Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Why is it that some of you huddlers are fixated on..


Recommended Posts

A wide receivers 40 time?

Do you guys realize that doesn't mean a damn thing in the NFL? You have to have more than speed. I've seen countless of times were I read some of your comments and shake my head at the sheer stupidit.

A wide out has to have not only speed, but awareness, has to have initiative, hand eye coordination, some type of athleticism to make plays. At least be smart enough to know how to learn a playbook. Can he run a route? Can he run the right route?

There are countless of wide outs that didn't run a 4.3 forty time and are great nfl players. The biggest example of this is Jerry Rice. But what did he have that compensated the lack of speed? Determination, great route running, great hands, superb intellect. He could learn a playbook. He wanted it bad.

In past years you had several low 40 time receivers that are really good wide outs. Last year's Jarvis Landry. The guy ran a horrible 40 time. But he caught everything in his path And knows his route tree. A couple of years ago, Keenan Allen, someone I was high ono, was injured and ran a slow 40 time. He went in the third to the Chargers, now SD has a #1 wide out.

The point is, I'd if a guy runs a slow 40 don't count him out. There are other ways to make up for that speed. Route running, hip placement, step placement, breaking in and out of routes is key to getting open, even the veteran moves to fake out a corner.

Having speed is fine, but can you control that speed? If you can't stop on a dime, it won't matter if you're fast as the flash.

When I see people bash the likes of say Justin Hardy because he ran a 4.5 forty at the combine or a 4.4 at his pro day, I can't help but to shake my head at the pure ignorance of it. He is one of the few guys that I would say is extremely underrated. His speed is decent but his work ethic, hands, route running, and determination will help him at the next level. If he is picked by the Panthers, I'll be ecstatic about it. Gettleman knows his poo.

/Rant over

Tl;dr - 40 times ain't poo Boys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is one of the best post I've read in a while. Between the experts Raving about 40 times and fans upset because the fastest receiver on the draft board wasn't selected, I just shake my head. The team needs a receiver with intelligence, heart, and a large catch radius (all three). If he doesn't have these three skills, he's just a JAG (just another guy).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A wide receivers 40 time?

Do you guys realize that doesn't mean a damn thing in the NFL? You have to have more than speed. I've seen countless of times were I read some of your comments and shake my head at the sheer stupidit.

A wide out has to have not only speed, but awareness, has to have initiative, hand eye coordination, some type of athleticism to make plays. At least be smart enough to know how to learn a playbook. Can he run a route? Can he run the right route?

There are countless of wide outs that didn't run a 4.3 forty time and are great nfl players. The biggest example of this is Jerry Rice. But what did he have that compensated the lack of speed? Determination, great route running, great hands, superb intellect. He could learn a playbook. He wanted it bad.

In past years you had several low 40 time receivers that are really good wide outs. Last year's Jarvis Landry. The guy ran a horrible 40 time. But he caught everything in his path And knows his route tree. A couple of years ago, Keenan Allen, someone I was high ono, was injured and ran a slow 40 time. He went in the third to the Chargers, now SD has a #1 wide out.

The point is, I'd if a guy runs a slow 40 don't count him out. There are other ways to make up for that speed. Route running, hip placement, step placement, breaking in and out of routes is key to getting open, even the veteran moves to fake out a corner.

Having speed is fine, but can you control that speed? If you can't stop on a dime, it won't matter if you're fast as the flash.

When I see people bash the likes of say Justin Hardy because he ran a 4.5 forty at the combine or a 4.4 at his pro day, I can't help but to shake my head at the pure ignorance of it. He is one of the few guys that I would say is extremely underrated. His speed is decent but his work ethic, hands, route running, and determination will help him at the next level. If he is picked by the Panthers, I'll be ecstatic about it. Gettleman knows his poo.

/Rant over

Tl;dr - 40 times ain't poo Boys.

 

I have said the same thing.  To extend your point, how many WRs whose speed is their most impressive attribute become elite WRs? 

 

Very few. 

 

Give me 4.55 and good hands any day.

 

Michael Irving said, "When are you going to run full speed anyway?  The route starts after the break--that has nothing to do with 40 speed because the start is where most fast guys get the low numbers.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of the greatest receivers in NFL history have had very average speed, so Yeh speed alone doesn't make a guy an automatic star. Look at the guy we snagged last year, dude isnt a "barn burner" yet he scored double digit tds and had 1000 yards...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Strange, every news article and tweet I just searched all mentioned waivers. It is definitely his sixth year of at least 6 games. All I was trying to think of earlier was at the vet min could he beat out Bryce in camp next year lol. He's kinda got the old Darnold issue where he can obviously launch deep balls and qb run at a level Bryce will never achieve, but it sounds like he would be content being like a Josh Allen backup who doesn't throw the whole game plan out the window if he has to come in for a series or two. If we had him and for some reason still wanted to start Bryce he would kinda do what Justin Fields was doing the other night with Dangeruss, coming in for designed runs and maybe some play action/triple option rpo things to go deep. That would be so obvious and sad though. At least Russ can still sling it 40 yards in the air with a flick of the wrist
    • Too late to edit above but the quote is from this Diane Russini article in the Athletic: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5941684/2024/11/23/russinis-what-im-hearing-the-day-the-jets-fell-apart-and-the-broncos-rallied-belichick-best-fits/ Okay.. there you have sorry I left that out the first post.  Also waivers keep the contract intact. That is the major difference in released and waived. It's all in that link from the other post.
    • Okay so I am reading something in The Athletic and it says that Jones had to pass through waivers. So I don't know. I looked this stuff up when we were number one there all offseason and I thought it said 4 years in the league got you vested, as they call it.  Vested gets you out of waivers as I understood it. I probably got something wrong, but when I think about the slack quality of journalism these days I wonder about that. So I went and looked, again. Well, well.  For everyone: "When a player has accrued at least four seasons in the NFL, they are considered a vested veteran. When these vested veterans get cut, they are released and their contract is terminated. When a vested veteran is released, they are an unrestricted free agent that can sign with any NFL team, and the team that released them doesn’t need to provide any additional compensation." It runs it all down here, where the quotes came from: https://www.profootballnetwork.com/waived-vs-released-nfl/ As far as Jones, the team turned down his 5th year option so I knew that meant he had 4 years in, because they re-signed him anyway, after turning down the much cheaper extra year.  The Athletic is owned by the New York Times so I shouldn't be surprised. That paper was an institution once upon a time but they let their standards go.
×
×
  • Create New...