Except that such judgment calls are already part of the game, Longtime. Part of the definition of pass interference involves catchability. I agree that it is somewhat subjective, but this probably wouldn't the only statistical category subject to such a criticism.

---

I truly agree, we are on same side here..

But I think this can't be subjective, because it is either intercepted or not.

What they could do is have 2 categories..

Interception

Tipped interception

But what if it was tipped at the line, couldnt you say the q/b threw it to low? Or what if a lb tipped it and was intercepted, couldnt that also be q/b fault for throwing it close to the lb?

To many variables if you ask me to change the way it is recorded

Agreed, or at least some sort of delineation that ascribes responsibility where it belongs. There's a difference between a fumble and a lost fumble. Likewise, there should be a difference between an interception that is obviously the fault of the quarterback (i.e., a bad throw) and one that is the fault of the receiver or simply the product of a good throw. You are right -- when the defense ends up with the ball, an interception has objectively occurred. But not all interceptions are alike. There is a stigma attached to interceptions; decisions about a quarterback's future are made on such numbers. Perhaps a paradigm shift in how interceptions are viewed or perceived is necessary: While all interceptions are bad, not all should be born on the shoulders of quarterbacks.

I realize I am saying the same thing over and over in different ways. 😉

---

well, just imagine how Fudged up stats are gonna be with the 18-game season....ugh!

---

So is the quarterback giving birth, or is he some kind of midwife?

Sorry, I couldn't resist that one. (It should've been "borne" with an "e.")

I see where you're coming from on this, but I think ultimately it would not be worth the trouble to discount these kinds of interceptions from a QB's record. It could also be potentially misleading, because a lot of drops occur on poorly thrown balls. I think that there just aren't enough of them to make it worthwhile, and they tend to even out over the course of a season and certainly a career.

Not to mention that you could open up a whole can of worms here: receivers slipping and falling, receivers running the wrong route, etc. Also, if we wanted previous stats to be comparable to contemporary stats, someone would then have to go back and review all the game tape in the history of the league to see which interceptions should've been caught by the receivers.

---

Yep, as I was scrolling back through the thread, I noticed the "born" gaffe. +1 for pointing it out.

Regarding receivers slipping and falling, etc., interceptions that result from such situations could be either the fault of the quarterback or the fault of the scheme. If the quarterback throws the ball after the receiver is already out of contention, it may well be the fault of the quarterback. On the other hand, if the play is a timing route and the quarterback has already released the ball when the slip occurs, it's probably the fault of the scheme. (This is one of the many reasons why schemes based heavily on timing routes annoy me -- they're not adaptable to split-second changes in conditions.)

Perhaps a suitable compromise would be analogous to a sack/fumble situation: When the defense drives the quarterback backward such that his momentum is stopped (or they tackle him), the result is a sack. However, if at the same time he loses the ball, a fumble also results (two statistical categories in one play!) and assuming the fumble is lost, change of possession ensues (a third statistical category). Extending this analogy to interceptions, an interception that results from a receiver falling or running the wrong route could be logged as an incompletion followed by . . . whichever term was chosen for such a situation (receiver-failed-to-complete, interception, etc.).

---

WR running wrong route to change it from a int?

Can't believe you said that honestly..Thats a Brett excuse

Because it is so subjective, who will be in charge if it? Will they slow game down to review tape?

And again what you think is a catchable ball, maybe the "official scorer" , may not think it was catchable and then its ruled an int...

Then we will have debates on why it was ruled a int when it should been a non int.

Yes, but such delineations could clarify differences between performances such as Brett's playoff game against the Rams, in which all the INTs were his fault and resulted from spectacularly bad throws, compared to some of his (or Rodgers', for that matter) INTs this year, in which wide receivers simply gave up on routes or slipped on the field.

---

There can never be a fool proof way of scoring an int..

so thats why now is the best option..

It sucks, and not fair, just as a 1 yard screen pass that goes for a 99 yard td is a td for the q/b..He really did nothing but gets credit..

As someone pointed out....It evens out in the end..

I prefer porn gaffes to be honest. Or not. Total boner-killers.

---