Why Combine 40 Speed is Over-rated.

[madd futher mucker 36]

Since those who are still posting here are the 'hard-core addicts' of fantasy football I decided to get you 'psyched up' for this week end's Combine by posting two 'thought pieces'. I posted "Why Combine 40 speed is Over-rated" on the two other forum sites that I post on, based on research I got from various sources on the net. It stimulated some tremendous comment in both forums. One site had one guy who was so adamant in his rebuttal it got a little 'personal'. All in good fun.

 

The responses on the other site caused me to put together a second 'thought piece' I'll call "The Two Faces of the NFL Combine". The second 'thought piece' is not my original thoughts or words, but are a combination of quoted responses to this one, including one part from the "Artist formerly known as 'Wildman". So here is the first: "Why Combine 40 speed is Over-rated".

 

To begin with, we have to understand that there is no such thing as a single "official" time at the NFL combine. Here is how it works: Those who participate in the 40 actually run twice, and on each run they are timed by two hand-held stopwatches and one electronic timer (which is still actually initiated by hand upon the player's first movement).

The data put together for NFL teams by National Scouting includes all six of those times for each player, but no single official time. Team scouts and coaches have various approaches for getting the 40 time they decide to use from those six timings. Some use averages. Some throw out slowest and fastest and then average the rest. Some ignore the whole thing and use a time taken by their own scout.

 

Also consider: the fastest anyone can react to any stimulus is about .15 seconds. Therefore any hand-timed time has an maximum uncertainty of up to .30 seconds associated with it. Even averaging times to reduce the percentage of error, a timing error variance of up to .05 (the difference between 4.5 and 4.55) between two identical runs is entirely possible.

 

Now examine the difference between being 'coached up' and running the 40 yard dash 'raw'. The Michael Johnson Performance Center just outside of Dallas charges athletes $18,000 for their six weeks pre-draft training program. It is only one of several - some claiming to have taken as much as .25 to .30 off a football player's pre-training time. (very believable if working with an athlete - say a lineman - having no track experience). Even athletes who have been high school track stars or who work out regularly with the university sprint teams improve their technique - because this training is geared specifically to 40 yards.

 

These training facilities teach optimal pre-start hand placement, optimal starting technique, breathing technique, how long your first step should be, optimal running technique (about 17 steps for the average NFL athlete), both optimum leg technique and optimum torso angle while running, and how to finish. Some use computer technology to analyze impact of changes in technique during the training. They tell the athlete what and when to eat before running the sprint and the stretching regimen to use. In addition to working the 40 time, most six week programs also coach techniques for the short shuttle, vertical jump, broad jump, 225 bench and more.

 

Finally consider what the timing differences really mean. Assuming perfectly accurate timing comparisons and that both athletes were coached up equally, the difference between a 4.3 (Maclin's estimated time) and a 4.5 (Britt's estimated time) is 1.8 yards - less than 5 1/2 feet) in a 40 yard dash. The difference between 4.46 and 4.5 is just a little over a foot (13 inches).

 

[The math - a 4.5 runner covers 95.56% of the distance that the 4.3 runner does, which comes to 1.8 yards over the course of 4.3 seconds (4.3/4.5=0.95556 * 40 = 38.2). To look at it differently, a guy running a 4.5 40 runs 8.8889 yards per second (40/4.5). In 4.3 seconds (the time the other guys has run 40 yards in), the 4.5 guy will cover 38.2 yards. 1.8 yards = 64.8 inches for 20/100th of a second. Divide that by 20 and each 0.01 second means a real difference of 3.24 inches.]

 

So how much does straight line speed really mean on the football field? In one game this year, I watched Eddie Royal on a 'go' route running up to a DB who had given him a nice 'cushion' but was just beginning to run with him. Eddie gave him a great body juke and immediately pulled away by almost 5 yards within 40 yards of the line of scrimmage. How much separation would he have gotten on sheer straight line speed without the great juke? Obviously very little unless that DB had the speed of an offensive lineman.

 

I'll post the second 'thought piece' tomorrow or Thursday.

[jocstrap 8]

I would say this time at the combine bumped this somebody to the 1st round

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixHb5pPP5yU

 

 

 

and what about this guys outstanding forty?

 

http://www.newsok.com/article/3018490/

 

 

Don't you dare throw a Michael Bennett time back at me. He was a track guy playing football

 

Those two above, are rb's with incredible speed.

 

If you have the forty time, why not milk the cash cow?

[Big_Pete 0]

I've seen fast 40 yard time players get caught from behind time and time again.

I've seen slow 40 yard time players pull away from defenders time and time again.

There is a difference in being in a tank top, track shorts, and track shoes running in a straight line than being in cleats with full pads on.

Just because you can blaze a 40 doesn't mean you'll be faster than a slow 40 yard time guy after you strap on pads and put on cleats.

I'm a Broncos homer, so I'll just point out that Terrell Davis ran a 4.6something 40 yard dash. I rarely if ever saw him get caught from behind. He had "game speed", not "track and field" speed.

Concequently, I've seen Eddie Royal with fantastic speed get caught time and time again from behind.

Again, pads & cleats are different than tank tops and track shoes.

I take game speed over 40 yard times any day of the week, and twice on sundays.

[WhiteWonder 2,172]

40 time is honestly not something i ever cared much about. Straight line, perfect environment running can only translate so much to speed on the field. I would much rather my favorite team draft a player with a great work ethic, instincts and play making ability over someone who is fast at the combine.

 

Sheer combine numbers alone can be misleading... look at Vernon Davis.

 

however im not sure you needed to go this in depth to point it out to anyone. ty tho

[madd futher mucker 36]

You go to the head of the class, WhiteWonder. Not everyone thinks like you do. There are some scouts, GMs and owners (yes I'm looking at you, Mr Al Davis) who are still flunking this course. Ever since Oympic track champion named Robert 'Bullet Bob' Hayes (the 'World's Fastest Human' at the '64 Summer Olympics) was drafted by Dallas in the 7th round and turned into a pretty darn good WR (and NFL Hall of Famer), the 40 speed has assumed out-of-proportion importance at the scouting combines.

 

Trivia: the 1st scouting combine started in 1963 called LESTO (for Lions, Eagles and Steelers Talent Organization); in '64 it became BLESTO when the Bears joined it.

[madd futher mucker 36]

Don't you dare throw a Michael Bennett time back at me. He was a track guy playing football

Not exactly so, jocstrap. As a U of Wisconsin alum, I can tell you that Bennett was both a track guy and an outstanding running back for the Badgers. He was ranked the top high school football (Milwaukee Tech High School) prospect in the State of Wisconsin before being recruited by the Badgers. He spent his 1st 2 years behind Heisman winning RB Ron Dayne, and in his only year as a starter, he ran for 1600 yards and 10 TDs despite missing a couple games due to injury. He was drafted by the Vikings in the 1st round and, after a 'then' Viking record-setting rookie season rushing for almost 700 yards and 226 receiving yards in 13 games played his rookie year, he was a Pro-Bowler in only his 2nd year in the NFL, accumulating 1650 combined rushing and receiving yards that year. (Few remember that Wisconsin produced two back-to-back 1st round NFL RBs).

 

After those first 2 years, Bennett sustained a series of severe knee and ankle related injuries. He never regained his production (or his blazing speed) after those injuries. Yes, he's still hanging on in the NFL, a shell of what he could have been had he avoided those injuries.

[madd futher mucker 36]

I found this in an article last year, you might find it interesting:

 

Poster: Not sure if anybody has heard of Matt Waldman but the guy does a great job scouting rookie talent. I just received his newsletter, and this was in it.

 

Quote: "Here's what three scouts had to say about a 207-lb., prospect that ran a 4.38-40 and had a dazzling 1681-yard season as a junior:

Scout One: "Speed kills. With his quickness out of a break he's going to have linebackers stumbling and falling all over themselves. He will undress them."

Scout Two: "I'm mixed on him. Some people say he's not instinctive and not a shake guy. (Expletive), he only has to make some kind of move and if you lean the wrong way he's gone. Great, great speed and he plays fast. Maybe when he matures he'll be your every down guy. Not now."

Scout Three: "He's a spot player that might give you a big play. He should have stayed in school and worked on catching the ball."

Who was the player they were talking about? None other than former Wisconsin Badger HB Michael Bennett.

 

This year [actually LAST year now], we have a highly regarded 211-lb., halfback that ran a 4.33-40. Although in the minority, I think Scout Two's comments also accurately describe this player, Raider Darren McFadden.

 

I love finding stuff like this - makes fantasy football fun year round.

[jgcrawfish 232]

I was thinking about this when reading the thread on who would make a good GM. Yes, measurables count for something, but shiite, just find me players who make plays. Agree completely on the 40 yrd times, in fact the cones and short shuttle are much better markers of how someones speed will translate. Bench presses don't mean a damn thing to me, but show me an RB that squats 550lb, keep his pads low, has a low center of gravity and keeps his legs pumping and I'll show you a guy who will get a first down when your team needs it and move a pile into the endzone. You've got to use the #'s as a tool and not the end all be all of evaluating talent. Every year when reading about somebody at the combine I start assigning Mamula lables to guys. FWIW, Vernon Davis got a Mamula lable from me.

[t.j 35]

Evaluating a player is a complex process. No aspect of the player, speed included, can be gauged with a single exercise. You can only put so much stock into a 40 time because it barely qualifies as a football situation, and it's imperfectly timed. You can't put on tape and compare the speed of two players either, because they aren't playing in the same conditions or against the same opponents (most of the time).

 

I think most teams have found that, at the Combine, the best thing you can get out of a player is not his measurables, but more personal stuff. Does he respond well when prodded during interviews? Does he seem to understand the game and learn quickly? Does he see the event as an opportunity to compete, or a minefield to try to avoid showing weaknesses? Does his medical examination raise red flags?

 

These are things that allow the teams to learn a lot about players at the Combine, but unfortunately none of it is revealed to the fans who pore over NFL Network coverage of the event. (And for good reason.)

 

Teams that succeed are the ones that can evaluate the right things on film, but also find out what you can't see on tape when meeting the players. Teams that fail are the ones whose judgement and preparation are not as good and therefore they end up relying more on measurables and statistics.

[fantasymind 1]

Evaluating a player is a complex process. No aspect of the player, speed included, can be gauged with a single exercise. You can only put so much stock into a 40 time because it barely qualifies as a football situation, and it's imperfectly timed. You can't put on tape and compare the speed of two players either, because they aren't playing in the same conditions or against the same opponents (most of the time).

 

I think most teams have found that, at the Combine, the best thing you can get out of a player is not his measurables, but more personal stuff. Does he respond well when prodded during interviews? Does he seem to understand the game and learn quickly? Does he see the event as an opportunity to compete, or a minefield to try to avoid showing weaknesses? Does his medical examination raise red flags?

 

These are things that allow the teams to learn a lot about players at the Combine, but unfortunately none of it is revealed to the fans who pore over NFL Network coverage of the event. (And for good reason.)

 

Teams that succeed are the ones that can evaluate the right things on film, but also find out what you can't see on tape when meeting the players. Teams that fail are the ones whose judgement and preparation are not as good and therefore they end up relying more on measurables and statistics.

 

Extremely well said and right on point, imo...

[De Novo 0]

I think the media focuses much more on 40 time than NFL GMs do. Most NFL GMs fully recognize that football speed is more important than track speed, and take 40s with the appropriate grain of salt. In fact, about 1 or 2 weeks ago I had the opportunity to ask an NFL GM and one of his VPs questions about players, the draft, etc. and they take 40 speed on a track without pads and cleats with a grain of salt. There are plenty examples of players out there who ran bad 40 times (Jerry Rice) but he was still a 1st round pick, coming from a small school.

[Yippie Skippy 0]

Didn't Chris Johnson have the fastest 40 time last year at the combine?? Certainly speed led to his success last season. Would of he had been drafted as high as he was with a poor 40 time??

[t.j 35]

Didn't Chris Johnson have the fastest 40 time last year at the combine?? Certainly speed led to his success last season. Would of he had been drafted as high as he was with a poor 40 time??

 

Chris Johnson's 40 time certainly elevated his draft position, just as good 40 times usually elevate a player's draft position.

The thing is, he is the type of guy where, one comes along every so often, and for years afterward GMs and coaches screw their teams trying to find the next one when there isn't one. Aside from the fact that CJ is much faster than most of the combine stars that people go ga-ga for at the combine (i.e. 4.40 40 guys), he also has better lower-body strength and skills than most speed backs, something many GMs and coaches are sure to overlook when trying to find the next Chris Johnson.

[jgcrawfish 232]

NFL.com has a nice walkthru running right now with Mike Mayock, who is a pretty good talent evaluator. It's bit rudimentary, but he explains several of the overall drills and then position specific drills. One thing that jumped out at me that he said was watching Steve Slaton at the combine last year he elevated him 2 rounds in his draft chart based on what he saw in the RB drills. Like I said, it's a bit basic, but it's good to know from a personnel guy what they are looking instead of just speed.

[jdswan922 0]

Chris Johnson's 40 time certainly elevated his draft position, just as good 40 times usually elevate a player's draft position.

The thing is, he is the type of guy where, one comes along every so often, and for years afterward GMs and coaches screw their teams trying to find the next one when there isn't one. Aside from the fact that CJ is much faster than most of the combine stars that people go ga-ga for at the combine (i.e. 4.40 40 guys), he also has better lower-body strength and skills than most speed backs, something many GMs and coaches are sure to overlook when trying to find the next Chris Johnson.

Chris Henry's (RB Tennessee) 40 time elevated his draft stock quite a bit too, but you don't hear his name anymore...

[Tusekan Raiders 0]

tj's post is right on track. 40 time is all part of the puzzle. Citing Chris Johnson and Chris Henry w/40 time ignores their success in other tests, as well. Player with light resumes (e.g. Johnson and Henry) have more riding on the Combine/Pro Day. Being a workout warrior helps them, for better or worse for the team that drafts them. By the same token, player with an established body of work aren't going to be hurt as much by a mediocre to poor effort at the Combine.