oldcow1945 said:

I'm ROTFL here!

I'd venture to say that it is not possible to accurately measure hundredths of a second. Even at the NFL combine.

Also the average could be skewed by one real fast guy or one real slow guy. If the Big Ten has 15 players that are faster than those in SEC, but the SEC has 5 really fast players, what conference is really faster?

oldcow1945 said:

It's meant as a joke when I call people an OSU fag. It's meant as a take-off on on the whole BQ fag thing. My bad for realizing that requied too much thing.

My God, did this whole board get an injection of estrogen or something?

Aloysius said:

/list]

C'mon Aloy, I don't think you are being genuine here. When you say that five one hundreds of second lends credence to the fact that the SEC is faster, then you are clearly taking a side. Anyone that hadn't taken a side would've looked at those numbers and said "It's a virtual wash". To a college or NFL scout, a WR running a 4.33 as compared to one running a 4.38,

it would make no difference at all. None. At that point it's his football ability. The post that started this whole thing said the Big Ten was "notoriously slow" and that the SEC was known for speed and the Big Ten was not. I went on to contend this and to prove that this is not the case. I think I clearly did that. A five one hundreds of second slower does not make anyone "Notoriously slow".

If the original poster who mentioned speed wanted to say SEC players are more athletic or better football players then that is his opinion and there is not one thing anyone can do to dispute that. But if you want to claim they are faster then I know that can be proven to be false. You said I'm set in my opinion. It's not an opinion. The numbers are right there. Five one hundreds of one second.

I explained the 4th round thing and you may not have seen it or still don't think it makes sense. I went with the first four rounds because it's those players that are generally accepted to be the ones that will contribute as a starter. I just didn't look at times beyond the 4th because those players simply are not very highly thought of. Their chances of making the team are not good. I wanted to look at those players that are expected to be productive NFL players. I think if you ask GM's they would tell you that starting around round 5 they aren't excpecting much from a player. He's a long shot. Do they make it? Sure they do. But the odds are against after about round 4.

So in the end, I wanted to measure those guys of true NFL talent.

@sez.ej said:

Besides my post did seem to kick everyone back on track for a while. where laureinitis stands in the draft... So sue me if I like the thread to stay on topic .

Are you saying you are the most misunderstood member here , or just the most picked on . I have lost track of which .

It just kills my how everyone gets so off track on these threads.. I could give a flying crap about what school he's from.. I am only interested in where he stands with the Browns and will he be a good player for us if we draft him and speculating on what spot we might try to get him.. Focus guys focus..

@riffer-x said:

Threads go where they may, that's the nature of the board.

Why do you always seem to be lecturing people anyway?

Riffer: feeling guilty? Feeling picked on? not sure why you are even the one who commented as your last post was 7 threads above my comment about getting off track. I am not sure where the "lecture" came in.. Do you still live with your parents?

Besides my post did seem to kick everyone back on track for a while. where laureinitis stands in the draft... So sue me if I like the thread to stay on topic .

WHERE (NFL production wise) are these players 3-4 YEARS after they were drafted? Are they starting? Still in the league? Productive as starters or backups? At that point, they should all have had opportunities to establish themselves in the NFL.

Just something else to muddy the waters. I certainly (with a job & 7 Grandkids & an upcoming wedding) don't have time to research it!

Mike

oldcow1945 said:

But Aloy said that five hundreds of a second lends credence to there being a difference.

Honestly, I don't care all that much because I'm not a partisan to either side of this debate. But I though the numbers at least left the question open, especially because your 4th round cutoff made little sense. Who knows what direction that difference would head if you included all cornerbacks drafted?

I could go ahead and re-crunch the numbers using all drafted cornerbacks, but I won't because

1. like ballpeen, I suspect this doesn't mean very much. It was more of a curious intellectual exercise for me.
2. I'm not convinced you actually give a shit about what the results would be. You're already set in your opinions, so any contrary results would just get a rolling eyes emoticon - which is fine, but then there's no use discussing it with you.

Aloysius said:

After exhaustively researching and analyzing the material, my conclusions are.....

None of it matters.

Corners taken

SEC: 18

Big Ten: 18 --> 4.4442

'08

Justin King: 4.31

Tracy Porter: 4.37

Charles Godfrey: 4.43

Jack Ikegwuono

'07

Leon Hall: 4.39

'06

Ashton Youboty

Alan Zemaitis

'05

Marlin Jackson: 4.52

Kelvin Hayden: 4.45

Scott Starks: 4.37

Dustin Fox: 4.43

'04

Chris Gamble

Jeremy LeSueur: 4.53

Rich Gardner: 4.46

'03

Eugene Wilson: 4.48

Bryan Scott

'02

Derek Ross: 4.59

Mike Echols

SEC: 4.4078 (out of 14)

'08

Patrick Lee: 4.41

Chevis Jackson: 4.52

Jonathan Wilhite: 4.38

'07

Chris Houston: 4.32

Jonathan Wade: 4.36

Fred Bennett: 4.46

'06

Jonathan Joseph: 4.31

Tim Jennings: 4.32

'05

Carlos Rogers: 4.44

Corey Webster

Travis Daniels: 4.54

'04

Dunta Robinson: 4.34

Ahmad Carroll: 4.34

Keiwan Ratliff

Bruce Thornton: 4.50

'03

'02

Lito Sheppard

Sheldon Brown: 4.47

Andre Goodman

@deadwombat said:

Over-analyzation here is running rampant. Also, I thought we were talking about James Laurinaitis.

This has been my point. That the speed difference is insignificant at least and ridiculous at most.

But Aloy said that five hundreds of a second lends credence to there being a difference.

Aloysius said:

So your research was on 7 players vs. 4 players

And you said this lends credence to there being a difference?

Aloysius said:

14 from the SEC? How many from the Big Ten?

Over-analyzation here is running rampant. Also, I thought we were talking about James Laurinaitis.

Speaking of which, JL is a fantastic player with a great head on his shoulders, but with our draft slots, it will be hard to take him: 5th place is too early for us and we have other issues to tend to, and honestly I think he will be gone by the time our next pick comes around.

Aloysius said:

Not sure that a .05 second difference is completely insignificant, but I'll put that aside for now. What you didn't see from looking at those numbers is that there were a lot more 4.3 guys among the SEC crew. While only 33% of the Big Ten guys registered times below 4.4, a full 50% of the SEC guys timed in the 4.3's. Because of the ridiculously small sample size, it's hard to tell whether that's indicative of anything, but it at least suggests that elite speed is more common in the SEC.

Where are you getting these past results?

Aloysius said:

Not sure that a .05 second difference is completely insignificant, but I'll put that aside for now. What you didn't see from looking at those numbers is that there were a lot more 4.3 guys among the SEC crew. While only 33% of the Big Ten guys registered times below 4.4, a full 50% of the SEC guys timed in the 4.3's. Because of the ridiculously small sample size, it's hard to tell whether that's indicative of anything, but it at least suggests that elite speed is more common in the SEC.

How did you get 50% of 21?

@ytownbrownsbacker said:

To be honest, I haven't heard that comparison used in a long time. nfldraftscout compares him to Rob Morris (which I think is a little too uncharitable).

Urlacher possesses a rare combination of size and athleticism: he can cover the deep zone like a Tampa 2 ILB must do, but he's also big & strong enough to stuff the run. I like Laurinaitis, but I don't think he possesses those same traits.

oldcow1945 said:

I'm ROTFL here!

Yeah, it's truly hilarious

Not sure that a .05 second difference is completely insignificant, but I'll put that aside for now. What you didn't see from looking at those numbers is that there were a lot more 4.3 guys among the SEC crew. While only 33% of the Big Ten guys registered times below 4.4, a full 50% of the SEC guys timed in the 4.3's. Because of the ridiculously small sample size, it's hard to tell whether that's indicative of anything, but it at least suggests that elite speed is more common in the SEC.

@ytownbrownsbacker said:

Ask, and you shall receive:

• Average 40 times:
  • SEC: 4.68
  • Ten: 4.71

oldcow1945 said:

One the other hand OSU has 15 southern players on their roster, 7 of them from Florida. (With another one this year in Jamaal Berry. The state of Florida's #1 Running back)

The states which have the most high quailty football players according to recruiting numbers are as follows.

Florida

Texas

California

Georgia

Ohio

I think the SEC swing has went the way it has simply because we are losing population up north. Pluto keeps harping on this and I can't disagree with him. More and more people are leaving the midwest, so not only are they leaving here they are moving to the south and giving them more of an influx of talent.

I still say it's cyclical and there is no doubt that the Big Ten is down right now, but they still can put out as good a players as anybody else, that will never be in question.

The scheduling thing is a joke. SEC teams play totally weak teams non conference. OSU is keeping lots of games in state to help fellow state schools.

I also believe the Big 12 has benefited from population movement.

@ballpeen said:

Bottom line is more kids want to play in places where the weather isn't crap 6 of the 9 months they are in school, thus SEC schools tend to get more of the blue chippers v. Big 10 schools.

I wouldn't disagree with that. But I'd also add that there are just a lot of good football players now in the south and they simply stay home. Of the 97 players on the Florida Gator roster only three are from Northern states. Two from NJ and one from CT.

One the other hand OSU has 15 southern players on their roster, 7 of them from Florida. (With another one this year in Jamaal Berry. The state of Florida's #1 Running back)

The states which have the most high quailty football players according to recruiting numbers are as follows.

Florida

Texas

California

Georgia

Ohio

Bottom line is more kids want to play in places where the weather isn't crap 6 of the 9 months they are in school, thus SEC schools tend to get more of the blue chippers v. Big 10 schools.

It's more likely a kid from Ohio or Minnesota is going to head to Florida or South Carolina v. the other kids heading up north.

That is why when you compare the conferences, you really need to look at the bottom tier schools in each...and that is where the big difference occurs, and what in the end most of the time makes the top teams slightly better...they play better, deeper teams week after week.