Who fumbled, lads, Dak or Hunter? And how Dallas punched itself in the face

[SteveTheCowboy]

It was clearly the running backs fault for not gripping the ball Dak put it in his chest he cannot close his arms around it for him he must do that himself.

The moment was too big and he didn't concentrate on securing the ball first his concentration was on running through the line and he failed to secure the ball.

Every analyst I heard speak on this said it was the running backs fault he fumbled.

Would have clearly been Daks fault if he dropped the ball before he put it in his chest but that did not happen.

In this video it looks like Dak bounced the ball off Hunter's chest pad instead of stashing it in his gut.

 

[Blackrain]

There's already been one thread on this from give me the ball do people think somehow if you keep putting threads up about it it will somehow turn into Daks fault.

It won't the running back didn't secure the ball before he started running it's done move on

 

[JoeKing]

Clearly Prescott's.

If it were "clearly" Prescott's fault we wouldn't be talking about it. I blame the RB for not understanding the play called. Hunter didn't even try to clamp onto the ball.

 

[Blackrain]

In this video it looks like Dak bounced the ball off Hunter's chest pad instead of stashing it in his gut.

the ball is right there it's not low it's not basketball he didn't bounce it anywhere it's right there.
he didn't concentrate and close his arms around the ball.

 

[G2]

If he was the leader people say he is, he'd take it.

Clearly something went wrong there. It actually does look like either bad hand off or miscommunication.

So Dak take the blame and...get it over with.

I rest my case.

 

[Blackrain]

That's what's really frustrating. Luebke was doing great, and looked like he might be the answer to short yardage situations, then that stinkin' fumble at the 1 happened. If we punch that one in, we probably win. It looked like the fumble was due to a bad handoff, in which case it's probably both their fault.
...
I still don't want to rule out Luebke for short-yardage situations. He was doing really well until the fumble, and it's not like we have a ton of short-yardage options. Maybe they can work out that handoff problem and he'll be fine.

It's certainly not rocket science other teams accomplished that basic task all the time I'm sure it could be worked out.

It helps to have a little concentration and focus on what you're doing

 

[CWR]

I rest my case.

Lol, hey it took like 4 whole posts to get there. That's not bad.

 

[Rockport]

He described what all of us saw watching the game. Didn't add any anything.

He said “Luepke missed the handoff.”

 

[Rockport]

It all depends if are a Dak fan or not. If you are a Dak fan, Dak handed the ball off cleanly but Leupke muffed it but if you are not a Dak fan, he clearly dropped the ball before he attempted to hand it off to Leupke.

See how simple that was!

Has nothing to do with it. MM said he missed the handoff. Thread closed.

 

[jgboys1]

Has nothing to do with it. MM said he missed the handoff. Thread closed.

I forgot! I almost blamed Dak. I am sorry!

 

[buybuydandavis]

I rewatched game. Dak put the ball right on the numbers. Luepke dives into end zone and doesn't even realize he dropped the ball. I don't know what heck he was doing,

At no point did Luepke *have* the ball such that he could have dropped it.
I don't deny that Dak put it on the numbers, but Luepke made *no* attempt to grab it, and *never* having grabbed it, he *still* dove into the endzone like he was the runner. That was clearly a fake dive for a RB who thought he was fake runner of a fake handoff.
Luepke didn't drop anything. He never attempted to take possession of the ball in the first place, and didn't.

 

[buybuydandavis]

He described what all of us saw watching the game. Didn't add any anything.

"The exchange was clean"

I saw *no* exchange. I didn't see Hunter even *attempt* to take possession of the ball, let alone *achieve* possession.

 

[tomokawan]

At no point did Luepke *have* the ball such that he could have dropped it.
I don't deny that Dak put it on the numbers, but Luepke made *no* attempt to grab it, and *never* having grabbed it, he *still* dove into the endzone like he was the runner. That was clearly a fake dive for a RB who thought he was fake runner of a fake handoff.
Luepke didn't drop anything. He never attempted to take possession of the ball in the first place, and didn't.

What are you looking at??? Dak put the ball right in his hands. You are saying Luepke never touched the ball?? Are you blind??

 

[OmerV]

It was weird how Luepke dove into the end zone like he had the ball

That seems to support the idea that he believed it was just a play action fake.

 

[OmerV]

Why risk the handoff from the 1 foot line.
QB sneak!!!!!!!!!!!!!

QB sneak would be an option, but teams hand the ball off at the 1 yard line all the time. It isn't controversial. But obviously a team has to execute.

 

[OmerV]

Are you guys serious? It's directly in Luepke's chest. lol If you want to give Dak static for his play in the rest of the game, fine, but this ain't it.

You're supposed to hand off in the gut, not the chest, but that really isn't the question anyway. The question is if there was some miscommunication. Luepke didn't act as if he was expecting a handoff, so it leads to a question of whether Dak & Luepke were on the same page.

 

[buybuydandavis]

What are you looking at??? Dak put the ball right in his hands. You are saying Luepke never touched the ball?? Are you blind??

Having someone put something onto your hands is not the same thing as you *grasping* that thing.

 

[tomokawan]

Having someone put something onto your hands is not the same thing as you *grasping* that thing.

You said " at no point did Luepke have the ball. The means he never touched it. Now your changing from not touching it to grasping. You are "Grasping" at not trying to contradict your-self and failing.

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

You said " at no point did Luepke have the ball. The means he never touched it. Now your changing from not touching it to grasping. You are "Grasping" at not trying to contradict your-self and failing.

You can "have" the ball and touch it without fully having control of it.
Have has nuances.
Does tha help, Davy?

 

[OmerV]

You said " at no point did Luepke have the ball. The means he never touched it. Now your changing from not touching it to grasping. You are "Grasping" at not trying to contradict your-self and failing.

Sorry, but you're wrong on this. Touching something and having it in your possession are not the same thing. Passes aren't deemed to be caught when a receiver merely touches the ball, he has to catch it and demonstrate clear possession.

That's not so say Luepke shouldn't have taken possession. That's the part that's baffling. I agree with buybuydandavis that it appeared Luepke thought it was supposed to be a fake handoff to him, and therefore didn't attempt to take the handoff. If so, there was a miscommunication somewhere.