superpunk

Pro Bowler
Messages
11,003
Reaction score
0
Jordan Gross, Brian Bulaga, Michael Roos, all at 33" or less.

From your article

As I mentioned earlier, arm length is a physical trait that can't be altered. Its importance varies depending on who you ask. Both the Bears and the Falcons have been criticized in some circles for taking offensive tackles in the first round in Chris Williams and Sam Baker, respectively, who fall below the average in terms of arm length.

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/ross_tucker/05/22/linemen/1.html#ixzz2LZwtKlSF

It's just a fucking meaningless number. I'm sure everyone would love tackles with some 37" arms, 6'8" and amazing quickness. But in the list of things that make you a good offensive lineman, and tackle in particular, arm length is pretty insignificant, particularly drawing some arbitrary 33" number in the sand. Most of the position is played with your feet and your base. If you NEED that extra length it's because you fucked your footwork up. And you're probably about to get called for holding.
 
Messages
1,274
Reaction score
0
By Dane Brugler | NFLDraftScout.com Senior Analyst
February 20, 2013 4:28 pm ET

With every team looking for the next Rob Gronkowski or Jimmy Graham at tight end, versatile safeties are more and more important in today's NFL. Teams are looking for safeties who can play with range to cover the back half of the field as well as attack the line of scrimmage.

Teams ideally want safeties who aren't defined by free or strong but can do both and handle multiple responsibilities. That type of defender doesn't last long on draft day, and they are also few and far between. Only four safeties have been drafted in the top 10 since 2005, including Alabama's Mark Barron, whom the Buccaneers took with the seventh overall pick last April.

This year's crop of safeties might have a few first-rounders, but the strength of this class is the depth. There are multiple future starters in this group, including some intriguing safeties in the second and third rounds.

Most to gain in Indianapolis
Logic says the players who put forth the most impressive workout results have the most to gain at the combine each year. That isn't necessarily the case. In most cases, the elite athletes are already well known by scouts. The players who actually boost their grades during the athletic drills at the combine are those who show better-than-expected athleticism or help their cause through interviews.

While many expect Texas' Kenny Vaccaro to be the first safety drafted in April, Florida International's Jonathan Cyprien has been gaining momentum all season. And with a strong pre-draft process, it wouldn't be surprising if he supplants the Longhorn defensive back as the top safety in this class for several teams. Cyprien is an aggressive striker with the speed to cover in space and the physical demeanor to be a force vs. the run.

Medical watch
Players have the option of passing on workouts at the combine, but every one of the 333 players invited will be subjected to a battery of medical evaluations that range from blood tests to X-rays to psychological testing. Some players have bumps and bruises that plagued them throughout the season while others are more serious.

Entering 2012 with mostly second day draft grades from scouts, Oregon's John Boyett was viewed as one of the top safety prospects in the nation. However, he suffered an early season injury that required surgery on both knees, keeping him sidelined for his final season in Eugene. Boyett's pro future is a question mark at this point, and he'll need positive reviews from the medical staff in Indianapolis to help his draft chances.

Tale of the tape
With scouts having seen most of the top prospects "on the hoof" over the fall and getting a second look at them on the "catwalk" before senior all-star games, the official measuring of heights, weight, hand and arms conducted during the combine is only occasionally newsworthy ... except when it comes to underclassmen, whom scouts often haven't seen up close yet.

Oklahoma's Tony Jefferson has been a starter since he arrived in Norman, impressing with his ability to tackle and make plays in coverage. He has a leaner frame but hits like a truck, and scouts will be interested to see what his official numbers are when he tips the scale.

Next question
Just like any interview that you might have gone through, the players invited to the combine are there to try to get a job. They have to impress their potential employers with intelligence and dedication.

Each NFL team is allowed 60 formal player interviews. Each interview can last up to 15 minutes. The topics of conversation can fluctuate wildly from team to team and from player to player.

Georgia will be well represented at Lucas Oil Stadium this week, including in the secondary led by Bacarri Rambo. However the Bulldog safety missed four games this past season due to suspension after a failed drug test. While his off-field character isn't a substantial concern, Rambo will still need to address the situation and put any worries to rest.

Workout warriors
While the medicals, weigh-ins and interviews all play more critical roles in a player's overall grade than his performance during athletic testing at the combine, there is no doubt that the extraordinary athleticism demonstrated during drills can leave scouts (and the media) buzzing. This hype has helped push players up draft boards in the past, and it will continue to do so in 2013.

While he has room to be more consistent breaking down in space, Texas' Kenny Vaccaro has a versatile skill set to be effective against both the pass and the run. He plays fast with a reckless abandonment and wastes little time in his movements, something that should help him during both the agility and positional drills at the combine. Vaccaro is also expected to be one of the few safeties in this class to run under the 4.5 mark in the 40-yard dash.

Although he doesn't have ideal size for the position, Syracuse's Shamarko Thomas is one of the top physical specimens in this class, with estimated 4.3 speed. He is a regular in the weight room and, while he has a smaller frame, he has maxed it out with muscle and bulk. Thomas won't be as highly drafted as Vaccaro, but he should record better numbers in Indy.
 
Messages
1,274
Reaction score
0
I've seen both numbers for him. Even without him on the list there are tons of tackles in the league making hey at 33" or less.

True.

Just for reference though, let's take a look at the Pro Bowl OTs this year that are not Joe Thomas.

Duane Brown 33.25
Ryan Clady 36
Andrew Whitworth 35
Joe Staley 35
Russell Okung 36
Jermon Bushrod 34.5
Trent Williams 34.25
Matt Kahlil 34.50

So as you can see the top OTs in the game generally have arm length 33 inches or over. Nothing to really argue.

In closing...FACE.
 

Bob Sacamano

All-Pro
Messages
26,436
Reaction score
3
Played like most through the high school level, but not along the lines.

But you don't have to have played to know that. It's common knowledge. Or at least I thought it was.

superpunk played semi-pro. Got you beat, son.
 

Bob Sacamano

All-Pro
Messages
26,436
Reaction score
3
Mr. Frigidaire said:
I'm not claiming short arms are an advantage but they aren't some uncomfortable disadvantage. Footwork is 90% of the job. 3 inches of arm length isn't making a ton of difference if your footwork and base is right. On the OL you want the guy in as close to your body as you can get him, he's easier to control that way. Against a bullrush some extra length would be nice but if you have a nice chop move you can drop the DE's arms anyhow, and you're still aiming for his chest, not trying to wrap your arms around him.

You wouldn't want long arms on a bull-rush. It's also an advantage to having longer arms because you can make the DE take a wider path to get around you.
 

Bob Sacamano

All-Pro
Messages
26,436
Reaction score
3
Jordan Gross, Brian Bulaga, Michael Roos, all at 33" or less.

From your article



It's just a fucking meaningless number. I'm sure everyone would love tackles with some 37" arms, 6'8" and amazing quickness. But in the list of things that make you a good offensive lineman, and tackle in particular, arm length is pretty insignificant, particularly drawing some arbitrary 33" number in the sand. Most of the position is played with your feet and your base. If you NEED that extra length it's because you fucked your footwork up. And you're probably about to get called for holding.

Bryan Bulaga sucks FYI
 

Bob Sacamano

All-Pro
Messages
26,436
Reaction score
3
punk is half-right. With so many pass-rushers converting from speed to power nowadays, you really need to be fundamentally sound and light on your feet.
 
Messages
46,859
Reaction score
5
sp's inability to acknowledge he's wrong in the face of evidence is very Hostile/sbk92-ish.

Props, amigo.
 
Messages
46,859
Reaction score
5
YOU DON"T NEED MORE THAN 31 INCHES!

YOU DON"T NEED MORE THAN 33 INCHES!

UH.... IT DOESNT MATTER!


just stfu please
 

junk

UDFA
Messages
2,719
Reaction score
0
I've seen both numbers for him. Even without him on the list there are tons of tackles in the league making hey at 33" or less.

Making hay.

I think Thomas' future is at guard anyway. I think he'd be a guy that could play tackle in a pinch. He reminds me of Marshal Yanda.
 

Cowboysrule122

Draft Pick
Messages
3,728
Reaction score
0
I could care less if they have short or long arms, as long as he's quick off the snap and excellent with their technique. Just sayin'.
 

cmd34

Pro Bowler
Messages
11,877
Reaction score
119
sp is right in the fact that not having long arms is the end all for whether or not a guy can play Tackle. The height, weight, arm length, speed, bench reps, etc are all guidelines. The true measure is game tape, can the guy play football or not? Can he be coached up? Nate Newton was a 6-3, 335 lb., undrafted refugee from the USFL in the days when players over 300 lbs were unwanted and considered lazy. The guy could play football. Tony Mandarich had "measurable's" and in the end couldn't play football.

I think fans get too caught up in that kind of stuff and get wowed at the Combine. I doubt many, if any scouts, get caught up anymore by this stuff. They have ideal measurements they may look for in a position but they still look at players who fall outside of those numbers if they think they can play.

Last week I agreed with dbair, today superpunk, next week I'll be sitting in on a Tucson plumbing slash coaching seminar.
 

cmd34

Pro Bowler
Messages
11,877
Reaction score
119
Jarvis Jones not working out is a mistake. Barkley has an excuse and would have worked out if he was cleared. No excuse for Jones not working out.
 
Messages
46,859
Reaction score
5
sp is right in the fact that not having long arms is the end all for whether or not a guy can play Tackle.

Uh, no. No one ever suggested arm length was the end all be all.

SP, however, was the one suggesting arm length was irrellevant, that only footwork mattered, and (lol) if you needed more than 31" arms, you'd probably be getting called for holding all the time.
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
57,616
Reaction score
8,289
It would never happen, but would you consider Cooper/Warmack in the first, then Warford in hte 2nd overkill?

Doubt they'd take two pure guards 1-2, although taking a G and someone who could play RT wouldnt surprise me
 

dbair1967

Administrator
Messages
57,616
Reaction score
8,289
Jarvis Jones not working out is a mistake. Barkley has an excuse and would have worked out if he was cleared. No excuse for Jones not working out.

People will poo poo all over it like they do all these guys who choose not to work out at the combine, but he'll blow up his proday workout and all will be forgiven.

Moving the combine back (as has now been suggested in last day or so) would probably moivate more guys to workout there instead of skipping all or parts of it.
 
Messages
46,859
Reaction score
5
Jordan Gross, Brian Bulaga, Michael Roos, all at 33" or less.

No, they're not. They're all at 33" or slightly longer.



It's just a fucking meaningless number.

Wrong again. It's absolutely not a meaningless number for any position along the trenches, ESPECIALLY at tackle where reach/punch/handfighting/redirecting is critical.

Is it the end all, be all? Of course not. But it's very important.

Maybe you havent' heard, but football is a game of inches. A game of split seconds. And you've been provided example after example of scouts, analysts, and even players themselves arguing the importance of arm length.

But instead of admitting your folly and moving on, you're taking a laughable never back down Hostilian approach and continuing to insist it's a "meaningless" number. Give me a fucking break.

Ross Tucker. A mediocre journeyman player. Basically average at best at everything. Guy had a lot of holes in his game. When asked what attribute he wished he could've had.... he didn't wish for quicker feet or more core strength.... he would've wanted longer arms. A guy who actually played in the league for a number of years obviously understood the importance of such a "meaningless" number.

The 33" isn't an 'arbitrary number' drawn in the sand. It's a very real indicator of future success. Each position has those.

Most QB's you want north of 6'2", for example.

Sure, you can find examples of QB's shorter than that. Drew Brees. Russell Wilson. Those are called outliers.

33" arms is general cut off arm length for tackles. Your notion that arm length is meaningless and that you can get by with 31" arms is moronic as all get out. It's not even worth arguing anymore because it's been refuted by players and scouts who know a hell of a lot more about the game than anyone on this forum.
 
Top Bottom