The truth about 40 times....

[Krangodnzr]

An interesting quote by Bobby Wade shows that he "gets it"

"Some guys run a 4.2 and play at 4.5 or 4.6 or more. I run a 4.5 or 4.6, and that's where I play at."

This is a fact of the NFL. There is no way in hell that McElroy ran a 4.3 in pads on the field. And Suggs plays just as fast, if not faster than his 40 time.

Jerry Rice runs around a 4.68, yet he regularly blew past guys that ran much faster 40 times throughout his career. Both Barry Sanders and Emmitt ran Marcel Shipp-like 40 times, yet many defenders could not keep up with them in the open field.

Just food for thought guys....God I can't wait until Saturday!

http://www.azcentral.com/sports/cardinals/03draft/0424wade0424.html

 

[SECTION 11]

As far as speed goes, Freeney runs fast, plays fast and he plays on turf for at least eight games. 13 sacks.

Suggs (if drafted by us) runs "slow," plays fast and would play on grass. What's a reasonable expectation for him in 2003?

 

[Krangodnzr]

Originally posted by SECTION 11
As far as speed goes, Freeney runs fast, plays fast and he plays on turf for at least eight games. 13 sacks.

Suggs (if drafted by us) runs "slow," plays fast and would play on grass. What's a reasonable expectation for him in 2003?

I think around 8-10 sacks his rookie year, would be reasonable.

As far as skills go, Dwight Freeney doesn't come close to Suggs. Suggs' pass rush moves are way superior to Freeney's and I honest think he will be a better pass rusher over the length of his career.

 

[Cardinals.Ken]

Originally posted by Krangthebrain
I think around 8-10 sacks his rookie year, would be reasonable.

As far as skills go, Dwight Freeney doesn't come close to Suggs. Suggs' pass rush moves are way superior to Freeney's and I honest think he will be a better pass rusher over the length of his career.

Word!

 

[BW52]

Originally posted by Krangthebrain
I think around 8-10 sacks his rookie year, would be reasonable.

As far as skills go, Dwight Freeney doesn't come close to Suggs. Suggs' pass rush moves are way superior to Freeney's and I honest think he will be a better pass rusher over the length of his career.

Terrell Suggs

For the #6 pick i expect 10 to 12 sacks rookie year.I would hope he would be better than Freeney and didn`t Freeney have 13 sacks. Fence stradling between Leftwich and Suggs

 

[Krangodnzr]

Originally posted by BW52
Terrell Suggs

For the #6 pick i expect 10 to 12 sacks rookie year.I would hope he would be better than Freeney and didn`t Freeney have 13 sacks. Fence stradling between Leftwich and Suggs

10-12 sacks for a rookie is phenomenal. I expect LESS, so that I'm not thoroughly disappointed (ala Wendell). I'm on the fence, despite what some think. I really believe that Suggs and Leftwich are both great players in the making, and I would lean more towards Leftwich, though Suggs fills a more pressing need.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Anyone remember Peter Warrick? Anyone remember him being touted as the first pick? Anyone remember his slow 40 time and everyone being shocked at it and him slipping to 4? Anyone else want to tell me how much of an impact reciever this guy has been in the pros?

Warrick was one of the best players I had ever seen in college - moves and making people look silly and his speed on the field pulling away from people - now what has happened to that player in the NFL - were the top three teams right to be scared by his forty times - or were they idiots who only believed in track stars rather than COLLEGE PRODUCTION and what they saw with their own eyes?

 

[AZCB34]

If Suggs is as great as most everyone thinks, why do you imagine him in the 8-12 sack range as a rookie when the whole world will be double teaming him?

Suggs will get 5-7 sacks and the off side DE will get double digits...assuming you think teams have to actually double Suggs to contain him (I don't other than a chip block from TE or RB).

 

[HoodieBets]

Originally posted by cheesebeef
Anyone remember Peter Warrick? Anyone remember him being touted as the first pick? Anyone remember his slow 40 time and everyone being shocked at it and him slipping to 4? Anyone else want to tell me how much of an impact reciever this guy has been in the pros?

Warrick was one of the best players I had ever seen in college - moves and making people look silly and his speed on the field pulling away from people - now what has happened to that player in the NFL - were the top three teams right to be scared by his forty times - or were they idiots who only believed in track stars rather than COLLEGE PRODUCTION and what they saw with their own eyes?

One word BENGALS! What QB did/do they have to throw to him. He is still a good WR. BTW he also had eye problems which prevented him from seeing the ball clearly. I believe he had eye surgery for it. Peter Warwick if he were to come to arizona right now would be by far the best WR. He is a good #2 on most teams though. Once the bengals get a well polished QB his numbers will soar.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Originally posted by azcardsfan1616
One word BENGALS! What QB did/do they have to throw to him. He is still a good WR. BTW he also had eye problems which prevented him from seeing the ball clearly. I believe he had eye surgery for it. Peter Warwick if he were to come to arizona right now would be by far the best WR. He is a good #2 on most teams though. Once the bengals get a well polished QB his numbers will soar.

Another word - CARDINALS! And funny - Didn't Chad Johnson (a 2nd year WR drafted in the 2nd round and not with the 4 pick) have a great year for the Bengals last year? Also him coming here and being the number #1 reciever isn't really saying anything at all.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Originally posted by cheesebeef
Another word - CARDINALS! And funny - Didn't Chad Johnson (a 2nd year WR drafted in the 2nd round and not with the 4 pick) have a great year for the Bengals last year? Also him coming here and being the number #1 reciever isn't really saying anything at all.

In the immortal words of Cardinal Ken - WORD!

 

[buff17]

Another thing is about guys being big disappointments in the NFL may be lack of motivation. Offseason conditioning and basicly how are they work while no one is there to watch them. When I played high school football during the offseason is the time when you get better. Same goes for college. NFL may be no different, but game experince helps too. Warrick looked to be a men among boys when he played at Flordia State. He looked super fast and was an all-around talent. Although, guys like Warrick are no suprise to me, he probably just got satisfied. Thats the worst thing that can happen to a young football player.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Originally posted by cheesebeef
Anyone remember Peter Warrick? Anyone remember him being touted as the first pick? Anyone remember his slow 40 time and everyone being shocked at it and him slipping to 4? Anyone else want to tell me how much of an impact reciever this guy has been in the pros?

Warrick was one of the best players I had ever seen in college - moves and making people look silly and his speed on the field pulling away from people - now what has happened to that player in the NFL - were the top three teams right to be scared by his forty times - or were they idiots who only believed in track stars rather than COLLEGE PRODUCTION and what they saw with their own eyes?

One thing that I would counter about this, is that Wide Receiver is a position that 40 times matter, since wideouts are running 40 yards all the time.

Yesterday on KDUS, Seth Joyner, Roy "Jetstream" Green, and Mark Carrier, all said that Suggs' 40 times didn't matter, and that Suggs will almost never run 40 yards. They all agreed that sack are a function of being relentless, which is a big plus of Suggs' game. They all agreed that Suggs' will be the best defensive player from this draft (and they all agreed that Leftwich will be the best offensive player).

 

[Cardinals.Ken]

Originally posted by Krangthebrain
One thing that I would counter about this, is that Wide Receiver is a position that 40 times matter, since wideouts are running 40 yards all the time.

Yesterday on KDUS, Seth Joyner, Roy "Jetstream" Green, and Mark Carrier, all said that Suggs' 40 times didn't matter, and that Suggs will almost never run 40 yards. They all agreed that sack are a function of being relentless, which is a big plus of Suggs' game. They all agreed that Suggs' will be the best defensive player from this draft (and they all agreed that Leftwich will be the best offensive player).

As far as Warrick goes, the dude is like 5'7"! That's why he will never be the threat that some invisioned many moons ago...

I was listening to the same show yesterday, and I couldn't agree more. Suggs is the best defensive player (overall) available in the draft. If we have a shot at him and pass, it'll be as bad as when the Blazers passed on Jordan for Sam Bowie.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Originally posted by Cardinals.Ken
As far as Warrick goes, the dude is like 5'7"! That's why he will never be the threat that some invisioned many moons ago...

I was listening to the same show yesterday, and I couldn't agree more. Suggs is the best defensive player (overall) available in the draft. If we have a shot at him and pass, it'll be as bad as when the Blazers passed on Jordan for Sam Bowie.

I'm glad that someone else heard them too.

They would know better than any of us, since all three were pretty good players in the NFL.

What I hear from FANS: Suggs is slow and weak. He will be a bust.

What I hear from Experts (ex-players, personell men, coaches): His workouts don't matter, his game tapes do. He is relentless and will be a great (not just good) NFL defender.


I think I will trust the experts on this one.