1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Comparing Tannehill to Luck,

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Pauly, May 8, 2016.

  1. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree Tank? Who is Tank? I am Guy Incognito.

    40,533
    33,035
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    There are so many variables, however the person who used these statistics did a good job utilizing the variables to show that at the very least they are not far off.

    Too much of football analysis is based on "eyes" and "feeling". I see a lot of that when it comes to Luck. Heck I see a lot of that when it comes to quarterbacks period. With "X factor" Or "put the team on their back" or whatever feeling/eyes words they use.
     
  2. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Returning to this point for a minute.

    Hypothetically, what would an average NFL QB have done for Indy or Miami over the last 4 years.

    First step is to adjust the NFL average to remove your in division opponents.
    Miami. Divisional opponents: 83.41. Adjusted league average: 88.11
    Indy. Divisional opponents: 90.62. Adjusted league average: 87.36

    (i.e. taking out the AFC East raises the rest of the league average and taking out the AFC South lowers the rest of the league)

    Second Step. Take 6 games against divisional opponents and 10 games against adjusted league average and then divide by 16 to get an average season rating.

    Expected career passer rating from an average NFL QB 2012-2015.
    In Miami: 86.3
    In Indy: 88.6.

    Conclusions.
    1. If the QBs were of equal skill the Indy QB should have a career passer rating 2 to 2.5 points higher than the Miami QB simply due to differences in the divisions.
    2. Tannehill has underperformed against an average NFL QB by 1.1 rating points
    3. Luck has underperformed against an average NFL QB by 3.6 rating points.
     
  3. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    I don't simply because of Luck's performance against the AFC East. Which is even worse when you take the playoffs into consideration.

    Based on what he's done so far it would be locking us into 1-5 or 0-6 against the AFC East. Bellichek in particular has treated Luck like he was a middle schooler ina biology class and Luck was a frog.
     
    resnor likes this.
  4. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    I think that a strong case can be made that Tannehill is a better passer than Luck.

    As for the other things that go into the assessing a QB, the stats become a lot murkier.
     
    resnor likes this.
  5. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Cbrad,

    I really want to thank you for doing all this work with the binomal probability. It has been hugely helpful, and I've learned a lot too.
     
    cbrad likes this.
  6. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    This whole thing was to point out that stats are not absolutes when it is pertaining to football, which I know you know, Pauly on the other hand I'm not so sure, and it was him, not you that I was looking to draw into this debate.

    You cannot always determine who is better with stats, it certainly will be easier after they've been in the league for a decade or more, but simply because QB17 is barely ahead doesn't tell the story, nor does vs the AFC or NFC east, south, north or west, because all teams from a division are not equal, and what year you played what team, and was it a short week, who traveled, and so forth.

    In division games are the most important games to every team, those are the games that every team circles every year, that's how you get to the playoffs, win your division, like you mentioned in another post, do teams build to play in division, teams that want to go to the playoffs do.

    How can we quantify how much a QBs ability to convert on 3rd down leads to winning? You can't, just like you can't quantify how QBs that tend to make plays in clutch situations lead to wins, but common sense tells you that it does factor in, it just can't be quantified.

    A theory that can be made, Luck plays better in games that are important, than does QB 17, the Colts win a lot of division games, and as the old saying goes, division games have a way of evening the scales, but conversely, the Fins lose a lot of division games, Luck has shown that he plays better in pressure situations, QB17 has shown that his game takes a dive in those same situations.

    So the theory can be made, with evidence, that Luck is the reason the Colts win their division, and QB17 is the reason the Fins lose their division, just a theory, but it is a theory that is reflected in the stats.
     
    Pauly and cbrad like this.
  7. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    I agree totally about wanting more advanced stats on the pressures.
    - Time to pressure
    - Quality of pressure allowed (fighting through blocks -v- Defender running free; number of rushers)

    Taking two historical examples Johnny Unitas (Colts) was famous for hanging in the pocket for as long as possible then throwing just as the defenders hit him. Dan Marino (Dolphins) was famous for his quick trigger and finishing games with a clean jersey.
    If Unitas and Marino had similar pressure numbers over a comparable period then you'd be justified in thinking Marino had a much worse line, which would have a knock on negative effect in the rest of the passing game.

    Coaching also comes into it. If one QB is coached to eat the sack/throw away and the other is coached to try to make a play with his legs/throw to a receiver that can make a difference too.

    However, without that information it's speculation.

    But it does come to an area where Luck has provided extra value over Tannehill than just passing the ball.

    Whether Tannehill can improve his game in this regard has yet to be proven.
     
  8. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    ryan had sh$$ to start his career across the board as well.
     
  9. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Táin Bó Cúailnge Club Member

    23,698
    39,847
    113
    Sep 7, 2012
    Hattiesburg, MS
    Indeed...

    http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/s...f-the-operation-ryan-tannehills-smarts/nSb3L/

     
    resnor and smahtaz like this.
  10. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Just a note on this. If you mean we can't currently quantify how much anything a QB, or for that matter any individual player, does leads to winning, then yes I agree (though one can quantify a range of possibilities). The important word is "leads" because we're talking causation here. At least for the moment that is not possible, though it's not impossible in theory if you were allowed to do all kinds of controlled experiments.

    However, if you meant that the causal effect on winning of a QB's 3rd down conversion rate (that is, the probability the team converts a 3rd down when the QB passes on 3rd down) is impossible to quantify, then that in principle is not correct. You can do that with win probabilities.

    For example, suppose the probability of winning in a given game situation is statistically known (based on historical data of the % of times a team won when it was in that same situation). With any 3rd down conversion rate from that specific game situation, you can then see how much win probability on average changes. Do that for every 3rd down situation and every point on the field, weight those by how often 3rd downs occur at those points on the field, and you have now quantified how much a QB's ability to convert 3rd downs (using the 2nd interpretation) leads to winning.

    Indeed, you can now compare that to anything else that can be quantified through changes in win probability. Win probability is the one statistical approach I've seen for analyzing football that really makes sense and forms a powerful foundation to build on. Sadly, a lot of things I've seen built on it are as crappy as win probability is good haha.
     
    Finster and Pauly like this.
  11. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Táin Bó Cúailnge Club Member

    23,698
    39,847
    113
    Sep 7, 2012
    Hattiesburg, MS
    Yes... Dan Marino was drafted onto a 1983 team in Miami that featured ProBowl LG, Bob Kuechenberg, ProBowl Center, Dwight Stephenson, and ProBowl RG, Ed Newman. Danny had probowler OLmen up until 1988. He was also throwing to Duper, then later on Mark Clayton and eventually TE, Ferrell Edmunds.

    In 1990, we picked up Webb, Sims, and TE Ferrell Edmunds. All probowl players from their rookie seasons, or were within a couple seasons.


    It's not like Danny was playing behind the garbage our current QB has endured the past 4 seasons.

    As far as career sack rates:

    Aaron Rodgers 7.0%
    Ben Roethlisberger 7.5%
    Ryan Tannehill 7.6%
    Russell Wilson 8.6%


    They're all above average in sack rate.

    And here's a fun little blurb... http://www.si.com/nfl/2015/12/27/packers-cardinals-mike-mccarthy-bruce-arians



    Sure does sound familiar...
     
    resnor and Pauly like this.
  12. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Just to put a few of my thoughts out there-
    a) First thing is that passer rating is a delicate stat. You really need 300+ attempts for the numbers to start becoming stable. That's why I broke the analysis down into divisions for the AFC and conference for the NFC. Smaller groupings than that make using passer rating very problematical.

    b) I've been looking purely at passer rating because it's a way to get an apples to apples comparison.

    c) I know that there are other stats that can be used to compare QBs taking into account other non-passing factors. For example Rushing attempts/sacks/ pressures etc. I've been waiting for other people to bring those stats into the argument because I like threads to be discussions not lectures. I'm part of this forum because I enjoy the discussion, so I deliberately started with a proposition many people would find challenging to see what other people could come up with.

    d) I honestly don't get why so many people are high on Luck. When you take him out of the AFC South he's an average QB with an average record.

    e) If Luck is the cause of Indy's great record against the AFC South I'd expect it to show up in the numbers somewhere. In 2014 with his +15 passer rating points over average it does, but it 2012,2013 and 2015 Indy went 11-2 against them with Luck having a passer rating worse than an NFL average QB would have against the AFC South.
    Also Luck has not outperformed average in the clutch division games over his career. His team have had a great record but Luck hasn't (as reflected in his passer rating).
    Until someone can point to something concrete to show the W-L record is caused by Luck, I think other factors are more likely.

    f) Stats are like fruit cakes. The smaller the slice the more anomalies you find. By taking whole of career stats you even out the short week, opponent injuries, team mate injuries, your injury factors because over time with enough volume they should end up roughly equal.

    g) Stats are randomly distributed. Sometimes you get lucky. For example in Sparano's first year the phins went something like 7-1 in games decided by 7 points or less helping us to 11-5. Over time the NFL shows that games decided by 0-7 are 50-50 affairs. Yet people here were raving about how Sparano was clutch and we were tough and this great record in close games was going to continue. The next year we came back the NFL average and reality smacked us in the face.
    You have to be really careful because our brains are wired to look for patterns. The easy answer is Indy has gone 17-2 against the AFC South with Luck as the QB, therefore it MUST be Luck.

    h) The passer rating formula was devised in 1972 or 1973 when the NFL was a much more run dominant league. Perhaps with the shift from run dominant to pass dominant the passer rating formulae needs to be adjusted.

    i) Confirmation bias is a thing. If you believe that [X] is true your brain accepts information that confirms [X] without questioning but looks for flaws in information that says [X] is not true. Andrew Luck was labeled future GOAT from before he was drafted. So people will look at Indy's record as confirmation that Luck is great. Tannehill was labeled as a project and has been the subject of intense media speculation. Everytime he does something good the "yes, buts ..." come out.
     
  13. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    I'm not that convinced about win probability yet. Mainly because it seems to me more as an exercise in backcasting than forecasting.

    Although this may be due to how it"s being used. When I see it being used in the first and second quarters when the error bars are massive it makes me shudder.
     
  14. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    As long as the game doesn't change much statistically speaking, win probability should be a great predictor. Here's one guy that found just that:
    http://thebiglead.com/2013/12/21/win-probability-for-nfl-games-how-accurate-is-it/

    The only cases where win probability didn't measure up well was in the "extremes", in other words cases where you don't have as much historical data to base the probabilities on.
     
    Pauly likes this.
  15. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    The way the league average passer rating has been climbing by 1-2 points a year over the last 6 or 7 years is what has me worried about win probability.
     
    cbrad likes this.
  16. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Yeah, valid concern. Changes in rules and/or how they're interpreted should always raise a (yellow) flag when using historical data. But the concept of win probability is definitely sound.
     
    Pauly likes this.
  17. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Also as more advanced statistical analysis becomes available coaches are beginning to change their strategies.
    For example the rise in the number of attempts to go for it on 4th down.

    But as you imply the game isn't changing at a dramatic rate, so the historical data should still be very solid.
    Maybe it needs to be weighted so more recent years count for more than older years to help account for changing times.
     
    cbrad likes this.
  18. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    You are clearly very good with statistical analysis Pauly, and stats are an integral part of football, and I think many people, myself included, appreciate what you bring to the table, as well as Brad, who, like yourself, is also very good with it.

    I was just simply using an exercise to highlight the many intangible things that also go along with football that are, if not impossible to quantify, extremely difficult to get an accurate reading on.

    The greatness of a QB on a team makes a terrific impact, the '08 season you referenced for example, what was't there in '09 was Penne, so was his impact the difference?

    When going on NFL avgs, you are getting bad and avg QBs, but I would bet a bucket of pig **** against a barrel of gold doubloons(can't help myself, love that reference) that analyzing the great QBs you would get a huge difference, and their ability to make plays when it counts is oft times the difference in winning and losing.

    You make a lot of great points, and arguments, and put in the leg work, which is greatly appreciated by me, I just think that the intangibles, which aren't just at the QB position, are probably carrying more water when it comes to the great teams.

    I think statistical analysis is probably much more accurate with avg teams with avg or below avg QBs, and that great QBs are the X factor as far as statistical analysis.

    Now, I've typed more in this thread than I have in the last 10 combined, lol, so you're generating good solid and civil debate, so I tip my cap to you sir.
    :yes:

    PS, we need a hat tipping smiley...
     
    Pauly likes this.
  19. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Thank's very much sir. It is a pleasure to have discussions like this.

    Although, too keep the nautical analogies going, I should nail my colors to the mast and say I absolutely do not believe in X-factors that can't be measured. The point about making critical plays at critical times is that if you focus on them you're disregarding the effects of the plays that they didn't make earlier in the game.
     
    Dol-Fan Dupree and Finster like this.
  20. Finster

    Finster Finsterious Finologist

    3,087
    2,038
    113
    Jul 27, 2013
    Don't get me going on nautical analogies, you'll set me to putting Master and Commander back in the DVD player, lol, and I just yesterday watched the De Ruyter Admiral movie on Netflix...
     
  21. Rock Sexton

    Rock Sexton Anti-Homer

    2,553
    1,793
    113
    Mar 14, 2015
    Recently it was the Wilson thing again, now it's the Luck once more? Oye vey. My fellow Dolphins fans are the only people on the planet having this discussion and trying to use statistics to elevate our QB to the level of those two who have a consensus of NFL professionals placing them higher.
     
    Fin-O and dolphin25 like this.
  22. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Just to be contrary.

    Panne's career W/L record in 0-7 point games: 22/23
    Penne's 2008 record in 0-7 point games: 7/2

    Is 2008 due to random variance or the clutch factor?
     
    Fin D and resnor like this.
  23. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Dude,

    Noone is saying that Tannehill has performed to the level of Wilson. Other people have argued that Wilson has been in a better position to produce because of better coaching and a better team.

    As for Luck I'm not saying Tannehill is as good as Luck, I'm saying Luck has been just as bad as Tannehill as a passer.

    NFL professional experts promoted Cam Cameron, Dave Wannstadt, Joe Philbin and Tony Sparano through the NFL coaching ranks until they became the HC of the phins. You saw how well that turned out.
     
  24. roy_miami

    roy_miami Well-Known Member

    1,385
    560
    113
    Oct 11, 2013
    I know in the modern era no good/great QB has a losing record over any 64 game stretch. No good/great QB has failed to make the playoffs in any of their first 4 seasons. So in that respect the deck is stacked severely against Tannehill. I don't know if the same can be said of individual passing stats, and as others have said the league is changing at such a pace that it would probably be impossible to research.

    And on top of that, besides Manning doing it twice, I don't know of any incumbent QB having success with a new coach after the previous coach had been fired. It seems like the value of a fresh start for both QB and team can not be overstated.

    The one thing Tannehill has going for him is the overall talent level at the position seems to be on the decline. Tannehill is a medium sized fish in the pond right now but as the giants like Brady, Brees, Roethlisberger, Rivers, Romo, and even the above average fish like Palmer, and Eli Manning start disappearing then maybe Tannehill becomes one of the bigger fish just by attrition.
     
    Pauly and dolphin25 like this.
  25. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    I think it's important to point out precisely why that matters. Being a medium sized fish in the pond means you're still a medium sized fish regardless of whether there are big sized fish or not. Where you rank relative to others isn't important compared to how much you help the team win.

    However.. if the big fish start disappearing, then that lowers the quality of the competition. So the reason what you said is important is because attrition should decrease the strength of the competition.
     
    Pauly and Finster like this.
  26. dolphin25

    dolphin25 Well-Known Member

    6,338
    2,400
    113
    Nov 22, 2014
    not really, he just regurgitated words and formations, that doesn't mean he understands what they are designed to do nor an understanding of the defense.
     
  27. dolphin25

    dolphin25 Well-Known Member

    6,338
    2,400
    113
    Nov 22, 2014
    oddly I thought there was discussions the last several years about how many weapons he had.
     
  28. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    pretty average stuff..in some units below average..
     
  29. Dol-Fan Dupree

    Dol-Fan Dupree Tank? Who is Tank? I am Guy Incognito.

    40,533
    33,035
    113
    Dec 11, 2007
    Like his rookie year when he had Bess, Hartline, Binns, Naanee, Fasano, Moore, and the not ready for prime time players of Matthews and Clay
     
    resnor likes this.
  30. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Indy's team record against the AFC South has me bugged. I will happily say that Luck's 111 passer rating in 2014 is a big part of them going 6-0 against the AFC south that year.

    I'll leave out 2015 because that was just one game.

    2012.
    Luck passing: 109 of 199 for 1410 yards. 8 TDs. 5 Ints. 80.2 rating
    54.8% completions. 7.1 ypa
    29 rushes for 107 yards. 2 TDs

    AFC South Defenses. Average 87.8 passer rating allowed.
    AFC South QBs season average rating: 80.1

    Indy's record. 4-2.

    2013
    Passing: 124 of 212 for 1422 yards. 8TDs, 3 Ints. 85.5 rating
    58.5% completions. 6.7 ypa.
    Rushing. 23 attempts for 135 yards. 1 TD

    AFC South Defenses. 91.2 passer rating allowed.
    AFC South QBs season average: 76.4
    Indy's record. 6-0

    I couldn't find team by team sacks allowed without going intothe game logs (Too much work for me) So I don't have data to say whether Luck was abnormally better at escaping sacks than a regular QB against those defenses or not.

    Bit over 2 seasons Indy went 10-2 against the AFC South despite Luck performing worse than an average NFL QB would against those defenses.

    Can someone explain why Luck is the reason why Indy went 10-2 in those games? What I have missed?
     
    Fin D likes this.
  31. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    No QB has ever succeeded with a **** oline, **** coaching, an abandoned running game and not being allowed to audible.
     
    resnor likes this.
  32. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    His "clutchy franchizey ityness".
     
    resnor likes this.
  33. djphinfan

    djphinfan Season Ticket Holder Club Member

    111,652
    67,546
    113
    Dec 20, 2007
    Mahomes.. D-Watson..Wentz..Mariota..Winston..Goff...more big fish comin.
     
  34. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    Maybe the question is wrong. Not sure what everyone else said but my position on Luck is that he is one important reason why Indy went 11-5 three years in a row. That doesn't mean he had to be equally important in beating division teams vs. non-division teams.

    As I showed earlier, there is evidence division winners play better against division teams than non-division teams. That means you might not need a difference-maker as much in those situations. Look at Indy's games vs. division teams in 2012 and 2013. You will see many are blowouts. 3 out of 6 in both 2012 and 2013 were decided by more than one TD. In 2014 it was 4 out of 6. Basically that means you don't always need Luck to be the difference-maker.

    Here's a stat that really stands out about Luck: in 2012 and 2013 he won 14 out of 16 games that were decided by one score or less (13 of them by 7 points or less and one by 8). 14-2 in one-score games?!? That is unbelievable because normally you see closer to 50% there for most starting QB's.

    That's suggestive of Luck rising up to the challenge when he's needed most. Point is, the question shouldn't be why Luck was responsible for helping to beat other AFC South teams. Not sure if anyone is pressing that argument anyway. The question should be the original one of why his teams went 11-5 three years in a row, and there are some stats that help support the argument Luck was instrumental in that.

    And one such stat (other than the 14-2 in one-score games) is game winning drives. Luck had 7 GWD's in 2012 and 4 in 2013. Even Brady had only one year in his career when he had 7 GWD's.
     
    roy_miami and Pauly like this.
  35. smahtaz

    smahtaz Pimpin Ain't Easy

    Do you have anything to support your wet toilet paper stance or are you just a troll?
     
    cuchulainn and resnor like this.
  36. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    Looking at records in 0-7 games.

    For example Chad Pennington went 7-2 in 2008, but his overall career record is 22-23. Which suggests, to me, that his record in '08 was a statistical outlier.

    In 2012/13 Luck went 14-2, but in 2014/15 Luck went 6-5. His record in 14/15 is consistent with an outlier coming back to the mean. If he has some special ability in close games then why did it disappear in 14/15?

    The major reason why people have a high opinion of Luck is Indy's record (a) against the AFC South and (B) in 0-7 point games in 2012 and 2013. Every time I slice the data I have a lot of difficulty coming up with a convincing explanation that Luck was a major part in the better than expected W-L record when his statistical performance as a QB wasn't as good as an average NFL QB would have done.
     
  37. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    "consistent with an outlier coming back to a mean", yes, but what is the mean? As far as we know the mean is his overall record in such games, which is 20-7. Who knows if that was luck or Luck (probably both) but that's the data we have. If that was real (it was Luck), then that is more than enough reason to argue Luck contributed to the 11-5 record in an important way.

    So what happened in 2014 and 2015? Well first of all, he was 4-2 in 2014 and 2-3 in 2015. 2014 fits perfectly in with the idea Luck's abilities in close games is above average. In 2015, he was 1-3 AFTER the injury, which is a good reason why one shouldn't compare 2012-2013 vs. 2014-2015, but should instead compare pre-injury vs. post-injury. Pre-injury Luck is 19-4 in one-score games which is astounding and probably reflective of something real because that's over a 3 year span.

    In any case, note that the 14-2 alone in 2012-2013 could explain the 11-5 record over an 8-8 record because you have 3 extra wins per season due to that.
     
    Pauly likes this.
  38. Pauly

    Pauly Season Ticket Holder

    3,696
    3,743
    113
    Nov 29, 2007
    If you are facing a disproportionate number of games against teams with bad defenses, bad QBs, or both bad QB and bad defense (i.e. the AFC South) shouldn't a QB register a disproportionate number of GWDs?

    It will be easier for your QB to score in any given drive and it will be harder for the opposing team to score back and regain the lead against you.
     
    resnor likes this.
  39. cbrad

    cbrad .

    10,659
    12,657
    113
    Dec 21, 2014
    I'd think it's the opposite. Imagine the NE Patriots playing a season against only weak college teams. How many game winning drives do you think they would have?

    None!

    GWD's have to occur in the 4th quarter or OT by definition.

    So the fact Luck had so many GWD's is even MORE impressive given that the AFC South was so weak. He got most against non-division teams: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/comeback.cgi?player=LuckAn00
     
  40. Fin D

    Fin D Sigh

    72,252
    43,684
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    Right, but GWD have to happen at the right time in the 4th to count.

    A QB can move the ball down the field and score to put his team on top, only to have the defense to lose it again in the next drive. Now there's not enough time for the offense to score again. Game over.

    Those should count and they don't. Its happened to Thill a few times and he clearly gets knocked for it.
     
    resnor likes this.

Share This Page