PDA

View Full Version : Peyton's Season Yardage total being reviewed



blamkin86
12-31-2013, 01:44 PM
ESPN said one camera angle makes the pass look like a lateral, which would make it a running play. Another angle shows Manning deeper than Decker, making it a pass.

If the play stands, Manning keeps the record. If the play is ruled a run, Manning would lose 7-yards and the record.

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/oops-denver-broncos-peyton-manning-may-not-have-broke-drew-brees-passing-yards-record

CoachChaz
12-31-2013, 01:52 PM
Who cares? Unless we win a Super Bowl, it doesnt mean shit either way

DenBronx
12-31-2013, 02:55 PM
I said to myself during the game that this could happen. They should have played him one more series in the 2nd half. Why would you only break it by 1 yard then pull him?

Northman
12-31-2013, 03:00 PM
Who cares? Unless we win a Super Bowl, it doesnt mean shit either way

Pretty much. The stats are just icing on the cake if we in the SB. Outside of that it really means very little in the big picture.

slim
12-31-2013, 03:01 PM
The record will be broken again within 5 years anyway.

BroncoWave
12-31-2013, 03:22 PM
So when do stat corrections usually come out? I feel like they would have said by now.

Army Bronco
12-31-2013, 03:26 PM
I just don't understand why this even exists. Someone actually gets paid to review game film? How do I get that job?

BroncoWave
12-31-2013, 03:39 PM
I just don't understand why this even exists. Someone actually gets paid to review game film? How do I get that job?

Players have bonuses in the contract for certain production milestones. It's important that the stats be recorded correctly.

Denver Native (Carol)
12-31-2013, 03:43 PM
from article:


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.


Plays are routinely reviewed throughout the season by Elias Sports Bureau, which keeps the league's statistical records, and teams are often notified in the days following games of corrections in items such as sacks or rushing and passing yardage.

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

Ziggy
12-31-2013, 03:45 PM
It's all a moot point. Peyton is going to crush it next season anyways.

Tned
12-31-2013, 03:59 PM
I just don't understand why this even exists. Someone actually gets paid to review game film? How do I get that job?

I've seen times where a sack has been taken away, because after the reviewed the play they decided it was a designed QB run, and therefore a rushing attempt rather than a sack.

Hawgdriver
12-31-2013, 04:08 PM
Who cares? Unless we win a Super Bowl, it doesnt mean shit either way

I think the main reason it matters is so we can say who gives a shit and mean it.

Denver Native (Carol)
12-31-2013, 04:10 PM
It's easy for anyone, who is not personally involved to say, so what, it does not matter, etc. I disagree with that. Peyton had a GREAT year. He is the MVP. This would be a great honor for him, and I hope it is not taken away from him. He earned this.

SR
12-31-2013, 04:33 PM
If it's not definitive, they won't take it away. If one angle shows it as a forward pass and one shows it as a lateral, that's not "definitive".

DenBronx
12-31-2013, 04:49 PM
Anyone have a clip of the play?

Denver Native (Carol)
12-31-2013, 04:55 PM
Anyone have a clip of the play?

Here's one

http://nfl.si.com/2013/12/30/peyton-...enver-broncos/

Hawgdriver
12-31-2013, 04:55 PM
It's easy for anyone, who is not personally involved to say, so what, it does not matter, etc. I disagree with that. Peyton had a GREAT year. He is the MVP. This would be a great honor for him, and I hope it is not taken away from him. He earned this.

Statistical records are important, but in the big picture not so much, compared to SB wins. And if he did not earned the record, so be it.

pulse
12-31-2013, 04:58 PM
It's easy for anyone, who is not personally involved to say, so what, it does not matter, etc. I disagree with that. Peyton had a GREAT year. He is the MVP. This would be a great honor for him, and I hope it is not taken away from him. He earned this.

The yardage record does matter and he does deserve to hold it with the year he has had, even if only for a few years at best. Still, Manning would be the first to say that's not a forward pass upon review. I bet he would rather not have all this this fuss over the matter. He's a very historically conscious football player. He would not want to hold it if it is not accurate, even considering the circumstance that kept him from playing in the second half and blowing the record to smithereens. The touchdown record will stand for a while even after he retires. 55 passing scores is just insanity. The passing touchdown mark doesn't come under threat every year. The yardage record, on the other hand, is under threat every year. 5,000+ yard seasons are no longer rare. Brady's done it. Stafford's done it. Brees is doing it in what seems like every season now. Now Manning has done it and may do it again next year. I wouldn't be surprised if Rodgers doesn't make a run with the receiving corps he'll have back next year. On the other hand, I don't know if anyone will come close to that 55 TDs mark for a good while. It takes a magical TEAM, not just an amazing QB, to pull off such a high rate of scoring.

Denver Native (Carol)
12-31-2013, 05:00 PM
Statistical records are important, but in the big picture not so much, compared to SB wins. And if he did not earned the record, so be it.

During the game, the stats were kept by a Raider's crew. I am sure the Broncos had the stats at halftime, and, with what they were given, there was no reason to play Peyton, and other starters in the 3rd qtr. If the stats had not indicated that the record was broken, the Broncos had the ball to start the 3rd qtr., and he would easily have set the record, more than likely on the Broncos' first possession.

gregbroncs
12-31-2013, 05:14 PM
I said to myself during the game that this could happen. They should have played him one more series in the 2nd half. Why would you only break it by 1 yard then pull him?And he comes out in the 3rd quarter of a game that's over and gets hurt. The coach loses his job the fan base is in riot mode and the team loses it's first round game. I'm sorry record or not playing him in the 3rd quarter would have been idiotic.

Army Bronco
12-31-2013, 05:32 PM
I just don't understand why this even exists. Someone actually gets paid to review game film? How do I get that job?

Players have bonuses in the contract for certain production milestones. It's important that the stats be recorded correctly.The Dems just messed with my retirement, that of my grandfather who fought in Vietnam and Korea, Daviis, SRs......the players damn bonus is not that important to hire people to do this ticky tack job.

BroncoWave
12-31-2013, 05:47 PM
The Dems just messed with my retirement, that of my grandfather who fought in Vietnam and Korea, Daviis, SRs......the players damn bonus is not that important to hire people to do this ticky tack job.

Wut? I don't really see the connection of your retirement to who the NFL hires to help them in their business.

OrangeHoof
12-31-2013, 06:02 PM
Why would you only break it by 1 yard then pull him?

Because it was Halftime but, yeah, I felt the same way you did. Take some snaps just to be sure and then call it a day. I don't think the NFL will pull it though. It was too close to take a record from someone.

BroncoWave
12-31-2013, 06:05 PM
Even thought I think it was pretty clear it was a backward lateral, I agree that they aren't taking it away. It's not like he played the whole game and needed every yard to break it. He could have easily stayed in and broken it if he'd wanted. And I bet Brees would have no qualms with letting him keep it. A competitor like him wouldn't want to take the record back on a technicality IMO.

MOtorboat
12-31-2013, 06:13 PM
http://fantasy.nfl.com/research/statcorrections#researchStatsCorrections=researchS tatsCorrections%2C%2Fresearch%2Fstatcorrections%25 3Fposition%253DO%2526sort%253Dpts%2526statCategory %253Dstats%2526statSeason%253D2013%2526statType%25 3DweekStats%2526statWeek%253D14%2Creplace

Here is a link to statistical corrections throughout the year. Week 17 corrections appear to have not been released yet.

Army Bronco
12-31-2013, 06:31 PM
The Dems just messed with my retirement, that of my grandfather who fought in Vietnam and Korea, Daviis, SRs......the players damn bonus is not that important to hire people to do this ticky tack job.

Wut? I don't really see the connection of your retirement to who the NFL hires to help them in their business.Because its really not that important to recheck stars if it doesn't even change the outcome. Its really not important.

BroncoWave
12-31-2013, 06:32 PM
Because its really not that important to recheck stars if it doesn't even change the outcome. Its really not important.

Not to you maybe. But to the players it is. I think the only reason you are angry about this is because it may cost Peyton Manning a record.

Army Bronco
12-31-2013, 06:41 PM
Because its really not that important to recheck stars if it doesn't even change the outcome. Its really not important.

Not to you maybe. But to the players it is. I think the only reason you are angry about this is because it may cost Peyton Manning a record.Not angry at all. I just think its retarded. I had no clue they rechecked stats...especially if stats are checked with no bearing on the outcome of a game...REEE-TARDED!!!!

BroncoWave
12-31-2013, 06:43 PM
Not angry at all. I just think its retarded. I had no clue they rechecked stats...especially if stats are checked with no bearing on the outcome of a game...REEE-TARDED!!!!

So it's completely meaningless to a player who gets a bonus for, say, 100 catches if he's at 99 at the end of the year and they change a rushing attempt on a lateral to a catch?

Like I said, just because it doesn't change the outcome of the game doesn't mean it lacks relevance.

Hawgdriver
12-31-2013, 06:44 PM
http://fantasy.nfl.com/research/statcorrections#researchStatsCorrections=researchS tatsCorrections%2C%2Fresearch%2Fstatcorrections%25 3Fposition%253DO%2526sort%253Dpts%2526statCategory %253Dstats%2526statSeason%253D2013%2526statType%25 3DweekStats%2526statWeek%253D14%2Creplace

Here is a link to statistical corrections throughout the year. Week 17 corrections appear to have not been released yet.

I'd be grateful if you gave an update when they are released, assuming it's not front page news.

BroncoWave
12-31-2013, 06:44 PM
I'd be grateful if you gave an update when they are released, assuming it's not front page news.

I would imagine Twitter will explode when the news comes out.

MOtorboat
12-31-2013, 06:45 PM
I'd be grateful if you gave an update when they are released, assuming it's not front page news.

I just did a google search for it. I'm sure the NFL will update that page at some point.

MOtorboat
12-31-2013, 06:47 PM
Not angry at all. I just think its retarded. I had no clue they rechecked stats...especially if stats are checked with no bearing on the outcome of a game...REEE-TARDED!!!!

Well, it's the Elias Sports Bureau and its part of a contract with the NFL. Big business...

Army Bronco
12-31-2013, 06:48 PM
Not angry at all. I just think its retarded. I had no clue they rechecked stats...especially if stats are checked with no bearing on the outcome of a game...REEE-TARDED!!!!

So it's completely meaningless to a player who gets a bonus for, say, 100 catches if he's at 99 at the end of the year and they change a rushing attempt on a lateral to a catch?

Like I said, just because it doesn't change the outcome of the game doesn't mean it lacks relevance.Dude, I get your point. I don't agree and I think its dumb. No issues brother. edit: not that your opinion is dumb but that the stat correction system is even around.

Army Bronco
12-31-2013, 06:50 PM
Not angry at all. I just think its retarded. I had no clue they rechecked stats...especially if stats are checked with no bearing on the outcome of a game...REEE-TARDED!!!!

Well, it's the Elias Sports Bureau and its part of a contract with the NFL. Big business...It really is just a business. That's why I stopped watching UFC years ago. It stopped being about martial arts. edit: I won't stop watching the Broncos but the NFL is changing a little too much for my taste.

Slick
12-31-2013, 07:24 PM
I am pretty sure they have been doing stat corrections for a while now. I think Peyton would have played another series if it were that important to him. Also, I'll be really surprised if they take the yardage recored away from him.

SR
12-31-2013, 08:12 PM
During the game, the stats were kept by a Raider's crew. I am sure the Broncos had the stats at halftime, and, with what they were given, there was no reason to play Peyton, and other starters in the 3rd qtr. If the stats had not indicated that the record was broken, the Broncos had the ball to start the 3rd qtr., and he would easily have set the record, more than likely on the Broncos' first possession.

I thought the on-site statisticians were NFL employees, not team affiliated?

spikerman
12-31-2013, 08:24 PM
And the record stands:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000307771/article/peyton-mannings-passing-yards-record-will-stand


Denver Broncos quarterback Peyton Manning's single-season passing yards record will stand.


The NFL and Elias Sports Bureau reviewed Manning's 7-yard pass to Eric Decker during the first quarter of the Broncos' Week 17 victory and decided replays were not conclusive enough to rule the play a lateral.

Denver Native (Carol)
12-31-2013, 08:45 PM
I thought the on-site statisticians were NFL employees, not team affiliated?

Mike Klis ‏@MikeKlis 40m

To be clear: It was Elias that made determination to back Raiders stats crew decision that play was forward pass.

topscribe
12-31-2013, 09:19 PM
And the record stands:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000307771/article/peyton-mannings-passing-yards-record-will-stand
You scooped both MHR and IAOFM. Neither has yet posted this news.

BroncoWave
12-31-2013, 09:20 PM
You scooped both MHR and IAOFM. Neither has yet posted this news.

Carol posted it first. She started a thread. She always gets the scoop!

Ziggy
12-31-2013, 09:26 PM
Carol posted it first. She started a thread. She always gets the scoop!

I think Denver Native (Carol) is just one of John Elway's alias accounts.

Hawgdriver
01-01-2014, 04:09 AM
Common sense prevails.

topscribe
01-01-2014, 11:00 AM
Common sense prevails.
Yes, it wouldn't have made any sense to take that away from Manning. The
whole world knows he could have stayed in and crushed the record.

MOtorboat
01-01-2014, 11:08 AM
Yes, it wouldn't have made any sense to take that away from Manning. The
whole world knows he could have stayed in and crushed the record.

I am glad Manning has the record, but I disagree.

He didn't stay in the game and crush the record so you can't assume he would. Is it probable, of course, but it's not what happened. Elias absolutely cannot base yardage or run/pass determinations off of "well, that likely would have happened."

The angle was inconclusive, so the play was upheld. That's the right call.

I knew the minute he only passed the record by a yard this was going to be an issue.

BroncoWave
01-01-2014, 11:24 AM
I am glad Manning has the record, but I disagree.

He didn't stay in the game and crush the record so you can't assume he would. Is it probable, of course, but it's not what happened. Elias absolutely cannot base yardage or run/pass determinations off of "well, that likely would have happened."

The angle was inconclusive, so the play was upheld. That's the right call.

I knew the minute he only passed the record by a yard this was going to be an issue.

See, I think the angle was 100% conclusive. I think the reason they upheld it is exactly what top said. If this were for any other team, I'd probably be pretty outraged about it, for the reasons you laid out. But since it's Manning and the Broncos I'm a homer and will let it slide.

Denver Native (Carol)
01-01-2014, 12:02 PM
This NFL writer has a breakdown of the whole play, from beginning to end. From his article under his final view/comment:


According to the NFL rulebook, a forward pass requires "the ball initially moves forward (to a point nearer the opponent's goal line) after leaving the passer's hand(s)."

Clearly when Manning begins to throw, Decker's not at a point closer to the Raiders goal line. But when Decker catches the ball, which is where Manning technically is throwing the ball, you could argue that Decker is closer.

full views-comments - from start to finish:

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24393148/nfl-elias-reviewing-peyton-manning-passing-record

topscribe
01-01-2014, 12:18 PM
I am glad Manning has the record, but I disagree.

He didn't stay in the game and crush the record so you can't assume he would. Is it probable, of course, but it's not what happened. Elias absolutely cannot base yardage or run/pass determinations off of "well, that likely would have happened."

The angle was inconclusive, so the play was upheld. That's the right call.

I knew the minute he only passed the record by a yard this was going to be an issue.
You're kidding, right? I can't assume that Manning would have completed some
more passes, had he stayed in? lol

Anyway, I was glad to see it, if only from the standpoint of a homer . . .

BroncoWave
01-01-2014, 12:30 PM
This NFL writer has a breakdown of the whole play, from beginning to end. From his article under his final view/comment:



full views-comments - from start to finish:

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24393148/nfl-elias-reviewing-peyton-manning-passing-record

Using the wording "the ball initially moves forward (to a point nearer the opponent's goal line) after leaving the passer's hand(s)." it absolutely was not a forward pass. You can certainly argue that Decker's body was closer to the goal line than where the ball was thrown from once he completed the catch, but that's not what the rule says. The rule says the BALL has to move closer to the goal from where it was initially thrown. The video makes it absolutely clear that the ball itself was thrown about a yard behind where he threw it from. Where Decker actually completed the catch isn't relevant to the wording of the rule.

topscribe
01-01-2014, 12:41 PM
Using the wording "the ball initially moves forward (to a point nearer the opponent's goal line) after leaving the passer's hand(s)." it absolutely was not a forward pass. You can certainly argue that Decker's body was closer to the goal line than where the ball was thrown from once he completed the catch, but that's not what the rule says. The rule says the BALL has to move closer to the goal from where it was initially thrown. The video makes it absolutely clear that the ball itself was thrown about a yard behind where he threw it from. Where Decker actually completed the catch isn't relevant to the wording of the rule.
And that's why I believe Elias let it slide because they knew he could have
come in during the second half and vaulted well over the record.

At the same time, Fox was probably correct in pulling Peyton. Had he left him
in, and Peyton gone down, Fox would have gone down in eternal infamy in
the entire league, and the Broncos' postseason hopes probably would have
gone down the tubes.

MOtorboat
01-01-2014, 12:47 PM
You're kidding, right? I can't assume that Manning would have completed some
more passes, had he stayed in? lol

Anyway, I was glad to see it, if only from the standpoint of a homer . . .

No, I'm not kidding, and that wasn't a "you" directed directly at YOU. It was a "you" directed at Elias Sports Bureau who keeps and verifies the stats. So don't get your panties in a bunch.

You and I are free to assume Peyton Manning likely would have smashed the record, and we both believe he would. But Elias Sports Bureau can't do that. That's the point, which was completely missed on your part.

I wish Denver would have had him throw two passes so we could've avoided this mess.

TXBRONC
01-01-2014, 01:00 PM
No, I'm not kidding, and that wasn't a "you" directed directly at YOU. It was a "you" directed at Elias Sports Bureau who keeps and verifies the stats. So don't get your panties in a bunch.

You and I are free to assume Peyton Manning likely would have smashed the record, and we both believe he would. But Elias Sports Bureau can't do that. That's the point, which was completely missed on your part.

I wish Denver would have had him throw two passes so we could've avoided this mess.

It would have been intellectually dishonest of Elias to let Manning keep the record based on something that didn't take place.

MOtorboat
01-01-2014, 01:02 PM
It would be intellectually dishonest let Manning keep the record based on something that didn't take place.

It would, yes. Which is why I think they ruled that it was best to leave the record in place because the stat crew at the game ruled it a forward pass and the video was fairly inconclusive, not because Manning COULD have thrown for more yards in the second half.

Denver Native (Carol)
01-01-2014, 01:22 PM
Using the wording "the ball initially moves forward (to a point nearer the opponent's goal line) after leaving the passer's hand(s)." it absolutely was not a forward pass. You can certainly argue that Decker's body was closer to the goal line than where the ball was thrown from once he completed the catch, but that's not what the rule says. The rule says the BALL has to move closer to the goal from where it was initially thrown. The video makes it absolutely clear that the ball itself was thrown about a yard behind where he threw it from. Where Decker actually completed the catch isn't relevant to the wording of the rule.

Unless you have something more current than the 2011 NFL rule book, what the writer wrote is word for word from the rule book.


Rule 8 Forward Pass, Backward Pass, Fumble
Section 1 Forward Pass
DEFINITION
Article 1 Definition
It is a forward pass if:
(a) the ball initially moves forward (to a point nearer the opponentís goal line) after leaving the passerís hand(s)

http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/11_Rule8_ForwardPass_BackPass_Fumble.pdf#page=1&zoom=auto,0,792

BroncoWave
01-01-2014, 01:37 PM
Which leads me to say again, Carol, that that rule shows without a doubt it was not a forward pass. The ball did not initially move to a point nearer the opponent's goal line after leaving the passer's hand. Here are a couple of stills that illustrate that.

This picture draws a straight line of the ball from the point it left his hand to the sideline. The ball was thrown from the 49 yard line.

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f33/Warbirdz7/PMPass1.png

This picture shows the exact point where the ball was caught by Decker. The straight line clearly shows it at the 48, a yard further from the goal line.

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f33/Warbirdz7/PMPass2.png

Based on the wording of the rule that you, yourself, posted "the ball initially moves forward (to a point nearer the opponent’s goal line) after leaving the passer’s hand(s)"

These shots make it pretty clear that the ball initially moved from a point further away from the opponents goal line, thus, making it a backwards lateral and a rushing attempt.

Denver Native (Carol)
01-01-2014, 01:48 PM
We could argue this forever, but it is a mute point - it was ruled in Manning's favor.

BroncoWave
01-01-2014, 01:54 PM
We could argue this forever, but it is a mute point - it was ruled in Manning's favor.

That's fine. The evidence shows they made the incorrect ruling though. As a Broncos fan, however, I'm certainly not complaining about it.

SR
01-01-2014, 02:31 PM
That's fine. The evidence shows they made the incorrect ruling though. As a Broncos fan, however, I'm certainly not complaining about it.

That's the same stance I made on Decker's TD two weeks ago. He didn't have control of the ball as he stepped out of bounds and I don't think it should have been a TD. Am I happy it was a TD? Duh.

BroncoWave
01-01-2014, 02:33 PM
That's the same stance I made on Decker's TD two weeks ago. He didn't have control of the ball as he stepped out of bounds and I don't think it should have been a TD. Am I happy it was a TD? Duh.

Yep, people who make rulings and decisions and sports are wrong all the time. If it happens to benefit the Broncos, so be it. Every team has rulings go for and against them. Might as well enjoy the breaks we get, even if we know they came from bad calls.

Denver Native (Carol)
01-01-2014, 02:41 PM
That's fine. The evidence shows they made the incorrect ruling though. As a Broncos fan, however, I'm certainly not complaining about it.

You feel the evidence you posted shows that, but have you found the "angle from above", which shows something different?


However, there was an issue with a 7-yard completion from Manning to Eric Decker late in the first half that could have changed the play to a run, allowing Brees to keep the record. 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/10224344/peyton-manning-passing-yardage-record-stand

Hawgdriver
01-01-2014, 02:50 PM
I think you're right, everyone posting in the thread.

pulse
01-01-2014, 02:53 PM
I keep wanting to see this overhead view. I've yet to find it. Not disregarding it. Either way, I'm glad he has the record, but from the midfield shot it still looks like a lateral.

BroncoWave
01-01-2014, 03:37 PM
You feel the evidence you posted shows that, but have you found the "angle from above", which shows something different?



http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2013/story/_/id/10224344/peyton-manning-passing-yardage-record-stand

Carol, read the rule again. Where Manning is is completely irrelevant. It matters where the ball travels relative to the goal line. That one angle is proof enough that the ball was moving away from the goal line.

Denver Native (Carol)
01-01-2014, 03:58 PM
Carol, read the rule again. Where Manning is is completely irrelevant. It matters where the ball travels relative to the goal line. That one angle is proof enough that the ball was moving away from the goal line.

OK - if where Manning is is completely irrelevant, why do many articles state that it was not a lateral from a different angle, and that is why they did not take the 7 yards away?

BroncoWave
01-01-2014, 04:00 PM
OK - if where Manning is is completely irrelevant, why do many articles state that it was not a lateral from a different angle, and that is why they did not take the 7 yards away?

I don't know, they didn't read the rule I guess? You posted the rule yourself. Where in the rule does it mention anything about the position of the player on the field?

Denver Native (Carol)
01-01-2014, 04:15 PM
The following in this link looks like it is from a different angle

http://nfl.si.com/2013/12/30/peyton-manning-yardage-record-denver-broncos/

BroncoWave
01-01-2014, 04:18 PM
The following in this link looks like it is from a different angle

http://nfl.si.com/2013/12/30/peyton-manning-yardage-record-denver-broncos/

??? That's the exact same angle pretty much. Still shows the ball traveling backwards.

BroncoJoe
01-02-2014, 10:33 AM
Exactly why are you all arguing this?

TXBRONC
01-02-2014, 11:52 PM
Exactly why are you all arguing this?

Because it's a bye week? :whoknows:

topscribe
01-03-2014, 01:20 PM
No, I'm not kidding, and that wasn't a "you" directed directly at YOU. It was a "you" directed at Elias Sports Bureau who keeps and verifies the stats. So don't get your panties in a bunch.

You and I are free to assume Peyton Manning likely would have smashed the record, and we both believe he would. But Elias Sports Bureau can't do that. That's the point, which was completely missed on your part.

I wish Denver would have had him throw two passes so we could've avoided this mess.
No problem, I wasn't offended. :)

And I do now see the point you were trying to make.
.

topscribe
01-03-2014, 01:24 PM
Carol, read the rule again. Where Manning is is completely irrelevant. It matters where the ball travels relative to the goal line. That one angle is proof enough that the ball was moving away from the goal line.
It's moot now. It was ruled a pass. Just like Tamme's beautiful sideline reception
that wasn't -- It is what it was ruled.
.

Ravage!!!
01-03-2014, 01:33 PM
Exactly why are you all arguing this?

two reasons.

1) Its BTB and that's what he does.

2) He's a Drew Brees fan.

Northman
01-03-2014, 02:09 PM
So we've all come to the conclusion that Manning owns the record. Good. lol

TXBRONC
01-03-2014, 03:58 PM
So we've all come to the conclusion that Manning owns the record. Good. lol

I came to that conclusion well before the ruling.

TXBRONC
01-03-2014, 03:59 PM
two reasons.

1) Its BTB and that's what he does.

2) He's a Drew Brees fan.

Yep. :nod: