BMI - invented in the 1800's, is it helpful or total junk? (1 Viewer)

[Liquid Tension]

To backtrack for a minute-

Why were some of the earlier guys wrong when they said player X(Faulk, Priest, Tiki, Dunn) were too small to be a RB in the NFL and how's that mesh up with BMI?

This is easy. Most people don't understand how to measure size. We all thought MJD was small. We were wrong. When you look at BMI, you'll quickly realize that MJD is the opposite of small. He's a tank. Fauk and Priest have ideal BMI scores. Tiki was probably pretty close to ideal when he was having his best seasons. Dunn is a tough guy to peg. I don't think he's as tall as the 5'9" he's listed at, but I don't know exactly how short he really is. Either way, he probably has a lower BMI than the rest and that's probably part of the reason why he never really achieved the stud status of the others (despite having a fine career overall). It will be interesting to follow Ray Rice for this reason since he's another "small" back with a high BMI.

The bolded part makes me think that some guys may put on the added weight to be ideal? Tiki was very light early in his career but later on added a seriously strenuous work out regime that made guys puke that did it with him. He enhanced his leg strength by double and probably put on good weight and helped his BMI.The question, is that if a guy is slightly under before and only needs "7" pounds more to be in the range then that does not seem to be an issue.

Stewart is a little above the range and I would think a guy his size will have trouble keeping his weight down?

Finally, while most weight is below the waist, a guy like Reggie Bush who is pretty huge in his torso has thinner type legs so his BMI is a double hit I would think?

Mostly thinking out loud here, but not having accurate weight height is an issue...I asked in the other thread what site is the "bible" for accurate height/weight?

 

[CalBear]

I would rather bet on a decade of results than assume that a player will be an exception to an established pattern.

You're only looking at one side of the results. Sure, most of the successful running backs have BMI within some defined range. But so do most of the failed running backs. Cedric Benson was highly drafted and a near-perfect body size by this measure, yet he busted. Cadillac Williams is also a top-4 RB who looks like a bust. William Green. Tim Biakabatuka. Lawrence Phillips. All busts, all top-10 picks, all with fine BMI by your measure.How many highly-drafted backs with McFadden's BMI have busted in the past 10 years? As far as I can tell, none. So what you're looking at is a lack of data about the success of talented RBs with different body sizes--you're not looking at data which suggests that RBs with different body sizes can't succeed.

 

[Liquid Tension]

Johnson's combine BMI was 27.5, which is lower than any top 30 RB in the NFL. The closest guys are Warrick Dunn and Reggie Bush.

But not necessarily lower than the top 30 RBs in the NFL displayed at the combine. If you're comparing combine numbers to current numbers, it's junk data.

This is what I was thinking

 

[EBF]

The bolded part makes me think that some guys may put on the added weight to be ideal? Tiki was very light early in his career but later on added a seriously strenuous work out regime that made guys puke that did it with him. He enhanced his leg strength by double and probably put on good weight and helped his BMI.The question, is that if a guy is slightly under before and only needs "7" pounds more to be in the range then that does not seem to be an issue.

Being slightly undersized is better than being acutely undersized, but both are worse than being ideal.

Stewart is a little above the range and I would think a guy his size will have trouble keeping his weight down?

Maybe. He's bigger than most of the elite backs, but there have been RBs with very similar BMI scores who have had long term success as workhorse backs in the NFL. Jamal Lewis and Ricky Williams are two guys who come to mind. I would probably like Stewart more if he was ten pounds lighter, but he put up monster numbers at the combine and was a top 15 pick. The fact that his BMI is slightly high isn't enough for me to significantly downgrade him.

Finally, while most weight is below the waist, a guy like Reggie Bush who is pretty huge in his torso has thinner type legs so his BMI is a double hit I would think?

That might be part of the problem with Reggie. He's similar to McFadden in that regard. Both guys have big torsos and relatively thin legs.

Mostly thinking out loud here, but not having accurate weight height is an issue...I asked in the other thread what site is the "bible" for accurate height/weight?

As far as I know NFL teams don't release that information, so you're out of luck once a player enters the league. NFL Draft Scout has accurate combine heights and weights for every major draft prospect since 1999.

 

[Liquid Tension]

Johnson's combine BMI was 27.5, which is lower than any top 30 RB in the NFL. The closest guys are Warrick Dunn and Reggie Bush.

But not necessarily lower than the top 30 RBs in the NFL displayed at the combine. If you're comparing combine numbers to current numbers, it's junk data.

It mostly holds up when you look at the combine numbers because most of these guys enter the league as finished products or very close to it. I can probably go back and make a new list using only combine numbers when I get a chance. It will show pretty much the same thing.

This is probably the thing I have the most problem with in all of this. I'd highly disagree that 20 yr old kids are finished products. I'd also suggest that NFL training regimens and college ones are different providing an opportunity for growth.

I can't speak from experience and I don't know this for sure, but I would venture to guess they are much closer than you are implying here. These top collegiate schools that pump out pro athletes probably have just as dedicated workout facilities and training programs that the pros do.

No matter what, they don't have the same amount of time. You know, some of these kids do attend class....

There are exceptions to every rule (and kid), but the workout regiment and diet along with full time responsibility makes it different in my mind. Plus, not every kid goes to USC. While many college teams upgrade their facilities, when compared to the NFL , they will come up short.

 

[EBF]

I would rather bet on a decade of results than assume that a player will be an exception to an established pattern.

You're only looking at one side of the results. Sure, most of the successful running backs have BMI within some defined range. But so do most of the failed running backs. Cedric Benson was highly drafted and a near-perfect body size by this measure, yet he busted. Cadillac Williams is also a top-4 RB who looks like a bust. William Green. Tim Biakabatuka. Lawrence Phillips. All busts, all top-10 picks, all with fine BMI by your measure.

Saying that all of the elite RBs in the NFL have a high BMI is not the same as saying every RB prospect with a high BMI will be elite in the NFL. You misinterpreted my argument. I'm not ignoring the failed high BMI running backs. I'm just saying that in order to have a chance at being an elite workhorse NFL RB, a player must have a high BMI. Players with a low BMI do not appear to have a chance since none of them have accomplished the feat. It's possible that a future prospect could prove this rule incorrect. No one has done it yet.

A chance at success > no chance at success.

A chance at success ≠ guaranteed success.

How many highly-drafted backs with McFadden's BMI have busted in the past 10 years? As far as I can tell, none. So what you're looking at is a lack of data about the success of talented RBs with different body sizes--you're not looking at data which suggests that RBs with different body sizes can't succeed.

I have a different interpretation. The United States is an enormous country with a huge population of athletes. There are probably millions of high school football players in the USA. The NCAA thins the ranks by selecting the best from that pool and eliminating the rest. The NFL thins the ranks by selecting the best from that pool and eliminating the rest. In all likelihood there are elite football players with low BMI scores. Yet none of these players make it through the filters to become workhorse NFL backs. These players are all busts. They were auditioning for the NFL and they failed.To me, the fact that no athletes with abnormal body types have emerged from the millions deep talent pool to become workhorse NFL RBs is "data which suggests that RBs with different body sizes can't succeed." If they could do it, then they'd be doing it. It's not for lack of effort or supply.

McFadden is a rare creature because he survived the selection process and performed well enough to convince an NFL team that he was worthy of a top 5 draft pick. In this sense he's unique and it's true that there's no recent precedent to show that he can't succeed. However, I believe that the absence of successful similar RBs in the NFL suggests that he's facing an uphill battle. You can argue that he's going to revolutionize the game and be the first of his kind to succeed. You mentioned Michael Jordan as a comparable situation. The difference is that height and size are assets in basketball. If you have two players with identical athletic skills, you will always take the taller player. Different story with thin RBs. Thinness is not an asset for NFL RBs. If you have two players with identical athletic skills, you will always take the stronger player.

When given a choice between Jonathan Stewart and Darren McFadden, you should take Stewart. They have very similar athletic ability and pedigrees, but Stewart is much stronger and there have been players with his body type who have achieved multiple elite seasons in the NFL. McFadden will have to defy recent history to accomplish feats that players with Stewart's body type accomplish regularly.

 

[Liquid Tension]

If you look at the elite NFL backs of the past 5-6 years (the guys who played at a high level for a long time) you get the following numbers using heights and weights from NFL.com:

.....

As you can see, the range is pretty narrow. Mostly between 29.5-32.0.

...

I just ran the numbers using combine heights and weights found on NFL Draft Scout.

Here are the combine BMI scores for the top 30 RBs in my PPR league:

Clinton Portis - 28.7

Reggie Bush - 28.3

Ryan Grant - 28.3



Ricky Williams - 34.4

Michael Turner - 33.6

Rudi Johnson - 33.0

Travis Henry - 32.8

Deuce McAllister - 29.2

Lots of discrepancies with this little theory.

There weren't many discrepancies when I used the NFL.com height and weight numbers. Using the actual combine numbers revealed a few more successful low-ish BMI guys, but the average (30.5) was actually exactly the same as when I used the NFL.com numbers. I think it dispels the notion that the only reason guys like McFadden, Charles, and Johnson look small is because they're being compared to NFL veterans and not incoming rookies. They look small even when compared to incoming rookies. Overall, there's a pretty clear pattern. Most of the top pro backs fall roughly within the 29-33 range. None of them had a BMI below 28 when they entered the NFL.

So how about that Reggie Bush?

What about him?

Soooo, how many pounds does Chris Johnson have to gain to fit into the BMI range...or at least 28.3?

 

[CalBear]

Saying that all of the elite RBs in the NFL have a high BMI is not the same as saying every RB prospect with a high BMI will be elite in the NFL.

You misinterpreted my argument. I'm not ignoring the failed high BMI running backs. I'm just saying that in order to have a chance at being an elite workhorse NFL RB, a player must have a high BMI.

Once again, you're asserting this without proof.

How many highly-drafted backs with McFadden's BMI have busted in the past 10 years? As far as I can tell, none. So what you're looking at is a lack of data about the success of talented RBs with different body sizes--you're not looking at data which suggests that RBs with different body sizes can't succeed.

I have a different interpretation. The United States is an enormous country with a huge population of athletes. There are probably millions of high school football players in the USA. The NCAA thins the ranks by selecting the best from that pool and eliminating the rest. The NFL thins the ranks by selecting the best from that pool and eliminating the rest. In all likelihood there are elite football players with low BMI scores. Yet none of these players make it through the filters to become workhorse NFL backs. These players are all busts. They were auditioning for the NFL and they failed.To me, the fact that no athletes with abnormal body types have emerged from the millions deep talent pool to become workhorse NFL RBs is "data which suggests that RBs with different body sizes can't succeed." If they could do it, then they'd be doing it. It's not for lack of effort or supply.

But you're missing the point that McFadden is someone who NFL scouts believe will be a success at RB. There are lots of lanky players who NFL scouts don't believe will be successful; there are probably lots of others who get turned into WRs or DBs or whatever. (Deltha O'Neal, for one). Here we are looking at a specific player who has graded out as one of the top picks in the draft, despite the fact that he does not fit perfectly in the traditional mold of the RB. You are asserting that NFL scouts are wrong; that they have failed to discount his body size in their evaluation of him. I think that's presumptuous and not supported by the available facts.

 

[Liquid Tension]

I thought you liked Reggie Bush, and he falls out of your BMI "ideal" zone definition.

I liked him when he was entering the league and he's been a great pick for me in the only dynasty league where I took him (PPR), but he's certainly been a mild disappointment as an NFL player. His struggles are part of the reason why I started paying attention to BMI. My current model would be skeptical of Reggie Bush.

So, that means you are trading him from that franchise, correct?Just wondering.

I wouldn't trade Reggie Bush in a PPR league. That doesn't mean I think he's the next great NFL back.

I get it, you have a theory that you're pushing yet you don't believe in it. Thanks.

Jeff, you should get flagged for unsportsmanlike conduct EBF has said what he believes and has been extremely calm in responding to all sorts of criticisms and attacks. He is going out on a limb a little to defend it but he has made it clear it is not the only factor.He can answer for himself that he believes it, but you have to take other factors into consideration. In the Bush example, I am sure the huge amount of receptions is enough for him to have more value in a PPR and last year is probably the low end of what we will see from Bush. This is a good reason though why PPR leagues are bad and artificial, especially for RB's.

 

[EBF]

If you look at the elite NFL backs of the past 5-6 years (the guys who played at a high level for a long time) you get the following numbers using heights and weights from NFL.com:

.....

As you can see, the range is pretty narrow. Mostly between 29.5-32.0.

...

I just ran the numbers using combine heights and weights found on NFL Draft Scout.

Here are the combine BMI scores for the top 30 RBs in my PPR league:

Clinton Portis - 28.7

Reggie Bush - 28.3

Ryan Grant - 28.3



Ricky Williams - 34.4

Michael Turner - 33.6

Rudi Johnson - 33.0

Travis Henry - 32.8

Deuce McAllister - 29.2

Lots of discrepancies with this little theory.

There weren't many discrepancies when I used the NFL.com height and weight numbers. Using the actual combine numbers revealed a few more successful low-ish BMI guys, but the average (30.5) was actually exactly the same as when I used the NFL.com numbers. I think it dispels the notion that the only reason guys like McFadden, Charles, and Johnson look small is because they're being compared to NFL veterans and not incoming rookies. They look small even when compared to incoming rookies. Overall, there's a pretty clear pattern. Most of the top pro backs fall roughly within the 29-33 range. None of them had a BMI below 28 when they entered the NFL.

So how about that Reggie Bush?

What about him?

Soooo, how many pounds does Chris Johnson have to gain to fit into the BMI range...or at least 28.3?

He'd have to gain more than 20 pounds to hit the league average of 30.5. He'd have to gain 6 pounds to hit 28.3.

 

[EBF]

But you're missing the point that McFadden is someone who NFL scouts believe will be a success at RB. There are lots of lanky players who NFL scouts don't believe will be successful; there are probably lots of others who get turned into WRs or DBs or whatever. (Deltha O'Neal, for one). Here we are looking at a specific player who has graded out as one of the top picks in the draft, despite the fact that he does not fit perfectly in the traditional mold of the RB. You are asserting that NFL scouts are wrong; that they have failed to discount his body size in their evaluation of him. I think that's presumptuous and not supported by the available facts.

We could keep going back and forth with this, but I don't think it will be very productive. It's like arguing for the existence of god. You can't prove that it exists. I can't prove that it doesn't. Neither of us is likely to change the other's mind. We could keep arguing all week and accomplish nothing. I've laid out plenty of reasons to support my skepticism of skinny running backs. I think it's a matter of common sense and that anyone who looks at all of the variables will see a pretty clear RB body type pattern emerging from the NFL's natural selection process. In the end, you either find the argument compelling or you don't.

 

[RudeDog]

The evidence so far is decent.

what could be improved about it? what "needs work"?

A bigger sample size.We've established that most of the 'elite' backs are between 29.5-33.5, but there's just not been enough 'elite' backs to comfortably make that a true statement.

I wonder what Marcus Allen's BMI would have been

 

[benm3218]

If you look at the elite NFL backs of the past 5-6 years (the guys who played at a high level for a long time) you get the following numbers using heights and weights from NFL.com:

.....

As you can see, the range is pretty narrow. Mostly between 29.5-32.0.

...

I just ran the numbers using combine heights and weights found on NFL Draft Scout.

Here are the combine BMI scores for the top 30 RBs in my PPR league:

Clinton Portis - 28.7

Reggie Bush - 28.3

Ryan Grant - 28.3



Ricky Williams - 34.4

Michael Turner - 33.6

Rudi Johnson - 33.0

Travis Henry - 32.8

Deuce McAllister - 29.2

Lots of discrepancies with this little theory.

There weren't many discrepancies when I used the NFL.com height and weight numbers. Using the actual combine numbers revealed a few more successful low-ish BMI guys, but the average (30.5) was actually exactly the same as when I used the NFL.com numbers. I think it dispels the notion that the only reason guys like McFadden, Charles, and Johnson look small is because they're being compared to NFL veterans and not incoming rookies. They look small even when compared to incoming rookies. Overall, there's a pretty clear pattern. Most of the top pro backs fall roughly within the 29-33 range. None of them had a BMI below 28 when they entered the NFL.

So how about that Reggie Bush?

What about him?

Soooo, how many pounds does Chris Johnson have to gain to fit into the BMI range...or at least 28.3?

He'd have to gain more than 20 pounds to hit the league average of 30.5. He'd have to gain 6 pounds to hit 28.3.

BMI doesnt measure muscle right? It measures mass. It cant tell if a player has slightly more fat than another right?So 6 pounds is one thanksgiving meal. HELLO? Are you saying that 6 pounds means a guy is not likely to succeed? WOW.

 

[munchkin]

Saying that all of the elite RBs in the NFL have a high BMI is not the same as saying every RB prospect with a high BMI will be elite in the NFL.

You misinterpreted my argument. I'm not ignoring the failed high BMI running backs. I'm just saying that in order to have a chance at being an elite workhorse NFL RB, a player must have a high BMI.

Once again, you're asserting this without proof.

How many highly-drafted backs with McFadden's BMI have busted in the past 10 years? As far as I can tell, none. So what you're looking at is a lack of data about the success of talented RBs with different body sizes--you're not looking at data which suggests that RBs with different body sizes can't succeed.

I have a different interpretation. The United States is an enormous country with a huge population of athletes. There are probably millions of high school football players in the USA. The NCAA thins the ranks by selecting the best from that pool and eliminating the rest. The NFL thins the ranks by selecting the best from that pool and eliminating the rest. In all likelihood there are elite football players with low BMI scores. Yet none of these players make it through the filters to become workhorse NFL backs. These players are all busts. They were auditioning for the NFL and they failed.To me, the fact that no athletes with abnormal body types have emerged from the millions deep talent pool to become workhorse NFL RBs is "data which suggests that RBs with different body sizes can't succeed." If they could do it, then they'd be doing it. It's not for lack of effort or supply.

But you're missing the point that McFadden is someone who NFL scouts believe will be a success at RB. There are lots of lanky players who NFL scouts don't believe will be successful; there are probably lots of others who get turned into WRs or DBs or whatever. (Deltha O'Neal, for one). Here we are looking at a specific player who has graded out as one of the top picks in the draft, despite the fact that he does not fit perfectly in the traditional mold of the RB. You are asserting that NFL scouts are wrong; that they have failed to discount his body size in their evaluation of him. I think that's presumptuous and not supported by the available facts.

If used correctly within a system which will exploit the strengths of McFadden it is possible he will prove to become a top 5 value at the RB spot, though this use may not be as a traditional back. The Deuce/Bush usage in their first year together shows how this system can be successful. It looks that The Titans are hoping for similar success with LW and CJ. I think it would be a mistake to assume that because McFadden has talent he can be used in the traditional role of a 25+ carry per game back. I am sure the Raiders are hoping that M Bush/J Fargas can be used in the more traditional role with McFadden being used as a back they can get out into space.We don't know how far McFadden would have fallen if the Raiders had not taken him. If not taken by the Jets at 6 it's very possible he could have fallen out of the top ten.

 

[Keys Myaths]

So 6 pounds is one thanksgiving meal. HELLO? Are you saying that 6 pounds means a guy is not likely to succeed? WOW.

I'm still on the fence on this debate.However, EBF has explained his reservations, has discussed this in the most civilized way possible, and has been completely transparent.The above comment was completely uncalled for. Plus, EBF has answered this question on multiple occasions. Let's stop acting like we're 6 year olds arguing over who's Matchbox car is better.

 

[sholditch]

EBF, as I pointed out in another thread, AP has a lower than avg BMI. Obviously that didn't stop him from being a monstrous success as a runner. If McFadden, who has a lower BMI than AP, has an incredible rookie year as well, will that shake your faith in BMI? Also, please rank the following factors in terms of importance in evaluating RB talent:

1. Conference/level of previous competition

2. Collegiate stats

3. Oline of new team

4. QB of new team

5. Offensive philosophy of new team

6. 40 time

7. BMI

8. Film observations

 

[EBF]

Also, please rank the following factors in terms of importance in evaluating RB talent:1. Conference/level of previous competition2. Collegiate stats3. Oline of new team4. QB of new team5. Offensive philosophy of new team6. 40 time7. BMI8. Film observations

1a. Film observations1b. Workout numbers1c. BMI2a. QB of new team2b. Offensive philosophy of new team2c. Oline of new team3a. Collegiate stats3b. Conference/level of previous competition

 

[schurov]

I wonder what Walter Payton's and Barry Sanders' BMI would have been, arguably two of the best RB in the history of game. Chris Johnson has Barry's body type...

 

[EBF]

I wonder what Walter Payton's and Barry Sanders' BMI would have been, arguably two of the best RB in the history of game. Chris Johnson has Barry's body type...

Using listed heights and weights:Barry Sanders - 30.4Walter Payton - 28.7Sanders was a lot thicker than Johnson. Payton was closer, but he played in a different era when players weren't quite as big.

 

[sholditch]

Also, please rank the following factors in terms of importance in evaluating RB talent:1. Conference/level of previous competition2. Collegiate stats3. Oline of new team4. QB of new team5. Offensive philosophy of new team6. 40 time7. BMI8. Film observations

1a. Film observations1b. Workout numbers1c. BMI2a. QB of new team2b. Offensive philosophy of new team2c. Oline of new team3a. Collegiate stats3b. Conference/level of previous competition

So do you consider Matt Forte or DMC a better prospect for pro success?

 

[switz]

EBF, as I pointed out in another thread, AP has a lower than avg BMI. Obviously that didn't stop him from being a monstrous success as a runner.

Didn't he get hurt? I don't think EBF ever said they couldn't be good runners... just not long term full time players.

 

[EBF]

Also, please rank the following factors in terms of importance in evaluating RB talent:1. Conference/level of previous competition2. Collegiate stats3. Oline of new team4. QB of new team5. Offensive philosophy of new team6. 40 time7. BMI8. Film observations

1a. Film observations1b. Workout numbers1c. BMI2a. QB of new team2b. Offensive philosophy of new team2c. Oline of new team3a. Collegiate stats3b. Conference/level of previous competition

So do you consider Matt Forte or DMC a better prospect for pro success?

I'm not wild about either, but I'd take DMC.

 

[puckalicious]

I wonder what Walter Payton's and Barry Sanders' BMI would have been, arguably two of the best RB in the history of game. Chris Johnson has Barry's body type...

Take a good look at both players, and then post.

 

[Football Jones]

I'd think that Adrian Peterson's 28.6 BMI would create less confidence in putting a lot of stock in BMI. Not only that, I believe you're going to see more & more less bulky RBs (meaning lower BMI numbers) dominating the position in college & in the pros.

The game has changed. FF has changed. You see less & less of the FB position, meaning offenses are spreading out their formations trying to isolate their best athletes. No longer do defenses run their base formation most of the time. They've now got a package for nearly every down & distance. Offenses have had to adjust.

You'll see fewer & fewer big RBs, & the trend has already started, IMO. Look at this year's RB crop. Lots of low BMIs. Lots of speed, quickness, & athletic prowess. I expect the average weight of starting RBs to decrease over the next 10 years or so.

 

[shader]

Marcus Allen, Tony Dorsett and Robert Smith had low BMI's. It's too bad or they could have been really good football players.

 

[shader]

After reading this thread, I'm convinced that you guys are overanalyzing the whole thing. BMI is nothing more than common sense.

A bigger, thicker guys is more likely to get the ball 25 times a game and run up the middle.

A smaller, thinner guy is more likely to be used in draws, sweeps, screens, counters, etc.

I'm the biggest CJ fan around, but I'd be PO'd if Jeff Fisher benched Lendale and ran CJ 25+ times a game, most of them first down runs up the middle.

All I know is that in practice, Titans' DC Schwartz has been screaming at his defense to square up Johnson because no one can get a good lick on him. Ability and speed like that aren't natural. You don't hear things like that about Rashard Mendenhall and Jonathan Stewart. They are traditional carry-the-mail runners and will likely have traditional careers that include injuries and 4-6 years of solid production.

CJ if used properly can have ten years of production, make the HOF and win super bowls with Vince Young. Whether or not he fits into the structured slot of a "traditional running back" is of no consequence. He's got talent that no other running back in the NFL has either, and that counts for something.

Perhaps for me the biggest test of BMI will be Darren McFadden. I think he's an absolute sure-fire beast running back and would laugh at anyone that takes Mendenhall ahead of him. Why? Because I saw McFadden physically dominate people and he has the ability to score from anywhere on the field.

I also think that as the NFL evolves into more and more of a passing league, and especially if the spread and elements of the spread creep in, you'll probably see smaller and faster running backs have a bigger and bigger role, and the BMI numbers might have to come down a point or so.

But in honesty, if Chris Johnson ran a 4.4 and didn't have football speed, I'd probably agree that his NFL career isn't as promising as some of the others on the list.

The 4.24 40 and unbelievable 1.4 10 are among the best times ever recorded by an NFL player. That sets him apart.

 

[EBF]

Chase Stuart wrote a nice article about RB BMI in his blog. One of his observations was that RBs aren't shrinking. They're actually getting bigger in terms of BMI. Many of the players who fit the description of versatile pass catching backs are actually high BMI guys. Faulk? Westbrook? MJD? Tomlinson? Some of the best pass catching RBs of the past decade. All of them have a BMI over 30.

I'm willing to buy the argument that more teams are trying a two back committee. The Saints are doing it. The Jaguars are doing it. The Cowboys and Titans are going to give it a try. I think teams are realizing that having two different flavors in your backfield can give you a little more flexibility on offense. But I don't think FF is changing. The most valuable FF backs will continue to be high BMI guys who play three downs and handle a massive workload. The system clearly favors that type since it has dominated for the past decade.

 

[shader]

Chase Stuart wrote a nice article about RB BMI in his blog. One of his observations was that RBs aren't shrinking. They're actually getting bigger in terms of BMI. Many of the players who fit the description of versatile pass catching backs are actually high BMI guys. Faulk? Westbrook? MJD? Tomlinson? Some of the best pass catching RBs of the past decade. All of them have a BMI over 30. I'm willing to buy the argument that more teams are trying a two back committee. The Saints are doing it. The Jaguars are doing it. The Cowboys and Titans are going to give it a try. I think teams are realizing that having two different flavors in your backfield can give you a little more flexibility on offense. But I don't think FF is changing. The most valuable FF backs will continue to be high BMI guys who play three downs and handle a massive workload. The system clearly favors that type since it has dominated for the past decade.

I think there exists the possibility for a new type of player..A true RB/WR hybrid. I think Reggie Bush should be dominant at this role. I think they were headed that way in season 1 and had to force him to play a traditional RB role in year 2, and he flopped at it.But I think a RB that lines up in the slot 15 20 times a game and gets 15 carries a game could be the most dangerous weapon on the field.That's why I think the Titans offense will be deadly, especially when you add in Vince Young's running ability. They can literally attack you by running the football from all over the field. And when Young throws, he'll have Crumpler and Johnson.I expect the Titans will use Johnson in a way that allows him to be as much of a weapon as possible. Hopefully the Saints do the same thing. If it works, Bush and Johnson could be two of the most explosive and dangerous players in the league, though neither will be the 300 carries in a season type back.The closest guy I've seen in this type of role was Marshall Faulk. When he started spreading wide and playing wide receiver, he was really creating mismatches and confusion all over the field. Fortunately for fantasy football lovers, we count receptions, so don't use BMI to downgrade Chris Johnson.As I said in my previous quote, DMC is the real test of BMI, not Johnson.

 

[EBF]

I agree that Johnson has a lot of potential as a versatile WR/RB combo. But let me ask you this: If you could have any 5 RBs in the NFL over the course of the entire five season period between 2003-2007, who would you pick? Probably something like this:

LaDainian Tomlinson

Clinton Portis

Edgerrin James

Shaun Alexander

Jamal Lewis

What do these guys have in common?

They all get the lion's share of RB touches for their teams. In order to be an elite FF back over multiple seasons, it's necessary to get a huge number of touches. The only guys who have demonstrated the ability to handle that workload are high BMI guys. Therefore I think niche backs are always going to take a backseat to featured backs in FF.

That doesn't mean a guy like Chris Johnson can't become a valuable player in certain formats (especially in PPR leagues). I've never really argued otherwise. I just think it's best to view a guy like him as potentially a more effective Reggie Bush rather than potentially the next Marshall Faulk. In all likelihood he'll never be able to handle the workload needed to put up stats comparable to those of the best high BMI backs of his generation.

 

[Football Jones]

As I stated earlier, I believe there's a shift to less bulky RBs. Not skinny guys, just slimmer, faster, quicker, more agile, better overall athletes. Adrian Peterson, McFadden, Chris Johnson, Forte, Kevin Smith...RBs like that will start becoming the norm, IMO. We won't know if I'm right for a few years, but I'm confident we'll see less & less bulkier RBs as human physiology dictates the better athletes (in general) are on the more slender side.

We've beat this to death, but the biggest problem I have with BMI is it simply replicates what we already know about the RB position. We already know the position suits shorter players, typically 5'9" to 5'11". The reason higher BMI guys are more successful is because a guy with a low BMI at that height would be too light. I don't like 180-190 pound RBs, either. They get thrown around too much.

And it's not like these guys are 6'3" 200. Chris Johnson is 5'11" 200. McFadden, Forte, & Smith all get dinged for their BMI yet they're all good-sized guys. I say bullhockey to being too lean. We're going to see more & more of these guys make it as teams go to more of an athletic RB. If Peterson, McFadden, Johnson, Forte, Smith, & some other similar guys start making it, I think we've got to start taking a different perspective on this thing.

 

[EBF]

We won't know if I'm right for a few years, but I'm confident we'll see less & less bulkier RBs as human physiology dictates the better athletes (in general) are on the more slender side.

To this I would merely answer: Faulk, Tomlinson, Emmitt, Portis, Westbrook, MJD, Edge...I don't agree with your take on this issue, but you're certainly entitled to believe whatever you find agreeable. One thing I do agree on is that it will definitely be interesting to follow the careers of this RB crop. Like I said earlier, you can almost split many of this year's top rookie backs into two distinct groups on the basis of BMI.

High BMI

Jonathan Stewart

Rashard Mendenhall

Ray Rice

Tashard Choice

Low BMI

Darren McFadden

Chris Johnson

Matt Forte

Jamaal Charles

Each group has two first round picks and two players chosen roughly within the same general draft range. You can swap Kevin Smith in for Matt Forte if you want. They're pretty interchangeable in terms of pedigree, body type, and athletic ability.

My hunch is that the four players in the high BMI group will cumulatively outproduce the four players in the low BMI group over the next 5-10 years. I also have a strong suspicion that when we look back on this class 3-4 years from now, it will be one of the first three players in my high BMI group who's unanimously considered the best FF back in the class (probably Stewart or Mendenhall).

 

[Football Jones]

We won't know if I'm right for a few years, but I'm confident we'll see less & less bulkier RBs as human physiology dictates the better athletes (in general) are on the more slender side.

To this I would merely answer: Faulk, Tomlinson, Emmitt, Portis, Westbrook, MJD, Edge...I don't agree with your take on this issue, but you're certainly entitled to believe whatever you find agreeable. One thing I do agree on is that it will definitely be interesting to follow the careers of this RB crop. Like I said earlier, you can almost split many of this year's top rookie backs into two distinct groups on the basis of BMI.

High BMI

Jonathan Stewart

Rashard Mendenhall

Ray Rice

Tashard Choice

Low BMI

Darren McFadden

Chris Johnson

Matt Forte

Jamaal Charles

Each group has two first round picks and two players chosen roughly within the same general draft range. You can swap Kevin Smith in for Matt Forte if you want. They're pretty interchangeable in terms of pedigree, body type, and athletic ability.

My hunch is that the four players in the high BMI group will cumulatively outproduce the four players in the low BMI group over the next 5-10 years. I also have a strong suspicion that when we look back on this class 3-4 years from now, it will be one of the first three players in my high BMI group who's unanimously considered the best FF back in the class (probably Stewart or Mendenhall).

BTW, I forgot to mention Jamaal Charles as another low BMI guy who I'm fairly high on. I also have nothing against high BMI guys if they're good athletes. It doesn't have to be one or the other. In general, yeah, I definitely think you'll start seeing more & more lower BMI guys simply because they're typically the better athletes. I'm also not concerned with any RB from the past. If a RB has been successful, there was a reason for it (I'm only looking at the present/future). All I'm saying is I think it's wrong to dismiss Peterson, DMac, CJ, Forte, Smith, Charles, etc., because they're on the slender side. I'm more concerned with weight & strength as opposed to BMI (along with their skill set, of course).

As far as group A & B, I kinda like B even tho I'm not overly high on McFadden. Strictly talking FF, tho (which is what I assume this discussion is about). It'll be interesting to see who's "right" or "wrong" on this BMI thing (if it can be determined). I disagree, but I respect your opinion (as I do others who strongly believe in BMI). Let's see what happens.

 

[CalBear]

I agree that Johnson has a lot of potential as a versatile WR/RB combo. But let me ask you this: If you could have any 5 RBs in the NFL over the course of the entire five season period between 2003-2007, who would you pick? Probably something like this:LaDainian TomlinsonClinton PortisEdgerrin JamesShaun AlexanderJamal LewisWhat do these guys have in common? They all get the lion's share of RB touches for their teams. In order to be an elite FF back over multiple seasons, it's necessary to get a huge number of touches. The only guys who have demonstrated the ability to handle that workload are high BMI guys.

Except that Portis wasn't a high BMI guy at the combine. Given that your sample size is 5, and one data point doesn't fit your hypothesis, you really should take a step back and look at what you're doing.

 

[Michael Fox Fan]

I agree that Johnson has a lot of potential as a versatile WR/RB combo. But let me ask you this: If you could have any 5 RBs in the NFL over the course of the entire five season period between 2003-2007, who would you pick? Probably something like this:LaDainian TomlinsonClinton PortisEdgerrin JamesShaun AlexanderJamal LewisWhat do these guys have in common? They all get the lion's share of RB touches for their teams. In order to be an elite FF back over multiple seasons, it's necessary to get a huge number of touches. The only guys who have demonstrated the ability to handle that workload are high BMI guys.

Except that Portis wasn't a high BMI guy at the combine. Given that your sample size is 5, and one data point doesn't fit your hypothesis, you really should take a step back and look at what you're doing.

Wait, I thought that low BMI guys never become high BMI guys....didn't I read that in here somewhere?

 

[UnknownCoach]

The combination of Stewart's heavy weight and his toe injury makes him IMO the biggest injury risk of this year's rookie crop. Being a heavy grinding pounding workhorse back does not extend a guys career over undersized backs. If a measurable actually makes a RB more prone to injury, I'd say its the heavier backs and/or the taller backs.

However you do want your fantasy back to have a big workload. I've never shied away from injury risk for that reason. I dont think its a debate over injury risk, but a debate over workloads. IMO, the players in this draft who I'm most worried about being able to handle a big workload are Johnson and Charles followed by Rice. McFadden is only a slight concern to me because his height lessens the importance of his BMI. BMI is more important for an overly short back like Rice than a tall back. Rice may have a high BMI, but is it really high enough to overcome being only 5 8 in the NFL. That 6 pounds he suppossably worked off for the comine is a considerable amount for someone that short. I have to think if he's only going to gain 6 pounds or if he can gain 11 pounds. Yes, I side with those who say that low BMI rookie will likely gain weight at the next level. That's been discussed enough though.

 

[munchkin]

I agree that Johnson has a lot of potential as a versatile WR/RB combo. But let me ask you this: If you could have any 5 RBs in the NFL over the course of the entire five season period between 2003-2007, who would you pick? Probably something like this:

LaDainian Tomlinson

Clinton Portis

Edgerrin James

Shaun Alexander

Jamal Lewis

What do these guys have in common?

They all get the lion's share of RB touches for their teams. In order to be an elite FF back over multiple seasons, it's necessary to get a huge number of touches. The only guys who have demonstrated the ability to handle that workload are high BMI guys.

Except that Portis wasn't a high BMI guy at the combine. Given that your sample size is 5, and one data point doesn't fit your hypothesis, you really should take a step back and look at what you're doing.

Wait, I thought that low BMI guys never become high BMI guys....didn't I read that in here somewhere?

No, I don't believe you did. What you read was that that transformation is not common with the player maintaining his quickness and speed. At least that was my interpretation.

 

[Michael Fox Fan]

I agree that Johnson has a lot of potential as a versatile WR/RB combo. But let me ask you this: If you could have any 5 RBs in the NFL over the course of the entire five season period between 2003-2007, who would you pick? Probably something like this:

LaDainian Tomlinson

Clinton Portis

Edgerrin James

Shaun Alexander

Jamal Lewis

What do these guys have in common?

They all get the lion's share of RB touches for their teams. In order to be an elite FF back over multiple seasons, it's necessary to get a huge number of touches. The only guys who have demonstrated the ability to handle that workload are high BMI guys.

Except that Portis wasn't a high BMI guy at the combine. Given that your sample size is 5, and one data point doesn't fit your hypothesis, you really should take a step back and look at what you're doing.

Wait, I thought that low BMI guys never become high BMI guys....didn't I read that in here somewhere?

No, I don't believe you did. What you read was that that transformation is not common with the player maintaining his quickness and speed. At least that was my interpretation.

lighten up

 

[switz]

I agree that Johnson has a lot of potential as a versatile WR/RB combo. But let me ask you this: If you could have any 5 RBs in the NFL over the course of the entire five season period between 2003-2007, who would you pick? Probably something like this:

LaDainian Tomlinson

Clinton Portis

Edgerrin James

Shaun Alexander

Jamal Lewis

What do these guys have in common?

They all get the lion's share of RB touches for their teams. In order to be an elite FF back over multiple seasons, it's necessary to get a huge number of touches. The only guys who have demonstrated the ability to handle that workload are high BMI guys.

Except that Portis wasn't a high BMI guy at the combine. Given that your sample size is 5, and one data point doesn't fit your hypothesis, you really should take a step back and look at what you're doing.

Wait, I thought that low BMI guys never become high BMI guys....didn't I read that in here somewhere?

No, I don't believe you did. What you read was that that transformation is not common with the player maintaining his quickness and speed. At least that was my interpretation.

lighten up

His comment was totally civilized....

 

[Stunt Rock]

I thought BMI was widely considered to be a junk statistic?

 

[msommer]

I thought BMI was widely considered to be a junk statistic?

In determining whether you are healthy and expected to outlive (or not) the average - it is.Maybe it can be used in evaluating NFL running backs instead...

 

[Michael Fox Fan]

I agree that Johnson has a lot of potential as a versatile WR/RB combo. But let me ask you this: If you could have any 5 RBs in the NFL over the course of the entire five season period between 2003-2007, who would you pick? Probably something like this:

LaDainian Tomlinson

Clinton Portis

Edgerrin James

Shaun Alexander

Jamal Lewis

What do these guys have in common?

They all get the lion's share of RB touches for their teams. In order to be an elite FF back over multiple seasons, it's necessary to get a huge number of touches. The only guys who have demonstrated the ability to handle that workload are high BMI guys.

Except that Portis wasn't a high BMI guy at the combine. Given that your sample size is 5, and one data point doesn't fit your hypothesis, you really should take a step back and look at what you're doing.

Wait, I thought that low BMI guys never become high BMI guys....didn't I read that in here somewhere?

No, I don't believe you did. What you read was that that transformation is not common with the player maintaining his quickness and speed. At least that was my interpretation.

lighten up

His comment was totally civilized....

where did i say it was uncivilized? i just said "lighten up". next time i'll insert the "sarcasm" emoticon instead of just a wink.

 

[switz]

I agree that Johnson has a lot of potential as a versatile WR/RB combo. But let me ask you this: If you could have any 5 RBs in the NFL over the course of the entire five season period between 2003-2007, who would you pick? Probably something like this:

LaDainian Tomlinson

Clinton Portis

Edgerrin James

Shaun Alexander

Jamal Lewis

What do these guys have in common?

They all get the lion's share of RB touches for their teams. In order to be an elite FF back over multiple seasons, it's necessary to get a huge number of touches. The only guys who have demonstrated the ability to handle that workload are high BMI guys.

Except that Portis wasn't a high BMI guy at the combine. Given that your sample size is 5, and one data point doesn't fit your hypothesis, you really should take a step back and look at what you're doing.

Wait, I thought that low BMI guys never become high BMI guys....didn't I read that in here somewhere?

No, I don't believe you did. What you read was that that transformation is not common with the player maintaining his quickness and speed. At least that was my interpretation.

lighten up

His comment was totally civilized....

where did i say it was uncivilized? i just said "lighten up". next time i'll insert the "sarcasm" emoticon instead of just a wink.

It seemed by your 'lighten up' comment that you thought his was aggressive. That's all.

 

[sholditch]

from now on I'm going to judge all RB prospects using phrenology.

"Of course you'd say that Smithers! You have the brain-pan of a stage-coach jilter!"

 

[moosebrew13]

What do people think about the Pro Football Prospectus article "Five Seconds Can Be A Lifetime?" The article introduces speed score. It is (weight * 200)/(40 time

) to the 4th power. The article is looking for an indicater of future success and it says "... neither height nor weight nor BMI seems to bear a relationship to NFL success by itself."

Using this metric Stewart scores high but DMC the second highest behind Chris Johnson. It says Stewart may be the best back of the class because of his combine best vertical.

Any thoughts on this article?

Also, doesn't it seem to come down to if you like DMC you are against BMI and if you don't you are for it. Seems people are just arguing about him with other data put in.

 

[switz]

What do people think about the Pro Football Prospectus article "Five Seconds Can Be A Lifetime?" The article introduces speed score. It is (weight * 200)/(40 time

) to the 4th power. The article is looking for an indicater of future success and it says "... neither height nor weight nor BMI seems to bear a relationship to NFL success by itself."

Using this metric Stewart scores high but DMC the second highest behind Chris Johnson. It says Stewart may be the best back of the class because of his combine best vertical.

Any thoughts on this article?

Also, doesn't it seem to come down to if you like DMC you are against BMI and if you don't you are for it. Seems people are just arguing about him with other data put in.

I think the speed metric is really unreliable. From what I've seen some of the guys with really high scores have been total busts (a la Michael Benett)I do believe speed is important, but also in itself does not bear a direct relationship with success.

BMI is important - we've seen that. Speed is important, but anything faster than 4.5 seems acceptable. How do you measure vision? Most RBs that I've seen succeed, have vision.

 

[puckalicious]

What do people think about the Pro Football Prospectus article "Five Seconds Can Be A Lifetime?" The article introduces speed score. It is (weight * 200)/(40 time

) to the 4th power. The article is looking for an indicater of future success and it says "... neither height nor weight nor BMI seems to bear a relationship to NFL success by itself."

Using this metric Stewart scores high but DMC the second highest behind Chris Johnson. It says Stewart may be the best back of the class because of his combine best vertical.

Any thoughts on this article?

Also, doesn't it seem to come down to if you like DMC you are against BMI and if you don't you are for it. Seems people are just arguing about him with other data put in.

I think the speed metric is really unreliable. From what I've seen some of the guys with really high scores have been total busts (a la Michael Benett)I do believe speed is important, but also in itself does not bear a direct relationship with success.

BMI is important - we've seen that. Speed is important, but anything faster than 4.5 seems acceptable. How do you measure vision? Most RBs that I've seen succeed, have vision.

Let's lobby the NFL to change the Combine events. New list of RB drills:

1. Vision test that quantifies peripheral vision (gotta use your peripherals!)

2. Slalom course to quantify forward speed while making lateral cuts

3. Impact power-meter to quantify impact force delivered to defenders

4. Vertical jump test while in stride, using set hurdle heights

5. Stiff-arm drill?

6. Some sort of obstacle course combining all of the above.

 

[switz]

Let's lobby the NFL to change the Combine events. New list of RB drills:1. Vision test that quantifies peripheral vision (gotta use your peripherals!)

They could have guys stand at 45 degree angles, about 3 yards away from the RB, and then have then alternate randomly whipping a football at his head, then time his response

2. Slalom course to quantify forward speed while making lateral cuts

I agree, this would be much better than the 3 cone and short shuttle

3. Impact power-meter to quantify impact force delivered to defenders

I'm not so sure this is as important, as good RBs avoid hits instead of delivering them

4. Vertical jump test while in stride, using set hurdle heights

Yes

5. Stiff-arm drill?

Probably not a bad idea, but instead of measuring pure force, measure more the effectiveness of the maneuver, as some RBs deliver a straight on stiff arm, others do more of a swipe to shift the defender... both can be effective. I think having tackling dummies on wire launched toward the RB, and then seeing how much the dummy moves (whether back or sideways) would be a good test.

6. Some sort of obstacle course combining all of the above.

Agreed... it should give us a better idea of what the guy does as a football player, instead of just an athlete. And if you time the obstacle course, or even legs between to obstacles, you get a better idea of the players speed.They should really do something like this!!

 

[LawFitz]

BMI is a nice measuring stick to consider but is certainly not the end all.

Look and Marcus Allen and Eric Dickerson. Two of the best of all time. Both would be considered skinny compared to the high BMI RBs.

Talent and heart can trump BMI.