Time to change how the rushing record is figured

[Tablarasa]

Lets see it as total yards divided by games in the season they were rushed (total games, not games played).

Not trying to put down Jamal's accomplishment this year, but it does not compare to OJ's 73 season. I think Brown had some pretty incredible seasons too, figured at yards per game of season.

 

[RPM]

good point. a lot to be said for the guys who did it with a 14 game schedule...

 

[TheFunkMonkey]

Too late for that. Think of all the records that have already been broken during the 16-game seasons.

Anyway, it wouldn't matter. Even if you made a distinction between 14 and 16-game records, people would eventually forget about the 14-game records.

For example, do you know who scored the most points (or rebounds, assists, steals, etc) in the NBA before the shot-clock? It is kinda the same thing.

 

[Tablarasa]

I have to disagree strongly.

Do you remember who holds the NBA record for points in a game? Most people do..the big 100 by Wilt. Many don't recall that it was before the 3-second rule and the lane were instituted though.

With the current NFL schedule having a bye along with extra games, its much easier to have what looks like a historical performance. OJ's 2003 season did not have an offweek, and of course had 2 less games to do it.

 

[Tablarasa]

After a bit of research, here are some numbers for you to look at.

From 1949 to 1960, the NFL played a 12 game schedule. From 1961 to 1977, the NFL played a 14 game schedule. From 1978 to the present, the NFL has played a 16 game schedule.

Notable years, broken down by Rushing/Game:

1) OJ Simpson 1973 2003 yards 143.07 pg
2) Jim Brown 1963 1863 yards 133.07 pg
3) Walter Payton 1977 1852 yards 132.29 pg
4) Eric Dickerson 1984 2105 yards 131.56 pg
5) OJ Simpson 1975 1817 yards 129.79 pg
6) J Lewis 2003 2066 yards 129.12 pg
7) B Sanders 1997 2053 yards 128.31 pg
8) Jim Brown 1958 1527 yards 127.25 pg
9) T Davis 1998 2008 yards 125.50 pg

Hopefully, I didn't miss any big non-strike years in compiling these numbers. While I agree, folks are highly unlikely to just stop using the "yards per season" standard, this stat could be stated at the same time, showing a much more meaningful relation to the efforts of years past.

At the same time, think about the 1,000 yard season. It has been the "standard" of excellence for a running back season since the 12 game schedule. At that time, it meant an average of 83+ yards a game for the entire season. Now, it means an average of 62.5 a game for the season..not exactly something special.

 

[TheFunkMonkey]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Tablarasa:
I have to disagree strongly.

Do you remember who holds the NBA record for points in a game? Most people do..the big 100 by Wilt. Many don't recall that it was before the 3-second rule and the lane were instituted though.

With the current NFL schedule having a bye along with extra games, its much easier to have what looks like a historical performance. OJ's 2003 season did not have an offweek, and of course had 2 less games to do it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You basically proved my point though. People remember Wilt's 100 because it is *still* the record!

I know it is far-fetched, but imagine if 27 players broke Wilt's record of 100 points. Older people would still remember Wilt, but I don't think too many kids would know that Wilt scored the 28th-most points in a game.

(To be fair, Wilt might be a bad example. Wilt's record is easy to remember because he was the first to break 100, and how can you forget a round-number like 100? But what if Wilt's record was 89 points? Wouldn't be so easy to remember, would it?)

But it is happening in baseball. If you hit 500 homers, you were a legend. It used to be an exclusive club, and it wasn't too hard to name all the players who hit 500 homers. But 15-20 years from now, how many kids are gonna know Mel Ott or Jimmie Foxx?

 

[TheFunkMonkey]

HOWEVER, I pretty much agree with you. I do think that yards-per-game is a better measure when you're comparing seasons of 12-16 games.

For example, it used to be a big deal when a RB got 1,000 yards in a season. But that's only 62.5 yards-per-game!!!!!!

Of course, it doesn't make sense for the NFL to use yards-per-game. The NFL needs to sell tickets, the NFL needs to get TV ratings. And you can't blame them, they're a business and they're supposed to make money.

Imagine if the announcers were like "Folks, Jamal Lewis is having a great year. In fact, if he can average 154.4378 yards in his next 4 games, he will break the NFL rushing record!"

That obviously isn't as catchy as "Folks, Jamal Lewis is having a great year. He only needs 397 yards to break Eric Dickerson's rushing record!"

 

[lander]

It's impossible to compare.

1. More games equals more yardage (obviously)
2. More games equals more injury (unmeasurable with yds/game IMO)

 

[RPM]

1500 yards is now the standard for the elite running backs in the league. baltimore traded priest holmes away because he was only getting 1100 or so...

 

[Tablarasa]

Ah, but do you remember who passed for the most yards each year? Or who had the highest quarterback rating, which is a much more obscure formula?

It would not be hard at all for the NFL to create a formula for running backs, taking into account total yardage, attempts, touchdowns, and fumbles..with games played of course being part of the formula.

 

[CountryDickMontana]

Tangent, sorry....How about the "sack" record? Deacon Jones claims Bruce Smith/Reggie White aren't even CLOSE to what his record would have been, if they would have kept that stat when he played.

 

[DENIRO]

rpm who did balt get for priest holmes