Scoring question

[Cunning Runt]

As far as I know, sacks count against the total passing yardage numbers, not rushing numbers for QBs.

 

I don't think that's right.

 

It's always been my understanding that a sack DOES count against rushing yardage, both for the QB individually and the team total.

[TheShiznit]

I don't think that's right.

 

It's always been my understanding that a sack DOES count against rushing yardage, both for the QB individually and the team total.

 

I believe sacks count against passing numbers since they happen when the quarterback is attempting to make a pass.

[Gunther]

As far as I know, sacks count against the total passing yardage numbers, not rushing numbers for QBs.

Correct, as can be seen in box scores. The sack yardage is handled within the team's passing stats, but not against the individual's stats.

[Easy n Dirty]

Correct, as can be seen in box scores. The sack yardage is handled within the team's passing stats, but not against the individual's stats.

 

That's my understanding also - it's just that in reviewing the play-by-play for the Broncos/Raiders game, they had an unusual notation where Cutler was sacked, but for zero yards. And on top of that, I didn't see a second rushing attempt for Cutler in the play-by-play, just the one kneeldown for -2 yards (box score showed 2 rushing attempts for -2 yards). So I'm concluding that a "sack" for zero yards is counted as a rushing attempt for zero yards? Guess I culd go back and count sacks.

[Big John]

That's my understanding also - it's just that in reviewing the play-by-play for the Broncos/Raiders game, they had an unusual notation where Cutler was sacked, but for zero yards. And on top of that, I didn't see a second rushing attempt for Cutler in the play-by-play, just the one kneeldown for -2 yards (box score showed 2 rushing attempts for -2 yards). So I'm concluding that a "sack" for zero yards is counted as a rushing attempt for zero yards? Guess I culd go back and count sacks.

In the NFL, a sack goes against the team's passing yards, but not against the QB's stats. A zero-yard sack is the same way. Once yardage is gained by the QB scrambling, it is considered a rushing play and no sack.

 

In college FB, a sack is considered a rushing play and negative rushing yards go against the QB and the team there.

[keggerz]

In the NFL, a sack goes against the team's passing yards, but not against the QB's stats. A zero-yard sack is the same way. Once yardage is gained by the QB scrambling, it is considered a rushing play and no sack.

 

In college FB, a sack is considered a rushing play and negative rushing yards go against the QB and the team there.

i think if they are tackled behind the LOS it still would be a sack but I am not 100% sure

[Big John]

i think if they are tackled behind the LOS it still would be a sack but I am not 100% sure

correct.

[McBoog]

You don't have a case unless your published scoring rules state:

 

1) QBs get credit for rushing yards

2) Players (including QBs) are penalized for negative yardage

 

Unless your rules specifically state this you have no case. Would a RB that ended up with negative yardage passing or receiving be penalized?

 

That is why we use combined rushing recieving yardage. But it still does not address their problem of negative yardage. What do the rules say. If they don't say anything, they have to be changed for NEXT YEAR!

 

BTW, I thought that with decimal scoring we would have no ties either. Had FOUR last year If you are going to tie with this type of scoring, I call it an act of God and say let it be!

[The Monarch]

If you really don't like having ties what we do in my leagues is award a 'Home Field Advantage' point to the home team in the case of a tie. I really like this system because it actually gives meaning to being away or at home, which is generally meaningless in FF.

[Grits and Shins]

If you really don't like having ties what we do in my leagues is award a 'Home Field Advantage' point to the home team in the case of a tie. I really like this system because it actually gives meaning to being away or at home, which is generally meaningless in FF.

 

HFA sucks in fantasy football. It is a purely arbitrary method of giving one team an advantage over another. There is no reason one team who scored just as many points as the other should be declared the loser based on some artifical declaration that the other team is the "home team".

 

If my team scores 115 points with the starters I selected from the players I managed to draft and acquire via free agency / trades and your team scores 115 points via the starters you selected from the players you managed to draft and acquire via free agency why should EITHER team be decalred a winner or loser (unless of course it is an elimination game). To say that this week you win because my fantasy team is the away team but had it been the week before I would have won because my team was the home team .... BOGUS.

[McBoog]

HFA sucks in fantasy football. It is a purely arbitrary method of giving one team an advantage over another. There is no reason one team who scored just as many points as the other should be declared the loser based on some artifical declaration that the other team is the "home team".

 

If my team scores 115 points with the starters I selected from the players I managed to draft and acquire via free agency / trades and your team scores 115 points via the starters you selected from the players you managed to draft and acquire via free agency why should EITHER team be decalred a winner or loser (unless of course it is an elimination game). To say that this week you win because my fantasy team is the away team but had it been the week before I would have won because my team was the home team .... BOGUS.

 

+1