Lorenzo Lingard

Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Messages
13,730
Whatever weight he ends up at is fine as long at it is a weight where he’s atlerically/physically comfortable, and can max perform at.

Arbitrary weight cutoffs are simplistic and irrelevant.

You can throw down another 1,000 word meaningless essay and it won’t change the fact that unless you do a statistically valid analysis correlating weight to performance, it’s all just your bullshlt and guesswork.

In other words, Lo is fine where he’s at, and as long as he keeps working he’ll improve. No need to worry about weight when you’ve got a worker.

Have another bag of Cheetos, weight guru.
 

bshaw28

Junior
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
1,740
Whatever weight he ends up at is fine as long at it is a weight where he’s atlerically/physically comfortable, and can max perform at.

Arbitrary weight cutoffs are simplistic and irrelevant.

You can throw down another 1,000 word meaningless essay and it won’t change the fact that unless you do a statistically valid analysis correlating weight to performance, it’s all just your bullshlt and guesswork.

In other words, Lo is fine where he’s at, and as long as he keeps working he’ll improve. No need to worry about weight when you’ve got a worker.

Have another bag of Cheetos, weight guru.
Again...I'm not saying 210 is a weight Lingard HAS to get to

I'm saying....projecting to the NFL....210 is "roughly" the weight where a RB can start carrying a full workload "much more often" - therefore giving him a more value/potential/higher ceiling. So I would "like" to see him get to 210+. Statistics back this, it's not arbitrary.

Duke probably played somewhere between 195-205 at Miami and was awesome. But his size lowers his NFL ceiling. Lingard can play at 205 and be awesome. He'll just have a lower NFL ceiling than if he were 215.

Here's a chart from Brian Burke who does Analytics at ESPN.

His Top 3 NFL Combine predictors for NFL success for a RB are in order:

1) 40 Time
2) Weight
3) 3 Cone Drill

87343


It' best to be Big & Fast. If you're not Big, you better be Fast. If you're not Fast, you better be Big. If you're not Big or Fast - good luck.
 
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Messages
13,730
Again...I'm not saying 210 is a weight Lingard HAS to get to

I'm saying....projecting to the NFL....210 is "roughly" the weight where a RB can start carrying a full workload "much more often" - therefore giving him a more value/potential/higher ceiling. So I would "like" to see him get to 210+. Statistics back this, it's not arbitrary.

Duke probably played somewhere between 195-205 at Miami and was awesome. But his size lowers his NFL ceiling. Lingard can play at 205 and be awesome. He'll just have a lower NFL ceiling than if he were 215.

Here's a chart from Brian Burke who does Analytics at ESPN.

His Top 3 NFL Combine predictors for NFL success for a RB are in order:

1) 40 Time
2) Weight
3) 3 Cone Drill

View attachment 87343


It' best to be Big & Fast. If you're not Big, you better be Fast. If you're not Fast, you better be Big. If you're not Big or Fast - good luck.
You’re relentless.

I’m a real world stats guy.

Your info is anecdotal, not statistically valid, therefore I am 100% unconvinced that the few pounds you’re talking about makes a difference.

Big, fast, ok, you forgot shifty, and good vision.

You can be not big, not fast, just fast enough, and if you have superior vision and shiftiness and cutting ability, make good decisions, you can be a very good running back maybe an all NFL type running back.

We can just keep going round and round
 

brock

All-American
Joined
Dec 4, 2011
Messages
28,445
Again...I'm not saying 210 is a weight Lingard HAS to get to

I'm saying....projecting to the NFL....210 is "roughly" the weight where a RB can start carrying a full workload "much more often" - therefore giving him a more value/potential/higher ceiling. So I would "like" to see him get to 210+. Statistics back this, it's not arbitrary.

Duke probably played somewhere between 195-205 at Miami and was awesome. But his size lowers his NFL ceiling. Lingard can play at 205 and be awesome. He'll just have a lower NFL ceiling than if he were 215.

Here's a chart from Brian Burke who does Analytics at ESPN.

His Top 3 NFL Combine predictors for NFL success for a RB are in order:

1) 40 Time
2) Weight
3) 3 Cone Drill

View attachment 87343


It' best to be Big & Fast. If you're not Big, you better be Fast. If you're not Fast, you better be Big. If you're not Big or Fast - good luck.
210 will be easy for lingard, he may be that by next month really.
 

bshaw28

Junior
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
1,740
Every single guy on your under 210 list had a season in college of 1500+ rushing yds. Yes, you need to be bigger to consistently withstand the punishment of an NFL season. But I'm more worried about what you can do as a Cane. I'll take a 1500 yard rusher on my team any day, whether he's 190 or 230.
That's an excellent point and I agree with you. But I think "College Production" and "NFL Potential" are 2 different discussions.

College Production
- Yearby can be a 1,000 yd back at 190 lbs. & 4.7 40
- Walton can be a 1,000 yd back at 200 lbs. & 4.6 40

But their NFL potential is limited, even though they were very productive at the college level.

We need to start getting more players that are productive at both the College and NFL level. The more players we get that are going to become good NFL players, the more games we'll win. That's a super simple and obvious point - but I'm trying to show how something small like a RB's weight factors into that.

NFL Potential
RB's under 210 pretty much have to have run for 1,500 yds in a season to be drafted int he first 3 Rounds to show that:

1) They've shown durability by handling a full workload in college
2) They're big time playmakers
3) They need to be fast (sorry Bills & Lions fans - your teams messed up)

Bigger RB's don't have to do that. Sony Michel and Josh Jacobs can become 1st round picks being career backups running slower 40 times because the have the weight to carry a full workload in the NFL.
 
Last edited:

brock

All-American
Joined
Dec 4, 2011
Messages
28,445
That's an excellent point and I agree with you. But I think "College Production" and "NFL Potential" are 2 different discussions.

College Production
- Yearby can be a 1,000 yd back at 190 lbs. & 4.7 40
- Walton can be a 1,000 yd back at 200 lbs. & 4.6 40

But their NFL potential is limited, even they were very productive at the college level.

We need to start getting more players that are productive at both the College and NFL level. The more players we get that are going to become good NFL players, the more games we'll win. That's a super simple and obvious point - but I'm trying to show how something small like a RB's weight factors into that.

NFL Potential
RB's under 210 pretty much have to have run for 1,500 yds in a season to be drafted int he first 3 Rounds to show that:

1) They've shown durability by handling a full workload in college
2) They're big time playmakers
3) They need to be fast (sorry Bills & Lions fans - your teams messed up)

Bigger RB's don't have to do that. Sony Michel and Josh Jacobs can become 1st round picks being career backups running slower 40 times because the have the weight to carry a full workload in the NFL.
So more don Chaney’s and less Henry parrish’s(who I think Is a lot like yearby but smaller and a bit faster) In a sense? I agree Whole heartedly with that
 

JD08

Freshman
Joined
Dec 19, 2014
Messages
1,322
Maybe we need to bring Felder back. He sure knew how to fatten them up.
 

bshaw28

Junior
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
1,740
You’re relentless.

I’m a real world stats guy.

Your info is anecdotal, not statistically valid, therefore I am 100% unconvinced that the few pounds you’re talking about makes a difference.

Big, fast, ok, you forgot shifty, and good vision.

You can be not big, not fast, just fast enough, and if you have superior vision and shiftiness and cutting ability, make good decisions, you can be a very good running back maybe an all NFL type running back.

We can just keep going round and round
You're 100% correct

Lingard weighing 210+ isn't a requirement. I'm saying it's a bonus.
 

bshaw28

Junior
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
1,740
As long as he's over 210. I've been told that's the critical factor.
Whoever told you that is incorrect.

If someone told you 210 is "roughly" the weight where a RB can "usually" start to handle a larger workload - that would be correct.

It's a general statement, not a definitive statement.
 

JD08

Freshman
Joined
Dec 19, 2014
Messages
1,322
Whoever told you that is incorrect.

If someone told you 210 is "roughly" the weight where a RB can "usually" start to handle a larger workload - that would be correct.

It's a general statement, not a definitive statement.
That was a jab. No need to parry.
 
Top