| Re, O-Line height: remember guys that the point at the top of your head [where the measuring rod rests,] is of almost zero importance. It's how long your arm levers are. The fact that they correlate usually with how long your legs and spine are is the only thing which makes the top-of-head measurement somewhat informative. The point here being, what's a guy like Zach Martin have for useful "extension"? For all we know he could be a bridge troll with a seven foot wingspan.
The "goodness" of an OT is also dependent upon a lot of other things of course, some of which could be related to height. Flexibility, knee-bending rather than waist-bending, top/bottom coordination, footspeed and nimbleness --- all of these [which I picked because statistically they often get worse as the body parts grow longer] have to be there as well. The "height" thing is just to provide one absolute "physics" advantage if all other elements are equal. As modern nutrition and early body training have worked their obvious magic on younger generations, more flexible, coordinated, and nimble giants have resulted, and the NFL grows slowly in size.
Still, we see an apparent line-in-the-sand right now at about 6'10" for football skill and durability. Whereas strength training, infant nutrition, and early athletic involvement can do astounding things, the ability of the human connective protein structures to deal with repetitive stronger and stronger stress, as well as sudden catastrophic stress, seems to be becoming a limiting factor. Visualize a very tall athlete getting blasted around the waistline and the connective tissues wildly whipping about on those longer levers --- force is greater with the greater acceleration at the end of a long "stick". It will be interesting to see if today's athletes can "survive" the forces that they are already taking, let alone what would come with greater levers to deliver and receive more powerful force generation. | 
Linear Mode
