Manning To Keep Record After Significant Stat Change In Question (1 Viewer)

[pizzatyme]

195 stat corrections doesn't seem like a lot

considering a total of 512 games played

2.62 corrections per game and this includes defensive corrections

Your math needs correcting.

Indeed it does. LOL Lets try 0.38/ game

Now let's work on figuring out how many ACTUAL games are played in the NFL every year...

32X16, no? 512

 

[rick6668]

195 stat corrections doesn't seem like a lot

considering a total of 512 games played

2.62 corrections per game and this includes defensive corrections

Your math needs correcting.

Indeed it does. LOL Lets try 0.38/ game

Now let's work on figuring out how many ACTUAL games are played in the NFL every year...

 

[pizzatyme]

195 stat corrections doesn't seem like a lot

considering a total of 512 games played

2.62 corrections per game and this includes defensive corrections

Your math needs correcting.

Indeed it does. LOL Lets try 0.38/ game

Now let's work on figuring out how many ACTUAL games are played in the NFL every year...

I missed the joke.

 

[RUSF18]

195 stat corrections doesn't seem like a lot

considering a total of 512 games played

2.62 corrections per game and this includes defensive corrections

Your math needs correcting.

Indeed it does. LOL Lets try 0.38/ game

Now let's work on figuring out how many ACTUAL games are played in the NFL every year...

32X16, no? 512

Only if every team is scrimmaging itself.

 

[Mario Kart]

195 stat corrections doesn't seem like a lot

considering a total of 512 games played

2.62 corrections per game and this includes defensive corrections

Your math needs correcting.

Indeed it does. LOL Lets try 0.38/ game

Now let's work on figuring out how many ACTUAL games are played in the NFL every year...

32X16, no? 512

No, essentially, 16 x 16 = 256 games

195 / 256 = .762

 

[Hoss Style]

And when you read them on a weekly basis you realize they are obvious errors (most are easy to tell, such as a catch, sack, etc given to the wrong player, while others (very few) are errors on plays like a backward/foward pass.) This is not news to many of us...

Wrong yet again, Hoss. They are not obvious errors, else they wouldn't have been scored incorrectly in the first place. The type of play in question here, whether it was a forward pass or a lateral, is exactly the type of stat correction the review process was designed for. And it failed here - miserably.And the delusional part here is people like yourself who really believe that this oversight was not because of the record, that either "there was another camera angle" or that "it was too close to call". In the stat review process, this is actually one of the more blatantly one sided instances I have seen.

They gave the guy a Mulligan. Quit deluding yourself, accept it for what it is, and move on.

How can I argue with you when you just make up your own facts, or maybe just aren't in the same ballpark with your definition of the word "obvious" when it comes to these corrections?So, you are saying that when a team stat guy puts down that a tackle was made by #42, and it was actually made by #47, it's not an "obvious" error? Because that's what most stat corrections are similar to.

Good lord, man. I like the passion you feel, but you're placing it so far out of bounds that it makes it impossible to take you seriously sometimes.

Just let me know if you think the example I use above qualifies as an "obvious" error to you, or not. If it doesn't, then there's no reason to even try to discuss this topic with you, and I'll bow out. If it does qualify as "obvious" to you, then I would still love to hear how you find me delusional.

I'm not expecting a lot of reason here in response, but I'm holding out hope.

I think it's a bit disingenuous of you to suggest repeatedly that somehow this Manning stat correction is outside the normal realm of the many weekly stat corrections we see. You make it sound like the only stat corrections we see are obvious. That is entirely false. Stat corrections include exact instances of this play, where a forward pass is ruled a lateral. It took me all of 5 minutes to find such a play. Week 2, Cutler throws sideways to Forte for a loss of 2 yards. It is originally called a forward pass. The stat corrections process changes it to a lateral. I haven't seen the play, by I have a real good hunch that the Manning play is just as definitive.Res ipsa loquitur.

Exactly. It speaks for itself.

Elias only fixes obvious errors.

You said, of the weekly errors that they correct:

They are not obvious errors, else they wouldn't have been scored incorrectly in the first place.

I gave you an example of a typical error, where they got a player's number wrong. That is an obvious error. You were wrong.

Elias did not deem this event as an obvious error. With their history of stat corrections I'm inclined to trust their judgement over you.

You say I'm suggesting this Manning call is outside the normal realm of corrections.

Wrong. In fact, what I am stating is the exact opposite - it was processed with the exact same criteria as other corrections - according to Elias. Disagree with them, if you like, but don't put it on me. If you read what I posted, the only thing I actually suggested was that it looked like the pass was a bit backwards to me, which actually agrees with your view on the play, if you would pause long enough to take a breath and read what I wrote.

I could circle back to my original question - you say their corrections are absolutely not obvious errors, so is changing a #42 to #47 an obvious error to you, or not?

But I'm gonna let it go. I'm arguing with someone who says they know exactly what happened behind the scenes in the NFL, that Elias intentionally jeopardized the integrity of their company for Peyton Manning and calls me delusional for not agreeing with his baseless, evidence lacking points.

Don't take it personal. I just know when to walk away. I might join in later if something comes up that actually holds merit.

 

[Adam Harstad]

195 stat corrections doesn't seem like a lot

considering a total of 512 games played

2.62 corrections per game and this includes defensive corrections

Your math needs correcting.

Indeed it does. LOL Lets try 0.38/ game

Now let's work on figuring out how many ACTUAL games are played in the NFL every year...

32X16, no? 512

Denver played Oakland last weekend. There were 2 teams, and they played 1 game each, but games played isn't 2 x 1 = 2.

To do it another way, in any given NFL week, there are 16 games played (ignoring byes). There are 16 NFL weeks (again, ignoring byes). Games played = 16 * 16 = 256.

 

[RUSF18]

Or 32 teams each get 8 home games = 256

(Sorry Buffalo)

 

[Hoss Style]

I cleaned up the above post, a bit. It sounded a bit too harsh. Apologies, General, for that.

I still don't understand what your trying to say sometimes, and I disagree strongly, but in a respectful manner.

 

[Not Sleeping]

I know this was mentioned earlier in the thread, but I just wanted to stress it again. If Decker had dropped the ball, and it was recovered by Oakland, but ruled a forward pass on the field, it seems obvious that Oakland would have won an in-game challenge and been awarded the ball. Because it was pretty clearly a lateral. I don't know how anyone can look at that play and not think it was a lateral.

Therefore some of us are left thinking that Elias intentionally chose to look the other way based on the "importance" of the play.

 

[Hoss Style]

I know this was mentioned earlier in the thread, but I just wanted to stress it again. If Decker had dropped the ball, and it was recovered by Oakland, but ruled a forward pass on the field, it seems obvious that Oakland would have won an in-game challenge and been awarded the ball. Because it was pretty clearly a lateral. I don't know how anyone can look at that play and not think it was a lateral.

Therefore some of us are left thinking that Elias intentionally chose to look the other way based on the "importance" of the play.

Fair enough. I see your point.

The only thing I can say is this - I really looked at it a bunch before I posted here. I spent probably an hour just looking at different sites with video and pictures showing the pass.

I saw some sites that showed still shots where the difference was extremely close to it being at least a straight sideways pass. The video is very hard to tell because the camera is moving and the players are moving. It's hard to tell where the actual ball is, and where it actually came out of Manning's hand - not where Manning is standing. That's why the still shots are much more effective in trying to determine the play. And even then I saw different pics at different times during the pass that favored both sides of the discussion.

After doing all that, I came to post why I thought Elias was true to their mantra of changing a stat only when definitive evidence exists to overturn a call made on the field.

And I also said that I thought the pass was slightly backwards, but in no way would bet my life on it.

 

[General Tso]

I know this was mentioned earlier in the thread, but I just wanted to stress it again. If Decker had dropped the ball, and it was recovered by Oakland, but ruled a forward pass on the field, it seems obvious that Oakland would have won an in-game challenge and been awarded the ball. Because it was pretty clearly a lateral. I don't know how anyone can look at that play and not think it was a lateral.

Therefore some of us are left thinking that Elias intentionally chose to look the other way based on the "importance" of the play.

This.The video of the lateral is conclusive, under any reasonable standard. I haven't heard one person view the play and conclude that it was a forward pass. Not one.

Just imagine for one second if this were Tom Brady instead of Peyton Manning. The uproar in here would be unimaginable.

 

[bostonfred]

When Brady set the TD record, the argument from Manning supporters was that Manning would have set the record higher if he hadn't sat out in week 17 that year. So in some ways, the discussion has stayed pretty consistent - Manning would have set the TD record higher in 2004 if he'd wanted to, he would have set the yardage record this year if he'd known that was a lateral, and he would have won lots of Superbowls if he'd played on different teams. I'm sure some people will always believe that Manning "choked" again, while others will always believe he would have set the record higher anyways, but the reality is that he's coming off one of the best regular seasons in history regardless. Congratulations are in order regardless of the asterisk.

 

[drummer]

So the stat holds right? Why all the trolling?

 

[Hoss Style]

Ok, gotta run, but remember -

The issue isn't whether the pass looked like it was backwards or not. It seems most agree that it looked that way.

The issue is whether Elias, after looking at many more angles than we, should have changed the stat because they saw overwhelming evidence that the call was wrong on the field. I find it hard to believe they would jeopardize their reputation on such a call.

It's possible, I guess, but it's in no way a clear, cut & dry accusation, as some are saying.

 

[General Tso]

Just food for thought here - as I hadn't heard this play cited in any of the dialogue. For those who argue that Manning would have just went on to break the record I the 2nd half, it doesn't always work out that way. In 1998 Nykesha Sales, a UConn woman's basketball player, was chasing the all time woman's scoring record. It seemed inevitable. Until she ruptured her Achilles when she trailed by only 1 point. The next game UConn worked out a deal with Villanova allowing Sales to score an uncontested shot to break the record. For those too young to remember, it opened up a long and protracted debate about the sanctity of records. It's interesting the Manning story hasn't created much drama or debate (other than in here).

http://articles.latimes.com/1998/feb/27/sports/sp-23531

 

[Pots]

So the stat holds right? Why all the trolling?

Brady and Brees supporters want a place to whine about Manning breaking records.

 

[jurb26]

Just imagine for one second if this were Tom Brady instead of Peyton Manning. The uproar in here would be unimaginable.

This is true.

 

[General Tso]

So the stat holds right? Why all the trolling?

Brady and Brees supporters want a place to whine about Manning breaking records.

I don't like any of the whores. My QB is Terry Bradshaw. I like the guys with no teeth who can't spell record if you spotted them an recor

 

[jurb26]

So the stat holds right? Why all the trolling?

Brady and Brees supporters want a place to whine about Manning breaking records.

Seems more like a bunch of Manning fanboys trying to redirect things to Brees and Brady to me.

 

[PatsWillWin]

*

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

Has nothing to do with the QB, the NFL wasn't having that reversed after the game and record was broken. It would have been much more of a joke to go back and take it away that it was to let him keep it.

If you really thought that record would be taken away, not if you truly thought it was a forward pass or not, but if you truly thought Manning would get that overturned then you don't have great common sense skills.

If you stared at that video and said..."hey, that was passed backward for a hakf yard, they are going to now take the all time yardage record away from Peyton Manning" in the middle of the following week I have some lakefront property I'd like to sell you near a swamp.

I am glad I like Brees, Brady and Manning equal as the jealousy and whining bavk and forth over the years has been comical. I went thru it with Barry vs Emmitt and it is exhausting and eventually you realize you can't win, you're not changing anyone elses mind so you just have to be confident in your own thoughts.

I also don't believe you can say who's better between Manning and Brady yet as their careers are not over yet. Guys have been arguing on here 10 years about it. Things will look a lit different if Manning wins the next 2 Super Bowls, same can be said for Brady.

Sit back and enjoy these two legends because they won't be around forever. Peyton is one of the greatest, don't get hung up on a pass that was ruled in game forward pass but later looks like it might have been a 1/2 backward pass.

To me, Mannings 50th Td pass vs Houston was juggled and no catch. I would have lost money on that, I still say that was no catch but he was given credit for TD and the yardage, that was much easier to see than this lateral vs Oakland.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

The issue is whether Elias, after looking at many more angles than we, should have changed the stat because they saw overwhelming evidence that the call was wrong on the field.

That may just be an expression, but in case it makes a difference, there was no call on the field. I believe that, at most stadiums, the scorekeepers are in a trailor in the parking lot.

(I mention this because "call on the field" makes it sound like it came from an official, perhaps with his own eyes at close distance, which may merit some special deference. In fact, it came from someone watching on a monitor, more or less like everybody at home.)

 

[IHEARTFF]

Has nothing to do with the QB, the NFL wasn't having that reversed after the game and record was broken. It would have been much more of a joke to go back and take it away that it was to let him keep it.

Exactly. Common sense ftw.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

The issue is whether Elias, after looking at many more angles than we, should have changed the stat because they saw overwhelming evidence that the call was wrong on the field.

That may just be an expression, but in case it makes a difference, there was no call on the field. I believe that, at most stadiums, the scorekeepers are in a trailor in the parking lot.(I mention this because "call on the field" makes it sound like it came from an official, perhaps with his own eyes at close distance, which may merit some special deference. In fact, it came from someone watching on a monitor, more or less like everybody at home.)

And you would hope they knew the record was on the line. If any game needed to be looked at with scrupulous eyes, it was that one. If it were my job, I would have been looking at that play 25 times at halftime to make sure that forward pass was my final conclusion before the half resumed. Let's hope those guys in the truck didn't go on a coffee break during that half.

 

[pizzatyme]

So, I'm an idiot. LOL :whoosh:

 

[Not Sleeping]

Has nothing to do with the QB, the NFL wasn't having that reversed after the game and record was broken. It would have been much more of a joke to go back and take it away that it was to let him keep it.

Exactly. Common sense ftw.

Well, obviously you guys are right, and I did actually learn something about the way things work. I actually thought it would be common sense that the stat review process would be handled consistent with how it is handled all other weeks, which would mean the yardage would be changed to rushing yards (which is what would have happened to this play if it had happened in Week 1). But now that I see the vast majority of the fans outside of this forum (like on NFL.com and in the comments on other sports sites) don't even understand the stat correction process, I realize that Elias and the NFL clearly decided it was better to look the other way since the masses would not understand why Manning was "robbed" of the record.

Just like it's common sense to understand the law will not be applied equally to rich and powerful people, it should have been common sense to understand the standard stat correction process would not be applied to Manning here.

 

[Short Corner]

195 stat corrections doesn't seem like a lot

considering a total of 512 games played

2.62 corrections per game and this includes defensive corrections

Your math needs correcting.

Indeed it does. LOL Lets try 0.38/ game

Now let's work on figuring out how many ACTUAL games are played in the NFL every year...

32X16, no? 512

 

[Ignoramus]

8 pages of this?

 

[Bamac]

Does anyone remember the women's CBB player who lost a scoring record because an ESPN archivist counted her points and she came up one-two short? There was a "This is Sportscenter" commercial parodying it in which the player foiled a Sportscenter anchor's attempt to break the record for consecutive shows.

My google skills are failing me, but I'm sure one of the sports savants on this board knows what I'm talking about.

Just food for thought here - as I hadn't heard this play cited in any of the dialogue. For those who argue that Manning would have just went on to break the record I the 2nd half, it doesn't always work out that way. In 1998 Nykesha Sales, a UConn woman's basketball player, was chasing the all time woman's scoring record. It seemed inevitable. Until she ruptured her Achilles when she trailed by only 1 point. The next game UConn worked out a deal with Villanova allowing Sales to score an uncontested shot to break the record. For those too young to remember, it opened up a long and protracted debate about the sanctity of records. It's interesting the Manning story hasn't created much drama or debate (other than in here).

http://articles.latimes.com/1998/feb/27/sports/sp-23531

Thanks, Gen Tso!

Here's the rest of the story. (My question was embarrassingly off the mark on factual details.)

All of it may have been not for two, but for naught. The well-meaning and well-orchestrated attempt to get her the record, the bittersweet celebration soon after tip-off, the subsequent furor for days after the game-that all seems pointless now.

For it turns out that when an injured Nykesha Sales hobbled to the basket against Villanova on Feb. 24 to make a prearranged lay-up that would break Kerry Bascom's University of Connecticut career scoring record of 2,177 points, Sales actually had 2,174 points at the time, not the 2,176 everyone believed. That's right: She needed four more points to break the record, not two.

How can this be? On Jan. 22, Sales was credited with 25 points in an 89-59 rout of host Seton Hall. But she scored only 23. A review of the videotape of the full game, produced and broadcast by Connecticut Public Television, reveals a different set of scoring totals than the official box score. The two extra points belonged to Kelly Hunt; the discrepancy probably occurred on a lay-up on a bang-bang play just past the midway point of the the first half. (After UConn had scored, Sales deflected a Seton Hall pass to Svetlana Abrosimova, who fed Hunt for the lay-up.)

The official scorer apparently missed it. The play happened so quickly that the scorer may still have been recording the previous basket. Sales was right under the hoop when Hunt's shot fell through; it's human nature to assume that the star with the 21-point average had scored yet again, and not the reserve who averages just four a game. That's why the box score that became official and ran on the wire services and in the next day's newspapers shows Hunt with only four points in the game, when she actually scored six.

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/magazine/archives/news/story?page=magazine-19980323-article20

I am 99% sure there was a "This is Sportscenter" commercial starring Sales that parodied this whole situation. Can't find the video anywhere, though.

 

[Hoss Style]

The issue is whether Elias, after looking at many more angles than we, should have changed the stat because they saw overwhelming evidence that the call was wrong on the field.

That may just be an expression, but in case it makes a difference, there was no call on the field. I believe that, at most stadiums, the scorekeepers are in a trailor in the parking lot.

(I mention this because "call on the field" makes it sound like it came from an official, perhaps with his own eyes at close distance, which may merit some special deference. In fact, it came from someone watching on a monitor, more or less like everybody at home.)

Indeed, the "call" I referenced was the stat guy's call about the play on the field. Sorry for any confusion there.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

Has nothing to do with the QB, the NFL wasn't having that reversed after the game and record was broken. It would have been much more of a joke to go back and take it away that it was to let him keep it.

Exactly. Common sense ftw.

Well, obviously you guys are right, and I did actually learn something about the way things work. I actually thought it would be common sense that the stat review process would be handled consistent with how it is handled all other weeks, which would mean the yardage would be changed to rushing yards (which is what would have happened to this play if it had happened in Week 1). But now that I see the vast majority of the fans outside of this forum (like on NFL.com and in the comments on other sports sites) don't even understand the stat correction process, I realize that Elias and the NFL clearly decided it was better to look the other way since the masses would not understand why Manning was "robbed" of the record.

Just like it's common sense to understand the law will not be applied equally to rich and powerful people, it should have been common sense to understand the standard stat correction process would not be applied to Manning here.

That is a good point, we are the crazy low percentage of fans who hang out on forums and argue this stuff. Not everyone who watches football is like that. Most people who I talked to didn't even know about this video and the possibility of overturning. Like you said, they wouldn't even understand it, not that you couldn't overturn it because of that reason, Lord knows the government does things that we don't all understand and that doesn't stop them but part of it is I just think it was much easier and probably fair to leave it as is.

Do I think that the fact he had an entire half to play against a Raider team that didn't even deserve a paycheck for that effort should be taken into account....no, you should have blinders on to that and just focus in on the play, but the reality is if you're part of whatever group sitting in the filmroom pondering if you are overturning this play and thinking of the ramifications, I can help think the thought of him not playing that 2nd half at least had some small part in their reasoning.

 

[dollarbill13]

So on a tangent... were there NO stat corrections for week 17 in the NFL? Just want to confirm before I pay out a very close championship game.

 

[Area51Inhabitant]

So on a tangent... were there NO stat corrections for week 17 in the NFL? Just want to confirm before I pay out a very close championship game.

Demarco Murray lost 3 rushing yards from 51 to 48. Devin Hester lost 6 return yards from 176 to 170.

http://fantasy.nfl.com/research/statcorrections

 

[Area51Inhabitant]

Oh and for what its worth, last year's scoring change that they made with Ben Roethlisberger giving him a touchdown pass after originally scoring the play a rush by Mendenhall was a closer play than the Manning play to Decker that wasn't changed.

 

[Adam Harstad]

Oh and for what its worth, last year's scoring change that they made with Ben Roethlisberger giving him a touchdown pass after originally scoring the play a rush by Mendenhall was a closer play than the Manning play to Decker that wasn't changed.

I went back to the week 2 Bears game to check out the Matt Forte reception that got changed to a rush attempt, and that was also a closer play than Manning-to-Decker (relative position of the two players was similar, but Cutler was throwing with his up-field arm while Manning was throwing with his down-field arm).

So yeah, it certainly seems like Elias looked the other way to avoid the negative publicity that comes from overturning a major record like this. At least, that's how it looks until we see this Zapruder FilmOverhead Angle that's been mentioned. I think it's telling that that video hasn't surfaced yet- if it really was as conclusive as has been claimed (or even if it just cast the play into doubt), you'd think it would be in everyone's best interest for it to be released.

 

[pizzatyme]

That game film has been "placed" with the Spygate film.

 

[jurb26]

A question about the overhead view Elias claims to have. How did they get it and why was it not available for the regular telecast of the game? Had the play been reviewed by Oak, say it was dropped resulting in a potential fumble, would the regular telecast and officials then had access to this top view?

 

[Warrior]

Just food for thought here - as I hadn't heard this play cited in any of the dialogue. For those who argue that Manning would have just went on to break the record I the 2nd half, it doesn't always work out that way. In 1998 Nykesha Sales, a UConn woman's basketball player, was chasing the all time woman's scoring record. It seemed inevitable. Until she ruptured her Achilles when she trailed by only 1 point. The next game UConn worked out a deal with Villanova allowing Sales to score an uncontested shot to break the record. For those too young to remember, it opened up a long and protracted debate about the sanctity of records. It's interesting the Manning story hasn't created much drama or debate (other than in here).

http://articles.latimes.com/1998/feb/27/sports/sp-23531

Probably because they are two completely different situations. In one, the team LET her get an UNCONTESTED two points to break the record. In the other, Manning earned the record by throwing a contested pass against a defense that was trying to stop him.

 

[Warrior]

A question about the overhead view Elias claims to have. How did they get it and why was it not available for the regular telecast of the game? Had the play been reviewed by Oak, say it was dropped resulting in a potential fumble, would the regular telecast and officials then had access to this top view?

Maybe because Elias had a week to get this extra film that may not have been readily available 3 seconds after the play ended.

 

[jurb26]

A question about the overhead view Elias claims to have. How did they get it and why was it not available for the regular telecast of the game? Had the play been reviewed by Oak, say it was dropped resulting in a potential fumble, would the regular telecast and officials then had access to this top view?

Maybe because Elias had a week to get this extra film that may not have been readily available 3 seconds after the play ended.

This sounds like a pretty bad excuse.

 

[Adam Harstad]

It's like a broken record: Manning takes wins first.

It was halftime in the Black Hole, and John Fox had to think through the laughter.

His Broncos had just played their best half of the season and the result was a 31-0 lead against the Oakland Raiders in the regular-season finale last Sunday.

There are 12 minutes between halves so even bathroom visits are rushed.

With the AFC's No. 1 playoff seed assured, Fox wanted to remove quarterback Peyton Manning out of the game, but first he needed to hear from Broncos media relations director Patrick Smyth.

Everybody in Oakland's visiting locker room knew, with only mild interest, that Manning began the game needing 266 yards to break the single-season record of 5,476 yards set by Drew Brees in 2011.

Everybody also knew, with greater interest, the Broncos had broken the scoring record in the first half and Manning had tacked on four touchdown passes to the single-season mark he had surpassed the previous week.

Smyth relayed that Manning had broke Brees' record by 1 yard. But, Smyth cautioned in a flash of prescience, all stats are subject to review.

Fox approached Manning and told him the deal. Manning knew Fox wanted to pull him both for sportsmanship and health purposes. But stats are adjusted from time to time — usually involving sacks — and it was communicated to both there was risk a couple of yards could be taken away from Manning. As there were no yards to spare, it would mean no record.

Manning said that didn't sound like a good reason to go back out there.

And that was that. Manning had been saying, in various ways the past two weeks, that he cared little about the passing yardage record. Here's the problem with yards: 42 of the league's 78 400-yard passing games (53.8 percent) in the past three seasons were recorded by losing quarterbacks.

It wasn't until after the game that a blogger from New Orleans steered attention to the play by posting a video. The scrutiny mushroomed until it reached Elias Sports Bureau, the NFL's statistician, for inspection.It took a while for Manning's 7-yard pass to Eric Decker in the first quarter to be deemed suspiciously close to a lateral. The officials on the field signaled forward pass. There was no mention of the completion becoming dangerously close to a running play on the CBS telecast. There was no chatter in the press box, or initially on Twitter.

The record was there for Manning, so he might as well take it, regardless of his indifference. But had it been taken away, he would have dealt with it.

"I did have discussions with Peyton at halftime, like you always do with your quarterback," Fox said. "That one wasn't as important. Don't get me wrong, in this league all records are great accomplishments. But that one probably mattered the least to him. The touchdowns and the scoring, those are related to winning. In the end, that particular record was outweighed by the score and the risk of injury."

As it turned out, the play in question was too close to overturn. Besides, there seemed to be an unnatural undercurrent to the inquiry. Earlier this season against Jacksonville, Broncos receiver Andre Caldwell gained 7 yards on a reverse in which Manning got too deep for his handoff and wound up having to pitch it forward.

Accidental or not, it should have been credited as a forward pass. Where was the outrage from area code 504 for that one?

All these after-the-fact reviews of Manning's passing records the past two weeks were somewhat amusing, maybe even spiteful. Besides the New Orleans blogger on the yardage mark, Texans interim coach Wade Phillips pointed out Manning shouldn't have received credit for his record-tying touchdown pass No. 50 because Decker bobbled it.

"I wish I could have got some calls back over the years," Fox said. "It doesn't work that way. The way it works is: 'Oh, my bad. Too bad.' "

Manning has enough records. He will get more in the next year or so as he chases down Brett Favre's career marks. But what Manning really wants, maybe even needs, is a second Super Bowl title.

And so at halftime in the Black Hole, Manning had a choice of securing a record, or his health for the playoffs. He was done for the day.

 

[Not Sleeping]

It's like a broken record: Manning takes wins first.

It was halftime in the Black Hole, and John Fox had to think through the laughter.

His Broncos had just played their best half of the season and the result was a 31-0 lead against the Oakland Raiders in the regular-season finale last Sunday.

There are 12 minutes between halves so even bathroom visits are rushed.

With the AFC's No. 1 playoff seed assured, Fox wanted to remove quarterback Peyton Manning out of the game, but first he needed to hear from Broncos media relations director Patrick Smyth.

Everybody in Oakland's visiting locker room knew, with only mild interest, that Manning began the game needing 266 yards to break the single-season record of 5,476 yards set by Drew Brees in 2011.

Everybody also knew, with greater interest, the Broncos had broken the scoring record in the first half and Manning had tacked on four touchdown passes to the single-season mark he had surpassed the previous week.

Smyth relayed that Manning had broke Brees' record by 1 yard. But, Smyth cautioned in a flash of prescience, all stats are subject to review.

Fox approached Manning and told him the deal. Manning knew Fox wanted to pull him both for sportsmanship and health purposes. But stats are adjusted from time to time — usually involving sacks — and it was communicated to both there was risk a couple of yards could be taken away from Manning. As there were no yards to spare, it would mean no record.

Manning said that didn't sound like a good reason to go back out there.

And that was that. Manning had been saying, in various ways the past two weeks, that he cared little about the passing yardage record. Here's the problem with yards: 42 of the league's 78 400-yard passing games (53.8 percent) in the past three seasons were recorded by losing quarterbacks.

It wasn't until after the game that a blogger from New Orleans steered attention to the play by posting a video. The scrutiny mushroomed until it reached Elias Sports Bureau, the NFL's statistician, for inspection.It took a while for Manning's 7-yard pass to Eric Decker in the first quarter to be deemed suspiciously close to a lateral. The officials on the field signaled forward pass. There was no mention of the completion becoming dangerously close to a running play on the CBS telecast. There was no chatter in the press box, or initially on Twitter.

The record was there for Manning, so he might as well take it, regardless of his indifference. But had it been taken away, he would have dealt with it.

"I did have discussions with Peyton at halftime, like you always do with your quarterback," Fox said. "That one wasn't as important. Don't get me wrong, in this league all records are great accomplishments. But that one probably mattered the least to him. The touchdowns and the scoring, those are related to winning. In the end, that particular record was outweighed by the score and the risk of injury."

As it turned out, the play in question was too close to overturn. Besides, there seemed to be an unnatural undercurrent to the inquiry. Earlier this season against Jacksonville, Broncos receiver Andre Caldwell gained 7 yards on a reverse in which Manning got too deep for his handoff and wound up having to pitch it forward.

Accidental or not, it should have been credited as a forward pass. Where was the outrage from area code 504 for that one?

All these after-the-fact reviews of Manning's passing records the past two weeks were somewhat amusing, maybe even spiteful. Besides the New Orleans blogger on the yardage mark, Texans interim coach Wade Phillips pointed out Manning shouldn't have received credit for his record-tying touchdown pass No. 50 because Decker bobbled it.

"I wish I could have got some calls back over the years," Fox said. "It doesn't work that way. The way it works is: 'Oh, my bad. Too bad.' "

Manning has enough records. He will get more in the next year or so as he chases down Brett Favre's career marks. But what Manning really wants, maybe even needs, is a second Super Bowl title.

And so at halftime in the Black Hole, Manning had a choice of securing a record, or his health for the playoffs. He was done for the day.

Interesting read. What we are seeing here is the difference between fantasy fanatics and casual fans. For us fantasy guys, we don't consider the week to be over until Wednesday when Elias has ruled from on high. So to us, it was just natural that we would assume that this would be ruled a lateral after an Elias review. Likewise, if it was really clear that this Week 6 play against the Jaguars was really a forward pass, then we expect it to be ruled a forward pass by Elias. It has nothing to do with "outrage from the 504". I don't even know where that is, but I guess they mean New Orleans? I'm pretty sure New Orleans fans, and Brees, really don't care about this. The "outrage" was simply because it was clearly a lateral and should be recorded as a lateral. Hell, go back and rule Week 6 a forward pass and give Manning the record. Even better.

 

[Adam Harstad]

Interesting read. What we are seeing here is the difference between fantasy fanatics and casual fans. For us fantasy guys, we don't consider the week to be over until Wednesday when Elias has ruled from on high. So to us, it was just natural that we would assume that this would be ruled a lateral after an Elias review. Likewise, if it was really clear that this Week 6 play against the Jaguars was really a forward pass, then we expect it to be ruled a forward pass by Elias. It has nothing to do with "outrage from the 504". I don't even know where that is, but I guess they mean New Orleans? I'm pretty sure New Orleans fans, and Brees, really don't care about this. The "outrage" was simply because it was clearly a lateral and should be recorded as a lateral. Hell, go back and rule Week 6 a forward pass and give Manning the record. Even better.

Yeah. And Klis' idea that nobody noticed that Decker play until after Manning set the record is way off base, too. I was on Twitter at the time of the pass. People were discussing the possibility of a stat correction in real time. It's not like some Saints fan with an axe to grind was going back through the tape with a magnifying glass.

I mostly re-posted the article for Manning's take on the situation. I'd said elsewhere that he really didn't seem to care about the yardage record. Sure, if all else is equal, he'd rather own it than not, but it never seemed like a big deal to him. This article seems to confirm that.

 

[Cheesedawg]

Does it really matter? With the direction the rules are being enforced I can't help but think that at least 2-3 guys are going to get 60+ very soon before I stop paying attention to football. It's nearly impossible for any team to play defense at this point.

You have put your finger on the salient point. Defense is being outlawed in the NFL. Get ready for NBA-scores.