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 are players more athletic now than they were 20 years ago?


CamMoon

Recommended Posts

I'm watching the 97 Playoffs where we play Dallas in the divisional round. I haven't watched an old game in a while, and I dont think I've ever watched any NFL game in its entirety that happened to be that old.

That being said, the players look clumpy, stiff, and a heck of a lot slower than todays players. Deion Sanders is the only guy that looked like he had the speed to play in todays NFL. Visually the game just looked slower, and it dragged along. What has changed in 20 years? Note, these guys look a lot bulkier than guys today.

Sent from my LGLS992 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, iamcline said:

Sure they have. Obviously not by much but if Genes haven't evolved then you wouldn't have so many players running 4.2 40s compared 20 years ago when a 4.4 was considered excellent.

That's training. Evolution doesn't solve for making people faster. It solves for reproduction. This is what I heard an evolutionary biologist sayou when debunking the paleo diet. I don't know if it applies here but it sounds good to me.

 

But whatever it does it doesn't make football players faster in 20 years. I've taken enough science in my life to know that. These guys parents aren't out running cheetahs to fug and make football players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well sure, but not soley. Evolution is ok. It happens (and fast).


I'm watching the 97 Playoffs where we play Dallas in the divisional round. I haven't watched an old game in a while, and I dont think I've ever watched any NFL game in its entirety that happened to be that old.

That being said, the players look clumpy, stiff, and a heck of a lot slower than todays players. Deion Sanders is the only guy that looked like he had the speed to play in todays NFL. Visually the game just looked slower, and it dragged along. What has changed in 20 years? Note, these guys look a lot bulkier than guys today.

Sent from my LGLS992 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app



All those old replays are in slow motion. Duh.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also camera quality has improved dramatically. Lets you see things better. 

Another thing is that many of the players going around today didn't really have positions in the mid to late nineties. Due to the rules the game really favored a bigger, slower player who could take a hit. Today the game has room for lots of little tiny shifty dudes that would have been murdered twenty years ago, and secondary players have adjusted to reflect this. 

but yeah the main reason is just training. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, electro's horse said:

Good god take a genetics course.

So your primary logic is camera quality?

So instead of posting your own opinion (which I see you have now done) you wanted to take a jab at me all because you don't agree with me. Ok, bud. Maybe I just read that wrong, let me get a new monitor so I can see it clearly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, iamcline said:

Sure they have. Obviously not by much but if Genes haven't evolved then you wouldn't have so many players running 4.2 40s compared 20 years ago when a 4.4 was considered excellent.

You joking? It's not like running a 4.4 is killing people off and keeping them from spreading their seed. It's clearly training. 40 time wasn't even a measured thing that long ago. Now it is a major factor in draftability and paycheck. Players train very specifically to be good at the combine exercises for those reasons and since they put their focus there, results improve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • If you are an athlete or former athlete (myself?  Cornhole 2021-present; Disc Golf 2013-got a mega blister and had to retire; speed walking--every black Friday at Walmart 2003-2009) you know what it is to lose confidence.  Self-inflicted or not (in my view, a lot of 2023 was coaching and a lot of 2024 was confidence), he has confidence now. How fragile is it?  I think the light is on, the game slowed down, and he is ready to do his thing.  He seems to be "mobile in the pocket" instead of "running scared."   Last year, there were times when AT was out, Johnson gone, and all he really had was XL and Coker--a raw rookie with upside and an UDFA rookie.  TE was rarely a viable option. It reminded me of Benjamin and Funchess.   Moore had to step up.  This season, Bryce has weapons.  I expect XL to improve.  I expect TMac to help tremendously, and I think Coker will be solid.  Renfrow?  Horn?  bonuses.    
    • His points are valid.  However, it seems a bit based on past performance and fails to take into consideration trends and conditions that might suggest growth in 2025.   For one, he breaks the team down by position and ranks them separately.  I guess that is a fair way to do it, but they are dependent upon each other. Last year, our DL sucked.  That impacts the rest of the defense.  With no internal pressure, the QBs simply step up to avoid the Edge rush.  I would have suggested that the internal DL is now featuring pass rushers and large people who can collapse the pocket.  Secondly, the LBs were not protected very well in 2024.  It is hard to see the holes and step up when a guard is in your earhole a second after the snap.  Finally, the defensive backs will be forced to make fewer tackles and they will be better in pass protection with a new and improved DL.    Canales made an interesting comment the other day, and I (from the outside looking in) feel the same way:  (paraphrasing) "I have never seen a better group of rookies."   I think the biggest concern is the learning curve.  How long before these rookies are ready?   I am bullish on this team.  I think they win 3 of their first 4 and get confident.  The get the fans behind them.  From there, they win 6 of the remaining 13.  If they stay injury free, they have an outside shot at the NFC south.     
    • Biiiiiig eyeroll on this.  First, Look at historical stats of the most recent historical great DBs.  I plucked 3, Revis, Sherman, and Norman (cuzz he was our guy).  Combined post age 30, there are TWO pro bowls between those 3 and wanna get this...ZERO seasons with 16 games started.  ALL missed time.  It is RARE that Corners survive that long in the NFL and its about time we started recognizing this fact.  Jaycee is a good bet because it hasnt been anything seriously devastating injury wise, and with his sample size he could and should be an incredible piece for the panthers through age 30. Jaire kinda flops on the other side, hes 28...so hes under 30, but he wants his payday before it comes up, hes also been injury prone lately.  Bulk of the contract will be on opposite side of 30.  Will both of these guys help us be better in 2026?  SURE!  No doubt, but the question is, will these guys help us past 2026...not sure. The investment isnt worth the risk, nor would the ROI be anywhere close to worth it.  Neither guy is moving us from a 6-8 win team to a 8-10 team, period. My point is we're in this state a 6-8 win team IMO and he projects us as  a 4-6 win team.  EVEN if we think Jaire or Ramsey will make us a 6-8 win team, it in NO WAY is worth the money or capital to move that much just to suck kinda less.  
×
×
  • Create New...