My Ambassador is one of those dudes who gets faster over longer distances. That tells me he's strong and fit.
Might not be the quickest guy in short areas, but he'll be the type of guy who will gash you for 70 in the 4th quarter when everyone else is sucking wind.
His 4.34 shuttle at the most recent Opening event tells me he has more the enough short area quickness for his size/build. I like his numbers more and more. And, his tape is what it is.
His 40 time isn't elite. His 300m hurdle time is. My comment wasn't meant to shortchange my Ambassador in any way. Usually, a guy who is so dominant at that distance in hurdles at that size is a super fit naturally strong guy. He will kill people in the 4th quarter.
This. I don't know as much about track as Dapper. But I respect anyone who can complete a 300m hurdle without face planting into cardiac arrest. A high school junior running 37.26 at the Ambassador's size is an elite athlete with real man balls.
Lots of tired opponents gonna be eating my Ambassador's knees in the 4th quarter over the next few years.
To me, being fast in the 300 hurdles is more related to this than to speed.
The only track times that I think have any relevance to football speed are 60m, 100m, and 110m hurdles, in that order. With the latter 2, I want to see a blazing fast time before I draw the conclusion that someone is fast on a football field - I'd say 10.5 or better in the 100m and 13.8 or better in the hurdles. I'm not saying anyone slower than those times is slow on a football field, but since 100m/110m is longer than you'll ever run on a football field, you have to be careful of the sprinters who can pass runners at the 60m/70m mark or beyond - that speed is useless on a football field. If you're running 10.5 or better in the 100m in h.s., you're probably in the top 40-50 in the country, and you have to be pretty **** fast throughout the race to finish with that time. 13.8 or better in the 110m hurdles is probably around top 20 in the country for h.s. in any given year. Top to bottom, hurdlers aren't as fast as sprinters - hence top 20ish vs. top 40ish.
As for 60m, 7.0 or better is pretty **** fast (probably top 60-80 in the country for h.s. in any given year). That's the point where I'd say someone can outrun angles against a lot of collegiate defenses. Lingard is just about there at 7.02 for a personal best in the 60 (to give a comparison, I believe Duke Johnson's best 60m time in college was 6.92, but he only participated during one indoor season). I'd say that means more in terms of football than his times in the 100m, 110mH, or 300mH, and, even then, I wouldn't say a 60m time means
a lot - unless you're Jacoby Ford and run sub 6.6.
But all of this is just like, my opinion, man.