Peyton Manning set passing record by 1 yard, but was a 7-yard pass vs. Oakland really a lateral?

Yahoo! ^

[dfwgator]

Somehow I don’t think Peyton gives a rip one way or the other.

[GreenAccord]

Based on the preponderance of offensive records set this year (total points by a team, on a weekend, etc,) it’ clearly obvious that all the defensively hindering rules have swayed the rules and play in the offense’s favor - by a wide margin.

You’re not allowed to go high on a QB, or low, or with your head, or with your hands to his head, and on and on, and on. And then there are the receivers who can’t be hit like they used to.

So really, we shouldn’t be all that surprised (or impressed) by the sudden uptick of offensive records being set. I know I’m not.

[C. Edmund Wright]

I agree….and Brees made sure he broke the record by a comfortable amount - in a game that was already decided…late in the fourth period. Nothing wrong with that IMO……and Peyton should have.

[citizen]

...so who really knows literally who has truthfully thrown for the most yards?

We all do, based on the official NFL stats. I could DVR the Falcons game and compute the rushing stats but why would I want to do all that work? The official NFL stats are the only stats that count.

And this sort of circumstance is one of the reasons they do the audit. Players have incentive clauses. Some of them involve yardage.

But the main reason is getting the stats correct for fantasy football. I've been on both the winning and the losing side of an audit adjusted stat. Seven passing yards subtracted and seven rushing yards added would change the winner and the loser in a lot of fantasy football matches.

[C. Edmund Wright]

We aren’t surprised….I dont think that was the issue here at all….and I don’t think ANYONE is surprised…..

[GreenAccord]

I would say that these records almost need a new era (sort of like baseball has its Live Ball Era).

So what if Peyton threw for 5,XXX yards (give or take 5 or 10)? The record should be categorized as belonging to some yet to be named offensive era in the NFL.

[Daveinyork]

No, I don’t SO miss the point. Bread and circusses at taxpayer expense.

[C. Edmund Wright]

I think you missed my point on the stats…..I know the stats are kept…but a play is given a whole number, period. In other words, you get a gain of 10 yards, one foot, 11 inches…..you are given 11 yards for the play. You gain 9 yards, one foot, 2 inches…you are given 9 yards for the play. My point is, stats are kept in “dollars” while they are really gained in “pennies” to use the analogy…..which is fine, that’s close enough…..but when we’re talking about 5400 yards, and a separation of one yard out of 5400…who actually knows whether or not Brees or Manning threw for more literal distance (if they measured it to the inch).

Again, NOT NOT NOT advocating it….just making a point.

And FTR, Fantasy has little to do with why they keep stats, at least major ones like yards passing in a year. Major stats have been around much much much longer than Fantasy Football…..

[C. Edmund Wright]

The taxpayer expense issue is a legit issue…BUT ITS NOT THIS ISSUE…..and no one was glorifying the players in this thread, merely discussing an irony that may have happened.

….but if on New Years weekend you want to be a miserable old cuss, knock yourself out…..go repaint your GET OFF MY LAWN sign….I think it’s faded….

[C. Edmund Wright]

I think most people who follow this realize that….and I think almost every discussion I hear about these things includes that as part of the discussion….but Bree’s record is new, so for purposes of these two people, it’s apples to apples.

[trisham]

...always always...some clown has to dig up some obscure measurement to see if it was real....did he also look through all the passes Brees threw for all his yards?.....did one of Brees receivers get more yards than he deserved?....did he notice one receiver got one yard too many?

**************************************

It's all part of the game, imho. For some fans, every little aspect of the game is interesting, and important. Manning is a great quarterback, without any doubt, but records do have to be accurate.

[rawhide]

On the play in question, Decker lined up in the slot

Decker basically steps backwards with Manning making a quick-hitting throw. Here Manning is cocking his arm back to throw:

When Manning releases the ball there's very little question that Decker is behind him (the ball is in the air at this point):

And when Decker makes the catch, he and Manning are insanely close in terms of what yardage marker they're on:

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.

[Hegewisch Dupa]

Who? Walter Peyton?

[citizen]

I didn’t miss anything. So many people on the internet have zero common sense and try to make something out of nothing.

The yardage is rounded up or down per play and credited accordingly. This is the only practicle way to do it.

If you don’t agree, start your own professional football league and tabulate the stats any &%#$ way you like.

[C. Edmund Wright]

Your stop frame is missing some key elements that you can see on the video version. The ball CLEARLY leaves Mannings hand above the 49…..almost exactly on the 49. The ball CLEARLY first touches the receivers hands at the 47 and a half to maybe 48 yard line….

Again, it’s the BALL, not the BODY, that matters for both QB and receiver. The ball flew backwards about a yard to a yard and a half in the air…..clearly….and the video makes this obvious. Your images, which are awesome, miss the moment of release, although your third image does show the ball just a couple inches inside the 49…..indicating that what Isaid was likely true.

[citizen]

Lateral, backwards by at least a full yard.

[C. Edmund Wright]

You don’t read very well tho…. I said, what, TWICE very clearly that I was NOT advocating for any different system…that I was making a philosophical argument only. I am sorry that you can’t read and don’t understand anything philosophical. Your snark was just embarrassing to yourself only….

Go repaint your GET OFF MY LAWN sign too……..be miserable if you insist on it.

[rawhide]

Looking at the yard markers from where it was thrown as to where it was caught, imho, it sure looks like a lateral?

[rawhide]

I can see the ball on the third frame.

[C. Edmund Wright]

From my post:
Again, NOT NOT NOT advocating it….just making a point.
Again, NOT NOT NOT advocating it….just making a point.
Again, NOT NOT NOT advocating it….just making a point.
Again, NOT NOT NOT advocating it….just making a point.
Again, NOT NOT NOT advocating it….just making a point.
Again, NOT NOT NOT advocating it….just making a point.
Again, NOT NOT NOT advocating it….just making a point.
Again, NOT NOT NOT advocating it….just making a point.
Again, NOT NOT NOT advocating it….just making a point.
Again, NOT NOT NOT advocating it….just making a point.
Again, NOT NOT NOT advocating it….just making a point.
Again, NOT NOT NOT advocating it….just making a point.
Again, NOT NOT NOT advocating it….just making a point.
Again, NOT NOT NOT advocating it….just making a point.
Again, NOT NOT NOT advocating it….just making a point.
Again, NOT NOT NOT advocating it….just making a point.

It’s fine to get snarky and be an ass to me…but have your ducks in a row, or I’ll blister you!!!!!!