3 cone is king. 3 cone >>>> vertical and broad jumps >>>> short shuttle. Those are the only drills that have positive correlations to DE success. 40 yard, 10 yard, long shuttle, and bench press can be all but ignored.

 

I am confused here. What is the difference between the short shuttle and 10 yard dash?

 

BTW this applies to DTs too.

---

"Not a fast dude." That is enough for me to write him off.

Terrell Suggs and his 114.5 sacks says hello.

---

Terrell Suggs and his 114.5 sacks says hello.

 

Terrell Suggs is fast enough to be a linebacker, so there's that.

---

"Not a fast dude." That is enough for me to write him off.

 

People wrote Terrell Suggs off when he was coming out of Arizona for this very same reason. That was a mistake. 

People wrote Jerry Rice off when he was coming out of Mississippi for this very same reason. That was a mistake. 

 

There's fast. Then there's football fast. I'll take heart, consistency, high motor and all effort over the great "fast" athlete. All that speed kills. And so does dropping the football, not having good strength and pop at the first point of contact and lack of instincts. 

---

"What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie? I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky. The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing; Rush in and die, dogs - I was a man before I was a king."

People wrote Terrell Suggs off when he was coming out of Arizona for this very same reason. That was a mistake. 

People wrote Jerry Rice off when he was coming out of Mississippi for this very same reason. That was a mistake. 

 

There's fast. Then there's football fast. I'll take heart, consistency, high motor and all effort over the great "fast" athlete. All that speed kills. And so does dropping the football, not having good strength and pop at the first point of contact and lack of instincts. 

There are also extreme outliers.

---

There are also extreme outliers.

 

Are you referring to Suggs and Rice?

---

Chasing a scrambling QB? Closing in on the QB once you get off your block? Catching a RB out of the backfield? Etc.


I know there are other more important factors, but to pretend like that's meaningless for DE/DT is like I previously said, ignorant.

 

None of those have anything to do with the 40, lol. :teehee:

---

Chasing a scrambling QB? Closing in on the QB once you get off your block? Catching a RB out of the backfield? Etc.


I know there are other more important factors, but to pretend like that's meaningless for DE/DT is like I previously said, ignorant.

closing in on the qb after the block has nothing to do with the 40 unless hes scrambling which is already the first question.

---

There are also extreme outliers.

What's the 3 cone threshold for pass rushers?

---

All of those things are pretty much secondary skills you wouldnt really be expecting your DE to do every down anyway. None of those things would make or break a guy with top pass rushing ability.

---

All of those things are pretty much secondary skills you wouldn't really be expecting your DE to do every down anyway. None of those things would make or break a guy with top pass rushing ability.

 

Teams get some very important information from all those drills, then figure out how to use it. Nothing is completely useless to people at the combine except Rich Eisen's annual 40 in work clothes.

---

Teams get some very important information from all those drills, then figure out how to use it. Nothing is completely useless to people at the combine except Rich Eisen's annual 40 in work clothes.

What very important information can you get from the 40 as it applies to dlineman? The 40 isnt really a factor for anyone in the trenches on either side.

---

He's smaller, but when I watch Barnett, he reminds me a bit of Kevin Dodd.

---

What's the 3 cone threshold for pass rushers?

 

From what I've been able to gather while searching, I'd wager it's around a 7.2 or faster.

---

There are also extreme outliers.

 

True. But you're talking about two players who were monsters in college. Suggs had 24 sacks in one year alone at Arizona. He ended up finishing with 44 sacks in his college career. That's ridiculous. And Rice was finishing up his career with NCAA records with receptions in a single season along with big time numbers that hovered around the 1900 yards receiving mark in one season. 

 

I just think some teams have shown that if you base most of your grading on a player because he doesn't run a 4.5 or faster in a 40 yard dash with no pads on, no helmet, no real worry of contact, etc. No obstacle in their way such as having to beat a block or beat a corner at the line of scrimmage. It's just obnoxious. A lot of people can haul [BLEEP] in 40 yards when you take all of the elements of football out of the equation. 

 

Mike Tyson said it best man. "Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth". 

 

Some drills, sure, they're better indicators of what that player can be and what they're capable of for their key positions. But, often times. It's what you see on film, on the stat sheet and how they go about preparing for the game that should be accounted for. 

---

"What do I know of cultured ways, the gilt, the craft and the lie? I, who was born in a naked land and bred in the open sky. The subtle tongue, the sophist guile, they fail when the broadswords sing; Rush in and die, dogs - I was a man before I was a king."

True. But you're talking about two players who were monsters in college. Suggs had 24 sacks in one year alone at Arizona. He ended up finishing with 44 sacks in his college career. That's ridiculous. And Rice was finishing up his career with NCAA records with receptions in a single season along with big time numbers that hovered around the 1900 yards receiving mark in one season. 

 

I just think some teams have shown that if you base most of your grading on a player because he doesn't run a 4.5 or faster in a 40 yard dash with no pads on, no helmet, no real worry of contact, etc. No obstacle in their way such as having to beat a block or beat a corner at the line of scrimmage. It's just obnoxious. A lot of people can haul [BAD WORD REMOVED] in 40 yards when you take all of the elements of football out of the equation. 

 

Mike Tyson said it best man. "Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth". 

 

Some drills, sure, they're better indicators of what that player can be and what they're capable of for their key positions. But, often times. It's what you see on film, on the stat sheet and how they go about preparing for the game that should be accounted for. 

 

On the other end of the spectrum you have a guy like Stephen Hill who had one decent year at GA Tech, had a great combine and has been pretty nonexistent in the NFL since.

---

closing in on the qb after the block has nothing to do with the 40 unless hes scrambling which is already the first question.

Again, I am not trying to say it's even close to the most important, but it's a factor.


If you have 2 players rated similarly, but one runs a 5.2 second 40 and one runs a 4.65 40, as long as there are no random concerns and everything else is apples to apples, I'd take the guy with the faster 40.

---

Coughlin when asked if winning will be a focus: "What the hell else is there? This is nice and dandy, but winning is what all this is about."

True. But you're talking about two players who were monsters in college. Suggs had 24 sacks in one year alone at Arizona. He ended up finishing with 44 sacks in his college career. That's ridiculous. And Rice was finishing up his career with NCAA records with receptions in a single season along with big time numbers that hovered around the 1900 yards receiving mark in one season.


I just think some teams have shown that if you base most of your grading on a player because he doesn't run a 4.5 or faster in a 40 yard dash with no pads on, no helmet, no real worry of contact, etc. No obstacle in their way such as having to beat a block or beat a corner at the line of scrimmage. It's just obnoxious. A lot of people can haul [BAD WORD REMOVED] in 40 yards when you take all of the elements of football out of the equation.


Mike Tyson said it best man. "Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth".


Some drills, sure, they're better indicators of what that player can be and what they're capable of for their key positions. But, often times. It's what you see on film, on the stat sheet and how they go about preparing for the game that should be accounted for.

That's my number 1. How does a player look on film. You can get an idea of everything about the player from that. Things like measurements and these new school spider charts should just be used as secondary supplemental information to help refine your tiers.

---

Coughlin when asked if winning will be a focus: "What the hell else is there? This is nice and dandy, but winning is what all this is about."

Some drills, sure, they're better indicators of what that player can be and what they're capable of for their key positions. But, often times. It's what you see on film, on the stat sheet and how they go about preparing for the game that should be accounted for. 

Of course it's accounted for. Production is a part of the puzzle. Ideally, especially if you're picking high, you can find both.  

 

Stephen Hill is an outlier in the other direction. Guys that are only athletic freaks usually don't get drafted that high either. He was justified because he played in the Georgia Tech offense that is very hard to have great production in, and he did show flashes. Also, doing the whole college comp thing to Megatron and Demaryius that people like to do. 

---

Again, I am not trying to say it's even close to the most important, but it's a factor.


If you have 2 players rated similarly, but one runs a 5.2 second 40 and one runs a 4.65 40, as long as there are no random concerns and everything else is apples to apples, I'd take the guy with the faster 40.

If you're making DL decisions based on the 40, then you're just being a less-insane version of Al Davis. :/

---