the older folks, and older regimes are all about it, thus that fact.
the newer regimes seem to know better.
except matt millen.
tromadz said:the older folks, and older regimes are all about it, thus that fact.
the newer regimes seem to know better.
except matt millen.
Sorry Trom but that's not how it works.
porky88 said:tromadz said:the older folks, and older regimes are all about it, thus that fact.
the newer regimes seem to know better.
except matt millen.
Sorry Trom but that's not how it works.
How what works? Learning from mistakes? Its a test that doesn't work, like the old witch trial tests. People learned.
(yes, the 40 yard dash is that dangerous)
why are you bringing up the wonderlic, which i mentioned like 5 posts ago, and then told you why (it is also a test that tells you nothing, like the 40). Thats very pack66-like, and I dont like it.
If that's how the remainder of this conversation is going to be, then we can end it with that.
I think the 40 is pointless, a lot of GMs do as well, and while it still somewhat effects draft stock, that is changing.
there, good day sir.
tromadz said:why are you bringing up the wonderlic, which i mentioned like 5 posts ago, and then told you why (it is also a test that tells you nothing, like the 40). Thats very pack66-like, and I dont like it.
If that's how the remainder of this conversation is going to be, then we can end it with that.
I think the 40 is pointless, a lot of GMs do as well, and while it still somewhat effects draft stock, that is changing.
there, good day sir.
You brought the wonderlic into this. Not me.
Provide proof that a lot of GM's think the 40 is pointless. There are 32. What's a lot? 1 or 2??? I'm sorry but if you think Jarrett can run a 4.75 40 and still go top 10 then your wrong in my opinion. What if he runs a 5.0? If it's as pointless as you state then that wouldn't matter.