or 'sure glad my kids don't want to play this'. is that bad?
in that case.
types. who'd a thunk it.
You should start that, I'd join the discussion. Maybe add tv shows too.
Lion. I liked it. That's my analysis.
This comment reminds me of people I work with. They reply all to an email telling everyone not to reply to all. These types of comments are generally self defeating.
I dunno, after the 5th reply all, I think a well-worded "please don't reply all" does more good than harm.
Actually WR's and CB's are the pretty much the only positions where it is very relevant. They actually do run 30/40/50 yards in a straght line.
If a WR runs a forty in 4.43 and the CB runs one in 4.5, the WR might just have a bit more of a window for the QB to drop the pass into on a deep route.
Of course acceleration, agility, etc. still play a part. But the 40 is a key indicator for WR.
Not to mention situations where the WR may or may not get run down from behind by a DB.
So I think it is very important for WR.
In most other cases though, I totally agree.
Burst is far more important than how long it takes a guy to run forty yards.
correlation with "burst", wait...
He did not include a /s... but I'd expect someone with 30k Mgopoints to understand sarcasm in text.
As I write this, Sydney has 29939 mgopoints, so you can't expect him to understand...
It's all relative. It's such a short distance that someone who is "fast" is fast throughout; you are taking off with a big burst, then pushing to the end. This isn't the 400 meter or even the 100 meter, where guys can "cruise" a small bit. The 40 isn't the end-all, be-all, but having a good time in it certain displays a certain level of speed that can translate to the NFL as much as 3-cone and broad jump numbers.
pretty relevant to RBs as well. Having the speed to turn a hole that gets an average speed player 10 yards into a 70 yard TD is one of few differentiators for the position.
If it were really and truly as totally irrelevant as you say, do you really and truly believe the NFL would still use it? I mean, wouldn't all 32 GMs, owners, coaches, and scouts get together and say, "Hey, we've been using this evaluation tool that has no relationship to football player quality. Maybe we should eliminate and/or replace it?"
This is not to say that it is the one and only thing that matters. But it is - like literally everything they do in this entire event - a useful additional piece of data that, when compiled together with lots of other data, scouts et al. can refer to when making decisions...
Forty times are just another data point. Any stat taken by itself can be misleading.
You're right, it's virtually worthless - that's why the NFL is literally chock-a-block with WR running 4.76 40s.
Right?!
Oh, it's not.....
Not really. He's a long strider with strength and endurance. Hence his good track speed. Seldom saw him blow away defensive backs off of the line or get big separation in his routes.
Yeah, that 40 time is stunning. Jehu Chesson was said to be the fastest guy on the team in 2015, and was the "speed guy" of the receiver corps. To have Darboh hit that time... wow. That demonstrates how much he developed in the last year, and helps explain how the receivers shook out last year.
This is more problematic for Chesson, a guy whose speed was his primary asset. His speed is very good but not worldbeating, and he struggled in other areas. Still, coming below a 4.5 might get him on a preseason roster, and then who knows?
Id bet anything that Chesson lost a step with that knee injury vs. Florida and is still not 100%
It might've also helped to have an offensive line that could get some "push" in the run game against middle-tier Big Ten teams.
- - -
No, I think there were too many holes or relative weaknesses on both sides of the ball (especially offense) to beat Clemson/Alabama. Look what happened to OSU. I'll have a "head asplode" moment if anyone suggests that Michigan would "match up better" than OSU.
Give it a couple of years. I think the future looks bright.
Our OL was the weakest position group. The average OL limited a national championships caliber team that was led by its national championship caliber defense.
I don't know how anyone can watch the Orange Bowl and not conclude that our OL wasn't weak. FSU's elite DL dominated our OL and limited what we could do offensively.
Co-sign. Wouldnt want to have seen that OL vs the DLs in the championship game. Speight was on the run almost all game vs FSU. And we had very few holes in the running game the entire first half. Clemson ran a bazillion plays and wore down Bama's defense late, something almost never done. UM would have had 20 minutes of possession vs a Bama type defense.
Also co-sign. Speight wasn't perfect but the OL was the weakness of the team. Frankly, all Michigan needed were a couple of first downs on the ground against both Iowa and OSU and those games are wins; the OL was consistently incapable of gaining yards when it needed to.
But, honestly, we'll look back at the 2016 team in a few years and wonder how Harbaugh managed to coax so much production out of a team with that talent. The RBs were good but not great. The WRs were ok but limited. The OL was mediocre-to-bad. Wilton Speight was a redshirt sophomore 3-star QB. And Michigan was that close. That team was a great defense paired with a mediocre offense that played like a really good offense for big stretches of the season.
good perspective to have. Michigan might not have a single offensive player taken in the top 3 rounds and still managed to score over 500 points and put up 5500 yards.