Quote:
Originally Posted by That Guy
and what about the senior bowl practices/one on one drills? the combine drill work? i've yet to hear a valid debunking of that, meaning there's at least some real value.
and things like 40 times are a semi useful stat - if one guy runs a 4.3, and another runs a 4.6, its pretty obvious which one is faster, even in pads. If someone runs a 4.35 and another guy runs a 4.31, obviously, the 40 times shouldn't be used as a basis for who to draft. either way, its just a piece to give you an idea of what potential maximums might be. game film is always the most important thing though - but sometimes that's hard to judge because of the competition (cooley played an awkward b-back position in div II, didn't he?).
oh yeah, we drafted carlos rodgers because of his cone times - oops.
|
But why do we care what the 40 times are, or how they perform in drills, when we can simply watch them play football on game tape?? If they're fast, it will show. If they're quick and agile, it will show. If they can jump, it will show.
It's not that 40 times aren't mildly useful, it's that they pale in comparison to the
real question: can these guys play football?
You don't answer that in drills, you don't answer that in workouts, you don't answer it at the combine. You answer it by playing football and showing you're good at it. The media and the internet overhype the combine and other workouts because libraries of game tape aren't readily available to their readers.
Putting stock in combine results is nothing short of retarded. Some guys played football well, and had good combine results. But you don't draft them because of the combine results. You draft them because they play football well. This stuff means jack squat.