Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

how does being too short hurt a rb?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • how does being too short hurt a rb?

    for example, why on earth would you say mjd is too small when he's 217 lbs, therefore thicker and more able to be an everydown back than the generic 6' 215 lbs back that gets drafted top 5 if they have all the skills mjd has, plus a couple inches of height?

    wouldn't being short actually help because lb's can't see you behind the line? and it makes you run lower and more compact.

    i'm just using mjd as an example because the guy is thicker and in my mind more durable than the average every down back but yet they knocked his size coming into the draft

  • #2
    I think height is pretty irrelevant as long as the weight and the agility and athleticism are there. Unless my physics is mistaken, mass and speed should be the only things that really affect an RB's power, not height. I think the lower center of gravity that a shorter back posesses would be helpful as well. The only places a guy's height would become a liability are in stretching for extra yards, throwing a stiff arm, or maybe pass blocking. That's what I would think though.

    Comment


    • #3
      Because it distorts vision and the ability to see a play develop and opportunities for those one or two cuts near the line of scrimmage.

      case closed.

      close thread
      my scent?...like making love to a lumberjack
      <TACKLE> i will ngata give you a bj raji
      <+BOE> Scott, with Burfict's character concerns (whether legit or not) you think Pioli would draft him. :D
      <+ScottWright> Why not. Baldwin does need a sparring partner...
      Originally posted by Hermstheman83
      What's with the hate on Ricky Stanzi? Those youtube clips of him with the hulk hogan theme music instantly make him better than Luck.

      Comment


      • #4
        yeah that's why like 6'3" gets knocked as much as sub 5'10"

        but really, the sub 5'10 shouldn't be a knock on any hb as long as he carries enough weight

        Comment


        • #5
          I can imagine when it comes to corners it's a pretty big deal...

          In a jump ball situation, where a 6'5" WR faces a 5'11" corner, once they jump, say the WR jumps up 35 inches, the CB will have to jump 41 inches just to get on the same height, since he's six inches shorter.

          Sig by Fenikz

          I remember NFLDC
          don't tell anyone, but Charlie Casserly is a dope fiend

          Comment


          • #6
            pros of being short - lower center of gravity, harder to bring down (as long as the mass is still there)

            cons - harder to see over the line of guys a good 6-10 inches taller than you in front of you

            Comment


            • #7
              Height is definitely an advantage when playing any position in football and most sports for that matter, there are just a ton of advantages of being tall

              Comment


              • #8
                Too tall is different. 5'9-6'0 is fine. 5'6 and 6'3 arent.
                my scent?...like making love to a lumberjack
                <TACKLE> i will ngata give you a bj raji
                <+BOE> Scott, with Burfict's character concerns (whether legit or not) you think Pioli would draft him. :D
                <+ScottWright> Why not. Baldwin does need a sparring partner...
                Originally posted by Hermstheman83
                What's with the hate on Ricky Stanzi? Those youtube clips of him with the hulk hogan theme music instantly make him better than Luck.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Vision is an issue, but other than that, not much. The little stuff jared mentioned, as well. It's very apparent that Jones-Drew has been an effective RB, so I don't know why this issue is being brought up. Plus, Jones-Drew had other issues coming out. He had good not great numbers, he was a so-so blocker, and some had questions about durability. There were also some questions about power. So, top 5 pick? Doubt it.

                  BoneKrusher

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by BeerBaron View Post
                    pros of being short - lower center of gravity, harder to bring down (as long as the mass is still there)

                    cons - harder to see over the line of guys a good 6-10 inches taller than you in front of you

                    that con cancels out though because they can't see him either

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by bored of education View Post
                      Because it distorts vision and the ability to see a play develop and opportunities for those one or two cuts near the line of scrimmage.

                      case closed.

                      close thread
                      You ignored the benefits of being short and having a low center of gravity. Not being able to see over the line works both ways. Distorts vision...? I don't think you explained enough to say "case closed".

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I would rather be trucked by a 6'5" 210 pounder rather than a 5'7" 210 pounder


                        Thank you XxXDragonXxX for the Avatar!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          who is to say that a tall player can't run as low a a small one, naturally this just gives him more of an explosion when he needs it


                          no 6'5 210 guy is ever gonna play RB

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Height gets a bit overrated (not the word I'm looking for really) in terms of running backs. Being too short is a problem even if you have the necessary bulk and when you get into that 5-8 range it gets a bit iffy. 5-9 for a running back for the most part. Injury issues come into play with guys that are so much smaller. Also even if a 5-8 guy has the same bulk as a 6-0 guy, it's still less weight which is an issue. While shortness is a bit overplayed (still not the word I'm looking for) the maximums to each side (being too tall is just as much of an issue) are a bit of an issue.

                            That is correct comahan
                            I ******* LOVE YOU DG
                            <3 dg

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Height is important, but it's far from critical.

                              5'10 to 5'11 is an ideal height for a RB, because it's both compact enough to avoid leg injuries and give good power, but long enough to give a frame that can gain more weight.

                              6'2 and beyond is too tall--- guys that big often run upright, which makes them prone to injuries.

                              And I think Maurice himself is proving why 5'7 isn't ideal either--- he had to drop 10 pounds during the last offseason so that he'd have a better weight for his height.

                              Weight is the most important factor. 205-215 pounds is the best weight to allow for speed and quickness while also giving enough size to be powerful.
                              Last edited by JT Jag; 03-20-2008, 06:38 PM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X

                              Debug Information