• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

2020 QB Commit Logan Smothers advances to state finals in 60 meter dash

Blue Howl

Drink up, Shriner!
5 Year Member
https://sports.yahoo.com/usain-bolt-casually-ties-nfl-combines-40-yard-dash-record-sweatpants-203431086.html
At the 2019 Super Bowl Experience on Saturday, Bolt unofficially tied the NFL scouting combine’s 40-yard dash record with a 4.22 rumble. .....Without any specific training, and while donning sweatpants and tennis shoes, Bolt tied Cincinnati Bengals wide receiver John Ross’ record from the 2017 combine....What makes things even more wild is that Bolt appeared to slow up at the end, in part because he was going to run into a padded barrier.
lol. And Bolt is 32 years old and retired as a competitive sprinter, and he isn't even very fast in the first half of a 100 meter race. I always get a big chuckle when football players brag about how they are as fast or faster than the world's best sprinters.
 

YUENGLING

Junior Varsity
5 Year Member
Respectfully, I'm not exactly sure accuracy is his forte at the moment. Now if you had talked about his pedigree and athleticism, I can get on board with that. I do agree he will flourish in Frost's system, but this kid needs a lot of coaching up.
A 66% completion rate as a high school QB is impressive to say the least.
 

David3464

Red Shirt
2 Year Member
I'll take Logan Smothers and how he has done so far as a HS player. You can't coach speed, and that is very important to have in SF's offense at the QB position. He has no problem running the ball and if his passing improves, which it will the longer he plays and gets coached at HS and then by MV, he'll be a good QB for us.


A 66% completion rate as a high school QB is impressive to say the least.
 

One Man Jury

Red Shirt
5 Year Member
Ran a 51.34 in the indoor 400 today. Followed it with a 7.28 in the finals of the 60 meter dash which isn't surprising after running a 400.
If this was on a standard 165 yard indoor track, that probably amounts to a sub-50 400m outdoor time. As a junior. That is a great combination of strength and speed for a qb. I don’t have a clue as to what his 40 would be. Of all the great sprinters I’ve been around on the track, nobody ran the 40.
 

One Man Jury

Red Shirt
5 Year Member

ShortSideOption

All Big 10
10 Year Member
If this was on a standard 165 yard indoor track, that probably amounts to a sub-50 400m outdoor time. As a junior. That is a great combination of strength and speed for a qb. I don’t have a clue as to what his 40 would be. Of all the great sprinters I’ve been around on the track, nobody ran the 40.
They have a 200m hydro banked track down there so the conversion is a bit less than on a 165 yard track.
 

alabamahusker

Scout Team
15 Year Member
I saw several games of his last season as it is literally right down the road..
The kid is quick no doubt.

I am holding out on an overall QB assessment as that little of an observation sample doesn’t mean much...
 
And that 6.87 would put Jaron at #21 in the Big Ten heading into this weekend. A 7.25 would rank #65 in conference. I'll take that in my quarterback, but still, the 40 time is more important.
As T Mart showed, the 10 YD dash may be the most important.
Duvall, Frost, and Chinander agreed at last year's coaches' clinic that the 10-yard time is as good of a measure of quickness as the 40, which the 40 is supposed to measure. They don't mind having 40 times, but they thought that it didn't reveal much more than the 10. If you're measuring speed, even at 100 yards some world-class sprinters are still accelerating, so the 40 doesn't necessarily measure top-end speed either. For football purposes, only maybe on a kickoff return will a player ever reach top-end speed, so the acceleration is more relevant.

I'd never thought about any of the above until they talked about it, but now I tend to agree. Any thoughts, @ShortSideOption ?
 
Last edited:

ShortSideOption

All Big 10
10 Year Member
Duvall, Frost, and Chinander agreed at last year's coaches' clinic that the 10-yard time is as good of a measure of quickness as the 40, which the 40 is supposed to measure. They don't mind having 40 times, but they thought that it didn't reveal much more than the 10. If you're measuring speed, even at 100 yards some world-class sprinters are still accelerating, so the 40 doesn't necessarily measure top-end speed either. For football purposes, only maybe on a kickoff return will a player ever reach top-end speed, so the acceleration is more relevant.

I'd never thought about any of the above until they talked about it, but now I tend to agree. Any thoughts, @ShortSideOption ?
This is a really fun debate to talk about, hits home with me. I was pretty tall, and had a really fast 100 meter time. But I was by no means quick, my 40 was fast, but not as impressive as my 100 meter, and while I never ran the 10 yard dash, that would have been average at best. I still remember running suicides (one sideline to the other) and seeing guys that my 100 was better than beating me, because they could get up to speed faster. Another time, we were doing spring conditioning and the coaches knew my times, we had a drill where we started on our stomach and then sprinted 20 yards to work on core and reaction and sprinting. I couldn't win a single one of those, and one of my coaches was coming with "you are obviously dogging it, you should be winning every single one of these!" I just couldn't get up to speed as fast as others.

Personally, i'll take a guy that has a lower top end speed but can get to his top end the quickest. If he gets caught from behind, it is what it is, but some of the guys that are really fast but take longer to get up and going might not even break away to get caught from behind. It's why there are WRs that are considered "striders". In the 40, I wasn't to top speed yet. I feel like I was in the 100s, but everyone is different. There's a reason that many times someone that wins the 60m indoors at NCAAs isn't the same as who wins the 100m, the start is so crucial.
 

All 'N' 011808

Former Walk-on
2 Year Member
Duvall, Frost, and Chinander agreed at last year's coaches' clinic that the 10-yard time is as good of a measure of quickness as the 40, which the 40 is supposed to measure. They don't mind having 40 times, but they thought that it didn't reveal much more than the 10. If you're measuring speed, even at 100 yards some world-class sprinters are still accelerating, so the 40 doesn't necessarily measure top-end speed either. For football purposes, only maybe on a kickoff return will a player ever reach top-end speed, so the acceleration is more relevant.

I'd never thought about any of the above until they talked about it, but now I tend to agree. Any thoughts, @ShortSideOption ?
Yeah, I would agree with that for football. In the 4 x 100m relay, I used to take this into consideration all the time based on who I put where and how far they actually ran. Every leg in this relay is not actually 100m based on where the handoffs are exchanged. That's why 100m splits can mean absolutely nothing because one guy might be running closer to 115m or something like that while two others are running less than 100m.
 

Native

ToungeInCheek since 2010
5 Year Member
This is a really fun debate to talk about, hits home with me. I was pretty tall, and had a really fast 100 meter time. But I was by no means quick, my 40 was fast, but not as impressive as my 100 meter, and while I never ran the 10 yard dash, that would have been average at best. I still remember running suicides (one sideline to the other) and seeing guys that my 100 was better than beating me, because they could get up to speed faster. Another time, we were doing spring conditioning and the coaches knew my times, we had a drill where we started on our stomach and then sprinted 20 yards to work on core and reaction and sprinting. I couldn't win a single one of those, and one of my coaches was coming with "you are obviously dogging it, you should be winning every single one of these!" I just couldn't get up to speed as fast as others.

Personally, i'll take a guy that has a lower top end speed but can get to his top end the quickest. If he gets caught from behind, it is what it is, but some of the guys that are really fast but take longer to get up and going might not even break away to get caught from behind. It's why there are WRs that are considered "striders". In the 40, I wasn't to top speed yet. I feel like I was in the 100s, but everyone is different. There's a reason that many times someone that wins the 60m indoors at NCAAs isn't the same as who wins the 100m, the start is so crucial.
My top end wasn't bad either, but on suicides I would get beat by way more than could beat me at 100 or even the 40s. I don't think I have a fast twitch muscle in my body except my eyelids. I'm not a slow blinker.
 

Redfish

Red Shirt
5 Year Member
This is a really fun debate to talk about, hits home with me. I was pretty tall, and had a really fast 100 meter time. But I was by no means quick, my 40 was fast, but not as impressive as my 100 meter, and while I never ran the 10 yard dash, that would have been average at best. I still remember running suicides (one sideline to the other) and seeing guys that my 100 was better than beating me, because they could get up to speed faster. Another time, we were doing spring conditioning and the coaches knew my times, we had a drill where we started on our stomach and then sprinted 20 yards to work on core and reaction and sprinting. I couldn't win a single one of those, and one of my coaches was coming with "you are obviously dogging it, you should be winning every single one of these!" I just couldn't get up to speed as fast as others.

Personally, i'll take a guy that has a lower top end speed but can get to his top end the quickest. If he gets caught from behind, it is what it is, but some of the guys that are really fast but take longer to get up and going might not even break away to get caught from behind. It's why there are WRs that are considered "striders". In the 40, I wasn't to top speed yet. I feel like I was in the 100s, but everyone is different. There's a reason that many times someone that wins the 60m indoors at NCAAs isn't the same as who wins the 100m, the start is so crucial.
This make me think back to Taylor Martinez, his biggest asset in my opinion was getting to top end speed extremely fast. I was always amazed how fast he was in the short distances of 5, 10 and 20 yards. Guys could never seem to get a good angle to tackle him.
 

Farmer Jake

Recruit
I may not know much about running times because the only time I ever run was chasing a calf that got away from the herd, but it makes sense that the 10 yard time is most important (with the ability to change direction) is the most important for someone starting from the backfield (got to get past the line of scrimmage). I can also see a 40 yard time being more important for wide receiver to get open down field faster.

P.S. The calf usually won.
 

Native

ToungeInCheek since 2010
5 Year Member
I may not know much about running times because the only time I ever run was chasing a calf that got away from the herd, but it makes sense that the 10 yard time is most important (with the ability to change direction) is the most important for someone starting from the backfield (got to get past the line of scrimmage). I can also see a 40 yard time being more important for wide receiver to get open down field faster.

P.S. The calf usually won.
You tag from the back of a truck? Open field tagging will test your 10 yr and juking ability.

 
Top