(01-25-2023, 06:01 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: I would disagree. I am not remembering anything off the top of my head in the passing game but there were 100% running plays that Huntley couldn't make where Lamar would have. That long run to put the Ravens at the goalline by Huntley? Lamar scores there if he has that kind of room. There was another play early on where Huntley was caught by Hubbard or Hendrickson, can't remember which. It was short of a first down, but Lamar would have converted there. 

I have no idea if the Bengals would have lost if Lamar played, but that game was close enough that I am glad we don't have to find out. 

Do you really think lamar is THAT MUCH faster than Huntley?  Come on, they are similar enough in speed.

(01-26-2023, 09:22 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Well in at least one place it’s back to KC at -1.

Sports book now has Chefs -2.5 and MOST are Chefs -1.

(01-26-2023, 02:36 PM)is a better optoTomkat Wrote: Do you really think lamar is THAT MUCH faster than Huntley?  Come on, they are similar enough in speed.

Imo, Lamar is certainly quicker and can juke better but not sure he's faster. Personally, with more reps and coaching, I believe Huntley is the better QB. Better arm, better mechanics in the pocket and far far far cheaper which allows them to go out and get better players..

(01-26-2023, 03:07 PM)MTBengalsFan Wrote: Sports book now has Chefs -2.5 and MOST are Chefs -1.

Thanks for the info. Not surprising. Some speculated that Mahomes would be on crutches come Wednesday (Tony Romo said on Sunday: "He's gonna almost be on crutches on Wednesday") and others in a walking boot. When he showed up as a full participant in practice, with video of him jogging, the betting line boomeranged back.

We've knocked him off 3 times when perfectly fine. Are we supposed to worry whether his ankle might be OK? I'm so confused here..

Either they lied about it being a high ankle sprain originally and he's fine or it is a high ankle sprain and they're trying to downplay it so we don't prepare for Henne. Both make sense and causes minor issues with preparations for the Bengals but I'm leaning toward the latter.

(01-26-2023, 02:36 PM)Tomkat Wrote: Do you really think lamar is THAT MUCH faster than Huntley?  Come on, they are similar enough in speed.

Yeah, definitely. Lamar ran a 4.34 where Huntley ran a 4.56. To put that in perspective, it is like looking at Chase & Higgins and saying "Is Chase really that much faster than Higgins?" 

(01-26-2023, 04:00 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: Yeah, definitely. Lamar ran a 4.34 where Huntley ran a 4.56. To put that in perspective, it is like looking at Chase & Higgins and saying "Is Chase really that much faster than Higgins?" 

2 tenths of a second is the blink of an eye dude.  They ran those times without equipment on.
If you think Lamar would have scored on the play where Huntley was pushed out at the 5... I disagree.  Lamar might have gotten an additional yard.

(01-26-2023, 04:06 PM)Tomkat Wrote: 2 tenths of a second is the blink of an eye dude.  They ran those times without equipment on.
If you think Lamar would have scored on the play where Huntley was pushed out at the 5... I disagree.  Lamar might have gotten an additional yard.

You're seriously underestimating that two-tenths of a second. Anecdotally, my best 40 time I ever ran was a 4.7 and guys who ran a 4.5 could routinely gain distance on me. I felt helpless. Again, it is like saying Higgins and Chase have no discernable difference between them when we have routinely seen Chase run by people and make big plays whereas Higgins doesn't have that same ability. Most of that time is in the acceleration and it makes a big difference. 

EDIT - I'll throw in this portion to get the rest of my thoughts out. If .2 seconds is "the blink of an eye", insinuating it isn't that big of a deal, then I would ask what is a big deal? Kenny Pickett's 40 is .4 seconds slower. That's not much longer than the blink of an eye by your measure. Is Lamar really that much faster than Kenny? 

Finally, Huntley didn't go out at the 5 - he went out at the 2. With Lamar's extra speed, that extra yard you give him could be more than enough to score the TD on the dive to the pylon. If you still disagree after this, then agree to disagree. 

(01-26-2023, 03:40 PM)LotD Wrote: Either they lied about it being a high ankle sprain originally and he's fine or it is a high ankle sprain and they're trying to downplay it so we don't prepare for Henne.  Both make sense and causes minor issues with preparations for the Bengals but I'm leaning toward the latter.

I'm really starting to lean towards they are lying about it being a high ankle. If it were, I don't think they would be risking him practicing on it, rather they would let get treatments and stay off it for a week. I'm calling shenanigans...

(01-26-2023, 04:06 PM)Tomkat Wrote: 2 tenths of a second is the blink of an eye dude.  They ran those times without equipment on.
If you think Lamar would have scored on the play where Huntley was pushed out at the 5... I disagree.  Lamar might have gotten an additional yard.

2/10 of a second is the difference between RD 1 and UDFA 

(01-26-2023, 04:19 PM)Sled21 Wrote: I'm really starting to lean towards they are lying about it being a high ankle. If it were, I don't think they would be risking him practicing on it, rather they would let get treatments and stay off it for a week. I'm calling shenanigans...

Yeah, could have been a totally different ankle injury. Romo was talking about him possibly being on crutches on Wednesday (exact words: He’s going to be almost be on crutches on Wednesday,") and all the analyses of high ankle sprains the last few days gave the impression of a rather severe and limiting injury. Certainly didn't expect full participant in practices and video of him jogging.

(01-26-2023, 04:55 PM)Nepa Wrote: Yeah, could have been a totally different ankle injury. Romo was talking about him possibly being on crutches on Wednesday (exact words: He’s going to be almost be on crutches on Wednesday,") and all the analyses of high ankle sprains the last few days gave the impression of a rather severe and limiting injury. Certainly didn't expect full participant in practices and video of him jogging.

If he is going to play I think he should undergo a piss test.

Listen the guy is going to play and be good... the issue is will he be able to avoid those sacks and get out of the pocket and still be effective.

That is what makes Mahomes special he's not your prototype pocket passer ala Brady, Manning and Burrow

Likely going to be lots of quick passes and ground game they will want to control the clock and shorten the game IMO.

(01-26-2023, 04:11 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: You're seriously underestimating that two-tenths of a second. Anecdotally, my best 40 time I ever ran was a 4.7 and guys who ran a 4.5 could routinely gain distance on me. I felt helpless. Again, it is like saying Higgins and Chase have no discernable difference between them when we have routinely seen Chase run by people and make big plays whereas Higgins doesn't have that same ability. Most of that time is in the acceleration and it makes a big difference. 

A 40 yd (120 ft) dash time of 4.7 seconds (Huntley) = 25.532 feet per second.
A 40 yd (120 ft) dash time of 4.5 seconds (Lamar) = 18.18 mph = =26.667 feet per second.

The YouTube video I watched of the run, is at 30 frames per second.
There are exactly 187 frames between here...



and here, where first contact is made...



187 frames at 30 fps = 187/30 = 6.233 seconds



Which means if Huntley ran 25.532 feet per second for 6.233 seconds, he would travel 159.141 feet 
Which means if Lamar ran at 26.667 feet per second for those same 6.233 seconds, he would travel 166.215 feet

A difference of 7.074 feet or just over 2 yards.
Contact was made at the 5 yard line, and Huntley was driven out at the 2

Would Lamar have scored?  MAYBE... by a foot.
But, it's not definite.

(01-26-2023, 05:32 PM)Tomkat Wrote: A 40 yd (120 ft) dash time of 4.7 seconds (Huntley) = 25.532 feet per second.
A 40 yd (120 ft) dash time of 4.5 seconds (Lamar) = 18.18 mph = =26.667 feet per second.

The YouTube video I watched of the run, is at 30 frames per second.
There are exactly 187 frames between here...



and here, where first contact is made...



187 frames at 30 fps = 187/30 = 6.233 seconds



Which means if Huntley ran 25.532 feet per second for 6.233 seconds, he would travel 159.141 feet 
Which means if Lamar ran at 26.667 feet per second for those same 6.233 seconds, he would travel 166.215 feet

A difference of 7.074 feet or just over 2 yards.
Contact was made at the 5 yard line, and Huntley was driven out at the 2

Would Lamar have scored?  MAYBE... by a foot.
But, it's not definite.

Great math, but the 40 times are wrong. You're pulling the 40 yard dash times from my story. Huntley ran a 4.56 and Lamar ran a 4.34. That puts Lamar running for nearly three yards further than Huntley. There's a genuine chance he outruns that angle by Bates or creates enough space to cut back inside and score with contact. 

(01-26-2023, 05:32 PM)Tomkat Wrote: A 40 yd (120 ft) dash time of 4.7 seconds (Huntley) = 25.532 feet per second.
A 40 yd (120 ft) dash time of 4.5 seconds (Lamar) = 18.18 mph = =26.667 feet per second.

The YouTube video I watched of the run, is at 30 frames per second.
There are exactly 187 frames between here...



and here, where first contact is made...



187 frames at 30 fps = 187/30 = 6.233 seconds



Which means if Huntley ran 25.532 feet per second for 6.233 seconds, he would travel 159.141 feet 
Which means if Lamar ran at 26.667 feet per second for those same 6.233 seconds, he would travel 166.215 feet

A difference of 7.074 feet or just over 2 yards.
Contact was made at the 5 yard line, and Huntley was driven out at the 2

Would Lamar have scored?  MAYBE... by a foot.
But, it's not definite.

That means he would have been 2 yards in front of the defender = not being touched on his way to the endzone. 

(01-26-2023, 05:45 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: Great math, but the 40 times are wrong. You're pulling the 40 yard dash times from my story. Huntley ran a 4.56 and Lamar ran a 4.34. That puts Lamar running for nearly three yards further than Huntley. There's a genuine chance he outruns that angle by Bates or creates enough space to cut back inside and score with contact. 

I went back and re-did the math using your updated times... which is reflected in the new "feet per second" values.

Which means if Huntley ran 26.316 feet per second for 6.233 seconds, he would travel 164.028 feet 
Which means if Lamar ran at 27.650 feet per second for those same 6.233 seconds, he would travel 172.342 feet

A difference of 8.314 feet or 2 yards + 2 feet.

I'll put on my "Mythbusters" hat and say it's plausible that he scores, but not confirmed.

(01-26-2023, 05:56 PM)Tomkat Wrote: I went back and re-did the math using your updated times... which is reflected in the new "feet per second" values.

Which means if Huntley ran 26.316 feet per second for 6.233 seconds, he would travel 164.028 feet 
Which means if Lamar ran at 27.650 feet per second for those same 6.233 seconds, he would travel 172.342 feet

A difference of 8.314 feet or 2 yards + 2 feet.

I'll put on my "Mythbusters" hat and say it's plausible that he scores, but not confirmed.

Correct, assuming contact is still made at the same exact time. We have at least demonstrated that Lamar would have definitely been further ahead than Huntley. If it played out the EXACT same way, Lamar would have been near the two yard line, just shy of it, instead of at the five. Contact angles are going to be different at that point, but a full speed Lamar at the two yard line likely has a high probability of scoring there. I don't think anyone has the angle to hit him and redirect him out of bounds.

What did i miss? This the Lamar Jackson thread now? Lol