Does arm length (OT) really matter?

[mr beauxjangles]

There have been numerous threads over the last few months examining the various OT prospects and many of them mention arm length. Zack Martin, Jake Matthews, Joel Bitonio, James Hurst among those often mentioned as having short arms, and Robinson, Moses, Kouandijo, Richardson, and Ja'wuan James among those whose stock is supposedly helped by their long arms.

 

Conventional wisdom is that arm length is among the most important measurements for a tackle - or really any player along the line. The logic is pretty obvious - length helps prevent rushers from getting to the outside and/or around a tackle.

 

There's no need to question the logic. It makes sense and coaches/scouts have studied and observed that long arms, all else constant, make for a better prospect. But therein lies the problem - "all else constant."

 

PFF takes a look at the impact of arm length on OT performance (overall PFF grades per snap, as well as run and pass blocking individually). Feel free tor read the entire piece here but suffice it to say, they have found absolutely no relationship between arm length and performance in recent years. Again, the problem here is that they are simply looking at correlation. Those with shorter arms may have many other qualities where they outperform the longer-armed prospects on average (if long arms really does matter, then it would be reasonable to assume that they need to be exceptionally strong in other areas to balance  this out). This would also be reasonable to assume if scouts are willing to accept a less polished or less technically sound prospect if they have great measurements (arms, hands, height/weight).

 

So what's the point? Don't just discount a guy because he has short arms. As oft-cited as it is, remember that Jake Long and Joe Thomas both have absolutely tiny arms by NFL standards (less than 33 inches).

 

Would welcome commentary from some of the more knowledgeable football guys here, especially those of you that played on the line in college or otherwise. I know that there are at least a few of you here.

[bababoey]

Is this a "does size matter" thread?  Because my girlfriend says no.  But she lies a lot so.......

[Man Strength]

If arm length matters, then according to your short arm list (which is accurate) white tackles are a thing of the past

[Kuech the Sneak]

Playing in the trenches you always wanna get your hands on the other player first, hands are a huge part of line play. Longer arms helps you make that first contact alot easier

[gamecockfanatic]

I would think the value of arm length would be dependent on other attributes on a case by case basis.

[Gin and Juice]

Logic tells me technique and being light on the feet supersede arm length. Those two variables being equal then give the nod to the longer arms, as long as the longer arms hold adequate strength

[WOW!!]

Arm length is a nice attribute to have. It covers up for not having great feet. But I would take great feet over it anytime.

[Jesse]

Leverage, strength, speed, hand placement, and scheme are all more important than a guy's arm length.

[PhillyB]

it's not arm length, it's how you use them that matters

[jarhead]

Is this a "does size matter" thread?  Because my girlfriend says no.  But she lies a lot so.......

That is not what she told me

[panthers55]

The analysis assumes that PFF grades ae objective and unfallible and that may be very untrue.  What if arm length does matter but PFF ratings are too subjective to be able to show the difference. Plus there are other factors like experience which can mitigate physical deficits. If you were actually trying to assess arm length in a controlled setting you would control for things like experience, strength of the overall line, number of times you are in pass protection versus run blocking etc. So really it tends to show that some players tend to overcome their physical limitations by using other skills.  But all things considered it makes sense that longer arms would be an asset just not the most important one.

[Peppers90 NC]

it probably does help, but then again, if a lineman has his arms stretched out, there's a good chance holding will be called

[MasterAwesome]

Who's the beast with the 37+ inch arms?

[Fox007]

The analysis assumes that PFF grades ae objective and unfallible and that may be very untrue.  What if arm length does matter but PFF ratings are too subjective to be able to show the difference. Plus there are other factors like experience which can mitigate physical deficits. If you were actually trying to assess arm length in a controlled setting you would control for things like experience, strength of the overall line, number of times you are in pass protection versus run blocking etc. So really it tends to show that some players tend to overcome their physical limitations by using other skills.  But all things considered it makes sense that longer arms would be an asset just not the most important one.

 

I doubt any of the grades or analysis is very scientific...which is why it's best to go with 'can the guy play or not'.

 

Some of those current guys with short arms who are dominating may very well just be better players...like you said it'd be pretty tough to determine just what sort of an edge or advantage having long arms actually gives a player.(if any)

 

Even saying longer arms is an asset is just a theory one that makes sense like you say...one thing I've always thought about is that having longer arms could also slow them down on the way up and into the opponent. So the shorter arms have less to travel to reach full extension(depending on what you're doing)...I'd imagine if you are doing a drive block and you can whip your arms into position and get them up and in position quicker the length of your arm isn't the end all be all for that and could actually hinder you if it affects your hand speed.