- Nov 4, 2007
Everyone has room to increase overall strength. What I’m saying is the things you’re looking at as predictive are the wrong things.I could be wrong, but wasn’t (isn’t?) ‘prime’ Brady visibly more ‘toned’ than back in 2000? Obviously correlation/causation issues, but people here have talked about his throwing strength improving over time, and I think that corresponds with a lot of things: mechanics, experience, and yeah ‘tone’. He looks more fit in the middle of his career.
And again, I’m not looking at McCorkle and calling that predictive of his throwing Strength.
im looking at him and calling that (speculating) predictive of his ability to increase his throwing strength as he conditions and reaches his prime. Obviously, mechanics and experience count too, and I never disregarded those (i certainly didn’t mean to).
So A. Throwing strength is more than just ‘arm strength’ but obviously that’s the shorthand term people use.
And B. You can, sometimes, look at someone and have some notion that he/she might have room to increase overall strength.
I think that’s all I said (and I understand that you may disagree with B)
Speaking of predictive, I should’ve needed SSF’s request. I don’t know if it’s just an overly Socratic style, but I wish these posts acknowledged being unfounded and based on poor hunches and lack of knowledge that don’t really have standing in a conversation with someone who spent 18ish years as a decently high level athlete, including in a strength sport where he trained under some of the best minds out there.
It’s not that I may disagree with B. B is wrong. It’s a pet theory with no foundation and when it’s been rebuked as such, why is there never a post saying “my previous post was wrong. I learned something today, or at least got some info to review.”
Read Hatfield and Louie Simmons and Tate and Wendler and Sheiko and Siff and Zatsiorski like I did. This is science. It’s all there.