SITE NEWS: We are moving all of our site and company news into a single blog for Sports-Reference.com. We'll tag all PFR content, so you can quickly and easily find the content you want.

Also, our existing PFR blog rss feed will be redirected to the new site's feed.

Pro-Football-Reference.com » Sports Reference

For more from Chase and Jason, check out their work at Football Perspective and The Big Lead.

Archive for September, 2009

Checkdowns: Name the 4,000-Yard Passers

Posted by Neil Paine on September 2, 2009

13 Comments | Posted in Checkdowns

AFL versus NFL: 1964-1966 Trends

Posted by Jason Lisk on September 2, 2009

For those that haven't been checking the blog on a regular basis through the off-season, this is part of a series on the AFL versus the NFL. For previous posts, we have now created a category and if you click here you can read all the others.

Let's now turn to trends developing in the middle part of the decade.

In the NFL, total offensive yards per game declined from the bubble of the early 1960's. Yards per attempt also decreased from the historic peak following rapid expansion, going from 7.9 in 1962, to 7.5 in 1963, to 7.2 in 1964, with a correction back to 7.5 in 1965 followed by a drop to 6.9 yards per attempt in 1966.

9 Comments | Posted in AFL versus NFL

Running back Personality Types, part two

Posted by Chase Stuart on September 1, 2009

Yesterday, I explained exactly what the heck running back personality types were. Today I'm going to take a look at the top RBs in all 16 personality types.

For each group, I'm listing the running backs from most extreme (i.e., most representative of the group) to least extreme. Recall that the four categories are:

Exciting/Plodder: Was this running back's YPC average better or worse than most good running backs?

Vulture/Yardage: Was this running back better at gaining rushing yards or scoring rushing touchdowns? Remember that this is all relative to each runner. A guy can be an all-time great at rushing and a scoring, but he has to still be either a vulture or a yardage eater.

Catcher/Runner: Compared to the other top running backs, how valuable was this guy in the receiving game?

Big/Small: Was this guy heavier or lighter than average?

After each running back's name, I've also listed his rank in each of the categories. Suppose RB X is an E-V-C-B, and his rank is 1-4-66-25. That would mean that he was the best ever at yards per carry and had the 4th highest rushing TD/rushing yards ratio. Remember there are 134 RBs in the study, so 67 running backs are in each group. If this guy was a 66 in catching, that means he was essentially neutral, i.e., he was the 66th best pass-catching running back. Note that you can't have a 68 -- at that point, you'd become a 67 in the other category. If a guy that was a 63 in the big category was 10 slots lower (i.e., a little lighter), he'd be a 63 in the small category. So RB X being a 25 in size means he is heavier (for his era) than over 100 other backs, but only a little bit heavier on average than a typical RB in the big category.

Let's go to the results.

13 Comments | Posted in Totally Useless

Page 3 of 3123