Most carries in a season (1 Viewer)

[Chase Stuart]

Four players have had over 100 carries in a single post-season:

John Riggins had 132 in 1982; TD has 112 in '97, Eddie George 108 in '99 and Jamal Lewis had 103 in 2000.

Name			  Year	Reg	Post   TotalTerrell Davis	 1997	369	112	481Jamal Anderson	1998	410	 70	480Terrell Davis	 1998	392	 78	470John Riggins	  1983	375	 87	462Emmitt Smith	  1995	377	 74	451Emmitt Smith	  1992	373	 71	444Eric Dickerson	1986	404	 26	430Eddie George	  2000	403	 27	430Shaun Alexander   2005	370	 60	430Larry Johnson	 2006	416	 13	429Eddie George	  1999	320	108	428Walter Payton	 1984	381	 46	427Eric Dickerson	1983	390	 33	423Jerome Bettis	 1997	375	 48	423Curtis Martin	 1998	369	 49	418Thurman Thomas	1993	355	 63	418Joe Morris		1986	341	 73	414Jamal Lewis	   2000	309	103	412Barry Foster	  1992	390	 20	410Corey Dillon	  2004	345	 65	410Edgerrin James	2000	387	 21	408Curtis Martin	 2004	371	 37	408James Wilder	  1984	407	  0	407Emmitt Smith	  1991	365	 41	406Ahman Green	   2003	355	 48	403Marcus Allen	  1985	380	 22	402Eric Dickerson	1984	379	 23	402Jamal Lewis	   2003	387	 14	401Earl Campbell	 1979	368	 33	401Earl Campbell	 1980	373	 27	400Natrone Means	 1994	343	 57	400Dorsey Levens	 1997	329	 71	400

 

[The Man with the Plan]

Damn. It's no wonder most of those players went on to have down years the next season. Too many carries.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Damn. It's no wonder most of those players went on to have down years the next season. Too many carries.

Four of those players ranked #1 the next year, and four others ranked in the top five. Six more ranked in the top ten. Of the top six in carries, four ranked in the top ten the next year.

 

[Dirty Weasel]

The playoff carries don't count as wear and tear on a RB, do they? Oh crap, time to recalculate my stats.

Including postseason, Emmitt Smith had over 400 touches in 6 straight seasons from 1991 thru 1996. He even went over the 500-touch plateau in both 1992 and 1995. Now that's a workhorse!

 

[The Man with the Plan]

Damn. It's no wonder most of those players went on to have down years the next season. Too many carries.

Four of those players ranked #1 the next year, and four others ranked in the top five. Six more ranked in the top ten. Of the top six in carries, four ranked in the top ten the next year.

I'm not sure that helps your argument. Many more players (such as Jamal Anderson, Terrell Davis, Shaun Alexander among others) also had their production fall off big time. You are correct that the 4 of the top 6 were in the top 10 but two of those players in TD and Jamal Anderson fell off the face of the earth. And when Emmitt Smith had his huge seasons in 92 and 95 his production fell off the next season. He maintained his ranking in 93 but he fell all the way from 1st to 6th in 1996. Terrell Davis was the only one to actually have a better season out of the top 6. So i'll reiterate. Heavy workload is not a positive. Larry Johnson owners beware.

 

[David Yudkin]

We've reviewed this before and I wrote an article on this very subject. After the fact, others determined that the fall off from heavy workload backs was actually LOWER THAN the dropoff compared to regular workload backs.

People are quick to point out some of the examples but there are so few of them that the sample size is suspect.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Damn. It's no wonder most of those players went on to have down years the next season. Too many carries.

Four of those players ranked #1 the next year, and four others ranked in the top five. Six more ranked in the top ten. Of the top six in carries, four ranked in the top ten the next year.

I'm not sure that helps your argument. Many more players (such as Jamal Anderson, Terrell Davis, Shaun Alexander among others) also had their production fall off big time. You are correct that the 4 of the top 6 were in the top 10 but two of those players in TD and Jamal Anderson fell off the face of the earth. And when Emmitt Smith had his huge seasons in 92 and 95 his production fell off the next season. He maintained his ranking in 93 but he fell all the way from 1st to 6th in 1996. Terrell Davis was the only one to actually have a better season out of the top 6. So i'll reiterate. Heavy workload is not a positive. Larry Johnson owners beware.

I don't have an argument. I'm just noting that many players with heavy workloads have done really well, too.Should Steven Jackson owners beware because Jackson ranked 5th all time in yards from scrimmage last year, and most of the players with huge yards from scrimmage seasons had worse seasons the following year? I think generally speaking, a heavy workload is a positive. Maybe the relationship isn't linear, but if it's not, it's pretty close. Very few players can handle the heavy workloads necessary to have a stud season. LJ has proven he can.

 

[joffer]

Damn. It's no wonder most of those players went on to have down years the next season. Too many carries.

Four of those players ranked #1 the next year, and four others ranked in the top five. Six more ranked in the top ten. Of the top six in carries, four ranked in the top ten the next year.

I'm not sure that helps your argument. Many more players (such as Jamal Anderson, Terrell Davis, Shaun Alexander among others) also had their production fall off big time. You are correct that the 4 of the top 6 were in the top 10 but two of those players in TD and Jamal Anderson fell off the face of the earth. And when Emmitt Smith had his huge seasons in 92 and 95 his production fell off the next season. He maintained his ranking in 93 but he fell all the way from 1st to 6th in 1996. Terrell Davis was the only one to actually have a better season out of the top 6. So i'll reiterate. Heavy workload is not a positive. Larry Johnson owners beware.

so Terrell Davis getting clipped from behind while trying to tackle someone returning an interception and tearing his ACL was a result of his 470 touches the year before, is that right?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

From an article I wrote elsewhere...

Since 1998...

The NFL attempts leader in '06 Larry Johnson... tbd.
The NFL attempts leader in '05, Shawn Alexander, was hurt in '06.
The NFL attempts leader in '04, Curtis Martin, was hurt in '05.
The NFL attempts leader in '03, Ricky Williams, fell apart mentally and /or emotionally and didn't play in '04. In that same year Jamal Lewis was 2nd (by only 5 carries) in attempts and the leading rusher with 2066 - was hurt in '04.

The NFL attempts leader in '02, Ricky Williams, was splendid in '03, but it looks like it may have taken a serious toll on his psyche.
The NFL attempts leader in '01, Stephen Davis, was hurt in '02.
The NFL attempts leader in '00, Eddie George, had an abysmal (3.0 ypc avg!) follow up season and remainder of his career.
The NFL attempts leader in '99, Edgerrin James, had a splendid '00 campaign, but like Ricky it took its toll. ... in the same year ('00) Eddie George was attempts leader Edge James was 2nd and would blow out his knee the next year.

And Edge was younger then almost anyone else as these constituted his first and second pro season, only to be hurt in his 3rd.

The NFL attempts leader in '98, Jamal Anderson, was hurt in '99 with a blown out knee.

I also discuss why it doesnt matter, but that just wouldnt be as much fun in this thread.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Damn. It's no wonder most of those players went on to have down years the next season. Too many carries.

Four of those players ranked #1 the next year, and four others ranked in the top five. Six more ranked in the top ten. Of the top six in carries, four ranked in the top ten the next year.

I'm not sure that helps your argument. Many more players (such as Jamal Anderson, Terrell Davis, Shaun Alexander among others) also had their production fall off big time. You are correct that the 4 of the top 6 were in the top 10 but two of those players in TD and Jamal Anderson fell off the face of the earth. And when Emmitt Smith had his huge seasons in 92 and 95 his production fell off the next season. He maintained his ranking in 93 but he fell all the way from 1st to 6th in 1996. Terrell Davis was the only one to actually have a better season out of the top 6. So i'll reiterate. Heavy workload is not a positive. Larry Johnson owners beware.

so Terrell Davis getting clipped from behind while trying to tackle someone returning an interception and tearing his ACL was a result of his 470 touches the year before, is that right?

Not an impossible happenstance.It is possible that with less wear and tear on the joint the acl would have shown more resilience in that moment.

When body parts are tired or worn, they give out.

 

[The Man with the Plan]

Damn. It's no wonder most of those players went on to have down years the next season. Too many carries.

Four of those players ranked #1 the next year, and four others ranked in the top five. Six more ranked in the top ten. Of the top six in carries, four ranked in the top ten the next year.

I'm not sure that helps your argument. Many more players (such as Jamal Anderson, Terrell Davis, Shaun Alexander among others) also had their production fall off big time. You are correct that the 4 of the top 6 were in the top 10 but two of those players in TD and Jamal Anderson fell off the face of the earth. And when Emmitt Smith had his huge seasons in 92 and 95 his production fell off the next season. He maintained his ranking in 93 but he fell all the way from 1st to 6th in 1996. Terrell Davis was the only one to actually have a better season out of the top 6. So i'll reiterate. Heavy workload is not a positive. Larry Johnson owners beware.

I don't have an argument. I'm just noting that many players with heavy workloads have done really well, too.Should Steven Jackson owners beware because Jackson ranked 5th all time in yards from scrimmage last year, and most of the players with huge yards from scrimmage seasons had worse seasons the following year? I think generally speaking, a heavy workload is a positive. Maybe the relationship isn't linear, but if it's not, it's pretty close. Very few players can handle the heavy workloads necessary to have a stud season. LJ has proven he can.

There's heavy workloads and then there's heavy workloads. 350 carries and 50 catches isn't the same thing as 400 carries. They add up to the same amount of touches but they are not same workload. So in that regard I wouldn't worry about Steven Jackson. Even if his yardage falls some it's still an incredible amount. Still he wasn't worked liked Larry Johnson. Not even close.Larry Johnson has proven that he can perform well with a heavy workload. What he has yet to prove however is that he can recover to have a great season after having a heavy (416 carries 41 receptions) workload the previous season. Many in his same situation have proven not to. Could LJ be an exception? Possibly. Will he? I doubt it.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Damn. It's no wonder most of those players went on to have down years the next season. Too many carries.

Four of those players ranked #1 the next year, and four others ranked in the top five. Six more ranked in the top ten. Of the top six in carries, four ranked in the top ten the next year.

I'm not sure that helps your argument. Many more players (such as Jamal Anderson, Terrell Davis, Shaun Alexander among others) also had their production fall off big time. You are correct that the 4 of the top 6 were in the top 10 but two of those players in TD and Jamal Anderson fell off the face of the earth. And when Emmitt Smith had his huge seasons in 92 and 95 his production fell off the next season. He maintained his ranking in 93 but he fell all the way from 1st to 6th in 1996. Terrell Davis was the only one to actually have a better season out of the top 6. So i'll reiterate. Heavy workload is not a positive. Larry Johnson owners beware.

Do you remember how those players got hurt? I'm not sure the workload is a good explanation.TD was injured while making a tackle; Alexander had a broken foot. Anderson's one was a weird one -- it was on artificial turf, it came after a long holdout and was early in the season, and it came on a play where he wasn't even touched. I'm not sure if his ACL was weaker because of a heavy workload the previous year, since I'm not a medical expert. But it seems like there are other likely explanations.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Damn. It's no wonder most of those players went on to have down years the next season. Too many carries.

Four of those players ranked #1 the next year, and four others ranked in the top five. Six more ranked in the top ten. Of the top six in carries, four ranked in the top ten the next year.

I'm not sure that helps your argument. Many more players (such as Jamal Anderson, Terrell Davis, Shaun Alexander among others) also had their production fall off big time. You are correct that the 4 of the top 6 were in the top 10 but two of those players in TD and Jamal Anderson fell off the face of the earth. And when Emmitt Smith had his huge seasons in 92 and 95 his production fell off the next season. He maintained his ranking in 93 but he fell all the way from 1st to 6th in 1996. Terrell Davis was the only one to actually have a better season out of the top 6. So i'll reiterate. Heavy workload is not a positive. Larry Johnson owners beware.

Do you remember how those players got hurt? I'm not sure the workload is a good explanation.TD was injured while making a tackle; Alexander had a broken foot. Anderson's one was a weird one -- it was on artificial turf, it came after a long holdout and was early in the season, and it came on a play where he wasn't even touched. I'm not sure if his ACL was weaker because of a heavy workload the previous year, since I'm not a medical expert. But it seems like there are other likely explanations.

Andersons is the very definition of too much workload. His acl broke down when it shouldnt have.Alexander also. His body gave out. It was a non-weight bearing bone that developed a crack. Which also wasn't from a direct hit.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Damn. It's no wonder most of those players went on to have down years the next season. Too many carries.

Four of those players ranked #1 the next year, and four others ranked in the top five. Six more ranked in the top ten. Of the top six in carries, four ranked in the top ten the next year.

I'm not sure that helps your argument. Many more players (such as Jamal Anderson, Terrell Davis, Shaun Alexander among others) also had their production fall off big time. You are correct that the 4 of the top 6 were in the top 10 but two of those players in TD and Jamal Anderson fell off the face of the earth. And when Emmitt Smith had his huge seasons in 92 and 95 his production fell off the next season. He maintained his ranking in 93 but he fell all the way from 1st to 6th in 1996. Terrell Davis was the only one to actually have a better season out of the top 6. So i'll reiterate. Heavy workload is not a positive. Larry Johnson owners beware.

so Terrell Davis getting clipped from behind while trying to tackle someone returning an interception and tearing his ACL was a result of his 470 touches the year before, is that right?

Not an impossible happenstance.It is possible that with less wear and tear on the joint the acl would have shown more resilience in that moment.

When body parts are tired or worn, they give out.

Wouldn't you expect his joints to give out on his 470th touch of the year, and not after a six month rest? It seems the beginning of a new season should carry much less risk than the end of a high workload one.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Damn. It's no wonder most of those players went on to have down years the next season. Too many carries.

Four of those players ranked #1 the next year, and four others ranked in the top five. Six more ranked in the top ten. Of the top six in carries, four ranked in the top ten the next year.

I'm not sure that helps your argument. Many more players (such as Jamal Anderson, Terrell Davis, Shaun Alexander among others) also had their production fall off big time. You are correct that the 4 of the top 6 were in the top 10 but two of those players in TD and Jamal Anderson fell off the face of the earth. And when Emmitt Smith had his huge seasons in 92 and 95 his production fell off the next season. He maintained his ranking in 93 but he fell all the way from 1st to 6th in 1996. Terrell Davis was the only one to actually have a better season out of the top 6. So i'll reiterate. Heavy workload is not a positive. Larry Johnson owners beware.

so Terrell Davis getting clipped from behind while trying to tackle someone returning an interception and tearing his ACL was a result of his 470 touches the year before, is that right?

Not an impossible happenstance.It is possible that with less wear and tear on the joint the acl would have shown more resilience in that moment.

When body parts are tired or worn, they give out.

Wouldn't you expect his joints to give out on his 470th touch of the year, and not after a six month rest? It seems the beginning of a new season should carry much less risk than the end of a high workload one.

Not necessarily. I would expect the body to adjust after the trauma. Like building muscle while you sleep, not while you move the weights.So while it wouldnt be cut and dry one way or another, I dont find it odd that a year later the body is not quite the same.

 

[joffer]

Damn. It's no wonder most of those players went on to have down years the next season. Too many carries.

Four of those players ranked #1 the next year, and four others ranked in the top five. Six more ranked in the top ten. Of the top six in carries, four ranked in the top ten the next year.

I'm not sure that helps your argument. Many more players (such as Jamal Anderson, Terrell Davis, Shaun Alexander among others) also had their production fall off big time. You are correct that the 4 of the top 6 were in the top 10 but two of those players in TD and Jamal Anderson fell off the face of the earth. And when Emmitt Smith had his huge seasons in 92 and 95 his production fell off the next season. He maintained his ranking in 93 but he fell all the way from 1st to 6th in 1996. Terrell Davis was the only one to actually have a better season out of the top 6. So i'll reiterate. Heavy workload is not a positive. Larry Johnson owners beware.

so Terrell Davis getting clipped from behind while trying to tackle someone returning an interception and tearing his ACL was a result of his 470 touches the year before, is that right?

Not an impossible happenstance.It is possible that with less wear and tear on the joint the acl would have shown more resilience in that moment.

When body parts are tired or worn, they give out.

they're not tired and worn after 6 months offthis debate seems a little pointless, as many seem to be pretty selective in the data they choose to point out. As Yudkin pointed out up in the thread, if you look at ALL the data, there's nothing definitive that points to LJ being any more susceptible to injury this year than any other RB.

 

[Dancing Bear]

I have tried to take a broader view of things and so for clarity here is the assessment. I have done a review of both RB workload and RB performance. I assumed regular season, Touches [rushes + receptions], and I assumed PPG. We are comparing year N with year N+1. There are 4 possible outcomes.

a) RB has Touches in year N+1 which have fallen off and are a minimum of 10% less than year N : RB has a PPG in year N+1 which has fallen off and is a minimum of 10% less than year N

b) RB has Touches in year N+1 which have fallen off and are a minimum of 10% less than year N : RB has a PPG in year N+1 greater than or within 10% of year N

c) RB has Touches in year N+1 greater than or within 10% of year N : RB has a PPG in year N+1 which has fallen off and is a minimum of 10% less than year N

d) RB has Touches in year N+1 greater than or within 10% of year N : RB has a PPG in year N+1 greater than or within 10% of year N

I then reviewed the data of two groups 20 touches or greater and 25 touches or greater. For your historical reference, only one RB in history has averaged 30 or more touches for a season and that distinction goes to James Wilder of the 1984 Tampa Bay Buccaneers [30.8]

There have been 68 total RB instances of 25 touches or greater. 41 different RB's have contributed to this distribution. There are 4 current RB's who have no year N+1 to compare to], so the instances are effectively reduced to 64.

There have been 402 total RB instances of 20 touches or greater [yes the 68 from above are included]. 148 different RB's have contributed to this distribution. There are 18 RB's who have no year N+1 to compare to], so the instances are effectively reduced to 384.

Here are the distributions.

20 Touches or greater

==============================

a) 156 - 40.6%

b) 24 - 6.3%

c) 60 - 15.6%

d) 144 - 37.5%

Note that following observations :

It is somewhat more likely for a RB to have 20 Touches or greater in Year N+1 than not.

--> 204 [53%] to 180 [47%].

It is somewhat more unlikely for a RB to exceed their previous PPG in Year N+1.

--> 216 [56%] to 168 [44%].

It is essentially equally likely that a RB will achieve either a) or d) in this group.

25 Touches or greater

==============================

a) 28 - 43.8%

b) 6 - 9.4%

c) 16 - 25.0%

d) 14 - 21.9%

Note that following observations :

It is somewhat more unlikely for a RB to have 25 Touches or greater in Year N+1 than not.

--> 34 [53%] to 30 [47%].

It is more than twice as likely that a RB does not repeat their PPG in Year N+1.

--> 20 [31%] to 44 [69%].

It is twice as likely that a RB will achieve a) rather than d) in this group.

Comparing the two distribution groups

==============================

It is essentially a 50-50 coin toss whether or not a RB will repeat Touches in year N+1 in either group. This means that from a Touches perspective there is no difference between the distributions and we have to realize that it is equally likely for any RB to drop off in Touches.

Additionally, there is a 40% chance that any given RB will fall into a) no matter what.

A RB's chances of falling into our most desired category d) go down tremendously between the 25 Touches or greater and the 20 Touches or greater; from a 37.5% chance down to 21.9% when comparing between the groups. It is not 2 to 1, but this is a substantial decrease in possibility.

A RB's chances of repeating PPG in year N+1 [with either b) or d)] go down some as well between the 25 Touches or greater and the 20 Touches or greater when compared with the alternate outcomes within their distributions; from a 44% chance down to 31% when comparing between the groups.

The following RB's have a 31% chance of repeating their PPG in 2007 :

Shaun Alexander, Steven Jackson, Larry Johnson, LaDainian Tomlinson

The following RB's have a 44% chance of repeating their PPG in 2007 :

Ronnie Brown, Frank Gore, Ahman Green, Edgerrin James, Rudi Johnson, Kevin Jones, Thomas Jones, Jamal Lewis, Willie Parker, Chester Taylor, Brian Westbrook

Finally, there is still a 50% chance that they will all repeat with 20 Touches or greater.

 

[Tong Po]

Damn. It's no wonder most of those players went on to have down years the next season. Too many carries.

Four of those players ranked #1 the next year, and four others ranked in the top five. Six more ranked in the top ten. Of the top six in carries, four ranked in the top ten the next year.

I'm not sure that helps your argument. Many more players (such as Jamal Anderson, Terrell Davis, Shaun Alexander among others) also had their production fall off big time. You are correct that the 4 of the top 6 were in the top 10 but two of those players in TD and Jamal Anderson fell off the face of the earth. And when Emmitt Smith had his huge seasons in 92 and 95 his production fell off the next season. He maintained his ranking in 93 but he fell all the way from 1st to 6th in 1996. Terrell Davis was the only one to actually have a better season out of the top 6. So i'll reiterate. Heavy workload is not a positive. Larry Johnson owners beware.

I don't have an argument. I'm just noting that many players with heavy workloads have done really well, too.Should Steven Jackson owners beware because Jackson ranked 5th all time in yards from scrimmage last year, and most of the players with huge yards from scrimmage seasons had worse seasons the following year? I think generally speaking, a heavy workload is a positive. Maybe the relationship isn't linear, but if it's not, it's pretty close. Very few players can handle the heavy workloads necessary to have a stud season. LJ has proven he can.

There's heavy workloads and then there's heavy workloads. 350 carries and 50 catches isn't the same thing as 400 carries. They add up to the same amount of touches but they are not same workload. So in that regard I wouldn't worry about Steven Jackson. Even if his yardage falls some it's still an incredible amount. Still he wasn't worked liked Larry Johnson. Not even close.Larry Johnson has proven that he can perform well with a heavy workload. What he has yet to prove however is that he can recover to have a great season after having a heavy (416 carries 41 receptions) workload the previous season. Many in his same situation have proven not to. Could LJ be an exception? Possibly. Will he? I doubt it.

Not sure I understand this arguement. 350 carries and 50 catches equates to a different physical workload than 400 carries?I mean he still got tackled didn't he? Or did Jackson run out of bounds every time he made a catch?And isn't that what we're talking about here? The trauma a RB's body receives from getting hit too many times?

 

[AB in DC]

Not sure I understand this arguement. 350 carries and 50 catches equates to a different physical workload than 400 carries?

Yes, it does. Not to rehash old arguments, but there's a study by FootballOutsiders that shows that the increased risks of RB decline only apply to a large number of carries, not to a large number of catches.

 

[coachjim]

We've reviewed this before and I wrote an article on this very subject. After the fact, others determined that the fall off from heavy workload backs was actually LOWER THAN the dropoff compared to regular workload backs.People are quick to point out some of the examples but there are so few of them that the sample size is suspect.

I think that more than the amount of carries a running back has is the type of runner he is. Is he a John Riggens, Jerome Bettis type or a Larry Johnson, Warrick Dunn type who rarely takes a straight on hit and uses the sidelines as a way to keep from getting hammered by a safety with the angle on him.I agree 400 carries is quite a few but if the guy who has 400 carries is actually getting tackled 325 times and using the sidelines the other 75 times then in reality he is the same as a guy getting hammered 325 times.It would be interesting to see a stat on how many times a guy is subjected to being tackled rather than running out of bounds to qualify this statement.

 

[Tong Po]

Not sure I understand this arguement. 350 carries and 50 catches equates to a different physical workload than 400 carries?

Yes, it does. Not to rehash old arguments, but there's a study by FootballOutsiders that shows that the increased risks of RB decline only apply to a large number of carries, not to a large number of catches.

I would be interested to see the specifics of that study. Because I would imagine that a RB catching a ball out of the backfield in full stride, then lowering a shoulder and colliding with a linebacker or strong safety, would certainly add to the long term wear and tear on his body.

 

[AB in DC]

Link to FO study.

Note the negative correlations for "Carries" and the positive correlations for "Receptions".

 

[Post Corner]

Another link to such a study on RB carries:

http://www.footballdocs.com/RB_carries_2005.html

I am avoiding LJ this year like the plague.

 

[nygiants56]

Damn. It's no wonder most of those players went on to have down years the next season. Too many carries.

Four of those players ranked #1 the next year, and four others ranked in the top five. Six more ranked in the top ten. Of the top six in carries, four ranked in the top ten the next year.

I'm not sure that helps your argument. Many more players (such as Jamal Anderson, Terrell Davis, Shaun Alexander among others) also had their production fall off big time. You are correct that the 4 of the top 6 were in the top 10 but two of those players in TD and Jamal Anderson fell off the face of the earth. And when Emmitt Smith had his huge seasons in 92 and 95 his production fell off the next season. He maintained his ranking in 93 but he fell all the way from 1st to 6th in 1996. Terrell Davis was the only one to actually have a better season out of the top 6. So i'll reiterate. Heavy workload is not a positive. Larry Johnson owners beware.

Do you remember how those players got hurt? I'm not sure the workload is a good explanation.TD was injured while making a tackle; Alexander had a broken foot. Anderson's one was a weird one -- it was on artificial turf, it came after a long holdout and was early in the season, and it came on a play where he wasn't even touched. I'm not sure if his ACL was weaker because of a heavy workload the previous year, since I'm not a medical expert. But it seems like there are other likely explanations.

Andersons is the very definition of too much workload. His acl broke down when it shouldnt have.Alexander also. His body gave out. It was a non-weight bearing bone that developed a crack. Which also wasn't from a direct hit.

before last season, Anderson had 1717 carries, an avg of 343/yr , for 5 STRAIGHT years...you claim his body 'gave out', huh? well, then, how'd he play in 10 games last season? in his second week back from the foot injury , he rushed for 201 yards against GB ( week 12) , and another 140 against SD in week 16. Yeah,his body gave out alright! and if he leads the NFL in rushes this season, what will your excuse be, that the 6 games he missed in 2006, helped his body recover?!puh-lease!



did you ever think that the RB's who lead the NFL in carries one year, might not be as dominant the following season, because of OTHER mitigating factors besides wear and tear:

free agency, i.e, loss of a fullback, loss of O-line members ( see SA last season,after losing Hutchinson), AGE ( see C-mart, George, Holmes), loss of a coach/coaching staff, loss of a QB to retirement,etc..

and then there's just freakish injuries - see Terrell Davis, Jamal Anderson.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Damn. It's no wonder most of those players went on to have down years the next season. Too many carries.

Four of those players ranked #1 the next year, and four others ranked in the top five. Six more ranked in the top ten. Of the top six in carries, four ranked in the top ten the next year.

I'm not sure that helps your argument. Many more players (such as Jamal Anderson, Terrell Davis, Shaun Alexander among others) also had their production fall off big time. You are correct that the 4 of the top 6 were in the top 10 but two of those players in TD and Jamal Anderson fell off the face of the earth. And when Emmitt Smith had his huge seasons in 92 and 95 his production fell off the next season. He maintained his ranking in 93 but he fell all the way from 1st to 6th in 1996. Terrell Davis was the only one to actually have a better season out of the top 6. So i'll reiterate. Heavy workload is not a positive. Larry Johnson owners beware.

Do you remember how those players got hurt? I'm not sure the workload is a good explanation.TD was injured while making a tackle; Alexander had a broken foot. Anderson's one was a weird one -- it was on artificial turf, it came after a long holdout and was early in the season, and it came on a play where he wasn't even touched. I'm not sure if his ACL was weaker because of a heavy workload the previous year, since I'm not a medical expert. But it seems like there are other likely explanations.

Andersons is the very definition of too much workload. His acl broke down when it shouldnt have.Alexander also. His body gave out. It was a non-weight bearing bone that developed a crack. Which also wasn't from a direct hit.

before last season, Anderson had 1717 carries, an avg of 343/yr , for 5 STRAIGHT years...you claim his body 'gave out', huh? well, then, how'd he play in 10 games last season? in his second week back from the foot injury , he rushed for 201 yards against GB ( week 12) , and another 140 against SD in week 16. Yeah,his body gave out alright! and if he leads the NFL in rushes this season, what will your excuse be, that the 6 games he missed in 2006, helped his body recover?!puh-lease!



did you ever think that the RB's who lead the NFL in carries one year, might not be as dominant the following season, because of OTHER mitigating factors besides wear and tear:

free agency, i.e, loss of a fullback, loss of O-line members ( see SA last season,after losing Hutchinson), AGE ( see C-mart, George, Holmes), loss of a coach/coaching staff, loss of a QB to retirement,etc..

and then there's just freakish injuries - see Terrell Davis, Jamal Anderson.

Anderson, you mean Alexander? And did you see my previous post with all the carry leaders and their subsequent injuries.Those wernt anything but injuries for the most part and its more then a coincidence. The wear and tear certainly takes its toll.

 

[Family Matters]

Some things we just don't know the answer to. This is one of them. We are talking about fantasy football and we are using our observations from afar. We have absolutely no knowledge of these players health records to know what really happened. We don't know if their workload caused the injury or if they had genetic disorders that caused them problems or if they simply fell prey to a freak play. Yet some will insist they know what happened becuase so and so had this many carries and then got injured and we can find 16 examples of when others got injured that had so many carries. Please stop people. You don't know, I don't know, no one knows for sure. This is nothing more than speculation and our "best guesses" and we also know there as much evidence, or more, to demonstrate that guys with large workloads so well. Emmit Smith comes to mind as an example.

BTW-how many guys got injured with less than 300 carries? Why? Did they not get enouhg of a work load? How many guys got injured at practice? Why?

RB's take a pounding and they get injured. That's all we know for sure. You cannot predict injuries, no one can. Personally, I'd rather focus my resources on identifying more tangible factors like:

Talent

Opportunity

Motivation

These are things I can better quantify in determining potential FF success. Injuries? Not so much.

 

[Dirty Weasel]

How long will LJ's 416 regular season carries record last? I won't give it any longer than 3 years. The fact of the matter is that teams don't have such a long-term interest in players as they did long ago. What does this mean? Give that workhorse RB all he can handle, and then some. And when he's in his contract year, the sky is the limit. I don't set a specific number of carries as a threshold for injuries; every person's body is different. Some RB's break down after only 200 carries.