Originally posted by GNielsen:
Again, the argument you and others are making is basically based on one fantastic player's 40 time. If your argument were a sound argument, then professional football people would not be paying any attention to 40 times. But of course, we know that they spend a lot of time looking at and analyzing 40 times. What you're basically saying is that you know a better way to pre-judge a given athlete's potential than the 40 time and I think that deserves one of your emoticons. The 40 time is a basic judgment tool. The idea is that a player with a better 40 time is more likely to be able to create separation from a defender - it obviously doesn't guarantee that - but it's an objective measuring tool, not a subjective judgement. The arrogance of people who would say "this isn't track and field" astounds me. Really!!! This isn't track and field???!!! Gee, thanks!
Your still missing the point... this isnt track and field.