Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Myth of the 40 Time

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: The Myth of the 40 Time

    [quote user="Kruunch"][quote user="bLuereverie"]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.[/quote]

    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).[/quote]

    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.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: The Myth of the 40 Time

      The 40 is the benchmark to gauge the time it takes to cover a punt(ave punt is 40 yards).

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: The Myth of the 40 Time

        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.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: The Myth of the 40 Time

          [quote user="bLuereverie"][quote user="Kruunch"][quote user="bLuereverie"]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.[/quote]

          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).[/quote]

          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.[/quote]

          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.
          I don't always root for the Cowboys but when I do I wear my pink Jessica Simpson edition Romo jersey. (yes I lost a bet)

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: The Myth of the 40 Time

            [quote user="bLuereverie"]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.[/quote]

            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.
            I don't always root for the Cowboys but when I do I wear my pink Jessica Simpson edition Romo jersey. (yes I lost a bet)

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: The Myth of the 40 Time

              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.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: The Myth of the 40 Time

                [quote user="Kruunch"][quote user="bLuereverie"][quote user="Kruunch"][quote user="bLuereverie"]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.[/quote]

                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).[/quote]

                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.[/quote]

                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.[/quote]

                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.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: The Myth of the 40 Time

                  [quote user="bLuereverie"]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.[/quote]

                  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.
                  I don't always root for the Cowboys but when I do I wear my pink Jessica Simpson edition Romo jersey. (yes I lost a bet)

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: The Myth of the 40 Time

                    [quote user="buffyblue"]
                    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.[/quote]

                    Fixed.
                    I don't always root for the Cowboys but when I do I wear my pink Jessica Simpson edition Romo jersey. (yes I lost a bet)

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: The Myth of the 40 Time

                      [quote user="Kruunch"]

                      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.[/quote]

                      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.


                      sigpic

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: The Myth of the 40 Time

                        [quote user="Kruunch"][quote user="bLuereverie"]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.[/quote]

                        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.[/quote]

                        Find where I said Rice was slow.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: The Myth of the 40 Time

                          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??

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: The Myth of the 40 Time

                            [quote user="BlueSanta"][quote user="Kruunch"]

                            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.[/quote]

                            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.

                            *
                            [/quote]

                            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.
                            I don't always root for the Cowboys but when I do I wear my pink Jessica Simpson edition Romo jersey. (yes I lost a bet)

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: The Myth of the 40 Time

                              The best player at every position in the league(discounting linemen and qb) runs under a 4.6

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: The Myth of the 40 Time

                                [quote user="Kruunch"]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.[/quote]

                                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/...e-of-greatness

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X