

 

They should say “When he established possession and made a foot ball move after establishing possession, he was beyond the 49 yard line”

 

Think about it. That’s the * they always pull to determine why a fumble isn’t really a fumble even though we all know the dude fumbled the ball.

 

So what the NFL should do is say that after he a) established full* control of the ball AND took 2 steps to make a football move, he was beyond the 49 yard line (more like beyond the 50), so the play should stand! Record for Manning!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Hope everyone enjoy new Years, dont let this spoil it, though i want it for PM it wont bother    Peyton , & if it does all that means is he will have more fuel to attack to get that SB win There is a bigger picture ahead for him

Edited January 2, 2014 by Nadine
masked profanity

[Warhawk]

 

If u think the comments here are exhausting u need to read those on mile high report

 

I posted one earlier

 

Took  a 2nd look and saw this one added , THis one was in GREEN Highlights I think it meant a serious # of recommendations, sort of our like system

 

Know what the NFL should determine?

 

They should say “When he established possession and made a foot ball move after establishing possession, he was beyond the 49 yard line”

 

Think about it. That’s the * they always pull to determine why a fumble isn’t really a fumble even though we all know the dude fumbled the ball.

 

So what the NFL should do is say that after he a) established full * control of the ball AND took 2 steps to make a football move, he was beyond the 49 yard line (more like beyond the 50), so the play should stand! Record for Manning!

 

 

 

That's kind of insane.

 

I mean, I guess you could theoretically change the rule to that (since that's most definitely NOT what the rule is now) - not that you should, mind you, but I guess you could - but even if you did (and let's be honest, you'd be changing a rule solely because the current rule didn't work out in Manning's favor) - even if you did, you couldn't apply it retroactively.

 

But seriously, that's definitely not the rule.

Edited January 2, 2014 by Nadine

[GoColts8818]

Look I am all for getting it right and if they change it fine but if I am Steelers fan if they change this I am demanding they make KC fly back to San Diego and retry that field goal and go back and call the flag they should have.  That's a much bigger mess up than this. 

[Warhawk]

Look I am all for getting it right and if they change it fine but if I am Steelers fan if they change this I am demanding they make KC fly back to San Diego and retry that field goal and go back and call the flag they should have.  That's a much bigger mess up than this. 

 

Completely different issue.  What we're talking about here is the stats guys moving a number from column A to column B when whether it was in column A or B had zero impact on the game.  That's easy to fix, without any consequences to the team.  What you're talking about is an officiating error.  Unfortunately, there's no way to fix officiating errors other than replay, and the NFL, in their infinite thickness, have only extended replay to certain things.

[House]

No. I'm saying I dont care if its a pass or not...if I look at an inch forward or backwards I say count the inches each player runs with it or it goes too....so what i'm really saying is if people are so obsessed with an inch or two...count them all...not just if it was a pass or not....i'm saying let it be...do we really care??? That all said obviously people do and I don't so I made my point and I will let this go. Whatever happens I won't care one bit..I just think its wierd to even go back to look at this stuff....EVER...regardless of circumstance.

I strongly question why you would enter into a thread just to say,"I don't care" over and over.

If you don't care then stop caring.

Clearly you have an opinion on the matter,"I don't care so why should anyone else", but it is what it is. This isn't new. It's not a unique circumstance. Corrections like this are made all the time. That's why the NFL has professional stat keepers, and not "Well it's close enough so we can just call it whatever" keepers.

[bayone]

That's kind of insane.

 

I mean, I guess you could theoretically change the rule to that (since that's most definitely NOT what the rule is now) - not that you should, mind you, but I guess you could - but even if you did (and let's be honest, you'd be changing a rule solely because the current rule didn't work out in Manning's favor) - even if you did, you couldn't apply it retroactively.

 

But seriously, that's definitely not the rule.

 

i wasnt calling for it to be used , as i noted at the very top it wasnt from me but a com mentor to article on Mile High Report, like our stampede blue (  again i wrote If u think the comments here are exhausting u need to read those on mile high report )

 

sorry if it sounded like I said it , am just saying on the Denver version of stampede blue comments are really wild

[Warhawk]

i wasnt calling for it to be used , as i noted at the very top it wasnt from me but a com mentor to article on Mile High Report, like our stampede blue (  again i wrote If u think the comments here are exhausting u need to read those on mile high report )

 

sorry if it sounded like I said it , am just saying on the Denver version of stampede blue comments are really wild

 

I know, sorry, I was using the general "you" as in "you, a hypothetical person," not "you, bayone."

 

So just wherever I said "you" in that post, pretend I said "one" or something.  It'll have the added benefit of making my post sound more pretentious.

 

Or you could change it to "a man", assume I'm talking to myself, and thus pretend I'm actually Jaqen H'ghar.  Clearly, a man should strive for greater grammatical clarity.

[GoColts8818]

Completely different issue.  What we're talking about here is the stats guys moving a number from column A to column B when whether it was in column A or B had zero impact on the game.  That's easy to fix, without any consequences to the team.  What you're talking about is an officiating error.  Unfortunately, there's no way to fix officiating errors other than replay, and the NFL, in their infinite thickness, have only extended replay to certain things.

I wasn't really serious about it. 

 

My point was this mess up by the officials was a bigger mistake than this yet this is the one people are losing their minds over.  Seems a little silly to me. 

[Girlzarefanstoo]

I find it very simple - whatever the rules and procedures that are in place on a normal day and a normal game should apply to this record as well.

 

If they normally check the work of the local statisticians and make changes - that's what they ought to do.

 

If they don't normally check the work of the local statisticians and make changes - that's how it should be done.

 

Nothing special either way, even though the record is very special.

[bayone]

Completely different issue.  What we're talking about here is the stats guys moving a number from column A to column B when whether it was in column A or B had zero impact on the game.  That's easy to fix, without any consequences to the team.  What you're talking about is an officiating error.  Unfortunately, there's no way to fix officiating errors other than replay, and the NFL, in their infinite thickness, have only extended replay to certain things.

 

last comment and have to go Yes I agree with above

 

However 

 

Imagine if  the FG miss   was somehow run back for a TD, then all San Diego Celebrates , Pitsbburgh plotts one, but as a scoring play its then reviewed , correct call made and Kc wins on second cl,oser try, now that would opf been something

[Warhawk]

I wasn't really serious about it. 

 

My point was this mess up by the officials was a bigger mistake than this yet this is the one people are losing their minds over.  Seems a little silly to me. 

 

Well, don't say that bolded part in Pittsburgh, you'll probably get shanked.

 

Which I suppose doesn't exactly deviate from your usual prospects in Pittsburgh, but hey...

 

More to the point, this is something that can actually be fixed after the fact, so, given that we're used to officiating screwups, this is somewhat more interesting to people not involved in the Steelers/Chargers/Chiefs brouhaha.

[dgambill]

We get it, you don't care about a high degree of accuracy in stat-keeping.  So, why get involved in this debate?  I mean, I absolutely agree with you that I don't need stats to appreciate that Manning is a great QB, but, that's kind of besides the point.  Just because you think it's crazy that people care about stats and records doesn't mean that their opinions on the matter are invalid.  I mean, there's nothing wrong with your opinion that it doesn't matter whether Manning breaks Brees' record, because there's nothing wrong with taking a largely subjective, wide-lens view of analyzing quarterback quality.  More power to you for that.

 

But frankly, coming into a thread where people are discussing how to treat a play on the stat sheet and going on and on about how you don't really care about statistics is sorta like coming into a thread where people are debating whether star wars or star trek is better and posting about how you prefer the works of Jane Austen over modern speculative fiction.  OK, valid opinion no matter how much I loathe Jane Austen, but it's not really relevant to the debate, and it doesn't invalidate the debate in any way either.  Lots of people care about stats and records.  Lots of people also like drag racing, or caviar, or JRPGs.  I don't like any of those things, but that doesn't mean a debate over which kind of fish has the tastiest eggs has no value.  Maybe not to me, but its perfectly legitimate to them.

 

In any case, the point in regards to your comment is that they're not nitpicking to quite that level.  What they do when they review the games is adjust fairly basic things, like who gets credit for a tackle or a sack, or whether a play was a run or a pass.  Insofar as WR targets is measured, I know that's something that can get changed a fair bit too.  The key difference here is that they're not changing anything that actually happened in the game, and they're not fixing refs' mistakes or anything like that.  They're just taking the numbers from the game, and making sure they're in the right columns.

 

That may sound phenomenally boring to you, but, that's what it is.

Yes...it does sound boring...and I just posted my opinon that I thought it was crazy...but I that is just me...like probably people that DON'T care about stats probably seem crazy or their opinion isn't valid to others. I never said someone's opinion wasn't valid...just that my opinion is this seems crazy to even go back and look at. Because to me...if your going to argue over inches for a forward pass...than argue every inch the whole season. To me that would be ludicrus to poor over video to do...just as it was to even go back and look at this play....just my feelings....I think its crazy....because if I am going to get so precise with measuring if the pass was forward or not then I think you should care just as much about every half yard the player got...every quarter yard. I just don't think its necessary or needed but I've really posted too much. I understand some people want to have integrity of the game or a record and thats fine with me...I'm more of a spirit of the play not so much a letter of the law. Please carry on the debate..don't let me side track it.

[Warhawk]

Yes...it does sound boring...and I just posted my opinon that I thought it was crazy...but I that is just me...like probably people that DON'T care about stats probably seem crazy or their opinion isn't valid to others. I never said someone's opinion wasn't valid...just that my opinion is this seems crazy to even go back and look at. Because to me...if your going to argue over inches for a forward pass...than argue every inch the whole season. To me that would be ludicrus to poor over video to do...just as it was to even go back and look at this play....just my feelings....I think its crazy....because if I am going to get so precise with measuring if the pass was forward or not then I think you should care just as much about every half yard the player got...every quarter yard. I just don't think its necessary or needed but I've really posted too much. I understand some people want to have integrity of the game or a record and thats fine with me...I'm more of a spirit of the play not so much a letter of the law. Please carry on the debate..don't let me side track it.

 

Sort of a slippery slope argument there.  In any case, they're already going back and looking at things, so, at the very least they should be consistent and do the same thing here.

 

I'm personally not THAT nitpicky with regards to this, but in my discussions with people re: football I like making statistical arguments, so frankly I like the idea that the people keeping those stats are incredibly dull and pedantic.  Means the stats are more reliable. 

[GoColts8818]

Well, don't say that bolded part in Pittsburgh, you'll probably get shanked.

 

Which I suppose doesn't exactly deviate from your usual prospects in Pittsburgh, but hey...

 

More to the point, this is something that can actually be fixed after the fact, so, given that we're used to officiating screwups, this is somewhat more interesting to people not involved in the Steelers/Chargers/Chiefs brouhaha.

My personal opinion is that if we aren't going to fix something that was a clear mistake and knocked someone out of the playoffs I don't think we should go back and change stats after the game and yes I know one is much easier to fix than the other. 

 

I know it's how it's done but it doesn't mean I have to agree with it.  With that said if they go back and change it they change it I don't really care that much about it. 

[Warhawk]

My personal opinion is that if we aren't going to fix something that was a clear mistake and knocked someone out of the playoffs I don't think we should go back and change stats after the game and yes I know one is much easier to fix than the other. 

 

I know it's how it's done but it doesn't mean I have to agree with it.  With that said if they go back and change it they change it I don't really care that much about it. 

 

Well, same with changing rules - maybe it's not how it should be done, and maybe we should just use the stats the guys who run the gametracker on NFL.com plug in (they're constantly wrong, but, fine), but at the very least, we can't just arbitrarily make that kind of change the last week of this regular season just so that Manning gets the record under the new system.

 

Besides, as soon as the case comes up where someone would have broken a record if the stat was corrected, you'll have a bunch of people clamoring to change the system to allow for stat corrections after the fact.

 

I figure, someone's always going to complain when something is recorded wrong initially.  Might as well go with the system where the stats end up being more accurate to what actually happened.

[GoColts8818]

Well, same with changing rules - maybe it's not how it should be done, and maybe we should just use the stats the guys who run the gametracker on NFL.com plug in (they're constantly wrong, but, fine), but at the very least, we can't just arbitrarily make that kind of change the last week of this regular season just so that Manning gets the record under the new system.

 

Besides, as soon as the case comes up where someone would have broken a record if the stat was corrected, you'll have a bunch of people clamoring to change the system to allow for stat corrections after the fact.

 

I figure, someone's always going to complain when something is recorded wrong initially.  Might as well go with the system where the stats end up being more accurate to what actually happened.

I didn't say they should just arbitrarily change the rules.  In fact I said I understand how it's done and if they change it I don't really care if they do. 

 

Again the idea that we will go back and change statistics after a game but just kinda say sorry to a team that was knocked out of the playoffs on a clear blown call is a bit silly to me.  If the argument is we need to get things right that's fine but that means you need to get the calls right that knock a team out of the playoffs right too or is it only we have to get it right when it's easy to fix?

 

I remember one year the Pats and Dolphins were playing a game and Miami thought they had won and after the game the refs figured out they blew a call and New England should get one last play so they brought both teams back out after the game was over and some Dolphins players had towels on after being dragged out of the shower and made them play the last play.  I would be okay if going forward we did something here where there was a clear mistake like this where it's not a judgment call IE something like having seven players line up where you can only have six and say hey we need to play that one over because that was caught before both teams were out of the stadium.  Again, it would have to be a very specific rules that probably isn't used that much but I'd be willing to bet Steelers fans sure wish there was a rule like this now. 

 

Again, if the goal is to get things right I am much more concerned about a clear blown call that might have very well changed the NFL's playoff picture than I am about if a stat is right or not.  Again, just my own opinion and I don't expect the league to go back and change the rules in the middle of the game that's not how they do things but I wouldn't mind them talking about this when the competition committee meets. 

[dgambill]

Sort of a slippery slope argument there.  In any case, they're already going back and looking at things, so, at the very least they should be consistent and do the same thing here.

 

I'm personally not THAT nitpicky with regards to this, but in my discussions with people re: football I like making statistical arguments, so frankly I like the idea that the people keeping those stats are incredibly dull and pedantic.  Means the stats are more reliable. 

Gotcha. Totally understand...I'm more of a guy that will say did you see that play Peyton or Tom made...or that TD pass he made....the window he fit it in. I don't think at any point I would have said did you see that "Lateral" Peyton tossed....I think I probably would say that was a nice pass Peyton threw to Decker for a nice gain. Like when that kid threw that perfect game a couple years ago...and they gave the guy a hit when he was out....to me it was still a perfect game...despite what Elias or whoever does  the stats in MLB...just me. Statistically it was a great season no matter what..very impressive and we will just wait and see what they decide. I'm sure they will use indisputable evidence to over turn the pass/laterral...so if there are multiple angles and one looks one way and the other another...they will just let it stand..but its their job..then go and do it....I just question the need for their job lol.

[House]

Fixing a mistake in stat recording, isn't the same thing as retroactively fixing an officials call, or lack of call, on the field.

You can't void a whole game because an official screwed up, but if the stat keepers are given incorrect information, or make the mistake themselves, that's an easy fix.

Apples. Oranges.

[GoColts8818]

Fixing a mistake in stat recording, isn't the same thing as retroactively fixing an officials call, or lack of call, on the field.

You can't void a whole game because an official screwed up, but if the stat keepers are given incorrect information, or make the mistake themselves, that's an easy fix.

Apples. Oranges.

Not if the argument is "we have to get things right".  It seems to be the argument is now we have to get things right but only if it's easy to fix.  Sorry that's a little silly to me.  Look I don't really care if Manning has this record or not so if they change it fine but don't sit here and tell me they changed it because they had to get things right and in the same breath go well we just have to ignore the blown call that changed the NFL playoff picture because that's too hard to fix.  The later cancels out the we have to get things right argument unless it's we have to get things right only when it's easy to fix after the fact. 

[Warhawk]

Gotcha. Totally understand...I'm more of a guy that will say did you see that play Peyton or Tom made...or that TD pass he made....the window he fit it in. I don't think at any point I would have said did you see that "Lateral" Peyton tossed....I think I probably would say that was a nice pass Peyton threw to Decker for a nice gain. Like when that kid threw that perfect game a couple years ago...and they gave the guy a hit when he was out....to me it was still a perfect game...despite what Elias or whoever does  the stats in MLB...just me. Statistically it was a great season no matter what..very impressive and we will just wait and see what they decide. I'm sure they will use indisputable evidence to over turn the pass/laterral...so if there are multiple angles and one looks one way and the other another...they will just let it stand..but its their job..then go and do it....I just question the need for their job lol.

 

Oh, it was a fantastic season.  No doubt.

 

And I'm sure the guys at Elias will get around to reviewing it after they finish setting up their Warhammer 40K figurines.

 

/sick burn

[dgambill]

Oh, it was a fantastic season.  No doubt.

 

And I'm sure the guys at Elias will get around to reviewing it after they finish setting up their Warhammer 40K figurines.

 

/sick burn

Best qoute of the day....pretty much how I feel about this whole thread lol....nice one!

[House]

Not if the argument is "we have to get things right". It seems to be the argument is now we have to get things right but only if it's easy to fix. Sorry that's a little silly to me. Look I don't really care if Manning has this record or not so if they change it fine but don't sit here and tell me they changed it because they had to get things right and in the same breath go well we just have to ignore the blown call that changed the NFL playoff picture because that's too hard to fix. The later cancels out the we have to get things right argument unless it's we have to get things right only when it's easy to fix after the fact.

They aren't changing what happened on the field. Only how it was recorded. It's not in any way the same thing as what you are describing.

Officiating on the field is 100% in the domain of the officials. They are infallible. You can't go back and say "There should have been holding here." The game is done. You can't have the players come back and resume play at the instance of a missed, or incorrectly called, infraction.

Elias has never come out and said, "We want everything, including officiating, 100% right." They just want their domain to be correct, and I don't think that's different then any other week.

Stats can be adjusted or corrected, because you aren't taking back how things occurred. You are just categorizing it properly.

Apples. Oranges.

[GoColts8818]

They aren't changing what happened on the field. Only how it was recorded. It's not in any way the same thing as what you are describing.

Officiating on the field is 100% in the domain of the officials. They are infallible. You can't go back and say "There should have been holding here." The game is done. You can't have the players come back and resume play at the instance of a missed, or incorrectly called, infraction.

Stats can be adjusted or corrected, because you aren't taking back how things occurred. You are just categorizing it properly.

Apples. Oranges.

To do what?  To get it right.  So if the goal is to get things right making sure the refs get a call right that might change the playoff picture is a lot more important to make sure they got right than if a stat is correct. 

 

My argument isn't to say they shouldn't go back and change the stat if it's not correct.  If it's not then by all means go back and change it like I said when I first posted in this I am all for getting it right.  However, I am also for getting calls correct that change the playoff picture like we saw on Sunday.  I would argue more that they need to come up with a way to try to make sure they get the later correct going forward than really addressing how they look at stats.  Going back and replaying something after we thought a game was over isn't unprecedented either, I used the Miami Pats game as an example after the refs realized they messed something up.  Again, I would agree any kind of rule they came up with would probably be very rarely used but I would rather there be a rule for it than just letting it go, again if the goal is to get things right. 

 

Again if I am a Steelers fan I laugh and probably throw something at my computer or Ipad if I read the league changes the Manning stat because "they wanted to get it right" and all they got was a hey sorry yeah our refs blew that call letter. 

 

Again, if the argument is get things right that needs to be across the board not just when it's easy to go back and fix to make sure we get it right.  Also, the fact the league sends out letters to teams when their refs make mistakes pretty much says they aren't infallible.  Also, like I said before any such rule would have to be for situations like we saw on Sunday where it's a clear missed call involving something like numbers, not any kind judgment call like holding.  I personally think the fake punt call was batched too but that's a judgment call and I fully agree you can't open that up for challenging.  However, having seven guys clearly lined up where you can only have six is not subjective at all.  It's like being able to review 12 men on the field.  Maybe that's the very simple fix here, we make that play reviewable (I think I heard it wasn't) and then the replay official can stop the game right there and say hey we need to review how the Chargers were lined up and the whole thing is fixed. 

[House]

To do what? To get it right. So if the goal is to get things right making sure the refs get a call right that might change the playoff picture is a lot more important to make sure they got right than if a stat is correct.

My argument isn't to say they shouldn't go back and change the stat if it's not correct. If it's not then by all means go back and change it like I said when I first posted in this I am all for getting it right. However, I am also for getting calls correct that change the playoff picture like we saw on Sunday. I would argue more that they need to come up with a way to try to make sure they get the later correct going forward than really addressing how they look at stats.

Again if I am a Steelers fan I laugh and probably throw something at my computer or Ipad if I read the league changes the Manning stat because "they wanted to get it right" and all they got was a hey sorry yeah our refs blew that call letter.

Again, if the argument is get things right that needs to be across the board not just when it's easy to go back and fix to make sure we get it right.

"Again" Elias has no control over NFL officiating. That would be like getting angry with my electrican, for not guaranteeing the work of my plumber.

Elias is only trying to make sure their realm is 100% accurate to their satisfaction.

Nothing to do with NFL officials, or the calls they make.

Two completely seperate issues.

[Warhawk]

My argument isn't to say they shouldn't go back and change the stat if it's not correct.  If it's not then by all means go back and change it like I said when I first posted in this I am all for getting it right.  However, I am also for getting calls correct that change the playoff picture like we saw on Sunday.  I would argue more that they need to come up with a way to try to make sure they get the later correct going forward than really addressing how they look at stats.

 

They have a way to do that.  It's called replay.  It's implemented poorly and needs to be changed somewhat, but it's there.

 

As far as fixing those problems after the fact, though, I'm sure they've had that discussion.  There's just no feasible, practical, reliable way to do it.  You can't just fly the team out to go through the field goal attempt again.  That costs a LOT of money, it cuts into teams' prep time for the playoffs, the weather is different, the condition of the players is different, the players can drill the situation and could approach it differently than they would have in the game.

 

There's just no way to do it.

[GoColts8818]

They have a way to do that.  It's called replay.  It's implemented poorly and needs to be changed somewhat, but it's there.

 

As far as fixing those problems after the fact, though, I'm sure they've had that discussion.  There's just no feasible, practical, reliable way to do it.  You can't just fly the team out to go through the field goal attempt again.  That costs a LOT of money, it cuts into teams' prep time for the playoffs, the weather is different, the condition of the players is different, the players can drill the situation and could approach it differently than they would have in the game.

 

There's just no way to do it.

Yes there is, this mistake was caught before teams left the stadium.  Something like this happened between Miami and New England years ago and the refs made them come back out and play the last play of the game about a half an hour after the game was "over".  So not only is there a way to do it the league has done it in the past. 

 

Personally the more I think about it the easier fix and probably what we will see done is making the play reviewable to start with (again I am pretty sure I heard Peter King say it wasn't) and then the replay official can buzz down since it's the last two minutes of the game and say hey you guys need to look at that just as they would have done had the Chargers had 12 men on the field. 

 

I would fully agree the replay system does need to be changed as well. 

 

However the argument that we have to go back and change the stat to get it right after the fact rings a little hollow with me when we just go hey sorry about that with a clearly blown call that changed the playoff picture.  I understand it's much harder to change a mistake by an official after the fact but it doesn't change the fact that officials mistakes are much more important to get right than if a stat is correct or not even if the later is an easy fix. 

[T Y Goodbye]

They ought to implement the system baseball has, in regards to stat changes. Say for example, a guy hits a hard shot, that takes a bad bounce, goes off the infielder's glove, and into the outfield for a single. At first its ruled an error. It gets reviewed immediately, and if it needs to be changed to a hit, its done within 10 minutes, and announced. There should be stat people at each game reviewing plays that are close, like the Peyton play, and decide immediately whether it was or wasn't a lateral.

 

That would solve this type of issue.

[GoColts8818]

They ought to implement the system baseball has, in regards to stat changes. Say for example, a guy hits a hard shot, that takes a bad bounce, goes off the infielder's glove, and into the outfield for a single. At first its ruled an error. It gets reviewed immediately, and if it needs to be changed to a hit, its done within 10 minutes, and announced. There should be stat people at each game reviewing plays that are close, like the Peyton play, and decide immediately whether it was or wasn't a lateral.

 

That would solve this type of issue.

That would be a good improvement as well.  Again, I am all for getting things right but I don't like the idea of going back and changing somethings after the fact while not touching others.  I don't care how much easier it is to fix one thing than the other I don't think it's right to change somethings after the fact but not others.  I would much rather have all things final after the game or have a system where if something needs to be corrected it can be after the fact.  If the case is to get something right either come up with a way to make sure you get it as right as you can during the game and then live with it once the game is "final" or have a system that can correct mistakes after the fact to get things right. 

 

Again to me it's extremely silly to go back and go we'll go over stats after the fact with a fine toothed comb just to make sure we got them right but we aren't going to touch a very clear blown call that changed the playoff picture.  The last one is a lot more important to get right than the first one right even if it's harder to correct. 

[Warhawk]

They ought to implement the system baseball has, in regards to stat changes. Say for example, a guy hits a hard shot, that takes a bad bounce, goes off the infielder's glove, and into the outfield for a single. At first its ruled an error. It gets reviewed immediately, and if it needs to be changed to a hit, its done within 10 minutes, and announced. There should be stat people at each game reviewing plays that are close, like the Peyton play, and decide immediately whether it was or wasn't a lateral.

 

That would solve this type of issue.

 

You're right.  They probably should do that.  Unfortunately, it's a bit late for that kind of thing to help Manning here.

[T Y Goodbye]

That would be a good improvement as well.  Again, I am all for getting things right but I don't like the idea of going back and changing somethings after the fact while not touching others.  I don't care how much easier it is to fix one thing than the other I don't think it's right to change somethings after the fact but not others.  I would much rather have all things final after the game or have a system where if something needs to be corrected it can be after the fact.  If the case is to get something right either come up with a way to make sure you get it as right as you can during the game and then live with it once the game is "final" or have a system that can correct mistakes after the fact to get things right. 

 

Again to me it's extremely silly to go back and go we'll go over stats after the fact with a fine toothed comb just to make sure we got them right but we aren't going to touch a very clear blown call that changed the playoff picture.  The last one is a lot more important to get right than the first one right even if it's harder to correct. 

 

I agree with you 100 percent...I'm sick and tired of these "letters of apology" from the NFL..oh.the ref's blew the call..so sorry...

[House]

So we are all in agreement that the NFL is wrong in their policies, but Elias has nothing to do with any of that?

[GoColts8818]

So we are all in agreement that the NFL is wrong in their policies, but Elias has nothing to do with any of that?

Yeah, never said they did.  I have zero issue Elias just one with how the NFL handles things. 

[House]

Yeah, never said they did. I have zero issue Elias just one with how the NFL handles things.

Elias is the one potentially taking the yardage away, but they have nothing to do with the polices the NFL puts in place that didn't allow it to be double checked in the moment.

[GoColts8818]

Elias is the one potentially taking the yardage away, but they have nothing to do with the polices the NFL puts in place that didn't allow it to be double checked in the moment.

and again my issue is with the NFL's policies not how Elias does things. 

[House]

and again my issue is with the NFL's policies not how Elias does things.

Elias is the one changing things after the fact not the NFL.

You seem to have a few issues with this whole situation it would seem.

[amfootball]

We get it, you don't care about a high degree of accuracy in stat-keeping.  So, why get involved in this debate?  I mean, I absolutely agree with you that I don't need stats to appreciate that Manning is a great QB, but, that's kind of besides the point.  Just because you think it's crazy that people care about stats and records doesn't mean that their opinions on the matter are invalid.  I mean, there's nothing wrong with your opinion that it doesn't matter whether Manning breaks Brees' record, because there's nothing wrong with taking a largely subjective, wide-lens view of analyzing quarterback quality.  More power to you for that.

 

But frankly, coming into a thread where people are discussing how to treat a play on the stat sheet and going on and on about how you don't really care about statistics is sorta like coming into a thread where people are debating whether star wars or star trek is better and posting about how you prefer the works of Jane Austen over modern speculative fiction.  OK, valid opinion no matter how much I loathe Jane Austen, but it's not really relevant to the debate, and it doesn't invalidate the debate in any way either.  Lots of people care about stats and records.  Lots of people also like drag racing, or caviar, or JRPGs.  I don't like any of those things, but that doesn't mean a debate over which kind of fish has the tastiest eggs has no value.  Maybe not to me, but its perfectly legitimate to them.

 

In any case, the point in regards to your comment is that they're not nitpicking to quite that level.  What they do when they review the games is adjust fairly basic things, like who gets credit for a tackle or a sack, or whether a play was a run or a pass.  Insofar as WR targets is measured, I know that's something that can get changed a fair bit too.  The key difference here is that they're not changing anything that actually happened in the game, and they're not fixing refs' mistakes or anything like that.  They're just taking the numbers from the game, and making sure they're in the right columns.

 

That may sound phenomenally boring to you, but, that's what it is.

Kudos for somehow not only working in but making Jane Austen relevant to this thread.

[GoColts8818]

Elias is the one changing things after the fact not the NFL.

You seem to have a few issues with this whole situation it would seem.

I don't have an issue with how Elias does things.  I have an issue with the NFL's stance on these things.  I've said many times I am all for getting things right and if that means we have to correct things after the fact so be it.  However, I don't like that we'll go back and correct one thing after the fact but not the other.  Personally I would like to see the later change and come up with a system to make sure what happened at the end of the KC/San Diego game that may have changed the NFL's playoff picture doesn't happen again.  I don't buy there is no way to do it either.  I think there are ways and precedent for it again sighting the Miami New England game that was restarted after being declared over almost a half an hour after the last play happened because the officials realized they messed up.  Personally I think it might just be as simple as making that play reviewable just like if 12 men are on the field is. 

 

I am just saying don't tell me we have to go back and correct stats in the name of getting things right but we can't correct officials mistakes after the fact because it's too hard.  It would seem it's only important to get things right when it's easy to correct.  That's not an issue with Elias that's an issue with how the NFL handles officials mistakes. 

[House]

I don't have an issue with how Elias does things. I have an issue with the NFL's stance on these things. I've said many times I am all for getting things right and if that means we have to correct things after the fact so be it. However, I don't like that we'll go back and correct one thing after the fact but not the other. Personally I would like to see the later change and come up with a system to make sure what happened at the end of the KC/San Diego game that may have changed the NFL's playoff picture doesn't happen again. I don't buy there is no way to do it either. I think there are ways and precedent for it again sighting the Miami New England game that was restarted after being declared over almost a half an hour after the last play happened because the officials realized they messed up. Personally I think it might just be as simple as making that play reviewable just like if 12 men are on the field is.

I am just saying don't tell me we have to go back and correct stats in the name of getting things right but we can't correct officials mistakes after the fact because it's too hard. It would seem it's only important to get things right when it's easy to correct. That's not an issue with Elias that's an issue with how the NFL handles officials mistakes.

Elias and the NFL are two separate entities. Both have different goals.

Elias is the one who wants to get their stats correct even after the fact. They're the one going back to possibly change the record.

NFL seems ambivalent. Clearly not two concerned.

Two separate issues, which you keep blending.

[GoColts8818]

Elias and the NFL are two separate entities. Both have different goals.

Elias is the one who wants to get their stats correct even after the fact. They're the one going back to possibly change the record.

NFL seems ambivalent. Clearly not two concerned.

Two separate issues, which you keep blending.

I disagree and I am going to leave it at that.

[Superman]

I don't have an issue with how Elias does things.  I have an issue with the NFL's stance on these things.  I've said many times I am all for getting things right and if that means we have to correct things after the fact so be it.  However, I don't like that we'll go back and correct one thing after the fact but not the other.  Personally I would like to see the later change and come up with a system to make sure what happened at the end of the KC/San Diego game that may have changed the NFL's playoff picture doesn't happen again.  I don't buy there is no way to do it either.  I think there are ways and precedent for it again sighting the Miami New England game that was restarted after being declared over almost a half an hour after the last play happened because the officials realized they messed up.  Personally I think it might just be as simple as making that play reviewable just like if 12 men are on the field is. 

 

I am just saying don't tell me we have to go back and correct stats in the name of getting things right but we can't correct officials mistakes after the fact because it's too hard.  It would seem it's only important to get things right when it's easy to correct.  That's not an issue with Elias that's an issue with how the NFL handles officials mistakes. 

 

I think sports fans are getting more and more intolerant of mistakes, which is kind of a hard issue to navigate. In the case of the Chargers/Chiefs game, for instance, what do you do to fix it? Go back and replay the game from the point of the violation? And does this apply even to minor violations (which I think the Chargers' violation was, by the way; had no effect on the play in question)? Do you have a crew review every play after it happens to make sure everything was ruled and called properly?

 

This is a very difficult issue, and I think at a certain point, no matter how far you're willing to go, you have to accept that mistakes are going to be made, and sometimes it's going to have an impact on the outcome of the game. It sucks, royally, but no one is perfect. At least the NFL acknowledges it, as opposed to other leagues.

 

In that context, it shouldn't be hard to understand why the league allows for stat corrections that have no impact on the outcome of the game. If the Decker play was a lateral or a forward pass doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things, because the impact on the game doesn't change. The only thing that changes is the way the stats are recorded. (It also has NOTHING to do with officiating; this is a statkeeper's error, and again, has nothing to do with the way the game went.)

 

If we want the NFL to fix things that aren't perfect -- to whatever extent possible -- why is there so much pushback in areas where they already allow for this to happen? This argument has pretty much devolved into "the NFL can fix stats retroactively, but they don't fix mistakes that effect the outcome of the game, so why even fix the stats?" That's strange to me. It's like saying "doctors can't cure cancer; why even bother with treating diabetes?" They fix what they can. One is a simple fix, the other is much more complicated. There's no justification for NOT fixing what you easily can fix.