2016 Combine

There's a reason why most of the really fast guys in the NFL have track in their background.

The really slow guys usually don't make track teams.

...the combine overall is less useful than it used to be, because instead of honest stats and interviews, everyone's preparing for them like a sat cram class.

definitely not useless, but the drill results have a higher variance to on field performance now than 15 years ago.I think the evaluation aspect is better then its ever been.

Teams like Seattle (where Scott hails) uses comps like the SPARQ to compare prospects; its technological advancements like SPARQ that make the combine results more useful.

NFL FO and organizations are well aware of the prep process. Its up to them to figure out how to get the information they want. And the prep process also helps expose guys that aren't putting the work in.

I'm on the other side.

Training for the 40 can make you faster. Many people don't know how to run fast. And if they learn some mechanics and techniques of running they can certainly run faster at the combine and be faster on the field. There's a reason why most of the really fast guys in the NFL have track in their background.

But, being faster doesn't necessarily equate to being better.

who actually got faster? please cite an NFL player that thinks learning body lean for a 40 in a t shirt helped them become a great speed threat in the NFL.

who actually got faster? please cite an NFL player that thinks learning body lean for a 40 in a t shirt helped them become a great speed threat in the NFL.Lol, yup because that's exactly what I'm saying.

Anyhow, there is an entire area of professional sports based on science and kinesiology that disagrees with you. But to each their own.

the combine is the single biggest over-hype crap the NFL sells. and of course ill be paying attention cause im a fiend

Yes. But you have to realize the combine isn't designed for the layman. The on the field stuff is net-net probably the least important of all the events that occur at the combine. #1 is the medical testing and #2 (or really 1a) is the personal contact/team meetings.

The combine events are merely a cross check/tie breaker because it allows the player to be compared against each other and provide data that can be used to compare against historical archives.

Now if you are a draftnik/wannabe amateur scout (like myself) you can use the combine numbers to separate players that have similar grades from watching tape. For example a couple of years back I graded Deone Buchannon and James Ward much higher then other draftniks. But after their combines I was certain that they were 1st round prospect because they combine numbers comparable to previous 1st rounders which confirmed what I saw on film.

Personally I love the combine and find it very useful.


The combine is not designed to help you figure out who's going to make it in the NFL. On the whole I consider the concept or belief in draft predictionto be a myth. The draft process is about proper evaluation, assessment and ranking/grading. Imo that's the best a FO/organization can expect during the draft process. Whether a prospect fails or succeed has many factors completely external to the tangible evaluation process that imo it renders prediction impossible. You can have 2 prospect with identical college production and combine performance. But you still have no idea how the prospects will respond to making/having serious money and being in a new city on their own without the pretense of having to attend class. Then there are factors external to the prospect like whether or not their personality meshes with their coaches/GM, whether or not they are a scheme fit or their coaches know how to adapt to their skills, whether or not the staff/GM are fired and the player doesn't fit the new scheme, whether the player tries cocaine or weed for the 1st time and becomes an addict etc.....

Excellent post! I'm not really into the scouting thing. Partly because I don't get an opportunity to really pay attention to what goes on in college football. Not that I don't like college football, but I don't get very many opportunities like I used to, to watch it. Since this is the case, I don't get to see a lot of these guys play in college. I get a chance to catch maybe, a third to a half of my favorite college team's games, and that's about it.

Excellent post! I'm not really into the scouting thing. Partly because I don't get an opportunity to really pay attention to what goes on in college football. Not that I don't like college football, but I don't get very many opportunities like I used to, to watch it. Since this is the case, I don't get to see a lot of these guys play in college. I get a chance to catch maybe, a third to a half of my favorite college team's games, and that's about it.Thanks. I used to coach youth basketball and football and still have the itch to coach so this arm chair "scouting" helps scratch it.

I don't watch nearly as much college football as I used to. I watch some games here and there and watch the bowl games to keep an eye of some of the top prospects. But the main place I go to find info on players is this site:

Draft Breakdown | NFL Draft Prospect Videos and More (http://draftbreakdown.com/)

They have 'cut-ups' of players that show only the plays they were involved in.
So you can watch all the plays from player X from the games they have available.

There's another site noonkick.com (its not working right now for some reason) that has complete games.

robert nkemdiche , and reggie ragland

I'm on the other side.

Training for the 40 can make you faster. Many people don't know how to run fast. And if they learn some mechanics and techniques of running they can certainly run faster at the combine and be faster on the field. There's a reason why most of the really fast guys in the NFL have track in their background.

But, being faster doesn't necessarily equate to being better.

Oh my God this is fucking nonsense. Dude seriously? First off, almost all the training that goes into coaching a 40 time is focused on the start. Getting off quickly and getting to top speed, which during a 40 is done based on a starting position that not at all mimics the starting position you'd use on a football field - it's a track start. That translates exactly nil to the NFL. For corners, it's not how fast they can run, it's how quickly they can flip their hips and change directions, and then once up to speed it's how fast they can run WHILE TRACKING THE BALL IN THE AIR. Technique used while running on the track and technique used while you're looking up to find a ball in flight is completely different. Same for WRs. For linemen speed isn't even an issue, it's explosiveness off the line, but not like a track start is in the 40 where your goal is to explode and then get upright at top speed as fast as possible, the goal is to explode while keeping your pad level as low as possible.

Running backs only run upright once they hit the open field. Before that, they keep their pad level low, and only get to the open field with quickness and agility.

And besides, do you really think players remember their training for the 40 when they're on the field? If you don't keep practicing something you lose it, and no coach on an NFL team is teaching them how to get off to a fast start in the 40. It almost sounds like you've never played a sport at the high school or college level - the training doesn't stick with you unless you have muscle memory with it. You have to drill it over and over. And nobody drills it like that in the NFL.

Lol, yup because that's exactly what I'm saying.

Anyhow, there is an entire area of professional sports based on science and kinesiology that disagrees with you. But to each their own.

you're either being purposefully obtuse or you're trying really hard to deflect instead of actually answering criticism.

kinesiology is a thing, i never said it wasn't, but nice try on not actually responding to the post. please tell me how training for the 40 helps in real games. i don't know any NFL player that runs a faster 40 when they're 27 or 30 then they did when they were 23. if you could study being faster and it actually worked, how could that hold true?

shaving a 1/20th of a second on your 40 doesn't help you cut or block or run routes any better, and it's completely different than being geared up (weighted down) and having hands in your face in a real game. outside of a corner completely forgetting to jam DJ on a fly route, it basically has no bearing beyond somewhat comparative speed.