Just curious as to who the best performers were in the NFL combine 225 pound bench press. Has anyone seen any links to results?
Enjoy.
Jake Long, OT, Michigan did the best on the bench with 37 reps. That’s impressive, but in seems in recent years the best performers have typically hit the low 40’s. Anyways, I just hope he is around when the Chiefs pick at #5.
Thanks for the link Tedro.
Very F’Respectable numbers but the numbers tell only half the story, check out this vid of NFL Combine Results Top 10
Enjoy,
But you’ve got to put it in context too.
Would I have a shot at the NFL if my numbers were similar?
With my 4.6 40, I’d be the second fastest QB except I can’t throw shit and am too f’getting old to even play.
Even my BP x 225 seems mortal by RB and CB standards, especially this year. WTF do these guys eat?
It’s amazing to see how each year the players are getting faster and stronger.
No worries fellow Old School Meat Heads,
Elite athletes still do stupid athlete shit, even more so.
Case in point, according to WithLeather, the best sports blog ever:
“Superstud Arkansas running back Darren McFadden turned in one of the most impressive performances of the scouting combine when he ran a blistering 4.27 in the 40-yard dash. But that may not be the only thing that’s blistering if he keeps having so much unprotected sex.”
http://www.withleather.com/post.phtml?pk=5101
Even in this statistical category they managed to outperform me 2 to 1.
It has got to be the food.
Those 40 times are bunk anyways. I gaurantee there wasn’t a player there running a legit sub 4.3, and I’d be willing to bet none of them are even under 4.4.
i think the combine has a little too much emphasis placed on it. Jerry rice routinely ran 4.7 40’s (unacceptable) but, until this season, held the single-season touchdown record. on the other end of the spectrum, reggie bush ran a 4.3 40 and BP’d 225 over 20 times, but so far he hasnt done shit.
[quote]tedro wrote:
Those 40 times are bunk anyways. I gaurantee there wasn’t a player there running a legit sub 4.3, and I’d be willing to bet none of them are even under 4.4.[/quote]
What makes you say that? Aren’t they all electronically timed? If so, they could only be “bunk” if the NFL had reason to misrepresent the 40 times and I see none. I think the times are accurate, but I would agree that a little too much emphasis is placed on them.
[quote]masonator wrote:
i think the combine has a little too much emphasis placed on it. Jerry rice routinely ran 4.7 40’s (unacceptable) but, until this season, held the single-season touchdown record. on the other end of the spectrum, reggie bush ran a 4.3 40 and BP’d 225 over 20 times, but so far he hasnt done shit.[/quote]
To be honest, I think saying Reggie hasn’t done shit is a little too harsh. He has definitely failed to meet expectations, but that is due in large part to the fact that the expectations were astronomical. He has made some meaningful contributions at times, especially in 2006. Bush is definitely not a conventional NFL RB and when the Saints lost Deuce, they became one-dimensional. Their ENTIRE offense suffered as a result, not just Bush.
Frankly, I think they ought to convert Bush to a PR/KR/WR. Bush could be a sick receiver similar to a guy like Steve Smith. But even if they keep him as a little scat back to compliment Deuce, he should have a much better year in 2008 assuming the O stays healthy. In short, he has failed to live up to the hype, but I wouldn’t say he was a draft “bust.”
[quote]tedro wrote:
Those 40 times are bunk anyways. I gaurantee there wasn’t a player there running a legit sub 4.3, and I’d be willing to bet none of them are even under 4.4.[/quote]
how are the combine times not legit? the start is hand controlled and when they cross the rope it stops
Maybe tedro means that the clock is started at the first movement of the athlete, which saves around 0.15 of the time “100 m Olympic style”, and the hand-timing also usually saves around 0.2.
You still can get pretty good idea who is fast and who isn’t with this method, I think.
To clarify:
The 40-times may be precise, but they are not accurate.
The combine has three timers. Two are completely hand timed, one is started by hand and stopped electronically. We don’t even know which time they are giving us, or if it is an average of all three. As pointed out hand-timind saves about 2 tenths, obviously the clock that is stopped electronically will be less. Also, the time is started at movement, which doesn’t really matter for comparison between athletes.
Now, to put things in context. Ben Johnson, who ran a 9.79 100m 20 years ago, rand that first 40 yards in 4.38 seconds. Let’s assume a .15 reaction time, which is actually on the slower side for an athlete of his caliper, you typically see times closer to .12. He’s now at 4.23. Mind you he also ran through 60 meters that day in 6.37, which would be a world record still today.
4.23! Ben Johnson. With track spikes. Out of blocks. On a fast track. And a tail wind. In the Olympic finals. En route to a World Record. With a little stanazolol to boot. 4.23.
Now you’re going to tell me that Darren Mcfadden, at the RCA dome, on field turf, with no wind, in football cleats or cross trainers, ran a 4.27?
I don’t think so.
[quote]tedro wrote:
To clarify:
The 40-times may be precise, but they are not accurate.
The combine has three timers. Two are completely hand timed, one is started by hand and stopped electronically. We don’t even know which time they are giving us, or if it is an average of all three. As pointed out hand-timind saves about 2 tenths, obviously the clock that is stopped electronically will be less. Also, the time is started at movement, which doesn’t really matter for comparison between athletes.
Now, to put things in context. Ben Johnson, who ran a 9.79 100m 20 years ago, rand that first 40 yards in 4.38 seconds. Let’s assume a .15 reaction time, which is actually on the slower side for an athlete of his caliper, you typically see times closer to .12. He’s now at 4.23. Mind you he also ran through 60 meters that day in 6.37, which would be a world record still today.
4.23! Ben Johnson. With track spikes. On a fast track. And a tail wind. In the Olympic finals. 4.23.
Now you’re going to tell me that Darren Mcfadden, at the RCA dome, on field turf, with no wind, in football cleats or cross trainers, ran a 4.27?
I don’t think so.[/quote]
I remember this from Boyles’ “Myth of Speed” article. First of all, the combine guys are not running in cleats or cross trainers. I believe track spikes are legal provided you don’t have the spikes in, but I imagine they are running on spike-less cross-county type waffles. Very light shoes, to be sure.
Next, I have no problem saying that some of these guys could run comparable or better 40 yard times compared to Ben Johnson. Read anything on the 40 and you’ll find that the 40 yard dash basically comes down to the first 10 yards. There is an extremely high correlation between one’s vertical/broad jump and the first 10 yards. Point being that a person with a good 40 is going to usually be a freak at explosiveness and acceleration.
Now I agree that a 100 meter sprinter like BJ will be pretty damn good at explosiveness and acceleration, but I have no problem saying that a football player might be comparable if not a touch better.
Look the 100 meter dash is 2.73 times longer than the 40-yard dash. The 200 meters is twice as long as the 100. You would accept that a number of people are as fast or faster than BJ at the 200 meter dash, why not accept what might be true at the other extreme? That is, that some NFL player are as fast or faster than BJ at a super short event? My point is that BJ was a specialist at a longer event, so it is not surprising to me that he could be beat by guys with talent geared to a much shorter event.
Any idea what BJ’s vertical was? What would you say if it turned out that the NFL combine’s elite had verticals that met or exceeded BJ’s? Would you dispute those too?
The 40 is all about the start. The track athletes you just mentioned may have good closing speed in the 100m, but they cannot use that speed in the 40.
In the endthese 40 times don’t matter. It comes down to how good of a football player you really are.
[quote]FFBMikey wrote:
The 40 is all about the start. The track athletes you just mentioned may have good closing speed in the 100m, but they cannot use that speed in the 40.
[/quote]
That’s ridiculous, and you obviously have no knowledge of the 100m.
[quote]tedro wrote:
Those 40 times are bunk anyways. I gaurantee there wasn’t a player there running a legit sub 4.3, and I’d be willing to bet none of them are even under 4.4.[/quote]
are you serious? lol. The time starts when there hand comes off the pad and it stops when they hit the rope. Its your perfect time…
I think the biggest shocker of the combine was the fact that LSU linebacker Ali Highsmith ran a 4.96 40. He’s a 220-something pound coverage guy that was projected to run a 4.55.
Oh, and there is no way that any of these guys are getting in Ben Johnson’s arena at any part of a sprint, let alone the start. This guy held records for the 60m indoor. He starts faster, no question.
BTW, the 40 is run in football cleats. No track shoes or cross trainers.
[quote]KingMike wrote:
tedro wrote:
Those 40 times are bunk anyways. I gaurantee there wasn’t a player there running a legit sub 4.3, and I’d be willing to bet none of them are even under 4.4.
are you serious? lol. The time starts when there hand comes off the pad and it stops when they hit the rope. Its your perfect time…[/quote]
I have heard from several reputable sources that the combine uses a manual start and an electronic finish.
Why they do this instead of FAT I have no clue.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
I have heard from several reputable sources that the combine uses a manual start and an electronic finish.
Why they do this instead of FAT I have no clue.
[/quote]
My guess is that, considering the 40 isn’t a track event and has no relevance outside of the game of football, they aren’t to worried about the actual accuracy. They’ve done it the same way for so long, and a lot of up and coming guys would lose a lot of money if everyone’s times got significantly worse all the sudden.
[quote]eic wrote:
I remember this from Boyles’ “Myth of Speed” article. First of all, the combine guys are not running in cleats or cross trainers. I believe track spikes are legal provided you don’t have the spikes in, but I imagine they are running on spike-less cross-county type waffles. Very light shoes, to be sure.
[/quote]
Some of the guys will wear track spikes on their school’s pro day, but it is cleats at the combine.
And world record holder’s in the 100m aren’t? You must have missed that he also ran through 60 meters (6.37), and 50 (5.52) meters in times that would have been world records. Again, in track spikes, on the track, with a tailwind, and for an Olympic gold medal.
You’re crazy, and have no respect for true speed.
Again, a world record through 50m and 60m, and he was actually known more for his acceleration.
[quote]
Any idea what BJ’s vertical was? What would you say if it turned out that the NFL combine’s elite had verticals that met or exceeded BJ’s? Would you dispute those too?[/quote]
Johnson didn’t win a gold medal for his jumping ability. There is a much stronger correlation between 40 yard times and 100m times than there is sprinting and vertical jumping. Whatever point you are trying to make there is moot.
Again, we are talking the world’s best sprinters with the world’s best conditions compared to college football players running in cleats on field turf. To say that not just 1, but dozens of players every year are at the same caliper as world class 100m athletes is ludacris.