Justin Forsett is a Ferrari
Piggybacking off some recent thought's from our own Captain Morgan and Co., I want to add some of my own thoughts on J-Force.
A few years back, The Discovery Channel aired a series of auto challenges billed as "The Mean Machine Cross Atlantic Challenge". Although a bit contrived (the challenges were hand picked to add drama to the finishes), it showed an interesting contrast in automaker focus.
The episode that most caught my attention, pitted a Corvette V06 versus a Ferrari 360 Modena. Five challenges included: acceleration, braking, low speed slalom, high speed slalom, and lateral acceleration. From the outset, the differences were quite clear. The displacement of the Corvette was head and shoulders above the Ferrari, outgunning it in all of the straight line events in which horsepower had an opportunity to take affect. It was spectacular in all the marquee events. Ten minutes into the program it dawned on me.
"This is the damn NFL combine of autos".
Ferrari won the lateral acceleration and braking challenges with ease. To an unbiased viewer, these events seemed peripheral in nature. There was no glory in winning a lateral acceleration and braking challenges was there? Although unspoken during the program, the Corvette seemed the clear "combine" winner. It was bigger, stronger, and much faster on the straight line comparisons. It was Darren McFadden.
Why then, if it appears so dominant in the head to head comparisons, does "Darren McFadden" not win on the streets of Monaco? Why does the smaller, "slower", Ferrari continue to rack up hardware on the F1 circuit year after year? The answer lies in the differences between torque and horsepower. Simply put, Ferrari is all about torque and balance, and not about top end, straight line horsepower-driven speed.
Simply put. Justin Forsett is a Ferrari.
Torque vs Horsepower
From an F1 drivers point of view, torque is king. Any car, in any gear, will accelerate at the exact same rate as it's torque curve. In layman's terms, this means that a car will accelerate fastest at it's torque-peak, and will not accelerate as hard below (or above) it. Torque is what a driver feels, and horsepower is merely an esoteric measurement within that context.
X foot pounds of torque will accelerate a car just as hard at 2000 rpm as it would at 4000 rpm in the same gear, yet the horsepower would double. Therefore, it's clear that horsepower isn't at all useful until the car reaches it's torque-peak limit (5252 rpm in a car). At this rpm, horsepower takes over, and top end speed is maximized. In this sense, a car and a running back are very similar.
A runningback's "horsepower" is what we all see on display in the 40 yard dash during the combine. At about 25 yards, the torque-peak is reached, and the players with loads of HP surge through the tape with great 40 times due to high top end speeds. These are your Corvette's.
By contrast, a players torque is on display for the cone and shuttle drills (lateral acceleration & braking). These are your Ferrari's, and from a physical tools perspective, where I place my money (see Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith, Curtis Martin, Marshall Faulk).
Justin Forsett in the NFL's "Streets of Monaco"
Alright, I admit that the comparison is slightly janky, but the analogy really does fit. When is the last time you saw a player run a straight line 40 on Sunday? I'll give you a hint. It was probably after the back was already into the second or third tier of the defense. That finishing horsepower, while obviously a nice bonus, is certainly not "bankable", and it doesn't move the chains with consistency.
The NFL is far more akin to an F1 circuit than a Nascar oval. The winding "lanes" created by an NFL offensive line, require the breaking and torque of a Ferrari, far more often than the straight line displacement of a Corvette. For a team running a West Coast Offense, the ability to get to the second and third tier consistently (even if not past it), is much more important than the ability to breakaway with top end horsepower "every once in awhile".
Watch this game tape of Forsett:
Justin Forsett Highlights 2009 (via TheVikingsworld)
The analogies made above are apparent when watching the video. You simply won't see more functional "torque" out of a player than Forsett. From the backfield to the second level, there are very few NFL backs that can compete. This is why Forsett is so effective running the ball. Although his overall top speed is much slower than even many LB's (4.65 & 4.73), he gets to that top speed much faster than everyone else. This is functional speed. This is Football speed.
40 Yard Dash vs Cone Drills
The following is a comparison of 40 vs 3-Cone drills from running backs in the same draft class as Forsett. With the exception of Chris Johnson, it's interesting (although certainly not conclusive) that the "3 cone backs" have largely been very effective early in their NFL careers, while players like McFadden, Aldridge, and Simpson stole the show at the combine with impressive 40 times.
Also of interest: Justin Forsett was amongst the more explosive 3-cone backs, while posting a "career threatening" type of 40 time (4.65).
3-CONE DRILL TIME
Ray Rice 6.65
Kevin Smith 6.74
Jamaal Charles 6.80
Matt Forte 6.84
Jacob Hester 6.85
Anthony Aldridge 6.88
Tashard Choice 6.88
Felix Jones 6.90
Jalen Parmele 6.96
Justin Forsett 6.96
(C. Johnson chose not to run 3 cone or shuttle.)
40-YARD DASH TIME
Chris Johnson 4.23
Darren McFadden 4.33
Anthony Aldridge 4.36
Jamaal Charles 4.38
Chad Simpson 4.42
Rashard Mendenhall 4.45
Matt Forte 4.46
Jalen Parmele 4.47
Felix Jones 4.47
Jonathan Stewart 4.48
Forsett as Seattle Featured Back
We can assume that things like vision and blocking are important aspects of being an NFL running back. This fan post intends only to address Forsett's perceived lack of physical tools. Somehow there is public sentiment that Justin is on borrowed time. That he is... a gimmick if you will. Sooner or later, the lethargic 40 time, and his diminutive stature will bring him back down to earth.
I would strongly disagree with any of these assessments. Justin Forsett is more than capable of being a dynamic feature back. While he shows poorly in the sexy specifications (horsepower and "curb weight"), he excels (even wins) in categories such as balance and torque.
The NFL after all, isn't played on oval tracks. It's played in the winding lanes of Monaco.
I like Seattle's chances with the Ferrari.
67 comments
|
33 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Well done.
I like the analogy, but rather than make it a one-liner, you took it and made something great/educational out of it. Sure, some of us would have been just as well served with a one-liner, some more of us might be with you if you wrote 5 lines on it. But this is a great fanpost.
I was a bit worried after posting it that it would come off...
for lack of a better word “janky”, but I just couldn’t escape the reality of the comparison.
When looking at his highlights, you can see instant separation from everybody (the equivalent of torque), followed by him hitting top gear and then getting run down once everyone else hits stride (lack of HP). It just emphasizes (in superlative fashion I might add) the total irrelevance of running 40 yard dashes.
I would LOVE to see the combine add a measurement…. a ’zero-to-top speed" timing. You would then get the benefit of knowing what kind of top gear the back has, as well as how fast they hit that gear.
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
You just got Rec'd.
Great article, and taught me a little about automobiles as well.
Bird Law in this country isn't governed by reason.
Greatly appreciated as well
and I think your idea for the combine would be an excellent addition.
by The Ancient Mariner on Jun 1, 2010 7:03 AM PDT reply actions
On that play against the Cards @ AZ 3rd and 16...
Am I crazy, or did Carlson munk up his “zone responsibility”
Then on that second play against the Cards (where Force scores) nice block by Griffith.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZDUh9yboqI
Your culture is primitive; yet so funky!
I'd say Washington is similar to Force...
while Jones is more of a high end BMW. On certain days, and against certain competition, he will look like the finest car on the road… but other days, when the “big boys” come out to play, ends up looking rather pedestrian.
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
Julius Jones would be Honda Accord. He is foreign (from dallas). Not too big or small. Not too fast. Not as eficient as other Hondas. Reasonably priced. Leon Washington would be a Go-Cart. Small, fast, nimble and fun as hell to drive.
by nickfru1 on Jun 1, 2010 8:49 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Washington is Ferrari/Porsche like
JJ is more of a Mustang GT. He is reasonably fast and agile, but real inexpensive for what you get. He won’t blow anybody away, unless you completely disregard him, then he will jump up and kick your ass once in a while.
It all makes sense
Forsett’s first-to-second-level burst is impressive.
But the car analogy doesn’t quite work. First, I don’t think there is a Corvette “V06”, although there IS a “Z06”. Second, the Vette makes far more torque (475 ft. lbs), earlier in the rpm band, than the 360 ever sees (275 ft. lbs). Corvettes, in fact, are torque monsters, with huge horsepower numbers as well.
Yeah the "V" is a typo... the "Z"'s have been a staple the entire decade.
What you are referring to requires a phenomenon known as gearing. Since the analogy is being made to a human, and humans have no gearing, I was drawing this analogy from a single ratio. Without this the, corvette is far inferior to the Ferrari as was confirmed in the lateral acceleration challenge.
The bigger analogy I was going for (without turning it into an auto tread) was that Ferrari’s focus on balance and torque, as opposed to raw engine displacement, is what wins F1 crowns year in and year out. The analogy is that a RB’s arena is far more akin to a winding F1 course than an oval where engine displacement is king.
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
Year in and year out?
Nah…Ferrari had a great run a few years ago (thanks to years of work, a brilliant designer and a stellar driver), but they had quite the dry spell previous to that. They’ll be back, of course. They always come back.
Being a guy who's raced cars
and coached running backs, I totally agree… Forsett is the nimble car that handles. I’d say the ability to put the power to the ground rather than just saying torque, but excellent analogy.
he wrote this article
just for you
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZDUh9yboqI
Your culture is primitive; yet so funky!
Well phrased...
I think the other thing that struck me was how much the show resembled the NFL combine. The “event” format really drove home that feeling, and the corvette really walked away looking like a “lottery pick”. It was at that moment the absurdity of both the shows setup (and the NFL draft) really are.
In real world applications, the corvette only wins on a drag strip or an oval, and players with JUST impressive 40’s require offenses that can allow them to work in space and off the edges. Your best RB’s are the “Ferraris” that require no room to make things happen.
At that moment, I actually stopped and thought to myself… DAMN Justin Forsett is very effective in these same “events” (lateral acceleration, starting and stopping).
Bring Your Game, Leave Your Name.
It also wins in Le Mans,
where the rules are written in its favour.
The kid carved up some great defenses last year.
Playing behind guys who were holding signs on freeway onramps that said “Will play the ZBS for food” before training camp.
I, for one, absolutely love the reactionary elements among our competition that insist that 40 times and bench presses matter on Sunday afternoon. It leaves a lot of really excellent talent with football speed and functional strength available for cheap dollar. Long as we remain committed to results instead of outdated and irrelevant metrics, game success will happen, especially when playing against those guys that have great bench presses and 40 times.
Any time I see a Seahawk RB have to get tackled from behind in the 2nd and 3rd level, I’m a happy man. I’d rather that than a home run hitter who gets a lot of 3 and outs along with 1 or 2 home runs a game. A runner like Force will eat up a lot of clock, keeping the Defense fresh and the opposing Defense tired.
Anyone seen any injury reports yet? I am looking for a whole lot less injuries than the Holmgren era, where each player was expected to show up in shape on their own (works great when you have guys like Rice, Big Walt and Favre on your roster), and the Mora era, where players were given a lot of conditioning they were not accustomed to (pulled groins? dozens of them?). Functional conditioning and game speed are all anyone needs to care about, and bench presses and 40 times pretty much never get done on a Sunday.
Wow... Forsett has really sparked interest on this blog as of late lol
Great post though. My brother, who is an auto mechanic, agrees with the analogy.
Golden!
I think White's release sparked that.
Now Force is what we got. As much has been said about LenDale’s attitude/performance/buying in I think that once PC had gotten to know what he had in Force releasing White was easy.
Shouldn't he already have?
Given that he was at USC and had to play against him once a year?
Golden!
by Carl Shinyama on Jun 1, 2010 10:27 PM PDT up reply actions
2007 Justin Forsett
Put up more yards against PC’s Trojans than any other team that year 164 yards on 31 Atts 5.2 Avg and a TD. You’d think PC’d remember Since it took a 4th quarter TD for USC to win.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Jun 1, 2010 10:35 PM PDT up reply actions
Here's the thing about F1 cars
They’re all about acceleration. Pure, blinding, push-you-back-through-the-seat acceleration. How fast are they? 0-60mph in 2 seconds. That’s fast…really, really fast. Thing is, they could do it in one second, but there’s all this pesky stuff about physics and wheel-spin and the like. Then they brake, and that’s hard, too. Then they accelerate again, and it’s left, right, brake, accelerate, brake, and then they shoot by at nearly 200mph on a straight (and it could be 300, but they need the downforce to stay on the track) and it’s brake again to get them down to 40 as they hit another corner.
Oval racing? Yawn.
Give me Formula Forsett any day.
by Buster! on Jun 1, 2010 10:21 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
They'd be fun to drive
But F1 is boring to watch. There’s very little actual racing. Whoever spends the most money wins unless something fluky happens.
Its just like Baseball!
Having been an F1 Fan for decades
I’d have to argue with that. It can be boring at times (just like watching your favorite football team getting blown out can be a real trial to watch), but it’s a remarkably fascinating sport if you get deep enough into it. And a team’s budget doesn’t guarantee wins…Toyota spent hundreds of millions per year over the last decade before calling it quits due to poor results. It takes money, certainly, but also technical expertise, team chemistry, brilliant driving, an ace pit crew, solid mechanics…it’s a (deceptively) team-driven sport.
I like this...
Good write up…
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Jun 1, 2010 11:12 AM PDT reply actions
Easy to follow.
I don’t fit anyone’s idea of a football guru, so reading your post really helped me to better understand how Forsett has, and will, help the offense. Very well written. Thanks for the work.
And then there's Jamaal Charles, who has both
No wonder he averaged almost 6 yards a carry on a crappy KC team.
He’s more like Barry Sanders, who had a wicked 40 time. Still, I remember Sanders getting caught from behind a few times. Emmit Smith is a good comparison though, I think his 40 time was very slow (4.7 or 4.8?). I don’t know, comparisons to other players can be tricky. I like this car comparison better, really does compare well to the combine. Nice work.
Ideally you want both, but I have been pretty impressed with Forsett’s shiftiness so far. He’s very fun to watch.
Jerome Harrison is another back that comes to mind for me.
What surprises me most about Forsett is his ability to run inside. That seems contrary to anything I’d expect to see. I loved the clip. His balance and footwork is fantastic. I hope he’s in the weight room and training his a$$ off so we can he what he does with a larger workload. Though I still pine of a feature-back like a DeAngelo or Stewart, what we have in Forsett looks good. It will take time before I can decide if it’s my blind Seahawk hope clicking in. Maybe Forsett is another who proves my thinking (and alot of others, too) wrong. Maybe he evolves into Ray Rice or Jamaal Charles in terms of both surprising prodcuction and league perception. My biggest concern is his durability and small frame. This writeup and clip has relieved some of my concern about his lack of speed. Maybe that is not a concern at all – just a wish. He could turn out to be Lorenzo Bookier or Travis Minor, which would be demoralizing, to say the least. I think he’s already surpassed guys like that with what we’ve seen so far, though. Perhaps we see a similar path as Harrison or Charles, who both have had the undersized label and really produced the second have of ’09. Both have recently been paired with bigger, complimentary backs though…
Red Bryant: surprise us!
I think his ability to run inside comes from both his bruising style
and his incredible acceleration (which Iverson already covered quite well). That acceleration allows him to “hit the hole” before the defense is able to read him, allowing him to burst into the backfield for a lot of 20 yard gains. At least, that’s my theory. It’s kind of like a DL who has a great jump off the snap, hitting OL before they are ready to defend against them. Only it’s for a RB.
Now with more lemon bars!
I agree, that's part of it.
That was a huge key with Alexander, too. Once he lost that initial burst of acceleration, he could no longer hit and get through the hole. Forsett’s 10-yard split is probably good (going to see it now…).
Red Bryant: surprise us!
Ahh. Not listed where I looked.
Chris Johnson’s was a full 1/10th of a second better than McFadden’s. 1.40 to 1.50 10-yard splits. Charles 1.46. Rice 1.47. Stewart’s 1.46, too. At 235lbs! Felix Jones 1.46.
Red Bryant: surprise us!
Harrison ran a 4.47
Ht Wt 40-yard dash 10-yd split 20-yd split 20-ss 3-cone Vert
5′9⅛″ 201 lb 4.47 1.55 2.62 4.08 6.79 34½ in.
Harrison is a restricted FA if Seattle doesn’t like Marshawn Lynch I’d take Harrison in a heart beat… Harrison and Forsett as a tandem would be sick add Washington when he gets off of the PUP list and that is a very dynamic stable.
by Sean Michael Patrick Gallegos on Jun 1, 2010 1:58 PM PDT up reply actions
Harrison mostly had bad showings running behind a pretty damn good line
Haven’t seen him run a lot (who watches the Browns), but at a glance he doesn’t look that good to me.
by Thomas Beekers on Jun 1, 2010 5:03 PM PDT up reply actions
Harrison mostly had bad showings running behind a pretty damn good line
Haven’t seen him run a lot (who watches the Browns), but at a glance he doesn’t look that good to me.
by Thomas Beekers on Jun 1, 2010 5:04 PM PDT up reply actions
As a side note, Tim Tebow's 3 cone drill time - 6.66
So not only did he prove that he is better then all the running backs, but also that he is in fact the antichrist in disguise.
by B.B.Finnegan on Jun 1, 2010 11:46 AM PDT reply actions 4 recs
Great write-up. Rec'd. (Bias alert: JForce has always been one of my favorite Hawks)
Makes me think of my 2nd favorite show (to watching the Hawks): TopGear on BBCA
by IslandHawk on Jun 1, 2010 11:52 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Month without sunshine?
Everett-dweller: Been there, done that.
Though they sink through the Sea, they shall rise again...Death shall have no dominion...
Very well done.
This is what good fan posts should be like. A new idea, informative, well thought out, and with supporting evidence. Good job.
Now with more lemon bars!
Fabulous article...
For those of us who do know a thing or two about cars, It’s a wonderful analogy.
I know **** about cars
but I thank the writer for explaining the context. Now if they could come up with analogy using WWII long range single seat fighters… then I’m in.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZDUh9yboqI
Your culture is primitive; yet so funky!
by jubelthebear on Jun 1, 2010 3:25 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Let's see, Justin couldn't be a P-38 or P-51 cause they were really fast...
…and the Zero too fragile
And the Spitfire fast…
And the Corsair fast and tough…
And the ME-262 wicked fast and the ME-109 fair?
How about something like an A-10 (a more modern aircraft) that is fairly slow, manouverable and tough?
I don’t know – not sure the idea translates to fighter aircraft.
if the P-51, or ME-109d is your standard
I think Forsett is the F6F Hellcat. Slower, slightly less “BMI” (hp/lb) than the Mustang. But more agile at it’s top gear (faster than the zero too)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZDUh9yboqI
Your culture is primitive; yet so funky!
Chris Johnson is the P-38 in my book.
That thing broke most propellor speed records. Hard to find a good fit for Forsett… Although wasn’t the ME-109 pretty maneuverable? Ferrari doesn’t have to equate to the toughest plane anyway cuz plenty of backs are more bruising than him.
Though they sink through the Sea, they shall rise again...Death shall have no dominion...
the ME-109
wasn’t as maneuverable at it’s higher speeds (it’s leading edge slats & wing design), but it could straight line and cruise much faster than the F6F.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZDUh9yboqI
Your culture is primitive; yet so funky!
Okey doke.
Can we call him Hellcat now??
Though they sink through the Sea, they shall rise again...Death shall have no dominion...
by Cheddar28 on Jun 2, 2010 11:03 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
rec'd
I’m all for it…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZDUh9yboqI
Your culture is primitive; yet so funky!
Brian Westbrook
Forse runs like Westbrook, specially the screen game.
Great article
Thanks!
Eddie Izzard ran 43 marathons in 51 days with 5 weeks of training. What's stopping you?
Shaun Alexander
is a ME-109
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZDUh9yboqI
Your culture is primitive; yet so funky!

by 


































