Love the break down around the 46 minute mark. So many things to be excited about with this kid. He's so very clearly not a guy who will only run a straight route and hope to get by his man (which is the only time a 40 time is relevant as most of us know). He's a receiver, and that play I'm referencing proves it.
Hey pal sorry I couldn't spend all day on the Internet with you and your new bff. You should try that Google thing sometime yourself. All you have to do is type in NEP and you can find your answers. NEP/EP are commonly used in sports analytics. You seem confused. I never said 40 time is the end all be all. It's just another useful piece of data. I said I consider below 4.0 to be elite speed but I never said elite speed is needed. In fact I said the opposite. You took offense because I said there is a strong correlation between 40 time and NFL success. To argue that there's not is silly. The combine average for WR is 4.55. The slower you are, the worse your chances of making it. Just because there are a few successful guys who are much slower than average makes them the exception not the norm. The times of the four WR from the all-pro list are faster than average to elite. The range was 4.52 to 4.38. The median range from that top 125 performance chart is 4.51 to 4.45. thanks for proving my point. Brown runs a 4.48 by the way.
You have the logic of a teenage girl on the rag. I said "4.35 is elite. 4.42 is not." and that was enough to prompt a serious of pissy and butthurt comments from you.
Yea that catch was nice and yesterday Smith was saying he thought that his catch was better than ODB's, but it wasn't. Beckham caught that ball between his thumb and forefinger as it was rolling out the back of his hand, I've never seen anybody make a catch like that
You're having a really rough go in this thread. Don't you realize that everyone is saying the same thing and you're the only one that thinks you're making any sense? Do you think that's some weird coincidence? Your recollection of things is cute but again, whatever floats your boat. If that's what you need to make you feel better, who am I to stop you? You responded to a post about Jackson and Smith as receivers. RECEIVERS. That play ON THE FIELD. Not about their 40. You implied that Jackson's 40 time put him in another stratosphere when it comes to speed using your archaic theory of "better 40 time equals faster". Pretend you didn't, but as its already been pointed out, everyone sees how foolish you're being.
Agreed, I didn't think Smith's one-handed catch was better than OBJ's fingertip catch either, but as the story said that Smith said it with a grin on his face I'm thinking he was just playfully bragging on himself.
What's scary is I don't know that he is. He may honestly still be of the mindset that 40 times translate to the field on an exact basis. If it weren't for the fact that this was once a theory, I'd say he's trolling. I'm afraid he's just stuck in the Al Davis mindset from the early to mid 2000s and hasn't progressed with the rest of the football fanbase.
listen if a kid who is 20 years old still doesnt know how to run routes the likelihood that he will all of a sudden care enough to become a great route runner is not that good. it amazes me that kids with so much talent can be pushed on along and never get the fundamentals of the game. this is stuff a guy like him should have learned in youth football. but he didnt. HAS to learn at the high school level.... but he didnt. and for christs sake urban how do you let him go through your program and not know how to run perfect routes? i mean fuck man its not htat hard. its all effort, understanding and repetition. but no they all just said oh wow look at all that talent, did you see that play he made!@?@?!?!@!
yeah i read the op and replied. i dont give a flying camel fuck what we are talking about now. i dont have time to read all 6 pages! can i get a cliffs notes version so i am in the Know
I agree, but the sad reality is that many coaches care more about their reputation and winning than they do developing their players. I think that's mostly at the high school level and Pop Warner levels, but collegiate coaches aren't immune. If collegiate coaches don't play those supreme atheletes because they have them focusing on their fundamentals, the teams don't win as many games and the coaches might get fired. It's a tough situation. Alumni are demanding. Pressure to win and go to bowl games or compete for the national championship are high. It's complicated by the fact that only 1-2% of high school football players go on to make the NFL. Some of those coaches aren't the best judges of talent or best teachers. Some of their assistants are young and their knowledge level can be lower, as well as their ability to teach. If they have a kid who's bigger, faster and stronger than anyone else, but who has shoddy fundamentals, what are they to do? Do they sacrifice the season and sit that kid and develop him to his full potential, make sure he knows solid technique and fundamentals (that is if the coach and his staff even know what those fundamentals/techniques are supposed to be) to enhance his chances of having a pro career? That's where baseball has an advantage over football with their minor league system where players can be taught proper techniques/fundamentals, but even there exceptional atheletes fly through the minor leagues and up to the show with glaring weaknesses. The thing is that one can't play at a high level if one is "thinking too much." One can't focus on playing naturally in games and letting instincts take over, when one is working to change one's techniques and fundamentals. It slows them down. Some minor things can be tweaked, but major changes take time and focused work apart from preparing for the next game. So coaches would have to make the choice between playing the kid as is or teaching him/preparing him for the next level and sitting him until he has learned what he needs to learn. The kids themselves may or may not know what it is they don't know and need to learn. They probably don't know how skilled the CSs are at this college or that college and what systems might be the best fit for them. For many, it's just where they can get a scholarship to play. For the exceptional few, they have their choice of schools and systems, but even then may not make the best choices. How are their parents supposed to help guide and advise them? Even their coaches may not know where the best situation is for the kid, or may be blinded by politics, friendships, or kickbacks if they steer the kid to a certain school over another. Rather than paying atheletes in college, I think the NFL ought to develop a minor league football system like baseball or like the NBA's D League where some kids can go straight out of high school and/or college. There the kids can focus on football and be paid, and supposedly learn the correct fundamentals and techniques. A perfect example is Tim Tebow. He should have learned the correct fundamentals for throwing the football in middle school or high school at least, but when his arm was good enough for those levels, and he was able to run over, around and through the other players his age, how is the coach supposed to be able to resist playing him?
Sound strategy.... Long story short, your entire post did not relate to Devin Smith at all. That's why nobody knows what the fuck you're talking about.
But what exactly makes you think Smith is a bad route runner? Just because most of the balls thrown his way were on a few particular routes does not mean that he can't run the other routes.
So your saying a 20 year old can't develop his game? That might be the dumbest thing I ever heard you can be taught how to run good routes or decent routes what you can't be taught is speed and altheticism As for smith noone really knows how raw of a route runner he really is since ohio st Only used him 1 way
