Analytics explain why the NFL stiffs running backs


My Minnesota Vikings are on a roll this year due to unexpectedly stellar play from their quarterback Sam Darnold. After being drafted very highly, Darnold turned out to be a dud. But suddenly he blossomed—no doubt helped greatly by our superstar wide receiver Justin Jefferson. This Sunday the Vikings play in London against the New York Jets and their future hall-of-fame QB Aaron Rodgers.

There’s no doubt that quarterbacks are the most important factors for success in the NFL, so it’s no surprise that there’s a positive correlation of 0.7 between annual passing yards and annual revenue according to Harvard economist Roland Fryer.* But it’s quite shocking that he finds a negative correlation of 0.01 for the value of running backs. I agree with Fryer that its delightful to “see analytics put to good use but sad to see football’s best position taking a back seat.”

Go Darnold, go Vikes!

P.S. As reported earlier this year by SI, The NFL Treats Elite Wide Receivers Very Differently From Top Running Backs. As a case in point, they highlight the huge contract just signed by Jefferson. “Show me the money”—the demand given by the wide receiver to his agent Jerry McGuire played by Tom Cruise—isn’t working for running backs, though they do make a lot more money than kickers or punters as seen in this ESPN ranking of pay by position.

*Comments on “The Economics of Running Backs,” Wall Street Journal, September 4.

  1. No comments yet.

You must be logged in to post a comment.