If the Chiz continues to recruit (over the next 3 years) the current way he is, what team would you compare us to in regards to speed?
Team Speed
- Thread starter EJ 4 STATE
- Start date
people may (or may not) rip me for this, but just remember the topic when I say Oklahoma.
We don't have some of the athletism or size that they do at certain spots, but we seem to hang with them with speed. if you sort the classes coming in this year we are quite even with them on speed too. we don't have the stars they do, but we all know that doesn't matter on the field. But I think we are similar to oklahoma in speed alone.
We don't have some of the athletism or size that they do at certain spots, but we seem to hang with them with speed. if you sort the classes coming in this year we are quite even with them on speed too. we don't have the stars they do, but we all know that doesn't matter on the field. But I think we are similar to oklahoma in speed alone.
I'll probably get negrepped to hell for this, but I don't think this class is any "faster" than any average class you'll find elsewhere. I think Iowa has more sub-4.5 guys than we do this year, and they are in the Big 10 (and Iowa).
4.5 guys or faster by school in the last recruiting class (from Rivals database):
Baylor: 6
Oklahoma State: 9
Oklahoma: 8
Texas: 8
Texas Tech: 5 (one not yet signed, so that would be 6)
Texas A&M: 8
Colorado: 6
Nebraska: 10
Kansas: 7
Kansas State: 11
Missouri: 3
Iowa State: 6
Iowa: 10
Iowa State 4.5 guys by class:
2007: 4
2006: 5
2005: 6
2004: 12
Bear in mind that the database isn't complete, but most of the "fast" guys have 40 times in the database.
So yeah, I don't see this class as being somehow WAY faster than any other class we've had, or really much faster than any other class in the Big 12. We are really just treading water.
4.5 guys or faster by school in the last recruiting class (from Rivals database):
Baylor: 6
Oklahoma State: 9
Oklahoma: 8
Texas: 8
Texas Tech: 5 (one not yet signed, so that would be 6)
Texas A&M: 8
Colorado: 6
Nebraska: 10
Kansas: 7
Kansas State: 11
Missouri: 3
Iowa State: 6
Iowa: 10
Iowa State 4.5 guys by class:
2007: 4
2006: 5
2005: 6
2004: 12
Bear in mind that the database isn't complete, but most of the "fast" guys have 40 times in the database.
So yeah, I don't see this class as being somehow WAY faster than any other class we've had, or really much faster than any other class in the Big 12. We are really just treading water.
eh 40 times are overated.. but when u look at the guys and the speed they have in this class i think the thing that sticks out is their size first then the speed to go along with the size.. seems like in the past all of the fast guys were smaller...
If we had a bunch of huge fast guys, I suspect we'd have a much more highly ranked class.
I know you guys get worked up about recruiting and are all looking for a bunch of positives and whatnot, but thinking that this class is somehow way better than classes we've had in the past is setting yourselves up for disappointment.
It's a solid class, but it's not really any better than most of DMac's classes. It's really a very, very average BCS-caliber class.
By the look of what offense we saw last year, I think we are headed in the direction of fast O-linemen that can pull or spring downfield blocks.
their 40 times will increase when they get in their workout programs at iowa state. I wouldnt worry about it cause I think chizik know what he is doin. We should make a bowl game next year and be descent again in 2 years it won't take long for chizik to get us ranked again. Even last season we almost beat Oklahoma. He did that without his players I can't wait to see how good we will be when chizik gets his guys in the system. I'm excited to see who chizik will sign for next years recruiting class. I hope we can get that 4 star widereciever from cedar rapids Washington and brandon weghner from sc heelan. And nick casa from Colorado would be a huge get. I can't wait
You can't really compare us to Iowa with the speed because they recruited at least three running backs. Our class had a ton of guys that will work into lineman, two kickers and such. We are fast for the positions that we recruited. You can't compare something in general looking to see how many had sub 4.5 speeds. But a lineman that is 320 lbs. and has a 28 inch vertical leap and speed to go with that is more exciting to me than three guys that are 4.5 and will compete with each other to be average in Sewer City.
Jason Carlson: sub 4.3 sec, I like that. I would put him in every aspect of this game WR, occasional DB-safety, and kickoff and punt returns.
I like that he's going after a lot of fast guys because if you are fast you have a little more room for error. If you make a mistake it's possible to make it up with speed.
You all need to remember we need speed at all positions or what I call "overall team speed". Speed is certainly important at the skill positions but it is important at all positions. I believe Chizik "gets this".
I like it when the lineman are running 4.9 40's versus the 5.3 40's we use to bring in. I think the biggest improvement will be increased speed from the trenches. Dan use to bring in alot of very large lineman that weren't very fast. Unfortunately some of these guys never seemed to get any better thtoughout their 4 years. I think we are looking at more athletic lineman now that will grow into teh position in a couple years and hopefully keep the speed.
There is so much more to the speed question. Is the kid quick? Does he have quick change of direction? Is he quicker to the ball than you would think based on a 40 time? As for the linemen, rarely do they ever need to run 40 yards. If they are quick off the ball, have the good feet and pad level then their 40 times may not mean so much.
it would be sweet if we had a real return threat. i know we have had our bright spots back there, but never really have we been real consistant
