- Joined
- May 1, 2008
- Messages
- 16,682
- Reaction score
- 3,686
Quite the opposite. Stanford's training program is notorious for emphasizing flexibility and endurance and not for optimizing traditional combine measurable. Stanford players tend to do poorly in most drills.One problem is the "Stanford Asterisk" on his numbers -- thanks to their unusal training program, Stanford players tend to put up unrealistically good measurables.
And there was Shannon Turley, the architect of a training regimen among the most distinct in college sports. He is Stanford’s director of football sports performance, and for years, he felt it necessary to write letters to N.F.L. scouts to explain the Cardinal’s nontraditional approach. He stopped that practice this year in the wake of Stanford’s success.
Although Stanford players may not perform as well in the bench press, or in the 40-yard dash at the N.F.L. combine, they often top the charts on F.M.S. scores. Asked for an example, Turley cited Richard Sherman, a fifth-round pick who became a dominant cornerback for the Seattle Seahawks.
Turley no longer mails those letters, addressed, “Dear N.F.L. Scout.” But he still must justify priorities and defend practices.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/31/s...n-redefines-strength.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Last edited: