Originally Posted by

**BradshawsHairdresser**
OK, I will try to write in words that are easier to understand.

You are saying that it's unfair to compare Willie Parker and Rashard Mendenhall because RM played in fewer games than WP.

You say that if RM had played in the same number of games as WP, RM would have more yards, and better statistics.

I call bull.

Over the course of his career, WP carried the ball 1253 times for 5378 yards. He averaged 4.3 yards per carry, and 68.1 yards per game.

Over the course of his career, RM carried the ball 847 times for 3480 yards. He averaged 4.1 ypc, and 63.3 yards per game.

Do the math. An equal number of games does not give RM more yards than WP. Sorry.

RM does have more touchdowns, 29 to 24. But for WPs first two years here, we had a guy named Jerome Bettis on the roster, who was getting the bulk of the opportunities when we got close to the goal line. If we'd had a Bettis playing for two of RMs years, he might have a few less TDs as well.

I believe the stats show that RM was a better receiver--but not by much. WP had 84 receptions over his career, an average of 1.1 per game, for 697 yards. RM has had 75, an average of 1.4 per game, for 660 yards.

As far as games missed due to injury--you seem to think that gives WP an unfair advantage. It could be argued that it shows he was more durable than RM.

In at least one category, RM is far ahead of WP: boneheaded tweets.:D