Keon Coleman Slow Jokes

[Royale with Cheese]

3 minutes ago, Not at the table Karlos said:

The MPH thing is kinda dumb. If a player has that much running room they’re gonna hit a higher top speed. Not many players each week get that much running room. So him being 9th for the week isn’t very impressive either. It also only factors in ball carriers. Hollins was pulling away from Coleman and all their DBs caught up with him. 

 

 

[NewEra]

22 minutes ago, Not at the table Karlos said:

And showed it twice yesterday. He’s slow. 

How fast was Hollins that he was pulling away from Coleman and the DBs that caught him from behind? 

I don’t know.  You tell me. 

 

7 minutes ago, Not at the table Karlos said:

The MPH thing is kinda dumb. If a player has that much running room they’re gonna hit a higher top speed. Not many players each week get that much running room. So him being 9th for the week isn’t very impressive either. It also only factors in ball carriers. Hollins was pulling away from Coleman and all their DBs caught up with him. 

lol……but the 40 times thing isn’t dumb, as if a guy will ever be wearing tights, starting out of a sprinters stance with no one to impede them for 40 yards. 
 

no one is saying that he’s fast.  He’s not fast for a WR.  We’re saying that he has enough functional speed to be big play threat and more than enough speed to be a good WR.  There are many WRs with similar speed that have had great careers and weren’t always labeled as slow

[Buffalo_Stampede]

He was running into the wind.

[Bockeye]

You know what’s funny is the fact that Cook is actually slower than Coleman.  Yes - different position but who woulda thought.  

[Buffalo Junction]

1 hour ago, transient said:

Did this thread really spend 3 pages arguing about whether an athlete that expended a bunch of energy getting downfield and breaking a tackle before stumbling was then less efficient at “running a 40” than he would have been had he not spent a bunch of energy and was fresh out of the blocks?!?! 🤔🤦‍♂️ Math may demonstrate his slower speed on the field in that exact moment, but it apparently doesn’t involve an offset that factors in common sense. 

Stay tuned…

 

They’re going to debate the speed of swallows carrying coconuts next week. 

[wettlaufer]

12 hours ago, Ed_Formerly_of_Roch said:

So YTD here's Coleman's Stats

 

 

And Worthy

 

 

Worthy has more TD's when you factor in the runs which tends to show he's more of a gadget guy.

What's up with those Coleman stats? 16 receptions in the regular season and 12 in his career? Huh?

[Royale with Cheese]

1 minute ago, wettlaufer said:

What's up with those Coleman stats? 16 receptions in the regular season and 12 in his career? Huh?

 

The stats guy is also slow.  It will take another day or two to add the 4 receptions to his career.

[Not at the table Karlos]

18 minutes ago, NewEra said:

I don’t know.  You tell me. 

 

lol……but the 40 times thing isn’t dumb, as if a guy will ever be wearing tights, starting out of a sprinters stance with no one to impede them for 40 yards. 
 

no one is saying that he’s fast.  He’s not fast for a WR.  We’re saying that he has enough functional speed to be big play threat and more than enough speed to be a good WR.  There are many WRs with similar speed that have had great careers and weren’t always labeled as slow

Can you show me where i said the 40 isn’t dumb? 

[damj]

14 minutes ago, Buffalo Junction said:

Stay tuned…

 

They’re going to debate the speed of swallows carrying coconuts next week. 

European or African?

[Einstein]

1 hour ago, NewEra said:

 

 

Ugh, not this again. I really thought that you all learned this concept during the whole Derrick Henry debacle. This is terminal instantaneous velocity. 

 

Instantaneous velocity is NOT speed. An object can be slow and still have a high instantaneous velocity. 

 

Example: A large rock heaved from a catapult will travel slowly to its target. BUT it will have an extremely high instantaneous velocity.

Velocity is the rate of change over time. So what the NFL does is they take a split second snapshot (aka, instaneous velocity), where a player moves from one yard to the next yard, and computes that on how long it took.

 

Problem: This does not tell you speed! Like the catapult example, it tells you how fast they are moving in a split second at their highest peak.

[Einstein]

1 hour ago, dickleyjones said:

No one is reaching terminal velocity @Einstein 

 

Uh, yes, they are. lol.

 

A persons terminal velocity during a run is the velocity they reach at their peak. It is quite literally their TERMINAL velocity. 

 

YOU, as a lay person pretending to do physics, arguing against someone who does physics every day, are likely thinking that terminal velocity is related to the max speed in free fall - because that’s what popular culture taught you.

 

1 hour ago, dickleyjones said:

Acceleration is not equal to both runners, and it is not a constant. So v = at doesn't really help us.

 

You are very lost. The correct equation is v = v0 + a * t, not v = a * t. You’re ignoring the initial velocity entirely, which is basic physics 101. The stumbler starts with an initial velocity  and that’s not wiped out by a brief stumble. lYou can’t just handwave away initial velocity and focus on acceleration. Your argument falls apart because you’re misunderstanding the fundamentals of motion. But even if you did, acceleration can be compared across two people simply by equaling the equations.

 

1 hour ago, dickleyjones said:

If you knew the actual rate of change in acceleration in each runner for the entire race then you should be able to calculate who would win. But we don't know that.

 

We do know that. Then we can take the rate of change in Coleman from his get off to when he catches the ball, OR post stumble (after regaining). Which is what I did. Then we can compare it to during and after the stumble.

 

some of you either never passed physics, or took it 20 years ago, and remember nothing. This is ridiculous. Like clockwork though, they will continue arguing.

 

[NewEra]

17 minutes ago, Not at the table Karlos said:

Can you show me where i said the 40 isn’t dumb? 

You didn’t-  

 

You called him slow- meanwhile his gauntlet was elite.  His 10 yard split was upper echelon.  He ran 20mph on a long td catch and run.  

 

If he had ran a 4.49 40, you wouldn’t be calling him slow, so it seems to me like the 40 means something to you.  While you may claim it, I don’t believe that you’re basing your “he’s slow” statement on your eyes.  

[JerseyBills]

1 hour ago, dickleyjones said:

Omg the people arguing about physics in here whilst proving nothing.

 

No one is reaching terminal velocity @Einstein 

 

Acceleration is not equal to both runners, and it is not a constant. So v = at doesn't really help us.

 

There are scenarios where someone stumbling vs someone starting from 0 will win a footrace, and scenarios where they will lose.

 

If you knew the actual rate of change in acceleration in each runner for the entire race then you should be able to calculate who would win. But we don't know that.

Bro their conversation had me cracking up. 

[Fan in Chicago]

34 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

The stats guy is also slow.  It will take another day or two to add the 4 receptions to his career.

Great. Now not only is Coleman slow but he makes the guy/gal reporting his stats to be slow too. 

[Not at the table Karlos]

4 minutes ago, NewEra said:

You didn’t-  

 

You called him slow- meanwhile his gauntlet was elite.  His 10 yard split was upper echelon.  He ran 20mph on a long td catch and run.  

 

If he had ran a 4.49 40, you wouldn’t be calling him slow, so it seems to me like the 40 means something to you.  While you may claim it, I don’t believe that you’re basing your “he’s slow” statement on your eyes.  

He’s slow because he is slow compared to other football players, college and pros. It’s why he gets caught from behind. Idgaf what his 40 time is if he runs slow on the field compared to other players. 
 

If his gauntlet was so elite why is he caught from behind twice? Because the gauntlet isn’t a football game it’s a drill. He’s still slow on the field. Why does he struggle to separate unless coverage is blown? Because he’s slow. He may be able to break tackles and get yards after the catch but he’s still slow. Anyone with functioning eyes can see it. 

 

[Royale with Cheese]

3 minutes ago, Not at the table Karlos said:

He’s slow because he is slow compared to other football players, college and pros. It’s why he gets caught from behind. Idgaf what his 40 time is if he runs slow on the field compared to other players. 
 

If his gauntlet was so elite why is he caught from behind twice? Because the gauntlet isn’t a football game it’s a drill. He’s still slow on the field. Why does he struggle to separate unless coverage is blown? Because he’s slow. He may be able to break tackles and get yards after the catch but he’s still slow. Anyone with functioning eyes can see it. 

 

 

Breece Hall is slow too.

 

 

[Einstein]

1 hour ago, Not at the table Karlos said:

And showed it twice yesterday. He’s slow. 

How fast was Hollins that he was pulling away from Coleman and the DBs that caught him from behind? 

 

It’s never a good idea to debate with people who do not have the base understanding to know when they are wrong. Without the base conceptual knowledge, they will just continue to argue on and on. We both knew better than to try.

 

Butchering physics equations, not understanding what terminal velocity, not realizing that velocity is at its weakest during acceleration. On and on. Goodness, they don’t even realize that they’re contradicting themselves. Out of one side of their mouth they’re saying he was only slow because he stumbled. Then on the other side of the mouth, they’re using a mile per hour instantaneous velocity stat (that they don’t understand), to claim that he was fast. They don’t know what instantaneous velocity even is! They don’t understand how that differs from speed over the course of  a run. It’s all so frustrating because they will argue nonstop while simultaneously being very wrong, but they don’t have the conceptual knowledge to realize that they’re wrong, so they just continue going on.

 

I am always trying to learn something. So if someone has something to teach me, I am ready to accept that they are right. But most posters in this thread show that they don’t actually want to know what’s right, they just want to win an argument. 

 

Long story short: Leave them to their wrongness. I should have done so in the beginning.

 

.

Edited October 21 by Einstein

[Not at the table Karlos]

3 minutes ago, Royale with Cheese said:

 

Breece Hall is slow too.

 

 

[Solomon Grundy]

1 hour ago, Not at the table Karlos said:

And showed it twice yesterday. He’s slow. 

How fast was Hollins that he was pulling away from Coleman and the DBs that caught him from behind? 

Hollins was already running full speed. Coleman had to regain his after stumbling 

[Royale with Cheese]

8 minutes ago, Not at the table Karlos said:

 

He was caught from behind in an open field.  Is that what you said?  Yes it was.