Most over rated: speed

[Yakuza Rich]

Nate Jones wasn't a 4.3 guy, unless his mom was timing him. I remember at his pro day he was something like a 4.6

Jerry Rice has stated on different occasions that he knows he could have run faster than he did in the 40, but he just couldn't "get up" for running a 40 yard distance by himself.

I think the 40 time is more or less a check to see if a guy runs as fast as people think he should run. Bill Polian uses the 40 time extensively for several positions and has said that if you don't run a specific 40 time at several positions then they disqualify you from being able to play that position. And last I've checked the Colts have had good success in the draft.

The combine and pro days are not as overrated as everybody thinks. For every Mike Mamula who had a so-so career in college and a great combine then stunk in the pros, there's a Keith Adams who had a great college career, poor combine and couldn't make the transition to the pros. As a check, it's a decent tool for teams to use.




YAKUZA

 

[ABQcowboyJR]

Speed is not everything. But anybody who ever played competitive sports knows that speed kills.

 

[Rack]

I hear what you are saying but CB is the position where raw speed is most needed.

Now there are many difference coverage schemes and guys like Henry will almost always have help over the top. That's because Henry is great when he can play the ball and attack passing routes without being concerned about getting beat deep. But we have seen Henry get abused at times by teams going deep on him.

CB is really tough because you need so many different skills but speed is definitely one of them. Guys that can't chase a WR across the field often struggle in many NFL schemes.

Thats also why even though Henry plays the ball 100 times better than TNew, Newman is still the better cornerback. TNew can chase a guy across the field and he can play a deep out but recover to defend for the out n up.

Its no coincidence Everson ended up at Free safety and Henry has already played some and gets mentioned yearly as a possible fit there again.

I agree it's more important to have speed at CB then any other position, but still not a "Need" at the position. If you know how to get position on a WR, that's more imporant than speed.


And IF Walls ended up as a FS, it wasn't till his 12th year in the league. Can't say that had ANYTHING to do with his speed.

He was a CB in his 10th year and won a superbowl as a starting CB for the Giants on one of the greatest Defenses of the last 30 years. I'd say he did alright.

 

[joseephuss]

drills are positionally based.

40 time gets applied far too often at positions where fast players have failed over and over and over again such as running back.
For a running back speed can be a big liability.

A RB needs acceleration(the trait so many covet in McFadden), vision and a low center of gravity. They also need to be able to block. If a guy can do those things they do not need to break 70 yards runs.

WR: speed is hugely overrated at WR. Some guys can play at 100% go and catch the ball and others can not. They get out of control. Body control, strength, hands, route running are all huge WR skills. It is wonderful to be able to blow by CBs and split coverages by scorching the seems but all of that is meaningless if you have a 5 yard cushion on a defender and let the ball fall hopelessly to the ground.

CB: For man to man types speed is key. You have to be able to stay with WRs and to take longer routes ot get to the same spot as they do. I still remember Aaron Glenn in his prime just beating guys to slants and picking the ball. Darrell Green and Deion and Rod Woodson. All pure speed guys who were man corners. I have no idea what Asante Samuel runs today in the 40 but I can guarantee you if he a mere 4.51 guy then the Eagles will regret signing him. Slower corners can make a great living playing in zone schemes or getting help over the top. See Anthony Henry.

That is the first time that I have ever heard that speed can be a liability. It is a ridiculous statement in an otherwise very good post.

Speed is never a liability. It is an asset. It just may not be a big enough asset to offset any true liabilities that a player may have going for them. Also, lack of big time speed may not be a big enough liability to off set all the other great assets a player may have. See Emmitt Smith. Now picture him if he had great speed.

 

[superpunk]

That is the first time that I have ever heard that speed can be a liability. It is a ridiculous statement in an otherwise very good post.

Speed is never a liability. It is an asset. It just may not be a big enough asset to offset any true liabilities that a player may have going for them. Also, lack of big time speed may not be a big enough liability to off set all the other great assets a player may have. See Emmitt Smith. Now picture him if he had great speed.

I don't think that's something that needs to be made a big deal of. If he had put "speed without patience" is a liability, then there would have been no problem with it. That's probably what he meant.

 

[AbeBeta]

1. Find where I said his speed got him nowhere. Do it, or SHUT YOUR TRAP.


2. Saying he started 16 games is proof that he is athletic is about as STUPID as it gets. Almost as STUPID as saying JuJo was better than MB3 cuz he was starting. Not to mention some of those starts were when we lost TWO WRs (Glenn and Morgan), and he sucked royally when he got playing time.


You're logic - or rather lack thereof - is freakin' hilarious.

Oh look at how Rack cries when someone doesn't portray his argument in the exact manner that he present it. Ironic, huh?

Since you don't seem to even understand your own argument, I'll spell it out for you -- you claimed 40 speed wasn't a good indicator of athleticism -- you then claimed that Randall Williams who had great speed on the 40 may have been the "least athletic WR in NFL history"

I pointed out that Williams actually played 6 years in the league -- when you made the ridiculous point that he did that b/c of special teams, I pointed out again that your butt was doing the talking as he'd actually started 16 games. So he was doing more than just playing ST.

So let me get this straight your argument is that Williams was not athletic. Again, explain to me how a guy who is not athletic makes it for SIX YEARS as a professional athlete.

 

[Rack]

Oh look at how Rack cries when someone doesn't portray his argument in the exact manner that he present it. Ironic, huh?

Since you don't seem to even understand your own argument, I'll spell it out for you -- you claimed 40 speed wasn't a good indicator of athleticism -- you then claimed that Randall Williams who had great speed on the 40 may have been the "least athletic WR in NFL history"

I pointed out that Williams actually played 6 years in the league -- when you made the ridiculous point that he did that b/c of special teams, I pointed out again that your butt was doing the talking as he'd actually started 16 games. So he was doing more than just playing ST.

So let me get this straight your argument is that Williams was not athletic. Again, explain to me how a guy who is not athletic makes it for SIX YEARS as a professional athlete.

And how does that prove his atheticism?

Please, explain in detail, how playing 6 years in the league proves he was atheltic?


I don't have to explain anything, YOU explain to me how playing X amount of years automatically makes on "Athletic".


Go ahead, Nancy, I'm waiting.

 

[AbeBeta]

And how does that prove his atheticism?

Please, explain in detail, how playing 6 years in the league proves he was atheltic?


I don't have to explain anything, YOU explain to me how playing X amount of years automatically makes on "Athletic".


Go ahead, Nancy, I'm waiting.

So let me get this straight.

Your argument is that playing 6 years as a professional athlete is not an indication of athleticism?

Seems like you are the one who needs to support an argument.

Anyone with half a brain would see (that's of course, twice what you are working with) that staying in the league and getting paid to be a professional athlete for six years is as clear an indication for athleticism as there is.

So let's see. In this thread you've argued that 40 time doesn't indicate speed and being a professional athlete doesn't indicate athleticism. Seems like you need to step away from the board for a few weeks, air out that garage, shake off the delirium that sucking all those fumes is causing, and come back when you can make some sense.

 

[Rack]

I got as far as "So let me get this straight"


If you can't answer the question, maybe this thread is too advanced for your level of thinking, you should probably just shut your trap before you make yourself look more foolish then you have (if that's even possible).


Playing 6 years in the league doesn't qualify someone as "Athletic" anymore than being the "Starter" qualified JuJo as the better RB than Barber (remember how you were ALSO wrong about that one?).

 

[Bob Sacamano]

being in the NFL, you are a pro athlete

how athletic remains to be seen, although Randall Williams is a straight-line speed guy, which is why he's a better TE than WR

 

[AbeBeta]

I got as far as "So let me get this straight"


If you can't answer the question, maybe this thread is too advanced for your level of thinking, you should probably just shut your trap before you make yourself look more foolish then you have (if that's even possible).


Playing 6 years in the league doesn't qualify someone as "Athletic" anymore than being the "Starter" qualified JuJo as the better RB than Barber (remember how you were ALSO wrong about that one?).

You present the idiotic claim that being in the NFL for 6 years fails to qualify someone as athletic -- so far the only argument you have made is that Williams made it in the league b/c of his special teams play. So you don't have to be athletic to play special teams? Funny, b/c I don't see a hell of a lot of non-athletic types running down field at top speed, shedding double teams, and making tackles. Nor do I see a ton of non athletic types starting for 16 games in the NFL in pass catching roles.

Surely, if he was the least athletic WR in NFL history, he would have not made it anywhere near that long in the league.

You see, Rack, what I'm using here is called logic. I know that stuff makes smoke come out of your ears but if you take notes and try really hard, you make be able to understand eventually.

If any one looks foolish here it is the guy who refuses to present a shred of evidence for his argument that Williams wasn't athletic. All you've done is scream "nuh uh" like a two year old without any attempt to put an argument forward.

 

[DFWJC]

Thought I'd see if this thing still had life. LOL
I see abersonc and rack are still at it!

 

[Rack]

Abersonc is still at his usual moronic self, not able to back up a single thing he says. He expects people to believe that playing X amount of years qualifies a player as automatically being "Athletic".


He also stated taht JuJo was better than MB3 (you can search his post history if you don't believe me) just cuz JuJo was starting over MB3.


Again, he'll try to LIE and say he was misunderstood, but just read his post history. The dude is absolutely clueless.

 

[AbeBeta]

Abersonc is still at his usual moronic self, not able to back up a single thing he says. He expects people to believe that playing X amount of years qualifies a player as automatically being "Athletic".


He also stated taht JuJo was better than MB3 (you can search his post history if you don't believe me) just cuz JuJo was starting over MB3.


Again, he'll try to LIE and say he was misunderstood, but just read his post history. The dude is absolutely clueless.

Ladies and Gentlemen, here we have the Rack Post Formula (patent pending). You too can post like Rack. Just do the following!

A. Make idiotic statement. The more idiotic the better!

B. Scream and yell when someone disputes your idiotic statement. Remember, if you yell loud enough, people will think you must be right!

C. Change subject to avoid having support idiotic statement. Do whatever you can to NOT provide evidence for your argument!

D. Require that someone prove you are wrong. Why should you have to prove your idiotic statement is right? That is too much work!

E. Hope people forget the statements you refuse to support!

What is so cool about this formula is that it requires absolutely no argument to support claims you make! Act now and you too can post like Rack!!!!!

 

[thechosen1n2]

the first 10 yards are more important than the 40 tiime, thats why e smith was still so effective. He had burst just no kick.

 

[superpunk]

Snarky snark snark

Snarky snark snark

 

[Doomsday101]

the first 10 yards are more important than the 40 tiime, thats why e smith was still so effective. He had burst just no kick.

I once heard Tony Dorsett say the same thing about the 1st 10 yards. Even though TD had great overall speed he also had quick acceleration into the hole and once you are past the LB and in the open field even 4.5 guys can take it to the house as Smith did many times