Can you sack a RB? (2 Viewers)

[matttyl]

Apparently in last night's game, Briggs was credited with a half sack by tackling K Hunter behind the line of scrimmage on a HB pass play. Directly from NFL.com play by play...

(10:03) 32-K.Hunter sacked at CHI 31 for -4 yards (sack split by 53-N.Roach and 55-L.Briggs). K.Hunter on a HB pass attempt.

I haven't gone back to see the play, but I plan to this evening. Did Kaepernick hand the ball or pitch the ball to Hunter, or was this a direct snap to Hunter? If it was the former, wouldn't the ability for a sack cease at that point as the QB no longer has the ball? Has this ever happened before?

PS - I ask because the outcome of a game in my league (not my game) hangs in the balance. Our rules state you get points for "sack of a QB"

 

[lod01]

He was trying to throw and they sacked him. I would guess that the NFL considers that a sack and so should every league.

I think he pitched it to him.

 

[matttyl]

Honestly, I've never heard of such a thing. It's a tackle for loss, obviously, but I don't think it should be a sack as Hunter isn't a QB. Not that it's the official source for anything, but the wikipedia page is for "sacking a QB", and never mentions the ability to sack any other position. I can't think of this ever happening before, but please anyone tell me if it has.

 

[bonesman]

Honestly, I've never heard of such a thing. It's a tackle for loss, obviously, but I don't think it should be a sack as Hunter isn't a QB. Not that it's the official source for anything, but the wikipedia page is for "sacking a QB", and never mentions the ability to sack any other position. I can't think of this ever happening before, but please anyone tell me if it has.

You lost bro... accept it.

 

[JD8p]

Had Hunter thrown and completed the pass, would he have received credit for the passing yards?

 

[Joe Summer]

Honestly, I've never heard of such a thing.

It has happened over 200 times since the NFL began tracking the "sack" stat in 1969Now, I suppose you could argue that the sack shouldn't count in your league, since your league's rules specifically say "sack of a QB", and Kendall Hunter isn't technically a QB.

But if you tried to make that argument in my league, I'd kick you out and keep your entry fee.

Face it: it's a sack.

 

[Otis]

NFL box score records Kendall Hunter under the passing stat line as 0/0 for 0 yards. So they apparently considered him to be passing on that play. I thought it was weird too -- why list him there if he never actually had a pass attempt.

My link

 

[Sinn Fein]

I did not see the play - did Hunter take a direct snap or a pitch?

Seems harder to justify if he took a pitch or a hand-off. But at the same time, it seems scorers are taking a close look at every play to determine if it is a designed run or a designed pass. A QB running on a designed run, will not take a sack if tackled behind the line. So, it seems fair to give a sack when a non-QB is tackled behind the line of scrimmage on a designed pass play.

 

[cracKer]

A QB running on a designed run, will not take a sack if tackled behind the line. So, it seems fair to give a sack when a non-QB is tackled behind the line of scrimmage on a designed pass play.

There are obviously a lot of variables that the people who record the stats have to factor, like option pass plays, but this answer is accurate

 

[Mentos]

Honestly, I've never heard of such a thing.

It has happened over 200 times since the NFL began tracking the "sack" stat in 1969Now, I suppose you could argue that the sack shouldn't count in your league, since your league's rules specifically say "sack of a QB", and Kendall Hunter isn't technically a QB.

But if you tried to make that argument in my league, I'd kick you out and keep your entry fee.

Face it: it's a sack.

Hunter was a passer on the play. He was not technically a QB on that play (I am assuming anyway; still have no TV reception due to the hurricane). I think this guy's league has a stupid rule if the owner is not awarded the sack.

 

[LarryAllen'sJockstrap]

Do you score your games by hand? I assume you use a website, and that website has assigned a value to the Bears D (or specific player/s) for last night's game. If your league site scored it as a sack (my guess is that's probably the case since the NFL did), then go with it. If your league site generated a score for the Bears D/Players that didn't include that sack, then I'd assume there is a direct interpretation of the league rule it must be a sack on a “true QB".

Sounds like the owner on the losing end of this deal needs to suck it up and PTTS. I'd be pissed beyond belief if I was in a league where a score was actually changed (from website default) due to an outside (even commish) interpretation of a rule like this.

 

[mbuehner]

Its really the same question of when a tackle is ruled a sack vs a tackle for loss for a quarterback. It depends on a lot of factors the league geeks examine for the play. Pass blocking is the first clue. If he hasnt tucked the ball and turned upfield deliberately, its a sack. But its not just about the ball carrier.

 

[rick6668]

Do you score your games by hand? I assume you use a website, and that website has assigned a value to the Bears D (or specific player/s) for last night's game. If your league site scored it as a sack (my guess is that's probably the case since the NFL did), then go with it. If your league site generated a score for the Bears D/Players that didn't include that sack, then I'd assume there is a direct interpretation of the league rule it must be a sack on a “true QB".Sounds like the owner on the losing end of this deal needs to suck it up and PTTS. I'd be pissed beyond belief if I was in a league where a score was actually changed (from website default) due to an outside (even commish) interpretation of a rule like this.

 

[Shutout]

I've never really paid much attention to something like this. So, when a Tim Tebow lines up in what is obviously the wildcat, I'm sure they consider him a QB, obviously. But what if Brad smith or ronnie Brown lines up in the wildcat? If they get tackled, is it a sack or a tackle?

Not that it amounts to a hill of beans outside of a close game in a league, but I'm curious just as a matter of consistency.

 

[TakiToki]

I remember the issue coming up a couple times before on this board. One was a Ronnie Brown wildcat play in which he was actually attempting to pass out of it, and the tackle was scored as a sack, and the other was a reverse to Brandon Marshall in which he was going to throw ball, but got sacked.

It's intent of the player with the ball behind the line of scrimmage, regardless of position. If a QB tucks the ball and is no longer attempting to pass, then it is not a sack if he is tackled behind the line of scrimmage.

 

[Area51Inhabitant]

I haven't seen a replay of the play since I saw it live but my memory of the play was that Hunter was looking to throw the ball but apparently didn't like what he saw downfield so he did tuck it before he got tackled. I'm skeptical that it will get changed since it was pretty clear that the intent of the play was to throw the ball but it would be interesting to get some league clarification about the rule.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I have no idea why this is so difficult to understand.

Any back can play any role.

Any player attempting to pass who is tackled while trying do so is "sacked."

I saw that play and my only thought was that the RB brought the ball in and it looked like he was trying to run, but then QBs get nailed for sack stats on that all the time. = 1 Sack.

 

[belljr]

Of course you can "sack a RB"

Can an RB get a passing touchdown? Passing yards? Credited with a tackle?

Can a kicker throw a pass?

Can a QB get a reception?

Isn't it all the same.

 

[MDSkinner]

Honestly, I've never heard of such a thing. It's a tackle for loss, obviously, but I don't think it should be a sack as Hunter isn't a QB. Not that it's the official source for anything, but the wikipedia page is for "sacking a QB", and never mentions the ability to sack any other position. I can't think of this ever happening before, but please anyone tell me if it has.

Definitely a sack, since Hunter was definitely back there to pass. A tackle for a loss would only be if it was clear he was not intentionally going back to pass, which clearly he was here.

 

[ldizzle]

I've never really paid much attention to something like this. So, when a Tim Tebow lines up in what is obviously the wildcat, I'm sure they consider him a QB, obviously. But what if Brad smith or ronnie Brown lines up in the wildcat? If they get tackled, is it a sack or a tackle? Not that it amounts to a hill of beans outside of a close game in a league, but I'm curious just as a matter of consistency.

Pretty sure if it is a designed run, then no. If it is a designed pass, then yes

 

[TakiToki]

I haven't seen a replay of the play since I saw it live but my memory of the play was that Hunter was looking to throw the ball but apparently didn't like what he saw downfield so he did tuck it before he got tackled. I'm skeptical that it will get changed since it was pretty clear that the intent of the play was to throw the ball but it would be interesting to get some league clarification about the rule.

It's not just tucking the ball to avoid the rush. It's about becoming a ball-carrier rather than passer. It's a very subjective metric. But there are plenty of times, especially with guys like Vick, Cunningham and Young throughout the years in which the play would begin as a pass play, but the QB would turn into a runner at some "magic" point and be credited with negative rushing yards if tackled behind the line (I've been playing IDP since the USA Today boxscore days).Also, there is nothing for the league to clarify. It's a method of stat-keeping, not a rule of the league. There is nothing involving sacks (or pass defenses or assisted tackles, for that matter) in the NFL rulebook.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I've never really paid much attention to something like this. So, when a Tim Tebow lines up in what is obviously the wildcat, I'm sure they consider him a QB, obviously. But what if Brad smith or ronnie Brown lines up in the wildcat? If they get tackled, is it a sack or a tackle? Not that it amounts to a hill of beans outside of a close game in a league, but I'm curious just as a matter of consistency.

The position of the player is irrelevant. If it's a designed pass, it's a sack. If it's a designed run, it's not.

 

[matttyl]

Honestly, I've never heard of such a thing. It's a tackle for loss, obviously, but I don't think it should be a sack as Hunter isn't a QB. Not that it's the official source for anything, but the wikipedia page is for "sacking a QB", and never mentions the ability to sack any other position. I can't think of this ever happening before, but please anyone tell me if it has.

Definitely a sack, since Hunter was definitely back there to pass. A tackle for a loss would only be if it was clear he was not intentionally going back to pass, which clearly he was here.

Any sack is automatically credited as a tackle for loss, as well as any other tackle behind the line of scrimmage. As for the above poster saying "deal with it", he must not have read the entire first post where I said this had nothing to do with my game. This was the deciding factor in a game between two other teams. It ended up resulting the game in a tie, which sucks for both of them (though I guess better than a loss). I guess my understanding of a sack was that it would only apply to the fist man receiving the snap (normally the QB, but at times a RB/WR in a "wildcat package" when he's looking to throw). I thought that once a handoff or toss had occurred (meaning a 2nd man is in possession of the ball after the snap), that a sack couldn't occur.

I went a little deeper and looked into the official NFL rulebook, and found that the term "sack" isn't defined anywhere. In fact, the term is only mentioned one time in the entire rulebook, in regards to a "sack dance" which could result in a 15 yard unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. Again, I'll bring up the wiki article about a sack, as it's at this point the only place I can find a definition for it (though I completely understand it's not official in any way)...

"In American football and Canadian football, a sack occurs when the quarterback is tackled behind the line of scrimmage before he can throw a forward pass, or when the quarterback is tackled behind the line of scrimmage in the "pocket" and the intent of what he was going to do is unclear. This often occurs if the opposing team's defensive line, linebackers or defensive backs are able to quickly get past blocking players of the offensive team (the quarterback's protection), or if the quarterback is unable to find a back to hand the ball off to or an available eligible receiver (including wide receivers, running backs and tight ends) to catch the ball, allowing the defense a longer opportunity to tackle the quarterback."

The bolded sections clearly only mention a quarterback, not other players. Also, it says that one occurs if the quarterback is unable to find a back to hand the ball off to, which Kaepernick clearly did on this play.

Again, this ruling does not involve my team in any way, and I'm just posting the question here that was posted by one of the involved teams from my league in this dispute. As the current result is a tie, I'm fine with it as it's like half a loss for both teams, but I was curious as to how others view this. Can you sack a non-QB, and even if you can, should our league award points for "sacking a QB" for that play?

 

[Biabreakable]

I think that if you are awarding points for tackle for loss at about the same amount as a sack it would remove some of the ambiguity.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

Is the RB Chris Johnson and do I have to sack him in a three foot hole? Then yes, obviously I can.

 

[Joe Summer]

I went a little deeper and looked into the official NFL rulebook, and found that the term "sack" isn't defined anywhere. In fact, the term is only mentioned one time in the entire rulebook, in regards to a "sack dance" which could result in a 15 yard unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. Again, I'll bring up the wiki article about a sack, as it's at this point the only place I can find a definition for it (though I completely understand it's not official in any way)...

"In American football and Canadian football, a sack occurs when the quarterback is tackled behind the line of scrimmage before he can throw a forward pass, or when the quarterback is tackled behind the line of scrimmage in the "pocket" and the intent of what he was going to do is unclear. This often occurs if the opposing team's defensive line, linebackers or defensive backs are able to quickly get past blocking players of the offensive team (the quarterback's protection), or if the quarterback is unable to find a back to hand the ball off to or an available eligible receiver (including wide receivers, running backs and tight ends) to catch the ball, allowing the defense a longer opportunity to tackle the quarterback."

The bolded sections clearly only mention a quarterback, not other players.

Seriously, you're relying on Wikipedia for your sources? You do realize that anyone can edit those pages, right?

 

[GregR]

I went a little deeper and looked into the official NFL rulebook, and found that the term "sack" isn't defined anywhere. In fact, the term is only mentioned one time in the entire rulebook, in regards to a "sack dance" which could result in a 15 yard unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. Again, I'll bring up the wiki article about a sack, as it's at this point the only place I can find a definition for it (though I completely understand it's not official in any way)...

"In American football and Canadian football, a sack occurs when the quarterback is tackled behind the line of scrimmage before he can throw a forward pass, or when the quarterback is tackled behind the line of scrimmage in the "pocket" and the intent of what he was going to do is unclear. This often occurs if the opposing team's defensive line, linebackers or defensive backs are able to quickly get past blocking players of the offensive team (the quarterback's protection), or if the quarterback is unable to find a back to hand the ball off to or an available eligible receiver (including wide receivers, running backs and tight ends) to catch the ball, allowing the defense a longer opportunity to tackle the quarterback."

The bolded sections clearly only mention a quarterback, not other players.

Seriously, you're relying on Wikipedia for your sources? You do realize that anyone can edit those pages, right?

Not only can anyone edit those pages, but someone has already edited it to correct the inaccuracy (and beat me to it).

Quarterback sack

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Former Vanderbilt quarterback Jay Cutler is sacked by Navy defender Jeremy Chase.

In American football and Canadian football, a sack occurs when the quarterback (or another offensive player acting as a passer) is tackled behind the line of scrimmage before he can throw a forward pass, or when the quarterback is tackled behind the line of scrimmage in the "pocket" and the intent of what he was going to do is unclear.

Considering whether I should I put in the Records that Marcus Allen is the non-quarterback who has been sacked the most. He was sacked 6 times. Though Joe Webb is currently showing as a WR in PFR and he has been sacked 11 times.

 

[matttyl]

I went a little deeper and looked into the official NFL rulebook, and found that the term "sack" isn't defined anywhere. In fact, the term is only mentioned one time in the entire rulebook, in regards to a "sack dance" which could result in a 15 yard unsportsmanlike conduct penalty. Again, I'll bring up the wiki article about a sack, as it's at this point the only place I can find a definition for it (though I completely understand it's not official in any way)...

"In American football and Canadian football, a sack occurs when the quarterback is tackled behind the line of scrimmage before he can throw a forward pass, or when the quarterback is tackled behind the line of scrimmage in the "pocket" and the intent of what he was going to do is unclear. This often occurs if the opposing team's defensive line, linebackers or defensive backs are able to quickly get past blocking players of the offensive team (the quarterback's protection), or if the quarterback is unable to find a back to hand the ball off to or an available eligible receiver (including wide receivers, running backs and tight ends) to catch the ball, allowing the defense a longer opportunity to tackle the quarterback."

The bolded sections clearly only mention a quarterback, not other players.

Seriously, you're relying on Wikipedia for your sources? You do realize that anyone can edit those pages, right?

Yes, of course I do. Unfortunately, it's the only place that I can find a definition of what a "sack" is, as it's not defined at all in the NFL rulebook.

 

[GregR]

They are also missing a passer running out of bounds while under pressure as a sack. Which I know is a sack because David Carr did it ad nauseum. Looks like it was once in there but was removed. Added it back in with a reference to verify it.

 

[matttyl]

They are also missing a passer running out of bounds while under pressure as a sack. Which I know is a sack because David Carr did it ad nauseum. Looks like it was once in there but was removed. Added it back in with a reference to verify it.

Thank you for updating the (easily changable) wiki page. This new definition has put the argument to rest in the league, and the tie will stand. I guess I learned something from this, in that a RB can be sacked.

 

[-jb-]

There's really only one way to solve this. Each owner needs to pound a six-pack of beer and engage in a 100 yard sack race. Winner gets the W.

 

[Ryan99]

And this is the fundamental problem with any rule that relies on the scorer divining the intent of a player or trying to predict the future. Here's an idea: instead of doing that, just score things based on what happened. It's like the stupid "if the defender pushed the receiver out of bounds, but the receiver would have stayed in bounds otherwise ..." rule that they finally got rid of.

Two solutions

Good solution: A team gets some fixed value for a tackle for loss (.25 points or whatever) and in addition gets a bonus for the number of negative yards on that play (1 point per 10 yards for instance). QB sacks will tend to be worth more than stopping the RB behind the line and sacking the QB at the end of a deep drop back will be worth more than if he scrambles and is sacked just before reaching the LoS, which it should be.

Better solution: stop giving points for sacks. It's dumb. A sack is just a negative yardage play, nothing more. It's no different than a tackle for loss. You don't take points away from a team defense for giving up positive yards, so don't give them points for negative yards.

 

[two_dollars]

Back in Walter Payton's heyday, he was listed as the teams 3rd string QB. If he were to attempt passes, could he not be sacked? Is he a "QB" or "RB" if he lines up under center? If Tebow was lined up wide and Greene took the snap, and did a backwards pass (long handoff) and Tebow in turn tried to throw to Keller, would he be sacked or not? There are a ton of situations where a QB can be an RB and a RB can be a QB. It's about intent, regardless of the number on his jersey or his listed position in the program.

 

[renesauz]

I did not see the play - did Hunter take a direct snap or a pitch?Seems harder to justify if he took a pitch or a hand-off. But at the same time, it seems scorers are taking a close look at every play to determine if it is a designed run or a designed pass. A QB running on a designed run, will not take a sack if tackled behind the line. So, it seems fair to give a sack when a non-QB is tackled behind the line of scrimmage on a designed pass play.

This

 

[Sea Duck]

Back in Walter Payton's heyday, he was listed as the teams 3rd string QB. If he were to attempt passes, could he not be sacked? Is he a "QB" or "RB" if he lines up under center? If Tebow was lined up wide and Greene took the snap, and did a backwards pass (long handoff) and Tebow in turn tried to throw to Keller, would he be sacked or not? There are a ton of situations where a QB can be an RB and a RB can be a QB. It's about intent, regardless of the number on his jersey or his listed position in the program.

It doesn't matter if you take the snap or not. All that matters is if you start to pass the ball.BTW, Walter Payton was never sacked in 34 career pass attempts.

 

[two_dollars]

Back in Walter Payton's heyday, he was listed as the teams 3rd string QB. If he were to attempt passes, could he not be sacked? Is he a "QB" or "RB" if he lines up under center? If Tebow was lined up wide and Greene took the snap, and did a backwards pass (long handoff) and Tebow in turn tried to throw to Keller, would he be sacked or not? There are a ton of situations where a QB can be an RB and a RB can be a QB. It's about intent, regardless of the number on his jersey or his listed position in the program.

It doesn't matter if you take the snap or not. All that matters is if you start to pass the ball.BTW, Walter Payton was never sacked in 34 career pass attempts.

Exactly, that's what I said. I think.

 

[Bri]

Honestly, I've never heard of such a thing.

It has happened over 200 times since the NFL began tracking the "sack" stat in 1969Now, I suppose you could argue that the sack shouldn't count in your league, since your league's rules specifically say "sack of a QB", and Kendall Hunter isn't technically a QB.

But if you tried to make that argument in my league, I'd kick you out and keep your entry fee.

Face it: it's a sack.

Hunter was a passer on the play. He was not technically a QB on that play (I am assuming anyway; still have no TV reception due to the hurricane). I think this guy's league has a stupid rule if the owner is not awarded the sack.

what he said. Position is where you line up. If hunter was lined up wide he'd be a WR for the play. If he shifted, he shifted, but it's where you line up at first.Assuming this is negatives on an individual offensive player (because for D a sack is a sack) If FF rules specifically say QB, then yeah I guess there's no -1 or -2 for a sack on a RB. I can see that as a grrr but true rule and who would have thought of that ahead of time type deal.

I doubt any leagues I'm currently in even list sacks for RBs so mine would probably not lose points for that sack.

Tomlinson threw a lot. WRs have thrown plenty of times since we started converting college QBs. When Tomlinson was doing it, as is the NFL, copycats arose and not all worked well. Link above has more than 200 times, I believe it.

Funny thing from an old book on one of the Gmen brass, Hostetler's agent was worried about his salary when he was lining up as a WR. Worried about him getting hurt too, probably primary concern, and he was ready to discuss bonuses and such if Hoss caught so many passes.

Kordell broke big mid to late one year and it was regularly posted whether he lined up as QB or WR.

Richie Anderson, an underrated excellent FB, lined up for 2-3 games as a WR because the Jets had an unbelievable bad streak of WR injuries. I remember his owner in FF wanting him listed as WR and putting on a good case for it. Commish had to, that's where he lines up.

Former QB, former NFL TE, James Casey is a FB/RB in FF this year.

Well, hope I threw enough out there for a grrr discussion your league is prob going to have.

 

[GregR]

And this is the fundamental problem with any rule that relies on the scorer divining the intent of a player or trying to predict the future. Here's an idea: instead of doing that, just score things based on what happened. It's like the stupid "if the defender pushed the receiver out of bounds, but the receiver would have stayed in bounds otherwise ..." rule that they finally got rid of.Two solutionsGood solution: A team gets some fixed value for a tackle for loss (.25 points or whatever) and in addition gets a bonus for the number of negative yards on that play (1 point per 10 yards for instance). QB sacks will tend to be worth more than stopping the RB behind the line and sacking the QB at the end of a deep drop back will be worth more than if he scrambles and is sacked just before reaching the LoS, which it should be.Better solution: stop giving points for sacks. It's dumb. A sack is just a negative yardage play, nothing more. It's no different than a tackle for loss. You don't take points away from a team defense for giving up positive yards, so don't give them points for negative yards.

From an actual football standpoint, I strongly disagree that there isn't a difference between a sack of the QB and tackling some other runner for a loss. There's definitely more football value in a QB sack. The offense is often slower getting into the next play since the guy who takes the play call and runs the huddle is dealing with the after effects of being hit. They sometimes end up with a delay of game or have to take a timeout specifically because of the sack. You also see teams who will run the ball after their QB takes a big hit because they want to give him a play to clear the cobwebs.And I think multiple sacks and QB hits can affect the QB's passing and make him rush his throws and not go through progressions, far more than similar increased hits in the backfield is going to make a running back's play deteriorate. Enough sacks can take away receiving options from a team as they have to keep more players in to block. All of those are tangible football benefits that just aren't there to the same degree with tackling a RB behind the line.So I've got no problem with awarding more for a sack than TFL. Though I think TFL's are worthy of fantasy points too.

 

[matttyl]

To sum up how we dealt with it....is that we didn't really deal with it. The play counted as a sack, and since we have IDP rather than team defense, Briggs was credited with half a sack (or 1.5 points) in our league. A standard "tackle for loss" is no different than a standard tackle, and is awarded a single point.

We changed the wording in the rules from "sack a QB" to just "sack" being awarded 3 full points (or 1.5 for half a sack).

The game resulted in a tie, and that virtually eliminated one team (the one without Briggs who I thought was being screwed) even though he is #2 in points.