+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 37
  1. #1

    Need an explanation please...

    Sorry if this has been brought up but I have a question...

    Why wasn't JPP's forced fumble of RGIII considered a sack?

    Honestly, I don't play fantasy football, I don't care about stats for the most part but I do take pride or satisfaction or what have you in knowing the Giants get after the QB and are among the leaders in sacks every year. Maybe its because I fell in love with seeing opposing QBs getting killed from the days of LT.

    If you watch the play... JPP is right on RGIII after he faked a hand-off to Morris and tries to make a move but JPP tackles him and forces the fumble but this isn't considered a sack?

    Why is this?

    Or was the early tackle of RGIII by JPP not considered a sack, where he first did the Gangnam dance celebration thing? I'm just confused how this is figured out.

    Stats wise the Giants are considered to have 3 sacks on the game... one each for Osi, Tuck, and JPP. I thought JPP should have had 2 sacks on the game.

    Can someone explain to me why he doesn't?


  2. #2
    All-Pro Drez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Because it was a running play and the scorekeepers correctly assigned it as such.

  3. #3
    RG3 was considered a runner, so it's a tackle for loss & a force fumble.
    "...two minute drill at the end of each quarter, Ya'know with the wind like this blowing mooch and marshall into the ocean...If that's behind me I think were getting 3 from 70 so holla at your boy. IF YOU DON"T PICK ME THAT'S A JOKE RIGHT?" - Justin Tucker, Ravens kicker

    Complain?, ain't Nobody got time for dat!


  4. #4
    So, they determine sacks based on what play is called by the offense? There were receivers running routes on the play, they didn't just block the defensive backs on them for RGIII to run.

    Also, during the play, RGIII didn't have a chance to run or pass or anything honestly.

    Huh, learn something new everyday I guess. Still seems a little odd to me because the announcers and others called it a sack as well.

  5. #5
    If it's a fumble, it can't be a tackle or a sack.

    A tackle ends the play.

  6. #6
    Veteran Medisleman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Under Giants Stadium End Zone
    That should have been a sack. There is no way you can assume RGIII was going to run. He looked like it cause JPP was coming!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Nah you can have sack/fumbles on the same play. Just ask Osi, I think in this case it is not a sack because the offense Washington was running. Run option, QB is a running back, therefore tackle forced fumble not a sack. I think so anyway. One thing I love about the NFL, you can play football as a kid and in HS and even in college but there are so many runs and so much subtlety you learn something new or see something for the first time just about every week.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by Kruunch View Post
    If it's a fumble, it can't be a tackle or a sack.

    A tackle ends the play.
    That's not true...see all of the tomahawk strips that LT used to do on Jaworski that were recorded as sacks...

  9. #9
    All-Pro Tony Bruno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Charleston, SC
    I think if a QB is tackled behind the LOS regardless of what they were doing it should be recorded as a sack... Unless he runs out of bounds behind the LOS then Ill say it was a loss of yards... But if someone pushes him OOB behind the LOS Id say its a sack... Either way great play regardless...

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by yoeddy View Post
    That's not true...see all of the tomahawk strips that LT used to do on Jaworski that were recorded as sacks...
    I wasn't aware any of them were counted as sacks (unless the QB recovered the fumble).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts