Sam Williams and Micah Parsons get the game balls

GRCowboy said:
Williams - 2 sacks, 1 FF, 1 FR and multiple huge TFLs when the game was close

Parsons - 1 sacks, 28303208 pressures, tackled the Detroit TE at the 1 yard line which would have been the go ahead TD for Detroit in the 3rd when things were looking hairy. Instead Detroit fumbles. Parsons took 7 points off the board for Detroit and won us the game.

Honorable mention: Offensive line blocked better in the 2nd half
Click to expand...
Nice!!!
 
gimmesix said:
Find me a rule that says when you're escaping pressure, you become a runner after five steps. He was falling right after he escaped pressure because he was tripped. That it took him five steps to fall is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

I literally just quoted you a rule that says you can become a runner after escaping pressure. If you aren't clearly a runner after taking 5 steps with the ball tucked, when are you? That was my question to you. To me, it's pretty obvious taking 5 steps makes you clearly a runner per the rules even if you're escaping pressure. What rule you got that says, "Nah."?
 
MarcusRock said:
I literally just quoted you a rule that says you can become a runner after escaping pressure. If you aren't clearly a runner after taking 5 steps with the ball tucked, when are you? That was my question to you. To me, it's pretty obvious taking 5 steps makes you clearly a runner per the rules even if you're escaping pressure. What rule you got that says, "Nah."?
Click to expand...

The rule says nothing about when you clearly become a runner. Five steps is an arbitrary standard that you are assigning here. I'm not saying, "Nah." I'm saying the standard isn't given. Considering that Armstrong was credited with a sack, I'm guessing that your arbitrary standard isn't correct. Goff was tripped up while trying to escape pressure. That it took him multiple steps to fall to the ground is irrelevant.
 
gimmesix said:
The rule says nothing about when you clearly become a runner. Five steps is an arbitrary standard that you are assigning here. I'm not saying, "Nah." I'm saying the standard isn't given. Considering that Armstrong was credited with a sack, I'm guessing that your arbitrary standard isn't correct. Goff was tripped up while trying to escape pressure. That it took him multiple steps to fall to the ground is irrelevant.
Click to expand...

I didn't create any arbitrary standard. I merely said what happened on the play after quoting the rule. The rule says a QB can clearly become a runner. If tucking it and taking 5 steps in the same direction isn't clearly becoming a runner when the rules say you can become one even if escaping pressure then what is was my question? And he didn't get tripped until after he took 5 steps. You said he stumbled the whole time and appear to be implying it here too. He didn't. He was running and he was tripped around his 5th step. Giving Armstrong a sack here is a gift. He'll love it and his agent will keep track to negotiate later but it appears to be against what the rules say.
 
MarcusRock said:
I didn't create any arbitrary standard. I merely said what happened on the play after quoting the rule. The rule says a QB can clearly become a runner. If tucking it and taking 5 steps in the same direction isn't clearly becoming a runner when the rules say you can become one even if escaping pressure then what is was my question? And he didn't get tripped until after he took 5 steps. You said he stumbled the whole time and appear to be implying it here too. He didn't. He was running and he was tripped around his 5th step. Giving Armstrong a sack here is a gift. He'll love it and his agent will keep track to negotiate later but it appears to be against what the rules say.
Click to expand...

So he gets a sack and instead of admitting that you were wrong, you say it goes against the rules. All it goes against is your interpretation of the rules.

Clearly is the key word in the rules that you quoted. It leaves it heavily open for interpretation. My argument is that Goff wasn't trying to run, he was trying to escape pressure and he was tripped. It wasn't clear that he was trying to become a runner, only that he was trying to get away from the pressure. Few people who trip directly fall to the ground; they stumble to the ground, and if they are trying to protect the ball, they are going to pull it in close to their body while stumbling to avoid possibly fumbling.

I'll say that I only remember one play similar to this where the QB was ruled to be a runner when he was trying to get out of a sack, and it was later corrected to be a sack. Official scorers understand that sacks are an important statistic for defenders, so they are generally not going to interpret it as the QB clearly becoming a runner unless it's absolutely clear.
 
gimmesix said:
The rule says nothing about when you clearly become a runner. Five steps is an arbitrary standard that you are assigning here. I'm not saying, "Nah." I'm saying the standard isn't given. Considering that Armstrong was credited with a sack, I'm guessing that your arbitrary standard isn't correct. Goff was tripped up while trying to escape pressure. That it took him multiple steps to fall to the ground is irrelevant.
Click to expand...
If it's a called pass play it's a sack, a called running play it's not a sack. (judgement call by whoever does it for the nfl)
 
speedkilz88 said:
If it's a called pass play it's a sack, a called running play it's not a sack. (judgement call by whoever does it for the nfl)
Click to expand...

I don't know if it's seen as quite that simple, but I would say that is generally true because you don't want to take sacks away from defenders for no reason. It's hard to judge when a QB who drops back for a pass has clearly decided to run. I think running QBs cloud the picture some because they may drop back to pass and then take off with it.
 
I don't know, the more I watch the replay, the more I can see it going either way. Armstrong definitely made the tackle, and Goff didn't start to stumble until he tripped him up, but I'm not sure Goff's intention was to run for the yardage, because he was carrying the ball in front of himself, like he wanted to be ready to throw it. But that may be just the way he runs, I don't know.
 
gimmesix said:
So he gets a sack and instead of admitting that you were wrong, you say it goes against the rules. All it goes against is your interpretation of the rules.

Clearly is the key word in the rules that you quoted. It leaves it heavily open for interpretation. My argument is that Goff wasn't trying to run, he was trying to escape pressure and he was tripped. It wasn't clear that he was trying to become a runner, only that he was trying to get away from the pressure. Few people who trip directly fall to the ground; they stumble to the ground, and if they are trying to protect the ball, they are going to pull it in close to their body while stumbling to avoid possibly fumbling.

I'll say that I only remember one play similar to this where the QB was ruled to be a runner when he was trying to get out of a sack, and it was later corrected to be a sack. Official scorers understand that sacks are an important statistic for defenders, so they are generally not going to interpret it as the QB clearly becoming a runner unless it's absolutely clear.
Click to expand...
This play is clearly a sack- anytime a QB drops back to pass and then tries to avoid pressure by running/scrambling and doesn’t get back to the LOS it’s a sack. Now if a QB never shows the intention to throw a pass, such as on a read-option or a designed QB draw and gets tackled behind the LOS it’s not a sack- just a TFL for defender. Parsons had at least a couple of these last season- one on Hurts and one on Mahomes.
 
Madtowner said:
This play is clearly a sack- anytime a QB drops back to pass and then tries to avoid pressure by running/scrambling and doesn’t get back to the LOS it’s a sack. Now if a QB never shows the intention to throw a pass, such as on a read-option or a designed QB draw and gets tackled behind the LOS it’s not a sack- just a TFL for defender. Parsons had at least a couple of these last season- one on Hurts and one on Mahomes.
Click to expand...

That seems to be where the rubber meets the road.
 
But you were wrong, just own up to it referee only fan. :rolleyes:

MarcusRock said:
I didn't create any arbitrary standard. I merely said what happened on the play after quoting the rule. The rule says a QB can clearly become a runner. If tucking it and taking 5 steps in the same direction isn't clearly becoming a runner when the rules say you can become one even if escaping pressure then what is was my question? And he didn't get tripped until after he took 5 steps. You said he stumbled the whole time and appear to be implying it here too. He didn't. He was running and he was tripped around his 5th step. Giving Armstrong a sack here is a gift. He'll love it and his agent will keep track to negotiate later but it appears to be against what the rules say.
Click to expand...
 
Dak is who this team runs through. Getting 24 points off of 5 turnovers against the leagues worst team isn't easy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Staff online

Members online

Total: 4,296 (members: 43, guests: 4,253)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
464,124
Messages
13,790,116
Members
23,772
Latest member
BAC2662
Back
Top