I was reviewing Combine results for RB, and was struck again by the common disparity between what a player does on the field and what the Combine or other similar tests show.
Someone recently suggested that Combine results tell us all we need to know about how a player will perform in the NFL, when actually, they are often misleading. For those who've watched the game for a while there are tons of NFL players who play much better or poorer than their raw abilities would predict. And among RB's, that's particularly true, where the whole is often more, or less, than the sum of its parts. I've always disliked the Cowboys, but have to acknowledge I've admired some of their players, like Witten, for example. And among RB's Emmitt Smith was a terrific RB, irrespective of dumping on what he did as a player. The point being; he was pretty slow, but played well anyway.
According to NFL.Com RB rankings, Ronald Jones is the 3rd best RB. And everyone else ranks him highly too. He's very elusive and has a great burst. So was I surprised to find he ran a 4.65 40 at the Combine! That's one of the slower times among RB's. Does that mean he'll stink because of it? Hell no! Believe what your eyes tell you from watching the player in games! There's every reason he should be a fine RB, 4.65 40 be damned.
And it's hopeful to me to paraphrase some of what Gettleman had say, that he's more interested in drafting football players, rather than just athletes.
I guess you're right!
I watched the video of his 40 on the website, and didn't specifically note that, though it's a very short clip. He didn't look happy after his run, but I didn't see undue distress during it. Undoubtedly, watching it live would be different.
But I stand by my other observations.
There are certainly minimum standards to meet, but a 4.8 LB can get to the ball carrier faster than a 4.5 by recognizing quicker and taking a better angle.
I think vision and reaction time are the most important difference makers for a RB - assuming they meet the baseline requirements for speed and strength.
Recognition and attitude are the difference makers for LB - again assuming base requirements for speed and strength. That's why I think the Smith kid from Georgia will be better than Edmonds.
IMO, I like the bursty quick guys better. I think they make better backs, its not very often they get in a 40 yd footrace.
IMO, I like the bursty quick guys better. I think they make better backs, its not very often they get in a 40 yd footrace.
Well put. Also someone who is 4.4 will take more than 30 yards to catch a 4.6 if they have as little as a one step start
Kamara ran a "decent" 4.56, but he's a Blur with the Ball.... I believe Jerry Rice Plodded his way to a 4.65, but ran away from defenders EVERY TIME!!!
And I also agree that vision and other factors play an equal role in playing speed. For example the RB, Chunn, from Troy I've been watching is fairly slow footed, and only ran a 4.62 at his pro day yesterday, but is still effective. And in studying his play you see that he makes his reads quickly, is very decisive and has no wasted motion.
That isn't a common perception. The scouts use the combine more to exclude certain players or to decide how to rank players they've been on the fence about. They use it as a way to supplement information.
Anyone who says the combine results say everything is either a moron or a fictitious entity created to try and add context to a shitty premise.
Quote:
Someone recently suggested that Combine results tell us all we need to know about how a player will perform in the NFL, when actually, they are often misleading
That isn't a common perception. The scouts use the combine more to exclude certain players or to decide how to rank players they've been on the fence about. They use it as a way to supplement information.
Anyone who says the combine results say everything is either a moron or a fictitious entity created to try and add context to a shitty premise.
Not fictitious at all, as it was stated by another poster regarding a prospect under discussion. I really have no interest in trying to impress anyone, least of all you. But while I have your attention, to precisely what shitty premise are you referring if you can climb down from your shitty snark long enough to respond?
You watch a Pitcher?.... some people exclusively watch Radar Gun Reading. So, tell me....one guy is throwing 96 and the hitters are very comfortable, and they are raking. The other guy is throwing 95, and every hitter looks uncomfortable---no good swings...bad contact.
The Bench Press??? It's probably more an indication of work ethic than playing strength---does the guy work out? Will he rehab from Injury?
The 40? It will make a few guys Pop---it may eliminate or hurt a couple. Mostly it explains the Long Runs...or the Lack of Long Runs.
Most fans are thinking 40,40,40,40,40.... Foot ball scouts are following more than the 40---Combine Fans are following almost nothing else.
Scouts and personnel people are well aware of playing speed vs timed speed and they use it as context to the evaluation.
Don't know what you're arguing against. Hell, you even used an example of a player who was dinged at the combine to try and make a point.
You can call it snark if you'd like, but you basically just foisted on the board a thread that isn't arguing an actual point.
Strange thread.
Strange thread.
AL Davis and Jerry Reese?
Football speed is different than 40 speed. Victor Cruz didn't have a blazing fast 40, but you never saw anyone catch him from behind on long TD runs before he got injured.
They scouts are trying to confirm what the game tape shows so they can slot guys. Ifntwo guys have an equal grade a better combine for one who’ll most likely push that guy higher on the board.
I assume that’s what poster of the original thought brought up in the OP was getting at.
Also as we know some GMs will slot great athletes higher than they should. And when they hit idiots will let things like in Reese We Trust. GM is a hard job. And scouting players isn’t a science. The over reliance on trumped up stats prevades our whole thought proves these days. The combine is great source of data but the trick is how to interpret it and not over rely on it.