Quote:Come on.  That is such a crude benchmark to use.  It's like admitting you don't know what you're looking at, so you have to use some kind of absurd shortcut to make your choice.     

 

"Well he blocked for Peyton Manning, so I can't tell if he's any good."  That's amateur hour.

 

As for our offensive linemen, I would say to you guys, it takes time for a line to get in sync, and during that time, they are going to look bad when the lineman beside them acts in ways they don't expect.   They don't get help when they expect it, or a defensive lineman doesn't get picked up, and they have to react to it after the ball has been snapped, and as a result, they are off balance and get beaten, or even pancaked.    All these guys will look a lot better when they get in sync with the other guys. 

 

Well, amateur hour must have also fooled our GM then too, Beadles sucks.

 

 

If I'm running a team, I'm staying away from overhyped linemen that blocked for QB like Manning. As said, its much harder for an OL to block for a QB that holds on to the ball long (since he has to contain his assignment longer), so thats the first place I'd be looking when it comes to finding good OL. Granted the instances of Manning like QB are few and far between, so it wouldn't really be an issue much. 

---