Time to put the "Willie Parker could only make sporadic runs" myth to rest

[Craic]

At least for the 2005 season. I was going to do other years, but it took me for-freaken-ever just to scrub the data to get it down to just Willie P for this 2005.

However, in 2005:

43 carries for negative yards
30 carries for no yards
77 carries for 1-2 yards
85 carries for 3-5 yards
35 carries for 6-9 yards
36 carries for 10+ yards.

Of those...

He had one consecutive carry for a loss (one carry right after another).
He had 2-3 consecutive carries where he carried for 0 yards before or after carrying for under 2 yards.
He had 5 carries where he carried for positive yardage both times, but only got 4 yards or less total consecutively.
And only 35 times that season, did he have two consecutive rushes that gained under five yards total (that equals under twice a game, since they played 20 games that year—or 1.75 times a game Willie P. would fail to rush for more than four yards on consecutive carries.


Raw numbers in next post. (Edit: will only let me put in the first forty because it trys to combine the posts, then kicks it back saying it's too big. So if anyone's interested, post here and let me know, and then I'll post another set of forty numbers until we get all 347 up. Either that, you ya'll can trust my numbers.

[Craic]

20050911_TEN@PIT	1	53	17	PIT	TEN	1	10	77	(8:17) W.Parker left tackle to PIT 24 for 1 yard (T.Beckham; A.Odom).	0	7	1
20050911_TEN@PIT	1	52	11	PIT	TEN	1	10	62	(7:11) W.Parker right tackle to PIT 41 for 3 yards (K.Vanden Bosch Tank Williams).	0	7	3
20050911_TEN@PIT	1	51	30	PIT	TEN	2	7	59	(6:30) W.Parker right end to PIT 40 for -1 yards (L.Thompson K.Bulluck).	0	7	-1
20050911_TEN@PIT	1	49	20	PIT	TEN	2	14	52	(4:20) B.Roethlisberger pass to W.Parker to TEN 4 for 48 yards (L.Thompson).	0	7
20050911_TEN@PIT	1	48	32	PIT	TEN	1	4	4	(3:32) W.Parker up the middle to TEN 3 for 1 yard (K.Bulluck).	0	7	1
20050911_TEN@PIT	2	44	6	PIT	TEN	1	10	40	(14:06) W.Parker up the middle to TEN 33 for 7 yards (J.Sandy).	7	7	7
20050911_TEN@PIT	2	43	32	PIT	TEN	2	3	33	(13:32) W.Parker left end to TEN 31 for 2 yards (K.Bulluck).	7	7	2
20050911_TEN@PIT	2	42	58	PIT	TEN	3	1	31	(12:58) W.Parker up the middle to TEN 29 for 2 yards (K.Bulluck L.Thompson).	7	7	2
20050911_TEN@PIT	2	42	18	PIT	TEN	1	10	29	(12:18) W.Parker right tackle to TEN 25 for 4 yards (P.Sirmon).	7	7	4
20050911_TEN@PIT	2	35	53	PIT	TEN	1	10	89	(5:53) W.Parker right end to PIT 15 for 4 yards (A.Woolfolk; L.Thompson).	17	7	4
20050911_TEN@PIT	2	35	14	PIT	TEN	2	6	85	(5:14) W.Parker left end to PIT 40 for 25 yards (T.Beckham).	17	7	25
20050911_TEN@PIT	2	33	19	PIT	TEN	1	10	27	(3:19) W.Parker left guard to TEN 25 for 2 yards (R.Long K.Bulluck).	17	7	2
20050911_TEN@PIT	2	32	43	PIT	TEN	2	8	25	(2:43) W.Parker right end to TEN 10 for 15 yards (Tank Williams).	17	7	15
20050911_TEN@PIT	2	32	0	PIT	TEN	1	10	10	(2:00) W.Parker up the middle to TEN 10 for no gain (A.Haynesworth K.Bulluck).	17	7	0
20050911_TEN@PIT	2	31	19	PIT	TEN	2	10	10	(1:19) W.Parker up the middle to TEN 9 for 1 yard (B.Kassell A.Haynesworth).	17	7	1
20050911_TEN@PIT	3	29	11	PIT	TEN	1	10	48	(14:11) W.Parker right guard to TEN 34 for 14 yards (Tank Williams).	20	7	14
20050911_TEN@PIT	3	28	35	PIT	TEN	1	10	34	(13:35) W.Parker up the middle to TEN 30 for 4 yards (A.Woolfolk L.Thompson).	20	7	4
20050911_TEN@PIT	3	27	57	PIT	TEN	2	6	30	(12:57) W.Parker right guard to TEN 25 for 5 yards (B.Kassell).	20	7	5
20050911_TEN@PIT	3	26	42	PIT	TEN	1	10	11	(11:42) W.Parker up the middle for 11 yards TOUCHDOWN.	20	7	11
20050911_TEN@PIT	3	22	2	PIT	TEN	1	10	80	(7:02) W.Parker right guard to PIT 24 for 4 yards (B.Kassell A.Woolfolk).	27	7	4
20050911_TEN@PIT	3	21	22	PIT	TEN	2	6	76	(6:22) W.Parker up the middle to PIT 27 for 3 yards (K.Bulluck).	27	7	3
20050911_TEN@PIT	3	20	40	PIT	TEN	3	3	73	(5:40) (Shotgun) B.Roethlisberger left end to PIT 32 for 5 yards (M.Waddell; L.Thompson).	27	7	5
20050911_TEN@PIT	3	19	53	PIT	TEN	1	10	68	(4:53) W.Parker up the middle to PIT 41 for 9 yards (P.Sirmon L.Thompson).PIT-M.Starks was injured during the play. His return is Questionable.	27	7	9
20050911_TEN@PIT	3	19	18	PIT	TEN	2	1	59	(4:18) W.Parker left end pushed ob at TEN 14 for 45 yards (K.Bulluck).TEN-K.Bulluck was injured during the play.	27	7	45
20050918_PIT@HOU	1	60	0	PIT	HOU	1	10	80	(15:00) W.Parker left end ran ob at PIT 39 for 19 yards (M.Coleman).	0	0	19
20050918_PIT@HOU	1	59	38	PIT	HOU	1	10	61	(14:38) W.Parker right guard to PIT 41 for 2 yards (K.Wong R.Smith).	0	0	2
20050918_PIT@HOU	1	58	34	PIT	HOU	1	10	47	(13:34) W.Parker up the middle to HST 44 for 3 yards (A.Peek R.Smith).	0	0	3
20050918_PIT@HOU	1	56	46	PIT	HOU	2	9	35	(11:46) W.Parker right tackle to HST 21 for 14 yards (C.Brown).	0	0	14
20050918_PIT@HOU	1	56	2	PIT	HOU	1	10	21	(11:02) W.Parker up the middle to HST 19 for 2 yards (J.Ioane).	0	0	2
20050918_PIT@HOU	1	53	39	PIT	HOU	1	10	22	(8:39) W.Parker ran ob at HST 16 for 6 yards (K.Wong).	3	0	6
20050918_PIT@HOU	1	49	16	PIT	HOU	1	10	92	(4:16) W.Parker left end to PIT 7 for -1 yards (D.Robinson).	10	0	-1
20050918_PIT@HOU	1	48	15	PIT	HOU	1	10	78	(3:15) W.Parker left end to PIT 29 for 7 yards (M.Coleman; R.Smith).	10	0	7
20050918_PIT@HOU	1	46	46	PIT	HOU	1	10	23	(1:46) W.Parker up the middle to HST 25 for -2 yards (M.Greenwood).	10	0	-2
20050918_PIT@HOU	1	45	15	PIT	HOU	1	4	4	(:15) W.Parker left guard to HST 5 for -1 yards (M.Greenwood). PENALTY on PIT-J.Hartings Offensive Holding 10 yards enforced at HST 4 - No Play.	10	0	-1
20050918_PIT@HOU	2	37	42	PIT	HOU	1	10	32	(7:42) W.Parker right guard to HST 30 for 2 yards (S.Payne).	17	0	2
20050918_PIT@HOU	2	37	9	PIT	HOU	2	8	30	(7:09) W.Parker left guard to HST 24 for 6 yards (K.Wong).	17	0	6
20050918_PIT@HOU	2	36	29	PIT	HOU	3	2	24	(6:29) W.Parker right tackle to HST 16 for 8 yards (R.Smith; J.Babin).	17	0	8
20050918_PIT@HOU	2	35	53	PIT	HOU	1	10	16	(5:53) W.Parker left tackle to HST 11 for 5 yards (R.Smith K.Wong).	17	0	5
20050918_PIT@HOU	2	34	34	PIT	HOU	3	1	7	(4:34) W.Parker right end ran ob at HST 2 for 5 yards (M.Greenwood). PENALTY on PIT-J.Tuman Offensive Holding 10 yards enforced at HST 7 - No Play.	17	0	5

[Steelerette]

I love Willie Parker, but that was 2005. We had Bettis. He played an appropriate complementary role in the running game. Then in 2006 we ran the wheels off him. After that he was rather lackluster... but he was never the kind of player who should have been the workhorse.

[fansince'76]

Steelreserve's gonna love this thread...

[Mojouw]

Willie Parker's downfall was the "Curse of 300". There is a raft of data on a # of RB's that after a season or two of 300+ carries their production falls off a cliff.

[zulater]

He was a good back ( not great) until Tomlin true to his word "ran his legs off" in 2007. He broke his leg towards the end of that season and was never the same player afterwards.

[ALLD]

He has one run where he is still in the record books and that is when it mattered most. Also give credit to OL and the Seahawks not being prepared.

[dislocatedday]

I have fond memories of Willie Parker's time with the Steelers. I am not sure why many people seem to look back on his time negatively. Outside of Franco Harris and Jerome Bettis, who else produced better at the halfback position for the Steelers in the modern era (since 1970)? Barry Foster had that one great year, but then he disappeared. I'd say Willie was 3rd best behind Franco and The Bus.

He was a very good player in my opinion. He did not have a very long career, but he did have 3-4 good seasons. He worked his tail off, and when given the opportunity he seized it. He far exceeded what anybody could have imagined as an undrafted FA coming out of college.

[fansince'76]

He has one run where he is still in the record books and that is when it mattered most. Also give credit to OL and the Seahawks not being prepared.

That only happened CUZ DA REFS CHEEETID!

[salamander]

That only happened CUZ DA REFS CHEEETID!

Yepp... DA STEALERS PAYED DA REFS!!! You know I couldn't resist.

[steelreserve]

I love Willie Parker, but that was 2005. We had Bettis. He played an appropriate complementary role in the running game. Then in 2006 we ran the wheels off him. After that he was rather lackluster... but he was never the kind of player who should have been the workhorse.

Exactly this. Parker was great as a dual-threat or change-of-pace back. When you put him in the lead role, he was way too one-dimensional, and every team that was halfway decent on defense could stop the running game whenever they chose to do so.

Why don't we look at 2006, the year he supposedly knocked it out of the park with almost 1,500 yards rushing. He had 7 100-yard games including two 200-yard games (against the 4-12 Browns and the 22nd-ranked Saints run defense). Then he had six games with a YPC average in the 2's or 1's; five of those games he had under 50 yards rushing, and three of them he had less than 30. That's about 40% of the time that he was absolutely KILLING us. That pretty much holds true throughout his career.

Wait, before you say "everyone has bad games," remember this was supposedly his BEST year. You had a total of about four lucky plays that made his fantasy football numbers mask the fact that he was completely ineffective almost half the time. Add to that the fact that much of his production came in herky-jerky spurts under regular circumstances, and I don't see how he really helped this football team.

MIA 29/115 3.97
JAX 11/20 1.82
CIN 31/133 4.29
SDG 14/57 4.07
KAN 21/109 5.19
ATL 20/47 2.35
OAK 22/83 3.77
DEN 14/70 5.00
NOR 22/213 9.68
CLE 16/46 2.88
BAL 10/22 2.20
TAM 22/61 2.77
CLE 32/223 6.97
CAR 23/132 5.74
BAL 13/29 2.23
CIN 37/134 3.62

[Craic]

Exactly this. Parker was great as a dual-threat or change-of-pace back. When you put him in the lead role, he was way too one-dimensional, and every team that was halfway decent on defense could stop the running game whenever they chose to do so.

Why don't we look at 2006, the year he supposedly knocked it out of the park with almost 1,500 yards rushing. He had 7 100-yard games including two 200-yard games (against the 4-12 Browns and the 22nd-ranked Saints run defense). Then he had six games with a YPC average in the 2's or 1's; five of those games he had under 50 yards rushing, and three of them he had less than 30. That's about 40% of the time that he was absolutely KILLING us. That pretty much holds true throughout his career.

Wait, before you say "everyone has bad games," remember this was supposedly his BEST year. You had a total of about four lucky plays that made his fantasy football numbers mask the fact that he was completely ineffective almost half the time. Add to that the fact that much of his production came in herky-jerky spurts under regular circumstances, and I don't see how he really helped this football team.

MIA 29/115 3.97
JAX 11/20 1.82
CIN 31/133 4.29
SDG 14/57 4.07
KAN 21/109 5.19
ATL 20/47 2.35
OAK 22/83 3.77
DEN 14/70 5.00
NOR 22/213 9.68
CLE 16/46 2.88
BAL 10/22 2.20
TAM 22/61 2.77
CLE 32/223 6.97
CAR 23/132 5.74
BAL 13/29 2.23
CIN 37/134 3.62

Actually, I was planning on doing 2006 until I realized it took me about 6 hours of data scrubbing to get what I had in the first post. I'll do 2006 at some point. But, you do have to admit that in 2005, Willie P. was not the type of runner you're claiming he was.

I'll leave 2006 until I check the ins and outs. I think maybe 2007 is the last I'll check, because after that, pretty much every back we had was running for -2, 3, 0, -2 yards do to the downfall of our O line.

- - - Updated - - -

Willie Parker's downfall was the "Curse of 300". There is a raft of data on a # of RB's that after a season or two of 300+ carries their production falls off a cliff.

I really think that was an issue as well. He ran twice for over 300 times. The first season included the playoffs.

[steelreserve]

Actually, I was planning on doing 2006 until I realized it took me about 6 hours of data scrubbing to get what I had in the first post. I'll do 2006 at some point. But, you do have to admit that in 2005, Willie P. was not the type of runner you're claiming he was.

I'll leave 2006 until I check the ins and outs. I think maybe 2007 is the last I'll check, because after that, pretty much every back we had was running for -2, 3, 0, -2 yards do to the downfall of our O line.

He was a little more consistent in 2005. He did have 4 or 5 shitbag games, but the difference was Bettis, and even Staley once, were able to make up for it in some of them.

Useless was probably not the right word to describe Parker ... he did have his moments, but really seemed to be at his best when his carries were in the teens and we were mainly relying on others - either other RBs or the passing game - as our primary means of offense. You went to Parker first, and it was a three-and-out, or maybe one first down, unless you happened to get some outstanding plays to bail you out. There is no denying the difference between that and the more or less continuous stretch of 15 years with Foster-Morris-Pegram-Bettis where you could run the ball and pretty much count on continuing to move forward unless you had two unlucky plays in a row. It wasn't just Bettis, or that Parker wasn't Bettis. It's an overall capability that the offense hasn't had in a long time since then, except for a brief flash with Mendenhall and an even briefer flash with Bell so far. I don't think Parker ever gave us that, not unless we were manhandling the opponent in general. Stats really can't capture that part of it, so I realize that's going to be totally subjective.

[The Bark]

I spent some time putting some different stats together several years ago and the problem I had with Willie, as much as I loved him, was, particularly in later years, once you removed his longest run of the game - his numbers were putrid. I would rather have a back who consistently gets me 4 yards a carry or better than one who, once you remove a 50 or 70 yard run (especially if it doesn't result in a TD) - averages a paltry 2.3 ypc. One moves the chains consistently whereas the other doesn't.

It's been a while since I've thought about it, but it would be interesting to see if other people have the same feeling or have broken down the stats further to illustrate something different.

[Craic]

Interesting idea, let's look at the stats, first, though you're right, it doesn't tell the entire picture:

Tennessee: 5.25 yards per run (and if you take out his long runs, 3.8). Break down: 3 runs of 2 or less yards, 5 runs of 3-5 yards, and 4 runs over five yards on first down.
Houston : 4.47 (w/o long runs, 3.42)
New England: 3.63 (no runs of more than 11 yards)
SD: 2.85 (w/o 1 long run, 1)
Jax 2.35 (no long runs)
Cin 10.9 (w/out long runs, 6—that was a heck of a game for Willie P. on first down running).
Bal 4.11 (w/out 1 long run 2.6).
Green Bay 3.5--no long runs
Bal 2.85 (2 w/out long runs)
Indy 5.1 (2.4 w/out long runs)
Cin 4.125 (3 without long runs)
Chic 3.67 (2 runs for 11 yards, just over 10 yard breaking point. No runs longer than that)
Min 2.1
Cleveland 2.4 (actually, 12.1 with a 80 yard TD run on first down, which shouldn't be discounted since he actually scored on the play)
Det 5.57 (4.38 without long runs)
___________________

Now, by my count, that's 11 games where he averaged 3 yards or more on first down, and if you take out his long runs, it's still seven games. ON top of that...

Willie had 19 runs on first down where he got under 3 yards, and then with the next run (or screen pass) set up a third and three, or better. That means he was 62 percent effective on getting decent first down yards (or making up for it on second down).

______________________________________________

Now, as to what you were saying, I don't think the issue is as much Willie P. per say, as it is the fact that we moved away from the type of football you're talking about. The year quoted above, after that middle section where the entire team stunk (offense got very few touches in a few of those middle games), the team was able to do exactly what you said. So what happened? It's easy, (1) we focused more and more on the pass; (2) our O line got old in a REAL hurry, don't foget Big Red's attitude issues, Marvel's back/neck going out on him, Jeff Hartings knees causing him so much trouble he retired, and Kendall Simmons turning into a turnstyle (Diabetes issues with strenght vs. weight, etc., probably).

I really think it's impossible to blame any of that on any running back, and especially when your O line virtually disappears in a year or so, to be replaced by scrubs because your O line coach couldn't be bothered to actually coach them up and instead employed the "Just get in front of them any way possible" mentality (which was great for the starters who already had the fundamentals down, but horrible for our second stringers who could never step up because of it).

So while I understand what you're saying, and I agree that we lost the ability to roll down the field, I think you're vastly overestimating Willie P.s influence in that. Matter of fact, I was surprised at the number of times I saw Jerome Bettis, who was a short-yardage guru, getting plugged for a loss or for under three yards in this year. So I think the idea of Bettis being able to go for 3 yards, 4 yard, 8 yeards, 3 yards, 4 yards, 6 yards, 4 yards on and on is a lot more myth than reality. SUre, he didn't get stopped in the backfield near as much as Willy P., but he also had a better O line than Willie P. through much of his career.

[Dwinsgames]

Parker had 2 significant issues ...

1) Bettis left and nobody replaced his impact

2) he broke his leg

once those two things merged he was done

[zulater]

Craig made some good points about the offensive line issues that plagued this team since 2006. We went away from the power offense with a hard charging fullback to lead the way after Cowher left too. A back like Parker needs a crease, if he's being hit in the backfield or at the LOS he's not going to do you much good. And no matter how you break it down he did get yards and we did win a lot of games with him as the primary back. Even if they were shutting him down, they still had to account for him, which opened up the passing game some.

[Craic]

Parker had 2 significant issues ...

1) Bettis left and nobody replaced his impact

2) he broke his leg

once those two things merged he was done

I almost agree with you, here's how I'd change it.

1) Bettis left and there was no one else to take any significant runs from Willie, nor did the coaching staff want to do it.

2) He ran/caught over 300 times at least twice, if not more (see item 1)

3) due to the above, his body wore down the injuries began piling up, which is death to a speed back.

[NCSteeler]

Offseason Boredom = Spending 6 hours researching and posting about a RB who hasn't played the game in 6 years.

[Craic]

Offseason Boredom = Spending 6 hours researching and posting about a RB who hasn't played the game in 6 years.

almost—procrastination plus offseason boredom...