Can we Rank 2011 RB Prospects by VISION ONLY? (1 Viewer)

[Boone22]

I was having a discussion with two coworkers yesterday and we started talking about what the most important attributes a Rookie RB needs to be successful. I don't want to get into the details but someone in our discussion thought that RB vision was the most important attribute for a rookie RB. Since I don't follow college football I'mm looking for help from the Sharkpool. Can you guys rank the incoming rookie RBs based ONLY on vision? We are curious to see how these players rank.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

Id imagine Matt Waldman's RSP will give specific vision ratings that will allow exactly that

 

[JFurby]

Vision records cannot be made public under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Regardless, when you evaluate the class with their corrective lenses in, there are almost no differences.

 

[Matt Waldman]

Id imagine Matt Waldman's RSP will give specific vision ratings that will allow exactly that

Yep - been working on that for the past two days and will continue to be working on it tonight and tomorrow. I also view vision as larger category with subcategories that include patience, decision-making, open field running, and anticipating what the defense gives the runner (pre-snap and immediate post snap).

 

[Matt Waldman]

Vision records cannot be made public under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. Regardless, when you evaluate the class with their corrective lenses in, there are almost no differences.

Sounds like my family of optometrists.

 

[Matt Waldman]

I was having a discussion with two coworkers yesterday and we started talking about what the most important attributes a Rookie RB needs to be successful. I don't want to get into the details but someone in our discussion thought that RB vision was the most important attribute for a rookie RB. Since I don't follow college football I'mm looking for help from the Sharkpool. Can you guys rank the incoming rookie RBs based ONLY on vision? We are curious to see how these players rank.

Vision is monumentally important. I'd probably say Vision, Balance, and Acceleration are the three things I really think differentiate a back's potential from his peers. Pad level and balance are often intertwined, but if you can see, anticipate, and set up what's happening around you as a runner you're going to make a play design successful or at least limit its failure that isn't your doing (blown blocks, etc.). Speed, power, and elusiveness are all items that a back has to have at a baseline level to stay on an NFL team but its the vision that differentiates a contributor from a starter and a starter from a star. Balance isn't just about getting hit and staying upright. Its also about having the ability to move at difficult angles with success or contort yourself and stay upright in small spaces - the term "fluidity" is a part of that. Acceleration to me is way more important than timed speed. Mark Ingram and Ryan Williams had non-descript 40-times, but watch them cut or burst through a lane and they explode through it. You want a back that can combine the Vision and Balance to set up a play, bounce through a little trash and still be in position to get downhill in a hurry. Great acceleration (w/vision and balance) will get a back with average top end speed gains in the 5-40 yard range far more often than a back with great top end speed and so-so vision/balance. This is why I don't get too wrapped up with 40 times. Now if they start running the 40 at the combine where they have a linebacker or safety coming at him from across the field from the depth that they play in a game and have some standing pads to simulate the height and depth of a line in front of the back, then I might watch the 40 with more interest. There is way too much happening on an NFL field to gauge straight-line speed or predictable back and forth shuttles and go off that without really heavily weighting what the back does on the field. Too many angles, change of direction, and strategy that goes into a successful play. That's my quick two cents.

 

[Boone22]

Matt, thanks for the input and I appreciate the insight. It would be interesting to go back and look at previous rookie classes and look at successful late round picks to see how they were rated for vision on their scouting reports. For example, how was Bradshaw's or Chris Ivory's vision ranked? Are there trends with later round picks past the top 3-4 backs in every draft?

 

[Matt Waldman]

Boone,

I can tell you that I had Bradshaw very highly ranked compared to most and his vision was the reason.

Samples

If you go to this link you can find samples of past reports I've done, including one of Bradshaw, Forte, Jerome Harrison, etc. I have more in-depth analysis within the actual publication.

You can also go here for more samples:

2011 RSP Thread

Best,

M

 

[Matt Waldman]

Matt, thanks for the input and I appreciate the insight. It would be interesting to go back and look at previous rookie classes and look at successful late round picks to see how they were rated for vision on their scouting reports. For example, how was Bradshaw's or Chris Ivory's vision ranked? Are there trends with later round picks past the top 3-4 backs in every draft?

While there's a lot of folks doing data analysis of some sort with draft picks, I think common sense and observation pretty much tells you that each NFL team is a business and every business organization has a different way of recruiting and evaluating the prospective employee pool. The better teams know not just "what to look for in a runner," but also "what to look for in a runner to match what their team does." I say this a ton on the Thursday night Audible podcast: RBs are the shooting guards of the NFL. The are some great ones that are irreplaceable but more than any other position, an NFL can find a quality free agent runner and get solid results. I was talking with Bloom earlier today and I think we both agree that there are is a lot of depth at the RB position, which could mean you'll see a lot of talented runners go late in this draft or even undrafted. This may not be an RB class filled with superstars, but there's enough depth that these guys take on days two, three, and in free agency will be bumping more established players out of jobs over time.

 

[5-ish Finkle]

Regardless, when you evaluate the class with their corrective lenses in, there are almost no differences.

I'm going to go ahead and totally disagree with this. If you evaluate a runner without his corrective lenses I'm quite sure a lot of those "Es" and "Fs" are going to turn into "A Small Cow?" or "Some kind of Frog?"