re: Who was LSU's last "freak" (athlete)?

Jacob Hester on every 4th down he converted against Florida!!! Freak!

quote:

---

I always thought Dalton Hilliard was a rare freak. He had those huge thighs and could change direction so fast he left defenders picking up their socks

---

SFP knows NOTHING about anything before 1995!!!

GOD, are you there?, Please give back the time it took me to open this thread... I know , I know - If I'd known it was another SFP thread I could have surely stopped!! Oh, and if it's not too much trouble could please stop my eyes from bleeding...

It is clear that SFP does not know what makes a great athlete. He thinks that speed and strength that can bemeasured on a clock or at the weight bench is a true measure of an athlete.

Those that actually have competed with athletes know that there are many other factors.

In my opinion, the last freak football athlete at LSU was Corey Webster. He had an unbelievable ability to change directions and control his body. Michael Clayton was also a great athlete. Neither were speedsters, but they were so athletic that they didn't need to be speedsters. They were both easily the best athletes on the field during their final spring games at LSU.

If speed and strength were what made a football layer a freek, then X Carter was a freek...of course, he was not a great player.

Right now, Chad Jones is a guy that has freek potential. He can throw in the mid 90's with control,he can hit a baseball (few athletes can), and he may become a great football player.

quote:

---

Neither were speedsters, but they were so athletic that they didn't need to be speedsters.

---

you do realize that there are guys with great agility and COD who are also speedsters and who are very strong also, right?

russell sheppard is one of those guys, as is PP

Sometimes I start to wonder if Chicken pays you a little on the side to start threads and keep them going, to be a contrarian to keep fanning the flames of argument... but somewhere in the middle of this thread, you slipped up a little and let the truth slip out-- here is what you said:

quote:

---

most smart people know if i'm tryin to teach a lesson. the rantards don't, but that's part of the process

---

You actually do think you are smarter than everyone else, and somehow you get some sort of weird self-validation by starting these conversations with semi-easy questions (but ones that have more than one answer), then contesting the answers that people give in an effort to control the conversation. So the posters that called you out for just wanting to "win" the argument and for being intellectually dishonest are absolutely correct. You yourself said you are trying to teach the rest of us ignorant folk a lesson.

As far as your stupid argument, most definitions of athlete revolve around somebody being trained or skilled in exercises, sports or games requiring physical strength, agility or stamina. A "freak" athlete would, according to most, be someone who was either generally outstanding or had attributes that were outstanding. There are plenty of good answers that started coming in, but you had to go and be an arse about it... "no Kevin Faulk was 1/10th too slow in the 40", blah, blah... if Laron weighed 10 lbs more (which by the way has nothing to do with his athleticism)...

Maybe Ryan Baker and Ron Brooks should be considered "freak" athletes because some here consider them undersized, yet they both display an ability to apply force at the right point in time to make plays, despite the fact that they don't meet your criteria for size/speed/measurables. At 175-180lbs, I guess Ron Brooks needs to run a 4.1 40 yard dash to be a freak... though if he puts on 40 lbs, he will automatically be a freak at 4.4-- how stupid does that sound?

By the way, Lance Armstrong and Tiger Woods are "freak" athletes, but they probably aren't great football players and have bad 40 times, etc. Oh wait, we were talking about football players, right? Well if that's the case and Woods and Armstrong don't count, why are you so focused on defining football athleticism as someone's weight and how high of a vertical leap they have? Why define a football player by sprinting and jumping characteristics that are better served for Olympic track tryouts? These measurables are only one indicator of athleticism and success. Football "athleticism" is more than speed and strength or your contrarian pick of Korte would have had more success on the field. What about vision and balance to name a couple of athletic qualities that are just as important?

While you do strike me as smarter than average, you also strike me as more immature than average, and a little pompous. So before you go trying to teach the rest of us a lesson, try looking at what's wrong with you first.

quote:

---

You yourself said you are trying to teach the rest of us ignorant folk a lesson.

---

if you could read, you would know this thread wasn't about lessons. i could not think of a freak athlete who went to LSU in the modern era

indy reminded me of a person i had overlooked

quote:

---

Football "athleticism" is more than speed and strength or your contrarian pick of Korte would have had more success on the field.

---

athleticism and player lever are 2 different things

quote:

---

While you do strike me as smarter than average

---

if you define average as about 99.9% of the population, then yes i am smarter than "average"

quote:

---

if you define average as about 99.9% of the population, then yes i am smarter than "average"

---

Pass the bar yet?

(legit question)

ETA: Wow that sounded like a flame. It isn't.

On topic: How about Kirston's 4.55?

Tim Pope..I kid..I kid!

quote:

---

Pass the bar yet?

---

yeah

quote:

---

How about Kirston's 4.55?

---

kid was a stud in 2003 and just got hurt. if he can somehow stay healthy he could do something in the NFL