ghostofhoke

February 21st, 2015 at 12:57 PM ^

Maybe you don't really understand how this whole draft evaluation thing works? Nobody is saying he is sunk by a slower 40 time. Performance in these tests do indicate things aside from just how you perform in a certain test. Performance on certain tests also indicate your ability to prepare in relation to your competition. These tests are more a system of checking boxes for scouts and if there are deficiencies or even people who outperform they can push people to look further at them. The combine performs it's intended mission quite well actually.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 11/21/2014

MGoPoints: 8562

west2

February 21st, 2015 at 11:31 AM ^

of Maurice Clarett on the 2002 NC buckeye team. Was really ballyhooed after challenging the NFL draft eligibility rules and finally entering the draft in 2005 was projected as a 1st rounder.  Then at the combine ran 4.7 and 4.8 40s and his draft stock fell off a cliff and was surprisingly drafted in the 3rd round but ultimately never played a down in the NFL.

Joined: 01/23/2011

MGoPoints: -998175

west2

February 21st, 2015 at 1:07 PM ^

thats not correct.  Clarett developed some team issues at OSU in 2003 related to filing false benefit claims that ultimately led to his dismissal from OSU (obviously its a longer story that I am trying to keep brief-its well documented if you want more info).  He then filed a lawsuit against the NFL over the 3 year eligibility rule that he ultimately lost.  He was available for the 2005 draft and considered a top draft prospect with some baggage.  He participated in the combine in February 2005 with the aforementioned disappointing 40 times then refused to participate in individual scout workouts and was dubbed "SloMo", projected as a 7 round pick but wound up drafted the last pick of the 3rd round by Denver.  He reported to training camp, develeped a reputation as difficult-uncooperative and was released without playing a down in late summer.  He was not picked up by any other teams.  6 months later (January 2006) he was arrested for armed robbery.  

Clearly, the slow 40 times began the downward spiral that cost him his shot at the NFL.  Whether Clarett intrinsically lacked the speed or this was a byproduct of lack of training ultimately doesnt matter as it raised a red flag that maybe Claretts ability was overstated.  Also I didnt say these were parrellel stories, I said it reminded me of Clarett. 

Joined: 01/23/2011

MGoPoints: -998175

Jimmyisgod

February 21st, 2015 at 11:49 AM ^

They said 20 drops in the last 2 seasons.  He's not a mismatch more anyone at that speed.  Too slow to get seperation on DBs and not big enough to box out LBs.  Hope he proves everyone wrong though and is the next Kelvin Benjamin.

Joined: 01/24/2012

MGoPoints: 10342

MichiganAggie

February 21st, 2015 at 11:54 AM ^

What did he ever do on the field against a top CB that made one think that Funchess is a blazer? Sure he looks good against college LBs and Safeties, but he never struck me as fast

Joined: 11/10/2008

MGoPoints: 1797

Losher

February 21st, 2015 at 12:23 PM ^

I think this just pushes him more into the tight end position and that means he has to pack on a few pounds to be able to be an effective blocker. Thats all a lot of guys arent that fast but he is athletic enough to make up for that in the short to intermediate route tree. 

Joined: 06/02/2012

MGoPoints: 827

bronxblue

February 21st, 2015 at 12:53 PM ^

My gawd some people around here are petty.

Yeah, he wasn't great at UM.  But he's fast and big enough to at least get a shot at the NFL, and had he decided to return I'm sure people would have been incredibly happy.  It sucks it didn't work out, but the worst thing he did was not play as well as people wanted and didn't meet the "effort" requirements of some of those watching.

EDIT:  I'll also add that while all the talk about 4.3/4.4 in the preseason was silly, there is also a chance that he just happened to have a bad, what, 10 minutes in which he ran two 40 yard sprints?  It can happen, as crazy as that sounds to some people.  If he's going to get dinged, he should for an underwhelming year and a tweener body type/skill set.  Those are actual, real deficiencies and why I never bought the 1st-round talk in a vacuum (though of course someone could still draft him there.  Tim Tebow went in the 1st round, for gawd's sake. Just takes one GM to make a dumb pick).  

But his future shouldn't hunge two 40 yard dash times in February.  Just as a counter-point, Denard ran a 4.43 at the combine, which is fast but wasn't overly sensational given his size and position (WR/RB).  And yet, this year he honed his body, became a bit stronger, and looked like a real asset going forward in Jacksonville.  So taking too much out of the combine isn't really useful.

Joined: 11/22/2008

MGoPoints: 172099

jblaze

February 21st, 2015 at 12:38 PM ^

Thread title sucks and should be changed

4.7 isn't bad for a guy his size. Also, how many people are here criticizing Funchess for lack of "heart" and then turned off a game early or didn't try their best to actually watch the game or skipped a Ufer?

Joined: 08/29/2008

MGoPoints: 19411

umchicago

February 21st, 2015 at 12:58 PM ^

Mariota - 4.52

Winston - 4.97   Damn, there are some linemen that almost get that.

Which QB do you think has put in some effort to get better since the season ended?  I think I know which QB I would take.

Joined: 02/05/2009

MGoPoints: 33707

bronxblue

February 21st, 2015 at 3:18 PM ^

I don't see the "smart" part about him - guys threw 18 picks this year, had a middling YPA, and that's not even getting into the off-field issues.

He has a good arm, but it seems far less accurate than people frame it as IME.

Joined: 11/22/2008

MGoPoints: 172099

falco_alba15

February 21st, 2015 at 2:40 PM ^

2008: Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, Chad Henne, Matt Flynn. 4.89, 4.84, 4.92, 4.79. Joe Flacco is the only one with a ring.

2009: Matt Stafford, Mark Sanchez, Josh Freeman. 4.81, 4.93, 4.90. No rings.

2010: Sam Bradford, Jimmy Clausen, Tim Tebow, Colt McCoy. 4.79, 4.76, 4.71, 4.79. No rings.

2011: Cam Newton, Jake Locker, Blaine Gabbert, Christian Ponder, Andy Dalton, Colin Kaepernick, Ryan Mallett. 4.56, 4.51, 4.63, 4.83, 4.53, 5.24. No rings, one Super Bowl appearance, see 2008.

2012: Andrew Luck, RGIII, Ryan Tannehill, Brandon Weeden, Brock Osweiler, Russell Wilson, Nick Foles, Kirk Cousins. 4.59, 4.33, 4.89, 4.83, 4.53, 5.03, 4.84. One ring.

2013: EJ Manuel, Geno Smith. 4.65, 4.58.

2014: Blake Bortles, Johnny Manziel, Teddy Bridgewater. 4.93, 4.68, n/r.

Yeah speed really matters.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 02/06/2013

MGoPoints: 776

bronxblue

February 21st, 2015 at 3:15 PM ^

Well, nobody says speed is the only factor, but a guy who can run around AND has good throwing mechanics and arm strength is better than one who doesn't.  I mean, Brandon Weeden could have run a 2.4 and he'd still be terrible.  But from that list, the faster guys tended to have the best careers.  I mean, Russell Wilson and Colin Kapernick both made SBs, Cam Newton is a multi-time Pro Bowler, RGIII was very good until he got injured, Stafford's deal was never speed but he moves better than other guys, and it's hard to read too much into 2013 and 2014 guys yet.

Yes, you can be a good QB and not be a blazer, but 4.9 for a guy with questions about his accuracy and decision-making isn't "good".

Joined: 11/22/2008

MGoPoints: 172099

falco_alba15

February 21st, 2015 at 3:53 PM ^

I just think people are getting overly enamored with speed and it's not necessary. People can rave that you can't teach speed, which may be true, but RGIII is the perfect example of what happens when speed is the underlying factor to the success of a quarterback. Surely we can agree that Denard was not a great quarterback. Would you rather have a fast guy that can throw, or a thrower that can run? 4.9 for a guy that's been touted as the more NFL polished than the guy with blazing speed behind a one-dimensional offense is not terrible, and Winston has great pocket awareness. I don't think either prospect is a slam dunk but all the same, the 40yd isn't going to be the definer of this particular draft pick. In fact, I'd bet that Winston gets drafted higher than Mariota.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 02/06/2013

MGoPoints: 776

bronxblue

February 21st, 2015 at 4:46 PM ^

I agree the 40-yard dash is an overrated measure of a player's abilities, but it is a data point on a guy.  As with Funchess, he should be judged on his play the past year and how that will translate to the NFL, but being kinda out of shape AND pretty slow, combined with his off-the-field issues, certainly raises some flags.

Joined: 11/22/2008

MGoPoints: 172099

Yeoman

February 21st, 2015 at 4:14 PM ^

...but don't know how you got to your conclusion.

By your own metric the most successful QB here is Wilson (he's had fewer years to collect rings than Flacco so he has the edge), who ran the third fastest time of the 31 on your list.

Looking at everyone on the list under 4.6 we have Wilson, Luck, Kaepernick, Geno Smith, Newton, Locker, RG III.

The slow list, over 4.9, is Henne, Sanchez, Freeman, Mallett, Foles, Bortles.

There are successes and busts in both lists, of course, but on the whole I don't have any trouble choosing the fast list over the slow. Am I wrong?

Joined: 06/08/2011

MGoPoints: 21391