(06-18-2013 09:34 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(06-18-2013 05:07 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(06-18-2013 04:38 AM)eagleskins Wrote:  It is all a crapshoot. But, the BCS schools are notorious for this type of hyperbole. I remember thUGA would always say how fast their defense is compared to other schools. That defense is slow as hell. Look at the combine numbers.

Since App State plays Georgia this year, hope you are right about their defense.

Even if their defense is "slow as hell"(it isn't), you probably need to worry more about keeping up with their offense.

Can we please get back to arguing about hand timed 40s? That's always a classic thread.

(06-18-2013 09:31 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(06-18-2013 04:38 AM)eagleskins Wrote:  It is all a crapshoot. But, the BCS schools are notorious for this type of hyperbole. I remember thUGA would always say how fast their defense is compared to other schools. That defense is slow as hell. Look at the combine numbers.

I think your bias is showing. Slow as hell? They had one linebacker with a really disappointing 40 time at their outdoor pro day and he was still a top 20 pick.

Look at their draft picks 40 times. Jones was timed with a sundial.

(06-18-2013 09:34 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(06-18-2013 05:07 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(06-18-2013 04:38 AM)eagleskins Wrote:  It is all a crapshoot. But, the BCS schools are notorious for this type of hyperbole. I remember thUGA would always say how fast their defense is compared to other schools. That defense is slow as hell. Look at the combine numbers.

Since App State plays Georgia this year, hope you are right about their defense.

Even if their defense is "slow as hell"(it isn't), you probably need to worry more about keeping up with their offense.

Yeah, that's my thinking exactly. I think we'll score a few points on the D, but I'm not sure that we can stop their offense at all. App definitely has some questions to be answered there.

(06-19-2013 03:58 AM)eagleskins Wrote:  

(06-18-2013 09:31 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(06-18-2013 04:38 AM)eagleskins Wrote:  It is all a crapshoot. But, the BCS schools are notorious for this type of hyperbole. I remember thUGA would always say how fast their defense is compared to other schools. That defense is slow as hell. Look at the combine numbers.

I think your bias is showing. Slow as hell? They had one linebacker with a really disappointing 40 time at their outdoor pro day and he was still a top 20 pick.

Look at their draft picks 40 times. Jones was timed with a sundial.

Jones ran 4.9, which was disappointing, but you're still overstating big time.

Do you know what Terrell Suggs or James Harrison ran?

(06-19-2013 12:05 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(06-19-2013 03:58 AM)eagleskins Wrote:  

(06-18-2013 09:31 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(06-18-2013 04:38 AM)eagleskins Wrote:  It is all a crapshoot. But, the BCS schools are notorious for this type of hyperbole. I remember thUGA would always say how fast their defense is compared to other schools. That defense is slow as hell. Look at the combine numbers.

I think your bias is showing. Slow as hell? They had one linebacker with a really disappointing 40 time at their outdoor pro day and he was still a top 20 pick.

Look at their draft picks 40 times. Jones was timed with a sundial.

Jones ran 4.9, which was disappointing, but you're still overstating big time.

Do you know what Terrell Suggs or James Harrison ran?

Stating the truth. None of their draft picks ran well.

(06-17-2013 02:28 AM)eagleskins Wrote:  McKinnon is a 4.3 guy. Now, will he run a 4.3 at the combine? Who knows. But, he is without a doubt the strongest QB in the country. He is going to be a very high draft pick at running back.

That's a pretty bold statement. Not saying he isn't strong, but if you have not seen them all play, you cannot possibly know that.

(06-24-2013 04:47 PM)Vobserver Wrote:  

(06-17-2013 02:28 AM)eagleskins Wrote:  McKinnon is a 4.3 guy. Now, will he run a 4.3 at the combine? Who knows. But, he is without a doubt the strongest QB in the country. He is going to be a very high draft pick at running back.

That's a pretty bold statement. Not saying he isn't strong, but if you have not seen them all play, you cannot possibly know that.

He meant strongest as in the weight room. The guy is a freak for sure.

I think he's benching close to 500 if not over. Last I heard his squats were over 600, and that was a while back. I'm not sure of exact numbers right now. He out-squats OL. It's insane, I've never heard of a QB do that.

(06-24-2013 05:01 PM)eaglewraith Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 04:47 PM)Vobserver Wrote:  

(06-17-2013 02:28 AM)eagleskins Wrote:  McKinnon is a 4.3 guy. Now, will he run a 4.3 at the combine? Who knows. But, he is without a doubt the strongest QB in the country. He is going to be a very high draft pick at running back.

That's a pretty bold statement. Not saying he isn't strong, but if you have not seen them all play, you cannot possibly know that.

He meant strongest as in the weight room. The guy is a freak for sure.

I think he's benching close to 500 if not over. Last I heard his squats were over 600, and that was a while back. I'm not sure of exact numbers right now. He out-squats OL. It's insane, I've never heard of a QB do that.

The last time they publicly released his numbers, IIRC, was last summer and that's what I remember. I've heard Coach Melton (S&C coach) has told him there was no need to get any stronger or bigger, but this guy is a workout freak. His commitment to the weights will pay dividends in the future as the younger QB's will see what it takes to start at QB in our system.

(06-20-2013 03:02 AM)eagleskins Wrote:  

(06-19-2013 12:05 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(06-19-2013 03:58 AM)eagleskins Wrote:  

(06-18-2013 09:31 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(06-18-2013 04:38 AM)eagleskins Wrote:  It is all a crapshoot. But, the BCS schools are notorious for this type of hyperbole. I remember thUGA would always say how fast their defense is compared to other schools. That defense is slow as hell. Look at the combine numbers.

I think your bias is showing. Slow as hell? They had one linebacker with a really disappointing 40 time at their outdoor pro day and he was still a top 20 pick.

Look at their draft picks 40 times. Jones was timed with a sundial.

Jones ran 4.9, which was disappointing, but you're still overstating big time.

Do you know what Terrell Suggs or James Harrison ran?

Stating the truth. None of their draft picks ran well.

And James Harrrison and Terrell Suggs both ran about 4.85, how did their NFL careers work out?

(06-24-2013 08:10 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 03:02 AM)eagleskins Wrote:  

(06-19-2013 12:05 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(06-19-2013 03:58 AM)eagleskins Wrote:  

(06-18-2013 09:31 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  I think your bias is showing. Slow as hell? They had one linebacker with a really disappointing 40 time at their outdoor pro day and he was still a top 20 pick.

Look at their draft picks 40 times. Jones was timed with a sundial.

Jones ran 4.9, which was disappointing, but you're still overstating big time.

Do you know what Terrell Suggs or James Harrison ran?

Stating the truth. None of their draft picks ran well.

And James Harrrison and Terrell Suggs both ran about 4.85, how did their NFL careers work out?

You picked 2 people out of thousands. At the end of the day, running a slow 40 for your position lowers your odds of making it in the NFL. There is no arguing that although there will always be exceptions which you pointed out.

(06-24-2013 08:18 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 08:10 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 03:02 AM)eagleskins Wrote:  

(06-19-2013 12:05 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(06-19-2013 03:58 AM)eagleskins Wrote:  Look at their draft picks 40 times. Jones was timed with a sundial.

Jones ran 4.9, which was disappointing, but you're still overstating big time.

Do you know what Terrell Suggs or James Harrison ran?

Stating the truth. None of their draft picks ran well.

And James Harrrison and Terrell Suggs both ran about 4.85, how did their NFL careers work out?

You picked 2 people out of thousands. At the end of the day, running a slow 40 for your position lowers your odds of making it in the NFL. There is no arguing that although there will always be exceptions which you pointed out.

A fair point, but look, the guy was the SEC defensive player of the year, there were eight SEC defense first round picks and that doesn't include guys like Clowney. II'm not saying Jones is the next Suggsor Harrison, but there's a reason he was a top 20 pick despite running 4.9.

(06-24-2013 08:38 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 08:18 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(06-24-2013 08:10 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(06-20-2013 03:02 AM)eagleskins Wrote:  

(06-19-2013 12:05 PM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  Jones ran 4.9, which was disappointing, but you're still overstating big time.

Do you know what Terrell Suggs or James Harrison ran?

Stating the truth. None of their draft picks ran well.

And James Harrrison and Terrell Suggs both ran about 4.85, how did their NFL careers work out?

You picked 2 people out of thousands. At the end of the day, running a slow 40 for your position lowers your odds of making it in the NFL. There is no arguing that although there will always be exceptions which you pointed out.

A fair point, but look, the guy was the SEC defensive player of the year, there were 8 SEC defensive player of the year and there were eight SEC defense first round picks and that doesn't include guys like Clowney. II'm not saying Jones is the next Suggsor Harrison, but there's a reason he was a top 20 pick despite running 4.9.

At one point during the season Jones was projected as the #1 pick, so his stock certainly dropped for him to end up at 20. Perhaps his speed and neck issues contributed to that.

(06-16-2013 09:02 AM)MTPiKapp Wrote:  

(06-16-2013 07:53 AM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  Our QB is 5'9" 225 and a legit 4.4 guy. I'm sure he will get a shot at the nfl as a rb as a undrafted free agent next year.

That's something that's thrown around quite a bit here and rarely turns out to be true. Seems every year there are a ton of Sun Belt signees who are supposedly 4.34 guys, almost always false. We had a quarterback from Folkston who ran for a ton of yards and outran a bunch of guys, I think his 40 time was like 4.56. I'm not saying your quarterback, who I watched a bit of against UGA(last year?) and appears to have great speed, is not a "legit 4.4 guy" but the only 40 times I take seriously are at the draft combine, seems in year's past there are more supposed 4.4 and lower guysbeing touted on this board on signing day than there are at the combine in any given year.

Actually GSU's QB has timed 4.4's several times. He is probably a 4.5 guy but he is pretty freakish. He is about 5'9 220 but he is also an incredable wieght lifter. He benches close to 500 lbs. Now as a former player I am always take with a grain of salt when people talk about players 40 times and bench press reps and things. Usually they are never what people say. Matter of fact guys that are in high school that are supposed to be running 4.5 get to college and run 4.7 and when they say they bench 400 they come in and bench way less, so I understand what you are saying here. However, Jerick Mckinnon at GSU is legit. He, like I said because I am close to the head coach and coaches and keep tabs with some of this, has run several times under 4.5 and the coaches tell me he is still improving in his wieght lifting which to me is incredible for his size.

(06-17-2013 10:09 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  For those that think player X runs a legit 4.4...read this article:

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...tball-2013

There are few subjects in sports more debated -- and more misunderstood -- than speed. While almost every major sport puts a premium on it, they seem to be unable to settle on a standard by which to accurately measure it.

Football programs at all levels and the media that cover them rely mostly on the 40-yard dash to quantify who is, and who is not, fast. In and of itself, there's nothing wrong with the idea that speed over 40 yards is a valuable asset. The problem is that it is not measured with any semblance of accuracy.

You know the old saying: "To err is human?" That definitely applies to the timing of the 40-yard dash. Almost every 40-yard dash time you've heard attributed to a player was timed by hand, meaning a human digit had a significant influence on its outcome. Even so-called electronically-timed 40-yard dashes require a human to start the clock once the runner begins the race on his own accord.

Studies have shown that such hand-based methods are prone to error and wipe away, on average, at least .24 seconds off the real time of a race. So that "official" 4.35 you think your favorite player ran at the combine? Yeah, it was probably more like a 4.69.
What's more, 40-yard dashes are run under widely disparate conditions. For instance, wind gauges are not used. Some 40s are run on a track, others on grass and still others on artificial turf. Some runners use spikes, while others run in sneakers. This extra bit of unrecorded variation adds even more unreliability to 40 times. Nonetheless, this is rarely taken into account when 40 times are discussed.

Luckily, we have an accurate standard by which to measure speed. It's called Fully Automatic Time, or FAT. This electronic timing method has been required in track for record purposes since 1977. No track time is officially counted as a record -- whether on a personal or world level -- that is not recorded with FAT. Furthermore, the governing bodies of track and field require wind readings and standardized running surfaces at sanctioned track events. The goal is to create uniform conditions so that times all over the world can be compared and contrasted with confidence.

So why doesn't football use FAT for the 40-yard dash? As Rob Rang reported last year, the NFL tried it at the 2012 scouting combine. But the results were kept secret and the FAT timing was dumped in 2013 in favor of a combination of hand and electronic times. Clearly, marketing and hype takes precedent over accuracy at the NFL combine. No one wants to rave about a running back who just ran a 4.7, right?

This is true but when you run as many 40's for times as they do in college over and over and you keep getting the times consistantly over and over then it is safe to say, concidering everyone uses this method, that a guy is at a certain time. As far as electronic times they are right but there is the electronic time that starts when the runner lifts his foot off the line. Normally these times come up a bit slow so they will add a couple points concidering how they are calibrated.

(06-18-2013 05:07 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(06-18-2013 04:38 AM)eagleskins Wrote:  It is all a crapshoot. But, the BCS schools are notorious for this type of hyperbole. I remember thUGA would always say how fast their defense is compared to other schools. That defense is slow as hell. Look at the combine numbers.

Since App State plays Georgia this year, hope you are right about their defense.

Players always run slower at the combines. I went through a combine and ran a slower time. Durning the season the players are in great shape and run faster times. By the time they get to the combing their legs are not in the same shape because of the time off. I was a 4.8 to 4.9 every time and even ran some 4.7's while timed during the seasons while around 290 lbs. I ran a 5.0 at the combine. But in the defense of the guys running at the combines, unless they continue to really stay in shape after the last game in college, they just dont have their legs as much. Most all of them dont come to the combines in the same shape as they were while practicing every day in college.

It's always fun though to see a player do better than expected.
We had a RB last year that out jumped the vertical measuring device.
The NFL scouts loved that.

Short guys can be effective. Joe Hamilton was listed generously at 5'11". And he should have won the Heisman.

(06-27-2013 11:12 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  Short guys can be effective. Joe Hamilton was listed generously at 5'11". And he should have won the Heisman.

Joe Hamilton with Calvin Johnson would have been something to see btw.

(06-27-2013 10:05 AM)eagle9098 Wrote:  

(06-17-2013 10:09 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  For those that think player X runs a legit 4.4...read this article:

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball...tball-2013

There are few subjects in sports more debated -- and more misunderstood -- than speed. While almost every major sport puts a premium on it, they seem to be unable to settle on a standard by which to accurately measure it.

Football programs at all levels and the media that cover them rely mostly on the 40-yard dash to quantify who is, and who is not, fast. In and of itself, there's nothing wrong with the idea that speed over 40 yards is a valuable asset. The problem is that it is not measured with any semblance of accuracy.

You know the old saying: "To err is human?" That definitely applies to the timing of the 40-yard dash. Almost every 40-yard dash time you've heard attributed to a player was timed by hand, meaning a human digit had a significant influence on its outcome. Even so-called electronically-timed 40-yard dashes require a human to start the clock once the runner begins the race on his own accord.

Studies have shown that such hand-based methods are prone to error and wipe away, on average, at least .24 seconds off the real time of a race. So that "official" 4.35 you think your favorite player ran at the combine? Yeah, it was probably more like a 4.69.
What's more, 40-yard dashes are run under widely disparate conditions. For instance, wind gauges are not used. Some 40s are run on a track, others on grass and still others on artificial turf. Some runners use spikes, while others run in sneakers. This extra bit of unrecorded variation adds even more unreliability to 40 times. Nonetheless, this is rarely taken into account when 40 times are discussed.

Luckily, we have an accurate standard by which to measure speed. It's called Fully Automatic Time, or FAT. This electronic timing method has been required in track for record purposes since 1977. No track time is officially counted as a record -- whether on a personal or world level -- that is not recorded with FAT. Furthermore, the governing bodies of track and field require wind readings and standardized running surfaces at sanctioned track events. The goal is to create uniform conditions so that times all over the world can be compared and contrasted with confidence.

So why doesn't football use FAT for the 40-yard dash? As Rob Rang reported last year, the NFL tried it at the 2012 scouting combine. But the results were kept secret and the FAT timing was dumped in 2013 in favor of a combination of hand and electronic times. Clearly, marketing and hype takes precedent over accuracy at the NFL combine. No one wants to rave about a running back who just ran a 4.7, right?

This is true but when you run as many 40's for times as they do in college over and over and you keep getting the times consistantly over and over then it is safe to say, concidering everyone uses this method, that a guy is at a certain time. As far as electronic times they are right but there is the electronic time that starts when the runner lifts his foot off the line. Normally these times come up a bit slow so they will add a couple points concidering how they are calibrated.

McKinnon will time at least 4.4. JJ timed 4.5 at the combine, and I'm pretty sure he's not ever been one of the fastest 5-7 guys on our team.

Still believe that Southern recruits have much more speed normally than Northern recruits.
Have not seen any trend to change that belief.