https://twitter.com/Vol_Track/status/859136135200735232
The NFL combine record is 4.22. Coleman ran a 4.12.
The NFL combine record is 4.22. Coleman ran a 4.12.
If Al Davis was still alive the Raiders would have drafted him...
FAT too, so legit timing. Only difference is not on turf but I think whatever the case he's comes out ahead
disregard my post I was going off images yeah it's on turf and seems like typical combine timing what a monster
Flo'da boy wrote:
FAT too, so legit timing. Only difference is not on turf but I think whatever the case he's comes out ahead
Did you even watch the video? I'm guessing you just looked at the thumbnail.
the bot wrote:
Flo'da boy wrote:FAT too, so legit timing. Only difference is not on turf but I think whatever the case he's comes out ahead
Did you even watch the video? I'm guessing you just looked at the thumbnail.
Did you even read the whole thread? I'm guessing you just saw his first post and assumed he didn't correct himself.
3.50 wrote:
the bot wrote:Did you even watch the video? I'm guessing you just looked at the thumbnail.
Did you even read the whole thread? I'm guessing you just saw his first post and assumed he didn't correct himself.
Did you even look at the time stamp? I'm guessing you just looked at the body of the posts.
3.49 wrote:
3.50 wrote:Did you even read the whole thread? I'm guessing you just saw his first post and assumed he didn't correct himself.
Did you even look at the time stamp? I'm guessing you just looked at the body of the posts.
Actually I did. You posted 2 minutes after their post. Maybe you could have refreshed the page? Moran.
This all really means nothing because the 40 yard dash is always at least partially hand-timed.
The margin of error is probably .1 or maybe even higher.
It's why the 40 yard dash is nonsensical until they use FAT timing - but that will never happen because people are accustomed to seeing completely unrealistic times. I read somewhere that the first 40 yards of Usain Bolt's 9.58 was only a 4.24 when using proper timing. Real NFL players that are wannabe 4.2 guys are really more like 4.5 guys.
Not meaningless. He ran a 40 just to see, timed under the same conditions the NFL prospects are timed at UT and he ran 4.12, a tenth under the combine record. With his 6.46, and other legit times, this totally computes. And there was no real incentive for him here. It confirms what we already thought, that top NCAA sprinters were significantly faster than any in the NFL. Not to say, however, that some NFL athletes (obviously Bob Hayes, Willie Gault, Darrell Green, and a few others) would not be at this level had they focused on track.
sprinter guy wrote:
This all really means nothing because the 40 yard dash is always at least partially hand-timed.
The margin of error is probably .1 or maybe even higher.
It's why the 40 yard dash is nonsensical until they use FAT timing - but that will never happen because people are accustomed to seeing completely unrealistic times. I read somewhere that the first 40 yards of Usain Bolt's 9.58 was only a 4.24 when using proper timing. Real NFL players that are wannabe 4.2 guys are really more like 4.5 guys.
Not sure how this hasn't been resolved over the years. But my friend and I worked at a major D1 football powerhouse's high school football camp in 2000-2001. They would run the 40 yd dash with a button on the ground to start and a laser (like in the video) at the finish. Totally auto timed. It obviously removes reaction time, but at least there's no additional "hand timed" element.
Bolt's 4.24 probably included his reaction time, so 4.0X is reasonable without it. And that was just coming out of his drive phase of a 100m, so he could likely go a touch faster.
I love it..people trow out track calling it the backup sport, kinda shows how gifted these athletes are,people don't even know how physically insane distance runners are. Respect to Coleman.
Flo'da boy wrote:
FAT too, so legit timing. Only difference is not on turf but I think whatever the case he's comes out ahead
That's not FAT timing idiot.
Flo'da boy wrote:
FAT too, so legit timing. Only difference is not on turf but I think whatever the case he's comes out ahead
People also misunderstand NFL combine results because, at least until recently (not sure if it's changed), there are actually several 40 times that are acquired and distributed to teams. Some involve a human-initiated 'start' with an electronic/laser 'stop', but the other is 100% electronic that doesn't start until player motion triggers the first laser sensor. It's that latter time that is as legit as you can get to assess a 40-yard dash as it ignores reaction time. Teams are free to choose whichever they place the most value in, average, etc.
As I understand it, ever since the 100% electronic timing was added, that's always the time used when talking about the 'fastest 40'. The way the athlete was timed in the video was NOT 100% electronic and not apples to apples w/ say John Ross' combine time.
RPanama wrote:
Flo'da boy wrote:FAT too, so legit timing. Only difference is not on turf but I think whatever the case he's comes out ahead
People also misunderstand NFL combine results because, at least until recently (not sure if it's changed), there are actually several 40 times that are acquired and distributed to teams. Some involve a human-initiated 'start' with an electronic/laser 'stop', but the other is 100% electronic that doesn't start until player motion triggers the first laser sensor. It's that latter time that is as legit as you can get to assess a 40-yard dash as it ignores reaction time. Teams are free to choose whichever they place the most value in, average, etc.
As I understand it, ever since the 100% electronic timing was added, that's always the time used when talking about the 'fastest 40'. The way the athlete was timed in the video was NOT 100% electronic and not apples to apples w/ say John Ross' combine time.
I know there's one method where a stop watch is linked up to the timing sensor at the 40 yard line, so it is a human initiated start, but the exact stopping time is FA. That might be what you're talking about above. If you look at the full video, it seems like, what looks to be his coach, started the stop watch himself, and obviously they had the timing system at the end (maybe linked to the stop watch).
I'd prefer it to be motion based from the beginning so it can neglect reaction time, but it is what it is. 4.12 is still fast and I think many of the top sprinters in the world can break 4.
Always a bit ...???....when it comes to the football 40.
The fastest time I'm aware of is a "rumored" 4.09 by Darrell Green. This was done in the Redskins facilities, so...??? Green a 10.08 sprinter.
I would like to have been able to have seen this Tennessee football 40.
lane
1.Willie Gault
2.Sam Graddy
3.Harlan Davis
4.Christian Coleman
5.Leonard Scott
6.Richmond Flowers
When we talk about 'laser time 40s,' typically, the start or finish is still manually controlled by someone wih a stopwatch. There is no FAT timing with the 40 yard dash at the combine or elsewhere.
The average time you have to add with a handheld start is roughly .14, but the margin of error can run you from about .10-.30 depending on the competency of the timer. That's part of why you see ridiculous hand times in short sprints in track meets - timer incompetency.
And, with a manual finish, even then, you typically have to add another tenth. That's where a lot of the .24 conversions come from - .14 reaction time for a start, .10 for the finish. And, the human error for these things is really high and you have two chances to mess it up when fully hand timing.
Yes, Christian Coleman is clearly faster than an NFL guy, but two different timers timing him could have gotten differing times of 4.08 and 4.18 for example. The margin of error is so great that putting any weight on the 40 is, scientifically speaking, worthless to everyone.
RPanama wrote:
Flo'da boy wrote:FAT too, so legit timing. Only difference is not on turf but I think whatever the case he's comes out ahead
People also misunderstand NFL combine results because, at least until recently (not sure if it's changed), there are actually several 40 times that are acquired and distributed to teams. Some involve a human-initiated 'start' with an electronic/laser 'stop', but the other is 100% electronic that doesn't start until player motion triggers the first laser sensor. It's that latter time that is as legit as you can get to assess a 40-yard dash as it ignores reaction time. Teams are free to choose whichever they place the most value in, average, etc.
As I understand it, ever since the 100% electronic timing was added, that's always the time used when talking about the 'fastest 40'. The way the athlete was timed in the video was NOT 100% electronic and not apples to apples w/ say John Ross' combine time.
Since the timing methods are so various, who, to your naked eye, looks faster across the 40 yards, Ross or Coleman?
Honestly, I'd take Coleman by more than .10
sprinter guy wrote:
Honestly, I'd take Coleman by more than .10
Yeah, it doesn't look close to me either.