University of Hawaii's 350 lb Running Back - Legit (not a joke)

day-day

Hall of Fame
Jan 2, 2005
9,937
1,659
187
Bartlett, TN (Memphis area)
... Do you have any suggestions for a better approximation for impact velocity? Without a radar gun pointed at a target on impact, I'm not sure there is one.

It could be legitimately argued that because of TR's lower mass, his acceleration (and therefore likely initial impact velocity) is much greater than DF's, narrowing or even overcoming the gap in energy production.
No, I don't know enough about how fast folks are going at various distances in their runs. It is possilbe that once two backs reach a "full head of steam" that they are going the same speed even though their 40-times are way different. One back may have a significant advantage at the line of scrimmage after only a few steps. Your posts also give insight on how much energy the players must exert to move their bodies at these rates.
 

JPT4Bama

Hall of Fame
Aug 21, 2006
5,793
0
0
Hoover, AL
True. But Bigun's alleged 4.9 (and others' suggested slower 6.0) 40 time was the measure that was being discussed when TexasBama suggested that when considering "force", it's better to be fast than big. I was merely pointing out that that's not necessarily true.

Fast and small may or may not produce a larger impact force than slow and big. It depends on the relative differences in mass and speed between test subjects. If the difference in mass is relatively greater than the difference in speed, it's better to be big than fast. If the difference in mass is relatively smaller than the difference in speed, it's better to be fast than big.

What's absolutely incontrovertible is that 230 lb (104.3 kg) TR moving at an assumed impact velocity of 8.3 m/s (based on 4.4 40 speed) produces 3,592.6 joules of energy, while 350 lb (158.8 kg) DF moving at an assumed impact velocity of 7.5 m/s (based on a 4.9 40 speed) produces 4,466.3 joules of energy. In fact, if DF's 40 time is as slow as 5.3, his energy output still exceeds TR's. He has to slip to 5.4 before he and TR produce roughly equal output. Am I arguing that DF's a better back? Absolutely not. He's not even on the same playing field as TR. But we're not talking about who's the better back. We're talking about what's better for producing impact force - size or speed. No matter what, it's always better to be big and fast.

I agree that what is important in calculating force is the speed at actual impact, not an average speed over 40yds, which as you say, will range from zero when the ball is snapped to some velocity greater than the average. Do you have any suggestions for a better approximation for impact velocity? Without a radar gun pointed at a target on impact, I'm not sure there is one.

It could be legitimately argued that because of TR's lower mass, his acceleration (and therefore likely initial impact velocity) is much greater than DF's, narrowing or even overcoming the gap in energy production.
Yes, yes but without the angle of the dangle how can we possibly know the heat of the meat?
Much less speed of the need?? :biggrin:
 

RT3413

All-American
Sep 14, 2004
2,176
0
55
Atlanta, GA
The obvious answer here is a pulling guard... could you imagine a 350lb blocker who had the speed to stay downfield with a RB?
 

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.