goemaw.com

TITLETOWN - A Decade Long Celebration Of The Greatest Achievement In College Athletics History => Kansas State Football => Topic started by: Trim on May 28, 2011, 01:13:17 PM

Title: Morgan Burns
Post by: Trim on May 28, 2011, 01:13:17 PM
Just won 100m with a 10.66. Rainy day. Not great for spinters.
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: The Minister on May 28, 2011, 01:57:06 PM
He's a good dude. 

Fast, too. So, that's a plus. 
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: Trim on May 28, 2011, 02:02:37 PM
He's a good dude. 

Fast, too. So, that's a plus. 

I completely disagree.
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: KSUBrian on May 29, 2011, 02:01:53 AM
any time comparos to other sprinter DBs from KS that became Cats?  Like with the initials TN.
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: jtksu on May 29, 2011, 02:20:38 AM
Pretty sure the all-class record in KS is like 10.26.  (Ponds from SE?)  So, somewhere in between would be my guess.  Newms was pretty damn raw in HS.
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: jtksu on May 29, 2011, 02:27:00 AM
My bad, Ponds ran a 10.36.  FYI, the kids that won the 6A title ran a 10.61 this yr.  (He's from Olathe North.  Wonder is he can play football?)
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: DoDRepeat on May 29, 2011, 03:25:27 AM
Tnew was timed sub 10.3 often. I'm about 99 percent sure Jordy ran 10.62 while still at riley btw.
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: The Manhatter on May 29, 2011, 11:35:28 AM
Newman didn't run any legit 10.3 times in high school.  He ran a 10.9 at state to win the 100 as a senior.  Both Burns and Jordy posted faster times at state.

Alot of these 10.3's you might hear about in high school are hand timed and wind-aided.  Burns has run those, too.  It's only when you have a fully automated timing device and wind-reading gauges do you find out the true speed. 

Burns time was impressive given the conditions.  It was a cool and muggy day.  To put that into perspective, the kid in 5A is a true 10.4 sprinter but he could only manage a 10.60.
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: 2perSam on May 29, 2011, 11:50:49 AM
I believe the state record for the boys 100m dash is held by Maurice Greene from KC Schlagle at 10.29 seconds(1992).  It was the fastest high school time in the nation that year and yes, it's the same Greene who held the world's record for a short while(9.79 seconds).

His older brother(Earnest) ran for K-State track in the late 80s early 90s.  He was also a fast S.O.B., but not as fast as his younger brother. 
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: Dugout DickStone on May 29, 2011, 12:23:49 PM
I believe the state record for the boys 100m dash is held by Maurice Greene from KC Schlagle at 10.29 seconds(1992).  It was the fastest high school time in the nation that year and yes, it's the same Greene who held the world's record for a short while(9.79 seconds).

His older brother(Earnest) ran for K-State track in the late 80s early 90s.  He was also a fast S.O.B., but not as fast as his younger brother. 

Mods let's start a track board and make 2per the board mod.
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: jtksu on May 29, 2011, 12:51:44 PM
So anyway-  Mario Ponds holds the KSHSAA record @ 10.36.  This 2pacSam fellow needs to check his sources.  Boom.  Roasted x2.

http://www.kshsaa.org/Public/Track/Records.cfm
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: yoga-like_abana on May 29, 2011, 01:09:44 PM
great hip movement, large nostrils means a large V02 max, this kid is gonna be a STUD  :thumbs:
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: Trim on May 29, 2011, 01:16:54 PM
Do we really need a half-dozen Burns threads?
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: 2perSam on May 29, 2011, 01:54:08 PM
So anyway-  Mario Ponds holds the KSHSAA record @ 10.36.  This 2pacSam fellow needs to check his sources.  Boom.  Roasted x2.

http://www.kshsaa.org/Public/Track/Records.cfm

Not disputing the source, but Ponds' time is the record for the KSHSAA Track & Field Meet State Championships, not the overall state record.  So you're wrong, Ponds does not own the overall fastest time in Kansas high school history, just the state meet record.  The kid from Valley Center(Joe Fisher) ran the second fastest time in Kansas high school history this year with a 10.35.  You need to re-read my post.  Maurice's record time was set at another meet, i.e., league invitational, district or regional meet. 

There's a chance I could be wrong, but Google's not showing any records.  Then again Google isn't the end all and be all.  That is why I said I believe rather that present my statement as an undeniable fact.  I'll keep checking and if I'm right, I'll be sure to post it. 

BTW, it's 2per not 2pac funny guy.
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: Catchacold on May 29, 2011, 01:57:04 PM
http://030b577.netsolhost.com/cik/docs/ks_hs_all_time_best.pdf

 :party:
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: yoga-like_abana on May 29, 2011, 01:58:54 PM
bad news fellas, just checked my sources and no one gives a crap about track and field
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: jtksu on May 29, 2011, 02:06:07 PM
Couple weeks ago, I totally ran a 3.7.  Yeah, it's not the official KSHSAA record because it was at some other event (at a KS high school) and yeah, it doesn't show up on Google but don't worry about that guys cause it totally happened, trust me.
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: DoDRepeat on May 30, 2011, 01:55:51 AM
Newman didn't run any legit 10.3 times in high school.  He ran a 10.9 at state to win the 100 as a senior.  Both Burns and Jordy posted faster times at state.

Alot of these 10.3's you might hear about in high school are hand timed and wind-aided.  Burns has run those, too.  It's only when you have a fully automated timing device and wind-reading gauges do you find out the true speed. 

Burns time was impressive given the conditions.  It was a cool and muggy day.  To put that into perspective, the kid in 5A is a true 10.4 sprinter but he could only manage a 10.60.

Didn't mean to intend Newman in HS
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: Panjandrum on May 30, 2011, 10:22:31 AM
bad news fellas, just checked my sources and no one gives a crap about track and field

Unless they're running all of these events in pads.  Apples to apples and all.
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: jtksu on May 30, 2011, 01:50:36 PM
By that rationale a guy's 40 time is irrelevant, and so are all his numbers in the weightroom.  (No pads.)  Wonderlic- worthless.  (No pads.)  Hell the entire NFL combine is now worthless because they don't wear pads.  Did you call the NFL and tell them that yet?  I bet they'd be really thankful to you!
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on May 30, 2011, 03:31:43 PM

Burns won the 200 also.  I believe he set the meet record with a 21.58

That's fast
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: DoDRepeat on May 31, 2011, 12:40:42 PM
By that rationale a guy's 40 time is irrelevant, and so are all his numbers in the weightroom.  (No pads.)  Wonderlic- worthless.  (No pads.)  Hell the entire NFL combine is now worthless because they don't wear pads.  Did you call the NFL and tell them that yet?  I bet they'd be really thankful to you!

I would tend to agree that track results don't directly mean he'll be fast on the football field. A lot of HS kids don't even know how to correctly run a 40 or a 100. They do if they run track, of course. And even if they do know how, they won't be as proficient in it as they would be after 4/5 years doing it in college for college coaches.

We had guys in hs that could fly in track. Hell, they were even better athletes in basketball. But in football they rode the bench because they weren't strong enough to put those pads/helmet on and be as effective.
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: Branson Bound on May 31, 2011, 02:07:53 PM
By that rationale a guy's 40 time is irrelevant, and so are all his numbers in the weightroom.  (No pads.)  Wonderlic- worthless.  (No pads.)  Hell the entire NFL combine is now worthless because they don't wear pads.  Did you call the NFL and tell them that yet?  I bet they'd be really thankful to you!

I would tend to agree that track results don't directly mean he'll be fast on the football field. A lot of HS kids don't even know how to correctly run a 40 or a 100. They do if they run track, of course. And even if they do know how, they won't be as proficient in it as they would be after 4/5 years doing it in college for college coaches.

We had guys in hs that could fly in track. Hell, they were even better athletes in basketball. But in football they rode the bench because they weren't strong enough to put those pads/helmet on and be as effective.

You act like the coach of our great football team can't do anything with speed. Sure, if we still had The Ron Prince Experiment running the show, this kid would never be anything more than a fast guy who looks good in pads, but Coach Snyder will turn him into a football player. Just you watch.
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: Ira Hayes on May 31, 2011, 02:23:37 PM
http://030b577.netsolhost.com/cik/docs/ks_hs_all_time_best.pdf

 :party:

42 kids on that list... and zero really good Division I football players.   :dubious:
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: jtksu on May 31, 2011, 02:27:49 PM
Mpwo was a rough ridin' stud player at Olathe North.  He chose to run track at ASU but he certainly could have played D1 football and likely at a high level.  And I'm not saying that being fast means you will be good at football.  I'm saying that if you have a guy like Burns who is a good player, having great speed is a nice bonus. 
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: Ira Hayes on May 31, 2011, 02:58:00 PM
Mpwo was a rough ridin' stud player at Olathe North.  He chose to run track at ASU but he certainly could have played D1 football and likely at a high level.  And I'm not saying that being fast means you will be good at football.  I'm saying that if you have a guy like Burns who is a good player, having great speed is a nice bonus. 

Considering he played two years at Arkansas State and wasn't even all-conference (Sun Belt!)  I'm gonna go ahead and call bullshit.
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: jtksu on May 31, 2011, 03:10:36 PM
We played him in the 6A CG and he was, by far, the best player on the field.  We had Rashaad Jackson on our team and Mpwo was a much better player on both sides of the ball.  Not sure why he chose to not play football during his frosh and soph years @ ASU.  I'd have to say Eniak was the best HS player I ever played against.   (I'm probably forgetting someone but Mpwo was a stud.)
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: Ira Hayes on May 31, 2011, 03:47:36 PM
Maybe Mpwo just wasn't motivated at Ark. St.

FWIW, Thomas Randolph was a big time sprinter and probably close to that list.  But he was not the best cornerback on his high school team.  He wasn't even close.
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: DoDRepeat on June 01, 2011, 02:06:44 AM
By that rationale a guy's 40 time is irrelevant, and so are all his numbers in the weightroom.  (No pads.)  Wonderlic- worthless.  (No pads.)  Hell the entire NFL combine is now worthless because they don't wear pads.  Did you call the NFL and tell them that yet?  I bet they'd be really thankful to you!

I would tend to agree that track results don't directly mean he'll be fast on the football field. A lot of HS kids don't even know how to correctly run a 40 or a 100. They do if they run track, of course. And even if they do know how, they won't be as proficient in it as they would be after 4/5 years doing it in college for college coaches.

We had guys in hs that could fly in track. Hell, they were even better athletes in basketball. But in football they rode the bench because they weren't strong enough to put those pads/helmet on and be as effective.

You act like the coach of our great football team can't do anything with speed. Sure, if we still had The Ron Prince Experiment running the show, this kid would never be anything more than a fast guy who looks good in pads, but Coach Snyder will turn him into a football player. Just you watch.

You represent everything I hate about cat fans.
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: jtksu on June 01, 2011, 02:09:00 AM
Terrance Newman is laughing at you while reading stuff about the lockout.
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: The Manhatter on June 01, 2011, 11:24:55 AM
I like following and reporting the track numbers because I love the sport and because it is just one measure of true long speed.  Key word there is "long" speed.  It's nothing more than a factual assessment of straightline speed and nothing more.

I'll also be the first to tell you it's relevance to football is minimal.  It is something you include in the evaluation but just one small piece of the overall puzzle.  If two kids believed to be close in their abilities on the football field then the track speed can be a deal breaker...all coaches want to work with kids that have it.

Truth be told even 40s are not overly important.  It is nice to have good 40 speed at corner or wide receiver because it demonstrates abilities on plays made down the field BUT 99% of the plays in football occur as a result from what happens in the first few yards which is why 10 and 20 yard splits are FAR more essential to football.  Mark Ingram ran a 4.6 at the combine but he's one of the quickest players in last year's draft.  He'll make a lot of the crucial 10-20 yard runs because he has that burst to do so.  I'll take a 4.6 corner with a 1.5 10 yard split over a 4.3 corner w/ a 1.6 yard split any day of the week provided there are enough differences on the field.  Believe it or not there are solid 4.6/4.7 corners all over the college game and a few in the NFL.

Athleticism, toughness, quickness, elusiveness, power...these are far better traits for a football player to possess than pure, straightline long speed.  But pure, straightline long speed is an added bonus and shouldn't be entirely ignored.

Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: jtksu on June 01, 2011, 11:29:03 AM
Aren't you the same Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) that thought Boss was good?
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: The Manhatter on June 01, 2011, 11:34:42 AM
Aren't you the same respect that thought Boss was good?

Oklahoma thought he was good, too...maybe you should send them emails or something?

Is that all you got?
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: MadCat on June 01, 2011, 11:55:01 AM
 :popcorn:
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: wes mantooth on June 01, 2011, 12:40:13 PM
Aren't you the same respect that thought Boss was good?

Oklahoma thought he was good, too...maybe you should send them emails or something?

Is that all you got?

jt just got morgan burns'd
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: jtksu on June 01, 2011, 02:27:22 PM
Sniff, sniff,. I smell roasting!  What are your opinion of his hips?   Are they manly?
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: Benja on June 01, 2011, 02:33:24 PM
This is just a terrible rough ridin' thread. Like, just all around bad.
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: Stevesie60 on June 01, 2011, 03:08:53 PM
This is just a terrible rough ridin' thread. Like, just all around bad.

You should start your own Burns thread.
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: Branson Bound on June 01, 2011, 03:33:39 PM
By that rationale a guy's 40 time is irrelevant, and so are all his numbers in the weightroom.  (No pads.)  Wonderlic- worthless.  (No pads.)  Hell the entire NFL combine is now worthless because they don't wear pads.  Did you call the NFL and tell them that yet?  I bet they'd be really thankful to you!

I would tend to agree that track results don't directly mean he'll be fast on the football field. A lot of HS kids don't even know how to correctly run a 40 or a 100. They do if they run track, of course. And even if they do know how, they won't be as proficient in it as they would be after 4/5 years doing it in college for college coaches.

We had guys in hs that could fly in track. Hell, they were even better athletes in basketball. But in football they rode the bench because they weren't strong enough to put those pads/helmet on and be as effective.

You act like the coach of our great football team can't do anything with speed. Sure, if we still had The Ron Prince Experiment running the show, this kid would never be anything more than a fast guy who looks good in pads, but Coach Snyder will turn him into a football player. Just you watch.

You represent everything I hate about cat fans.

You hate us because we are good, squawk. 59-7
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: WillieWatanabe on June 01, 2011, 03:34:17 PM
This is just a terrible rough ridin' thread. Like, just all around bad.

You should start your own Burns thread.

lol
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: DoDRepeat on June 01, 2011, 05:30:34 PM
By that rationale a guy's 40 time is irrelevant, and so are all his numbers in the weightroom.  (No pads.)  Wonderlic- worthless.  (No pads.)  Hell the entire NFL combine is now worthless because they don't wear pads.  Did you call the NFL and tell them that yet?  I bet they'd be really thankful to you!

I would tend to agree that track results don't directly mean he'll be fast on the football field. A lot of HS kids don't even know how to correctly run a 40 or a 100. They do if they run track, of course. And even if they do know how, they won't be as proficient in it as they would be after 4/5 years doing it in college for college coaches.

We had guys in hs that could fly in track. Hell, they were even better athletes in basketball. But in football they rode the bench because they weren't strong enough to put those pads/helmet on and be as effective.

You act like the coach of our great football team can't do anything with speed. Sure, if we still had The Ron Prince Experiment running the show, this kid would never be anything more than a fast guy who looks good in pads, but Coach Snyder will turn him into a football player. Just you watch.

You represent everything I hate about cat fans.

You hate us because we are good, squawk. 59-7

 :facepalm:
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: CNS on June 01, 2011, 05:31:37 PM
Bet Burns would be slow in

(https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimages.footballfanatics.com%2FFFImage%2Fthumb.aspx%3Fi%3D%252fproductImages%252f_597000%252fff_597995_xl.jpg%26amp%3Bw%3D400&hash=6001ec53d7ad08df46bf97f0f4e459d55dcfd58f)
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: Branson Bound on June 01, 2011, 06:19:10 PM
By that rationale a guy's 40 time is irrelevant, and so are all his numbers in the weightroom.  (No pads.)  Wonderlic- worthless.  (No pads.)  Hell the entire NFL combine is now worthless because they don't wear pads.  Did you call the NFL and tell them that yet?  I bet they'd be really thankful to you!

I would tend to agree that track results don't directly mean he'll be fast on the football field. A lot of HS kids don't even know how to correctly run a 40 or a 100. They do if they run track, of course. And even if they do know how, they won't be as proficient in it as they would be after 4/5 years doing it in college for college coaches.

We had guys in hs that could fly in track. Hell, they were even better athletes in basketball. But in football they rode the bench because they weren't strong enough to put those pads/helmet on and be as effective.

You act like the coach of our great football team can't do anything with speed. Sure, if we still had The Ron Prince Experiment running the show, this kid would never be anything more than a fast guy who looks good in pads, but Coach Snyder will turn him into a football player. Just you watch.

You represent everything I hate about cat fans.

You hate us because we are good, squawk. 59-7

 :facepalm:

And I rest my case. Game, set, match, squawk.
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: DoDRepeat on June 02, 2011, 12:18:23 AM
By that rationale a guy's 40 time is irrelevant, and so are all his numbers in the weightroom.  (No pads.)  Wonderlic- worthless.  (No pads.)  Hell the entire NFL combine is now worthless because they don't wear pads.  Did you call the NFL and tell them that yet?  I bet they'd be really thankful to you!

I would tend to agree that track results don't directly mean he'll be fast on the football field. A lot of HS kids don't even know how to correctly run a 40 or a 100. They do if they run track, of course. And even if they do know how, they won't be as proficient in it as they would be after 4/5 years doing it in college for college coaches.

We had guys in hs that could fly in track. Hell, they were even better athletes in basketball. But in football they rode the bench because they weren't strong enough to put those pads/helmet on and be as effective.

You act like the coach of our great football team can't do anything with speed. Sure, if we still had The Ron Prince Experiment running the show, this kid would never be anything more than a fast guy who looks good in pads, but Coach Snyder will turn him into a football player. Just you watch.

You represent everything I hate about cat fans.

You hate us because we are good, squawk. 59-7

 :facepalm:

And I rest my case. Game, set, match, squawk.

 :dubious: Yeah I was at 59-7. Sitting in the k-state section. Because I'm a k-state fan. I'm saying you're an embarrassment to us all.
Title: Re: Morgan Burns
Post by: Branson Bound on June 06, 2011, 04:38:57 PM
By that rationale a guy's 40 time is irrelevant, and so are all his numbers in the weightroom.  (No pads.)  Wonderlic- worthless.  (No pads.)  Hell the entire NFL combine is now worthless because they don't wear pads.  Did you call the NFL and tell them that yet?  I bet they'd be really thankful to you!

I would tend to agree that track results don't directly mean he'll be fast on the football field. A lot of HS kids don't even know how to correctly run a 40 or a 100. They do if they run track, of course. And even if they do know how, they won't be as proficient in it as they would be after 4/5 years doing it in college for college coaches.

We had guys in hs that could fly in track. Hell, they were even better athletes in basketball. But in football they rode the bench because they weren't strong enough to put those pads/helmet on and be as effective.

You act like the coach of our great football team can't do anything with speed. Sure, if we still had The Ron Prince Experiment running the show, this kid would never be anything more than a fast guy who looks good in pads, but Coach Snyder will turn him into a football player. Just you watch.

You represent everything I hate about cat fans.

You hate us because we are good, squawk. 59-7

 :facepalm:

And I rest my case. Game, set, match, squawk.

 :dubious: Yeah I was at 59-7. Sitting in the k-state section. Because I'm a k-state fan. I'm saying you're an embarrassment to us all.

I'm sure you left in shame at halftime.