Opponent fumbles recovered and fumbles recovered
Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2025 12:36 pm
Hopefully, TJ's research will be at PFR eventually. But in the meantime the process for showing "takeaways" (INT + FR) as some writers do usually, is total fumbles recovered, whether offensive or defensive.
Usually it does not matter much ... Butkus 27 total, 25 def -- like that.
But with Bednarik, he has 13 defensive fumbles recovered and 21 total. I have been starting to go through the charts I have and making the corrections, but it is a pain in the neck. The only source I know isthe NFL Record (and Fact) books. And AFL has almost nothing.
So, if a guy has a 13-year career you have to look at all 13 Record books to make sure. For the AFL, you have to go through gamebooks ...
It's an interesting situation -- for several reasons.
First, fumbles recovered is often luck -- we read (at least me) growing up that such and such had a nose for the ball. Well, maybe that's true and maybe it's not, but the value of them is limited because a lot of the time guys have 1 or none or two FRs in a year. It's a rare play for an individual, the NFL record is under 30.
Second, even if someone had 30 takeaways (15 INT, 15 FR) does it matter that for most people the 15 includes an offensive recovery, maybe someone got one on special teams or fell on a loose ball that another defensive player fumbled.
Third, if all of it were complete -- and available .. how much does it matter?
I think wit NFLGSIS you can separate out defense, special teams and "misc) but you still have to check on PFR because they use the total number. You can use ESPN Stats ... and they show def FR -- and don't add in misc ... but the special teams and misc may be added together ...
I guess all this shows -- the defensive stats are always going to be skewed, sacks (one guys does work, another gets the sack, also double teams), tackles (sometimes a lot of tackles is because defense is bad, cannot get off the field), INT (guys with big INT sometimes picked on), FR (a decent factor of luck)
I like to count things, but also consider the skews, but if we do have the FRs, would be nice to see if a significant number are not necessarily takeaways --
Usually it does not matter much ... Butkus 27 total, 25 def -- like that.
But with Bednarik, he has 13 defensive fumbles recovered and 21 total. I have been starting to go through the charts I have and making the corrections, but it is a pain in the neck. The only source I know isthe NFL Record (and Fact) books. And AFL has almost nothing.
So, if a guy has a 13-year career you have to look at all 13 Record books to make sure. For the AFL, you have to go through gamebooks ...
It's an interesting situation -- for several reasons.
First, fumbles recovered is often luck -- we read (at least me) growing up that such and such had a nose for the ball. Well, maybe that's true and maybe it's not, but the value of them is limited because a lot of the time guys have 1 or none or two FRs in a year. It's a rare play for an individual, the NFL record is under 30.
Second, even if someone had 30 takeaways (15 INT, 15 FR) does it matter that for most people the 15 includes an offensive recovery, maybe someone got one on special teams or fell on a loose ball that another defensive player fumbled.
Third, if all of it were complete -- and available .. how much does it matter?
I think wit NFLGSIS you can separate out defense, special teams and "misc) but you still have to check on PFR because they use the total number. You can use ESPN Stats ... and they show def FR -- and don't add in misc ... but the special teams and misc may be added together ...
I guess all this shows -- the defensive stats are always going to be skewed, sacks (one guys does work, another gets the sack, also double teams), tackles (sometimes a lot of tackles is because defense is bad, cannot get off the field), INT (guys with big INT sometimes picked on), FR (a decent factor of luck)
I like to count things, but also consider the skews, but if we do have the FRs, would be nice to see if a significant number are not necessarily takeaways --