Cory's Corner: Pump The Brakes On Athleticism

I like that general manager Brian Gutekunst has his sights set on athletic players. 

But, let’s pump the brakes. There’s a difference between a player that is a Combine All-Star and one that is an actual football player.

Case in point is Josh Jones. Remember his first training camp two years ago? Everyone was in awe by how well he played in shorts. He was incredibly athletic and was flying all over the field.

However, there was one problem: he was a completely different player once the pads came on. This happens every training camp. People get enamored with athletic traits of draft picks and free agents and expect those traits to carry over to the football field.

You may have heard or seen the term Relative Athletic Score associated with players from this past draft. The RAS takes a player’s Combine results and boils it down to one discernible number. The reason that I don’t like to put all of my trust into the RAS is because the No. 1 RAS score from the 2019 NFL Draft was punter Mitch Wishnnowsky. Obviously, his score isn’t going to matter much because how often is his speed and agility going to help him boom 50-yard punts? 

Rashan Gary, the Packers’ No. 12 pick, was tied for the No. 3 RAS (9.95) and has been compared to Mario Williams (10.0 in 2006), Kyle Vanden Bosch (10.0 in 2001) and Shawne Merriman (9.9 in 2005). All three of those players have posted double-digit sack totals in the NFL en route to substantial careers. 

Gary’s speed and athleticism are off the charts. There’s a reason why he was the No. 1 college prospect in high school. However, athletic thresholds aside, none of that stuff matters anymore. 

I give Gutekunst credit for wanting to get quicker. The NFL has morphed from a big boys’ league to a speedsters league. If you don’t believe me, just look at the first round. There are 17 players with an RAS over 9.0. The general rule is that 0-5 is average for the position and size, over 8 is very good and over 9 is elite. The only player the Packers drafted that had a sub-8.0 RAS was tight end Jace Sternberger, with a 5.25.

All of these metrics are nice, but it’s just window dressing. Because what difference does this athletic ability mean if it can’t be utilized on the football field? And conversely, what happens if Sternberger’s mitts catch everything that Aaron Rodgers throws his way? When I watched his college tape, he actually reminded me of Jason Witten — not very quick but his soft hands seem to catch everything. 

The RAS scores may sound nice and shiny, but I need to see these guys when the pads are on. NFL games aren’t decided in compression shorts. That’s why I would like to see the NFL have players run the 40-yard dash with pads on. I think that would give a much better indication of who the player could actually be. 

Until the pads come on, these players are a huge question mark.

 

 

-------------------

Cory Jennerjohn is a graduate from UW-Oshkosh and has been in sports media for over 15 years. He was a co-host on "Clubhouse Live" and has also done various radio and TV work as well. He has written for newspapers, magazines and websites. He currently is a columnist for CHTV and also does various podcasts. He recently earned his Masters degree from the University of Iowa. He can be found on Twitter: @Coryjennerjohn

NFL Categories: 
2 points

Comments (120)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
Alberta Packer's picture

April 30, 2019 at 10:22 am

Still prefer this approach vs. the previous "he's just a football player" - 4.60 40 yd. dash dbs' and out-of-position players selection criteria.

+ REPLY
13 points
15
2
Leatherhead's picture

April 30, 2019 at 11:18 am

Isn't that the approach that put us in 4 championship games in 10 years and the playoffs 8 years in a row??

I'm with Cory on this. I have seen SO many guy picked on the basis of their athletic potential who never amounted to squat. Quentin Rollins is the first one who comes to mind. One year of football experience, but lots of athletic ability. But others, too.

Was Micah Hyde one of those 4.6 40 DBs? I think maybe he was. Damn good football player. It takes 0.2 seconds to blink. That's the difference, over 40 yards, between a 4.45 guy and a 4.65 guy.

Quick minds are always quicker than quick feet.

+ REPLY
2 points
9
7
Demon's picture

April 30, 2019 at 01:01 pm

Jeez old school give it up!! The 8 straight trips to the playoffs ( half of them as a wildcard? and 3 losses in the NFC title game does not make any kind of dynasty.

Most of us here have come to the realization that TT did not do enough to put the best team possible on the field. Yet you and very few other look at him as godlike.
There were many opportunities to improve the Pckers roster but Ted stubbornly refused. When you combined his horseshit drafting with his refusal to utilize trades and FA you get the roster Gute inherited. One that is full of holes and mostly devoid of talent.

At least the " in Td we trust" crowd is smart enough to keep their heads buried in the sand. You however come on here and tell us what a great job he did. For the last 3 plus years Ted just plain sucked and he got what he deserved. I only wish it would have been sooner!

Isnt there a blog somewhere that you and Dash and others can join to profess your love of the sizzler?

+ REPLY
-1 points
10
11
Leatherhead's picture

April 30, 2019 at 01:18 pm

Demon....I just don't understand you, or your need to insult people who disagree with you.

I've been a fan of the Packers for over 50 years.....over half of our 100 years. And I'm telling you, flat out, that the Thompson/McCarthy Era is one of the best stretches of the last 50 years, probably second only to the Lombardi Era.

Fact. This "last three years" stuff is just nonsense to anybody who wants to take a look. Thompson's last three years as GM would have been 2015, 2016, and 2017. Two playoff appearances, one Championship game appearance.

He drafted 24 players that are still in the league. That's 8 guys/year in a seven round draft.

You speak from ignorance, IMO. I doubt seriously if you've ever had to put a team together, or coach it. I think most of what you know is stuff that you've heard other people say. And I think your childish insults are not welcome and I wish you'd either learn to talk about football or go away.

+ REPLY
8 points
15
7
Demon's picture

April 30, 2019 at 02:46 pm

You claim ted to be this great talent evaluator, yet he coulnt even evaluate the talent on his own team. You mentioned Micah Hyde, where is he playing right now? Whom do we have to thank for that? How about his team mate Heyward? Where is he playing?

Ted is gone and most of us are thankful he is.
Go Gute.

+ REPLY
4 points
9
5
Leatherhead's picture

April 30, 2019 at 06:12 pm

This is just wrong in so many ways that I don't know where to start, so I'll start at the end and work backward.

1) Ted is gone, and most of us are thankful he is. First off, he's not gone. He's Gutekunst's longtime mentor and has an official position in the senior leadership of college scouting. So that's just wrong. As for the "most of us are thankful", that's your opinion, in the first place, and in the second place, what "most" people think is beside the point. That's salesman talk. It's called "bandwagoning", and it's kind of a weak attempt at that.

2) Where is Micah Hyde, and how did he get their? Well, Thompson drafted him out of college, and he played for us for four seasons. He was 63 out of 64 possible regular season starts, which gives him a real high grade in the most important ability......availability. I like that, and I liked him because of it. But also because he was quick minded, and he could tackle. He got at least 45 tackles each year with us. In four years, he had 8 interceptions and some fumble recoveries and some tackles for loss.

He wasn't a great size/speed guy or he'd have been taken early in the draft, but he was a real good player, I thought.

So....after the 4th year, he entered FA. I remember discussions on several fan boards where the idea that Micah Hyde might take $7 million/year was derided by Packer fans ("Good riddance", "not worth it", "JAG" etc.)

So we lost him in FA to Buffalo, and only a few of us cared. The rest thought that he was a kind of unathletic guy on a bad pass defense (30th in yards/attempt and 29th in TDs) who would be OK at $3/$4 million maybe but not $7.

AND the plan was for Randall, Rollins, Burnett, Dix, to comprise the core of the secondary, and there was no reason to spend that much money on a guy like Hyde when you could draft a guy.

So Hyde left in Free Agency for more money. And we drafted Kenny King with our first pick in the 2017 draft. And King hasn't been available and Hyde has. But that could change.

So.....that's the answer to your question about where Hyde was playing and how he got there.

+ REPLY
2 points
4
2
IceBowl's picture

April 30, 2019 at 02:56 pm

Old school,

Looks like the same old troll, with a new ID (s). He/she is/are just mad they don't know Pack (or football) history. Or just football in general.

It would be silly for you to leave because of some kid in their mama's basement. or in jail, or tripping the light fantastic.

+ REPLY
-1 points
4
5
porupack's picture

April 30, 2019 at 05:12 pm

OS;
What was the insult? Demon made some valid points, and I didn't see the insult. I think you're not adequately answering his point that playoff and 1 SB isn't adequate measure off talent acquisition. Demon is saying that we had SOME exceptional talent, but across the board, we were subpar to get it done over a span. That even includes the argument that we went to the SB with a lot of subprime players in 2010. A team just needs a critical mass of talent, and luck and other things to go your way (element of surprise which is a huge factor for GB2010 as well as the Kurt Warner Rams among many other examples).

Try to refute Demon without just the playoff appearances, # of years in playoffs, and percentages because that doesn't adequately prove we had the talent provided by TT.

+ REPLY
1 points
5
4
Leatherhead's picture

April 30, 2019 at 06:17 pm

If the talent to do all that winning in the regular season, and the playoffs, over that period of time wasn't provided by Thompson.....then how did it get there?

Osmosis? Magic? Providence? How? I'd really like to know the answer to that one, actually.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
porupack's picture

May 01, 2019 at 01:07 pm

OS,
Lots of things kept GB in that streak of playoff visits;
1) ARodgers, Bahk, Bulaga, and 2-3 other above average players kept this team competitive. But too many below average talent, and it showed in critical situations in big games.
2) weak division
3) luck in some big games, w some non-calls went our way.

Lots of things worked against GB (besides some poor drafting results);
1) key injuries, and career ending injuries at key positions in defense, and offense
2) stagnant coach strategies, schemes
3) misalignment between coach and GM, and not always getting the right players (may be talented, but poor fit, or trying to retrofit).
4) hindsight wisdom; but releasing some talent too soon e.g., Heyward, JC Trettor. Those two departures left some nagging holes.

So...for an honest debate, we have to recognize all of these, pro and against a list of declining success indicators listed below;
1) # of SB wins
2) post season wins
3) post season appearances
4) win record
5) team stats
6) team cohesion and job happiness
7) showing up for games

So, you lock in on 1 indicator (playoff appearannces) and lock in on 1 factor for that; drafted sufficient talent, then you are going to get your share of critique for ignoring the rest.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
IceBowl's picture

April 30, 2019 at 06:25 pm

porupack,

What were Demon's valid points??

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
porupack's picture

May 01, 2019 at 01:09 pm

Demon points out that TT didn't do enough to put, and keep sufficient talent across the team, and that's just opinion, and fine. But it is in response to OS who says it was there, and his proof is simply that we had a run of post season visits.
There is a lot wrong with that as proof, and Demon raises that for discussion.
There are multiple factors, and one can't make conclusions unless there is multiple years of data. Could be coaching, schemes, training/preparation, drafting, coordination b/w coaches and GM, injury unluck, and strength of division. So many factors.
IMO, OS doesn't address the critique that there wasn't enough talent. Just keeps claiming that we had a streak of playoff appearances to prove we had enough talent. That inadequately addresses what a lot of folks say, its because of Rodgers and about 2-3 other elite players that carried the team, along with some ok players on Oline, but a lot of average or below average talent that really showed up at key moments, in big games.
So yes, some elite talent, but not sufficiently restocked and retained from 2011 - onward.

+ REPLY
-1 points
0
1
IceBowl's picture

May 01, 2019 at 03:02 pm

porupack'

Is it surprising you are an expert on Demon and his opinion?

This is a really tired mantra. TT was not a single entity. He was in charge of a group of professionals that are paid very well to evaluate talent. I don't think TT was throwing darts at a list of college players to decide his picks. How dumb.

We had talent, and as you say, many other factors (like every other team in the NFL has), to give the Pack all those winning seasons. But that cannot be done without talent. Where did that talent come from?? Did the Pack make mistakes? Yes!!! Dahhh. Did the Patriots??? Yes!!! Did the Dolphins?? Do all teams??? Dahhhh. But the Pack was not the Dolphins (or most other teams) They were winning. Where did we get the talent to do that? Not darts!!!

Then you go on to say we were winning because of our talent. .... "because of Rodgers and about 2-3 other elite players that carried the team....." No team can afford "elite" players across the board. All teams have to use, as you say "average" players. Just stop trying to be so ridiculous.

I think OS went out of his way to entertain Demon's old, washed up opinion. Way more effort and info than was warranted, IMO.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
porupack's picture

May 01, 2019 at 09:10 pm

not an expert. Its just how I read his Demon's point.

His point wasn't blaming only TT. He just refuted the claim that postseason appearances doesn't equate to a talented roster.

And to my point, yes, we had some elite talent. But not enough to overcome other factors I mentioned above.

Oh, and I didn't try to be ridiculous. Just discussing OS's assertion about playoff appearances equates with a talented roster. And the original discussion was about Gute drafting athletic players needs a bit of caution. OS made the points about previous rosters being better under TT. So, this is fair game for a counter argument.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
IceBowl's picture

May 01, 2019 at 10:08 pm

pourupack,

Do you think we are dopes? I read and follow threads. Sure, not all do, but many do, including me. I do not like nonsense trying to suggest baseless points. (like some/some one said) Just stupid and baseless. That some one could be sitting in the insanyasylum.

Why are you telling us his position?? Don't you think your kid can speak for himself??

Tell me how we get to postseasons (all them) without talent. Does taking that position feel comfortable to you?

You do understand that making such a run in the NFL is darn near impossible. And I offer up 31 other teams that would kill for that win record, and the talent that it took to accomplish it.

I don't care if yous like him or not, but TT provided the pack the talent to make those runs, year after year.

OS was exactly right.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Samson's picture

April 30, 2019 at 01:50 pm

Demon
Some refuse to live in today's world. .... Yesterday will always be better. ... It's sad & sometimes comes with advanced years. --- (BTW - I'm pushing 70 years of age.... I like 2019)

+ REPLY
-1 points
3
4
PeteK's picture

April 30, 2019 at 05:33 pm

No, some commenters are living in the past by constantly demeaning Thompson. He had nothing to do with this draft so why bring up his name. Research, Wolf versus Thompson and it will show that Thompson compared favorably to Ron Wolf. On the other hand, you were probably the same people that complained at the end of the Wolf/Holmgren era instead of showing some respect for the great job they did. If Gute/Lafleur come close to the success of the TT/MM era we will be incredibly fortunate.

+ REPLY
1 points
3
2
Leatherhead's picture

April 30, 2019 at 06:29 pm

The world I live in has Brian Gutekunst as the GM of the Packers. He went 6-9-1 last year, which was a half-game worse than the previous year when Rodgers missed half the season. The year before that we had been in the NFC Championship game.

So, we're worse than we were 2 years ago, and not really any better than we were last year.

Gutekunst, in his first 16 months, has made a buttload of personnel changes. The DC, the HC, many of the assistant coaches, numerous players....lots of change. And yes, when you're under .500 and out of the playoffs you should make changes. No issue with any of that.

But understand that changes come with a downside too. FAs sometimes don't work out. Draft picks sometimes don't work out. And sometimes unintended consequences occur.

We could well go 12-4 and win the division and Gutekunst is a genius. Amen, I'd love it. I think it's equally possible that we could finish out of the playoffs for the second straight year under Gutekunst.

That's the world I"m living in.

+ REPLY
5 points
5
0
porupack's picture

May 01, 2019 at 01:20 pm

OS,
Nice that you point that change brings risk to us. Its clear. Certainly, we were seeing declines in multiple areas. Certainly last year record was further decline and a result certainly, that was mostly due to a lot of sub-par performance from veterans and injuries. Certainly, most rookies can't be expected to turnaround the team in year one. Certainly, most rookies under Gute have yet to emerge and be worthy of judging. Certainly, you can't draw any conclusions on Gute based on team record. Certainly some data on individual performance is beginning to roll in. But there is no way to judge Gute until this year, but in fairness, it really takes 3 years.
So your position that; 1) talent acquisition was all fine before, and 2) Gute is already failing based on 1 season of team record; is unreasonable.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
John30856's picture

May 01, 2019 at 06:58 am

wow Demon, Old School is correct it has been a hell of a run. Not quite there but

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Alberta Packer's picture

April 30, 2019 at 02:17 pm

And players with quick feet and quick minds are always greater than players with just quick minds.

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
Rak47's picture

May 01, 2019 at 01:02 am

Ikr, As sharp as Aaron Rodger's mind is, imagine him with Bulaga's speed and Corey Linsley's arm strength and accuracy. :-]

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
Rak47's picture

May 01, 2019 at 01:00 am

You and Cory both are missing the point entirely. What makes either of you think that Gute is drafting combine stars who can't play? It really is quite simple, he is drafting "quality football players in college" who fit an athletic profile as opposed to quality football player in college who lack the necessary skill traits to excel in the NFL. The entire perspective that you and Cory have as if there is something wrong with drafting athletically gifted players, is argumentative and short sighted at best.

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
IceBowl's picture

April 30, 2019 at 10:21 pm

Rak47,

Yes absolutely. And he better be. He has 31 others to beat out. Or he is gone.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
WestCoastPackerBacker's picture

May 01, 2019 at 02:31 pm

Micah Hyde was a darn good football player. But he was also getting beat over the middle a lot! And he kept dropping picks that fell right into his hands. Quinten Rollins sure looked the part as a rookie. But then he had a series of injuries and never lived up to the potential.

Making the playoffs is great, but it was clear in the NFC Title game against the Falcons that GB was old and slow compared to them. The picks this year aren't just workout wonders. They had plenty of tape to watch on Savage's instincts and playmaking. Same with Gary. They had plenty of tape to see him eat double teams and make impact plays.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
Hawg Hanner's picture

April 30, 2019 at 12:10 pm

Agree...why "pump the brakes" on athleticism and speed which are prerequisites for any player. The observation is stupid to some extent for you cannot very well predict performance in the pros off tape. If you could there would not be draft misses. At least when you're fast you can recover. Cory can go back to the Thompson era to see how well pluggers work out

+ REPLY
2 points
6
4
jannes bjornson's picture

April 30, 2019 at 12:39 pm

Case in point Sam Shields. Not great on his technique but his 4.3 speed helped prevent the big strike.

+ REPLY
4 points
5
1
Leatherhead's picture

April 30, 2019 at 12:49 pm

As a rookie, Shields was the nickel back and helped us to the Super Bowl.

The next year, he was a starting CB in a secondary that gave up an NFL record amount of passing yards. His best year was 2014, where his approximate value, according to pro-football-reference, was 7. (that same year, Richard Sherman's approximate value was 16.)

Shields was a very fast athlete and mostly an average, not great, football player.

+ REPLY
-2 points
6
8
Coldworld's picture

April 30, 2019 at 01:33 pm

A little harsh. He was a good corner but over reliant on raw speed, unsurprisingly since he was a late convert from WR. He was starting caliber and a great pick up. He was not bound for Canton.

+ REPLY
7 points
8
1
Leatherhead's picture

April 30, 2019 at 12:44 pm

Those "pluggers" were in the playoffs 8 straight years.

I'm a little confused. These guys who are elected to the HOF....are they elected because they were great athletes or great football players? Or do you have to be a great athlete to be a great football player? And where does that leave Tom Brady?

+ REPLY
4 points
5
1
Samson's picture

April 30, 2019 at 01:28 pm

"I'm a little confused."
Smartest thing you've posted..... maybe ever. ---- LOL.

Edit: OldSchool -- note LOL ... don't take my comment personally.

+ REPLY
-1 points
3
4
Leatherhead's picture

April 30, 2019 at 01:21 pm

And this would be Samson with yet another comment that has nothing at all to do with football and is just a gratuitous personal insult.

This is what we want here? Because if it is, I'll be happy to leave and go somewhere else to talk football. Just let me know, Jersey Al.

+ REPLY
-3 points
2
5
Samson's picture

April 30, 2019 at 01:29 pm

You're always looking for a conflict. -- Please, enough with your constant historical references about the good ol' days. --- Haven't you heard?..... "These are the good 'ol days".

See edit above ... submitted for your approval.

+ REPLY
1 points
4
3
Leatherhead's picture

April 30, 2019 at 01:35 pm

So if I say "You're a dumbass....don't take it personally", that's OK?

I don't think so. And I'm not looking for conflict, but I AM interested in fairness. The Thompson/McCarthy Era is one of the best in Packer history. Portraying it as anything else is a lie.

They weren't perfect. Nobody is. But they did a damn good job. We'll see if Gutekunst does as well.

+ REPLY
0 points
3
3
Tarynfor12's picture

April 30, 2019 at 02:09 pm

I can certainly appreciate your love of history but the age of success being a playoff team has passed. It's a win now league and if you don't win the goal you have not succeeded in this NFL. Sure there are still some,like yourself, who believe being also ran's and not even a bridesmaid is successful. The era of drafting players for 2-4 develop and anticipated one team careers is gone. Today, you need players that can play year one and get what you can for 3-4 years and move on but getting the SB is the only victory and all else is nothing but a tissue to cry in.

+ REPLY
2 points
5
3
IceBowl's picture

April 30, 2019 at 02:37 pm

Tarynfor12,

You say ... " It's a win now league and if you don't win the goal you have not succeeded in this NFL."

You say 31 teams have not succeeded. I say bull-ony! The draft and players are a big part of a team, no question. But there are many more factors that make that "one" team. There are many steps to success.

If you can pick all the players that can play year one, you are missing out on a high paying career.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Tarynfor12's picture

April 30, 2019 at 02:58 pm

It isn't just about the players, it's also about HC's and GM's being allowed to do over and over what has failed.
If the NFL isn't a win now league with the SB as it's definition of success, why is every new young HC being as the new heralded win now new culture guy who at their press conferences speak about " Win Now " and not 3-8 years from now. Everyone here spoke in the same terms when LaFleur was hired....win now before Rodgers is done and done may come sooner if what doesn't happen...Win a SB...and not just make the playoffs....we've been doing that much easily, it caused us to get knocked out two years in a row because we weren't in WIN NOW mode but...'We're a highly successful football team ' as like our former HC.

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
Adorabelle's picture

April 30, 2019 at 04:16 pm

I disagree why the team became not successful the last few years. You appear to be saying that if they don't do what you think they should then they aren't trying to win. You can questions decisions and outcomes but I don't think you can question motivation like that. The packers of 2014 didn't clean house after the awful loss because they thought the core on hand was their best chance for success in 2015. No one thought well that was good enough we aren't going to try and win this year.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Tarynfor12's picture

April 30, 2019 at 05:35 pm

I can accept what happens in any season if the team isn't playing or being used to simply win a weak Division and then have the FO boast about making the playoffs and then going home the next week.
The decisions and lack of were a major flaw for GB. Player retention and releasing was mind boggling.
So many hate bringing up or talking comparison with the Patriots and they are wrong to ignore them. What does BB do every season...moves and changes players to win now and does so quite effectively. Players like Matthews and Perry, two of our most disappointing high paid resigns would never have remained in NE having played and not played like they did. As he has shown when players don't do their jobs and even when some do, if there's a better fit to do the job he moves on it. GB sits and waits while other teams pass them and the last two seasons have certainly proved as much.
This draft was to be a win now draft and as of today, we are better only by default of new blood but can that new blood be the infusion needed that is part of the New Culture and the LaFleur Win Now mantra...We will see.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
Adorabelle's picture

April 30, 2019 at 06:50 pm

Maybe it is just semantics and actually we agree. But it is not that they were doing nothing, they were trying, but it was that the decisions they made were poor. Drafts went poor the wrong players were let go and the like. I am not willing to say someone was not trying but I will say they did badly. Of course everyone wants to do it as well as New England but there's a reason why one group is the best ever and the rest are only aspiring to be.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
dobber's picture

April 30, 2019 at 01:05 pm

If it were any one thing, the HOF would be much larger than it currently is.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Samson's picture

April 30, 2019 at 01:11 pm

Hawg
Hard to argue your point. --- The test to determine speed has always been used to grade potential NFL players going back to the beginning. Even if it was a one on one race in the parking lot. -- I don't see why quantifying speed should be an issue. --- RAS is just more sophisticated than 20 or 30 years ago. --- Use it if it helps. --- It's nice to have a "modern GM" with Gute.

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
Coldworld's picture

April 30, 2019 at 01:40 pm

I like RAS, but as you say it’s just one factor. Drafting track athletes who could not catch, run routes etc has been tried, tested and failed. That said if the optimal pick is fast, agile and demonstrates field awareness then it is dumb not to evaluate on the basis of all three.

If you are taking a flyer in a late round or UDFA, then speed/athleticism (RAS) is king for most positions because it’s a prerequisite that can’t be taught whereas the rest can’t be and speed without aplomb can still a special teamer make.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
jannes bjornson's picture

April 30, 2019 at 07:26 pm

RAS , Jazz whatever. This is the same criteria used since the days of Unisys computers. Measurables. Timed speeds. hand size, frame and length. None of this is new. The draft still comes down to homework and hunches. The rest is up to the Player to pick it up and stay healthy.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Hawg Hanner's picture

April 30, 2019 at 02:50 pm

So far I like what has been done by the GM, though it's hard not to look good after the years of failure. One player in particular stands out as mediocre-Jake Ryan. Sure he made tackles, but only after gains. Nick Perry was another pedestrian talent. Datone Jones, Justin Harrell, Jerel Worthy, Carl Bradford, Quentin Rollins...the list goes on. Not one of these guys was an elite athlete. I'll take the athletes, thanks

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
PeteK's picture

April 30, 2019 at 05:53 pm

Great just throw gas on the fire. Didn't I see you under a bridge.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
WestCoastPackerBacker's picture

May 01, 2019 at 02:34 pm

Beg to differ on Perry. He was one of the most impactful defenders per snap when he was healthy. He was a run stuffer and a force in the pass rush. Plenty of hurries and TFLs. His issue was his health and how it impacted his availability and his play on the field. When healthy, he was certainly worth a low first round pick, which is what he was.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
John30856's picture

May 01, 2019 at 06:59 am

Agreed

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jeepingmakooi's picture

April 30, 2019 at 10:30 am

I'm sure they compare the ras score to production vs others in the same position... A high Ras and good production and traits tends to lean to a player who can get better and has yet to hit his peak abilities. Always more to the story Cory

+ REPLY
8 points
8
0
Samson's picture

April 30, 2019 at 10:36 am

You're right ... RAS is used to supplement many other bits of information obtained through many sources. --- Gute may very well lean on RAS more than many GMs but (IMO), he & his staff are looking at all aspects of a potential draftee --- not just a single representative number.

+ REPLY
5 points
6
1
Coldworld's picture

April 30, 2019 at 10:50 am

This is why I like Savage: good athleticism and high football IQ. I really think that, outside of the 7th or UDFA, both IQ and character need to be present as well as a high RAS. Each is a big part of success.

While it is true that RAS alone is a poor indicator, great attitude and awareness will only get one so far without the physical tools. As in all things it’s a balance.

Jones is one of a line of athletes TT selected that so far haven’t demonstrated awareness or perhaps got lost in the notoriously complex playbooks and multiple position demands of the MM era. There is hope that new coaches can better manage the learning demands, but some players don’t have the ability to read the field while others take time for things to click.

So far, it’s a little early to judge whether Gute is balancing RAS with football smarts. I certainly hope so. Savage does appear to have both.

+ REPLY
5 points
5
0
jeepingmakooi's picture

April 30, 2019 at 11:43 am

Savage and Alexander seem to both show what your looking for

+ REPLY
6 points
6
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

April 30, 2019 at 01:12 pm

"While it is true that RAS alone is a poor indicator"

How is it a poor indicator? It's just 1 metric around the deterministic measurements. It can't be used alone to predict NFL success, but neither can anything else. Success is multifactor and includes probabilistic things like intelligence, coaching, schematic fit, work ethic, luck and others that are less feasible or infeasible to measure.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Coldworld's picture

April 30, 2019 at 01:45 pm

It’s a poor indicator in isolation because it addresses only one aspect of several necessary to succeed. Great football IQ is similarly a poor guide in isolation because it can exist without the physical gifts to make it worth anything at a higher level of competition. In simplistic terms: combine a high RAS quotient with really good anticipation skills and then you have a player to take note of.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

April 30, 2019 at 03:22 pm

Every individual dimension is a poor indicator in isolation.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
Samson's picture

April 30, 2019 at 01:14 pm

Butler....to....Collins....to....Savage. -- Plausible lineage.

+ REPLY
4 points
5
1
Since'61's picture

April 30, 2019 at 10:37 am

The draft is a crap shoot. All the tests and numbers cannot predict how well a college athlete will adjust to the speed of actual NFL play.

Coaching is a critical factor and how a player is utilized is also crucial to a player’s success in the NFL.

There will be unexpected successes and unexpected failures due to a myriad of reasons. As I posted on another thread, Phase 1 is player selection, the GMs role. Phase 2 is preparation, the coaches role. Phase 3 is execution, the players job. Each is equally important to a players and a team’s success. Some will take time, some won’t make it, some will excel.

The RAS, the combine, pro- day and college performance are just leading indicators without any guarantee of future performance. Thanks, Since ‘61

+ REPLY
13 points
13
0
Coldworld's picture

April 30, 2019 at 10:54 am

I think you can tell a lot about football smarts from college tape. I know that there are other factors in adjusting to the bigger faster and more complex NFL, but I don’t think that prevents identifying the ability to read and anticipate.

+ REPLY
6 points
6
0
Since'61's picture

April 30, 2019 at 11:14 am

Agree, its about how well a college player can leverage his ability to read and anticipate at the NFL. Some will transition quickly, some will take longer, for others it won’t happen. College tape does not tell us which players will make the transition to the NFL and which won’t. If that were true the draft would be easy, but as we all know it’s not a very exact science. There are too many variables which affect each player differently.

Cory is saying that athleticism is one factor but not the only factor. Reading and anticipating is another factor. There are many more variables beyond those. We’ll see more when the pads come on and then more when the games begin. It’s a process that requires time.
Thanks, Since ‘61

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
cheesycowboy's picture

April 30, 2019 at 12:29 pm

The three legs of a milk stool as I learned it. One bad leg and the stool has to have support to function only partially. Thanks

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
zerotolerance's picture

April 30, 2019 at 07:35 pm

Words of wisdom. I real these comments just to get your take. Many thanks.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Since'61's picture

April 30, 2019 at 09:01 pm

Appreciate your kind words. Thanks, Since '61

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

May 01, 2019 at 05:26 am

Excellent Since '61, especially bringing up coaching. Initially I was concerned about some of the offensive coaches brought in by MLF, mostly because I hadn't ever heard of most of them or they were short on experience. But the NFL is full of excellent coaches who started out exactly like some of the coaches on MLF staff.

Personally I like the idea Gutekunst has a "Type" and that is an athletic player. To many times we saw the previous GM draft guys who were anything but athletic.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Swisch's picture

April 30, 2019 at 10:53 am

Excellent perspective! There's a big difference between a track star and a football player.
What struck me about our draft picks is that along with their athleticism, these guys seem to have demonstrated some good results on the football field.
In the case of Gary -- where the results seemed less than spectacular for a pick at #12 overall -- it seems someone who was apparently getting double-teamed on a consistent basis is a force to be reckoned with.
Also, I'm wondering if Gary was out of position, and at too heavy a weight, with his hand in the dirt.
Perhaps a somewhat sleeker Gary, menacing blockers from an array of standing positions at inside and outside linebacker, will feel liberated and enlivened to maul ball carriers all over the field.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Coldworld's picture

April 30, 2019 at 11:06 am

From what I’ve seen, Gary was double or triple teamed frequently and often played away from. In addition, his prowess against the run is impressive and his coach admitted that the scheme was in part centered not on him rushing but shutting down the run in the middle and outside.

That said, like many freak athletes who are physically on a higher plane than their peers, I do get the sense that he just relies on natural speed and power advantage. I see effort, power and speed galore, but I think he needs to accept the need to focus on refining his technique and expanding his tools. At the moment it’s just beast mode in passing situations. I will say this though, the number of times he causes a sack by others stuck out noticeably even so.

He will be a force against the run early. If he adds to his rushing skill set, the sky is the limit, but I am excited to see him fly around on running plays alone. No man his size should move that fast and be able to run sideline to sideline like he does.

+ REPLY
6 points
6
0
Swisch's picture

April 30, 2019 at 12:19 pm

Let's hope that Gary, and our other draft picks, enjoy learning the techniques that will give them more advantages over opponents, and increase their capacity for monstrous play on the field.
It's gotta be fun when something you've worked hard to master on the practice field translates into a crashing sack or a crushing block during a game.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
jannes bjornson's picture

April 30, 2019 at 12:48 pm

It doesn't hurt any defensive player if they learn some martial arts or work the bag at a gym. Joey Browner's hand usage was superb after years of study in Master Mark's (RIP) Dojo. Woodson enhanced his upper body and hand play with his boxing lessons.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
John30856's picture

May 01, 2019 at 07:02 am

and lets face it at this point no one in here knows how these choices will turn out or has any influence on how this or future drafts turn out.

Chill, turn down your attempts at in-depth analysis and enjoy the games :)

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Guam's picture

April 30, 2019 at 10:57 am

I like RAS scores as one component of an evaluation, but it should not be the only component. Just as large a component is the player's drive and heart.

Gary has an off the charts RAS score for a man of his size. His college production can be explained by the frequent double teams as well as perhaps the Michigan defensive scheme which reportedly did not play to his strengths. All of that said I can not get out of my head the fact that the doctors cleared him to play and he declined to play in Michigan's biggest rivalry game versus Ohio State. How do you not play in that game with a berth in the Big Ten championship game at stake? There may well have been issues I am unaware of, but it seems likely by now we would have heard a better explanation than he just didn't want to play. Is Gary's heart really in the game?

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
Coldworld's picture

April 30, 2019 at 11:22 am

He played in the defeat in November 2018, notching up 5 tackles, 3 solo and one for a loss, so not sure which Ohio game you are referring to.

He did decline to take part in the Peach Bowl against Florida. In recent years that has become an increasingly common practice for players heading into the draft. It’s not hard to see why. Football is big money and injuries cost big time. I understand from a fan perspective, but until colleges pay their athletes as professionals, athletes have the right to put their careers first.

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
Guam's picture

April 30, 2019 at 11:27 am

I may have read some bad information, but I was referring to the game this year. I thought he had skipped that game. I knew he also passed on the Peach Bowl and while I don't love that, I understand it. My bad if I was repeating faulty information. I feel much better about Gary if that is the case.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
jannes bjornson's picture

April 30, 2019 at 12:50 pm

He also wanted to R and R his shoulder and prep for the Combine. Limit Risk and hope for the reward.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Tarynfor12's picture

April 30, 2019 at 11:51 am

The Combine should be done in full uniform since they are suppose to be getting evaluated by NFL staff in search of what the NFL deems necessary and not what was restricted in college and no games are played in underwear.
These players train for the underwear Combine when they should be training for what and how they will actually be performing in a uniform that most certainly effects everything done at the Combine.

+ REPLY
8 points
8
0
IceBowl's picture

April 30, 2019 at 02:47 pm

Tarynfor12,

I disagree. Wearing pads (or not) for the 40, or high jump, or broad hump, etc. doesn't equate to playing football. It's just a measurement. (Not many OL run 40 yds in a football game)

And you are dead wrong about no games played in underwear. The "Lingerie League" is huge. :-)

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
Tarynfor12's picture

April 30, 2019 at 03:07 pm

The Lingerie League...is that the one for adolescent boys and men of child level self confidence with such bland lives,must watch this football version of pole dancing porn as justification for their relief via self touching only.
It was childish to bring that into an adult conversation.

+ REPLY
-3 points
1
4
IceBowl's picture

April 30, 2019 at 03:40 pm

Tarynfor12,

Lady, you were the one to bring underwear (childish) into this adult (?) conversation. Even further, you said it didn't happen. Kinda ... wrong.

But jeeze, it sounds like you had a good experiences watching. WOW!

Those tough (emancipated) lady athletes applied for, and earned a paycheck. They do not warrant belittling. (feeding their kids)

+ REPLY
3 points
4
1
Tarynfor12's picture

April 30, 2019 at 04:22 pm

The term underwear in my respect is not the same as your lingerie thinking.

No I never watched pass the point of seeing what is was all about. As much as I understand the thinking of doing what one needs to to feed their children, this from that respective had and has nothing to do with the topic.

If that was the topic, let's not forget that most, if not all, are profession career woman and did this to get more noticed in each one's field. There may be a few that are as you say doing to feed their children but most used it for their own exploitation to get ahead, much as like posing in Playboy etc years ago, which i have no issue with either.

+ REPLY
-1 points
1
2
IceBowl's picture

April 30, 2019 at 06:29 pm

Tarynfor12 ,

You say ...... "The term underwear in my respect is not the same as your lingerie thinking."

But they are one in the same. Not my definition.

You say ...... "If that was the topic, let's not forget that most, if not all, are profession career woman and did this to get more noticed in each one's field."

Sorry, but you have no insite as to why any of these ladies played. Don't try to patronize us with such nonsense.

I could go on with more of your baseless statements ( ....."but most used it for their own exploitation to get ahead....")

Because you don't know what they were doing or thinking.

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
Tarynfor12's picture

April 30, 2019 at 06:48 pm

Perhaps you should read some of their bio's...there are accountants, police officers, lawyer, real estate agent, professional trainer,dental assistant, pro wrestler etc,etc,etc.
It's all good, just don't say there doing it to feed their kids because that's all they got going for them.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
IceBowl's picture

April 30, 2019 at 07:01 pm

Tarynfor12,

I never said .... "just don't say there doing it to feed their kids because that's all they got going for them."

I would never say or assume such a thing. Geeze, can you read what I said??

So do not try to put words in my mouth!! It is unbecoming.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
John30856's picture

May 01, 2019 at 07:04 am

you sir, by your comments, exhibit childish comments

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PeteK's picture

April 30, 2019 at 06:00 pm

That's a great idea because it mimics the real situation. Put it in a bowl of ice and back off. ICEBOWL

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
IceBowl's picture

April 30, 2019 at 06:40 pm

PeteK,

Point?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 01, 2019 at 07:43 am

What does it matter how they establish the baseline so long as players are all measured at the same baseline? The problem isn't how they're measured, it's what the consumers of the information do with it after the fact.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
IceBowl's picture

May 01, 2019 at 09:24 am

dobber,

Right. Good common sense.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Lphill's picture

April 30, 2019 at 12:29 pm

good point Tarynfor12

+ REPLY
1 points
2
1
Coldworld's picture

April 30, 2019 at 01:51 pm

I’d make em wear full uniform and simulate soldier field in a 35 degree rainstorm for one run then take the average.

Better TV too Roger?

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
IceBowl's picture

April 30, 2019 at 04:24 pm

Now you're talking football. YEAH!!!!!!!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PeteK's picture

April 30, 2019 at 06:04 pm

You and Son of Sam must be listening to the same Demon dog today. Lets take it easy by not attacking reasonable commentators.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Leatherhead's picture

April 30, 2019 at 06:34 pm

I've been under the impression they're the same person. Correct?

XXXXXXXXXXX

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
IceBowl's picture

April 30, 2019 at 06:44 pm

PeteK ,

You don't say who you are referring to, but if you are referring to me, PLEASE show where I am "attacking reasonable commentators"

Thanks....

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
PeteK's picture

April 30, 2019 at 06:59 pm

Misunderstanding , wrongly thought you were giving Taryn a hard time ,but you weren't. I'm still smoldering from people unfairly bashing Thompson like he was the GM of the Bears for the last ten years. You actually defended Old Schl.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
IceBowl's picture

April 30, 2019 at 07:08 pm

PeteK,

Thanks for the response ...

Well I have posted disagreements with Taryn12 also. Some really bizarre posts to me.

But old school gets an awful lot right, and for those trolls to push him to leave does not serve this forum right.

+ REPLY
2 points
2
0
PeteK's picture

April 30, 2019 at 07:17 pm

Looking at the posts now between you and Taryn gives me a laugh. I let the bizarre disrespect for Thompson get to me . You can take your head out of the ice bowl now because I just stuck my big jughead in. Have a great night!!!!

+ REPLY
0 points
1
1
IceBowl's picture

April 30, 2019 at 07:24 pm

PeteK.

:-)

Nothing like communication.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
John30856's picture

May 01, 2019 at 07:05 am

look at your comments and try waiting a while before you hit the reply button

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

April 30, 2019 at 01:06 pm

"The general rule is that 0-5 is average"

Not at all. 0-5 is about the lowest 50%. RAS is that it is a relative score that can show any measurement on a scale of 0-10 where 5.00 is always the mean for that position group.

relativeathleticscores dot com/methodology/

+ REPLY
3 points
3
0
TXCHEESE's picture

April 30, 2019 at 01:07 pm

The only problem with the whole pads thing is, you would all of the sudden have everyone wearing kicker's pads, so does that really do anything for anyone. The track suits allow everyone to be measured with the same accuracy, because the performances in the drills are relative to only those getting tested in the same position group.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
Tarynfor12's picture

April 30, 2019 at 01:22 pm

You wear the pads of your invited position which is what you played in college...how hard is that to implement.

+ REPLY
0 points
2
2
Coldworld's picture

April 30, 2019 at 04:24 pm

I agree, although I think it would need to be of the group in which you are testing, which is not always the same.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
egbertsouse's picture

April 30, 2019 at 01:15 pm

As Max McGee used to say when he would hear how big, fast, and strong a certain draft choice was, “Yeah, but can he play football?”

+ REPLY
6 points
6
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

April 30, 2019 at 04:49 pm

Good old Max...he is missed!

What was he thinking getting on the roof to clean gutters when in his 70's?

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
IceBowl's picture

April 30, 2019 at 07:14 pm

Knock,

Might have something to do with Lombardi.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jannes bjornson's picture

April 30, 2019 at 09:38 pm

He had a bit of Dementia coming on. His wife did not realize what he was up to that sad day in Edina. Always tipped well.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Alberta Packer's picture

April 30, 2019 at 03:06 pm

Really, you can have good fast athletes who are also good football players - which I think is the current management's approach. With the previous management, not so much. See Richard Rogers (TE), Ladarius Gunter (CB), Quinten Rollins...

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
IceBowl's picture

April 30, 2019 at 04:07 pm

Since '61 says,

"The draft is a crap shoot."

So true, before, during and after the draft. We are still guessing and trying to predict. Why?? There is no right answer. So, please let go of whichever number you think is better. We do not know. The Pack (like all teams) will have misses.

To those that have applied to college, what were they looking for. Just your high school grades?? Noooo! They wanted extra curricular info, sports info , clubs info, associations info, and on and on. They wanted to get as big of a picture of you as they could get.

Same as football. They gather as many groups of information as they can to throw into the blender and try to get the best (all SEC) , most tasty (3.3 forty), highest quality (1000 wonderlick) mix of information they can.

And still, the Pack (like all teams) will have misses.

It is a crap shoot, but the more info, the better the odds. But it is the BEST mix, not whether one measurement is the best.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Alberta Packer's picture

April 30, 2019 at 03:51 pm

I don't think that the Draft is quite a "crap shoot" - suggesting a random and unpredictable selection/success outcome Instead, Draft success is based on statistical probability - utilizing value variables, weight and ranges. It is not random why some GMs consistently draft better than others. While all GMs will not hit on 100% of their selections - the better ones will be able to perform at a higher statistical level (successful picks) than others.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jannes bjornson's picture

April 30, 2019 at 09:42 pm

So, in other words, the higher your draft Position , the higher the probability of hittting on a player to make the roster and maybe a greater correlation is his rank of selection gives him a better chance of a attaining a probowl or better career.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
IceBowl's picture

April 30, 2019 at 09:46 pm

jannes bjornson,

If not sarcasm, absolutely.

In real life maybe 75/25.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
KnockTheSnotOutOfYou's picture

April 30, 2019 at 04:43 pm

Ice,
Isnt most things in life where you are trying to guess, predict, etc. No different than trying to hire that great employee or finding that special partner in life. Is the new car the right one and so on.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
IceBowl's picture

April 30, 2019 at 09:44 pm

Knock,

Sure, isn't that my point.

Sorting through all the info for your best prediction. And, even with that, some will miss.

Just human nature and LIFE!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
IceBowl's picture

April 30, 2019 at 04:00 pm

Alberta Packer,

I don't understand if you are disagreeing or not. It looks like we agree, but is there something I am missing.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Alberta Packer's picture

April 30, 2019 at 05:10 pm

I think it's semantics - the term "crap shoot" vs. the science of scouting and drafting - with known probabilities. While I do agree that it is impossible to absolutely predict the success/failure of any one draft choice (perhaps in this way it is a crap shoot) - overall we can if we know/ understand what the selection criteria is for the Packers. Of course very few of us have access to this model. However in hindsight we can now see how a vital part of their model has impacted previous and current drafts - particularly from an athletic standpoint - i.e. size and speed. In the TT era it seems that size and speed was less valued than with the current management. At this point I will reference what has now been regarded as the very poor '15 draft class. Had this drafting strategy continued, I think that there was a high probability that the Packers would have continued to draft poorly in successive years. Fortunately a change in management has brought more of a contemporary vision of what an NFL prospect/player should possess in order for a team to compete at the highest levels. As a result I think that the Packers have a higher probability of current and future success than at any time in the last 3+ years.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
IceBowl's picture

April 30, 2019 at 06:32 pm

Alberta Packer,

Fine, if it is just semantics, then we agree.

Nice.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
John30856's picture

May 01, 2019 at 07:07 am

In violent agreement

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Adorabelle's picture

April 30, 2019 at 04:22 pm

What does the nfl ever do but value athleticism and physical traits? You have to be this big to play this position and this heavy to play there. You have to run this fast and jump this high to move from a 5th round pick to a first rounder. Of course now the good athletes have to perform, everyone has to perform.

+ REPLY
1 points
1
0
IceBowl's picture

April 30, 2019 at 06:34 pm

Adorabelle,

It seems some have to be so in depth (smart?) they forget the very basis of sports.

Couch potatoes aren't playing in the NFL, or other pro sports.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
IceBowl's picture

May 01, 2019 at 03:13 pm

Love your enthusiasm, but what does it matter??

How many players run, uncontested for 40 yards. for 20 yards, or even 10??

The combine just measures numbers. Having pads, or not, doesn't change a thing.

Just put Richard Sherman on the field 8 yds off the ball, and see where that combine 40 time (with or without pads) puts you.

Can't you see it is just a measurement??

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Adorabelle's picture

April 30, 2019 at 11:54 pm

The NFL swears by it. Speed, different drills, weights. They study and measure and measure and study. A tenth of a second off your 40 time gets you drafted two rounds higher and more money. I have never seen anyone really effectively explain to me what that tenth of a second does that means you are a better football player now but the NFL swears by it.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
IceBowl's picture

May 01, 2019 at 09:50 am

Adorabelle ,

Of course this time of year, what else do the "talking heads" have to talk about. Just numbers, measurables to explain their selected tape clips. Blah, Blah, Blah.

I don't think you will ever get an effective explanation of a 10th of a second making you a better football player, because it does not mean that. All it means is that someone is a blink of an eye faster. But, as you say, the NFL swears by (loves) speed.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0

Log in to comment and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.