Average sprint times for a pro soccer player?

disgraceful_admin wrote:

soccer succer wrote:

Indeed a ridiculous comment, lol. He's pulling this bull straight out of his rosebud.

If the legitimate 10.3/4-ers aren't even the fastest, then why are you giving them as examples. What is this sh1t, man?

Here's the first example I thought of:

http://www.all-athletics.com/en-us/2013-02-22/qprs-nedum-onuoha-i-d-be-disappointed-if-my-100m-wasn-t-ten-seconds-something

This guy ran 11.09 as a 14 yr old, and he had nothing on the fastest footballers.

I'm sure you geniuses will tell me that many sprinters peak at age 14. Most Premier League forwards could beat you in a 100m while dribbling a ball or two.

There's several hundred pro footballers, mostly forwards, in top teams around Europe that can run

... There's several hundred pro footballers, mostly forwards, in top teams around Europe that can run

disgraceful_admin wrote:

soccer succer wrote:

Indeed a ridiculous comment, lol. He's pulling this bull straight out of his rosebud.

If the legitimate 10.3/4-ers aren't even the fastest, then why are you giving them as examples. What is this sh1t, man?

Here's the first example I thought of:

http://www.all-athletics.com/en-us/2013-02-22/qprs-nedum-onuoha-i-d-be-disappointed-if-my-100m-wasn-t-ten-seconds-something

This guy ran 11.09 as a 14 yr old, and he had nothing on the fastest footballers.

I'm sure you geniuses will tell me that many sprinters peak at age 14. Most Premier League forwards could beat you in a 100m while dribbling a ball or two.

There's several hundred pro footballers, mostly forwards, in top teams around Europe that can run

Less than 10.6 right off the bat with more training than they currently do.

Cristiano likely had sub-10 potential as a sprinter, had he chosen that sport at a young age. It's absurd to suggest otherwise.

disgraceful_admin wrote:

soccer succer wrote:

Indeed a ridiculous comment, lol. He's pulling this bull straight out of his rosebud.

If the legitimate 10.3/4-ers aren't even the fastest, then why are you giving them as examples. What is this sh1t, man?

Here's the first example I thought of:

http://www.all-athletics.com/en-us/2013-02-22/qprs-nedum-onuoha-i-d-be-disappointed-if-my-100m-wasn-t-ten-seconds-something

This guy ran 11.09 as a 14 yr old, and he had nothing on the fastest footballers.

I'm sure you geniuses will tell me that many sprinters peak at age 14. Most Premier League forwards could beat you in a 100m while dribbling a ball or two.

There's several hundred pro footballers, mostly forwards, in top teams around Europe that can run

So your example of someone who has ran 10.3 is of someone who has ran a windy 11.09 when he was younger?

Anyway when it comes to speedy footballers Nedum Onohua is ranked as one of the highest. So I don't know where "he had nothing on the fastest footballers" comes from

disgraceful_admin wrote:

disgraceful_admin wrote:

Here's the first example I thought of:

http://www.all-athletics.com/en-us/2013-02-22/qprs-nedum-onuoha-i-d-be-disappointed-if-my-100m-wasn-t-ten-seconds-something

This guy ran 11.09 as a 14 yr old, and he had nothing on the fastest footballers.

I'm sure you geniuses will tell me that many sprinters peak at age 14. Most Premier League forwards could beat you in a 100m while dribbling a ball or two.

There's several hundred pro footballers, mostly forwards, in top teams around Europe that can run

Less than 10.6 right off the bat with more training than they currently do.

Cristiano likely had sub-10 potential as a sprinter, had he chosen that sport at a young age. It's absurd to suggest otherwise.

Ronaldo raced a 10.2 guy over 25 meters and lost by 0.3 that's not even remotely close. Where do you get the idea he could go sub 10 if he was a sprinter?

mediocresprinter wrote:

disgraceful_admin wrote:

There have been guys in the Premier League who ran legitimate 10.3-10.4 and still aren't even the fastest across the field.

Such as?

Not that fast sub 11 has been done but not usually by the best players.

Average speed is around low 12 secs faster players around 11. Most teams only have a few really fast players.

The faster players are good over 30m rather than 100m. The hardest thing is running with the ball at pace which many of the absolute fastest are incapable of.

Close enough wrote:

I think the 400m would be closer to 51.7x.

Laughable. 4 guys from my high school team were faster than that. They were the 4x400 team.

disgraceful_admin wrote:

Soccer has the highest talent pool of any sport in the world.

After distance running by quite a way actually.

soccer players do not sprint during games. They run in short bursts, sometimes pretty fast, but they're not sprinting. What they do doesn't translate to speed on the track.

I coached a prof footballer with a team here in the UK (premiership) he wasn't a first team player and has since retired at age 23!!!

However, he was the fastest player in that squad fullstop, in the first team was a player who wasrated as being one of the fastest in the premiership.

My guy could not break 11sec for the 100m

Simple as that, soccer players are quick....not fast! there is a difference and unfortunately most football/soccer players think they are gods gift and so don't understand that they simply do not compare and the media of course is just as blind when they see a 'quick' 40 from a rolling start lol

Coacherman wrote:

A lot of elite and pro soccer players could be pretty good 800 runners (1:50ish) with only a little specific training. They're aerobically fit and very explosive.

How much training is a little?

'This guy ran 11.09 as a 14 yr old, and he had nothing on the fastest footballers.'

List the runners who were faster over 100m at 14

The hilarious thing about this article, is most of the players claim to have run the time, but there's no proof. Or there are people who claim that they ran a certain time, but the soccer player doesn't corroborate. But the top 3 guys seem to be real times.

giggity wrote:

http://www.thesportster.com/soccer/top-15-fastest-100m-times-ran-by-footballers/

The hilarious thing about this article, is most of the players claim to have run the time, but there's no proof. Or there are people who claim that they ran a certain time, but the soccer player doesn't corroborate. But the top 3 guys seem to be real times.

The only legit times there are the top 3, Onouha and Kimowya.

And the top 2 are hardly footballers

This.

At 25 meters, Ronaldo gets beaten by .30 seconds by a Spanish guy, Ángel David Rodriguez, who has lifetime PR of 10.14 (+1.7 wind). Rodriguez ran the WC's in 2007, '09, '11, and '13 and in Olympics in 2008 and 2012 and only once made it to the semis (Daegu) where where he ended up 7th .

Source:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZqEj-Qyg6U

It's funny that Ronaldo gets brought up as an example. Sure, he's a fast player, but hardly the guy I would've picked as the standard bearer for the entire sport.

Bad Wigins wrote:

soccer players do not sprint during games. They run in short bursts, sometimes pretty fast, but they're not sprinting. What they do doesn't translate to speed on the track.

Yes they do. Not all of them. Players in the spine of the formation rarely reach top speed, but wide players most definitely do. Counter-attacking strikers playing against a high line also get up to top speed as well (which is why it's not surprising that Vardy was clocked as the fastest player in the premiership last year).

800 dude wrote:

Players in the spine of the formation rarely reach top speed, but wide players most definitely do. Counter-attacking strikers playing against a high line also get up to top speed as well

Galen Rupp can get up to top speed too. What does that have to do with sprinting? Sprinting is not just running as fast as you can.

sdflkf wrote:

I was a mediocre player on a decent team (state champions a few times in the club system). I was probably fastest/2nd fastest on team, definitely some of the california teams had wayyy faster players than me. I started running track my freshman year hs and ran 54/1:59 w/o too much training.

Aka a lot of the better players easily are running ~50s quickly, sub 2, and probably 10.5 for elite to 11.5 for "fast" players.

watch carlin isles to see how a 10.2 guy looks on the pitch.

Your estimates probably aren't far off. I saw somewhere else in this thread some joker state that C. Ronaldo could "easily" run sub-10. I think that guy would perhaps go sub-11, and it wouldn't be easy for him. The acceleration just isn't there. But there are some really fast guys in the sport-- 10,5ish, maybe even a bit quicker.

I ran track in high school w/ Landon Donovan before he signed w/ the

German club at 16 or 17. He was pretty quick, but nothing special. I could've seen him reeling off some nice mile times, maybe a decent 800. Myself and many other people on the team were a good deal faster than he was and proved it on a daily basis.

holy moses wrote:

Didn't Michael Owen run 10.8 as a 14 year old? I bet a good couple of dozen soccer players would be able to do less than 10. if trained a bit for it.

Adam Gemili was in the Chelsea Youth Program, Darren Campbell quit athletics to pursue a football career for a few years, Christian Malcolm picked track over soccer at 15.

Hopefully that link helps, it might not be inclusive of burners who are knocking around the lower leagues but it has Gemili and Campbell on it.

Keep in mind that most of these kids quit track after English Schools so your fastest guys are 11 flat or a bit faster but Marvell Wynne ran 10.39 as a high school senior so that is perhaps more in line with what the fastest guys could have run if they put more time into athletics.

Also bear in mind that England is not a warm weather place conducive to year round outdoor track use like southern California or Florida.

Obviously take these speeds as you find them http://www.totalsportek.com/list/fastest-footballers/