12-13-2012, 04:39 PM
(12-13-2012, 03:01 PM)shoju Wrote: One slight nitpick Kevin.
Chris Johnson's 4.24 40 yard combine time was fast, but it wasn't "the" fastest.
Frank Cooney Wrote:That said, Bo Jackson has the best verifiable time at a Combine with his 4.12 clocking at the New Orleans Superdome in 1986.
Sorry I should have said Chris Johnson has the fastest 40 time using fully electric timing (meaning the start and the stop). Jackson did his with a hand start on the timer (perhaps it was 3 separate hand starts and then the average or median time was used). He was fast, he was crazy fast, but it was timed with a different method. I believe Deion Sanders was a 4.1 something using the same timing methods as Jackson. I'm pretty sure that the "official NFL" record is Chris Johnson. But then again what is officially recorded changes. Sacks didn't become official until 1982 as one of the more notable examples. I don't know when combine "records" became official.
I also think that all the players you named, you still be able to play today, and possibly would be great still, even if you just took them from their rookie years to today and started them fresh. They would be a bit behind because of some of advances, but most of the Hall of Fame caliber players would still be able to start, many would be pro bowl/all pro level, and some would still be able to be Hall of Famers. The outliers haven't changed as much as the average players have. The worst NFL players now just have a significant athletic advantage. Though there is more to the game than that. Now one of the differences is QB. Unitas would likely be better now than he was in the past. Rules changes that don't allow the defensive backs to essentially mug the wide receiver for the whole length of the field would likely make it so Unitas saw more open receivers or at least more tight windows, and he had the throwing accuracy. That's also part of why QB's have become even more critical to success. Passing is a more time efficient way to gain yards, and it also helps minimize the number of players that can have a direct impact on the play, because it doesn't have to start in the middle of the field, it can take the typical 12-15 players closely involved in a running play and drop that to as few as 8 or so (only 3 rushing D lineman, so 2 oline men don't really matter much, the QB, the receiver and the back in one on one coverage). Sure it's not usually that few, but it can happen.
Oh and I also typo'd when I said 300+ players that go 4.8 or faster. I meant to say there are now 300+ pound players that can run a 4.8 40. That's just freakish. Sure guys that big pretty much never need to get flat out, but just the ability to get that much weight moving that fast.
I was an OK athlete in my younger days. I've done a 5K in under 18 minutes, a 3200 meters (~2 miles) in 10:45, I've done a 100m dash in the high 12s. But my best 40yard would still have been well over 5. Usain Bolt would have been 20 some odd meters ahead of me at the finish. But there are 300 pound men playing in the NFL who have had 100m times recorded in the mid 10s range who would have only been 8 - 12 meters behind him when he set the world record.
An old Popular Mechanics article does a nice quick summary of some of the types of typical forces involved.
Part of the reason kick off rules have been changed isn't because of higher occurrence of injuries, but the severity of injuries, mostly because it's one of the few times where players can hit each other at full speed. The "defenseless receiver" rules being another case, but even then the defender isn't usually able to deliver full power, and the receiver isn't often going full tilt because even on the best throw momentum is lost in making the catch.
I played a few years of high school football in the early 90's and took and delivered a few big hits, in general, you can shrug it off because of the padding. I've also played a bit of rugby, and yeah, just the nature of the game, like I mentioned, you don't have nearly as many chances to deliver the big hit, and the demands of the game don't allow the same degree of specialization that the NFL allows, etc. You see this with the difference between punts and kick offs in the NFL. On punts you don't have nearly the same number of opportunities for the big hits because there is much more "side by side" and short range blocking. It's generally only if the punter does a really good job on the kick (getting good hang time) and the receiving team blows blocking assignments that you get the chances for the really high speed hits that nearly every kick off has.
All that being said the kick off changes and the newer ideas being floated around about it, are more about PR than actual safety because of all the lawsuits that NFL is facing.
But this game just isn't baseball, basketball, or hockey, where era translation is much easier. Wilt Chamberlain would still dominate, Elgin Baylor would have no trouble fitting in, and Michael Jordan could still be the greatest player ever. Sandy Koufax and Babe Ruth would still dominate, Willie Mays would still be able to be a super star. The average MLB and NBA players have also gotten better, but the nature of the game hasn't morphed the same, the skill sets haven't changed as much. When you have 22 players interacting on every play in football, vs 10 in basketball, vs 2 or 3 in baseball, and you add in the start/stop nature; the ability to specialize and then train and condition and select certain types of people for those roles increases.
---
It's all just zeroes and ones and duct tape in the end.
It's all just zeroes and ones and duct tape in the end.