Thread: Does Our Safety Count As a Turnover?

I presume not, since they did regain possession, even if forced to immediately kick to us. At the time I didn't care, because it widened our lead (if not meaningfully) and gave us the ball (which was huge.) However, I'd like to maintain our streak of games with a defensive turnover; I think it just ended though. On the other hand, a 19 pt swing was more than enough to overtake GB as #1 scoring D; that's suitable consolation. This team with an offensive line: Un-freakin-STOPPABLE!

Doesn't matter. The defense was dominant and we won the game

Originally Posted by Yashahla17

Doesn't matter. The defense was dominant and we won the game

The offense was just as dominant. It was a whole team effort.

Nope.......so chalk up a 19 point -1 turnover ratio win. #somanyflaws #nooffense #weveplayednobody #panicbuton #hashtagwhiskey

Originally Posted by Canmore

The offense was just as dominant. It was a whole team effort.

No doubt but since the thread was about the defense there was no need to mention the offense. Like i said a hundred times tonight if the offense can play like tonight the rest of the way I'll guarantee a super bowl.

Well, officially the defense is on pace to give up 208 points for the season through 7 games. If they continue at this pace, they would be better than the 2013 Seahawks (in the regular season anyway). So, a turnover or two here or there won't be terribly important. Aaron Rogers threw the ball away a lot. He doesn't make stupid plays with the ball. When nobody was open, you didn't see him try and force it in and get picked off by Chris Harris or Talib. He threw it right into the turf.

There's a reason he's the #1 QB in all football and you saw it last night. He extended plays with his feet, and he made good decisions. There was just nowhere to throw the ball, and he had no pocket to step up into and throw and no time without scrambling for his life.

Originally Posted by Cugel

Well, officially the defense is on pace to give up 208 points for the season through 7 games. If they continue at this pace, they would be better than the 2013 Seahawks (in the regular season anyway). So, a turnover or two here or there won't be terribly important. Aaron Rogers threw the ball away a lot. He doesn't make stupid plays with the ball. When nobody was open, you didn't see him try and force it in and get picked off by Chris Harris or Talib. He threw it right into the turf.

There's a reason he's the #1 QB in all football and you saw it last night. He extended plays with his feet, and he made good decisions. There was just nowhere to throw the ball, and he had no pocket to step up into and throw and no time without scrambling for his life.

Yeah, I'm down with all that, and went into this game knowing it could end the streak: They've only made FOUR through 6 games (now 7,) the NFLs 2nd best total. You're absolutely right about Rodgers (who doesn't even commit turnovers when he RUNS, unlike many so-called "dual threats") and they (usually) have a top 5 rushing attack and leads to further reduce turnovers. It just would've been nice to continue the streak, because forcing turnovers is evidence of alertness, discipline and sound fundamentals across the board.

That said, we DID force a few, just didn't quite get to the ball in time to exploit them, partly because GB was quick to hop on the ball when they did happen. Good teams exploit opponent errors, but good teams also don't COMMIT errors for good opponents TO exploit. ONE turnover between BOTH teams in the whole GAME says a lot itself.

That one play with Green Bay's RB was clearly a fumble that appeared to be recovered by us. I wonder why we didn't challenge that. Can you challenge if it's a fumble and get the ruling overturned, that is from down by contact to fumble, even if your team doesn't recover? Would that count as a successful challenge?

Originally Posted by CrazyHorse

That one play with Green Bay's RB was clearly a fumble that appeared to be recovered by us. I wonder why we didn't challenge that. Can you challenge if it's a fumble and get the ruling overturned, that is from down by contact to fumble, even if your team doesn't recover? Would that count as a successful challenge?

Don't know how a carefully worded challenge would've played out, but TECHNICALLY the refs didn't call "no fumble" (so we couldn't challenge that,) they called "runner was down by contact:" EXACTLY what he was if he recovered the fumble. From my view, he did, so we should still lose that challenge; it was clearly a fumble, IMHO, but it looked like he trapped the ball against his body on the ground, and there wasn't "conclusive" nor "irrefutable" evidence to say he DIDN'T and we DID, so we lose: Fox challenge.

We made a good heads up play to strip it, but it happened to land right next to the RB (probably because he was gripping it hard,) who made a good heads up play to immediately grab it again before we had a chance. We DID come out of the pile with it, but only AFTER he was down by contact and a bunch of our guys got it away from him again. The safety was a similar deal: A good team created a loose ball, but another team (technically) avoided it becoming an actual turnover.