Help me understand arm length

[CaliforniaCheez]

Brian Bulaga allegedly has short arms and that was a criticism of him.

Reading the write up on Mike Neal, one of his positives is that he has long arms.

Yet the measurements indicate that Bulaga's arms are 1/4 inch longer than Neal's.

Burnett is described as having long arms because they measure a 1/2 insh longer than Bulaga's.

Somewhere some person has described the ideal length of arms for each position. Even so let's say you have defensive end Neal going against OT Bulaga.

Why would the 1/4 inch advantage that Bulaga has on Neal be a disadvantage to Bulaga?

Why would the long arms of Neal be an advantage for him if they are actually shorter than Bulaga's??

In my opinion technique and strength are more important than arm length.

Yet Milwaukee's Sentinel Journal makes a big deal out of the long arms of Neal at 33 inches and the short arms of Bulaga at 33 1/4.

I know there are a lot of bloggers and journalist who spread big piles of manure to cover up that they do not know a lot about football and players. I am thinking arm length is a part of it.

I'm not going to call BS on arm length just yet but I am close to it.

Can someone explain why long arms for a defensive lineman can be shorter than than the longer yet short arms for an offensive tackle?

[twoseven]

OL is often trying to contain anything that comes at them within the wingspan of their arms in pass blocking technique during a pass rush, the longer the arms the less likely the rush is to get around them. DL's arms more useful to rip upfield and contain at the point of attack. longer arms on a DE is a plus, but not a necessity. longer arms in interior line play could actually be considered a disadvantage in some cases due to leverage. imagine a 6 foot 8 260 lb guy's power and quickness versus a 6 foot 3 260 lb guy's power and quickness, paying special attention to what each player's center of gravity will be like. shorter levers on players of equal bodyweight are usually quicker and more powerful in a confined space, but this is getting really picky.

on the other hand, the ultimate potential for greatest size and strength of any person is the length of their frame (arms, legs, and torso). a 6 foot 3 frame has a max potential by way of size and strength that is much less than that of a 6 foot 8 frame of equal proportions. at some point the smaller frame will lose quickness, flexibility and/or just get fat if they add a lot of bodyweight, whereas those taller frames can pack on a lot more size and muscle without the same degree of problems (which is another reason why you want longer arms, and legs and torso on an OL). think too tall jones versus john randle. it all depends on where you are in space, and what you are looking to do with it.

personally, i'll put the quickness of the feet well above arm length. arm length is not as crucial if your feet can keep you in front of your rusher. you can't coach arm length, but you can improve quickness.

[ND72]

For OL guys, it's that initial punch. Here is a great comparason for you. Michael Oher has 42 inch arms from shoulder to wrist....D1 player, NFL player....I played D2 football, from shoulder to wrist I have 30 inch arms. That means if I was going after Michael Oher, he would reacher me 12 inches before I could get near him. I succeeded more in college when they moved me to guard because the DT's were right there, and there was no reach advantage.

My best comparision is actually in boxing. Does anyone remember the Mike Tyson - Lenox Lewis fight? Tyson couldnt' get anywhere near Lewis because of Lewis' arm reach.....same idea on OL/DL.

[twoseven]

For OL guys, it's that initial punch. Here is a great comparason for you. Michael Oher has 42 inch arms from shoulder to wrist....D1 player, NFL player....I played D2 football, from shoulder to wrist I have 30 inch arms. That means if I was going after Michael Oher, he would reacher me 12 inches before I could get near him. I succeeded more in college when they moved me to guard because the DT's were right there, and there was no reach advantage.

My best comparision is actually in boxing. Does anyone remember the Mike Tyson - Lenox Lewis fight? Tyson couldnt' get anywhere near Lewis because of Lewis' arm reach.....same idea on OL/DL.adding onto this..arms, legs and hips are strongest/most powerful at full extension (straight/locked arms and legs and fully extended hips as if you are standing up versus folded into a ball or crouch). so, since fully extended arms, legs and hips are strongest it then comes down to how fast they can get there which is ultimately happening fastest with a shorter length, they have less distance to travel to get to full extension.

[Tony Oday]

I think the biggest question is does a 1/2 an inch REALLY make that much of a difference?

[swede]

I think the biggest question is does a 1/2 an inch REALLY make that much of a difference?

According to my e-mail inbox it does.

[Gunakor]

I think it's all overhyped to a large degree. Excellent technique and footwork can make up for shorter arms. Look at Joe Thomas, another short armed LT. Excellent technician, great footwork, incredible athlete, and most importantly, DOMINATING. Keep the guy you're blocking in front of you and you don't need the longest arms.

[Gunakor]

I think the biggest question is does a 1/2 an inch REALLY make that much of a difference?

According to my e-mail inbox it does.

:lol:

[Maxie the Taxi]

I wonder if Willie Davis or Forrest Gregg ever had their arm length measured by Lombardi?

[Tony Oday]

I think the biggest question is does a 1/2 an inch REALLY make that much of a difference?

According to my e-mail inbox it does.

:lol:


lol nice! But they always 4 inches ;)

[CaliforniaCheez]

Man you guys are way to serious!

Neal has "long arms" that are shorter than Bulaga's "short arms".

I don't think you realize that you are being conned by all the arm length BS.

[ND72]

Man you guys are way to serious!

Neal has "long arms" that are shorter than Bulaga's "short arms".

I don't think you realize that you are being conned by all the arm length BS.

well all I know is our all american DE with crazy long arms in college owned my ass cause he got the punch on me before I could get the punch on him. It's not as over hyped as you think.

[Patler]

For OL guys, it's that initial punch. Here is a great comparason for you. Michael Oher has 42 inch arms from shoulder to wrist....D1 player, NFL player....I played D2 football, from shoulder to wrist I have 30 inch arms. That means if I was going after Michael Oher, he would reacher me 12 inches before I could get near him. I succeeded more in college when they moved me to guard because the DT's were right there, and there was no reach advantage.

My best comparision is actually in boxing. Does anyone remember the Mike Tyson - Lenox Lewis fight? Tyson couldnt' get anywhere near Lewis because of Lewis' arm reach.....same idea on OL/DL.

That all makes sense, when the difference is significant. It makes me laugh when the talking heads talk about 1/4" or 1/2" in arm length making a significant difference. I can't believe that it does.

Wouldn't it be more informative if they actually measured forward reach and wingspan as opposed to just arm length?

If contacting a rusher directly in front before he contacts you is what a scout wants to evaluate; they should measure forward reach, which is affected by flexibility in the shoulders and even elbows. A player with somewhat shorter arms but good flexibility in his shoulders and elbows might actually have a longer forward reach than a player with longer arms who is very stiff in the shoulders and elbows.

If lateral coverage is important, they should measure wingspan. Broad shoulders can easily make up for arms that are 1/4" or 1/2" shorter than someone else.

[Maxie the Taxi]

If arm length means so much, why is Clifton Geathers still on the board. His arms are a month long: 37 3/4 in.

Maybe it makes a difference who's on the working end of those arms. :)

[ND72]

For OL guys, it's that initial punch. Here is a great comparason for you. Michael Oher has 42 inch arms from shoulder to wrist....D1 player, NFL player....I played D2 football, from shoulder to wrist I have 30 inch arms. That means if I was going after Michael Oher, he would reacher me 12 inches before I could get near him. I succeeded more in college when they moved me to guard because the DT's were right there, and there was no reach advantage.

My best comparision is actually in boxing. Does anyone remember the Mike Tyson - Lenox Lewis fight? Tyson couldnt' get anywhere near Lewis because of Lewis' arm reach.....same idea on OL/DL.

That all makes sense, when the difference is significant. It makes me laugh when the talking heads talk about 1/4" or 1/2" in arm length making a significant difference. I can't believe that it does.

Wouldn't it be more informative if they actually measured forward reach and wingspan as opposed to just arm length?

If contacting a rusher directly in front before he contacts you is what a scout wants to evaluate; they should measure forward reach, which is affected by flexibility in the shoulders and even elbows. A player with somewhat shorter arms but good flexibility in his shoulders and elbows might actually have a longer forward reach than a player with longer arms who is very stiff in the shoulders and elbows.

If lateral coverage is important, they should measure wingspan. Broad shoulders can easily make up for arms that are 1/4" or 1/2" shorter than someone else.

I agree with that Patler....If you're talking the difference between 36.5 inches and 37 inches...no, no diffference.

[Sparkey]

Man you guys are way to serious!

Neal has "long arms" that are shorter than Bulaga's "short arms".

I don't think you realize that you are being conned by all the arm length BS.

I think protecting the outside as a LT is the biggest plus for having long arms. It is easier to ride someone out away from the edge. Thing is long arms dont make up for heavy feet.

Bulaga has longer arms than Clifton, so its not an issue in my estimation.