Sack or Interception

[Craztel]

Since some NFL Quarterbacks still havent' figured this out yet, I thought it would be fun to get a concensus here, on which is worse for the team. So the question for the board is.......


"Which is worse for your team on a 3rd and long, a 10 yard sack or an Interception?"


We all know that interceptions are bad, and really mess with QB's head, but are some interceptions actually better then others........??? I have a couple of ideas on this, but I would like to hear from others, before posting them.....

[triumph]

Depends on a lot of factors. Field position is a big one. In most cases a sack is better than an interception. At least on a sack you have the ability to punt the ball and push the field possession. Would also depend on how far down the field was the interception.

[Ghost X01]

interception for sure, ur gonna punt anyways so why risk getting your qb hurt from a sack, take the pic and and move on next set of downs

[threepoint]

Well, I would have to say that the 10-yard sack is worse. The opposition would be getting the ball further downfield. This is on the assumption that the interception has beent thrown several yards past the line of scrimmage and there isn't much of a runback. On the other hand, interceptions can be run back for big gains and even touchdowns, so who's to say?

[FourBear]

I would say interception, but it really does depend on the position on the field at the time. Unless your team is good defensively on many levels and will be able to stop a possible drive from an interception...in that case, I think a sack would be worse.

[GiantFisch]

I agree that field position is crucial; what if you're at your own 10 yard line? A sack could easily become a safety or giving the ball right at your opponent at the 50 or so via a punt. Regardless, in general, I'd take the sack. With a good punt, you can give your team a lot of breathing room on defense. An interception means that the other team immediately gets the ball usually not terribly far from the line of scrimmage and is a big momentum boost. Moreso than a sack, in my opinion.

Again, that's just a general rule of thumb. Field position does override this rule, though.

[tater03]

I would have to say an interception. But your right it would on depend on the yard your at.

[fsuguy316]

It all depends on field position... but obviously you take neither. You throw the ball out of bounds... even if its a grounding call, you still don't risk injury.

[kelkat]

I'm with you - take the sac. An interception will be worse, especially if they manage to run it for a touch down. I've seen interceptions turn games completely around - I've never seen a sac do that.

[Coda1108]

I'd say an interception is definitely worse. I'd rather have my special teams punting unit going after the punt returner than having my offensive unit trying to stop a defensive back.

[Craztel]

I see a lot of good points here, and they actually get to the basis of my querry. Here's how I feel about this situation, though I'm no expert by any means......


The first option for any quarterback, would be to throw the ball out of bounds. Sure they don't gain any yards, but they are not losing anything either. If a QB doesn't have time to throw out of bound, which in many cases they don't have that opportunity, they should hold on tight to the ball and take the sack. If they are just going to throw the ball up, in most cases they hurt their team, rather then help it. As someone stated in an earlier post, an interception by the opposing team, can change the momentum of a game fast.......

[Brown_23]

Interception hurts too much in many more ways than just potentially better or worse field position. Momentum, confidence all are affected by interceptions especially when a throw is made that shouldn't have been thrown.

Take the sack, boot the ball and tough up on D. Choosing a INT over sack is unheard of and I would never recommend it. How often to punts get returned for TD? Next to never, reason is the D is set up and prepared. Not the same case on a INT.

[jcurry3rd]

the question is a great one but a bit vague if your in your side of field close to endzone the sack is worst while the length of distance thrown could make it like a long punt but if its a short pass and he can run it straight into the endzone then the sack is better!!!! too many variables

[Foytey]

I would always say a sack is always better than an interception. A turnover is never a good thing. I would rather my quaterback eat it and take the sack instead of forcing a throw to the wrong place. Even if the turnover is made where the punt will be received anyway. yours truly a quote by foytey moaq

[inSTAALed]

Sack > Interception as long as you aren't on your own goal line.