Forty Times

[bennyl08]

http://www.nfl.com/photoessays/0ap3000000637218

Some interesting combine stats from the NFL, some concerning forty yard dash times.

Of the 18 running backs since 2003 that have run a forty time in 4.40 or faster, 7 of them have recorded at least 1, 1000 yard rushing season. However, of the backs who have run a 4.75 or faster, 53 in that time span, 0 of them have recorded 1000 yards rushing in a season.

In contrast, since 2003, 51 WR's have run the forty in 4.40 or faster and only 6 have recorded 1000 yard receiving seasons. 138 WR's have run it in 4.6 or slower, with 7 having 1000 yard receiving seasons.

Some thoughts on these stats: First, one should be skeptical based on the difference in metrics used. Why did they pick 4.75 for RB's and 4.60 for receivers? My first thought is that they were looking to make that point to begin with and cherry picked the values. Secondly, difference in likelihood of hitting 1000 yards. Most years in that time span, it is easier for a running back to get 1000 yards than a WR. Now, most of those years there were plenty more 1k receivers than rushers, but there are also a lot more receivers overall. A team may have 3 rb's but 6-7 receivers and typically one rb is on the field at a given time while there may be 3 wr's.

Nonetheless, forty time certainly appears to be more correlated to picking up yards as a rusher than a receiver (notice I carefully said picking up yards rather than being more successful).

[lasthog]

Nm

[HOGINTENNESSEE]

We have had 2 of those sub 4.4 RB with 1,000 season Knile and Dmac.

Weird in the article it doesn't mention Knile.

[HiggiePiggy]

We have had 2 of those sub 4.4 RB with 1,000 season Knile and Dmac.

Weird in the article it doesn't mention Knile.

Because he has never had a 1000 yard season in the nfl. 

[HOGINTENNESSEE]

Because he has never had a 1000 yard season in the nfl. 

That make sense. I thought it was talking how productive they were in college

[bphi11ips]

Receivers

http://www.nfl.com/photoessays/0ap3000000637218

Some interesting combine stats from the NFL, some concerning forty yard dash times.

Of the 18 running backs since 2003 that have run a forty time in 4.40 or faster, 7 of them have recorded at least 1, 1000 yard rushing season. However, of the backs who have run a 4.75 or faster, 53 in that time span, 0 of them have recorded 1000 yards rushing in a season.

In contrast, since 2003, 51 WR's have run the forty in 4.40 or faster and only 6 have recorded 1000 yard receiving seasons. 138 WR's have run it in 4.6 or slower, with 7 having 1000 yard receiving seasons.

Some thoughts on these stats: First, one should be skeptical based on the difference in metrics used. Why did they pick 4.75 for RB's and 4.60 for receivers? My first thought is that they were looking to make that point to begin with and cherry picked the values. Secondly, difference in likelihood of hitting 1000 yards. Most years in that time span, it is easier for a running back to get 1000 yards than a WR. Now, most of those years there were plenty more 1k receivers than rushers, but there are also a lot more receivers overall. A team may have 3 rb's but 6-7 receivers and typically one rb is on the field at a given time while there may be 3 wr's.

Nonetheless, forty time certainly appears to be more correlated to picking up yards as a rusher than a receiver (notice I carefully said picking up yards rather than being more successful).

You meant, of the 53 running backs who have run 4.75 or slower, 0 have had 1,000 yard seasons.

40 times are like most other "metrics" - they are useful in a vacuum.  What you don't see in a vacuum are Jerry Rice's routes and hands or Emmitt Smith's vision and balance.  It also doesn't show playing speed:

http://www.49ers.com/news/article-2/Baalke-Jerry-Rice-Puts-40-yard-Dash-in-Perspective/2263a098-32f5-4926-8768-94ca0606c4e5

[woodrow hog call]

I heard Dre got so big he can't even run the forty😜

[bennyl08]

Receivers
You meant, of the 53 running backs who have run 4.75 or slower, 0 have had 1,000 yard seasons.

40 times are like most other "metrics" - they are useful in a vacuum.  What you don't see in a vacuum are Jerry Rice's routes and hands or Emmitt Smith's vision and balance.  It also doesn't show playing speed:

http://www.49ers.com/news/article-2/Baalke-Jerry-Rice-Puts-40-yard-Dash-in-Perspective/2263a098-32f5-4926-8768-94ca0606c4e5

I didn't mean to say anything different than what I said, but your wording was much more concise and flowed better.

Having said that, I think you meant to say "they aren't useful in a vacuum."

To that, I'd agree. Forty times are only one piece of a puzzle. They don't show change of direction, how fast you run while carrying weight of pads and a ball. How fast you can run while making decisions, and a whole host of other factors. However, what a forty yard dash does show is what you can run in gym shorts in a straight line when you are only focusing on running run. The back's 10 yard splits and 3-cone numbers would be more important to look at if you only want to look at a single metric. However, forty times still tell a story and give you information. If you were to rank the Arkansas rb's of the past decade, and plotted them with respect to their forty times, you'd see a pretty strong trend. Dmac was the best and he's also the fastest. Collins would come in second and he runs pretty fast, probably in the 4.5's. Next would be some debate between Knile and JWill and Felix, then Dennis Johnson and Smith. Those are the fastest guys we've had unless you want to count guys who were only here for a spell and transferred. For a lot of them like Evans, we'd have to find their pro-day numbers if they even did compete (yes I know Evans is still young and isn't close to being a senior, hence i used the word "like").

I might do some data stuffs sometime later and actually plot average yards per season and forty time. I'd expect it to be parabolic in some degree. Too fast and it means you are likely going to be too small and will try and bounce it outside a lot rather than getting the yards available. Too slow and a back with equal agility and vision but who is faster will take your carries.

[PorkSoda]

the nfl combine uses hand start with laser finish.  so there is still room for human error.  and can account for the difference to 4.4 to 4.6. 

in otherwords, they are essentially useless.

[bphi11ips]

I didn't mean to say anything different than what I said, but your wording was much more concise and flowed better.

All I said is what the article said.  4.75 or faster is in the same universe as 4.4 or faster if I remember my third grade new math correctly.  It was a typo I'm sure.  Been there, done that.

[bennyl08]

the nfl combine uses hand start with laser finish.  so there is still room for human error.  and can account for the difference to 4.4 to 4.6. 

in otherwords, they are essentially useless.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/nfl-draft-scout/25073644/scouting-combine-real-time-40s-to-be-used-for-first-time

Not in the past few years they haven't.

Also, here is some data from 2005 to 2014 that I compiled for RB's.

[bphi11ips]

the nfl combine uses hand start with laser finish.  so there is still room for human error.  and can account for the difference to 4.4 to 4.6. 

in otherwords, they are essentially useless.

Only to football coaches.  They are gospel truth to recruiting services, mock draft bloggers, and message board jockeys.

[bennyl08]

Only to football coaches.  They are gospel truth to recruiting services, mock draft bloggers, and message board jockeys.

You honestly think football coaches think they are useless?

Why does CBB have prospects run them during the Arkansas summer camps? Why does he mention them in his press conferences?

[bphi11ips]

You honestly think football coaches think they are useless?

Why does CBB have prospects run them during the Arkansas summer camps? Why does he mention them in his press conferences?

Of course they're useful.

[PorkSoda]

Of course they're useful.

useful yes, in gauging relative speed.  but its not an exact science.

so many factors go into a track time that dont necessarily translate to the field.

[bphi11ips]

useful yes, in gauging relative speed.  but its not an exact science.

so many factors go into a track time that dont necessarily translate to the field.

There are also many variables in a forty time.  It's become so important in recruiting that private trainers are everywhere promising to knock off a tenth of a second or two.  4.5?  You're a candidate for WR, but corners need 4.4 or better.  4.6?  Safety for you, bud.  OLB if you weigh 210 or more. 

Straight line speed is important in space, but you have to get there first.  Knowing how to find holes in coverage is an art.  So is breaking a CB's ankles.  See Drew Morgan.  Or Wes Welker, of course.  Closing speed can be as much about heart than speed, provided the speed is there to begin with. 

Speed alone won't make a great football player.  Football players with great speed are weapons.

[Jek Tono Porkins]

There are also many variables in a forty time.  It's become so important in recruiting that private trainers are everywhere promising to knock off a tenth of a second or two.  4.5?  You're a candidate for WR, but corners need 4.4 or better.  4.6?  Safety for you, bud.  OLB if you weigh 210 or more. 

Straight line speed is important in space, but you have to get there first.  Knowing how to find holes in coverage is an art.  So is breaking a CB's ankles.  See Drew Morgan.  Or Wes Welker, of course.  Closing speed can be as much about heart than speed, provided the speed is there to begin with. 

Speed alone won't make a great football player.  Football players with great speed are weapons.

I'd also add that being in pads and being able to hold onto the ball are also variables. You have a guy that runs a 4.4 forty. Great. Now stick some pads on him and have him hold onto the football for dear life. You're dealing with something different there. It does you no good to have a blazing running back if he can't hold on to the ball.

[Cinco de Hogo]

Stars matter!

[lumphog]

Stars matter!

NO   they don't

[Inhogswetrust]

What was Jerry Rice's 40 time? IIRC he was not known as the fastest but some people say he might be the best football player ever.

[Mike_e]

You would think,or at least I do, that a 40 time would be more valuable in measuring a running back than a receiver.  A 40 time is all about sustained explosion.  Sure you can explode off the starting line but can you keep it up for a useful distance?

Getting through the LOS is doable for anybody talented enough to play running back.  Getting past the linebackers is another thing though and requires sustaining your momentum.  You can get to a 1000 if you can pop a few carries for 20 or more yards but if you're only getting 3 or 4 per carry 1000 of them is a long way to go.

Receivers on the other hand have an advantage in that they aren't being pursued with mean intent from the LOS.  They can run as far as they need to go without much hindrance and it's only when they catch the ball that they have to worry about people really trying to stop them.  It's more important that they are exactly where they are supposed to be on the field than it is to get there as fast as possible.  A tenth of a second isn't going to ruin the play so long as the ball is caught.

Defensive players having to cover so much ground are a no-brainer in this.

[bphi11ips]

What was Jerry Rice's 40 time? IIRC he was not known as the fastest but some people say he might be the best football player ever.

I posted a link above about Jerry Rice and playing speed.  Google him and you'll see anywhere from 4.59 to 4.71.  Wes Welker you'll see 4.65. 

[Jackrabbit Hog]

What was Jerry Rice's 40 time? IIRC he was not known as the fastest but some people say he might be the best football player ever.

I might go with best wide receiver ever, but not best player ever.  To me best player ever has to be someone who excelled at many facets of the game.  That's why I've always considered Walter Payton to be the best I ever saw.  He could have been All-Pro at many positions, on either side of the ball.  Ditka said he was the best blocker on the team, he had a stronger arm than McMahon, and he could kick field goals from over 50 yards.  Jim Brown was another.

[LZH]

You would think,or at least I do, that a 40 time would be more valuable in measuring a running back than a receiver.  A 40 time is all about sustained explosion.  Sure you can explode off the starting line but can you keep it up for a useful distance?

Getting through the LOS is doable for anybody talented enough to play running back.  Getting past the linebackers is another thing though and requires sustaining your momentum.  You can get to a 1000 if you can pop a few carries for 20 or more yards but if you're only getting 3 or 4 per carry 1000 of them is a long way to go.

Receivers on the other hand have an advantage in that they aren't being pursued with mean intent from the LOS.  They can run as far as they need to go without much hindrance and it's only when they catch the ball that they have to worry about people really trying to stop them.  It's more important that they are exactly where they are supposed to be on the field than it is to get there as fast as possible.  A tenth of a second isn't going to ruin the play so long as the ball is caught.

Defensive players having to cover so much ground are a no-brainer in this.

A tenth of a second translates into a yard or more. That could mean the difference between a defensive back getting his hands on the ball and a receiver getting enough separation for a completion....and possibly a touchdown.

40 yard dash times are equally important to all skill position players.

[bphi11ips]

A tenth of a second translates into a yard or more. That could mean the difference between a defensive back getting his hands on the ball and a receiver getting enough separation for a completion....and possibly a touchdown.

40 yard dash times are equally important to all skill position players.

I agree but would generally replace "40 yard dash times" with "speed".  A 40 time is an indication of football speed, but not the end all.

[Mike_e]

A tenth of a second translates into a yard or more. That could mean the difference between a defensive back getting his hands on the ball and a receiver getting enough separation for a completion....and possibly a touchdown.

40 yard dash times are equally important to all skill position players.

Oh come on, in sandlot maybe.  Or an improvised fly.

The receiver knows where the ball is supposed to be and when because the WR and the QB have practiced it until they've gotten it down.  The defenders are guessing until the ball is actually thrown and will be close enough to the WR that a 40 time is useless.  A 4 time maybe but more likely a 2 or a 1 time.

The only thing that a tenth or a fifth of a second will matter is in how long you have to maintain the pocket for the QB.

I am NOT saying that a WR can just poke along out there but timing and precise route running are the keys to a good passing game.

Of course you already know that it's just not 5 o'clock wherever you are.

[cardinalandwhite]

I refer any who don't think game speed makes a difference at receiver to Reed's touchdown against LSU.

I refer any who think speed is the most important aspect for skill positions to Morgan and Collins.

Collins' 40 time will be interesting, as it won't be terribly fast, but I suspect a fast time to 10 yards and a very good score for the 3 cone.

[Danny J]

Running 40 without pads is pointless IMO...put them in full NFL game day equipment then run the times from your starting stance at the line. One of the fastest players in pads I have seen at Arkansas was Jarius.

[Ex-Trumpet]

40 times should be run in full pads, like they will play.  Results may be very different!

[bennyl08]

Running 40 without pads is pointless IMO...put them in full NFL game day equipment then run the times from your starting stance at the line. One of the fastest players in pads I have seen at Arkansas was Jarius.

Jarius was also in the low 4.4's. Him, Knile, and McFadden were some of the fastest hogs we've seen in the past decade.

I mostly agree that it would be better to have players run in pads.  It would likely lead to players choosing less padding and lighter pads to run in the combine than what they'd actually wear in a game. Still closer to game speed running than otherwise, but you've just added a confounding variable.

[PorkSoda]

Jarius was also in the low 4.4's. Him, Knile, and McFadden were some of the fastest hogs we've seen in the past decade.

I mostly agree that it would be better to have players run in pads.  It would likely lead to players choosing less padding and lighter pads to run in the combine than what they'd actually wear in a game. Still closer to game speed running than otherwise, but you've just added a confounding variable.

I'm not sure what running in pads would help with.  nobody is timing 40's in a game.  its only used a one small comparative aspect in an overall evaluation.  its only really useful for weeding out the outliers such as CB's who run a 4.8.

[ChitownHawg]

You would think,or at least I do, that a 40 time would be more valuable in measuring a running back than a receiver.  A 40 time is all about sustained explosion.  Sure you can explode off the starting line but can you keep it up for a useful distance?

Getting through the LOS is doable for anybody talented enough to play running back.  Getting past the linebackers is another thing though and requires sustaining your momentum.  You can get to a 1000 if you can pop a few carries for 20 or more yards but if you're only getting 3 or 4 per carry 1000 of them is a long way to go.

Receivers on the other hand have an advantage in that they aren't being pursued with mean intent from the LOS.  They can run as far as they need to go without much hindrance and it's only when they catch the ball that they have to worry about people really trying to stop them.  It's more important that they are exactly where they are supposed to be on the field than it is to get there as fast as possible.  A tenth of a second isn't going to ruin the play so long as the ball is caught.

Defensive players having to cover so much ground are a no-brainer in this.

Very few runs by a back are straight line like the 40. Burst of quickness and lateral movement are just as important as straight line speed. Take AC as an example. His 40 probably will not make headlines on ESPN.

But his ability to move laterally and lose little speed is phenomenal.

[bennyl08]

I'm not sure what running in pads would help with.  nobody is timing 40's in a game.  its only used a one small comparative aspect in an overall evaluation.  its only really useful for weeding out the outliers such as CB's who run a 4.8.

I imagine a stronger player can maintain speed better carrying 15 pounds of pads and helmet than a weaker player. Though, the DL player will often have heavier pads than the cornerback.

Would it change much? Probably not. However, there are some real world applications such as special teams and go routes. At the end of the day, it only measures one component of a players speed and it's main purpose is to allow scouts to judge players on an even field. That way, when you go back to watch the tape, between say Prescott and Wentz, you then have some standardized rubric to compare the two. Otherwise, you have one guy playing against sub level competition and the other vs SEC. Like the bench press, one player may appear to be a lot stronger than another, but in fact is not as strong and was playing weaker competition. Bench press is not the single best indicator of strength, but it can still be helpful when comparing tape.

[husker71]

you know how many less pads they wear now than when I played.  Go back until the 80s on youtube and notice how many were all padded up   just an observation

[LZH]

Oh come on, in sandlot maybe.  Or an improvised fly.

The receiver knows where the ball is supposed to be and when because the WR and the QB have practiced it until they've gotten it down.  The defenders are guessing until the ball is actually thrown and will be close enough to the WR that a 40 time is useless.  A 4 time maybe but more likely a 2 or a 1 time.

The only thing that a tenth or a fifth of a second will matter is in how long you have to maintain the pocket for the QB.

I am NOT saying that a WR can just poke along out there but timing and precise route running are the keys to a good passing game.

Of course you already know that it's just not 5 o'clock wherever you are.

I understand what you're saying, but my point was mainly pertaining to deep out and up routes and deep crossing routes. Those have nothing to do with timing...they are five step drop, bounce as you find your target and set your feet, and then let 'er rip. All other things being equal, a 4.4 receiver has a better shot at the ball than a 4.6 receiver.

And for what it's worth, the talk about guys like Jerry Rice and Emmitt Smith not having fast 40 times can be addressed by watching how many guys caught them from behind. Some guys are fast as hell once they get to full stride, which may take them a few extra steps more than others.

[bennyl08]

A good WR case study is that of Cobi Hamilton and Jarvis Landry.
                Cobi         Landry
40            4.56        4.61
20            2.69        2.69
10            1.63        1.58
bench         11         12
vert          29.5        28.5
broad        8'11        9'5"
3-cone      7.09       7.56
shuttle     4.31         4.59
ht/wt       6'2 212    5'11 205
hands      8 3/4"     10 1/4"
arms       32.5"       31.75"

What do we see? We see two athletes that are pretty similar. Cobi has the edge in size and change of direction and in top speed. Jarvis has bigger hands and is more explosive.

What do we see? Cobi has barely been able to sniff the field while Jarvis has been quite productive. The big things you heard with Cobi was that he didn't have that quick first few steps. He had the speed at the top end, but was too slow to get that initial separation.