Early combine results
Early RB results from yesterday:
De'Veon Smith - 22 reps on BP
Dalvin Cook - 22 reps
Fournette - DNP (say's he'll lift at LSU Pro day)
Perine - 30 reps
McCaffrey - 10 reps (so much for skipping the bowl to prepare for combine)
http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2017/3/2/14796202/2017-nfl-combine-results-…
Ben Braden - 25 reps / 5.04 40
Does Harbaugh do any kind of combine stuff at the satellite camps to identify diamonds on the rough?
If the NFL can use combines to identify hidden talent beyond just what they see on film, why can't Michigan?
Yeah, because the number of reps has a direct correlation to whether or not he will be a good football player. Try again.
Because that matters at all to a running back?
that having a strong upper body would help as an NFL RB no?
"Underwear Olympics"....... well done, Highlander... I upvoted you for making me laugh.
If a QB has to take contact, something went wrong. A RB takes contact every play. You can argue bench press isn't a good indicator of playing strength, but Brady is a terrible example.
business. i just hope you aren't married.
QBs, especially ones like Brady, don't test off the charts at the combine. Manning was a goofy, uncoordinated white guy running around at the combine too, he just had a more prestigious college career and bloodline. It's not like he was benching 225 30 times while Brady was going for 7. QBs depend less on physical talents that are measured by bench press, vertical leap, and shuttle times, than they do on intelligence. Mechanics are also way more important, which is why a monster like Tebow who throws like a girl was terrible in the NFL unlike Brady who runs like a girl but can throw.
Bench press might not be a great indicator of a RB's ceiling, but McCaffrey tested way below the majority of the field and RB/WR are judged on their measurables, not on the mechanics of their running form.
They're not useless indicators. They're just relied on WAY too heavily.
They may also confirm (or deny) something that you see on film and want to verify.
For example, what if De'Veon Smith ran a 4.5? I think most of us would agree that's a lot faster than we expected. And so if you're a GM on the fence about whether or not he has decent enough speed to play in the league...that 4.5 tells you "yes." It doesn't make him a good football player - the tape tells you that.
On the flip side, what if he runs a 4.85? Well if you watch the film, you don't see too much breakaway speed. That may raise a red flag for you that he was tougher and stronger than those he went up against in college, but the NFL is a grown man's game.
You don't draft him solely on the 40, but if you have some questions...the combine can most certainly help. You just can't assume because someone under performed or over performed that he is good at football.
Brady under performed at the combine, but any idiot with 2 eyes could tell you he was a good QB. Deshaun Watson is a solid QB who turns the ball over too much - running a 4.37 isn't going to take away all those INTs. Only coaching and development solves that problem.
I do believe Bill Walsh is why everyone puts so much stock in measurables. He had these prototype lists for every postition and he had a lot of success. So now, the prototype is focuse on from the Walsh era and not how well he coached those players.
I also think these tests are less relevant for a qb than a position like a rb. Who cares if a qb can bench 225 20 times? As long as he has good throwing power which translates to being able to throw it far and fast then strength doesn't matter. On the other hand, a strong upper body can be beneficial for a RB who is constantly hitting/ getting hit by other guys and in constant battles where strength would help.
I know this because they pretty much disregard bench press from the evaluation
Well, we'll find out who ends up being the best NFL back won't we? I am in the camp that there is a minimum strength necessary but once that is met, adding bulk-type strength beyond that doesn't help one be a better running back or football player in general. Perine isn't more likely to be a better NFL running back because he got 30 reps as opposed to the 22 the other two had. It doesn't quite work that way.
Or have a father who was known to have been successful in the NFL. Not that it is always a good indicator but sometimes it works.
being equal it can't hurt to have more upper body strength espeically if we are talking about a three down back. If I'm comparing all of the top RB's and all of their other stats are very comparable, I'd probably lean more towards the guy that has more upper body strength...just seems like it would make a difference as the season progressed.
Hello, and welcome to "How Much Ya Bench," the show dedicated to body building and a steroid-free power lifting experience.
When you are 6' and 200lbs and concerns about durability exist, barely putting up 10 reps isn't going to help your cause.
I could do 10 reps at 225 as a freshman in HS. He must have pulled something, or had something go wrong.
You must have had one heck of a middle school weight program.
Ehh... I manage to put up 200lbs 8x as a HS Freshman.
I was 6'1", 175lbs and lifted 3-4 days a week with the HS football team all summer between 8th and 9th grade to reach that point.
At 42 years old, that is still the most I've ever weighed in my life.
Definite FIVE fakes out of five
Really? As a high school freshman? I'm calling bullshit.
it's true. i watched him do 10 reps at 225 as a HS freshman. he did all 10 reps as i watched while i was running a 4.1 40.
I can do 225 reps at 10 pounds, so we're basically equal.
It's probably due to that chip on his shoulder that he was talking about yesterday,
and do a cycle.
He's gotta get himself to the end of the 1st round somehow... The Patriots are waiting.
Even worse when you look at his short arm length. All else equal, shorter arms = stronger bench numbers.
I would think leg strength tests would be more valuable.