- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: LSU Pro Day Results
Posted on 3/15/10 at 1:30 pm to 225rumpshaker
Posted on 3/15/10 at 1:30 pm to 225rumpshaker
quote:
Well seems to me how all the others outside of Scott and Coleman had roughly the same 40 time numbers I really doubt the track was faster.
everyone that ran at the combine and ran today all had faster times today.
you doubt the track was faster??? lol
thats one big coincidence if not.
2
Posted on 3/15/10 at 1:39 pm to Doc Inside
Jacob Cutrera LB 6-3¨û/238 29¨ú & 9¨ö 4.63/4.62 18 4.42/11.81 7.20 9-10 35
Impressive
Impressive
Posted on 3/15/10 at 1:40 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
Lester Earl
quote:
you doubt the track was faster??? lol
I realize comprehension is difficult to some so let me try and explain again.
Below are the times of people who ran at the combine and ran today at LSU.
Harry Coleman
LSU: 4.45/4.48
Combine: 4.65
Chris Hawkins
LSU: 4.40/4.41
Combine: 4.43
Chad Jones
LSU: 4.54/4.60
Combine: 4.57
Brandon LaFell
LSU: 4.55/4.55
Combine: 4.59
Charles Scott
LSU: 4.53/4.53
Combine: 4.67
Out of these skills position guys everyone ran within hundredths of a second of their combine 40 times. The only exception is Coleman and Scott.
Again I ask if the track was SO MUCH FASTER how come LaFell, Jones, and Hawkins did not improve on their times as much?
Posted on 3/15/10 at 1:41 pm to Lester Earl
I am really surprised at some of the lifting numbers. There is no excuse for the lineman not posting bench numbers north of 25. I know its not the keystone to performance but the big nasties need to do better than that.
Posted on 3/15/10 at 1:44 pm to 225rumpshaker
quote:
Again I ask if the track was SO MUCH FASTER how come LaFell, Jones, and Hawkins did not improve on their times as much?
who said it was "SO MUCH FASTER"???
not me
it was faster, and that is blatantly obvious.
Posted on 3/15/10 at 1:45 pm to CharlesLSU
quote:
I am really surprised at some of the lifting numbers. There is no excuse for the lineman not posting bench numbers north of 25.
I wish I could say this surprises me, but it doesn't. LSU has not trained their players for endurance lifting. These kids have been doing 6 reps and below for 4 years now. That muscle doesn't just change over night. I think you see their functional strength more than the endurance power.
Posted on 3/15/10 at 1:47 pm to NorthEndZone
quote:
Jacob Cutrera LB 6-3¨û/238 29¨ú & 9¨ö 4.63/4.62 18 4.42/11.81 7.20 9-10 35
Impressive
another guy that could potentially get drafted despite subpar performances on the field
Posted on 3/15/10 at 1:50 pm to Lester Earl
You are the one saying the track is obviously faster.
So I am still curious what sample are you basing this off of that you are so certain the track was faster than the one in Indy?
The only two players who improved their times by a drastic amount are Coleman and Scott.
Did they replace the track when the other players ran so they would not run as fast?
Or are you just dismissing that those other players ran the same times only off by a couple hundredths of a second?
So I am still curious what sample are you basing this off of that you are so certain the track was faster than the one in Indy?
The only two players who improved their times by a drastic amount are Coleman and Scott.
Did they replace the track when the other players ran so they would not run as fast?
Or are you just dismissing that those other players ran the same times only off by a couple hundredths of a second?
Posted on 3/15/10 at 1:50 pm to LSUBraingirl
quote:
I wish I could say this surprises me, but it doesn't. LSU has not trained their players for endurance lifting. These kids have been doing 6 reps and below for 4 years now. That muscle doesn't just change over night. I think you see their functional strength more than the endurance power.
Even so, if a kid is posting a 450 lb 1-rep, I would expect at least 25 reps. While Moffit sure as hell knows more than I do, I think the NFL has as good a grasp on this as Moffit and they are not in agreement based upon results.....
Posted on 3/15/10 at 1:54 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
another guy that could potentially get drafted despite subpar performances on the field
Now that I can agree with. Dude has the build and ability. If he can stay healthy, he can be a really good special teamer. Also a good NFL career. I dont think Pro Bowler or anything, but a solid career
Posted on 3/15/10 at 1:54 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
people said a lot of the same shite about randall gay, and ryan clark, and curtis taylor.
Uh yeah, NO. You just mentioned 3 guys with way better careers at LSU than Danny McCray. Not even close.
Posted on 3/15/10 at 1:56 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
people said a lot of the same shite about randall gay
I am not saying he absolutely won't be drafted, but comparing him to Randall Gay is a big stretch. Gay was a very good cover guy that lacked exceptional speed, but due to playing very sound technique was very productive at the college level. The same can't be said for the guy you are backing, his technique was not good and he was always out of position to make a play on the majority of passes thrown to the guy he was supposed to be covering.
Posted on 3/15/10 at 1:59 pm to 225rumpshaker
quote:
So I am still curious what sample are you basing this off of that you are so certain the track was faster than the one in Indy?
im basing it on the fact that just about EVERYONE who ran at each facility, had faster times today at LSU. everyone.
even if its hundredths of second, its still faster.
11 of the 12 runs were faster than their combine time. Coincidence, i guess.
quote:
The only two players who improved their times by a drastic amount are Coleman and Scott.
and Scott was 6 lbs lighter an obviously in better shape. But it's not that, according to you. And the track isnt faster, according to you. He just "had a better start".
its not that big of a deal to argue about. You can think it was a result of whatever you want my man.
Posted on 3/15/10 at 2:00 pm to CharlesLSU
muscle strength vs muscle endurance
I did a quick google search, and this site explains the difference pretty well. I did alot of studying on this subject in college. Many people do not understand the physiology behind the two. You would think it would only make sence that if a person can lift alot of weight, then they should also be able to lift less weight for a longer period of time....doesn't really work that way. The muscles used oxygen in different ways depending on the type of workout a person is doing. It takes a while to retrain your body.
I did a quick google search, and this site explains the difference pretty well. I did alot of studying on this subject in college. Many people do not understand the physiology behind the two. You would think it would only make sence that if a person can lift alot of weight, then they should also be able to lift less weight for a longer period of time....doesn't really work that way. The muscles used oxygen in different ways depending on the type of workout a person is doing. It takes a while to retrain your body.
Posted on 3/15/10 at 2:03 pm to LSUBraingirl
quote:
LSUBraingirl
Nice find, but which way is more productive for football? Why would moffit use one, but scouts go by another. If the NFL thinks more reps is the way to go, does Moffit know something they dont or is he not changing with the times. I have to think the NFL being a huge business, will have done more research on the matter and use the results that best suit the NFL.
Posted on 3/15/10 at 2:07 pm to thunderbird1100
quote:
Uh yeah, NO. You just mentioned 3 guys with way better careers at LSU than Danny McCray. Not even close.
Ryan Clark, yeah
the other 2 are debatable.
Randall Gay only got a look because he ran well at his pro day. Sub 4.4
very comparable. Gay got burned more than McCray ever did.
Curtis Taylor career: 112 tackles, 2 sacks, 5 INTS, 0 FF, 2 TFL
McCray- 191 tackles, 4 sacks, 3 INTS, 3 FF, 7 TFL,
yea, ummmm...
This post was edited on 3/15/10 at 2:08 pm
Posted on 3/15/10 at 2:08 pm to Lester Earl
quote:Not trying to argue with you just pointing out that not everyone was that much faster. So I do not think it is as simple as a fast track. No one knows why Scott and Coleman ran faster than everyone else did. Glad they did because it improved their stock for April.
Lester Earl
This post was edited on 3/15/10 at 2:09 pm
Posted on 3/15/10 at 2:10 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
McCray- 191 tackles, 4 sacks, 3 INTS, 3 FF, 7 TFL,
3 d coordinators in his career. Didnt help, but I cringed when he was on the field. He just didnt produce. Taylor was bigger and faster I think. He was also a good tackler with better players in front of him.
Posted on 3/15/10 at 2:13 pm to Chuck U Farley
McCray was forced to be a nickel back a lot of the time. Meaning he basically lined up in a spot that a CB usually does on the slot WR.
Yet he was a safety. He was always better when he played deep, with the play developing in front of him.
Taylor was 209lbs and ran a 4.64 at the combine. 13 bench reps
McCray 213 and ran 4.46 and 4.47. 23 bench reps
Yet he was a safety. He was always better when he played deep, with the play developing in front of him.
quote:
Taylor was bigger and faster I think.
Taylor was 209lbs and ran a 4.64 at the combine. 13 bench reps
McCray 213 and ran 4.46 and 4.47. 23 bench reps
This post was edited on 3/15/10 at 2:15 pm
Posted on 3/15/10 at 2:15 pm to Chuck U Farley
quote:
Nice find, but which way is more productive for football? Why would moffit use one, but scouts go by another. If the NFL thinks more reps is the way to go, does Moffit know something they dont or is he not changing with the times. I have to think the NFL being a huge business, will have done more research on the matter and use the results that best suit the NFL.
EXACTLY!
but, she isn't necessarily saying one is better than other.
The NFL wants big men who have more gas in the tank. I will cite Igor O. from Oregon a few years back. The guy could 1-rep 500+ easily but also had somewhere around 48 reps at the combine. I think the 1-rep is obsolete at best.
This post was edited on 3/15/10 at 2:18 pm
Page 4 of 10
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News