Stephen Dubner

The real issue is value.

The value of a running play versus the value of a passing play.

So, Brian, the reason I was really eager to speak with you is that Roland wrote this piece in the Wall Street Journal about the decline of running back salaries.

And I've been told that if we had to point to one person in the universe who

who is perhaps most responsible for that decline, it might be you.

Do you want to claim that credit or blame?

Now, football stats were only a hobby at the time because you were a U.S.

Navy pilot, correct?

In what ways would you say that your military background contributed to the way that you frame the questions you're trying to answer in football?

So in a war-like setting, when you're trying to advance into enemy territory, which weapon is more valuable, the ground game or the passing game?

Brian Burke's analytic approach allowed him to answer that question.

Let's back up a bit.

You don't have to go back to the 1920s or the 1950s, but pick whatever seems like a sensible starting point in modern NFL history and tell me how the running game evolved and was eventually superseded by the passing game.

So the story you're telling me is simply that football people, including coaches and analytics people like you,

have been discovering over the years that passing is more valuable than running.

Additionally, the league itself decided over many years to make passing more prominent by rule changes.

And so now we've just arrived at this new circumstance where passing is just more valuable than running.

Where does that leave the running back in the modern football economy?

Now, you may be thinking, I understand that running backs have become somewhat less valuable, but are they really that much less valuable?

The answer to that question has to do with something that happened in 2011.