And that is why QB's don't win football games.

[Pappy13]

The better TEAM won. The better QB lost.

[Run Ricky Run]

Can couldnt hit water if he fell off a boat. He is a running back who occasionally throws.

[dolphins4life]

The refs won this game

[Spider-Dan]

"turnover ratio"

It's easy to win games when your opponents are handing you the ball over and over.  Almost any team would look dominant with the opposing QB committing six turnovers (as Carson Palmer did in the NFCCG).  The real test is when you come up against a team that doesn't beat themselves for you.

[Tenshot13]

The refs won this game

ugh, wtf are you talking about?

[Pappy13]

"turnover ratio"

It's easy to win games when your opponents are handing you the ball over and over.  Almost any team would look dominant with the opposing QB committing six turnovers (as Carson Palmer did in the NFCCG).  The real test is when you come up against a team that doesn't beat themselves for you.

Denver's defense forced those turnovers. Why is it that we always focus on the offense and blame them for a turnover rather than praise the defense for forcing the turnover? Denver's defense played brilliant they deserve the credit.

[Rich]

Defense STILL wins championships.

[Spider-Dan]

Denver's defense forced those turnovers. Why is it that we always focus on the offense and blame them for a turnover rather than praise the defense for forcing the turnover?

I don't think a defense forces a QB to throw a bad pass.  That is a result of poor decision-making.

I'd certainly give credit to the defense for a strip-sack-fumble, of which DEN forced multiple.  But unlike in the NFCCG, Peyton didn't choose to throw the ball to 4 Panthers.  That makes a huge difference in the outcome of games.

[Rich]

I don't think a defense forces a QB to throw a bad pass.

That's part of the purpose of pressure, to force the QB to rush a throw or to hit the QB as he is throwing so the pass is off.

[Spider-Dan]

The QB can elect to throw the pass somewhere else, or to throw it away, or not to throw a pass at all.

It is the difference between "unforced error" and "forced error."  In my view, strip-sack-fumble is forced error; INT that was tipped at the line is forced error; a bad throw to a well-covered receiver is unforced error.

[Rich]

The QB can elect to throw the pass somewhere else, or to throw it away, or not to throw a pass at all.

It is the difference between "unforced error" and "forced error."  In my view, strip-sack-fumble is forced error; INT that was tipped at the line is forced error; a bad throw to a well-covered receiver is unforced error.

If a QB is being hit as he throws, he can't go thru the process of "electing" what to do with the ball.

Also, there are plenty of schemes that disguise coverage so a receiver seems open when he is in fact not. Certainly the credit should go to the defense on a play like that.

[Pappy13]

I don't think a defense forces a QB to throw a bad pass.  That is a result of poor decision-making.

I respectfully disagree. The defense can and does force QB's to either throw before the receiver is open or before the QB has had a chance to go through his progressions to find an open receiver. If you don't have an open receiver to throw to and the defense is going to sack you unless you throw the ball, then the QB is in fact forced to throw a bad pass because there is no good pass to throw. I think that happened repeatedly on Sunday. I wouldn't say that happened in every case, but sure happened enough to give praise to Denver's defense rather than simply blame the QB for poor decisions.

[Spider-Dan]

If a QB is being hit as he throws, he can't go thru the process of "electing" what to do with the ball.

Also, there are plenty of schemes that disguise coverage so a receiver seems open when he is in fact not. Certainly the credit should go to the defense on a play like that.

I can think of no better example of "decision making" than being able to accurately read a defense, so I'd say tricky defenses still fall under the umbrella of unforced errors.

If you're going to file "well, I didn't know a defender would be there!" under forced error, you've just defined unforced errors out of existence.  No QB thinks a defender will be where he is throwing the ball at the time the pass is thrown.

If you're talking about passes that are altered because the QB was hit before the throw was completed, sure, I guess you can file those with strip-sack-fumbles and tipped balls?  I think that's a small minority of INTs.

If you don't have an open receiver to throw to and the defense is going to sack you unless you throw the ball, then the QB is in fact forced to throw a bad pass because there is no good pass to throw.

Again, you have the option to throw the ball away or take a sack, both of which are preferable to INTs.

[Rich]

If you're talking about passes that are altered because the QB was hit before the throw was completed, sure, I guess you can file those with strip-sack-fumbles and tipped balls?  I think that's a small minority of INTs.

I think it is more of a root cause than you think.

Also, if a QB has no open receivers and the game is in the balance, should he just take the sack or throw the ball away?

[Spider-Dan]

I personally think that 4th down INTs should be scored as a turnover on downs, or something similar.