NFL: Rushing for 1,000 Yards Still a Good Measure of Success?

by Jeff Little (Senior Writer)

601 reads

April 12, 2008

Currently UnEdited

This article has not been edited yet.

The NFL Season starts the weekend after Labor Day. Each team plays 16 games during a 17-week period. Since the NFL started there’ve been countless changes. This article will focus on the number of games played during the regular-season. From 1935 – 1960 an NFL team played 12 games or less. This didn’t change until the 1961 season when the teams played a total 14 games.

This change came about when the American Football League began play. One thing that made the AFL different was its 14-game schedule over a 15-week period, in which each of the eight teams played each of the other teams twice, with one bye week.

The NFL at that time had a fight on its hands; competition from the new league caused them to move to a 14-game season. Today’s NFL season consists of 16 games and has been that way since the 1978 season.

When a running back rushes for 1,000 yards it is deemed a measure of success. Is rushing for 1,000-yards in one season still an appropriate number? In today’s NFL, if a running back rushes for 1,000 yards in one season, he has run for an average of 62.5 yards per game. That's hardly a true measure of success, unless those 62.5 yards were instrumental in deciding if the team won.

If that same runner churned out 40 to 50 yards in the third or fourth quarter and kept a hot opposing quarterback on the sidelines, 62.5 yards would be huge.

During a 14-game season, if a running back rushed for 1,000 yards he would have gained an average for 71.4 yards per game. This is almost a 10-yard-per-game increase. The increase is higher and more significant in a 12-game season with 83.33 yards per game average. So what is the real difference?

The real difference is reflected in two different ways: time of possession and the big breakaway runs. If you take away the big runs in the NFL of most players, you’re talking anywhere from one or two a game. So you would say 10-16 long breakaway runs per season. I’m talking runs over 20-30 yards.

On average I feel it can be viewed as productivity over long distance runs. I think the bar has to be raised now that it is a 16-game season. I think the measure of success for a running back has to increase as well.

Rushing for 85 yards per game in a 16-game season would put a runner in excess of 1,300 yards per season. That should be the new measure of success for a NFL running back. It would usually allow that runner's team to win the time of possession battle, impact each game and lead to an impressive season. The breakaway runs would take this mark higher.

Reaching that number would be difficult in this era of having two runners share the load in a two-headed rushing tandem. Having two runners share the load does extend the season for both runners and keep them from being exhausted in the fourth quarter. While the bar needs to be raised, it will be at the expense of some individual rushing totals.

Want to write for Bleacher Report? We are a community of fans who write about sports. And we're growing. Click here to learn more.

Comments (30) Add a comment »

Reply to this Comment by Anonymous
from about 1 month ago

RAIDER STEVE says: I think a RB that runs for 1000 yards is still good. Look at what us Raiders fans say about Justin Fargas now a days. He rushed for 1002 I think and that was in only a few starts last season so that I just like rushing in the "Old Era's" that you talked about Jeff. His best runs were in the 4th quarters of games also. So does that make Fargas a "Premier RB". Maybe he is and maybe he isn't. But I think that in this era(2000-2008) that a "Premier RB" should have 1300- 1600 rushing yards. These are the kind of numbers that RB's Ladainian Tomlinson/ Adrian Peterson/ Brian Westbrook/ Larry Johnson(when he's healthy) put up in a season. Today teams have the 2 RB tandems. And sometimes the complimentary RB's have about 1000 yards or so(Julius Jones/ Marion Barber) or (Adrian Peterson/ Chester Taylor) and others. I think the speed of the game in the NFL is much faster than the "Old Era's" were. But I believe that it was much tougher to run back in the 70's & 80's. So having said all of that. I think that having a 1000 yard RB these days is good to have. But having a 1000 RB back then(70's & 80's) was GREAT. Times have to change. It's life. It's a new game/ a new breed/ and a new genre of NFL football. Make way for the "Duel Tandem RB Era".
1. by Jeff
  from about 1 month ago
  
  Good Takes Raider Steve. It is a new era. This is not to knock reaching the mark of course but I just feel that it is time to raise the bar. Thanks for the comments and the feedback.
Reply to this Comment by Anonymous
from about 1 month ago

RAIDER STEVE says: I agree with your article Jeff. You are truly a wise man. 1300 yards is the new standard of RB in this day and age.
Reply to this Comment by Andrew
from about 1 month ago

It seems that more and more backs are accomplishing that "sacred" 1000 yard level. You are right, maybe it is time for another golden standard.
1. by Jeff
  from about 1 month ago
  
  Thanks for the feedback
Reply to this Comment by Chris
from about 1 month ago

couldn't agree more. it seems like every rb is getting 1000 yards nowadays
1. by Jeff
  from about 1 month ago
  
  Thanks for the feedback and I love the AI photo. I just had a serious laugh thinking about the interview and how many times he said "Practice."
Reply to this Comment by Leanna
from about 1 month ago

I agree that the bar must be raised since it is a 16 game season. A 1,000 yard season isn't that impressive anymore in the NFL. Just about every running back you see in the NFL is getting over 1,000 yards a season.
1. by Jeff
  from about 1 month ago
  
  Thanks for the feedback
Reply to this Comment by tim
from about 1 month ago

good article,i also agree.1000 yds doesn't mean as much with the 16 game season.
1. by Jeff
  from about 1 month ago
  
  Thanks for the comments and the feedback
Reply to this Comment by Brendan
from about 1 month ago

1,300 yards is the new number, as you say. You can get 1,000 yards and not even be your team's featured back, in some cases.

Mind you 1,000 is an accomplishment- anyone who runs for 1,000 will probably be looked at by teams around the league and warrant consideration as a quality backup runner. But it's no longer an elite total.

Great read.
1. by Jeff
  from about 1 month ago
  
  Thanks for the comments and the feedback
Reply to this Comment by Tito
from about 1 month ago

Yeah........1000 yards is nothing......it should be 1250 good, 1500 great. Yds per carry must be figured in too.
Reply to this Comment by Anonymous
from about 1 month ago

There has been many article's written about the Raider Fans that call us a bunch of "Dysfunctional Underachievers" that are nothing more than Thugs who can't spell..They are oblivious to the truth that we are passionate about our family (The Raiders) and aggressive in protecting our house (The Coliseum)...I am done reading the ridiculous sarcasm that has no statistcal fact mentioned just "Obsessed Hate" that criticezed the philosophy of one of the great sport teams of all time "The Raiders".. I have picked Jeff's article to post my comment because of his knowledge of the game,being a true Raider Fan and for not being one of those irrelevant (hack) writers for B.R. that specifically attemps to target our fans,our team and our nation... Jeff keep up the great work.... Jim "Raider Fan since 1967"
1. by Jeff
  from about 1 month ago
  
  Jim, thanks for the compliments, comments, kind words. I'm looking to always post a good read for the site. Thanks for reading and supporting the Raiders since 1967.
2. by Jeff
  from about 1 month ago
  
  Jim I'm going to request that you do me a favor and rate this or any of my previous articles. I would appreciated it and it can help the article be read by more people. Thanks in advance.
Reply to this Comment by Rod
from about 1 month ago

I think there is a little bit of confusion over the "1000 yard" benchmark these days.

1000 yards is not the "he's a phenominal running back" of the significantly shorter seasons.

In this day and age, the age of pass heavy / West Coast offenses, and 17 week seasons; 1000 yards is the "well, he's doing pretty good".

You can't fault a guy who gets 1000.... it means he's doing his job.
It doesn't necessarily mean he's Pro Bowl material, but it means he's pulling his weight for the team.
Look at it that way.

Basically, it should be a "you can't hate on me" pass, nothing more....

... hell, Reggie Bush hasn't even broke 600 yards yet!
1. by Jeff
  from about 1 month ago
  
  Rod thanks for the comments & feedback, The article wasn't knocking anyone for achieving 1,000 yards at all. I'm not saying its a bad thing either it is a good achievement. What I'm saying in the article is that the 1,000 barrier has been a benchmark for a running back for years as a measure of success when teams played less games in a season, now that teams plays 16 games the question posed is a 1,000 yard season still a true measure of success?
Reply to this Comment by Devlan
from about 1 month ago

it seems to me 1200 yards means u're pretty decent, 1500 yards you've a pretty dang good season, and anything in excess of that is for a lot of backs a career year. It's also important to look at YPC in my opinion. The ability to catch out of the backfield and pass protect has also become increasingly important. I agree 1000 isn't waht it used to be. Nice article. *thumbs up*
1. by Jeff
  from about 1 month ago
  
  Devlan, Thanks for the comments and feedback
Reply to this Comment by Anonymous
from about 1 month ago

Hey Jeff, I would be more than happy to give you my opinion on your article('s) but first, so I have a better understanding (without going into detail), how B.R. rates your article('s) and what it takes for a shot at the front page.....Jim..
1. by Jeff
  from about 1 month ago
  
  Hey Jim, no problem here it is:The star-rating system influences both article placement and writer ranking—so judge appropriately. Four- and five-star ratings should be reserved for truly exceptional pieces. The best Bleacher Report articles display original thought, incisive analysis, and diligent craftsmanship. Let those criteria guide your thinking in assigning a score.
Reply to this Comment by Dave
from about 1 month ago

Today's game needs the due-tandem rb's.
Simply, the running back position is the most demanding on the field. Everytime the back is handed the ball, they're more than likely to be tackled (makes sense right). Having a change-up in running backs is only sensible. Sure 750 rushing yards in a season may not look incredible on paper, but in Reggie Bush's rookie year, combined with the 1,057 yards gained by Deuce, the Saints had the number one offense in football. Not only the Saints, but Dallas, Washington, and Minnesota are starting to give their #2 backs more carries per game. Rushing yards in a season doesn't matter at all if you aren't winning games- and 3 of the previously mentioned teams were .500 or better in '07, remember (the Saints were without Deuce for the majority of the season). Having a change in pace in the backfield creates so much more possibility for an offense. Just imagine what the change from a speedy, elusive back to a tough, powerback can have effect on defense. What's next? Will defense's around the league then begin substituting linebackers and defensive ends according to the changes the offense makes?
1. by Jeff
  from about 1 month ago
  
  Thanks for the comments, That's a good point you raise and yes that is what is happening in today's NFL. I also agree that defenses have and will continue to substitute linebackers and defensive ends according to the changes the offense makes. In writing the article I didn't forget about that fact, it just wasn't the focus of the piece. Thanks for the feedback and solid takes.
Reply to this Comment by Jeremy
from about 1 month ago

I believe that basing a running back's success primarily on the amount of yards they gain in a season is almost impossible within the contemporary game. While some runners tend to accumulate significant yardage totals primarily through short runs, such as Thomas Jones, other running backs may accumulate less yardgage due to a committee back system but with a much higher yard per carry average (such as Brandon Jacobs, who had a little over 1,000 yards with a 5.0 avg last season). Therefore, I believe that yards totals, averages, touchdowns, recieving numbers, and blocking all should be taken into appropriate consideration when evaluating the production of a running back. Good article.
1. by Jeff
  from about 1 month ago
  
  Thanks for the comments, You raise some valid points and I agree with your thoughts as well. Thanks as well for the feedback and solid takes on the issue.
Reply to this Comment by Anonymous
from about 1 month ago

Hey Jeff, I would rate this article with 3 stars... It has history,fact and opinion with the door open for readers to comment..Goob job... Jim..
1. by Jeff
  from about 1 month ago
  
  Thanks Jim for the reading, the rating of the article and the comments.
Reply to this Comment by Anonymous
from about 1 month ago

Sorry Good job not Goob job.. I guess we can't spell.. Jim