Bill, I appreciate what you were trying to do -- but extrapolating a 40 time isn't the same as reporting one that is officially timed.
Despite the missing 40 time, we had other track "comps" that suggested that the kid was blazing fast. There is no way using logic or empirical evidence that he was a 4.71. It wouldn't make sense for that position, and there would be no reason for Fran Brown to recruit a CB with that type of speed [or lack thereof].
For the record, I also don't believe / take at face value the 4.29 estimate -- because it wasn't officially timed, either -- it's just another projection. And also because very few people are capable of running that fast.
But no doubt, this kid is fast!
RF2044,
Thank you!
I try to get all the information possible on an offered recruit in each evaluation.
Sometimes doing these evaluations, the only way to get a 40 time is to do a conversion, either because the player is not a sprinter and has not done an officially (FAT - Fully Automated Time) timed 40, or has only run meters 55m, 60 m, 100 m which is official timing, the rating sites have no 40 which 75% of the time all of them have very little statistical information so I go search for it, be it HT/ WT, weight room stats etc.
I had to convert, and I understand that the time is not an officially timed 40, but it was all I had to go by. Very few times on this board are FAT times - the schools do not, unless the player is a sprinter and also runs track, have the equipment set up to time races.
So, I go to MileSplit to get an official time IF they have it. Most recruits who are as fast as he is are running track - eg: "The Longwood star from Long Island is one of New York State's top sprinters as well, and has logged a 6.45 second 55M time according to MileSplit." Rivals.
The only way you are going to get an officially run 40 on Gibbs is if he runs one and it is reported, or if he visits and they have him run a 40. Otherwise as you say, "this kid is fast."
cuse.com
en.wikipedia.org
