What SHOULD the League do about the Ravens and Broncos situa

[conace21]

Hinton cannot get credit for the start because he was not on the field for the first offensive play. If you look at Terry Glenn's gamelog, he is not credited with a start in the 1996 AFCCG. That is because on Jacksonville's first possession, Jaguars punter Bryan Barker tried to run after a high snap, and was tackled at his own two yard line. New England came out in a goalline offense with 23 personnel (2 RB's, and three tight ends). So Mario Grier, John Burke and Keith Byars are listed as starters.

[JWL]

Yes and Priest Holmes started Super Bowl 35. Who was on the field for the first play is not in doubt. I didn't find the stat keeping to make sense with that Cincinnati-Washington game. Dalton was split wide. Sanu took a snap under center and performed as a quarterback. Sanu technically started the game as a quarterback. Why is the QB start credited to Dalton? If the record keeping is to be fair and consistent, then Sanu should have gone down as the starting quarterback that day in 2012.

[conace21]

I tend to agree regarding Dalton/Sanu.
My comment was strictly regarding Denver.


"Lindsay did not really perform as a quarterback today although he did take some shotgun snaps and then handed off to Gordon. The only guy who resembled a modern day quarterback was Hinton."

Even though Hinton was the only player to resemble a modern QB, he will not get credit for the start, since he wasn't on the field for the first play.

[JWL]

I'm hoping Lindsay gets listed as the starter. Ultimately, it won't matter. It is not like Tom Brady getting credit for a start taken away from him because Tampa Bay lined up Ronald Jones in a wildcat formation to start a game and 20 years from now Mahomes retires with one more QB win than Brady. This will just be in small type in the Broncos QB starts section of their media guide. Either "Lindsay 0-1" or "Hinton 0-1."

[JohnR]

Marlin Briscoe redux

[rhickok1109]

I think the whole notion of a W-L record for quarterbacks is ludicrous and should be ignored.

[RichardBak]

I think the whole notion of a W-L record for quarterbacks is ludicrous and should be ignored.

I agree. I've never understood it. Say the QB has a miserable day---throws 4 picks, goes 5-15 for 78 yds----but the stud RB picks up 188 yds rushing and scores the game-winner with 3 seconds left. Um, the QB gets "credit" for the win?? And the RB gets what? A participation trophy? An extra 10 minutes in the whirlpool? A lifetime subscription to Coffin Corner?

Why not credit all starters with a W/L record?

[Jay Z]

The W/L is not done the same as baseball. The starter gets the W or L even if he comes out of the game and the backup winds up winning. Bart Starr gets the "W" for the 1965 Colts playoff despite only playing one play and leaving with a 7-0 deficit.

Other problem is that in baseball, the pitcher can theoretically control his own destiny. I suppose the catcher can drop repeated third strikes or there can be errors, but the pitcher has most of the control over the defense. Don't give up any runs, pitcher can't lose. The QB is not a defensive player. If the QB builds a lead and the defense blows it, it goes from W to L with nothing done by the QB.

[JWL]

I think the whole notion of a W-L record for quarterbacks is ludicrous and should be ignored.

I agree although my comments here would not suggest such a viewpoint. My actual stance/question here is, "What silly way will the statisticians go about documenting this strange circumstance regarding statistical minutae?"

[JWL]

For what it is worth, Pro Football Reference is currently showing Hinton as the starting quarterback.