Classic question--
If you were building a football program--would you base it around speed or size?
For me---speed. Especially in Class A. (Naturally--a good combination of both is the right answer)
But if you had to focus your weights/offseason program on one or the other--what would you pick?
I would have to go with speed if I had to choose.
Be nice to have good mix of both.
I would say speed, unless your players are perfect on keying where the ball is going to be they will have to be fast. But if you have good size and you can read where the ball is going and get there, you are just as fast. Even the slowest people can make up for it by being smart.
drive a ferarri head on with a mac truck and see what happens.....yeah, u can say the mac truck wont catch the ferrari but in football it dont matter how fast you are youre gonna get hit......but i like to see a mix of both
[QUOTE="LCwildcatJR"]drive a ferarri head on with a mac truck and see what happens.....yeah, u can say the mac truck wont catch the ferrari but in football it dont matter how fast you are youre gonna get hit......but i like to see a mix of both[/QUOTE\]
I agree but if I had to pick one it would probably be speed.
As a coach I'd work my team more on strength than speed. Speed is much more a natural ability in high school than strength. Speed is much harder to obtain through working out. Most anyone working hard in the weight room for 4-5 years will get strong. So I definently say strength that way you can have a good line and let your naturally talented speedsters run through the holes.
Tomcat68 Wrote:As a coach I'd work my team more on strength than speed. Speed is much more a natural ability in high school than strength. Speed is much harder to obtain through working out. Most any good working hard in the weight room for 4-5 years will get strong. So I definently say strength that way you can have a good line and let your naturally talented speedsters run through the holes.
:thumb:
both i want jerome and barry
Its hard to pick between the 2
toolbox Wrote:I would have to go with speed if I had to choose.
Be nice to have good mix of both.
I agree
irateSku
Of course I would go with speed. But I woud take quickness before anything.
I would like to have both....but STRENGTH is key
With a good back and a bad o-line, the back gets 0-2 yards.
Witha bad back and a good o-line you'll get 3-5.
Strength is very important and so is Speed......but, if a quick team plays a strong team, the quick team will win 9 times out of 10
Idc how strong you are, if you cant catch someone, it dosen't matter
size size and more size. sure speed has advantages but when size hits speed its lights out
i would take speed anyday if tehy cant catch you then the strenth dosnt matter
I would go with size and strength becasue u can maul a team over and hurt their feelings
speed anytime !!!!!!!!!!!
Really you need both if you think about it. Because if you are a passing team you want your WR to be in good shape so they can run to for the QB to throw it to them, and size they have to be tall to jump to catch the ball!
I think Speed, with a little bit of Size to go along with it. Look at the Indianapolis Colts. They dont have alot of size, with the exception of Freeney, and look how well they been doing this year.
size because no matter how quick you are going to get hit
i would go with size and strength and then teach your kids how to take proper angles that will make them football fast there is a difference in fast and football fast
It would be great to have both, but I would take speed, there are alot more things u can do!
I would take size becasue in the mountains alot of teams run the ball and if u want to be good running team u need size up front