Chances a QB started a game he has no pass attempts or carries in?

[StillSwinging]

For years it's been listed that Fran Tarkenton had 125 wins as a starter. That number creeps up again this week since Manning is at 124. But a year ago when I went through the games I thought it was pretty clear that Tarkenton only had 124 wins. It goes back to a game from 1963 where I think the Vikings have it wrong. Games started weren't really being kept officially until around 1969, which is why Jim Marshall's consecutive start streak (that Favre "broke") wasn't even 100% confirmed.

The Vikings say Fran Tarkenton started this game on 12/15/63 despite Fran not throwing a single pass or having a carry.

But the NY Times has it as "Ron VanderKelen, in his first starting assignment as a pro, today directed the Minnesota Vikings to a 34-13 victory over the Philadelphia Eagles in the 1963 National Football League finale for both teams."
The Chicago Tribune (12/16/63, C2) says the same, as does the Hartford Courant, the Los Angeles Times, and this old Sports Illustrated article has it too. So I gave that start and win to Vander Kelen.

I assume articles on the game were done in a similar fashion to how they are today, with writers at the game (perhaps in a pressbox back then like today) writing their story as the game goes on. Surely they and SI couldn't have seen something different from the Vikings, could they? Why would they all write something that wrong?

And I know it's the Vikings that put this 125 number out there because it's in their media guide and they don't credit Vander Kelen for that game. This was the first time I found fault with the Vikings' record keeping; the second was when I saw them erase a 4th quarter drive from Favre's total for no reason. And of course the networks have rolled with their numbers, seeing as FOX put up Favre with 43 GWDs in the Steeler game, when it should be 44.

The Vikings are looking Denver-esque in their record keeping.

And on a related note, if you start the game in the Wildcat on the very first play, should the QB lined up at WR truly be given the QB start or not? Technically he started the game at WR, and the Wildcat player was the QB. Jake Delhomme and Carolina had this happen last year and they credited Jake with the start, and I saw another team or two do it this year.

[Vols44]

The best online reference I know of lists Tarkenton with 124 wins, 109 losses and 6 ties.

http://www.pro-football-reference.co...T/TarkFr00.htm

The site has improved a lot in the past two years as the webmasters added historical data contributed by sources such as the newspaper clipping you referenced.

[Jared]

Originally Posted by StillSwinging

And on a related note, if you start the game in the Wildcat on the very first play, should the QB lined up at WR truly be given the QB start or not? Technically he started the game at WR, and the Wildcat player was the QB. Jake Delhomme and Carolina had this happen last year and they credited Jake with the start, and I saw another team or two do it this year.

That seems ridiculously nit picky. Of course he is the starting QB for that day. Who cares that they opened in an odd formation? That would be like saying someone wasn't the starting TE because they opened the game with a 4 WR 1 back set.

[StillSwinging]

Originally Posted by Jared

That seems ridiculously nit picky. Of course he is the starting QB for that day. Who cares that they opened in an odd formation? That would be like saying someone wasn't the starting TE because they opened the game with a 4 WR 1 back set.

Actually, I think that is how it works.

Take the 2004 Patriots for example

Corey Dillon had 15 GP, 14 starts. He is not credited with starting the season opener against the Colts. If you look at the gamebook you'll see they started with 3 WRs & 2 TEs, no RB gets credited with a start. If you look at the team page, you'll see Dillon had 14 starts and Faulk had 1 (Steeler game), so they're only credited with 15 starts at the RB position.

[StillSwinging]

Originally Posted by Vols44

The best online reference I know of lists Tarkenton with 124 wins, 109 losses and 6 ties.

http://www.pro-football-reference.co...T/TarkFr00.htm

The site has improved a lot in the past two years as the webmasters added historical data contributed by sources such as the newspaper clipping you referenced.

I know, I'm the one that added that to the site (along with the 1-loss subtraction from Unitas). Starting records are fairly accurate from the teams, but Tarkenton and Unitas were my two biggest finds given they were top 5 in wins. Someone else later picked up an error on Joe Namath that I missed, which puts him under .500 for his career.

[Jared]

Originally Posted by StillSwinging

Actually, I think that is how it works.

Take the 2004 Patriots for example

Corey Dillon had 15 GP, 14 starts. He is not credited with starting the season opener against the Colts. If you look at the gamebook you'll see they started with 3 WRs & 2 TEs, no RB gets credited with a start. If you look at the team page, you'll see Dillon had 14 starts and Faulk had 1 (Steeler game), so they're only credited with 15 starts at the RB position.

All this tells me is that the statistic as currently tallied is flawed. If a guy is the clear cut #1 tailback on his team during an entire season, it seems silly to not give him credit for a week just because of the one play that happened to be first.

[Pantherfan Griz]

This is a little off topic but when I first read the title of the thread I thought someone was making a plan for the Panthers.

They could benefit form having their starting QB not throw a single pass in teh game. It would cut down on the points for the other team.

[Xulu Bak]

Originally Posted by Pantherfan Griz

This is a little off topic but when I first read the title of the thread I thought someone was making a plan for the Panthers.

They could benefit form having their starting QB not throw a single pass in teh game. It would cut down on the points for the other team.

They could benefit even more by not having him on the field at all.

Put D. Williams in the shotgun, J. Stewart next to him, and motion S. Smith.

[BradyJustWins]

Originally Posted by StillSwinging

Actually, I think that is how it works.

Take the 2004 Patriots for example

Corey Dillon had 15 GP, 14 starts. He is not credited with starting the season opener against the Colts. If you look at the gamebook you'll see they started with 3 WRs & 2 TEs, no RB gets credited with a start. If you look at the team page, you'll see Dillon had 14 starts and Faulk had 1 (Steeler game), so they're only credited with 15 starts at the RB position.

Difference being in Delhomme's case, he was actually in the game as a "starter".

So are you suggesting Delhomme should be given one less QB start and have one WR start?

That's fairly unrealistic seeing Delhomme played the rest of the game at QB. I could see it in the Pats case, because they technically didn't start a RB. The Panthers had a QB in the game, he just lined up at a different spot to start the game.

[StillSwinging]

Originally Posted by BradyJustWins

Difference being in Delhomme's case, he was actually in the game as a "starter".

So are you suggesting Delhomme should be given one less QB start and have one WR start?

That's fairly unrealistic seeing Delhomme played the rest of the game at QB. I could see it in the Pats case, because they technically didn't start a RB. The Panthers had a QB in the game, he just lined up at a different spot to start the game.

In the few situations in NFL history where a RB had to start at QB (Tom Matte, Jim Powers, George Taliaferro), they were given the QB start. Is it what your position is that matters, or is it simply where you line up? Because in Delhomme's case, he was lined up at WR, so why not give him the WR start? I actually haven't checked the Panthers' guide to see if they give him the QB start or not. I do remember checking the gamebook after that one and it said Delhomme at QB.