Tate Hate

[BFritz21]

(10-14-2015, 08:27 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No.  You are wrong.  I am not going to argue it anymore.  I am just telling everyone to listen closely whenever a kicker is attempting a very long field goal.  Many times the announcers will mention that long field goals are easier to block because they are launched at a lower trajectory.

Many deep kick offs are line drives.

HA!

If that were true, when quarterbacks are practicing tossing long balls back and forth, why aren't they just throwing the straight bullets instead of lofting them in the air?  It's because when something is launched with force, air under it allows it to carry further.  It takes much more strength to throw a deep line drive than it does to throw a deep ball with loft, and the same translates to kicking.

Of course, too high takes away distance, which plays into your field goal comment, because filed goal kickers figure out he perfect trajectory and height.

No.  I'm not wrong.  It's simple physics.

If you can contradict the highlighted part, I'll happily admit that I'm wrong.

[fredtoast]

(10-14-2015, 09:49 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: No.  I'm not wrong.  It's simple physics.

I am not an expert at physics but I believe that 45 degrees would be the most efficient launch angle.

So the question would be what is the average launch angle of an NFL kick off.

Any physics majors out there?

[BFritz21]

(10-14-2015, 10:44 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I am not an expert at physics but I believe that 45 degrees would be the most efficient launch angle.

So the question would be what is the average launch angle of an NFL kick off.

Any physics majors out there?

TYPICAL FRED RESPONSE!!  IGNORE THE PART I ASK HIM TO ADDRESS AND GO OFF-TOPIC!!  (It was only on-topic because we were talking about launch angles, which a line-drive kick isn't 45 degrees, so he'd be proving himself wrong.)

This is why I should stay away from debates with Fred because he'll debate (usually make stuff up) until he's in a corner, and then he just goes AWOL like this.

Not sure why I didn't think of the 45 degree angle, but thank you for aiding in making my point stronger 

[fredtoast]

(10-15-2015, 12:56 AM)BFritz21 Wrote: TYPICAL FRED RESPONSE!!  IGNORE THE PART I ASK HIM TO ADDRESS AND GO OFF-TOPIC!!  (It was only on-topic because we were talking about launch angles, which a line-drive kick isn't 45 degrees, so he'd be proving himself wrong.)

I am exactly on point.  What is the launch angel of a kick off?

[fredtoast]

(10-14-2015, 09:49 PM)BFritz21 Wrote:   It takes much more strength to throw a deep line drive than it does to throw a deep ball with loft, and the same translates to kicking.

But if you throw it at too steep of an angle it will just go high in the air and not cover a long distance.

[BFritz21]

(10-15-2015, 01:18 AM)fredtoast Wrote: I am exactly on point.  What is the launch angel of a kick off?

Not even close to on point.

(10-15-2015, 01:20 AM)fredtoast Wrote: But if you throw it at too steep of an angle it will just go high in the air and not cover a long distance.

But it's much easier to throw the ball with loft than it is to throw line drives, and the same with kicks because it takes much more velocity to stay up if you throw a  line drive.

I can't believe you, an attorney, is seriously trying to argue that it's just as easy to throw (or kick) something at a line drive than it is with loft. I'm pretty sure that you have to be arguing just to hopefully derail the conversation at some point to avoid admitting being wrong.

Do you realize how hard you'd have to kick (or throw) a ball to defy the laws of physics and have it just stay in the air?

[fredtoast]

(10-15-2015, 03:38 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Not even close to on point.

But it's much easier to throw the ball with loft than it is to throw line drives, and the same with kicks because it takes much more velocity to stay up if you throw a  line drive.

I can't believe you, an attorney, is seriously trying to argue that it's just as easy to throw (or kick) something at a line drive than it is with loft.  I'm pretty sure that you have to be arguing just to hopefully derail the conversation at some point to avoid admitting being wrong.

Do you realize how hard you'd have to kick (or throw) a ball to defy the laws of physics and have it just stay in the air?

Once again, pretty easy to smack you down

http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/1999-12/946091968.Ph.r.html

Re: Why is a longer field goal kick (football), kicked at a lower angle?

An end-over-end football kick will generate even less lift because of its irregular shape and must therefore behave somewhat like a baseball because it is observed that a lower kicking angle will travel farther than the 45 degree angle predicted by basic (no drag/lift) ballistics.






Just google the question and you will see several more sources explaining that on longer kicks a lower trajectory is needed.

[BFritz21]

(10-16-2015, 12:25 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Once again, pretty easy to smack you down

http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/1999-12/946091968.Ph.r.html

Re: Why is a longer field goal kick (football), kicked at a lower angle?

An end-over-end football kick will generate even less lift because of its irregular shape and must therefore behave somewhat like a baseball because it is observed that a lower kicking angle will travel farther than the 45 degree angle predicted by basic (no drag/lift) ballistics.






Just google the question and you will see several more sources explaining that on longer kicks a lower trajectory is needed.

Once again, you never fail to amaze me.  I can't believe you still post bogus information (bullshit) and think that I, of all people, will just accept it as Gospel without reading.


From your link:

Quote:To hit the long field goals, I strike the ball with a more upward trajectory which gives more translational energy and less end-over-end spin. This part of why it is easier to kick a ball off a kickoff tee versus the ground.

Less spin than a field goal, which is what your link was about- field goals.  

However, this site deals with kickoffs and punts and goes into much more detail on how more hang time needs a 45 degree to achieve the most distance. 

In the summary, if can be seen that:

Quote:kickoffs are launched at angles near 45° to maximize their distance 

Once again, it's too easy to smack you down, but it gets annoying that you keep making me do the work.

[Penn]

(10-14-2015, 10:44 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I am not an expert at physics but I believe that 45 degrees would be the most efficient launch angle.

So the question would be what is the average launch angle of an NFL kick off.

Any physics majors out there?

None of this is meant to be rude to either party but I'm just going to say it in a blount way so please ignore what might appear as hostile and just take the meaning.

This is where I stopped reading shortly after you originally posted.  I see more discussion has occurred and I'm not at the moment fully fresh on what lead to this statement.  Due to the inane nature of the typical back and forth between Brad and almost anybody as well as the same nature of of a back and forth nature of you and just about anybody, I won't re-read nor will I read what happened since.

But I will address this post.

TLDR - Simply put, transfer of energy is being ignored by you.

First point is that law (whatever name it is) about calculating the hypotenuse of a right triangle (A squared plus B squared equals C squared and all the surrounding things we know).  The hypotenuse being the near line (its actually a parabola due to gravity) of 45 degree angle is going to mean the ball should be equal in height off the ground at the line of scrimmage as the distance away the kick occurred form (usually about 8 yards).  Why are guys trying to jump up to block a ball that is nearly 24 feet off the ground?  Answer - the ball isn't travelling at an approximate 45 degree path.

The angle of the motion by the object (in this case a foot) striking (or otherwise propelling) the projectile (in this case the ball) as well as how close to the center line of the projectile is struck.  In a vaccum, yes the angle of motion is 45 degrees directly through the center line of the object would produce the best distance.

In this case the vacuum I am referring to is not only absence of air but absence of all and any factor other than gravity. The factors not being considered - the ball is on the ground or kickoffs and feild goal attempts and the foot has to be traveling a somewhat constant arc for full momentum.

Extend your leg and foot out in front of you so the surface of the foot at contact point is an approximate 45 degree angle.  How high off the ground is it? I hope that height isn't the same height as the height needed to strike a football that is on the ground (actually on a tee, but still).  Well, maybe not.  If you were that height you could make a lot of money on freakshow appearances.

If you don't understand why the toes should be pointed away from you let us know and someone may explain it to you.

Now also consider the ball is at a 90 degree angle to the ground and shape of the ball.  Even if you could make contact with the ball at a 45 degree angle passing through the centerline of the ball, just how much room for error do you have?  The center of the ball is much more forgiving if you are slightly off the centerline.

A punt is used on free kicks because it is more possible to get close too the needed angles to acheive more distance.  However even a punt isn't usually going to be a target angle of 45 degrees because we don't live in a vacuum (again, that isn't only air but air is the biggest factor).

[*rfaulk34*]

Why do i always have to do all the work?

http://kicking.com/The%20Physics%20of%20Kicking%20a%20Football%20-%20Brancazio%20-%201985.pdf

[grampahol]

All these physics to determine why people hate Brandon Tate? Wow..I never knew it could be so complicated.