i_am_the_swammi Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 Why is a kneel-down considered a rushing attempt, but a sack is not? I have wondered this before. Anyone? If a QB scrambles out of bounds behind the line of scrimmage trying to avoid a sack, he is credited with a rushing attempt....but if he is actually sacked, he is not credited with a rushing attempt. I would think a kneel-down would be the same as a sack, since there was no intent to rush the ball. Interesting, because that kneel-down that Plummer took last night at the end of the game was credited as a rushing attempt, and the -1 yard gave him 9 yards rushing for the night (rather than 10), costing a team in our league a win. He is furious with the rule interpretation, so I wanted some opinions here. Anyone have any ideas? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LegFuJohnson Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 If you run out of bounds to avoid a sack, I think it is considered a sack, and not a rushing attempt. But what should it be considered? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted September 27, 2005 Author Share Posted September 27, 2005 No idea...its just a curious loophole that considers a kneel-down a rushing attempt, but a sack is not. If a sack is not considered a pass attempt, or a rush attempt, what is it? Just a sack, right? Why isn't a kneel-down considered the same way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Sacrebleu Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 Why is a kneel-down considered a rushing attempt, but a sack is not? I have wondered this before. Anyone? If a QB scrambles out of bounds behind the line of scrimmage trying to avoid a sack, he is credited with a rushing attempt....but if he is actually sacked, he is not credited with a rushing attempt. I would think a kneel-down would be the same as a sack, since there was no intent to rush the ball. Interesting, because that kneel-down that Plummer took last night at the end of the game was credited as a rushing attempt, and the -1 yard gave him 9 yards rushing for the night (rather than 10), costing a team in our league a win. He is furious with the rule interpretation, so I wanted some opinions here. Anyone have any ideas? 1024445[/snapback] A kneel down is a rushing attempt albeit a pisspoor one, as you are acknowledging that you are making no attempt to throw the ball. You are stating that you are running, though you have decided to make that run a -1 yard run and wainting for someone to down you. Of course it could ba argued that you are attempting a pass, from your knee and waintg for someone to 'sack' you in a very delicate manner. Both could be argued, they went with the former. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vet Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 No idea...its just a curious loophole that considers a kneel-down a rushing attempt, but a sack is not. If a sack is not considered a pass attempt, or a rush attempt, what is it? Just a sack, right? Why isn't a kneel-down considered the same way? 1024466[/snapback] I guess because you can't credit the defense with a sack on a kneel-down since there is no attempt to pass the ball, and you have to account for the play somehow. I guess they consider it the same thing as if the team tried a QB sneak and got stuffed for no gain or a slight loss - that would be considered a rushing attempt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted September 27, 2005 Author Share Posted September 27, 2005 I guess because you can't credit the defense with a sack on a kneel-down since there is no attempt to pass the ball, and you have to account for the play somehow. I guess they consider it the same thing as if the team tried a QB sneak and got stuffed for no gain or a slight loss - that would be considered a rushing attempt. 1024478[/snapback] Good thoughts guys...I talked to my uncle, who refs high-school football and he offered the same thoughts we mentioned, but went further: He feels a kneel-down SHOULD be considered a sack, since the QB is the one with the ball. QBs turtle in the pocket all the time under a rush, and since a kneel-down is like "turtling", it should also be considered a sack. He never knew a kneel-down was considered a rushing attempt, and couldn't imagine thats how the NFL viewed it. His thought was simplist: if a QB is tackled/touched behind the line of scrimmage for a loss, it should be considered a sack...period. I kind of agree. Very strange indeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyBalata Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 No idea, but I love it. Went to bed last night with 12 minutes left in the game last night, my opponent had Plummer and we were tied. Woke up this morning to find out I won by .2 ! All due to the kneel down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmoore Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 (edited) we need to keep this one inside of our fantasy football community or else we look like a bunch of big :nerd:s ...nothing can be further from the truth I am sure. I assume they have to spot the ball where he knelt, so it's a rushing loss. Nobody from the other team forced him down (physically or otherwise), so it's not a sack. Just bad luck for you if it's your QB... Edited September 27, 2005 by cmoore Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Holliday Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 I see no reason it should be considered a sack. If they listed every kneel down a sack there would be no reason to even keep track of the stat as it would be meaningless . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 As per other posters, it is not a sack when there is no intent to pass the ball. On the other hand, it would be considered a sack if a RB goes wide, looks downfield and gets tackled, as he was looking to pass. This is sometims a judgment call, and teams have appealed whether a pass was intended for sack purposes, and some of them were changed on that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Sacrebleu Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 I think Doc nailed it. In the grand scheme of things (unless you are down by .02 points in FF) tagging a QB with -1 Rushing yards is not a big deal. But giving a sack to the Defense is a big deal stat wise. This also doesn't saddle the QB with another sack against. Since arguments can be made for sack or negative rushing equally, doing it this way doesn't skew the stats as bad as the other way. Football ain't baseball in the grand scheme of things in terms of statitstics, but a -1 rushing yard in the score box the next day reflects the play a lot better than a sack. Of course they could just have a category 'knee down' and avoid this debate altogether Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steeler Posted September 27, 2005 Share Posted September 27, 2005 He is furious with the rule interpretation1024445[/snapback] He is furious with the way the NFL has interpreted a kneel down since forever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.