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

By CamMoon,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

CamMoon Newbie

CamMoon

Posted
Posted

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
csx Grand Master

csx

Posted
Posted
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
WilmyWood Rookie

WilmyWood

Posted
Posted
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
electro's horse Grand Master

electro's horse

Posted
Posted

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
iamcline Newbie

iamcline

Posted
Posted
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
imminent rogaine Experienced

imminent rogaine

Posted
Posted
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.

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Captain Morgan
      Round 1 - Panthers Select Tetairoa McMillan at Pick 8

      By Captain Morgan · Posted

      King Tet talking to Jaycee already. McMillan, shortly after he was drafted, was asked which NFL cornerback he wants to "Moss" most. His answer was an intriguing one. "Well, since we're going to be going against each other in practice, it's Jaycee Horn,"              Jaycee Horn   @jayceehorn_10 · Follow Seatbelts go on all sizes let’s get it lil bra!! @TMAC96795                 Keep Purring Podcast (Ben)   @KeepPurringBen Great article by @KassidyGHill TMac vs Horn "With that in mind, when asked in one booth which NFL corner he was most looking to 'Moss,' McMillan quickly answered, "Well, since we're going to be going against each other in practice, it's Jaycee Horn."   https://pantherswire.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/panthers/2025/04/29/panthers-tetairoa-mcmillan-jaycee-horn-nfl-draft/83347503007/?taid=68111d1ca9319b00015aff6d&utm_campaign=trueanthem&utm_medium=trueanthem&utm_source=twitter  
    • MHS831
      Smitty's pre-draft analysis of Nalo

      By MHS831 · Posted

      It is probably harder to justify taking plays off in a draft where you are drafted six picks after a freak of nature--How Hunter did it is beyond me--and in Colorado of all places!  WRs run sprint after sprint.  Arizona was playing from behind a lot and that means pass every play.  I get it.  
    • tukafan21
      Draft Grades

      By tukafan21 · Posted

      I'll give you the Etienne pick to make up for Brooks, but I think you're looking at the T-Mac/XL picks wrong. Taking T-Mac wasn't "covering" the mistake of the other picks, it was "fixing" the XL pick. We took XL there because we expected him to be our new #1, but it just seems clear after his rookie year that he's never going to be THAT type of guy, even if he improves significantly.  But he does seem like he has that high end #2 potential, and that's where the T-Mac pick makes it "fixing" the pick and not "covering" for a bad one. The T-Mac pick pushes all the other WR's down a peg in the pecking order, and in turn, that makes them all that much better as they'll now be going up against a DB one more peg down on their own pecking order. XL and Coker don't have have a 1/2 pairing potential, but they both could be at the very upper end of the 2's and 3's out there, it totally changes the equation for who they are for us.
×
×
  • Create New...