PDA

View Full Version : The Myth of the 40 Time



tittletoshofner
02-29-2012, 11:27 AM
I really don't understand the origin and importance of the 40 yard time that everyone thinks is so special. How often does a linebacker on a given play run 40 yards (full speed as well). Ray Lewis's 40 time was 4.7 (maybe that's why he was like the 5th LB drafted that year after the likes of Reggie Brown who had exactly 0 tackles in the NFL). Perhaps a 10 yard burst speed might be helful in judging a linebacker. Well what about WR? They run 40 yards full out on a fly pattern. Well Darius Heywood Bey ran an incredible 4.30 and our own Hakeem Nicks ran amuch slower 4.49. How has that worked out for Oakland?</P>


</P>

Kruunch
02-29-2012, 11:42 AM
A very over hyped stat ... especially when people use it to negate (either pro or con) a players' history to date.

buddy33
02-29-2012, 11:56 AM
Especially for the big guys. Now the first 10 yards I do think is a good determination of how explosive he can be.

slipknottin
02-29-2012, 01:11 PM
Ray Ray ran a 4.58.

40 yard dash is just another evaluation tool.

Guys who look really fast on the field almost always run fast in the 40.

Look at the most explosive players in the NFL at any position, they always run well.

smashndash715
02-29-2012, 01:15 PM
its yes and no..it is overrated..but at the end of the day if you have a linebacker that runs a 5.0 40 yd dash..regardless if he is running 40 yds on any given play i can bet you he is still not that explosive

Kruunch
02-29-2012, 01:16 PM
Ray Ray ran a 4.58.

40 yard dash is just another evaluation tool.

Guys who look really fast on the field almost always run fast in the 40.

Look at the most explosive players in the NFL at any position, they always run well.

So not true.

Jerry Rice ran a 4.7 at the Ceepo Combine and was the most explosive WR of all time.

You could go down the list of players who ran amazing 40s and couldn't get open to save their lives in the NFL (Rocket Ishmail anyone?).

Heck, MM ran a 4.59 and his draft stock plummeted ... he certainly ran faster then that on the field.

Two 40 times at one Combine means nothing except to those teams with really poor personel departments.

They should make the players do the Combine in pads. THAT would give more accurate measurables. Some players just don't do as well in pads as they do in shorts.

Kruunch
02-29-2012, 01:19 PM
its yes and no..it is overrated..but at the end of the day if you have a linebacker that runs a 5.0 40 yd dash..regardless if he is running 40 yds on any given play i can bet you he is still not that explosive

That's an extreme .. we're talking about 1 - 2 tenths of a second difference between an amazing 40 time and pedestrian 40 time (4.4 vs. 4.6).

bLuereverie
02-29-2012, 01:20 PM
I never considered Rice to be amongst the most explosive. Nor was Emmit Smith and so on and so forth. Those are just guys who just had the additional measure to really hone their craft.

smashndash715
02-29-2012, 01:21 PM
its yes and no..it is overrated..but at the end of the day if you have a linebacker that runs a 5.0 40 yd dash..regardless if he is running 40 yds on any given play i can bet you he is still not that explosive

That's an extreme .. we're talking about 1 - 2 tenths of a second difference between an amazing 40 time and pedestrian 40 time (4.4 vs. 4.6).

well thats what i mean..if one lb runs a 4.4 and another runs a 4.6 it doesnt mean you should take the 4.4 guy..it doesnt even mean the 4.4 will be faster during the game...i was saying only when its an extreme case is when you should show caution

slipknottin
02-29-2012, 01:27 PM
[Jerry Rice ran a 4.7 at the Ceepo Combine and was the most explosive WR of all time.

Mike Lombardi said when he was in oakland they timed Jerry Rice in the 4.3s on grass.

Mario manningham ran a 4.42 at his proday.

Fast players run fast 40s. I understand sometimes they have a bad day at the combine, but to think players who are football fast run slow in the 40.... well that just doesnt happen.

Kruunch
02-29-2012, 01:27 PM
I never considered Rice to be amongst the most explosive. Nor was Emmit Smith and so on and so forth. Those are just guys who just had the additional measure to really hone their craft.

Then you didn't watch them play.

Both left people in the dust repeatedly and were nearly impossible to catch from behind (in fact I don't recall either being caught from behind ... ever).

Kruunch
02-29-2012, 01:30 PM
[Jerry Rice ran a 4.7 at the Ceepo Combine and was the most explosive WR of all time.

Mike Lombardi said when he was in oakland they timed Jerry Rice in the 4.3s on grass.

Mario manningham ran a 4.42 at his proday.

Fast players run fast 40s. I understand sometimes they have a bad day at the combine, but to think players who are football fast run slow in the 40.... well that just doesnt happen.

Now you're quibbling.

Football fast and track fast just aren't the same thing. As proven ... there are guys who run amazing 40s and look like they're in tar on the field and guys with very pedestrian 40s who look and play with blazing speed in pads.

slipknottin
02-29-2012, 01:31 PM
Football fast and track fast just aren't the same thing. As proven ... there are guys who run amazing 40s and look like they're in tar on the field and guys with very pedestrian 40s who look and play with blazing speed in pads.

No, there arent. Guys who are really fast on the field run fast in the 40.

There are plenty of guys who play slow on the field but run a fast 40.

Thats the difference with the combine.

Kruunch
02-29-2012, 01:32 PM
its yes and no..it is overrated..but at the end of the day if you have a linebacker that runs a 5.0 40 yd dash..regardless if he is running 40 yds on any given play i can bet you he is still not that explosive

That's an extreme .. we're talking about 1 - 2 tenths of a second difference between an amazing 40 time and pedestrian 40 time (4.4 vs. 4.6).

well thats what i mean..if one lb runs a 4.4 and another runs a 4.6 it doesnt mean you should take the 4.4 guy..it doesnt even mean the 4.4 will be faster during the game...i was saying only when its an extreme case is when you should show caution

Yeah in that case I would agree.

One of the reasons I wasn't hyped about the Greg Jones pick last year (even as a 6th) ... he was both small AND slow. Horrible combination for an MLB in a C2 scheme.

smashndash715
02-29-2012, 01:42 PM
its yes and no..it is overrated..but at the end of the day if you have a linebacker that runs a 5.0 40 yd dash..regardless if he is running 40 yds on any given play i can bet you he is still not that explosive



That's an extreme .. we're talking about 1 - 2 tenths of a second difference between an amazing 40 time and pedestrian 40 time (4.4 vs. 4.6).

well thats what i mean..if one lb runs a 4.4 and another runs a 4.6 it doesnt mean you should take the 4.4 guy..it doesnt even mean the 4.4 will be faster during the game...i was saying only when its an extreme case is when you should show caution

Yeah in that case I would agree.

One of the reasons I wasn't hyped about the Greg Jones pick last year (even as a 6th) ... he was both small AND slow. Horrible combination for an MLB in a C2 scheme.
yea i doubt jones ever pans out to be anything more then a special teams player...im actually semi comfortable with our lb's right now which i havent felt in a while..kiwi played good..boley is a key part to our d..and i think j williams is gonna be a beast

bLuereverie
02-29-2012, 01:48 PM
I never considered Rice to be amongst the most explosive. Nor was Emmit Smith and so on and so forth. Those are just guys who just had the additional measure to really hone their craft.

Then you didn't watch them play.

Both left people in the dust repeatedly and were nearly impossible to catch from behind (in fact I don't recall either being caught from behind ... ever).

Ahhh here we go. The "obviously never saw them play" argument just because someone has a different evaluation from yours.

Never did I say Rice was slow, but never would I say he was amongst the fastest in his respective position let alone against the DBs he faced. Maybe stronger, well-balanced, smarter, so on and so forth plus playing in that SF West Coast helps.

Using the catch from behind situation is a poor example as every defender is at a disadvantage in that scenario. Saying Rice/Smith dominated because of their raw explosion/speed is just a farce of an argument and more of an insult to them because they compensated with so much more.

p.s. I saw them plenty.

Bluesmagoo
02-29-2012, 01:50 PM
The 40 is the benchmark to gauge the time it takes to cover a punt(ave punt is 40 yards).

bLuereverie
02-29-2012, 01:51 PM
The point anyway is I don't know why everything has to be so black and white in here. One side, 40 means everything whereas one side it's completely useless. Both sides are wrong.

It's a source of info for scouts to infer that is very much relevant, but hardly the penultimate.

Kruunch
02-29-2012, 02:01 PM
I never considered Rice to be amongst the most explosive. Nor was Emmit Smith and so on and so forth. Those are just guys who just had the additional measure to really hone their craft.

Then you didn't watch them play.

Both left people in the dust repeatedly and were nearly impossible to catch from behind (in fact I don't recall either being caught from behind ... ever).

Ahhh here we go. The "obviously never saw them play" argument just because someone has a different evaluation from yours.

Never did I say Rice was slow, but never would I say he was amongst the fastest in his respective position let alone against the DBs he faced. Maybe stronger, well-balanced, smarter, so on and so forth plus playing in that SF West Coast helps.

Using the catch from behind situation is a poor example as every defender is at a disadvantage in that scenario. Saying Rice/Smith dominated because of their raw explosion/speed is just a farce of an argument and more of an insult to them because they compensated with so much more.

p.s. I saw them plenty.

No you didn't. If you had you'd understand how silly your statements are (especially about him being stronger ... lol). This isn't opinion ... he was just flat faster and quicker then anyone on the field and showed it throughout his long career.

Here let me help you out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMzyMglPvw8

There are about a bajillion other videos showing the same thing. What made him truly remarkable was his YAC. He moved as if he was the only person on the field and everyone else just looked like they were standing still.

Now match that video (or any you care to view) with the fact that he ran a 4.71 40 time before he was drafted.

Kruunch
02-29-2012, 02:05 PM
The point anyway is I don't know why everything has to be so black and white in here. One side, 40 means everything whereas one side it's completely useless. Both sides are wrong.

It's a source of info for scouts to infer that is very much relevant, but hardly the penultimate.

It's situational.

A slow 40 time from a guy that normally cooks on the field (to Slip's point) is more than likely a bad day on the track and fairly meaningless.

However a fast 40 time on someone you don't expect to have that kind of speed is something that will open your eyes.

A good example of this Coby Fleener. If he runs a 4.7 40 at his Pro Day, most will think "ho hum". However if he runs a 4.55 40, then there will be a huge buzz about him because that shows people he has the capability of running that fast and will probably move him into the #1 spot for TEs (and make him a borderline first round pick).

The more important measurables that come from the 40 (in almost all cases) are the splits which show acceleration.

bLuereverie
02-29-2012, 02:07 PM
He was incredibly stronger than others at the point of catch. Your link even shows it. Both Rice and Smith were incredibly agile, but explosive wouldn't even be a descriptive they'd use on themselves.

buffyblue
02-29-2012, 02:08 PM
I never considered Rice to be amongst the most explosive. Nor was Emmit Smith and so on and so forth. Those are just guys who just had the additional measure to really hone their craft.

Then you didn't watch them play.

Both left people in the dust repeatedly and were nearly impossible to catch from behind (in fact I don't recall either being caught from behind ... ever).

Ahhh here we go. The "obviously never saw them play" argument just because someone has a different evaluation from yours.

Never did I say Rice was slow, but never would I say he was amongst the fastest in his respective position let alone against the DBs he faced. Maybe stronger, well-balanced, smarter, so on and so forth plus playing in that SF West Coast helps.

Using the catch from behind situation is a poor example as every defender is at a disadvantage in that scenario. Saying Rice/Smith dominated because of their raw explosion/speed is just a farce of an argument and more of an insult to them because they compensated with so much more.

p.s. I saw them plenty.

No you didn't. If you had you'd understand how silly your statements are (especially about him being stronger ... lol). This isn't opinion ... he was just flat faster and quicker then anyone on the field and showed it throughout his long career.

Here let me help you out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMzyMglPvw8

There are about a bajillion other videos showing the same thing. What made him truly remarkable was his YAC. He moved as if he was the only person on the field and everyone else just looked like they were standing still.

Now match that video (or any you care to view) with the fact that he ran a 4.71 40 time before he was drafted.

Jerry Rice was quick but he was never a burner. The things that seperated him were his hands, ability to break tackles and his preparedness. He was always in great shape and he was so strong.

Jerry Rice was the greatest reciever ever but not because of his speed.

Kruunch
02-29-2012, 02:10 PM
He was incredibly stronger than others at the point of catch. Your link even shows it. Both Rice and Smith were incredibly agile, but explosive wouldn't even be a descriptive they'd use on themselves.

You mean Rice has strong HANDS. Yes he did. Saying he's just strong implies that he's breaking tackles by running through people.

You want to believe Rice (and Smith) were slow ... shrug.

Whatever makes you sleep better at night.

Kruunch
02-29-2012, 02:11 PM
Jerry Rice was quick but he was never a burner. The things that seperated him were his hands, ability to break tackles and his preparedness. He was always in great shape and he was so strong.

Jerry Rice was the greatest reciever ever but not JUST because of his speed.

Fixed.

BlueSanta
02-29-2012, 02:12 PM
Now match that video (or any you care to view) with the fact that he ran a 4.71 40 time before he was drafted.

I agree with your premise. Jerry Rice was very fast, anyone who saw him play in his prime knew it . John Madden said he believed Rice was the fastest man in the NFL during his prime. Thats pretty impressive since there were 2 players who were olympic sprinters during that time playing in the league.

But, you also have to remember that the 40 times were taken by hand back then. That leaves HUGE room for error. We had guys this year who's times, after electronic verification, were corrected by almost .2 and thats with only the start being hand timed. Back then, both the start and finish were hand timed.

Remember Taylor Mays was timed at 4.24.After electronic review it was revised to a 4.43. That was with only the start being hand held.

bLuereverie
02-29-2012, 02:14 PM
He was incredibly stronger than others at the point of catch. Your link even shows it. Both Rice and Smith were incredibly agile, but explosive wouldn't even be a descriptive they'd use on themselves.

You mean Rice has strong HANDS. Yes he did. Saying he's just strong implies that he's breaking tackles by running through people.

You want to believe Rice (and Smith) were slow ... shrug.

Whatever makes you sleep better at night.

Find where I said Rice was slow.

Spizi
02-29-2012, 02:26 PM
the 40 means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Look at Rich Eisen (a terrible athlete) beating Tebow with a mere 5 yard head start.

A GUY WHO RUNS A 6.03 BEATS A GUY WHO RUNS A 4.7 WITH ONLY A 5 YARD HEAD START! Now people are trying to say that running a 5.0 or a 4.5 even matters??

Kruunch
02-29-2012, 02:26 PM
Now match that video (or any you care to view) with the fact that he ran a 4.71 40 time before he was drafted.

I agree with your premise. Jerry Rice was very fast, anyone who saw him play in his prime knew it . John Madden said he believed Rice was the fastest man in the NFL during his prime. Thats pretty impressive since there were 2 players who were olympic sprinters during that time playing in the league.

But, you also have to remember that the 40 times were taken by hand back then. That leaves HUGE room for error.* We had guys this year who's times, after electronic verification,* were corrected* by almost .2 and thats with only the start being hand timed.* Back then, both the start and finish were hand timed.

Remember Taylor Mays was timed at 4.24.After electronic review it was revised to a 4.43. That was with only the start being hand held.

*


Hand times are usually faster than electronic though.

My point to all this however is that 40 times, especially for receivers are fairly meaningless.

If a receiver clocks an amazing 40 time, it doesn't make him a better receiver (ala Stephen Hill). If he has mediocre hands, he'll still have mediocre hands. It also doesn't illustrate how fast they'll be in pads or over the middle, or how they deal with contact on their release.

Conversely, slow 40 times (again for WRs) don't mean a whole lot. If the guy has played fast in the past, then the guy was just off when the 40 time was taken.

Sanu is a good example. Ran a really slow 40 time (4.6+) but anyone who has watched him play (either live or on tape) understands that he plays and runs much faster then that.

Taylor Mays is a great example of a 40 time making his draft stock rise unwarranted.

lawl
02-29-2012, 07:11 PM
The best player at every position in the league(discounting linemen and qb) runs under a 4.6

slipknottin
02-29-2012, 08:11 PM
Now match that video (or any you care to view) with the fact that he ran a 4.71 40 time before he was drafted.

As I said, in oakland he was running in the 4.3s on grass according to Mike Lombardi. Maybe he somehow dropped from a 4.7 to a 4.3 by his 17th year in the league. I dont know. But this "jerry rice ran slow but he played fast" argument is nonsense. He ran fast too. He just ran poorly at the combine.

So he ran poorly at the combine, that happens. Lots of guys run poor at the combine then significantly better at their prodays, happens every year.

According to this article on nfl.com, Rice didnt even run slow at the combine, he ran sub 4.5.

http://www.nfl.com/halloffame/story/09000d5d8198bd34/article/thank-you-jerry-for-being-the-epitome-of-greatness

slipknottin
02-29-2012, 08:12 PM
the 40 means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Look at Rich Eisen (a terrible athlete) beating Tebow with a mere 5 yard head start.

A GUY WHO RUNS A 6.03 BEATS A GUY WHO RUNS A 4.7 WITH ONLY A 5 YARD HEAD START! Now people are trying to say that running a 5.0 or a 4.5 even matters??

Thats pretty significant.... In only 40 yards, that guy can make up 5 yards on a guy slower than him. Chasing down a HB or receiver, or trying to get to the corner against a DB... Thats substantial.

slipknottin
02-29-2012, 08:14 PM
Remember Taylor Mays was timed at 4.24.After electronic review it was revised to a 4.43. That was with only the start being hand held.

*


Official times are no more accurate than unofficial times.

Thats why scouts/GMs in the stands all hand time, then compare times amongst themselves.

Official times just means it has a laser at the end of the track, its still hand started.

According to scouts in the crowd, Mays ran somewhere around 4.31 on his first run. This 4.43 time is complete and utter BS.

jomo
02-29-2012, 08:21 PM
Ray Ray ran a 4.58. 40 yard dash is just another evaluation tool. Guys who look really fast on the field almost always run fast in the 40. Look at the most explosive players in the NFL at any position, they always run well.I think this is one of those stats where great players generally have really good 40 times within their position but great 40 times doesn't mean you are a player by any means. It's just one of the tools used to evaluate.

slipknottin
02-29-2012, 08:25 PM
great 40 times doesn't mean you are a player by any means. It's just one of the tools used to evaluate.

I agree completely.

My only point was that guys who play fast, and look fast on the field, well, those guys run fast 40s too.

jomo
02-29-2012, 08:34 PM
great 40 times doesn't mean you are a player by any means. It's just one of the tools used to evaluate. I agree completely. My only point was that guys who play fast, and look fast on the field, well, those guys run fast 40s too.Yes!

tonyt830
02-29-2012, 08:36 PM
the 40 time is one of many measuring tools to evaluate a player. Positions like O-line, QB, and even DE/DT, I don't put too much stock into their 40's</P>


</P>


Now like another poster mentioned, the 10 yard split is important in those positions. It shows the explosion off the line. And on top of that, your Wrs, Rbs and Dbs, don't line up in a 3 point stance before the snap of the ball.</P>


</P>


</P>


I hear a lot of analysts use the term "quicker than fast" Agility, change of direction, balance are just as important, as straight line 40 speed for skill positions.</P>


</P>


By the way speaking of Rich Eisen's 40---did he run it on Tuesday? I did not finish watching what I DVR'd on Tuesday.</P>

slipknottin
02-29-2012, 08:39 PM
<


By the way speaking of Rich Eisen's 40---did he run it on Tuesday?* I did not finish watching what I DVR'd on Tuesday.</P>

He ran. Hauled *** too.

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-combine/09000d5d82745c19/Rich-Eisen-runs-the-40-yard-dash

tonyt830
02-29-2012, 08:43 PM
&lt;


By the way speaking of Rich Eisen's 40---did he run it on Tuesday? I did not finish watching what I DVR'd on Tuesday.</P>


He ran. Hauled *** too. http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-combine/09000d5d82745c19/Rich-Eisen-runs-the-40-yard-dashthanks slip, I just looked it up on youtube. Did he say he ran a 6.03? LOL!!! He is bound to break 6 if he put on a tee shirt and sweats.</P>


</P>


I was laughing Sunday when they showed him getting a head start about 5 or 6 yards on the likes of Newton, Luck, Tebow and RG III, if I'm not mistaken! LOL!!!!</P>

slipknottin
02-29-2012, 08:46 PM
thanks slip, I just looked it up on youtube.* Did he say he ran a 6.03?* LOL!!!** He is bound to break 6 if he put on a tee shirt and sweats.

Yea. 6.03! Pretty incredible for a 42 year old Jewish guy wearing a suit who never played sports.

Raptor22
02-29-2012, 08:56 PM
The whole purpose of the 40, or any of the combine drills is to confirm the things the scouts saw on tape.

The fun part is when tape and drill disagree. For instance, when Wright ran poorly. He flies on the field but had a crap 40 time. It could just be that he had a bad day, or didn't start well. Likewise, Kuechly ran about a quarter second faster than anyone was expecting him to based on his game tape.

That's when the scouts have to go back to the tape and figure out WHY there's a disparity between the tape and the workout. Are they thinking too much and that's slowing them down? Is the scheme hiding their weaknesses? Or is it not using them effectively?

The good franchises don't draft based on the combine. They use the combine to confirm their assessments of the players' tape.

jomo
02-29-2012, 08:59 PM
I have no intention of taking this thread off its rails but I off this brief digression:</P>


"The myth of the Romo" lol</P>

Spizi
02-29-2012, 10:40 PM
the 40 means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Look at Rich Eisen (a terrible athlete) beating Tebow with a mere 5 yard head start.

A GUY WHO RUNS A 6.03 BEATS A GUY WHO RUNS A 4.7 WITH ONLY A 5 YARD HEAD START! Now people are trying to say that running a 5.0 or a 4.5 even matters??

Thats pretty significant.... In only 40 yards, that guy can make up 5 yards on a guy slower than him. Chasing down a HB or receiver, or trying to get to the corner against a DB... Thats substantial.

How is that significant?? People obsess over a guy running a 4.7 vs a 4.4 yet Eisen just proved that even though he is a full 1.3 seconds slower than tebow he beat him with only a 5 yard head start. 2,3, or even 4 tenths of a second in a 40 doesn't mean ****. no one runs a 40 in a game, no one starts in a 40 stance in a game, and no one starts on their own in a game, there's a snap of the football.

slipknottin
02-29-2012, 10:43 PM
How is that significant?? People obsess over a guy running a 4.7 vs a 4.4 yet Eisen just proved that even though he is a full 1.3 seconds slower than tebow he beat him with only a 5 yard head start. 2,3, or even 4 tenths of a second in a 40 doesn't mean ****. no one runs a 40 in a game, no one starts in a 40 stance in a game, and no one starts on their own in a game, there's a snap of the football.

Im not going to argue.

You're completely correct, the difference bewteen 4 tenths is meaningless. Eli Manning clearly has the same speed on the field that Chris Johnson does.

BlueSanta
03-01-2012, 12:02 AM
Remember Taylor Mays was timed at 4.24.After electronic review it was revised to a 4.43. That was with only the start being hand held.




Official times are no more accurate than unofficial times.

Thats why scouts/GMs in the stands all hand time, then compare times amongst themselves.

Official times just means it has a laser at the end of the track, its still hand started.

According to scouts in the crowd, Mays ran somewhere around 4.31 on his first run. This 4.43 time is complete and utter BS.

Thats not true at all. They used superimposed images vs Jacoby ford, Javid best, Spliier and the other fast guys from that year to show us how Mays ran slower that those guys. They also compared Ford to Chris Johnson's record run of 4.24 and confirmed he was slightly slower. The video confirmed the official results for all of us to see on TV. The hand timers were WAY off, they even said it on air.

slipknottin
03-01-2012, 12:29 AM
Thats not true at all. They used superimposed images vs Jacoby ford, Javid best, Spliier and the other fast* guys from that year to show us how Mays ran slower that those guys. They also compared Ford to Chris Johnson's record run of 4.24 and confirmed he was slightly slower. The video confirmed the official results for all of us to see on TV. The hand timers were WAY off, they even said it on air.*


As I said, Mays ran a 4.31. The video was simulcast with Trindon Holliday and Jacoby Ford.

Jacoby Ford finished first in the video (he ran a 4.28). Mays finished second, then Holliday finished third. Holliday ran a 4.34.

The official time was absolutely 1000% wrong.


There is absolutely no way he ran faster than Holliday, but had a .1 slower time. As I said, scouts in the stands overall agreed he ran somewhere in the 4.30-4.33 range.

If we want to get further into it... they changed from the RCA dome to Lucas Oil Stadium in 2008.

Theres a reason the times at the new stadium have been lower, despite guys who are legitimate world class sprinters (trindon holliday, Chris Rainey, etc). The new turf is already notoriously slower than the old stadium, and player have mentioned it as well.

Chris Johnson would have timed quite a bit slower. Not going to speculate on the difference, but wouldnt be surprised if he ran in the 4.3 flat range.

RagTime Blue
03-01-2012, 12:56 AM
There's a lot of technique involved in all these drilss, and I think execs are looking to see who prepares themselves best for the task at hand.

tonyt830
03-01-2012, 07:22 AM
Thats not true at all. They used superimposed images vs Jacoby ford, Javid best, Spliier and the other fast* guys from that year to show us how Mays ran slower that those guys. They also compared Ford to Chris Johnson's record run of 4.24 and confirmed he was slightly slower. The video confirmed the official results for all of us to see on TV. The hand timers were WAY off, they even said it on air.*


As I said, Mays ran a 4.31. The video was simulcast with Trindon Holliday and Jacoby Ford.

Jacoby Ford finished first in the video (he ran a 4.28). Mays finished second, then Holliday finished third. Holliday ran a 4.34.

The official time was absolutely 1000% wrong.


There is absolutely no way he ran faster than Holliday, but had a .1 slower time. As I said, scouts in the stands overall agreed he ran somewhere in the 4.30-4.33 range.

If we want to get further into it... they changed from the RCA dome to Lucas Oil Stadium in 2008.

Theres a reason the times at the new stadium have been lower, despite guys who are legitimate world class sprinters (trindon holliday, Chris Rainey, etc). The new turf is already notoriously slower than the old stadium, and player have mentioned it as well.

Chris Johnson would have timed quite a bit slower. Not going to speculate on the difference, but wouldnt be surprised if he ran in the 4.3 flat range.yeah there have been some fast straight line runners the passed couple of years. There have been a few players the passed 2 to 3 years that I thought could have been timed as fast as Johnson. I always wondered if its been an electronic timer error with Johnson or any of the other guys like Spiller, Holiday, Ford, Rainey etc. I never thought the newer turf at Lucas Oil could impact a 40 time over the old RCA dome turf, but I guess that could be a factor as well.


I always thought Deon Sanders was fast, didn't he run a 4.29 40 at his combine? Joey Galloway is another name that comes to mind when I think of fast 40 times at the combine.

buffyblue
03-01-2012, 12:44 PM
Jerry Rice was quick but he was never a burner. The things that seperated him were his hands, ability to break tackles and his preparedness. He was always in great shape and he was so strong.

Jerry Rice was the greatest reciever ever but not JUST because of his speed.

Fixed.

Dude save the know it all attitude for someone else.

Jerry Rice had decent speed but he wasnít one of the faster WRs in the league. Part of the reason he worked so hard at everything else was because he couldnít just burn everyone to the ball.

Kruunch
03-01-2012, 02:02 PM
Jerry Rice was quick but he was never a burner. The things that seperated him were his hands, ability to break tackles and his preparedness. He was always in great shape and he was so strong.

Jerry Rice was the greatest reciever ever but not JUST because of his speed.

Fixed.

Dude save the know it all attitude for someone else.

Jerry Rice had decent speed but he wasnít one of the faster WRs in the league. Part of the reason he worked so hard at everything else was because he couldnít just burn everyone to the ball.

Incorrect.

Marvelousmik
03-01-2012, 02:13 PM
cruz ran a 4.49 and i think hes one of the fastest/quickest guys in the NFL.

Redeyejedi
03-01-2012, 02:25 PM
Thats not true at all. They used superimposed images vs Jacoby ford, Javid best, Spliier and the other fast* guys from that year to show us how Mays ran slower that those guys. They also compared Ford to Chris Johnson's record run of 4.24 and confirmed he was slightly slower. The video confirmed the official results for all of us to see on TV. The hand timers were WAY off, they even said it on air.*


As I said, Mays ran a 4.31. The video was simulcast with Trindon Holliday and Jacoby Ford.

Jacoby Ford finished first in the video (he ran a 4.28). Mays finished second, then Holliday finished third. Holliday ran a 4.34.

The official time was absolutely 1000% wrong.


There is absolutely no way he ran faster than Holliday, but had a .1 slower time. As I said, scouts in the stands overall agreed he ran somewhere in the 4.30-4.33 range.

If we want to get further into it... they changed from the RCA dome to Lucas Oil Stadium in 2008.

Theres a reason the times at the new stadium have been lower, despite guys who are legitimate world class sprinters (trindon holliday, Chris Rainey, etc). The new turf is already notoriously slower than the old stadium, and player have mentioned it as well.

Chris Johnson would have timed quite a bit slower. Not going to speculate on the difference, but wouldnt be surprised if he ran in the 4.3 flat range.Yeah I saw the Vid Slip is talking about. They screwed up the times

slipknottin
03-01-2012, 03:45 PM
cruz ran a 4.49 and i think hes one of the fastest/quickest guys in the NFL.


Cruz is explosive as hell. Evidenced by his ridiculous vert jump (41.5") which is one of the best recorded vert jumps by a WR in the past 5 seasons.

But Cruz on the field doesnt seem to have elite long speed. More quick/shifty type speed. IMO, he plays like he runs in the mid 4.4s. So does Nicks for that matter. Neither is a pure burner.

But you dont have to run 4.2s to be a big play guy in the NFL.

Kruunch
03-02-2012, 10:00 AM
cruz ran a 4.49 and i think hes one of the fastest/quickest guys in the NFL.


Cruz is explosive as hell. Evidenced by his ridiculous vert jump (41.5") which is one of the best recorded vert jumps by a WR in the past 5 seasons.

But Cruz on the field doesnt seem to have elite long speed. More quick/shifty type speed. IMO, he plays like he runs in the mid 4.4s. So does Nicks for that matter. Neither is a pure burner.

But you dont have to run 4.2s to be a big play guy in the NFL.

You'll have to explain to me how a vertical jump translates into explosiveness.

juice33s
03-02-2012, 10:22 AM
cruz ran a 4.49 and i think hes one of the fastest/quickest guys in the NFL.


Cruz is explosive as hell. Evidenced by his ridiculous vert jump (41.5") which is one of the best recorded vert jumps by a WR in the past 5 seasons.

But Cruz on the field doesnt seem to have elite long speed. More quick/shifty type speed. IMO, he plays like he runs in the mid 4.4s. So does Nicks for that matter. Neither is a pure burner.

But you dont have to run 4.2s to be a big play guy in the NFL.

You'll have to explain to me how a vertical jump translates into explosiveness. his ball skills certainly made him one of the most explosive recievers in the nfl at 18.7 yards per catch

Kruunch
03-02-2012, 11:25 AM
cruz ran a 4.49 and i think hes one of the fastest/quickest guys in the NFL.


Cruz is explosive as hell. Evidenced by his ridiculous vert jump (41.5") which is one of the best recorded vert jumps by a WR in the past 5 seasons.

But Cruz on the field doesnt seem to have elite long speed. More quick/shifty type speed. IMO, he plays like he runs in the mid 4.4s. So does Nicks for that matter. Neither is a pure burner.

But you dont have to run 4.2s to be a big play guy in the NFL.

You'll have to explain to me how a vertical jump translates into explosiveness. his ball skills certainly made him one of the most explosive recievers in the nfl at 18.7 yards per catch

Absolutely but that had little to do with his vertical (he hasn't been involved in a lot (if any) jump ball catches in either 2010 or 2011.

40, 40 splits, broad jump, shuttle ... those are all evaluations into explosiveness for a receiver (in my mind). Vertical is nice to have, but having a huge vertical doesn't mean a lot for someone used as a slot receiver mostly.

It's a nice measurable to have for sure ... just when I think of an "explosive" receiver (especially when I think of Cruz's type of explosiveness) I think of acceleration, change of direction, vision and hand strength / softness at the point of the catch.

buffyblue
03-02-2012, 11:30 AM
cruz ran a 4.49 and i think hes one of the fastest/quickest guys in the NFL.


Cruz is explosive as hell. Evidenced by his ridiculous vert jump (41.5") which is one of the best recorded vert jumps by a WR in the past 5 seasons.

But Cruz on the field doesnt seem to have elite long speed. More quick/shifty type speed. IMO, he plays like he runs in the mid 4.4s. So does Nicks for that matter. Neither is a pure burner.

But you dont have to run 4.2s to be a big play guy in the NFL.

You'll have to explain to me how a vertical jump translates into explosiveness. his ball skills certainly made him one of the most explosive recievers in the nfl at 18.7 yards per catch

Absolutely but that had little to do with his vertical (he hasn't been involved in a lot (if any) jump ball catches in either 2010 or 2011.

40, 40 splits, broad jump, shuttle ... those are all evaluations into explosiveness for a receiver (in my mind). Vertical is nice to have, but having a huge vertical doesn't mean a lot for someone used as a slot receiver mostly.

It's a nice measurable to have for sure ... just when I think of an "explosive" receiver (especially when I think of Cruz's type of explosiveness) I think of acceleration, change of direction, vision and hand strength / softness at the point of the catch.

Out jumping Asmaougha twice in the Philadelphia Eagles game is basically what brought Cruz to the mediaís attention.

I think the point some folks are missing is that if someone isnít among the fastest WRs then they arenít quick. That is just not the case. Victor Cruz and Hakeem Nicks are both quick and fast. They are just not the fastest in the league. Jerry Rice was fast but he wasnít near the topr of the league in speed. H is speed was not what set him apart.

buffyblue
03-02-2012, 11:31 AM
Jerry Rice was quick but he was never a burner. The things that seperated him were his hands, ability to break tackles and his preparedness. He was always in great shape and he was so strong.

Jerry Rice was the greatest reciever ever but not JUST because of his speed.

Fixed.

Dude save the know it all attitude for someone else.

Jerry Rice had decent speed but he wasnít one of the faster WRs in the league. Part of the reason he worked so hard at everything else was because he couldnít just burn everyone to the ball.

Incorrect.

No I am correct. You are the one that is incorrect. You are obsolete.

NJAquaman
03-02-2012, 11:47 AM
Its just a metric to distinguish similar players....

We all know that speed kills so it is high on the list.

Field/Tape speed and 40 speed are two different animals....

NJAquaman
03-02-2012, 11:47 AM
Its just a metric to distinguish similar players....

We all know that speed kills so it is high on the list.

Field/Tape speed and 40 speed are two different animals....

LT_was_good
03-02-2012, 12:00 PM
An extra 4/10 second makes no different in 40 time, just like an extra 4 mph makes no difference in a pitcher's fastball ... oh wait.

slipknottin
03-02-2012, 12:16 PM
You'll have to explain to me how a vertical jump translates into explosiveness.

Vert and long jump are the two best tests to show instantaneous burst.

40 is for long speed, the shuttle and cone drills show lateral speed and agility.

Kruunch
03-02-2012, 02:19 PM
You'll have to explain to me how a vertical jump translates into explosiveness.

Vert and long jump are the two best tests to show instantaneous burst.

40 is for long speed, the shuttle and cone drills show lateral speed and agility.

I get the long jump part ... but vertical and "explosiveness"?

slipknottin
03-02-2012, 04:23 PM
I get the long jump part ... but vertical and "explosiveness"?

I dont get what you dont understand.


the two jumping drills are the best indication of how quickly a guy can coil and explode.

One is lateral, one is vertical, but both are very similar.

heavyhitter
03-04-2012, 11:44 PM
<ul id="watch-related" class="video-list"><li class="video-list-item video-list-item-related"><a class="related-video" href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdPmexUhjWk&amp;feature=related"><span dir="ltr" class="title" title="USC Taylor Mays 4.24 40 Yard Dash at NFL Combine"><font size="3">USC Taylor Mays 4.24 40 Yard Dash </font>
</span></a>[/list]

<span dir="ltr" class="title" title="Tebows 4.7 40 yard dash"></span> (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l0pm_Wo6Cjg&amp;feature=related)



</p><ul id="watch-related" class="video-list"><li class="video-list-item video-list-item-related"><h3><font size="3">Trindon Holliday Runs a 4.21 sec. 40 Yard Dash (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9U9GdYWuI0)</font></h3>[/list]


</p>


</p>

heavyhitter
03-04-2012, 11:55 PM
<font size="2">Believe it or not, 40 times do matter to a certain extent. Whoever the poster was that said it was a measuring tool hit it on the head. Game films and live game scouting will always be the number one consideration for placing prospects in the draft though.</font>