Results 1 to 12 of 12
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By AvengerRam

Thread: I'm getting tired of "unofficial" 40 times

  1. #1
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,513
    Rep Power
    167

    I'm getting tired of "unofficial" 40 times

    I had the Combine coverage on here and there this weekend, and I have to say, its a pretty mediocre TV event. To some extent, its unavoidable, as the event is not designed for TV, and never will be as compelling as Draft Weekend itself.

    But the one thing that can be fixed that would make it more interesting is the "unofficial" 40 time issue.

    Here's how it typiacally goes:

    1. Player runs the 40.
    2. NFL Network announces the "unofficial" 40 time.
    3. The internet (from Twitter to ESPN) discusses the significance of the time.
    4. The "official" time is announced, and is almost always slower than the "unofficial."
    5. Half the internet discusses the "official" time, while the other half is still discussing the "unofficial" time.

    40 times are only interesting if there is a degree of standardization that allows you to compare players. I see no utility in announcing imaginary "unofficial" times that, in the end, are supplanted by "official" times. It just makes the task of comparing players that much more difficult.

    And don't even get me started on Pro Day times run on fast tracks with the wind at the player's back.


  2. #2
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,513
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: I'm getting tired of "unofficial" 40 times

    By the way, I just went into the parking lot at my office and ran an unofficial 40 time of 4.37.
    MoonJoe likes this.

  3. #3
    berg8309's Avatar
    berg8309 is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    New Orleans
    Posts
    1,897
    Rep Power
    42

    Re: I'm getting tired of "unofficial" 40 times

    Official time clocked you at 4.45.

  4. #4
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,513
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: I'm getting tired of "unofficial" 40 times

    Quote Originally Posted by berg8309 View Post
    Official time clocked you at 4.45.
    I'll take it!

  5. #5
    HUbison's Avatar
    HUbison is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Kentucky
    Age
    40
    Posts
    13,555
    Rep Power
    144

    Re: I'm getting tired of "unofficial" 40 times

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    By the way, I just went into the parking lot at my office and ran an unofficial 40 time of 4.37.
    Quote Originally Posted by Berg
    Official time clocked you at 4.45
    See?..........slower.
    "Before the gates of excellence the high gods have placed sweat; long is the road thereto and rough and steep at first; but when the heights are reached, then there is ease, though grievously hard in the winning." --- Hesiod

  6. #6
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,513
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: I'm getting tired of "unofficial" 40 times

    Unofficially, Dewey defeated Truman.

  7. #7
    MauiRam's Avatar
    MauiRam is online now Pro Bowl Ram
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Maui, Hi.
    Age
    70
    Posts
    4,853
    Rep Power
    79

    Re: I'm getting tired of "unofficial" 40 times

    Around a week ago, on the ESPN radio, (Sedano & Stink show), Mark Schlereth (a.k.a. Stink) discussed forty times. Stink singled out the 40 yard dash in particular, and the combine in general as being “the most worthless event in modern sports.” He then went on to say (in his opinion) there is a far more important measurable for football players than a fast 40 time. The flaw here according to Stink, is that an athlete may be able to run like a deer once he decides to actually run, but this blazing forty time will not translate to the field if said player's reaction time is average or below. According to Mark, it is an athlete’s reaction time to the plethora of visual and audio stimuli on an NFL field of play, that is of far greater importance. He cited by way of example, certain receivers owning blazing combine forty times, which when actually inserted in a live game, looked average at best, and downright slow at worst. The numbers didn’t translate over to the football field if their physical reaction/mental processing times were slow.

    Mark stated that there are variety of tests available which are capable of accurately measuring athletes' reaction times, and that athletes with the quickest reaction times will (in his opinion) translate their skills to the field far more readily than merely a guy who can run forty yards the fastest in shorts and t-shirt when said guy feels he is ready to initiate the run.

    Some of Marks stories describing these phenomena were quite humorous, but the underlying message made a lot of sense. He stated that reaction times are likely the most critical “times” for any player - at any position.


    The Truth About Speed, NFL Combines and the 40 Yard Dash!

    by Mike Boyle
    Speed is the stuff of urban legend. Deion Sanders supposedly showed up at the NFL Combine, ran a 4.2 and went home. We routinely hear of high school kids who purportedly run 4.3's and 4.4's. The stories of "reported" speed have gotten out of control. This would not be a problem in and of itself. Most of us could look at it and say "so what" people lie or people embellish. The real problem is that the lies seem to be setting the standard. One of the reasons that I no longer train athletes for the NFL Combine is the unrealistic expectations of athletes and agents based on these "urban legends" or the occasional freakish performance like Vernon Davis this year.

    Davis measured out at 6'3" and 263 lbs., ran a 4.38 forty and vertical jumped 40 inches. Those are insane stats. We won't see that again for a long time in my mind. Every year it seems like there is some freakish performance by an athlete that raises the bar of expectation. I would have less of a problem if these expectations were not trickling down to high school kids. My intention is to set the record straight with facts. In order to prove this I pored over the NFL Combine results for the six years that I had on file. The following statistics are taken directly from the Combine results. It should be noted that although the Combine times are considered "electronic", they are closer to handheld than electronic. There are three potential timing options:

    1- Electronic start- electronic finish. This should be the standard but, unfortunately is not. The start is done with a touch pad and the finish with a photocell. This is the most accurate and as a result yields the slowest times. An electronic start/ electronic finish time has been shown to be .22 seconds slower than a hand held 40 yard dash. ( Brown, 2004)

    2- Hand Start- electronic finish. This is a system used uniquely at the NFL Combine. A hand start-electronic finish will be approximately .1 seconds slower than a hand held 40 yard dash. In the combine the use of hand start will be particularly evident in the faster ten yard dash times. Athletes will run 10 yard times much closer to a hand held but, times at each following split will be closer to the electronic time.

    3- Hand Start- hand finish- this is the fastest and least accurate. Handheld times tend to be faster but are clearly more prone to human error. Many of the legendary times I believe were hand-held timing combined with human error or human expectation.

    At the NFL Combine in 1996, 97, 98, 2001 and 2003 and 2006 no one ran a 4.2. No one. Not one person. In 2001 Ladainian Tomlinson ran one 4.36, five in the 4.4's and vertical jumped 40.5. 2003 was a fast year, yet still produced no 4.2's. Ten athletes ran 4.3's in 2003. The heaviest was a 223 pound running back. The Combine track is always said to be slow but the truth is it is simply accurate. All of these supposed fast times seem to be run at times when no independent verification is available. Seems a bit curious doesn't it.

    Here's another angle on the whole "speed" thing. Ben Johnson and Carl Lewis ran split times of 4.67 for 40 meters ( Bryan, Rose-Hulman) The split times are below.

    1.84 10 yd
    2.86 20 (1.02 split)
    3.8 30 (.94 split)
    4.67 40 (.87 split)

    40 meters is 43.74 yards. This would make the distance approximately ten percent further. This means we could reduce the time by approximately .36 seconds to account for the additional 3.7 yards. This would mean that in constant acceleration mode the best sprinters in the history of the world, using blocks, ran 4.31 for 40 yards. Does it seem plausible that high school football players can run faster times without blocks.

    The table below shows some of the athletes who ran below 4.4 at the NFL Combine. Obviously the athletes are getting faster but, we still don't see the dreaded 4.2's we hear so much about. In 2005 I believe one athlete actually ran a 4.2 although I did not have those stats available. One athlete in a decade.

    In 2006 of nineteen running backs listed in the internet report (unofficial) Maurice Drew of UCLA was the only 4.3 and he ran a 4.39. In other words one running back ran under 4.4 and, he did it by one one-hundreth. Four wide receivers out of thirty-one ran under 4.4. In fact five ran over 4.6. This means more wide receivers ran over 4.6 than under 4.4. 2006 was an exceptional year for defensive backs with nine sub 4.4's. The key, again in 2006 was that there were no 4.2's in the results I saw.

    As coaches, we need to stop perpetuating the myths. We need to tell our athletes what the average at the NFL Combine was and not what the best "freak" times were. We need to further explain to them that it is unrealistic to expect to even meet the NFL averages. As with everything in our society, we have raised the bar unrealistically high. Let's be honest with ourselves and with our athletes.

  8. #8
    Flippin' Ram's Avatar
    Flippin' Ram is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Long Beach, CA
    Posts
    2,441
    Rep Power
    32

    Re: I'm getting tired of "unofficial" 40 times

    I believe the 40-yd dash is a poor measurement of a player's speed in big leagues. The 10-yd split would be more important IMO because it can give us a general idea of a player's initial burst, which is crucial for pass-rushers and halfbacks.

    ♪ R.I.P. Nujabes ♫
    Your beat still laments the world

  9. #9
    AvengerRam's Avatar
    AvengerRam is offline Moderator Emeritus
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Longwood, Florida, United States
    Age
    46
    Posts
    18,513
    Rep Power
    167

    Re: I'm getting tired of "unofficial" 40 times

    I'm not advocating for or criticizing the value of the 40.

    Whatever measure is used, I just find the "unofficial" reports annoying.

  10. #10
    FestusRam's Avatar
    FestusRam is offline Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Festus, Missouri
    Posts
    1,172
    Rep Power
    20

    Re: I'm getting tired of "unofficial" 40 times

    I personally don't mind the unofficial, until the media and social networks get involved.

    When I watch a player run the forty, I realize the unofficial time is probably wrong. But, most of the time, the margin of error is only about .05-.10, so I can at least get an idea of what he ran right then and there.

    What annoys me about the unofficial times is when people see them and run with them.

    I've seen way to many headlines and tweets(And I don't even have twitter) declaring unofficial times as legitimate by completely ignoring the fact that they are indeed unofficial. The headline or tweet will read "Player X runs 4.37 in 40" and they'll casually forget to inform readers that that time was actually unofficial.

  11. #11
    Nick's Avatar
    Nick is offline Superbowl MVP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Morgantown, WV
    Age
    31
    Posts
    19,321
    Rep Power
    153

    Re: I'm getting tired of "unofficial" 40 times

    Quote Originally Posted by FestusRam View Post
    I personally don't mind the unofficial, until the media and social networks get involved.

    When I watch a player run the forty, I realize the unofficial time is probably wrong. But, most of the time, the margin of error is only about .05-.10, so I can at least get an idea of what he ran right then and there.

    What annoys me about the unofficial times is when people see them and run with them.

    I've seen way to many headlines and tweets(And I don't even have twitter) declaring unofficial times as legitimate by completely ignoring the fact that they are indeed unofficial. The headline or tweet will read "Player X runs 4.37 in 40" and they'll casually forget to inform readers that that time was actually unofficial.
    I unofficially agree with you.

    I have no problem with unofficial times, as long as you know what you're getting. It kind of baffles me that the NFL haven't found a way to provide more immediate "official" times at this event.

    It's all kind of a moot point anyways, because my understanding is that the actual teams all have their own hand-timing people there anyways and don't go by the unofficial or official times provided by the league.

  12. #12
    MoonJoe's Avatar
    MoonJoe is offline Ram MVP
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Norco, CA
    Age
    48
    Posts
    1,425
    Rep Power
    42

    Re: I'm getting tired of "unofficial" 40 times

    Quote Originally Posted by AvengerRam View Post
    Unofficially, Dewey defeated Truman.
    Again!? Dang it!
    "The disappointment of losing is huge!"

    Jack Youngblood

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 8
    Last Post: -02-12-2014, 09:21 PM
  2. Replies: 7
    Last Post: -01-06-2013, 04:55 PM
  3. Replies: 8
    Last Post: -10-26-2011, 11:35 PM
  4. Replies: 2
    Last Post: -11-14-2005, 06:31 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •