Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

Doing some 'research' on old RBs, and noticed a discrepancy with Cliff Battles rushing totals. In my Neft/Cohen encyclopedia, it lists Battles with 511 yards in 1934 and 310 yards in 1935. Pro Football Refence shows Battles with 480 yards in 1934 and 230 in 1935. Which is correct? And why is there a discrepancy in the first place?

Bryan wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2024 6:27 pm Doing some 'research' on old RBs, and noticed a discrepancy with Cliff Battles rushing totals. In my Neft/Cohen encyclopedia, it lists Battles with 511 yards in 1934 and 310 yards in 1935. Pro Football Refence shows Battles with 480 yards in 1934 and 230 in 1935. Which is correct? And why is there a discrepancy in the first place?

The numbers on pro-football-reference come from Total Football, so presumably their original source was the Elias Bureau. I guess they'd been sitting on the revised numbers for years, waiting for somebody to pay for them.

Bob Gill wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2024 8:10 pm

Bryan wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2024 6:27 pm Doing some 'research' on old RBs, and noticed a discrepancy with Cliff Battles rushing totals. In my Neft/Cohen encyclopedia, it lists Battles with 511 yards in 1934 and 310 yards in 1935. Pro Football Refence shows Battles with 480 yards in 1934 and 230 in 1935. Which is correct? And why is there a discrepancy in the first place?

The numbers on pro-football-reference come from Total Football, so presumably their original source was the Elias Bureau. I guess they'd been sitting on the revised numbers for years, waiting for somebody to pay for them.

So, I have a book called All-Time Greats that was written by Don Smith and the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Its profiles on all the HOF players, organized by induction year. This book lists Cliff Battles' stats and its the same as the Neft/Cohen totals. I dusted off my Total Football and, as you said, it clearly states "statistics provided by Elias Sports Bureau" on the cover....and the 1934 and 35 discrepancies exist. Admittedly I rank Elias Sports Bureau about a notch below the KGB, but how did they get 'wrong' statistics in the first place? And why do they perpetuate inaccuracies?

Bob Gill wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2024 8:10 pm The numbers on pro-football-reference come from Total Football, so presumably their original source was the Elias Bureau. I guess they'd been sitting on the revised numbers for years, waiting for somebody to pay for them.

SHows that the "Official Encyclopedia of the NFL" is the most accurate in stats. I suppose the NFL paid whatever it cost to get their stats.