Pennington's reputation is well established.

The fact that the ball travells 50 yards is irrelevant. My dad is 72 and can still heave it 50 yards.

There are several issues that impact the deep ball.

When a QB throws a ball, he sends it on a certain trajectory, and spirals the ball. The speed of the spiral impacts how long the ball maintains its speed and that trajectory. The 'tighter' the spiral, and faster the spiral the farther the ball travels, and as it is on its descent portion of the arc it is still cutting through the air and it comes down on the same arc. If the ball is rotating slower, it loses its arc and starts to fall. That is what is called floating. And floating causes the ball to get pushed off course by cross winds. Chad Pennington's spiral is nice and tight on medium throws, but on deep balls it isn't there.

Size of hands and even where his pinky finger is on the laces can affect this.

Chad is a GREAT game manager, with GREAT accuracy on short to medium throws, but he has a long earned reputation, and as a fan of his, I can see why.

BTW, Ginn isn't wide open because he is facing double coverage and that put Hartline in single.

realist Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When a QB throws a ball, he sends it on a certain
> trajectory, and spirals the ball. The speed of the
> spiral impacts how long the ball maintains its
> speed and that trajectory. The 'tighter' the
> spiral, and faster the spiral the farther the ball
> travels, and as it is on its descent portion of
> the arc it is still cutting through the air and it
> comes down on the same arc. If the ball is
> rotating slower, it loses its arc and starts to
> fall. That is what is called floating.

How does the spinning of the ball relate to arm strength? You're referring to the ball overcoming air resistance. Whether you like it or not, a spinning ball and a non-spinning ball have the same aerodynamics and pretty much the same drag going through the air. The ability of a spinning ball to cut through the air better than a non spinning ball is nearly insignificant. Unless the ball starts wobbling or flipping end-over-end, the aerodynamics are preserved.

The primary thing that would truly cause a ball to "float" is an arch that is too high. The higher the arch, the longer the ball stays in the air and the more wind resistance it must deal with. A lower arch also travels to its destination faster (maintaining the timing of the deep throw) because the ball travels a shorter distance overall. Throwing with a lower arch is all about technique, not strength, although the movement of the human shoulder DOES make it easier to throw a ball with a high and slow arch than a low and fast one. Penny's previous shoulder surgeries may make it difficult or even painful for him throw with a lower arch.

The size of a QB's hands only make it easier to hold the ball and, hence, deliver it with the optimum arch.

The speed of the "spiral" has very little effect in it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/01/2009 02:08AM by montequi.

BTW: Be careful what you wish for when it comes to a QB's arm strength. Baltimore won a Superbowl with "weak-armed" Trent Dilfer. The next season the dumped Dilfer for "stong-armed" Elvis Grbac. They haven't been back to a Superbowl since!! Whatever you want to say about their defense their Superbowl year, that defense didn't change much for several years after. You think a "weak-armed" QB, who happens to be accurate and a great leader, can't make a difference? Think again!

I have to agree, the Dilfer case is not accurate but a solid deep baller, and deff agree with the spiral. LOL actualy its quite funny to hear somone say the spiral, and not throwing with a spiral has the same effect. lol Wow well i cant be the whipping boy all the time...

ghotirule Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Whether you like it or not, a spinning ball and a
> non-spinning ball have the same aerodynamics and
> pretty much the same drag going through the air.
> The ability of a spinning ball to cut through the
> air better than a non spinning ball is nearly
> insignificant.
>
> A completely bogus statement.
>
> The spiral has a gyroscopic effect - it keeps the
> ball stabilized on its long axis in the air.
> Because the shape of the football oriented along
> its long axis is quite aerodynamic, you want it to
> keep that orientation. A stabilized ball gives it
> a smaller front facing surface area, lowering the
> coefficient of drag. The higher the spiral speed,
> the tighter the spiral, the lower the drag.
>

I understand how SOME speed would help drag, but the speed of the spin shouldn't make a difference. As long as you have the gyroscopic effect, a faster spin does nothing.

I have been coaching Senior High School Football for 20 years.

The size of the hand, the grip, and speed of the spiral ALL MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

The reason a 'rifle' has more distance and accuracy than 'shot' guns ( even when firing a solid slug) or the older musket, is that a rifle spirals the bullet, which has the effect of cutting through the air and decreasing the drag.

A high arc will indeed cause a ball to float. As will a ball that is gripped too much in the middle with the index finger coming off last, rather than the pinky,. As will a ball that has less spiral than another.

If the spiral had no effect, you should be able to throw a football an equal distance even if you don't grip the laces. Same shape cutting through the air. The laces allows for more spiral, so if you throw it grabing the leather, less spiral, according to you it should travell the same distance. According to me it won't. Go try.

......thank you. You said it better than me.

The faster speed does nothing on the early part of the trajectory, but as the ball gets further in to the trajectory it slows down at the top and regains speed as it descends. As faster spinning ball extends the arc as the ball experiences less drag throughout trajectory, and in particular it maintains a better spin through the descent; therefore it gains more speed than a slower spinning ball, and is better able to maintain its original arc and landing spot.

Aqua&Orange Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Victorygaygan, everything you have ever said has
> never been interpreted right because its
> impossible to interpret. You are an idiot who
> cannot spell who rants and raves around here like
> the drunken village idiot. Everybody here counts
> you as a joke, your post are moronic and 95% of
> the time everybody just skips over your post when
> they have seen one of your 10 aliases,
> victorygogan, dolphinnumberonestunner or any of
> the other stupid names you have used.
>
> Please go back to your coloring books and try to
> color within the lines.

RESPONSE: WOOWWWWWWW! And I thought he was you using an alias.

LOL you learn somthing new every day!!! I just cant believe that a guy who writes that would be serving in the Armed forces! I bet his Commanding Officer wouldnt like to read somthing like that. After all he is US Government property, and for that held to a higher standard! Looks like somone didnt get the memo.

MiamiThunder Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> LOL you learn somthing new every day!!! I just
> cant believe that a guy who writes that would be
> serving in the Armed forces! I bet his Commanding
> Officer wouldnt like to read somthing like that.
> After all he is US Government property, and for
> that held to a higher standard! Looks like somone
> didnt get the memo.


RESPONSE: I agree with you that it was nasty. Unnecessarily so. But that has been my experience with A & O. I still thank him for his service to our country and I also thank you.

You know what is nasty Chyren? Those PM's you used to fill my inbox with. And a few other people around here know that as well too.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

Aqua&Orange Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You know what is nasty Chyren? Those PM's you used
> to fill my inbox with. And a few other people
> around here know that as well too.


RESPONSE: Are you really in the military service? I think Miami Thunder has a point. One thing military people have is honesty. I have sent out about 3 pms in all my time on the board not counting those to the moderators. The only one I sent to you, as you well know, was to further argue a point and you sent back a very nasty response that refused to discuss the issue.

Of all of the things that military (United States that is) people do is to be honest.

So let's put it right out on the line. Everyone on the board will be awaiting an answer. Are you or not in the United States Military or National Guard and if in the military, what branch?

You don't have to say where you are deployed. Just confirm you are in the military and indicate what branch.

Quite frankly, I believe you to be too juvenile to be in the service, regardless of age. I grew up next to Fort Sill, Oklahoma, and I've never seen a military person with your immaturity and disposition. Usually, basic training molds better men than that.

(In case you can't figure it out, this is not a PM.)