Inside The Madden Curse
| 16
|
by user Davis21wylie
When the news came out last week that a chipped bone in Shaun Alexander's left foot would keep him out for at least a few weeks, just about everyone reflexively pointed to the Madden Curse -- that strange, career-killing phenomenon surrounding the cover athletes of the world's greatest football-game franchise. But is there truly a Madden Curse? I, for one, don't particularly believe in curses, and I'm sure Alexander would say the same thing. In fact, he did -- last May, to the Seattle Times:
| "I don't believe in curses," Alexander says. "I'm always the person that goes against the grain, the baseball player who grabs the random bat. Once you start believing in curses, you have to think about what sock you put on, how many times you stepped on a crack, did you pass a black cat, did you walk under a ladder, did you open an umbrella in the house. After that you get worn out.
"You know when there's an old creaky house, and you start worrying? Well, stop. It's an owl or a bird." |
Okay, but what about that broken bone? What about Marshall Faulk (or his Rams, for that matter), neither of which were ever the same after #28 graced the cover of Madden? What about Michael Vick, Eddie George, Dorsey Levens... -- well, you know the list. Since 1999, when John Madden stopped making us look upon his visage whenever we picked up the game's box, not a single cover athlete has managed to escape some kind of drop-off, whether in health or performance (or so the myth goes). Using the system I employ every week to rank players, let's take a look at the extent of the damage:
Season Type Team Pos G Plays TAY NetPts Pts/Pl PAR PAR/G WARP ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1997 M-2 det rb 16 348.2 2329.5 194.13 0.558 112.99 7.06 2.82 1998 M-1 det rb 16 360.1 1670.5 139.21 0.387 55.31 3.46 1.38 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By the way, year "M-2" means two years before his "Madden Season", "M-1" means one year before, and so forth. Sanders retired, so he's really not a great example. I don't know if unexpected retirement qualifies as a curse, so we'll look at the alternate cover man for Madden 2000...
Season Type Team Pos G Plays TAY NetPts Pts/Pl PAR PAR/G WARP ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1997 M-2 gnb rb 16 352.7 1707.0 142.25 0.403 60.07 3.75 1.50 1998 M-1 gnb rb 7 128.4 467.0 38.92 0.303 9.00 1.29 0.22 1999 M gnb rb 14 322.1 1471.0 122.58 0.381 47.53 3.40 1.19 2000 M+1 gnb rb 5 86.4 325.5 27.13 0.314 6.99 1.40 0.17 2001 M+2 gnb rb 15 56.8 249.5 20.79 0.366 7.56 0.50 0.19 2002 phi rb 16 86.4 472.5 39.38 0.456 19.24 1.20 0.48 2003 nyg rb 11 69.9 238.0 19.83 0.284 3.55 0.32 0.09 2004 phi rb 15 98.2 479.5 39.96 0.407 17.08 1.14 0.43 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Levens actually had one of his best seasons in his Madden Year. It was pretty much his last good year, though, as he morphed into an average-at-best, injury-prone, limited-use back from his M+1 season on. Curse? Inconclusive.
Season Type Team Pos G Plays TAY NetPts Pts/Pl PAR PAR/G WARP ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1998 M-2 oti rb 16 365.0 1499.0 124.92 0.342 39.87 2.49 1.00 1999 M-1 oti rb 16 352.3 1716.0 143.00 0.406 60.91 3.81 1.52 2000 M oti rb 16 435.4 1879.5 156.63 0.360 55.18 3.45 1.38 2001 M+1 oti rb 16 339.5 1141.5 95.13 0.280 16.02 1.00 0.40 2002 M+2 oti rb 16 366.8 1370.5 114.21 0.311 28.74 1.80 0.72 2003 oti rb 16 320.2 1117.0 93.08 0.291 18.48 1.15 0.46 2004 dal rb 14 136.0 497.0 41.42 0.305 9.73 0.69 0.24 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay, here's where it gets interesting. George was never the most efficient of backs, often racking up his yards on the sole basis of durability, but he really went downhill after M+1... For reference, an average back will put up around .340 pts/play, and you can see above that George was well below that during the last four years of his career. Of course, he did carry the ball an insane number of times leading up to his Madden Year, culminating with 403 carries in 2000 alone. So, Madden Curse? Frankly, I'd be more inclined to believe that George's crazy pre-Madden workload led to his demise.
Season Type Team Pos G Plays TAY NetPts Pts/Pl PAR PAR/G WARP ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1999 M-2 min qb 1 3.1 6.0 0.50 0.161 -0.22 -0.22 -0.01 2000 M-1 min qb 16 323.3 2033.5 169.46 0.524 94.13 5.88 2.35 2001 M min qb 11 253.3 1357.0 113.08 0.446 54.06 4.91 1.35 2002 M+1 min qb 16 369.5 1734.0 144.50 0.391 58.41 3.65 1.46 2003 M+2 min qb 14 298.0 1943.5 161.96 0.543 92.52 6.61 2.31 2004 min qb 16 364.6 2426.5 202.21 0.555 117.26 7.33 2.93 2005 min qb 7 131.0 490.0 40.83 0.312 10.31 1.47 0.26 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For me, Culpepper's the guy who single-handedly debunks the Madden Curse. Yes, he had a historically great M-1 season in 2000. Yes, he was injured and less effective in 2001, and the Vikings didn't do well. But, his M+2 was just as good as his M-1. And his M+3 was one of the greatest seasons by a quarterback, ever. Madden Curse? Hardly -- unless it applies to booze cruises four years later.
Season Type Team Pos G Plays TAY NetPts Pts/Pl PAR PAR/G WARP ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2000 M-2 ram rb 14 298.1 1985.0 165.42 0.555 95.96 6.85 2.40 2001 M-1 ram rb 14 306.8 1952.5 162.71 0.530 91.22 6.52 2.28 2002 M ram rb 14 254.2 1261.0 105.08 0.413 45.85 3.28 1.15 2003 M+1 ram rb 11 229.8 1034.0 86.17 0.375 32.62 2.97 0.82 2004 M+2 ram rb 14 219.3 931.0 77.58 0.354 26.49 1.89 0.66 2005 ram rb 16 87.0 442.5 36.88 0.424 16.60 1.04 0.42 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Faulk definitely fell victim to something after three all-time great seasons in 1999, 2000, and 2001. Was it workload, like George? Probably not; as you can see, he never had the number of touches that George had, only (barely) recording 300 adjusted plays (rushes + 1/2 * receptions) on just one occasion during his immediate pre-Madden years. Injuries can happen regardless of workload, though, and Faulk's was a painful and nagging high ankle sprain that limited his ability to burst and cut, and ultimately ended his run as an elite player. Was it the curse's doing? Well, Faulk was 29 when he appeared on Madden and his career hit the skids, an age at which most running backs begin to break down regardless of workload... So maybe Faulk had just reached his expiration date. Maybe.
Season Type Team Pos G Plays TAY NetPts Pts/Pl PAR PAR/G WARP ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2001 M-2 atl qb 8 85.3 589.5 49.13 0.576 29.25 3.66 0.73 2002 M-1 atl qb 15 315.7 2002.0 166.83 0.528 93.28 6.22 2.33 2003 M atl qb 5 89.6 451.5 37.63 0.420 16.75 3.35 0.42 2004 M+1 atl qb 15 281.2 1600.0 133.33 0.474 67.81 4.52 1.70 2005 M+2 atl qb 15 296.0 1411.0 117.58 0.397 48.62 3.24 1.22 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We all know what happened to #7 in the 2003 preseason, but, let's face it, Vick's playing style practically encourages that type of thing to happen. I mean, I'm pretty sure that a smallish QB who frequently runs draws and bootlegs and who has a penchant for laying himself out at the end of plays doesn't really need a hex on himself to suffer a catastrophic injury, right? But why has he not come close to his 2002 level of production since the injury? Well, several non-curse reasons, including the Falcons' West Coast scheme that, frankly, doesn't fully utilize Vick's unique skill set, and the simple fact that defenses have adapted to Vick since 2002. Less mobility because of the curse/injury, however, is not a reason; here's the way my system breaks down Vick's career rushing:
Year Rushing PAR -------------------- 2001 19.01 2002 41.71 2003* 11.76 2004 47.04 2005 30.98 --------------------
He was actually more effective running the ball in 2004 than in 2002. So, in short, I don't see a curse so much as I see the other 31 coaching staffs in the league scheming ways to stop Vick, making him beat them with his inaccurate arm rather than his crazy legs.
Year AGE Team GP SK SFY INT YDS LNG TD FUMR YDS TD --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2002 27 BAL 5 0.0 0 2 4 4 0 1 0 0 2003 28 BAL 16 1.5 0 6 99 37 1 2 1 0 2004* 29 BAL 15 1.0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2005 30 BAL 7 1.0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All right, those numbers really don't tell us much. So he had less interceptions? Big whoop. In all honesty, Lewis has been in decline for several years, but how can you attribute that to the curse? He's getting long in the tooth, and you couldn't expect him to continue his GOAT-level play forever. Besides, here's Baltimore's defense since Lewis became a superstar:
Year Lewis G PA Rank ----------------------------- 1999 16 277 6th 2000 16 165 1st 2001 16 265 4th 2002 5 354 19th 2003 16 281 6th 2004* 15 268 6th 2005 7 299 10th -----------------------------
Lewis missed one game during his Madden year, but Baltimore's D was just the same -- if not better, as they allowed fewer points. People point to the fact that the Ravens missed the playoffs in 2004, but it's insane to blame Lewis for the fact that Kyle Boller sucked and Jamal Lewis didn't repeat one of the greatest RB seasons of all time. And it's my understanding that Madden's eponymous curse always begins to show itself during the season that the player graces the cover, meaning that Lewis' 2005 injury couldn't possibly be ascribed to the curse. In other words, Lewis suffered no ill effects by being on Madden's cover, raising serious doubts about the curse's existence.
Season Type Team Pos G Plays TAY NetPts Pts/Pl PAR PAR/G WARP ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1999 phi qb 12 151.1 584.0 48.67 0.322 13.46 1.12 0.34 2000 phi qb 16 365.7 1966.5 163.88 0.448 78.67 4.92 1.97 2001 phi qb 16 326.7 1785.5 148.79 0.455 72.67 4.54 1.82 2002 phi qb 10 236.2 1445.5 120.46 0.510 65.42 6.54 1.64 2003 M-2 phi qb 16 309.5 1686.5 140.54 0.454 68.43 4.28 1.71 2004 M-1 phi qb 15 277.0 1933.5 161.13 0.582 96.58 6.44 2.41 2005 M phi qb 9 203.5 1038.5 86.54 0.425 39.13 4.35 0.98 2006< M+1 phi qb 4 87.5 735.0 61.25 0.700 40.86 10.22 1.02 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
McNabb was injured and less-effective during his Madden year. This year, he's been simply unbelievable. No, I can't explain it, except to say that this guy may have had something to do with it. And, I'll say it again, injuries happen, especially to mobile QB's. But, nonetheless, chalk one up in the Curse's favor...
Season Type Team Pos G Plays TAY NetPts Pts/Pl PAR PAR/G WARP ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2000 sea rb 16 67.7 353.0 29.42 0.435 13.64 0.85 0.34 2001 sea rb 16 336.8 1665.5 138.79 0.412 60.32 3.77 1.51 2002 sea rb 16 328.8 1519.0 126.58 0.385 49.97 3.12 1.25 2003 sea rb 16 344.2 1669.5 139.13 0.404 58.93 3.68 1.47 2004 M-2 sea rb 16 363.3 1907.5 158.96 0.438 74.31 4.64 1.86 2005 M-1 sea rb 16 377.5 2194.0 182.83 0.484 94.88 5.93 2.37 2006< M sea rb 3 67.5 218.0 18.17 0.269 2.44 0.81 0.06 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay, to reiterate: workloads matter. In the 2005 regular season, Alexander carried the ball 370 times; he tacked on 60 more rushes in the playoffs. That's a lot of punishment to deal with, no matter how outstanding the athlete, and, sure enough, virtually every running back who exceeds 390 combined playoff and regular-season carries suffers a significant decline the very next season. Alexander has proven himself to be no exception, missing at least Sunday's game against Chicago with that broken foot, if not more. This has nothing to do with the curse, though -- it has to do with runners taking on huge workloads and not living to tell about it. Giving your star RB 370+ carries is basically like asking for them to have a catastrophic injury within a year; unless their name is "Eric Dickerson" or "Emmitt Smith", you'll be sorry you did.
Summary
There is definitely a phenomenon surrounding injuries and/or poor play during a cover athlete's Madden year. Here's how they break down in total (excluding Sanders, but including Alexander and McNabb though Week 3 of 2006):
Type # G Plays TAY NetPts Pts/Pl PAR PAR/G WARP ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- All M-2 8 103 2125.2 11710.0 975.85 0.459 480.66 4.67 12.01 All M-1 8 115 2441.1 13969.0 1164.09 0.477 595.31 5.18 14.86 All M 8 72 1625.6 7676.5 639.71 0.394 260.94 3.62 6.53 All M+1 6 66 1373.9 6349.0 529.09 0.385 208.96 3.17 5.23 All M+2 6 74 1236.9 5905.5 492.12 0.398 203.93 2.76 5.10 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spooky. However, I'd be willing to bet that you could assemble any list of players who were great in one season (MVPs, for instance, or rushing champs), and they would decline similarly over the next few years. Why? Because of Regression to the Mean: things seek equilibrium, and if a player had an abnormally good and/or lucky season (lucky to avoid injury, even) one year, he will likely see some of that production and durability disappear during the next season, even if he does everything the same (trains the same, takes the same vitamins, ritually vomits the same way before every game like Jim Kelly used to, etc.) as the previous year. Regression to the mean is real, it's inevitable, and, for players like Faulk and Alexander, it can be quite painful (not to mention for the poor saps that had them in fantasy...).
In other words, the Madden Curse is just nonsense. It's nothing that can't be explained by prior workloads or just plain old regression to the mean... And the fact that Ray Lewis didn't even decline (and that McNabb and Culpepper came back to post better-than-ever seasons after appearing on Madden) dispels the notion of the curse even further. Besides, think about it: why would John Madden want to curse his cover athletes anyway? They're helping him rake in millions of dollars from gamers worldwide. No, he loves his cover boys, and don't let anyone tell you otherwise. As for that other curse, though, I think it definitely may be onto something...
Date
Tue 10/03/06, 11:23 am EST
