"FBG Commish Ruling" on Mon Nite - Our .02 (1 Viewer)

[TeddyKGB]

People need to stop thinking of Tampa D in this case as Sapp, Brooks, Lynch, etc. They were not on the field. This much is true and irrefutable. But Tampa's defense was on the field as soon as Doss made the pick.

Giving McCardell rushing yards and a TD, as I have seen in some circles, is ridiculous. This was a defensive TD for Tampa Bay.

 

[cjack]

From the NFL Rulebook: Rule 3, Section 35, Article 1 Whenever a team is in possession, it is the Offense and, at such time, its opponent is the Defense. Rule 3, Section 35, Article 2 The team that puts the ball in play is Team A, and its oponent is Team B. For brevity, a player on Team A is referred to as A1 and his teammate as A2, A3, etc. Opponents are B1, B2, etc. Note: A team becomes Team A when it has been designated to put ball in play, and it remains Team A until a down ends, even though there might be one or more changes of possession during the down. This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.I think this sums it up.. McCardell should be on Offense when he recovers the fumble.

That would be the assumption from reading the rules, but that suggests that any defensive player who takes possession of the ball on a turnover becomes an offensive player. That suggests that a defense can never score since as soon as they have the ball, they become an offense.People keep citing that rule, but it does little to clarify the issue.

 

[ff weasel]

From the NFL Rulebook: Rule 3, Section 35, Article 1 Whenever a team is in possession, it is the Offense and, at such time, its opponent is the Defense. Rule 3, Section 35, Article 2 The team that puts the ball in play is Team A, and its oponent is Team B. For brevity, a player on Team A is referred to as A1 and his teammate as A2, A3, etc. Opponents are B1, B2, etc. Note: A team becomes Team A when it has been designated to put ball in play, and it remains Team A until a down ends, even though there might be one or more changes of possession during the down. This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.I think this sums it up.. McCardell should be on Offense when he recovers the fumble.

If you read above where I have those rules listed, you will see I have the same sentiment and conclusion as you do.

 

[Greg R]

Here's what Bill had to say about it this morning:

Q: Was McCardell's TD a defensive touchdown?

A: No. The Tampa Bay Buccaneers began the play on offense. After the interception, according to NFL rules, the defense becomes the offense and vice versa. This is what causes the confusion. But if you really take that logic to its conclusion, it would stand to reason that there could never be a defensive TD. Additionally, let's take that interpretation and reapply it to when McCardell gained possession of the ball - he was back on offense again. There is no scenario where McCardell's TD can be credited to the Bucs defense.

With all due respect, this answer does not help at all. We all know that if your D returns an INT for a TD, your D gets credit for the TD. According to Bill's response, they should NOT be credited for a TD in ANY circumstance since after they gain possession, they are on offense.

No where did he advocate that a defense can't score a TD. He was pointing out the inconsistency in the argument that the O becomes the DT after a turnover.

 

[ff weasel]

From the NFL Rulebook: Rule 3, Section 35, Article 1 Whenever a team is in possession, it is the Offense and, at such time, its opponent is the Defense. Rule 3, Section 35, Article 2 The team that puts the ball in play is Team A, and its oponent is Team B. For brevity, a player on Team A is referred to as A1 and his teammate as A2, A3, etc. Opponents are B1, B2, etc. Note: A team becomes Team A when it has been designated to put ball in play, and it remains Team A until a down ends, even though there might be one or more changes of possession during the down. This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.I think this sums it up.. McCardell should be on Offense when he recovers the fumble.

That would be the assumption from reading the rules, but that suggests that any defensive player who takes possession of the ball on a turnover becomes an offensive player. That suggests that a defense can never score since as soon as they have the ball, they become an offense.People keep citing that rule, but it does little to clarify the issue.

Where does it state that? If Team B took possession and scored, it would clearly be a defensive touchdown as they started out as Team B (defense). I think this makes more sense than change of possession where the offense becomes defense during a down... This leads to what you stated above about the defense never being able to score because they would be offense. I think you have it backwards.

 

[Gringoloco]

A long time ago our league agreed that common sense dictates that the team that has the ball at the outset of any play is on offense and the other team is on defense. This does not change during the course of the play for any reason.Originally, we decided this to help clarify fake field goals (are they ST scores?, no because it's the offense on the field). Now we use this ruling for cases such as this.I really think the best way to rule this is as Joe recommended. TB started the play on offense, Indy on defense. Any rulings shuld begin and end on that premise.

 

[Greg R]

I really think the best way to rule this is as Joe recommended. TB started the play on offense, Indy on defense. Any rulings shuld begin and end on that premise.

2nd best way.Best way: IDP

 

[ff weasel]

2nd best way.

Best way: IDP

Agreed on this point.

 

[cjack]

From the NFL Rulebook: Rule 3, Section 35, Article 1 Whenever a team is in possession, it is the Offense and, at such time, its opponent is the Defense. Rule 3, Section 35, Article 2 The team that puts the ball in play is Team A, and its oponent is Team B. For brevity, a player on Team A is referred to as A1 and his teammate as A2, A3, etc. Opponents are B1, B2, etc. Note: A team becomes Team A when it has been designated to put ball in play, and it remains Team A until a down ends, even though there might be one or more changes of possession during the down. This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.I think this sums it up.. McCardell should be on Offense when he recovers the fumble.

That would be the assumption from reading the rules, but that suggests that any defensive player who takes possession of the ball on a turnover becomes an offensive player. That suggests that a defense can never score since as soon as they have the ball, they become an offense.People keep citing that rule, but it does little to clarify the issue.

Where does it state that? If Team B took possession and scored, it would clearly be a defensive touchdown as they started out as Team B (defense). I think this makes more sense than change of possession where the offense becomes defense during a down... This leads to what you stated above about the defense never being able to score because they would be offense. I think you have it backwards.

I'm not sure what I have backwards.We know common sense would tell us that a defensive player who picks up a fumble and returns it for a TD would be credited with a defensive score. However, the NFL rules quoted above says that Team A is on offense until a change possesssion, then Team B become offense, and vice versa. The second change of possession reverses that and puts Team A back on offense. When can a player have possession of the ball and be considered a defensive player according the that rule?I don't think the TB D should get credit, but I don't see where the rule helps in making a case for or against. If I read that rule, I come away thinking that it's impossible for a defensive player to score a TD since as soon as they take possession of the ball, they're on offense.My main point here is that the NFL rule doesn't clarify the issue.

 

[Tiger Fan]

I, on the other hand, agree with Joe and the FBGs.The NFL rule is vague at best so that does little to clarify the argument.So, I look upon logic and common sense to determine a ruling.If you draft a defense/special teams in fantasy football, it's for the purpose of getting points for those respective units. It's not for the purpose of getting the benefit of unclear rules and freak plays.Forget the rules for a minute, and just tell me whether you think it's fair for a DT/ST to be awarded points for a play when neither the defense nor the special teams were on the field.I think the NFL rule is confused by semantics regarding whether a team is on offense or defense, but logic and common sense should prevail.

I agree the NFL rules are vague and that if you want to be literal here, a defense can technically never score a TD ......but I do think it's fair that the Tampa D gets credit b/c once BJ threw the INT, Tampa became the defense.FYI, I have to connection to any of these players in any leagues.

 

[ff weasel]

I think where we differ is this statement by you... "However, the NFL rules quoted above says that Team A is on offense until a change possesssion, then Team B become offense, and vice versa. The second change of possession reverses that and puts Team A back on offense. "I don't believe that is what the rule says. I think it clearly states that Team A is on offense until the end of the down. It also states that this contrasts the team offense and defense switching within the down. That's my take at least.We both agree on what we feel the outcome should be, but obviously our interpretation is different.

 

[chet]

Here's what Bill had to say about it this morning:

Q: Was McCardell's TD a defensive touchdown?

A: No.  The Tampa Bay Buccaneers began the play on offense.  After the interception, according to NFL rules, the defense becomes the offense and vice versa.  This is what causes the confusion.  But if you really take that logic to its conclusion, it would stand to reason that there could never be a defensive TD.  Additionally, let's take that interpretation and reapply it to when McCardell gained possession of the ball - he was back on offense again.  There is no scenario where McCardell's TD can be credited to the Bucs defense.

With all due respect, this answer does not help at all. We all know that if your D returns an INT for a TD, your D gets credit for the TD. According to Bill's response, they should NOT be credited for a TD in ANY circumstance since after they gain possession, they are on offense.

No where did he advocate that a defense can't score a TD. He was pointing out the inconsistency in the argument that the O becomes the DT after a turnover.

Actually, I don't think I missed the point after re-reading it, but maybe I didn't make my point clearly. Bill says, "But if you really take that logic to its conclusion, it would stand to reason that there could never be a defensive TD. Additionally, let's take that interpretation and reapply it to when McCardell gained possession of the ball - he was back on offense again. There is no scenario where McCardell's TD can be credited to the Bucs defense"

So, his logic for not crediting the Bucs D with a TD is that no defense ever scores a TD since they are technically on offense. The implication is that he would never credit any defense with a TD since they were not on defense! We all know that that is not how our leagues work.

So, my point is that his opinion adds nothing since we all credit defenses with TDs even though they were "technically" on offense when they came into possession of the ball.

 

[MrPack]

From the NFL Rulebook: Rule 3, Section 35, Article 1 Whenever a team is in possession, it is the Offense and, at such time, its opponent is the Defense. Rule 3, Section 35, Article 2 The team that puts the ball in play is Team A, and its oponent is Team B. For brevity, a player on Team A is referred to as A1 and his teammate as A2, A3, etc. Opponents are B1, B2, etc. Note: A team becomes Team A when it has been designated to put ball in play, and it remains Team A until a down ends, even though there might be one or more changes of possession during the down. This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.I think this sums it up.. McCardell should be on Offense when he recovers the fumble.

From the NFL Rulebook: Rule 3, Section 35, Article 1 Whenever a team is in possession, it is the Offense and, at such time, its opponent is the Defense. Rule 3, Section 35, Article 2 The team that puts the ball in play is Team A, and its oponent is Team B. For brevity, a player on Team A is referred to as A1 and his teammate as A2, A3, etc. Opponents are B1, B2, etc. Note: A team becomes Team A when it has been designated to put ball in play, and it remains Team A until a down ends, even though there might be one or more changes of possession during the down.

This is where it should stop for FANTASY FOOTBALL, and common sense should kick in here. (I'm talking for leagues without IDP, as I don't know how IDP rules work since I've never been in a league with IDP)I do know that fantasy football is about scoring, and this is where for all intensive purposes this rule should stop for fantasy football leagues.

This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

This part is for the NFL rules on tackling and blocking. Because the tackling and blocking rules change with a change of possession.For all of you wanting to follow this rule to the letter, the only obvious conclusion is there can be NO defensive scoring, because once there is a change of possession, an INT in this case, the Defense would get credit for a fumble recovery, but then the offense would get the score...... The defense would get credit for an INT, but the offense credit for a fumble.....We as commissioners and owners must use some common sense here

 

[jeffsalmans]

Rule 3, Section 35, Article 1 Whenever a team is in possession, it is the Offense and, at such time, its opponent is the Defense. Rule 3, Section 35, Article 2 The team that puts the ball in play is Team A, and its oponent is Team B. For brevity, a player on Team A is referred to as A1 and his teammate as A2, A3, etc. Opponents are B1, B2, etc.

Note: A team becomes Team A when it has been designated to put ball in play, and it remains Team A until a down ends, even though there might be one or more changes of possession during the down. This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

Read it again. Team A remains team A until the down ends, but Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

I read the rule again and still don't come to the same conclusion as you.A team becomes Team A when it has been designated to put ball in play, and it remains Team A until a down ends, even though there might be one or more changes of possession during the down.

I believe the rule is stating that this is in contrast to the following:

This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

Read it once more and explain what this means: "Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.""Team A" and "Team B" are only ways of designating. They don't change with Off/Def. Just as Tampa Bay is always Tampa Bay whether on O or D.

 

[JGannon]

To me it is clear that the NFL is calling it a Defensive TD...just scroll down to McCardells name---4 TD's=3 Receiving + 1 Defensive

http://www.nfl.com/stats/leaders/NFL/TTDS/2003/regular

 

[ff weasel]

Rule 3, Section 35, Article 1 Whenever a team is in possession, it is the Offense and, at such time, its opponent is the Defense. Rule 3, Section 35, Article 2 The team that puts the ball in play is Team A, and its oponent is Team B. For brevity, a player on Team A is referred to as A1 and his teammate as A2, A3, etc. Opponents are B1, B2, etc.

Note: A team becomes Team A when it has been designated to put ball in play, and it remains Team A until a down ends, even though there might be one or more changes of possession during the down. This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

Read it again. Team A remains team A until the down ends, but Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

I read the rule again and still don't come to the same conclusion as you.A team becomes Team A when it has been designated to put ball in play, and it remains Team A until a down ends, even though there might be one or more changes of possession during the down.

I believe the rule is stating that this is in contrast to the following:

This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

Read it once more and explain what this means: "Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.""Team A" and "Team B" are only ways of designating. They don't change with Off/Def. Just as Tampa Bay is always Tampa Bay whether on O or D.

You obviously skipped over my statement... I don't know how to make this clearer to you, but this is in CONTRAST to the following. It is my opinion, yes my opinion, that the following is just the example as to what this rule contrasts. It is not part of the rule per se.

This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

 

[dchristi]

I vote for the Defensive TD-in my IDP league you'd have-Int -1 for ManningInt +3 for DossFumble -1 for DossFum Rec +3 for McCardellTD +6 for McCardell (Off/Def doesn't Matter here)D/ST TD +6 for TB DOur D/ST don't get points for the recoveries and Int's-The players dn a side note-those who say Special Teams should only get the points when they're on the field-How many leagues give FG points to Special Teams? After all-it's a special Teams play. :wacko:

 

[ff weasel]

We will all never agree on this issue, but I just find it hard to believe that the rule would state two contrasting statements, unless the second was only used as an example to what it contrasts.Off to work now. But hope everyone decides for their own league how to score it. Ciao

 

[jeffsalmans]

Rule 3, Section 35, Article 1 Whenever a team is in possession, it is the Offense and, at such time, its opponent is the Defense. Rule 3, Section 35, Article 2 The team that puts the ball in play is Team A, and its oponent is Team B. For brevity, a player on Team A is referred to as A1 and his teammate as A2, A3, etc. Opponents are B1, B2, etc.

Note: A team becomes Team A when it has been designated to put ball in play, and it remains Team A until a down ends, even though there might be one or more changes of possession during the down. This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

Read it again. Team A remains team A until the down ends, but Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

I read the rule again and still don't come to the same conclusion as you.A team becomes Team A when it has been designated to put ball in play, and it remains Team A until a down ends, even though there might be one or more changes of possession during the down.

I believe the rule is stating that this is in contrast to the following:

This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

Read it once more and explain what this means: "Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.""Team A" and "Team B" are only ways of designating. They don't change with Off/Def. Just as Tampa Bay is always Tampa Bay whether on O or D.

You obviously skipped over my statement... I don't know how to make this clearer to you, but this is in CONTRAST to the following. It is my opinion, yes my opinion, that the following is just the example as to what this rule contrasts. It is not part of the rule per se.

This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

This is my last try. You are missing the point of why the NFL used the word "contrast". It used it because it is using both the descriptive terms "Team A and Team B" and "Offense and Defense" and doesn't want to get them confused. For clarity, let's insert "Tampa Bay" for "Team A" and "Indianapolis" for "Team B".Rule 3, Section 35, Article 2 The team that puts the ball in play is TAMPA BAY, and its oponent is INDIANAPOLIS. For brevity, a player on TAMPA BAY is referred to as A1 and his teammate as A2, A3, etc. Opponents are B1, B2, etc.

Note: A team becomes TAMPA BAY when it has been designated to put ball in play, and it remains TAMPA BAY until a down ends, even though there might be one or more changes of possession during the down. This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. TAMPA BAY is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when INDIANAPOLIS secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

In other words, TB became defense when Doss intercepted, but was still TB.

 

[MarshallRob]

Does McCardell get credited with any official rushing yards along with his TD? And hypothetically, if he had picked up a fumble by a fellow offensive player and ran it in, with no intervening possession by the opposing team, would he get rushing yardage then?

 

[DeadStroke]

I've lost respect for the "expert commish", for blindly stating that the touchdown is not a defensive score.

 

[jeffsalmans]

On a side note-those who say Special Teams should only get the points when they're on the field-How many leagues give FG points to Special Teams? After all-it's a special Teams play. :wacko:

Best post of the day.

 

[EvilTodd]

To me it is clear that the NFL is calling it a Defensive TD...just scroll down to McCardells name---4 TD's=3 Receiving + 1 Defensivehttp://www.nfl.com/stats/leaders/NFL/TTDS/2003/regular

And if you go into his Game Log it shows the TD under the fumbles category. I think it's under Def on the page you mentioned just because it doesn't fit under Run or Reception. Basically it's just not consistent even on NFL.com.

 

[Topes]

Rule 3, Section 35, Article 1 Whenever a team is in possession, it is the Offense and, at such time, its opponent is the Defense. Rule 3, Section 35, Article 2 The team that puts the ball in play is Team A, and its oponent is Team B. For brevity, a player on Team A is referred to as A1 and his teammate as A2, A3, etc. Opponents are B1, B2, etc.

Note: A team becomes Team A when it has been designated to put ball in play, and it remains Team A until a down ends, even though there might be one or more changes of possession during the down. This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

Read it again. Team A remains team A until the down ends, but Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

I read the rule again and still don't come to the same conclusion as you.A team becomes Team A when it has been designated to put ball in play, and it remains Team A until a down ends, even though there might be one or more changes of possession during the down.

I believe the rule is stating that this is in contrast to the following:

This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

Read it once more and explain what this means: "Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.""Team A" and "Team B" are only ways of designating. They don't change with Off/Def. Just as Tampa Bay is always Tampa Bay whether on O or D.

You obviously skipped over my statement... I don't know how to make this clearer to you, but this is in CONTRAST to the following. It is my opinion, yes my opinion, that the following is just the example as to what this rule contrasts. It is not part of the rule per se.

This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

This is my last try. You are missing the point of why the NFL used the word "contrast". It used it because it is using both the descriptive terms "Team A and Team B" and "Offense and Defense" and doesn't want to get them confused. For clarity, let's insert "Tampa Bay" for "Team A" and "Indianapolis" for "Team B".Rule 3, Section 35, Article 2 The team that puts the ball in play is TAMPA BAY, and its oponent is INDIANAPOLIS. For brevity, a player on TAMPA BAY is referred to as A1 and his teammate as A2, A3, etc. Opponents are B1, B2, etc.

Note: A team becomes TAMPA BAY when it has been designated to put ball in play, and it remains TAMPA BAY until a down ends, even though there might be one or more changes of possession during the down. This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. TAMPA BAY is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when INDIANAPOLIS secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

In other words, TB became defense when Doss intercepted, but was still TB.

Am I the only one here who thinks that ffweasel and jeffsalmans are in complete agreement here..?

 

[chet]

I've lost respect for the "expert commish", for blindly stating that the touchdown is not a defensive score.

I agree 100%. Based on his statement, defenses would never be credited with TDs. I'm surprised that Joe would accept his "ruling" apparantly without reading his statement.

 

[cjack]

Rule 3, Section 35, Article 1 Whenever a team is in possession, it is the Offense and, at such time, its opponent is the Defense. Rule 3, Section 35, Article 2 The team that puts the ball in play is Team A, and its oponent is Team B. For brevity, a player on Team A is referred to as A1 and his teammate as A2, A3, etc. Opponents are B1, B2, etc.

Note: A team becomes Team A when it has been designated to put ball in play, and it remains Team A until a down ends, even though there might be one or more changes of possession during the down. This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

Read it again. Team A remains team A until the down ends, but Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

I read the rule again and still don't come to the same conclusion as you.A team becomes Team A when it has been designated to put ball in play, and it remains Team A until a down ends, even though there might be one or more changes of possession during the down.

I believe the rule is stating that this is in contrast to the following:

This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

Read it once more and explain what this means: "Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.""Team A" and "Team B" are only ways of designating. They don't change with Off/Def. Just as Tampa Bay is always Tampa Bay whether on O or D.

You obviously skipped over my statement... I don't know how to make this clearer to you, but this is in CONTRAST to the following. It is my opinion, yes my opinion, that the following is just the example as to what this rule contrasts. It is not part of the rule per se.

This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. Team A is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when B secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

This is my last try. You are missing the point of why the NFL used the word "contrast". It used it because it is using both the descriptive terms "Team A and Team B" and "Offense and Defense" and doesn't want to get them confused. For clarity, let's insert "Tampa Bay" for "Team A" and "Indianapolis" for "Team B".Rule 3, Section 35, Article 2 The team that puts the ball in play is TAMPA BAY, and its oponent is INDIANAPOLIS. For brevity, a player on TAMPA BAY is referred to as A1 and his teammate as A2, A3, etc. Opponents are B1, B2, etc.

Note: A team becomes TAMPA BAY when it has been designated to put ball in play, and it remains TAMPA BAY until a down ends, even though there might be one or more changes of possession during the down. This is in contrast with the terms Offense and Defense. TAMPA BAY is the offense when the down starts, but becomes the defense if and when INDIANAPOLIS secures possession during the down, and vice versa for each change of possession.

In other words, TB became defense when Doss intercepted, but was still TB.

Am I the only one here who thinks that ffweasel and jeffsalmans are in complete agreement here..?

Probably, but they still seem to be missing the main point. The last part of the last sentence says, "... and vice versa for each change of possession."So, yes Tampa Bay became defense when Doss intercepted the ball, and Indy became offense. However, when Doss fumbled the ball and McCardell recovered, now Indy was the defense again, and Tampa Bay was now offense.

I'm not saying it helps with the ruling or makes sense, but I wish people would continue reading to the end before trying to make a judgement based on only part of the sentence.

Bottom line: The NFL rule is poorly written and does little to clarify the situation in question.

 

[jpeace121]

Here's what Bill had to say about it this morning:

Q: Was McCardell's TD a defensive touchdown?

A: No. The Tampa Bay Buccaneers began the play on offense. After the interception, according to NFL rules, the defense becomes the offense and vice versa. This is what causes the confusion. But if you really take that logic to its conclusion, it would stand to reason that there could never be a defensive TD. Additionally, let's take that interpretation and reapply it to when McCardell gained possession of the ball - he was back on offense again. There is no scenario where McCardell's TD can be credited to the Bucs defense.

With all due respect, this answer does not help at all. We all know that if your D returns an INT for a TD, your D gets credit for the TD. According to Bill's response, they should NOT be credited for a TD in ANY circumstance since after they gain possession, they are on offense.

No where did he advocate that a defense can't score a TD. He was pointing out the inconsistency in the argument that the O becomes the DT after a turnover.

Actually, I don't think I missed the point after re-reading it, but maybe I didn't make my point clearly. Bill says, "But if you really take that logic to its conclusion, it would stand to reason that there could never be a defensive TD. Additionally, let's take that interpretation and reapply it to when McCardell gained possession of the ball - he was back on offense again. There is no scenario where McCardell's TD can be credited to the Bucs defense"

So, his logic for not crediting the Bucs D with a TD is that no defense ever scores a TD since they are technically on offense. The implication is that he would never credit any defense with a TD since they were not on defense! We all know that that is not how our leagues work.

So, my point is that his opinion adds nothing since we all credit defenses with TDs even though they were "technically" on offense when they came into possession of the ball.

Chet's statement, and the accompanying debate, highlights the fallacy of the defensive TD ruling for me. Basically, the defensive TD ruling asserts that the Colts became the offense after the INT, and the Bucs became defense. According to that logic then, shouldn't Barber's interception return for a TD later in the game be an offensive score?To me, that's where the argument falls apart.

 

[RandyDB]

To me it is clear that the NFL is calling it a Defensive TD...just scroll down to McCardells name---4 TD's=3 Receiving + 1 Defensivehttp://www.nfl.com/stats/leaders/NFL/TTDS/2003/regular

this ends all arguments for me.

 

[JDubs]

In fairness to the NFL, I highly doubt they care in the slightest how a rule effects scoring in fantasy football. As others have pointed out, the rule is in place for the officials to determine penalties.

 

[chet]

Chet's statement, and the accompanying debate, highlights the fallacy of the defensive TD ruling for me. Basically, the defensive TD ruling asserts that the Colts became the offense after the INT, and the Bucs became defense. According to that logic then, shouldn't Barber's interception return for a TD later in the game be an offensive score?To me, that's where the argument falls apart.

Exactly right. You can't have it both ways. I think FBG dropped the ball on this one.

 

[DeadStroke]

In fairness to the NFL, I highly doubt they care in the slightest how a rule effects scoring in fantasy football. As others have pointed out, the rule is in place for the officials to determine penalties.

True, but then why does an interception returned for a touchdown count as a score against the team defense?

 

[Gringoloco]

I agree 100%. Based on his statement, defenses would never be credited with TDs.

I'm surprised that Joe would accept his "ruling" apparantly without reading his statement.

Made perfect sense to me. He never said that defenses should never get credit for TD's. He said that Tampa Bay was on offense at the outset of the play.My basic interpretation of his ruling was was also made the most sense to me. Since Tampa Bay was on offense at the beginning of the play, and Indy was on defense, that is how any rulings should be based.

If it is ruled based on change of possessions during a play, then this "expert" commish seems to indicate we would never have DEF TD's. Of course, that shouldn't be the case, basically implying that change of possessions during a play should not change the basics here...that Tampa Bay was on offense and Indy on D at the "snap" and anything after that should be rules accordingly.

Thankfully, I am only in two non-IDP leagues, and this issue did not affect any outcomes. I understand the inconsistency that both sides could see, especially when ruling the fumble recovery. Either way you call it, arguments can be made.

Not only do I rely on who has the ball at the snap for such decisions, but also common sense. McCardell's TD should not be ruled a DEF TD.

Of course, it's obvious this opinion is far from unanimous.

 

[kak]

A long time ago our league agreed that common sense dictates that the team that has the ball at the outset of any play is on offense and the other team is on defense. This does not change during the course of the play for any reason.Originally, we decided this to help clarify fake field goals (are they ST scores?, no because it's the offense on the field). Now we use this ruling for cases such as this.I really think the best way to rule this is as Joe recommended. TB started the play on offense, Indy on defense. Any rulings shuld begin and end on that premise.

I'm pretty schocked that more people can't see the logic in gringoloco's post.Stop thinking offensive/defensive, change of possesion, etc. The team that has the ball to start the play is the offense until that play is over. That allows for our "normal" defensive scores, while preventing the oddball "punter drops bad snap, but then scrambles and throws a TD."

 

[Val Rannous]

Well, I might as well put in my 2 cents worth. As commissioner of a league that has been playing since 1989, We already have rules that cover this. Trust me, it has come up before. Here is the way our constitution rules this situation:If a offensive player turns over the ball (either by fumble or interception), and then the defense then fumbles back to an offensive player who then scores (as was the case last night): There are 2 changes of possession, and the NFL considers the team to be on DEFENSE after a change of possession. Therefore, the team that started on defense (Indy) gets an interception, and return yardage points for the Indy D team. The team that goes on defense after the interception (Tampa) gets a Fumble recovery, return yardage, and a return TD for the Tampa D team. Since we do not use IDP's, McCardell gets no individual points.If an offensive player fumbles, and another offensive player picks up the ball and scores (such as in the Ravens game last week): there is no change of possession, and no points for picking up the fumble (only defenses get fumble recovery points). The player who picks up the ball scores a TD, but gets no yardage (since we score Rushing/Receiving yards, and this is Return yardage).Side notes: This also applies to Special teams: if an offensive player plays on special teams, then the special teams/defense gets the points for anything he does.James SpurnyComissioner, FFFL.

 

[Crocodile]

I'm a commissioner and this play determined the outcome of one of our games. To me, it's a no-brainer. The forcing of the fumble was clearly a defensive play for the Bucs. The direct result of that fumble (McCardell's TD run) was a defensive play in the same way that a Warren Sapp fumble return for a TD would be a defensive play. The Bucs DT gets the points. To rule any other way would present a rules-challenging can of worms that I, as commissioner, have no interest in opening.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

If Team B took possession and scored, it would clearly be a defensive touchdown as they started out as Team B (defense).

The point of the note is that "Team B" and "Defense" are not synonymous. "Team B" is the team that began the play without possession. The "Defense" is the team that, at any given time during the play, is not in possession. So Tampa Bay started out as Team A, then remained Team A. It also started out as Offense, but then becames Defense, but then became Offense again. So there's no sense in putting "defense" in parentheses after "Team B" the way you did -- they are not the same thing.

 

[smcindoe]

After the interception, according to NFL rules, the defense becomes the offense and vice versa. This is what causes the confusion. But if you really take that logic to its conclusion, it would stand to reason that there could never be a defensive TD.

This seems pretty clear: Bill is using "there could never be a defensive TD" argument to prove his point, that it doesn't make fantasy football sense to assume that the defense becomes the offense and vice versa.Where are people getting the idea that Bill thinks there should never be defensive TDs? Are they not reading what he wrote, or just willfully misrepresenting it because they don't agree with him?

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I don't believe that is what the rule says. I think it clearly states that Team A is on offense until the end of the down.

It does not say that Team A is on offense until the end of the down. It specifically says that Team A may start out on offense but end up on defense.

 

[Joe Bryant]

For you guys in our $15,000 contest, I'll also add this caveat. David Dodds is the commish of that contest. I'll back whatever decision he rules there 100%. I can definitely see both sides of the argument. I stated my side earlier and it's just my opinion. I'll let David have the final say on how the $15,000 contest is scored. I'm smart enough to know when good people are in charge of something and to let them run it while I get out of the way.J

 

[mardukes]

To me it is clear that the NFL is calling it a Defensive TD...just scroll down to McCardells name---4 TD's=3 Receiving + 1 Defensive

http://www.nfl.com/stats/leaders/NFL/TTDS/2003/regular

And if you go into his Game Log it shows the TD under the fumbles category. I think it's under Def on the page you mentioned just because it doesn't fit under Run or Reception. Basically it's just not consistent even on NFL.com.

Leave it to a guy who has to write "basically". This is simple, read the box score:Team Qtr Time Play Description (Extra Point) (Drive Info) Visitor Home

Buccaneers 1 9:52 K.McCardell 74 yd. pass from B.Johnson (M.Gramatica kick) (1-74, 0:14) 0 7

Buccaneers 1 4:55 K.McCardell 57 yd. fumble return (M.Gramatica kick) 0 14

This is officially scored as a fumble return not a recovery. Returns belong to the defense, recoveries the offense. There is no room for interpretation, postulation, rumination...

Now, if you want to score your league contrary to the OFFICIAL stats, be my guest, but keep it to yourself.

 

[mardukes]

It's a rushing TD for McCardell. INDI does not get an INT, or charged with a fumble. Them taking possession during a play is a mute point, because they didn't end with possession. The INT and fumble really never happened, from a scoring perspective.

Say Kurt Warner throws a 60 yard bomb to Torry Holt, and Holt makes the catch, runs 5 yards, and fumbles the ball away. What happens? Does Holt get credit for a 65 yard catch and penalized for the fumble? Nope. The catch is a mute point, because the end result was a turnover. The only scoring there is the fumble.

This is a similar scenario to what happened.

Wrong. Wrong. And Wrong.McCardell is not credited with any rushing yards, just a fumble recovery for a TD.

Indy is given credit for an interception and a fumble.

Holt would be given credit for a 65 yard reception and a fumble.

almost rightit's a fumble RETURN for a td

 

[Greg R]

So, his logic for not crediting the Bucs D with a TD is that no defense ever scores a TD since they are technically on offense. The implication is that he would never credit any defense with a TD since they were not on defense! We all know that that is not how our leagues work. So, my point is that his opinion adds nothing since we all credit defenses with TDs even though they were "technically" on offense when they came into possession of the ball.

No. His logic for not crediting the Bucs D with a TD is that the offense stays the offense regardless of what happens.What you keep referring to is his explanation why the opposing view, that the offense becomes the defense after a turnover, isn't consistent. He is pointing out that if you use the argument that the Bucs O turned into the Bucs D, then your same argument would apply to the Bucs D turning into the Bucs O on the Barber TD. He isn't advocating that is how it should be. He's saying that is where taking the stand that O becomes D takes you if you apply it consistently. So instead he says don't use that rule as the deciding factor. Get it now?

 

[tdoss]

Gotta agree with Mardukes...Return is defensiveHence, the reason the NFL's official stats have McCardell's scoring listed as 3 offensive TD's and 1 defensive TD for the year.When in doubt...go with how the NFL scores it.Defensive.

 

[mardukes]

Hi Folks,

First thing. This is an interpretation of how our Commish Guru, Bill Davies, sees this call. While you guys can argue amongst yourselves, I really have no desire to argue it. What people have asked us for is an opinion and this is what that is.

Here's what Bill had to say about it this morning:

Q: Was McCardell's TD a defensive touchdown?

A: No. The Tampa Bay Buccaneers began the play on offense. After the interception, according to NFL rules, the defense becomes the offense and vice versa. This is what causes the confusion. But if you really take that logic to its conclusion, it would stand to reason that there could never be a defensive TD. Additionally, let's take that interpretation and reapply it to when McCardell gained possession of the ball - he was back on offense again. There is no scenario where McCardell's TD can be credited to the Bucs defense.

Q: Why didn't McCardell's return yards on the fumble recovery show up as receiving yards.

A: Because they weren't receiving yards. They were return yards. We traditionally think of similar oddities as being like laterals, where one player receives receiving yardage, but no reception. That's not what happened here. It was a fumble recovery - plain and simple.

Q: Who gets credit for the TD?

A: That depends. This will sound very lawyerly, but it really does depend. As I mentioned before, there is no scenario where the Bucs defense get credit for a TD. McCardell may get credit for the TD, depending on how your rules are written. This is a fumble recovery, not a receiving TD. If your rules do not recognize fumble recoveries for TDs by offensive players, then no one gets credit for the TD. If they do, McCardell gets credit for the TD. This is going to lead to some ticked off McCardell owners.

Q: If our league does not reward for fumble recoveries for a TD, should McCardell still get credit?

A: Technically, no. Every league is tasked with handling it as they desire, but no. If your rules have overlooked this possibility, then you can correct next offseason but it is not a McCardell TD. Your league management system won't recognize it and your league shouldn't either.

Good luck!

The Commissioner

/////////////////

Joe's comment: I think the key phrase from Bill is this This is a fumble recovery, not a receiving TD. If your rules do not recognize fumble recoveries for TDs by offensive players, then no one gets credit for the TD. If they do, McCardell gets credit for the TD.

NFL.com http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20031006_IND@TB is very clear on this. It was a fumble recovery TD for McCardell of 57 fumble recovery yards. The only real issue as I see it is how your league is set up to handle fumble recoveries for TDs by offensive players. I can't help you with that. I know in all my local leagues, our offensive players do get credit for a fumble recovery TD. This happens quite a bit.

So in my bottom line opinion, this was a fumble recovery TD by McCardell playing on offense. It was not a defensive TD. The question really becomes how your league handles fumble recovery TDs by offensive players.

I understand CBS is possibly ruling this differently. That's fine. If you want to use CBS, use CBS. It honestly won't hurt our feelings one bit. As I said before, I honestly have no desire to argue this. If you think I'm wrong, that's fine. Use a different ruling. All we're doing here is providing our opinion and you can take that for what it's worth.

J

Wrong. It wasn't a fumble recovery for td it was a fumble RETURN which is a defensive score.How can you rule contrary to the NFL official scoring?

If your rules specifically prohibit dual credit for the player & the DE/ST (or DE specifically) then no TD for McCardell. Otherwise TD for each. If your rules distinguish one kind of TD vs another, you need to get some good rules.

 

[Gridiron Gorilla]

After the interception, Tampa Bay began defending their endzone. While defending their endzone, they caused a turnover and returned it for a TD.

 

[Goose]

FLM is our stats service. Here is our league's current feeling on the play.

If Bledsoe fumbled and Henry recovered and ran it in for a score, FLM would give Henry the TD (no yardage) and that would be it.

FLM does not have "fumble recovery TD by QB, RB, WR, TE, K" as a valid scoring category but have awarded it in the past as a TD for the offensive player.

Since the fumble is scored by the NFL as miscellaneous which removes it from the D they have treated it as if McCardell recovered a fumble while on offense.

Seems reasonable, logical and consistant.

If they change their mind, we'll change ours. Basicly, we are awaiting any possible change to the interpretation of miscellaneous by FLM.Case closed.

 

[shmagu]

If we are to use the NFL stats for every other scoring issue, then why wouldn't we use it in this instance?Seems like a fairly simple "issue" to me.

 

[Topes]

FLM is our stats service. Here is our league's current feeling on the play.

If Bledsoe fumbled and Henry recovered and ran it in for a score, FLM would give Henry the TD (no yardage) and that would be it.

FLM does not have "fumble recovery TD by QB, RB, WR, TE, K" as a valid scoring category but have awarded it in the past as a TD for the offensive player.

Since the fumble is scored by the NFL as miscellaneous which removes it from the D they have treated it as if McCardell recovered a fumble while on offense.

Seems reasonable, logical and consistant.

If they change their mind, we'll change ours. Basicly, we are awaiting any possible change to the interpretation of miscellaneous by FLM.Case closed.

Is that you're league's feeling or FLM's feeling. You state that it is your league's feeling, but then the quotation seems to be semi-official.For the record, this is a much bigger issue currently at the FLM site.

 

[mardukes]

FLM is our stats service. Here is our league's current feeling on the play.

If Bledsoe fumbled and Henry recovered and ran it in for a score, FLM would give Henry the TD (no yardage) and that would be it.

FLM does not have "fumble recovery TD by QB, RB, WR, TE, K" as a valid scoring category but have awarded it in the past as a TD for the offensive player.

Since the fumble is scored by the NFL as miscellaneous which removes it from the D they have treated it as if McCardell recovered a fumble while on offense.

Seems reasonable, logical and consistant.

If they change their mind, we'll change ours. Basicly, we are awaiting any possible change to the interpretation of miscellaneous by FLM.Case closed.

Do you mean that category of "Misc" under the heading of "Final Defensive Statistics"?Defensive touchdown--Case Closed.

 

[tdoss]

FLM is our stats service. Here is our league's current feeling on the play.

If Bledsoe fumbled and Henry recovered and ran it in for a score, FLM would give Henry the TD (no yardage) and that would be it.

FLM does not have "fumble recovery TD by QB, RB, WR, TE, K" as a valid scoring category but have awarded it in the past as a TD for the offensive player.

Since the fumble is scored by the NFL as miscellaneous which removes it from the D they have treated it as if McCardell recovered a fumble while on offense.

Seems reasonable, logical and consistant.

If they change their mind, we'll change ours. Basicly, we are awaiting any possible change to the interpretation of miscellaneous by FLM.Case closed.

But that's simply not true...the NFL ruled McCardell's TD as Fumble Return...and if you look at his stats on NFL.com...you'll clearly see 3 Receiving Offensive TD's and 1 Defensive TD.NFL.com ruled it as a "Defensive TD"...not miscellaneous...