FIFA match statistics show Michael Bradley covered 12.2 km, Johnson top speed 32.98 km/h in US v. Portugal game.

agip wrote:

some quick no doubt error prone math has 20 mph equal to a 11.25 second 100m.

and no doubt he only did it for 20 meters or fewer.

ok. Fine.

To try to be accurate for a sprint projection (ignoring the grass:track part):

32.98 km/hr * .27777 = 9.16 meters/sec

1/9.16 m/sec * 10 = 1.092 sec/10 meters (that's how splits for sprints are expressed)

Bolt had a peak velocity of 0.81 sec/10 meters in his 9.58

So, 1.092/0.81 * 9.58 => 12.91 sec 100 meters.

Not quite crossfit territory, but Mo Farah might beat him.

sprinters would lose in a soccer match...what's the point?

No sprinters are claiming to beat Ronaldo at soccer. But soccer fans keep bragging about how fast those guys are compared to sprinters. And all the times I see for soccer players' sprint capability are really slow. They likely couldn't beat the best 60-year-old masters sprinters.

And all but a handful of soccer players don't make as much as Bolt, either.

coach d wrote:

agip wrote:

some quick no doubt error prone math has 20 mph equal to a 11.25 second 100m.

and no doubt he only did it for 20 meters or fewer.

ok. Fine.

To try to be accurate for a sprint projection (ignoring the grass:track part):

32.98 km/hr * .27777 = 9.16 meters/sec

1/9.16 m/sec * 10 = 1.092 sec/10 meters (that's how splits for sprints are expressed)

Bolt had a peak velocity of 0.81 sec/10 meters in his 9.58

So, 1.092/0.81 * 9.58 => 12.91 sec 100 meters.

Not quite crossfit territory, but Mo Farah might beat him.

A soccer player rarely goes more than 30 yards at full throttle. I believe it would be more fair to use Bolt's speed at 20-30m or 30-40m which would put him between 11.62 and 12.16, wearing heavier cleats and shin guards, on grass.

He would definitely crush Mo Farah.

Case in point, Yedlin and Ronaldo had slower "top speeds" for the match even though everyone knows they are fast.

Ronaldo raced some short distance against Angel David Rodriguez and was beaten, 3.31 to 3.61. With Rodriguez's 10.14 assuming Ronaldo could output the same relative power over 100 meters we could put him at 11.06.

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

slanty sideways wrote:

I know Wejo/Rojo are probably a bit defensive of the guy given who his father is. But defending his play yesterday or so far this World Cup is ridiculous.

What the hell? It always amazes me that people make huge conclusions about me based on who my own father is, where I went to school.

But now I'm a bradely defender because of who is father is? Please explain. Am I protective of him because his father was once the US coach or because his father once coached at Princeton? This is getting into the la-la conspiracy theory type crazy.

I actually do think Bradley is a key player for us. He was awful in game 1. I thought he was really good early in game 2.

As I watching the game, I did think at one point, "Why is bradly barely running. He's not running that fast," and wondered if it was because he was trying to save himself for the end of the game. When I saw that stats which clearly show he's running more than anyone on the field, I then did the smart thing and concluded he's being smart and realizing he's got to be there for the whole 95 minutes. I think a midfielder like him is in SUPREME shape.

Now if he only he'd run a little more at the very end, we'd have won.

To me, Ronaldo was a joke. The US was creating all sorts of scoring chances because the guy simply won't play defense at all. That's why the US is decent at soccer. Our stars will go back and play defense if they need to.

The end of that game reminded me of the end of NCAA lacrosse game a few years ago when Cornell had it one. All they had to do was call time out and the game was over. Instaed, they turned the ball over and lost .

It literally would be hard to score faster than Syracuse scored against Cornell with no defense - the same is true of the US - Portugal game.

Am i disappointed in the outcome? Yes. Does part of me want to react at Bradley? I guess but I hate fans who boo at any pro sporting event. I think it's 100% unacceptable except in specific instances of a) lack of effort b) PED use.

He's the best possession midfield in the country. I support him just and hope he helps us in game #3.

As I tell people who email me after they get banned from LetsRun, pleae remember, you are talking about real human beings.

BFD

If you want to compare soccer players to running think about two sets of 30 x 40yard sprints with walk rest of 1min.

I would bet most of you guys (including me) would puke after this workout.

slanty sideways wrote:

jacked wrote:

Being that people like Adam Gemili and Andrew Wheating are mediocre futbol players with some world class futbol players having much greater talent, I predict that if you trained the most talented players to their specific strength, they would have times of 9.6 o 9.7 in 100 meters, 19.0-19.5 in 200 meters, 43 in 400 meters, 1:38 n 800 meters, about 3:25 in 1500 meters, and 7:20 in 3,000. They would crush existing times below 5,000 meters.

The reason some guys are going to be better at futbol is because of natural muscle strength in the quads, while some better at track are going to have greater strength in the hamstrings/hip flexors.

Your understanding of both track and futbol isn't very good if you think that one equals the other.

You be trolled by an obvious troll son!

Did the statistics show it only took him 5 feet to blow the lead?

Your understanding of both track and futbol isn't very good if you think that one equals the other.

You're right and I think the problem most people have is that they think that just because someone is world class in one sport they'd be world class in another.

That's not the case. NBA players would not jump into a decathlon and break the world record.

Pro football players would not be good at other sports- they are too specialized.

Some of you folks don't seem to realize that the objective in soccer is to win a soccer game, not to clock the fastest sprint time or log the most miles.

Just figured I'd help you out here.

Manchester wrote:

coach d wrote:

To try to be accurate for a sprint projection (ignoring the grass:track part):

32.98 km/hr * .27777 = 9.16 meters/sec

1/9.16 m/sec * 10 = 1.092 sec/10 meters (that's how splits for sprints are expressed)

Bolt had a peak velocity of 0.81 sec/10 meters in his 9.58

So, 1.092/0.81 * 9.58 => 12.91 sec 100 meters.

Not quite crossfit territory, but Mo Farah might beat him.

A soccer player rarely goes more than 30 yards at full throttle. I believe it would be more fair to use Bolt's speed at 20-30m or 30-40m which would put him between 11.62 and 12.16, wearing heavier cleats and shin guards, on grass.

He would definitely crush Mo Farah.

This ^

Anyone who thinks that Farah could hang with some of the faster soccer players in a sprint is absolutely clueless. Nearly as clueless as those who think that the faster soccer players could hand with Bolt or Bekele in their respective events.

Recognizer of Brilliance wrote:

This ^

Anyone who thinks that Farah could hang with some of the faster soccer players in a sprint is absolutely clueless. Nearly as clueless as those who think that the faster soccer players could hang with Bolt or Bekele in their respective events.

Corrected typo

Sorry

soccer players won't run a good flat 100m.

because.

they are trained to run with a ball or zig zag.

they use their arms for balance and their form is "terrible" for track.

but then again you put a track guy on the soccer field and he's pretty useless because to receive the ball and run and defend he does not have a clue how to use his arms or even feet.

rest assured that the best athletic talent in the world is in foot ball.

but there are a few phenoms that slip through the cracks. bekele, bolt, etc.

No - it's 90 minutes of fartlek training. That makes soccer players killers in 800-1000m races.

not a hiker wrote:

boomheadshot wrote:

7.5 miles in 95 minutes. not too bad. Roughly 12:40 pace. And people on this board are actually arguing that they can beat real runners in a race. Ha!

This was my observation watching the world cup over the weekend. Soccer is a lot like ultra running. They run from time to time but most of the time they are jogging or walking around.

coach d wrote:

No sprinters are claiming to beat Ronaldo at soccer. But soccer fans keep bragging about how fast those guys are compared to sprinters. And all the times I see for soccer players' sprint capability are really slow. They likely couldn't beat the best 60-year-old masters sprinters.

And all but a handful of soccer players don't make as much as Bolt, either.

Soccer would be more like mid-distance, 800-3k etc.

Doubt a sprinter would be able to run 6 miles in a game.

Le Foot wrote:

Randy Oldman wrote:

Bradley is going to struggle to recover before the Germany game.

He'll be fine. That extra km or whatever won't make a difference.

Did you watch? Did you see the conditions they were playing in? The guy could barely walk by the end of the game.

20 mph was his peak speed, not his average speed over a couple of meters.

coach d wrote:

And all but a handful of soccer players don't make as much as Bolt, either.

What is your point? Usain Bolt is an extreme outlier among track and field athletes. Bekele made a little over a million in 2009, and he's at least arguably the GOAT. Ronaldo, on the other hand, makes over 70 million. The AVERAGE salary (not including endorsements) of a Man City player is over 8 million. In soccer, a million dollar player is considered incredibly cheap. There are only a handful of million dollar athletes in the entire history of track and field.