Jonathan Taylor is your 1.01 now.

[Vcize]

Nice game for J.Taylor today, 22-90 and 4-24. It’s almost like RBs need more touches to get going sometimes.

Yeah. It's amazing how that works.

Derrick Henry has 550 yards @4.1 ypc and 2 tds in first half of games and 1,000 yards @5.8 ypc and 14 tds in the 2nd half.

People just don’t get not every player is the same

Is that a career metric or a 2020 metric?

Even if it's career, it is far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far and away an outlier.

NFL.com recently updated their website and now you can only look up these stats for the most recent season, not over a whole career, which is annoying so I can't check it myself. Prior to that change though I remember doing a study on this and basically every RB of note saw their YPC decrease throughout the time of game and throughout their number of carries. That is, for basically every significant RB, their YPC in the 4th quarter was worse than their YPC in the 1st quarter, and their YPC in carries 25+ was worse than their YPC in carries 1-10.

Emmitt, LT2, Peterson, Edge, CMart, Bettis, Marshawn, etc.

The notion that a RB gets stronger as the game goes on is complete fallacy imho. Statistics back this up. Even more obviously, logic does too. The notion that one guy getting hit on every rush and carrying the load is "wearing down" a defense of 11 players, half of whom do nothing on most rusing plays, and who are constantly rotating in and out with rest, is absurd.

Again, analytics back this up. Traditionally, other than maybe the odd exception well within the realm of statistical variance, if a RB isn't great in their first 10 carries they are not going to be great in carries 25+. Both analytically and logically it makes no sense that a running back "gets better as the game goes on", and it's one of the silliest common sayings in all of professional sports right next door to the people who for decades clung to "but the rookie hasn't proven anything on an NFL field yet, so he can't possibly be better than a veteran already."

[Sriracha]

I wouldn't say alarming. It's disappointing from the hype he had pre season, but it's not the end all. Many high quality RBs have seasons below 4.0.

He may very well be a bust, but it is way too early to make that call based on a few poor games.

Exactly.. Leveon Bell (3.5 ypc), Joe Mixon (3.6), Marshawn Lynch (4.0, 4.1, 3.8, 3.6).... Ladainian Tomlinson (3.6)

This is a lot like saying that Antonio Brown only had 167 yards as a rookie so we shouldn't right off Dezmon Paton yet.

I mean sure, it's true. It's not a death knell. But it is far, far from ideal and we should definitely be focusing on the guys that have already broken out over the guys that have performed poorly but may one day, in a hail marry, break out.

Completely disingenuous comparison. They're both WRs which have very different analytical predictors than RBs... and Antonio Brown and Dezmon Patmon do not share any similarities besides the fact they were both drafted in the 6th round. I believe we can both agree that Antonio Brown is an extreme outlier.

If Jonathan Taylor breaks out, it'll be far from a "hail mary".

[Dynasty DeLorean]

Yeah. It's amazing how that works.

Derrick Henry has 550 yards @4.1 ypc and 2 tds in first half of games and 1,000 yards @5.8 ypc and 14 tds in the 2nd half.

People just don’t get not every player is the same

Is that a career metric or a 2020 metric?

Even if it's career, it is far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far, far and away an outlier.

NFL.com recently updated their website and now you can only look up these stats for the most recent season, not over a whole career, which is annoying so I can't check it myself. Prior to that change though I remember doing a study on this and basically every RB of note saw their YPC decrease throughout the time of game and throughout their number of carries. That is, for basically every significant RB, their YPC in the 4th quarter was worse than their YPC in the 1st quarter, and their YPC in carries 25+ was worse than their YPC in carries 1-10.

Emmitt, LT2, Peterson, Edge, CMart, Bettis, Marshawn, etc.

The notion that a RB gets stronger as the game goes on is complete fallacy imho. Statistics back this up. Even more obviously, logic does too. The notion that one guy getting hit on every rush and carrying the load is "wearing down" a defense of 11 players, half of whom do nothing on most rusing plays, and who are constantly rotating in and out with rest, is absurd.

Again, analytics back this up. Traditionally, other than maybe the odd exception well within the realm of statistical variance, if a RB isn't great in their first 10 carries they are not going to be great in carries 25+. Both analytically and logically it makes no sense that a running back "gets better as the game goes on", and it's one of the silliest common sayings in all of professional sports right next door to the people who for decades clung to "but the rookie hasn't proven anything on an NFL field yet, so he can't possibly be better than a veteran already."

It’s been true basically since he’s been a starter, so 2019 and 2020.

And I never said ALL rbs get stronger as the game goes on, not sure why you’d write a paragraph refuting something I never said.

[Bronco Billy]

The notion that a RB gets stronger as the game goes on is complete fallacy imho. Statistics back this up. Even more obviously, logic does too. The notion that one guy getting hit on every rush and carrying the load is "wearing down" a defense of 11 players, half of whom do nothing on most rusing plays, and who are constantly rotating in and out with rest, is absurd.

Again, analytics back this up. Traditionally, other than maybe the odd exception well within the realm of statistical variance, if a RB isn't great in their first 10 carries they are not going to be great in carries 25+. Both analytically and logically it makes no sense that a running back "gets better as the game goes on", and it's one of the silliest common sayings in all of professional sports

How does a guy who feels knowledgable enough to lecture here not understand what has been true of many great RBs, and has been for a long time? Offensive lines and RBs can learn in-game through game flow where weaknesses can be exploited. Put that together with superior physical attributes and add that the really good ones work hard to enhance their stamina, and it’s quite logical that better backs can get more efficient and productive as they get increased work load and deeper into games.

To argue otherwise means that you just must not watch much football or you just won’t believe what you see.

[remedy29]

It sounds like Vcize never played a snap of football. Defending the run, first involves the defensive line, then the LBs. And yes, those DB are not getting hit throughout the game, but they are the last line of defense.
It's the same reason Peyton Manning and Tom Brady go up tempo a lot. They want to tire the defensive line. Once the DL is tired, the offensive will have success.

[Vcize]

The notion that a RB gets stronger as the game goes on is complete fallacy imho. Statistics back this up. Even more obviously, logic does too. The notion that one guy getting hit on every rush and carrying the load is "wearing down" a defense of 11 players, half of whom do nothing on most rusing plays, and who are constantly rotating in and out with rest, is absurd.

Again, analytics back this up. Traditionally, other than maybe the odd exception well within the realm of statistical variance, if a RB isn't great in their first 10 carries they are not going to be great in carries 25+. Both analytically and logically it makes no sense that a running back "gets better as the game goes on", and it's one of the silliest common sayings in all of professional sports

How does a guy who feels knowledgable enough to lecture here not understand what has been true of many great RBs, and has been for a long time? Offensive lines and RBs can learn in-game through game flow where weaknesses can be exploited. Put that together with superior physical attributes and add that the really good ones work hard to enhance their stamina, and it’s quite logical that better backs can get more efficient and productive as they get increased work load and deeper into games.

To argue otherwise means that you just must not watch much football or you just won’t believe what you see.

But that's kind of my point. People have said it about many RBs. That doesn't mean it's been TRUE of many great RBs.

Most of those guys' efficiency went DOWN as the game went on, not up. Like I said on the last page unfortunately NFL.com pulled their career splits so I can't present the data again here but I remember offhand things like Emmitt Smith's worst YPC, lowest analytics metrics, etc were all in the 4th quarter. They were all at their worst on carries 25+ and at their best on carries 1-10.

It's fun to say stuff like "Marshawn Lynch gets better as the game goes on". But it's just a saying. Statistically Lynch has a lower YPC in the 4th quarter than he does in the 1st quarter. He has less YAC per carry in the 4th quarter than he does in the 1st quarter. He has a lower YPC and less YAC on carries 25+ than on carries 1-10.

Most of the RBs that anyone has ever said "he gets better as the game goes on" analytically and statistically actually got worse or stayed flat as the game went on. Which makes sense, because playing running back is unimaginably exhausting.

That's why I was so surprised when I saw the stat about Henry. When I had run that study it was several years ago so Henry wasn't a part of it. Maybe I am misremembering the extent of the differences but based on what I remember offhand he is a true outlier in the strongest sense of the word, because the vast majority of other great running backs that people like to say "got better as the game went on" ACTUALLY got statistically worse as the game went on.

[Vcize]

It sounds like Vcize never played a snap of football. Defending the run, first involves the defensive line, then the LBs. And yes, those DB are not getting hit throughout the game, but they are the last line of defense.
It's the same reason Peyton Manning and Tom Brady go up tempo a lot. They want to tire the defensive line. Once the DL is tired, the offensive will have success.

I mean I never played a snap of NFL football, that much is true. I definitely played my fair share of football before a career ending neck injury though.

[TD41]

All these RB names of the past decade... Someone mention my love David Wilson?

[murphysxm]

The notion that a RB gets stronger as the game goes on is complete fallacy imho. Statistics back this up. Even more obviously, logic does too. The notion that one guy getting hit on every rush and carrying the load is "wearing down" a defense of 11 players, half of whom do nothing on most rusing plays, and who are constantly rotating in and out with rest, is absurd.

Again, analytics back this up. Traditionally, other than maybe the odd exception well within the realm of statistical variance, if a RB isn't great in their first 10 carries they are not going to be great in carries 25+. Both analytically and logically it makes no sense that a running back "gets better as the game goes on", and it's one of the silliest common sayings in all of professional sports

How does a guy who feels knowledgable enough to lecture here not understand what has been true of many great RBs, and has been for a long time? Offensive lines and RBs can learn in-game through game flow where weaknesses can be exploited. Put that together with superior physical attributes and add that the really good ones work hard to enhance their stamina, and it’s quite logical that better backs can get more efficient and productive as they get increased work load and deeper into games.

To argue otherwise means that you just must not watch much football or you just won’t believe what you see.

But that's kind of my point. People have said it about many RBs. That doesn't mean it's been TRUE of many great RBs.

Most of those guys' efficiency went DOWN as the game went on, not up. Like I said on the last page unfortunately NFL.com pulled their career splits so I can't present the data again here but I remember offhand things like Emmitt Smith's worst YPC, lowest analytics metrics, etc were all in the 4th quarter. They were all at their worst on carries 25+ and at their best on carries 1-10.

It's fun to say stuff like "Marshawn Lynch gets better as the game goes on". But it's just a saying. Statistically Lynch has a lower YPC in the 4th quarter than he does in the 1st quarter. He has less YAC per carry in the 4th quarter than he does in the 1st quarter. He has a lower YPC and less YAC on carries 25+ than on carries 1-10.

Most of the RBs that anyone has ever said "he gets better as the game goes on" analytically and statistically actually got worse or stayed flat as the game went on. Which makes sense, because playing running back is unimaginably exhausting.

That's why I was so surprised when I saw the stat about Henry. When I had run that study it was several years ago so Henry wasn't a part of it. Maybe I am misremembering the extent of the differences but based on what I remember offhand he is a true outlier in the strongest sense of the word, because the vast majority of other great running backs that people like to say "got better as the game went on" ACTUALLY got statistically worse as the game went on.

I admittedly did not read the whole post, but if your theory is Derek Henry gets worse as the game goes on.... I am confused.

[Bronco Billy]

The notion that a RB gets stronger as the game goes on is complete fallacy imho. Statistics back this up. Even more obviously, logic does too. The notion that one guy getting hit on every rush and carrying the load is "wearing down" a defense of 11 players, half of whom do nothing on most rusing plays, and who are constantly rotating in and out with rest, is absurd.

Again, analytics back this up. Traditionally, other than maybe the odd exception well within the realm of statistical variance, if a RB isn't great in their first 10 carries they are not going to be great in carries 25+. Both analytically and logically it makes no sense that a running back "gets better as the game goes on", and it's one of the silliest common sayings in all of professional sports

How does a guy who feels knowledgable enough to lecture here not understand what has been true of many great RBs, and has been for a long time? Offensive lines and RBs can learn in-game through game flow where weaknesses can be exploited. Put that together with superior physical attributes and add that the really good ones work hard to enhance their stamina, and it’s quite logical that better backs can get more efficient and productive as they get increased work load and deeper into games.

To argue otherwise means that you just must not watch much football or you just won’t believe what you see.

But that's kind of my point. People have said it about many RBs. That doesn't mean it's been TRUE of many great RBs.

Most of those guys' efficiency went DOWN as the game went on, not up. Like I said on the last page unfortunately NFL.com pulled their career splits so I can't present the data again here but I remember offhand things like Emmitt Smith's worst YPC, lowest analytics metrics, etc were all in the 4th quarter. They were all at their worst on carries 25+ and at their best on carries 1-10.

It's fun to say stuff like "Marshawn Lynch gets better as the game goes on". But it's just a saying. Statistically Lynch has a lower YPC in the 4th quarter than he does in the 1st quarter. He has less YAC per carry in the 4th quarter than he does in the 1st quarter. He has a lower YPC and less YAC on carries 25+ than on carries 1-10.

Most of the RBs that anyone has ever said "he gets better as the game goes on" analytically and statistically actually got worse or stayed flat as the game went on. Which makes sense, because playing running back is unimaginably exhausting.

That's why I was so surprised when I saw the stat about Henry. When I had run that study it was several years ago so Henry wasn't a part of it. Maybe I am misremembering the extent of the differences but based on what I remember offhand he is a true outlier in the strongest sense of the word, because the vast majority of other great running backs that people like to say "got better as the game went on" ACTUALLY got statistically worse as the game went on.

https://www.footballdb.com/statistics/n ... rt=rushatt

I didn’t go through the entire list, but 6 of the top 10 RBs in rushing attempts this year have greater ypc in the 4th quarter than they do in the 1st quarter.

You’re welcome to go through as many players and years as you like, but I don’t think you’ve got enough evidence to back your position.

[mgscott]

How does a guy who feels knowledgable enough to lecture here not understand what has been true of many great RBs, and has been for a long time? Offensive lines and RBs can learn in-game through game flow where weaknesses can be exploited. Put that together with superior physical attributes and add that the really good ones work hard to enhance their stamina, and it’s quite logical that better backs can get more efficient and productive as they get increased work load and deeper into games.

To argue otherwise means that you just must not watch much football or you just won’t believe what you see.

But that's kind of my point. People have said it about many RBs. That doesn't mean it's been TRUE of many great RBs.

Most of those guys' efficiency went DOWN as the game went on, not up. Like I said on the last page unfortunately NFL.com pulled their career splits so I can't present the data again here but I remember offhand things like Emmitt Smith's worst YPC, lowest analytics metrics, etc were all in the 4th quarter. They were all at their worst on carries 25+ and at their best on carries 1-10.

It's fun to say stuff like "Marshawn Lynch gets better as the game goes on". But it's just a saying. Statistically Lynch has a lower YPC in the 4th quarter than he does in the 1st quarter. He has less YAC per carry in the 4th quarter than he does in the 1st quarter. He has a lower YPC and less YAC on carries 25+ than on carries 1-10.

Most of the RBs that anyone has ever said "he gets better as the game goes on" analytically and statistically actually got worse or stayed flat as the game went on. Which makes sense, because playing running back is unimaginably exhausting.

That's why I was so surprised when I saw the stat about Henry. When I had run that study it was several years ago so Henry wasn't a part of it. Maybe I am misremembering the extent of the differences but based on what I remember offhand he is a true outlier in the strongest sense of the word, because the vast majority of other great running backs that people like to say "got better as the game went on" ACTUALLY got statistically worse as the game went on.

https://www.footballdb.com/statistics/n ... rt=rushatt

I didn’t go through the entire list, but 6 of the top 10 RBs in rushing attempts this year have greater ypc in the 4th quarter than they do in the 1st quarter.

You’re welcome to go through as many players and years as you like, but I don’t think you’ve got enough evidence to back your position.

Quit providing links and facts to the argument. Where is your long, 4-paragraph opinion piece. #fakenews.

[Bronco Billy]

But that's kind of my point. People have said it about many RBs. That doesn't mean it's been TRUE of many great RBs.

Most of those guys' efficiency went DOWN as the game went on, not up. Like I said on the last page unfortunately NFL.com pulled their career splits so I can't present the data again here but I remember offhand things like Emmitt Smith's worst YPC, lowest analytics metrics, etc were all in the 4th quarter. They were all at their worst on carries 25+ and at their best on carries 1-10.

It's fun to say stuff like "Marshawn Lynch gets better as the game goes on". But it's just a saying. Statistically Lynch has a lower YPC in the 4th quarter than he does in the 1st quarter. He has less YAC per carry in the 4th quarter than he does in the 1st quarter. He has a lower YPC and less YAC on carries 25+ than on carries 1-10.

Most of the RBs that anyone has ever said "he gets better as the game goes on" analytically and statistically actually got worse or stayed flat as the game went on. Which makes sense, because playing running back is unimaginably exhausting.

That's why I was so surprised when I saw the stat about Henry. When I had run that study it was several years ago so Henry wasn't a part of it. Maybe I am misremembering the extent of the differences but based on what I remember offhand he is a true outlier in the strongest sense of the word, because the vast majority of other great running backs that people like to say "got better as the game went on" ACTUALLY got statistically worse as the game went on.

https://www.footballdb.com/statistics/n ... rt=rushatt

I didn’t go through the entire list, but 6 of the top 10 RBs in rushing attempts this year have greater ypc in the 4th quarter than they do in the 1st quarter.

You’re welcome to go through as many players and years as you like, but I don’t think you’ve got enough evidence to back your position.

Quit providing links and facts to the argument. Where is your long, 4-paragraph opinion piece. #fakenews.

My bad.

[Vcize]

How does a guy who feels knowledgable enough to lecture here not understand what has been true of many great RBs, and has been for a long time? Offensive lines and RBs can learn in-game through game flow where weaknesses can be exploited. Put that together with superior physical attributes and add that the really good ones work hard to enhance their stamina, and it’s quite logical that better backs can get more efficient and productive as they get increased work load and deeper into games.

To argue otherwise means that you just must not watch much football or you just won’t believe what you see.

But that's kind of my point. People have said it about many RBs. That doesn't mean it's been TRUE of many great RBs.

Most of those guys' efficiency went DOWN as the game went on, not up. Like I said on the last page unfortunately NFL.com pulled their career splits so I can't present the data again here but I remember offhand things like Emmitt Smith's worst YPC, lowest analytics metrics, etc were all in the 4th quarter. They were all at their worst on carries 25+ and at their best on carries 1-10.

It's fun to say stuff like "Marshawn Lynch gets better as the game goes on". But it's just a saying. Statistically Lynch has a lower YPC in the 4th quarter than he does in the 1st quarter. He has less YAC per carry in the 4th quarter than he does in the 1st quarter. He has a lower YPC and less YAC on carries 25+ than on carries 1-10.

Most of the RBs that anyone has ever said "he gets better as the game goes on" analytically and statistically actually got worse or stayed flat as the game went on. Which makes sense, because playing running back is unimaginably exhausting.

That's why I was so surprised when I saw the stat about Henry. When I had run that study it was several years ago so Henry wasn't a part of it. Maybe I am misremembering the extent of the differences but based on what I remember offhand he is a true outlier in the strongest sense of the word, because the vast majority of other great running backs that people like to say "got better as the game went on" ACTUALLY got statistically worse as the game went on.

https://www.footballdb.com/statistics/n ... rt=rushatt

I didn’t go through the entire list, but 6 of the top 10 RBs in rushing attempts this year have greater ypc in the 4th quarter than they do in the 1st quarter.

You’re welcome to go through as many players and years as you like, but I don’t think you’ve got enough evidence to back your position.

When I ran the study years ago (it is somewhere on footballguys.com if you want to dig for it) it was using career numbers, not just 1 season's worth of numbers. I'm sure there is a lot of variance year to year but over the course of their career an overwhelming percentage of them had a YPC that trended downwards as the game went on.

That was sometime 3-5 years ago to be fair so I suppose it's possible something could have changed since then, but I don't really think it's very likely.

[Bronco Billy]

But that's kind of my point. People have said it about many RBs. That doesn't mean it's been TRUE of many great RBs.

Most of those guys' efficiency went DOWN as the game went on, not up. Like I said on the last page unfortunately NFL.com pulled their career splits so I can't present the data again here but I remember offhand things like Emmitt Smith's worst YPC, lowest analytics metrics, etc were all in the 4th quarter. They were all at their worst on carries 25+ and at their best on carries 1-10.

It's fun to say stuff like "Marshawn Lynch gets better as the game goes on". But it's just a saying. Statistically Lynch has a lower YPC in the 4th quarter than he does in the 1st quarter. He has less YAC per carry in the 4th quarter than he does in the 1st quarter. He has a lower YPC and less YAC on carries 25+ than on carries 1-10.

Most of the RBs that anyone has ever said "he gets better as the game goes on" analytically and statistically actually got worse or stayed flat as the game went on. Which makes sense, because playing running back is unimaginably exhausting.

That's why I was so surprised when I saw the stat about Henry. When I had run that study it was several years ago so Henry wasn't a part of it. Maybe I am misremembering the extent of the differences but based on what I remember offhand he is a true outlier in the strongest sense of the word, because the vast majority of other great running backs that people like to say "got better as the game went on" ACTUALLY got statistically worse as the game went on.

https://www.footballdb.com/statistics/n ... rt=rushatt

I didn’t go through the entire list, but 6 of the top 10 RBs in rushing attempts this year have greater ypc in the 4th quarter than they do in the 1st quarter.

You’re welcome to go through as many players and years as you like, but I don’t think you’ve got enough evidence to back your position.

When I ran the study years ago (it is somewhere on footballguys.com if you want to dig for it) it was using career numbers, not just 1 season's worth of numbers. I'm sure there is a lot of variance year to year but over the course of their career an overwhelming percentage of them had a YPC that trended downwards as the game went on.

That was sometime 3-5 years ago to be fair so I suppose it's possible something could have changed since then, but I don't really think it's very likely.

Got it. So I give you a database so that the numbers are transparent to everyone and anyone who wants can seek data, pick the first 10 names on this years list and show you that over half of the RBs perform something that you aver is a rare event, and so you completely move the goal posts.

I’ll know better in the future. Thanks.

[Vcize]

https://www.footballdb.com/statistics/n ... rt=rushatt

I didn’t go through the entire list, but 6 of the top 10 RBs in rushing attempts this year have greater ypc in the 4th quarter than they do in the 1st quarter.

You’re welcome to go through as many players and years as you like, but I don’t think you’ve got enough evidence to back your position.

When I ran the study years ago (it is somewhere on footballguys.com if you want to dig for it) it was using career numbers, not just 1 season's worth of numbers. I'm sure there is a lot of variance year to year but over the course of their career an overwhelming percentage of them had a YPC that trended downwards as the game went on.

That was sometime 3-5 years ago to be fair so I suppose it's possible something could have changed since then, but I don't really think it's very likely.

Got it. So I give you a database so that the numbers are transparent to everyone and anyone who wants can seek data, pick the first 10 names on this years list and show you that over half of the RBs perform something that you aver is a rare event, and so you completely move the goal posts.

I’ll know better in the future. Thanks.

What goalposts did I move? Sorry if it wasn't clear but I was talking about career numbers in the very first post I brought it up. I even said that it would surprise me if Henry's numbers being quoted were career numbers and that the only reason I couldn't just pull the numbers back up is because the only source that compiled splits via career no longer provides that data.

Anyway pretty sure this side track has run its course by now we've gotten far away from talking about JT, lol.

NFL.com recently updated their website and now you can only look up these stats for the most recent season, not over a whole career, which is annoying so I can't check it myself. Prior to that change though I remember doing a study on this and basically every RB of note saw their YPC decrease throughout the time of game and throughout their number of carries. That is, for basically every significant RB, their YPC in the 4th quarter was worse than their YPC in the 1st quarter, and their YPC in carries 25+ was worse than their YPC in carries 1-10.

Emmitt, LT2, Peterson, Edge, CMart, Bettis, Marshawn, etc.