• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

WR Ted Ginn, Jr. (Official Thread)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
This suggests Maurice Greene's record run would be just over 4 seconds flat in the 40 yard dash! I would tend to say you should weigh the number from 4.067 to 4.05 because the extra distance could have a fatigue factor.
Click to expand...

Actually, you should probably bump it up to at least 4.07 because he was still accelerating throughout the whole race. No way would he have slowed down.

But I like the comparison
 
Upvote 0
This suggests Maurice Greene's record run would be just over 4 seconds flat in the 40 yard dash! I would tend to say you should weigh the number from 4.067 to 4.05 because the extra distance could have a fatigue factor.
Click to expand...

I think (IMO) you're weighting this the wrong way... since the start (stopped to max accelleration) is actual weight... ( 9.78 at 100m is more than half of 19.32 at 200m- where there probably really is a fatigue factor-and a turn to run)

I would guess the Mo Green number was actually more like a legit 4.12-4.15.

The reality is of course that depending on how guys sprint... better burst, or higher top speed... you do actually have to actually measure it.

To be quite honest... I wouldn't be at all surprised if Joey Galloway in College could beat Ginn in the 40... (Wouldn't be surprised if he didn't)... What makes Teddy Special is that burst from Fast to Ludicrous speed at his top end... That's why his best Track events aren't shorter sprints.

Just because Ted ran a 4.4 flat legit.. and some other idiot ran a 4.39 doesn't mean the other guy is faster on the field... screw times... you've SEEN it.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
People do not realize how much the start/finish can alter the time...Mo Greene trains every day on his start/finish technique. Many HS kids tend to rise up before they make any forward progress...if the watch starts on first movement, this kills their time.

OB, like AK said, I think your equation is fine, but it is measuring top speed too much without the acceleration added in. Say Ginn breaks off a long run down the sideline...untouched and in a straight line...timing a 40 yard segment of that run is not going to give you an accurate time.
 
Upvote 0
osugrad21 said:
People do not realize how much the start/finish can alter the time...Mo Greene trains every day on his start/finish technique. Many HS kids tend to rise up before they make any forward progress...if the watch starts on first movement, this kills their time.

OB, like AK said, I think your equation is fine, but it is measuring top speed too much without the acceleration added in. Say Ginn breaks off a long run down the sideline...untouched and in a straight line...timing a 40 yard segment of that run is not going to give you an accurate time.
Click to expand...
this is why 40 times are not as relevant as "football speed"
 
Upvote 0
bucknut11 said:
Actually, you should probably bump it up to at least 4.07 because he was still accelerating throughout the whole race. No way would he have slowed down.
Click to expand...

Uh, no. Sprinters don't accelerate through the first 40-50m of a sprint...they're at top speed by around the 15-20m point.
 
Upvote 0
MililaniBuckeye said:
Uh, no. Sprinters don't accelerate through the first 40-50m of a sprint...they're at top speed by around the 15-20m point.
Click to expand...

Well-- see that's the rub, and why its impossible to theoretically calculate.... Guys like Ben Johnson were probably full speed at 10m.... (Roid aided- Just using him as an example of an awesome burst).... Michael Johnson... maybe as long as 8 or 10 strides... so more like 25-30m....

I think we need to get Mo Greene down to the track and time him at 40 and get this over with.
 
Upvote 0
LloydSev said:
quit timing these damn kids with no pads on.

Pad these kids up and THEN make them run the 40. That's what I wanna see.
Click to expand...
Yeah! And make them spin around on a baseball bat, too! Or maybe make them carry 40-50 pounds on their guts and see how fast they are, then!
 
Upvote 0
What's so wrong asking them to do something that they will be doing every single day during football season??

There is absolutely no correlation between the 40 now, and their football speed on the field... nothing... but everyone builds it up as if it means something anymore.
 
Upvote 0
I think there's a better way to interpolate what Maurice Greene's 40-yard time would be.

His world record time in the 50-meters is 5.56, set in 1999.
His world record time in the 60-meters is 6.39, also set in 1999.
His rate of speed for the 10 meters past 50 is thus .83 seconds/10 meters.

I believe that sprinters are basically running at their top speed between 25 and 70 meters; before 25 they are accelerating, and after 70 they are tiring.

If we assume that a sprinter is running the same rate between 40 and 50 meters as he is between 50 and 60 meters, Greene's 40-meters time would be 4.73, since he's running at a rate of .83 seconds/10 meters. (5.56 - .83).

Then we subtract the time it would take him to go 3.424 meters, which is the distance between 40 yards (36.576 meters) and 40 meters.

.83 seconds/10 meters = .083 seconds per meter, times 3.424 = .284 seconds

4.730 (estimated 40 meter time) minus .284 (estimated time to run the difference between 40 yards and 40 meters) = 4.446

4.446 seems high, but it only assumes that Maurice Greene's 50 and 60 meter records were of equal performance, and that he runs the same rate between 36.576 and 60 meters down the track.
 
Upvote 0
LloydSev said:
What's so wrong asking them to do something that they will be doing every single day during football season??
Click to expand...
Seriously, I agree. I'd like to see all the players' times while they're wearing pads and uniforms. And they should run on the same grass as they do during the game. That's the true test to compare the players speeds against each other.

I was just joking about the spinning and extra weight. I just thought it would be funny to see that.

But how often do players run 40 yards? Maybe a true test would be their 10-, 20-, or 25-yard times. I know that might be ludicrous to make them run 10 yards, but that's probably more accurate to football distances.
 
Upvote 0
You're numbers look pretty good... and I think the times are consistent... if you compare the 50 and 60 to his best 100 time... his speed rates over the last 50 and 40 in that 100 would have been .0846 m/s and .085 m/s respectively... so that .83 number is proabably pretty close.

4.446 still seems pretty high.
 
Upvote 0
AKAKBUCK said:
You're numbers look pretty good... and I think the times are consistent... if you compare the 50 and 60 to his best 100 time... his speed rates over the last 50 and 40 in that 100 would have been .0846 m/s and .085 m/s respectively... so that .83 number is proabably pretty close.

4.446 still seems pretty high.
Click to expand...
I think the .0846 and .085 show a little tiring the last 20 or 30 meters.

Doesn't 4.446 seem high, though? It shows how inaccurate all the hand-held times are. But anybody that runs an electronic time under 4.50 has some real speed.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top