Romo's fumble

[Big Ernie McCracken]

I'm sure they lose plenty. What does that have to do with giving a player a net gain of points worth half as much as most leagues reward for throwing a TD for something that is not as crazy rare as you guys seem to be saying it is.

 

 

The more I read this thread, the more I realize just how big of a dewsh detlef really is

Edited September 18, 2008 by Big Ernie McCracken

[Chief Dick]

The more I read this thread, the more I realize just how big of a dewsh detlef really is

 

Makes you two look like Thelma and Louise.

[Azazello1313]

The more I read this thread, the more I realize just how big of a dewsh detlef really is

 

detlef is a giant dewsh, and you are a hugh, smelly, yeast-infected, not-so-fresh-feeling bagina

[Azazello1313]

Another QB takes a snap, drops it on the ground, recovers it, and then gets creamed for a 10 yard loss. That earns you a net 2 pts in hookandladders scoring.

 

dude, they need to bring back charlie ward. he could just dribble the ball down the field and earn you like 200 points

[detlef]

i think you like arguing more than you like football. i don't know what your basis is for saying i don't my stuff. your still playing team defense like a high-school kid. i doubt very seriously that you know more about football than me. i don't have all day to go back-and-forth with you today.(it really is like talking to a wall) i have to take my children to practice now...-but if your bound and determine to argue with me over a rule, in a league your not even in ,and know nothing about, i will try to make an effort to respond to your nonsense later.

Listen dude, I simply started off by saying you should reexamine a rule that allows QBs to profit from dropping the ball and picking it up. Then you started in with the "you don't get it" bit and "maybe you should stick to wine". That's the thing though, I do get it. I get things. I'm not always right, but it's not because I don't get things. I understand what you are trying to accomplish with your rule. However, I also understand that you've created an unfortunate and unexpected side effect of rewarding QBs or other players for doing something that likely ends whatever chance a play had of succeeding.

 

I also understand that you are under the impression that QBs landing on their own fumbles are freak occurances that are nowhere near common enough to bother with tweaking a rule over. Was it you or keggerz that said that way more fumbles are recovered by the defense?

 

Well, Big Country pointed out that's not the case. The funny thing is, I think you took his reply to mean that he had your back on this one but I'm afraid that if you read it again, you'd find that is not the case. That he even qualified his findings with the fact that QBs are not responsible for all the saved recoveries was something to say that, while his findings illustrate that your assumptions are mostly wrong, it's not as bad as his numbers would make it seem.

 

None the less, once again. No single defensive player recovered more than 4 fumbles and most didn't even recover 3. Here's a short list of QBs who had at least 3 last year:

 

Kitna 7

Romo 5

Rivers 4

Rothlesburg 4

E Manning 4

Favre 4

Campbell 4

P Manning 3

Hasselbeck 3

J Cutler 3

 

As I imagined, QBs are very, very well represented on the overall leader board for fumble recoveries. Not exactly the freak abberation you claim it to be after all.

 

Now, first off, there's no way to say that each and every one of those recoveries was picking up their own miscue but you'd have to be a contrarian shmuck like keggerz to base a rebuttal on that. We all watch the game enough to know that it's safe to say the lion's share of those recoveries are bailing themselves out. Now, who knows how many of those resulted in a completely lost play. However, once again, the eyeball test tells us that, considering the timing needed to run a play, it is typically not a good thing.

 

Now, in fairness, each of those QBs had enough fumbles so that, as a net for the season, they did not end up on the plus side considering your -2/+4 deal. However, in many cases, they ended up with a net zero lost for fumbles on the season considering that they got net love for doing nothing more than screwing up and then at least salvaging possession. Take Kitna for instance. He put the ball on the ground 17 times. That's 17 plays that either ended up as a turn over or likely a loss. Yet, by virtue of personally bailing himself out 7 of those times, he nearly cleaned the slate.

 

So yes, I love to argue. Especially when someone incapable of making a decent point claims I'm in above my head. Especially when someone says "not even close" about a claim of mine, then I show him that I was actually spot on, and then they resort to stealing some other idiot's inane pap about wine.

 

You're up

[hooknladder]

Listen dude, I simply started off by saying you should reexamine a rule that allows QBs to profit from dropping the ball and picking it up. Then you started in with the "you don't get it" bit and "maybe you should stick to wine". That's the thing though, I do get it. I get things. I'm not always right, but it's not because I don't get things. I understand what you are trying to accomplish with your rule. However, I also understand that you've created an unfortunate and unexpected side effect of rewarding QBs or other players for doing something that likely ends whatever chance a play had of succeeding.

 

I also understand that you are under the impression that QBs landing on their own fumbles are freak occurances that are nowhere near common enough to bother with tweaking a rule over. Was it you or keggerz that said that way more fumbles are recovered by the defense?

 

Well, Big Country pointed out that's not the case. The funny thing is, I think you took his reply to mean that he had your back on this one but I'm afraid that if you read it again, you'd find that is not the case. That he even qualified his findings with the fact that QBs are not responsible for all the saved recoveries was something to say that, while his findings illustrate that your assumptions are mostly wrong, it's not as bad as his numbers would make it seem.

 

None the less, once again. No single defensive player recovered more than 4 fumbles and most didn't even recover 3. Here's a short list of QBs who had at least 3 last year:

 

Kitna 7

Romo 5

Rivers 4

Rothlesburg 4

E Manning 4

Favre 4

Campbell 4

P Manning 3

Hasselbeck 3

J Cutler 3

 

As I imagined, QBs are very, very well represented on the overall leader board for fumble recoveries. Not exactly the freak abberation you claim it to be after all.

 

Now, first off, there's no way to say that each and every one of those recoveries was picking up their own miscue but you'd have to be a contrarian shmuck like keggerz to base a rebuttal on that. We all watch the game enough to know that it's safe to say the lion's share of those recoveries are bailing themselves out. Now, who knows how many of those resulted in a completely lost play. However, once again, the eyeball test tells us that, considering the timing needed to run a play, it is typically not a good thing.

 

Now, in fairness, each of those QBs had enough fumbles so that, as a net for the season, they did not end up on the plus side considering your -2/+4 deal. However, in many cases, they ended up with a net zero lost for fumbles on the season considering that they got net love for doing nothing more than screwing up and then at least salvaging possession. Take Kitna for instance. He put the ball on the ground 17 times. That's 17 plays that either ended up as a turn over or likely a loss. Yet, by virtue of personally bailing himself out 7 of those times, he nearly cleaned the slate.

 

So yes, I love to argue. Especially when someone incapable of making a decent point claims I'm in above my head. Especially when someone says "not even close" about a claim of mine, then I show him that I was actually spot on, and then they resort to stealing some other idiot's inane pap about wine.

 

You're up

 

let me try and make this simple enough for you to understand. recovering a fumble, whether it's your own, or someone else's, is a good thing, and ought to be rewarded.

[Big Ernie McCracken]

Listen dude, I simply started off by saying you should reexamine a rule that allows QBs to profit from dropping the ball and picking it up. Then you started in with the "you don't get it" bit and "maybe you should stick to wine". That's the thing though, I do get it. I get things. I'm not always right, but it's not because I don't get things. I understand what you are trying to accomplish with your rule. However, I also understand that you've created an unfortunate and unexpected side effect of rewarding QBs or other players for doing something that likely ends whatever chance a play had of succeeding.

 

I also understand that you are under the impression that QBs landing on their own fumbles are freak occurances that are nowhere near common enough to bother with tweaking a rule over. Was it you or keggerz that said that way more fumbles are recovered by the defense?

 

Well, Big Country pointed out that's not the case. The funny thing is, I think you took his reply to mean that he had your back on this one but I'm afraid that if you read it again, you'd find that is not the case. That he even qualified his findings with the fact that QBs are not responsible for all the saved recoveries was something to say that, while his findings illustrate that your assumptions are mostly wrong, it's not as bad as his numbers would make it seem.

 

None the less, once again. No single defensive player recovered more than 4 fumbles and most didn't even recover 3. Here's a short list of QBs who had at least 3 last year:

 

Kitna 7

Romo 5

Rivers 4

Rothlesburg 4

E Manning 4

Favre 4

Campbell 4

P Manning 3

Hasselbeck 3

J Cutler 3

 

As I imagined, QBs are very, very well represented on the overall leader board for fumble recoveries. Not exactly the freak abberation you claim it to be after all.

 

Now, first off, there's no way to say that each and every one of those recoveries was picking up their own miscue but you'd have to be a contrarian shmuck like keggerz to base a rebuttal on that. We all watch the game enough to know that it's safe to say the lion's share of those recoveries are bailing themselves out. Now, who knows how many of those resulted in a completely lost play. However, once again, the eyeball test tells us that, considering the timing needed to run a play, it is typically not a good thing.

 

Now, in fairness, each of those QBs had enough fumbles so that, as a net for the season, they did not end up on the plus side considering your -2/+4 deal. However, in many cases, they ended up with a net zero lost for fumbles on the season considering that they got net love for doing nothing more than screwing up and then at least salvaging possession. Take Kitna for instance. He put the ball on the ground 17 times. That's 17 plays that either ended up as a turn over or likely a loss. Yet, by virtue of personally bailing himself out 7 of those times, he nearly cleaned the slate.

 

So yes, I love to argue. Especially when someone incapable of making a decent point claims I'm in above my head. Especially when someone says "not even close" about a claim of mine, then I show him that I was actually spot on, and then they resort to stealing some other idiot's inane pap about wine.

 

You're up

 

 

 

For a guy who plays in leagues that don't use IDP, you seem awfully worried about the rules of hook and ladder's league. I suggest you graduate to a more advanced scoring system before criticizing others.

[detlef]

let me try and make this simple enough for you to understand. recovering a fumble, whether it's your own, or someone else's, is a good thing, and ought to be rewarded.

Yes, it is better to recover a fumble than not to. This much is certainly clear and exactly why in an IDP all players should get points for recovering fumbles. However it is also better not have fumbled to begin with rather than to fumble and recover your own, which is why you should not be rewarded for a net +2 for having done so.

 

Whatever, agree to disagree.

[Jrick35]

ok, a few questions for the originator of this topic.

 

1 - How can the value of one team gaining possession be greater than the loss suffered by a team that lost possession?

The pts lost for a lost fumble has to be = to the pts gained for a fumble recovery

The pts lost for an int thrown by a player has to be = to the pts gained for catching an INT

And the pts lost & gained for fumbles have to be = to the pts gained & lost for Int's.

My basis for this is that each results in the same exact thing. One team loses possession and another team gains possession

 

2 - If your reasoning for deducting pts from a player for fumbling the ball, even if the same team recovers the fumble so possession is never lost, is because fumbling is bad, do you also deduct pts for a RB if he first runs backwards before then turning around and gaining yards all on the same play? Because by your logic, losing yards is bad, even if you end up gaining yards on the same play.

 

3 - If you answered yes to question #2, does the RB lose less pts for each yard he runs backwards than he gains per yard running forward?

For instance. Let's say a RB gets .1 pts per yard gained. Based on this a 10 yard gain would equal 1 pt. Unless of course we deduct from said runner .05 pts for each yard ran backwards. Now if the same RB runs backwards 5 yards and then reverses direction and ends up gaining 10 yards from the original line of scrimmage his net pts for that run would be 7.25 because he would have lost .25 for going backward for 5 yds.

 

Just wondering.

[whomper]

I can see detlefs point. It would be tough though not to award the guy who recovered his own fumble as opposed to a guy that recovered someone elses. I dont think a website would have scoring set up that way. As far as recovering your own does your league deduct point for fumbling ? If it does then I gues it would be a wash or close to it if Romo recvered his own. I see dets point about getting rewraded for something bad that you did but sometimes it happens in fantasy sports. Like in baseball. Sometimes you closer comes in and blows a save but ends up getting the win. He didnt do his job but points went his way. I havent read this whole thread so sorry if my points were touched on already

[detlef]

I can see detlefs point. It would be tough though not to award the guy who recovered his own fumble as opposed to a guy that recovered someone elses. I dont think a website would have scoring set up that way. As far as recovering your own does your league deduct point for fumbling ? If it does then I gues it would be a wash or close to it if Romo recvered his own. I see dets point about getting rewraded for something bad that you did but sometimes it happens in fantasy sports. Like in baseball. Sometimes you closer comes in and blows a save but ends up getting the win. He didnt do his job but points went his way. I havent read this whole thread so sorry if my points were touched on already

Well, it seems like you could both penalize the specific act of fumbling and reward the specific act of recovering a fumble without rewarding the combined act of fumbling and recovering one's own fumble by simply making the two amounts equal. Like -2 for one and +2 for another rather than making it -2 and +4 as hookandladder does. Problem solved quite simply.

 

And, considering that the numbers seem to support that QBs seem to commit the act of fumble/recover more than any single IDP recovers fumbles, it hardly seems like something that should just be brushed under the rug as an unfortunate and uncommon side effect to the scoring system.

Edited September 18, 2008 by detlef

[Jrick35]

I can see detlefs point. It would be tough though not to award the guy who recovered his own fumble as opposed to a guy that recovered someone elses. I dont think a website would have scoring set up that way. As far as recovering your own does your league deduct point for fumbling ? If it does then I gues it would be a wash or close to it if Romo recvered his own. I see dets point about getting rewraded for something bad that you did but sometimes it happens in fantasy sports. Like in baseball. Sometimes you closer comes in and blows a save but ends up getting the win. He didnt do his job but points went his way. I havent read this whole thread so sorry if my points were touched on already

 

The bone of contention here is that league that the guy who started this topic belongs to deducts 2 points for fumbling but awards 4 points for recovering a fumble, even if it is your own fumble.

 

So a RB fumbles the ball (-2) and it bounces back into his hands (+4) and he is tackled for no gain (0). In this guys League that RB just gained 2 points.

 

That simply does not make sense.

Edited September 18, 2008 by Jrick35

[Azazello1313]

The bone of contention here is that league that the guy who started this topic belongs to deducts 2 points for fumbling but awards 4 points for recovering a fumble, even if it is your own fumble.

 

So a RB fumbles the ball (-2) and it bounces back into his hands (+4) and he is tackled for no gain (0). In this guys League that RB just gained 2 points.

 

That simply does not make sense.

 

would you please submit your application to detlef to be his editor?

[whomper]

The bone of contention here is that his league deducts 2 points for fumbling but awards 4 points for recovering a fumble, even if it is your own fumble.

 

So a RB fumbles the ball (-2) and it bounces back into his hands (+4) and he is tackled for no gain (0). In this guys keague that RB just gained 2 points.

 

That simply does not make sense

 

 

I agree. I think it should be equal points.

 

 

 

dude, they need to bring back charlie ward. he could just dribble the ball down the field and earn you like 200 points

 

Until I read JRicks post above I didnt understand this post. Now that I do understand

[detlef]

would you please submit your application to detlef to be his editor?

Really, these were my first two posts on the subject. What's so hard to figure out about that?

 

I would be more concerned about the fact that my league rewards a dude for dropping the ball and picking it up than I would about how a strange play like this should be scored.

 

 

I don't know. One very simple thing would be to make it -2/+2 so it would be a net zero situation when you got your own fumble?

[Big Country]

It would be tough though not to award the guy who recovered his own fumble as opposed to a guy that recovered someone elses. I dont think a website would have scoring set up that way.

 

The closest scoring rule that most sites have (well, definitely MFL) that I am aware of is the rule that only scores for fumble recoveries from your opponent. In this case though, if a QB fumbles, he would get no points for recovering it, but neither would any other offensive player, like say the tailback diving on the ball or something similar.

[hooknladder]

ok here it is. the site is MFL, and it certainly scores per our league rules. this is not a head-to-head legue, it's a total points league,IDP, one OFF and one DEF keeper with limited free-agent picks, and no add/drop...winner take all. the scoring does not have to be equal because your not head-to- head. i seriously doubt Detlef has ever been in a league like this. it's very challenging and everyone in it really knows their stuff.

Detlef has no concept of a league like this one, so he really ought to keep his opinions to himself.(of which he is incapable) i tried to be civil and tell him he was'nt getting it but he just can't let it go. i wonder if Detlefs league has add/drop? that's real baby stuff. let me get it straight. -so your rewarding teams that do a bad thing by drafting a crappy player, and then you let them right out of it by grabbing another instead. over and over. or if a player gets hurt. some players are added and dropped by several teams...not exactly authentic NFL...

 

it just does'nt get any simpler -recovering a fumble, be it your own, or someone else's, is a good thing, and ought be rewarded.

Edited September 18, 2008 by hooknladder

[keggerz]

Was it you or keggerz that said that way more fumbles are recovered by the defense?

It was me and I was doing like you do....ASSUMING that was the case....and there was a reason for that.....I ALWAYS back up

my stances with stats...I am sure there are many that would attest to that...but I did that because that is all you were doing ASSUMING

without backing it up with anything. But I am glad that you are at least making an attempt now to use stats to help your argument.

 

Now, first off, there's no way to say that each and every one of those recoveries was picking up their own miscue but you'd have to be a contrarian shmuck like keggerz to base a rebuttal on that. We all watch the game enough to know that it's safe to say the lion's share of those recoveries are bailing themselves out.

stay classy and while you believe those things to be true it really does help an argument when someone actually prooves it instead of saying "trust me I blah blah blah"

 

ok, a few questions for the originator of this topic.

 

1 - How can the value of one team gaining possession be greater than the loss suffered by a team that lost possession?

The pts lost for a lost fumble has to be = to the pts gained for a fumble recovery

The pts lost for an int thrown by a player has to be = to the pts gained for catching an INT

And the pts lost & gained for fumbles have to be = to the pts gained & lost for Int's.

My basis for this is that each results in the same exact thing. One team loses possession and another team gains possession

 

2 - If your reasoning for deducting pts from a player for fumbling the ball, even if the same team recovers the fumble so possession is never lost, is because fumbling is bad, do you also deduct pts for a RB if he first runs backwards before then turning around and gaining yards all on the same play? Because by your logic, losing yards is bad, even if you end up gaining yards on the same play.

 

3 - If you answered yes to question #2, does the RB lose less pts for each yard he runs backwards than he gains per yard running forward?

For instance. Let's say a RB gets .1 pts per yard gained. Based on this a 10 yard gain would equal 1 pt. Unless of course we deduct from said runner .05 pts for each yard ran backwards. Now if the same RB runs backwards 5 yards and then reverses direction and ends up gaining 10 yards from the original line of scrimmage his net pts for that run would be 7.25 because he would have lost .25 for going backward for 5 yds.

 

Just wondering.

with regards to your points:

 

1. I will give you this to chew on QBs throw in the neighbor hood of say 15-20is INTs....defensive player intercepting those passes is much rarer and is a reason to reward it with greater points. Also, you are out of line any time you tell someone that their rules HAVE to be a certain way. There is not great FF scoring reference manual that is a MUST follow for leagues. So don't try and tell someone how they HAVE to have their rules. I may or may not like Hooks rule I wont judge his league based on it....I can easily see why you would want to award points for a fumble that isnt from an opponent.

 

2. Difference is that a RB hasn't lost yardage until the play is over and he is down. This really was a horrible attempt at an example.

 

3. Like I said above what a horrible horrible example.

 

Now I am sure that you watch plenty of football....Lets use this example....

 

QB throws an INT....the CB is running it back and he fumbles the ball at the opponents 20 yard line but a LB was trailing the play and the WR that knocked the ball out of the CBs hand is in a scuffle to come up with the ball...so what if

 

1. The LB comes up with the fumble from the pile. Should he not get points because it was a fumble from his own team?

 

Next example:

 

Running back is trying to get to the edge and a LB causes him to fumble the ball....

 

1. There is a mad scramble and a WR comes up with the ball. Should he not get points because it was a fumble from his own team?

 

Now in each of the above examples if the person that fumbled the ball recovers their own miscue should they not be granted the same points as their teammate would have gotten?

 

Now if you are going to say but blah blah blah just stop.....I get it some of you are being close minded to how a guys scoring system is in another leauge....all along my point has been that you can just say his scoring system is flawed because a QB can turn a bad play into positive points.

[Big Country]

Also, you are out of line any time you tell someone that their rules HAVE to be a certain way. There is not great FF scoring reference manual that is a MUST follow for leagues. So don't try and tell someone how they HAVE to have their rules.

 

keg -

 

I pulled this out because i was going to post something very similar, not just in reference to detlef or jrick, but also to hooknladder with several of the comments he has made touting the superiority of his league.

 

No league is perfect. No scoring system, setup, strucutre, etc. is right or better than another. We all have our preferences. Different folks want more involved setups, others prefer the enjoyment aspect, etc.

 

No need to go further, I think that point is clear.

[keggerz]

keg -

 

I pulled this out because i was going to post something very similar, not just in reference to detlef or jrick, but also to hooknladder with several of the comments he has made touting the superiority of his league.

 

No league is perfect. No scoring system, setup, strucutre, etc. is right or better than another. We all have our preferences. Different folks want more involved setups, others prefer the enjoyment aspect, etc.

 

No need to go further, I think that point is clear.

agreed and do you feel that ....i think the wall is saying something, again

[Jrick35]

It was me and I was doing like you do....ASSUMING that was the case....and there was a reason for that.....I ALWAYS back up

my stances with stats...I am sure there are many that would attest to that...but I did that because that is all you were doing ASSUMING

without backing it up with anything. But I am glad that you are at least making an attempt now to use stats to help your argument.

 

 

stay classy and while you believe those things to be true it really does help an argument when someone actually prooves it instead of saying "trust me I blah blah blah"

 

 

with regards to your points:

 

1. I will give you this to chew on QBs throw in the neighbor hood of say 15-20is INTs....defensive player intercepting those passes is much rarer and is a reason to reward it with greater points. Also, you are out of line any time you tell someone that their rules HAVE to be a certain way. There is not great FF scoring reference manual that is a MUST follow for leagues. So don't try and tell someone how they HAVE to have their rules. I may or may not like Hooks rule I wont judge his league based on it....I can easily see why you would want to award points for a fumble that isnt from an opponent.

 

2. Difference is that a RB hasn't lost yardage until the play is over and he is down. This really was a horrible attempt at an example.

 

3. Like I said above what a horrible horrible example.

 

Now I am sure that you watch plenty of football....Lets use this example....

 

QB throws an INT....the CB is running it back and he fumbles the ball at the opponents 20 yard line but a LB was trailing the play and the WR that knocked the ball out of the CBs hand is in a scuffle to come up with the ball...so what if

 

1. The LB comes up with the fumble from the pile. Should he not get points because it was a fumble from his own team?

 

Next example:

 

Running back is trying to get to the edge and a LB causes him to fumble the ball....

 

1. There is a mad scramble and a WR comes up with the ball. Should he not get points because it was a fumble from his own team?

 

Now in each of the above examples if the person that fumbled the ball recovers their own miscue should they not be granted the same points as their teammate would have gotten?

 

Now if you are going to say but blah blah blah just stop.....I get it some of you are being close minded to how a guys scoring system is in another leauge....all along my point has been that you can just say his scoring system is flawed because a QB can turn a bad play into positive points.

 

To answer your question, in my opinion, recovering a fumble should only be awarded pts if said recovery results in a change of possession.

 

As for me telling someone how their rules should be that is my bad in the way I worded my post. I was

stating how I feel it has to be. I should have included an 'IMO' somewhere.

 

But!! How is my example horrible?

 

What has changed about the game if the team that fumbles the ball recovers the ball? At the very most, the only thing that has changed is the line of scrimmage.

 

What has changed about the game if a runner, runs backward prior to gaining yards? At the very most, the only thing that has changed is the line of scrimmage.

 

They have the same exact effect on the game. So why not score them the same way? And IMHO, the wya they should be scored is by not including those scenarios in your scoring in the first place.

[keggerz]

To answer your question, in my opinion, recovering a fumble should only be awarded pts if said recovery results in a change of possession.

 

As for me telling someone how their rules should be that is my bad in the way I worded my post. I was

stating how I feel it has to be. I should have included an 'IMO' somewhere.

 

But!! How is my example horrible?

 

What has changed about the game if the team that fumbles the ball recovers the ball? At the very most, the only thing that has changed is the line of scrimmage.

 

What has changed about the game if a runner, runs backward prior to gaining yards? At the very most, the only thing that has changed is the line of scrimmage.

 

They have the same exact effect on the game. So why not score them the same way? And IMHO, the wya they should be scored is by not including those scenarios in your scoring in the first place.

as an example....lets use the Romo fumble and tweak the results some:

 

Romo fumbles in the EZ after dropping back from say the 10 yard line....the fumble is in the EZ and if the D Team recovers it that is 7 for them but if romo recovers it in the EZ it is a safety good for 2 points for the D team....so yeah he fumbled it but his recovery saved his team 5 points....now of course the Romo fumble was different but that is an example of how a bad fumble can be worse so there is something positive about him recovering his own fumble.

 

Your example is just bad because it doesnt matter what happens behind the line of scrimmage if there is no fumble or tackle.....most leagues I am aware of if a RB is tackled for a loss he does indeed lose points.

 

oh and with regards to this:

What has changed about the game if the team that fumbles the ball recovers the ball? At the very most, the only thing that has changed is the line of scrimmage.

that recovery keeps them from losing possession and that is a big thing and I can see why some would say it is worth more then just a fumble since a fumble doesnt always equate to a lost possession...while a recovery does mean that you either kept possession(very positive) or gained possession(for a D play and again a very positive things for a team)

Edited September 18, 2008 by keggerz

[alexgaddis]

Good lord, let this thread die!!!

[Big Ernie McCracken]

Yes, it is better to recover a fumble than not to. This much is certainly clear and exactly why in an IDP all players should get points for recovering fumbles. However it is also better not have fumbled to begin with rather than to fumble and recover your own, which is why you should not be rewarded for a net +2 for having done so.

 

Whatever, agree to disagree.

 

 

Let's all adjust our league scoring so that it's detlef friendly

[hooknladder]

Good lord, let this thread die!!!

 

it can't die if you add to it