Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well you should get jobs as NFL GMs. Or Kool Aid marketing reps. You must be trolling. You can’t possibly believe what you are typing.

Do you really believe all of pro sports has it wrong?

Or are the rosters are all lies?

You guys are actually taller than NFL lineman if you stood side by side. Because you should beat them at 5’7 with your low man advantage.

Crazy talk. By the way the earth is round. Sorry.

You have an inability to comprehend what is being said and lack any real experience. You watch sports. Thats where it ends for you

Look tough guy. You don’t know me. I don’t know you. Don’t make assumptions. You are wrong on the facts and you know it. The rosters don’t lie. Size is an advantage in sports.

I get it. It’s a bitter pill to swallow. It’s also not my fault ok?

Anonymous wrote:Well you should get jobs as NFL GMs. Or Kool Aid marketing reps. You must be trolling. You can’t possibly believe what you are typing.

Do you really believe all of pro sports has it wrong?

Or are the rosters are all lies?

You guys are actually taller than NFL lineman if you stood side by side. Because you should beat them at 5’7 with your low man advantage.

Crazy talk. By the way the earth is round. Sorry.

You have an inability to comprehend what is being said and lack any real experience. You watch sports. Thats where it ends for you

Anonymous wrote:Hey, how about ratio of torso to leg length? Is a taller guy with shorter legs better than a short guy with long legs?

Ha. Just noting how silly this thread has become. Anyhow, speed kills. When I played I loved defending the skillful guys over the fast and quick guys. So much easier. Tall, short, average didn’t matter. It was speed, especially someone with both speed and skills.

I agree. This thread is goofy. Analysis being done by partisans. There is more than enough proof that kids off all heights and size can find away to excel at the highest levels.

Speed kills. Speed has always killed. Speed will always kill.

Well you should get jobs as NFL GMs. Or Kool Aid marketing reps. You must be trolling. You can’t possibly believe what you are typing.

Do you really believe all of pro sports has it wrong?

Or are the rosters are all lies?

You guys are actually taller than NFL lineman if you stood side by side. Because you should beat them at 5’7 with your low man advantage.

Crazy talk. By the way the earth is round. Sorry.

Hey, how about ratio of torso to leg length? Is a taller guy with shorter legs better than a short guy with long legs?

Ha. Just noting how silly this thread has become. Anyhow, speed kills. When I played I loved defending the skillful guys over the fast and quick guys. So much easier. Tall, short, average didn’t matter. It was speed, especially someone with both speed and skills.

USA TODAY Sports
Height, Weight and Speed: Designing the Perfect NFL Running Back
BJ KISSEL
JUNE 11, 2013

Only two of the top 10 running backs in the NFL last year stood over 6'0" tall. Adrian Peterson and Arian Foster were the two players above 6-feet that ran for at least 1,215 yards.

You've got players like Alfred Morris, Doug Martin and Frank Gore that check-in at 5'9". While football is known as a sport that's looking for the biggest, baddest players around at that particular position, that doesn't always mean height when talking running backs.

We're going to take a look at how you'd design the perfect running back in today's NFL. Considering the season that Adrian Peterson had last year, it's hard not to just take a look at him and say, "This! This is what the perfect NFL running back is supposed to look like."


Let's start with height.


You don't want the player to stand too tall in the backfield because it makes him easier to find for the defensive players. Shorter players can "hide" behind the taller offensive linemen. You also want to have a low center of gravity and make it easier to get underneath the pads of defenders looking to make a tackle.

You'll see players like Morris, Trent Richardson, Ray Rice, Maurice Jones-Drew and Frank Gore that have consistently shown that height isn't as important a factor for a running back as it could be for some other positions. In many cases, like for the players above, being shorter has actually been a benefit for them. They're able to get underneath defenders and use their lower body strength to always fall forward.

Shorter players also tend to be "stockier" and pack a punch with a bowling ball-type mentality. Shorter legs also mean shorter strides and an ability to change directions quicker than a 6'2" back like you'd see from Steven Jackson.

Anonymous wrote:Someone is going to post how a few NTs in football are short. Wait for it....

Different lifts are better for different body types. On average, shorter people have better leverage than taller people. As height increases, leverage decreases and ROM increases, producing a disadvantage. The main disadvantage long limbed athletes have is the weight they are using has to travel a farther distance.

A shorter player also has an advantage over a taller player because he has a lower center of gravity. The lower you hit your opponent, the more force you have. You will be able to drive your opponent backward when you hit him lower than he hits you. Coaches at all levels constantly preach that "low man wins" in all individual blocking and tackling drills, and that applies to running backs who are blocking.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reach, Leverage, Mass and Strength. That's what is comes down to. Size is an advantage in most sports including soccer. Soccer is not only played on the ground. But even on the ground size matters.

1. The taller player is on average heavier and stronger and will thus generally win the 1v1 physical battle on the ball. In all contact ball sports. The shorter player has to rely on speed to win. Until they meet a fast tall player and then they are again disadvantaged due to reach, leverage, mass and strength.

2. The taller player has greater reach with legs and can make tackles or strikes/volleys that a shorter player cannot. Another advantage for tall defenders and forwards.

And in the aerial game...

3. The taller player has greater vertical reach and will win the aerial battle for the ball on headers in both boxes. This is why CBs and Strikers are tall.

4. Due to the reach issue - in certain positions there is a clear height cutoff. Goalies at 5'9 for example.

For the relatively smaller player (average or shorter than average) to make it they need to have "Best in the World" abilities on the ball or foot skills aka Dunn, Lavelle or Messi. These athletes are an absolute joy to watch.

The leverage is a big deal. Stand a tall and shorter person next to each other fighting for the ball. The taller person needs less force to push the shorter person off the ball.

Same as how using a longer lever requires less force than a short lever.

Actually the opposite. You clearly never played contact sports lowest man always wins on leverage.

Lol. That’s why offensive and defensive lineman are so tall.

The fact that you can't understand what I said confirms you never played contact sports..

If there were 5'7" 350lbs men who could run a decent 40 yard dash, yes, they would make a great lineman. Perfect in fact, because they would have both leverage and a QB can see over them easily.

But leverage in linemen does win and that favors "low man".

There it is LMAO 😂

Someone is going to post how a few NTs in football are short. Wait for it....

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reach, Leverage, Mass and Strength. That's what is comes down to. Size is an advantage in most sports including soccer. Soccer is not only played on the ground. But even on the ground size matters.

1. The taller player is on average heavier and stronger and will thus generally win the 1v1 physical battle on the ball. In all contact ball sports. The shorter player has to rely on speed to win. Until they meet a fast tall player and then they are again disadvantaged due to reach, leverage, mass and strength.

2. The taller player has greater reach with legs and can make tackles or strikes/volleys that a shorter player cannot. Another advantage for tall defenders and forwards.

And in the aerial game...

3. The taller player has greater vertical reach and will win the aerial battle for the ball on headers in both boxes. This is why CBs and Strikers are tall.

4. Due to the reach issue - in certain positions there is a clear height cutoff. Goalies at 5'9 for example.

For the relatively smaller player (average or shorter than average) to make it they need to have "Best in the World" abilities on the ball or foot skills aka Dunn, Lavelle or Messi. These athletes are an absolute joy to watch.

The leverage is a big deal. Stand a tall and shorter person next to each other fighting for the ball. The taller person needs less force to push the shorter person off the ball.

Same as how using a longer lever requires less force than a short lever.

Actually the opposite. You clearly never played contact sports lowest man always wins on leverage.

Lol. That’s why offensive and defensive lineman are so tall.

The fact that you can't understand what I said confirms you never played contact sports..

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't read this entire thread.

Just wanted to chime in that i played in the ACC and i check out games and highlights whenever i can.

Miami is a team full of giants - like 5'11" or taller in the back. And they're HORRIBLE. I watched a few highlights of other teams just murdering them in the back. I don't know what is wrong with their coach, but it looked to me like she recruited players for the physical attributes and ended up with a bunch of just truly bad players.

UNC, Duke FSU and UVA all have players who start in the midfield back who are 5'5" and under. In fact some of the best players on each of those teams are "short".

Those teams are by a vast majority taller than average.

Maybe so but some of their best players (for instance Pinto, Fox, Tolentino, Brown, Boade, Pluck, Godfrey, etc) are 5'5" and under.

All of their top scorers and defenders are tall - c’mon you are just picking exceptions. There too many great tall players to even name.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reach, Leverage, Mass and Strength. That's what is comes down to. Size is an advantage in most sports including soccer. Soccer is not only played on the ground. But even on the ground size matters.

1. The taller player is on average heavier and stronger and will thus generally win the 1v1 physical battle on the ball. In all contact ball sports. The shorter player has to rely on speed to win. Until they meet a fast tall player and then they are again disadvantaged due to reach, leverage, mass and strength.

2. The taller player has greater reach with legs and can make tackles or strikes/volleys that a shorter player cannot. Another advantage for tall defenders and forwards.

And in the aerial game...

3. The taller player has greater vertical reach and will win the aerial battle for the ball on headers in both boxes. This is why CBs and Strikers are tall.

4. Due to the reach issue - in certain positions there is a clear height cutoff. Goalies at 5'9 for example.

For the relatively smaller player (average or shorter than average) to make it they need to have "Best in the World" abilities on the ball or foot skills aka Dunn, Lavelle or Messi. These athletes are an absolute joy to watch.

The leverage is a big deal. Stand a tall and shorter person next to each other fighting for the ball. The taller person needs less force to push the shorter person off the ball.

Same as how using a longer lever requires less force than a short lever.

Actually the opposite. You clearly never played contact sports lowest man always wins on leverage.

Lol. That’s why offensive and defensive lineman are so tall.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reach, Leverage, Mass and Strength. That's what is comes down to. Size is an advantage in most sports including soccer. Soccer is not only played on the ground. But even on the ground size matters.

1. The taller player is on average heavier and stronger and will thus generally win the 1v1 physical battle on the ball. In all contact ball sports. The shorter player has to rely on speed to win. Until they meet a fast tall player and then they are again disadvantaged due to reach, leverage, mass and strength.

2. The taller player has greater reach with legs and can make tackles or strikes/volleys that a shorter player cannot. Another advantage for tall defenders and forwards.

And in the aerial game...

3. The taller player has greater vertical reach and will win the aerial battle for the ball on headers in both boxes. This is why CBs and Strikers are tall.

4. Due to the reach issue - in certain positions there is a clear height cutoff. Goalies at 5'9 for example.

For the relatively smaller player (average or shorter than average) to make it they need to have "Best in the World" abilities on the ball or foot skills aka Dunn, Lavelle or Messi. These athletes are an absolute joy to watch.

The leverage is a big deal. Stand a tall and shorter person next to each other fighting for the ball. The taller person needs less force to push the shorter person off the ball.

Same as how using a longer lever requires less force than a short lever.

Actually the opposite. You clearly never played contact sports lowest man always wins on leverage.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't read this entire thread.

Just wanted to chime in that i played in the ACC and i check out games and highlights whenever i can.

Miami is a team full of giants - like 5'11" or taller in the back. And they're HORRIBLE. I watched a few highlights of other teams just murdering them in the back. I don't know what is wrong with their coach, but it looked to me like she recruited players for the physical attributes and ended up with a bunch of just truly bad players.

UNC, Duke FSU and UVA all have players who start in the midfield back who are 5'5" and under. In fact some of the best players on each of those teams are "short".

Those teams are by a vast majority taller than average.

Maybe so but some of their best players (for instance Pinto, Fox, Tolentino, Brown, Boade, Pluck, Godfrey, etc) are 5'5" and under.