What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Week 5 Stat Correction Thread [Changes Released] (1 Viewer)

Phenix

Footballguy
What do you have and what have you noticed.

I believe a 5 yard pass from Manning to Decker could be changed to a run though not sure.

Chiefs may have 1 sack taken from them as Tennessee/Fitzpatrick may have ended up over the line of scrimmage at the GL in that GL stand.

Just what I noticed, thoughts?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
you are freaking me out. Chiefs lose a sack, and my Win this week turns into a Loss.
Also in KC/TEN game:

1st Quarter

(11:52) (Punt formation) 2-D.Colquitt punts 40 yards to TEN 22, Center-43-T.Gafford. 17-D.Williams MUFFS catch, touched at TEN 22, RECOVERED by KC-31-M.Cooper at TEN -2. TOUCHDOWN.

Obviously scoring in different leagues is different, but I believe that muffed punts are not usually credited to the defense as a defensive fumble recovery. The stat services are currently listing it as such. I'm not positive, but I think this is one that might be tweaked after the pencil pushers have their way with it.

 
No one has asked in here yet, but someone in my league asked last night about the fumble where Julio scooped up and gained yardage.

I saw a tweet from @yahoofantasy that specifically said there are no points for that, if anyone is wondering.

 
There was an early play in MNF, 1st Quarter I believe, where the Falcons broke up a play in the backfield. Geno Smith scrambled toward the sideline but was tackled behind the LOS. It wasn't immediately apparent to me if it was a designed run or pass. The official scorer immediately noted it as a sack, either the first or second of the night for the Falcons (can't remember). It looked, to me, to be the kind of play which I would not be surprised to see not count as a sack upon later review, but, it could just as easily remain as such.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top