Been giving this a lot of thought....and I am a OL guy and

[PDaDdy]

I still have hopes the Meredith or Bell could step up their game and man the RT position. Additionally, a name to watch is Rodger Saffold of Indiana. We just hired his old OL coach and he could be their in the 4th and could be a real steal there. He basically shut down Brandon Graham of Michigan who will probably be a first rounder.

 

 

I need to start looking deeper in the draft class to see who could be available to man the RT spot for us. I only heard about this guys name because DarthIce thought he would be a good candidate to draft late at LT so that we could use our #9 pick on a QB. Sounds like we have an inside track on the guy if he is available to us when we can fill the RT position.

 

Now I have to go check out more LeFevour video. I have only seen about 3 minutes but I immediately saw some size, a big arm and some wheels. Those things are the price admission for me to even CONSIDER a guy a potential franchise QB for Buffalo. No guarantee of success with those traits but all but a guarantee of failure without them.

[K-9]

Because I have integrity I will answer your hypothetical completely fantasy question. If I were starting a team from scratch and my fantasy choices were take a guaranteed franchise QB vs a guaranteed franchise LT I take the QB.

 

MEANWHILE BACK IN REALITY.... The Bills will potentially have the choice between a rookie QB prospect who for whatever reasons would start in 2010 behind an abysmal line OR draft a solid LT prospect who WILL help the o-line in 2010. I say "WILL" because anyone we get will be much better than what we have at LT. It is a technicality but one that makes my claim nearly a can't miss vs rolling the dice on a promising QB prospect who we might hit big on.

 

In the real world that the Bills currently live in I highly suggest that they get the line sorted first. Again this isn't a good line, it isn't a average line, it isn't even good enough to be bad right now. This is an abysmal, terrible line. At some point the line can get so bad that it becomes the #1 priority. We are here folks. It's that bad.

 

So I will ask you a question. I think you have already stated your answer but would you want to draft Sam "the shoulder" Bradford to play in his rookie year behind whatever patchwork line we slap together if we don't spend our #9 pick on a LT OR would you want to get a solid LT to help bolster the line and make the running game AND the QB better? Me ...I consider QBs enough of a risk and important enough to make sure there is ABSOLUTELY no chance to screw up their development because we put them in front of the firing squad with no blind fold.

 

On the Kelly situation. You are honestly focusing on completely the wrong thing. The thing to focus on is that Kelly didn't start for the Bills until some of those pieces were in place in 1986. When did they make their first superbowl? Don't forget that Kelly complained a lot about his o-line his first few years too!!!! Don't forget that. That line was light years ahead of what we currently have. Jim wasn't a wet behind the ears rookie who could have had his confidence and career crushed behind one of the worst lines in history. He was 4 year veteran behind a line that was much better than what we have and got only better.

 

Let's not bring in a rookie pick at #9 and ruin him because we didn't protect him.

 

*Queue the draft the QB and let him sit a year or 2 fantasy statement*

 

*sheesh*

 

I'll see if I can boil it down again.

 

1) I don't care if the Bills draft a QB at #9 or not. I want them to take whom they believe is the best player to take at that time. As I've stated, we have so many needs we pretty much can't go wrong by taking BPA. Take your argument back to those that ardently argue we NEED to take the QB if he's there. Wrong. We take him if that's who the Bills have rated higher than anyone else. If a QB is their highest rated player they will take him. It would suggest he has the ability to be a franchise player and solidify the most important position on offense. And we BOTH agree that a franchise QB will get thrown to the wolves his first couple seasons until we have a chance to fix the OLine and he learns to play at the next level.

 

But I suggest you are the one living in a fantasy world if you think it's a linear process of 1.) Fix OLine, 2.) Get franchise QB. If they feel a franchise QB is there when they pick they'll take him. Otherwise they simply don't feel one is worth it at that spot. It's far far more difficult to find a great QB than great OLmen.

 

2) Glad you pointed out that Kelly complained about his OLine his first few years. He had a LOT to complain about. Our OLine wasn't that good his first few years and yet he played at a very high level with little help up front. Yes that line was better than our current one but our current one is a lot closer to what Kelly had his first two seasons in Buffalo than any QB on our current roster is to what Kelly was his first few years. Kelly showed greatness playing behind a crappy line immediately upon entering the league. Wolford was a rookie GAURD. Hull, while having experience in the USFL, was still new to the NFL. BOTH would take several seasons to mature. Richter was the ONLY member of that line that was any good at the time. Christ, Jones and Devlin were our tackles for goodness sake. Yet Kelly shined. Because he was GREAT. Because he COULD. Without a great OLine. Without three great WRs or a good TE. Without Thurman. Without a great defense.

 

Regardless whom the Bills select, whether it be a QB, OLman, DLman, or LB, that rookie will face immediate pressure to perform well and will get roasted by everyone around here without a clue. It's well known that OT is the second hardest position on offense to learn next to QB. So, like Wolford and Richter before him, he's gonna get blown up at times until he adjusts to the NFL. All players drafted are crapshoots.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[Thurman#1]

I know that 1990 superbowl is difficult for Bills fans to watch, you know SB 25, "wide right". The one where a back up scrub at QB ...a power running game ...great defense ...beat the highest scoring team of that year.

 

The Bills were 21 point favorites and should have destroyed the NY Giants... should have!

 

 

 

Did any of you watch the New England Patriot-Baltimore Ravens wildcard game they played in New England this year?

 

Joe Flacco went 4-10 for 34 yards and yet the Ravens beat the Patriots In New England for a 33-14 win.

 

Anyone care to explain how the Ravens won that game with the winning QB completing only 4 passes in 10 attempts for a total of 34 yards?

 

 

 

And yet somehow the Ravens didn't make the Super Bowl and the Colts and Saints did. Hmmm. Wonder why that was.

 

If you want to build a team with results like the Ravens this year, win one playoff game and out, build like the Ravens. But Flacco is a second-year guy and has a lot of room to grow, and if he does become a franchise guy, the Ravens have a shot to go very far.

[PDaDdy]

I'll see if I can boil it down again.

 

1) I don't care if the Bills draft a QB at #9 or not. I want them to take whom they believe is the best player to take at that time. As I've stated, we have so many needs we pretty much can't go wrong by taking BPA. Take your argument back to those that ardently argue we NEED to take the QB if he's there. Wrong. We take him if that's who the Bills have rated higher than anyone else. If a QB is their highest rated player they will take him. It would suggest he has the ability to be a franchise player and solidify the most important position on offense. And we BOTH agree that a franchise QB will get thrown to the wolves his first couple seasons until we have a chance to fix the OLine and he learns to play at the next level.

 

But I suggest you are the one living in a fantasy world if you think it's a linear process of 1.) Fix OLine, 2.) Get franchise QB. If they feel a franchise QB is there when they pick they'll take him. Otherwise they simply don't feel one is worth it at that spot. It's far far more difficult to find a great QB than great OLmen.

 

2) Glad you pointed out that Kelly complained about his OLine his first few years. He had a LOT to complain about. Our OLine wasn't that good his first few years and yet he played at a very high level with little help up front. Yes that line was better than our current one but our current one is a lot closer to what Kelly had his first two seasons in Buffalo than any QB on our current roster is to what Kelly was his first few years. Kelly showed greatness playing behind a crappy line immediately upon entering the league. Wolford was a rookie GAURD. Hull, while having experience in the USFL, was still new to the NFL. BOTH would take several seasons to mature. Richter was the ONLY member of that line that was any good at the time. Christ, Jones and Devlin were our tackles for goodness sake. Yet Kelly shined. Because he was GREAT. Because he COULD. Without a great OLine. Without three great WRs or a good TE. Without Thurman. Without a great defense.

 

Regardless whom the Bills select, whether it be a QB, OLman, DLman, or LB, that rookie will face immediate pressure to perform well and will get roasted by everyone around here without a clue. It's well known that OT is the second hardest position on offense to learn next to QB. So, like Wolford and Richter before him, he's gonna get blown up at times until he adjusts to the NFL. All players drafted are crapshoots.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

 

I got your point about drafting best player available. There is truth in that argument as there is truth in drafting for need. The answer is in the middle somewhere. My philosophy is drafting for need AS LONG AS IT IS NOT A REACH. If you draft purely for best player available we could end up with a team full of DBs because they are the best player available at picks 9 - 11 which we seem to own any given year. Ignoring need is stupid. Reaching for need is also stupid.

[PDaDdy]

And yet somehow the Ravens didn't make the Super Bowl and the Colts and Saints did. Hmmm. Wonder why that was.

 

If you want to build a team with results like the Ravens this year, win one playoff game and out, build like the Ravens. But Flacco is a second-year guy and has a lot of room to grow, and if he does become a franchise guy, the Ravens have a shot to go very far.

 

 

I'm sorry but those are foolish conclusions. The Jets and the Ravens BOTH made the play offs with the same basic formula. Barring injuries or losing key contributors those teams are set to be good for a while. Sooooo...if by some chance the Ravens or the Jets win the superbowl in 2010 or 11 will you then change your tune and say YES this is how you win a superbowl and that is the only way? OR...will you come to the factual realization that there are many ways to win a superbowl and the last two teams that got there happened to have great QBs AND great offensive lines?

[Thurman#1]

The difference between most GM's and Bill Polian is that Polian understands that the QB needs a solid surrounding cast to support him. Good experienced veteran offensive coaches, good O linemen, good skill players. Is it a surprise that Payton Manning's QB coach became the head coach after Tony Dungy retired?

 

You can flush the golden rule when your needs on the offensive line are greater then the need at QB. The Buffalo Bills currently need both a left and right tackle and a good blocking tight end.The Bills should have drafted a left tackle last year to replace Jason Peters.

 

So tell us Thurman#1... which QB in this years draft should the Bills go all out to acquire and not draft a left tackle. Which QB in the 2010 draft is going to lead this team to the playoffs?

 

The problem with the "golden rule" is that you need a GM like Bill Polian to have the intelligence to utilize it.

 

 

 

That's what you think the difference is, that Polian understands that teh QB needs a solid surrounding cast to support him? Seriously? Everyone on here underestands that. What makes you think that most GMs don't. Hell, most 9 year olds understand that. Polian is better at getting a surrounding cast, that's what makes him different. He knows how to be a great GM. The fact that POLIAN USES THE GOLDEN RULE EVERY TIME ought to be a lesson for every GM.

 

Polian's needs at OL that first year in Indy were great. Manning got destroyed that first year, and a lot of it was because his OL sucked. Yet he didn't pick an LT, he picked a QB.

 

You ask "So tell us Thurman#1... which QB in this years draft should the Bills go all out to acquire and not draft a left tackle. Which QB in the 2010 draft is going to lead this team to the playoffs? " That question has already been asked, virtually word by word and answered by me, in this thread, virtually word by word. It would have saved you some trouble to read the thread, but OK, I'll answer by quoting myself rather than type it again:

 

 

who is a good QB to draft?

 

Did you feel JeMarcus Russell was a good QB? Matt Leinart? Brady Quinn? John Beck? ......

 

 

I'm not saying that I know 100% correctly who the correct QB would be. Though I WAS pretty sure that JaMarcus Russell was NOT the correct guy.

 

What I AM saying is:

 

1) Both Clausen and Bradford in his last healthy year (he didn't play enough last year to give a legitimate sample of his work) have stats MUCH better than any of those other guys you used as examples.

 

2) The highest percentage way to find a franchise QB is to draft one in the first. There are definitely other ways, drafting one later, picking up an FA or even a UDFA, or trading, and all of them have provided some success. But with QBs, you have to try to maximize your chances of success, and the highest percentage way of finding a franchise guy is drafting one in the first round.

 

3) Whichever guy I like (Clausen) is not important. The important thing is whichever guy Nix likes. And if Nix likes either guy, he should do what he has to do. If he doesn't like either guy, then by all means go LT or DT or LB, though I'd go LT.

 

 

Finally, you say:

 

 

The problem with the "golden rule" is that you need a GM like Bill Polian to have the intelligence to utilize it.

 

 

Well, I have to agree with you there. To have any success in NFL football you need a good GM. It is simply an absolute necessity. If you have a GM as good as Polian, you are saying, you can have success with the "Golden Rule" but otherwise you will fail. Dude, without an excellent GM there is not one single rule in the book that will help you succeed. Bad GM = Bad Team, it's as simple as that.

 

So if Nix is a good GM, he will use the "Golden Rule," and be successful. And if Nix is a bad GM, this team is going nowhere, "Golden Rule" or not. Yeah, that sounds about right.

 

Whatever our differences, I'm sure we're both hoping Nix turns out to be a great GM like Polian.

[PDaDdy]

That's what you think the difference is, that Polian understands that teh QB needs a solid surrounding cast to support him? Seriously? Everyone on here underestands that. What makes you think that most GMs don't. Hell, most 9 year olds understand that. Polian is better at getting a surrounding cast, that's what makes him different. He knows how to be a great GM. The fact that POLIAN USES THE GOLDEN RULE EVERY TIME ought to be a lesson for every GM.

 

Polian's needs at OL that first year in Indy were great. Manning got destroyed that first year, and a lot of it was because his OL sucked. Yet he didn't pick an LT, he picked a QB.

 

You ask "So tell us Thurman#1... which QB in this years draft should the Bills go all out to acquire and not draft a left tackle. Which QB in the 2010 draft is going to lead this team to the playoffs? " What a horrendous question. Because it has already been asked, virtually word by word and answered by me, in this thread, virtually word by word. So, I'll quote myself rather than type it again:

 

ROFLOL....Oh how WRONG you are buddy. Manning's first year, 1998, Indy had the #6 overall passing offense and gave up the second fewest sacks in league with 22 vs the worst team that year at 67. THAT is 1/3 the number of sacks of the worst team. Tell me again how his line sucked? Please, please tell me. I want to see if you can speak with your foot in your mouth!!!!!

 

Other posters will whine about my attitude but it's this type of BS misinformation that runs the risk of making people dumber if they don't research a posters claims.

 

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?off...mp;d-447263-p=1

[K-9]

That's what you think the difference is, that Polian understands that teh QB needs a solid surrounding cast to support him? Seriously? Everyone on here underestands that. What makes you think that most GMs don't. Hell, most 9 year olds understand that. Polian is better at getting a surrounding cast, that's what makes him different. He knows how to be a great GM. The fact that POLIAN USES THE GOLDEN RULE EVERY TIME ought to be a lesson for every GM.

 

Polian's needs at OL that first year in Indy were great. Manning got destroyed that first year, and a lot of it was because his OL sucked. Yet he didn't pick an LT, he picked a QB.

 

You ask "So tell us Thurman#1... which QB in this years draft should the Bills go all out to acquire and not draft a left tackle. Which QB in the 2010 draft is going to lead this team to the playoffs? " That question has already been asked, virtually word by word and answered by me, in this thread, virtually word by word. It would have saved you some trouble to read the thread, but OK, I'll answer by quoting myself rather than type it again:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Finally, you say:

 

 

 

 

 

Well, I have to agree with you there. To have any success in NFL football you need a good GM. It is simply an absolute necessity. If you have a GM as good as Polian, you are saying, you can have success with the "Golden Rule" but otherwise you will fail. Dude, without an excellent GM there is not one single rule in the book that will help you succeed. Bad GM = Bad Team, it's as simple as that.

 

So if Nix is a good GM, he will use the "Golden Rule," and be successful. And if Nix is a bad GM, this team is going nowhere, "Golden Rule" or not. Yeah, that sounds about right.

 

To be fair, the Colts selected LT Tarik Glen the year prior to getting Manning so they were at least set at that position. The hypothetical I'm interested in is who Polian would have taken first if BOTH Glen and Manning were available in the same draft. There is no doubt he'd have taken Manning.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[PDaDdy]

To be fair, the Colts selected LT Tarik Glen the year prior to getting Manning so they were at least set at that position. The hypothetical I'm interested in is who Polian would have taken first if BOTH Glen and Manning were available in the same draft. There is no doubt he'd have taken Manning.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

 

Again more hypothetical stuff but let's hope he did have the vision to see that Manning was going to be Manning. That being said that situation has approximately 0% to do with the potential choice the Bills will have to make. The Colts had a great pass blocking line when they drafted Manning. We can not say the same.

[Thurman#1]

ROFLOL....Oh how WRONG you are buddy. Manning's first year, 1998, Indy had the #6 overall passing offense and gave up the second fewest sacks in league with 22 vs the worst team that year at 67. THAT is 1/3 the number of sacks of the worst team. Tell me again how his line sucked? Please, please tell me. I want to see if you can speak with your foot in your mouth!!!!!

 

Other posters will whine about my attitude but it's this type of BS misinformation that runs the risk of making people dumber if they don't research a posters claims.

 

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?off...mp;d-447263-p=1

 

 

 

Oh, you replied before I finished that post. I had to go get the quotes. Check it out again.

 

As to your point, I never said he had a lot of sacks. I said he took a pounding, and he did. To this day, Manning is excellent at avoiding sacks, particularly by getting rid of the ball. He did an awful lot of that that first year.

 

The 1998 line:

 

LT Tarik Glenn

LG Steve McKinney

C Jay Leeuwenburg

RG Tony Mandarich

RG Larry Moore

RT Adam Meadows

 

When they started to be a good line is when Polian brought in C Jeff Saturday and a decent RG. That first year they had a young Tarik Glenn, who was already pretty good but got much better as he got experience. Following the Golden Rule, after picking up Manning, Polian shored up LG with Steve McKinney, who was pretty good, but was a rookie, with rookie problems. They also had Meadows, who was pretty good.

 

But after that year, they let Leeuwenburg go for a reason, and he was out of football two years later. Mandarich we all know, that was his last year in football for a reason. Larry Moore, another rookie, (and another proof of Polian's use of the Golden Rule, picking Manning first even though he had needs on the line) wasn't particularly good in replacement of Mandarich.

 

When Polian came, he had weaknesses at RG, C, and LG. He picked Manning first, then two guards later. After fiddling with the middle of that line for two years or so, he brought in Saturday, who was the crucial piece that made them good. That first year, they weren't. Yet Polian went QB first.

[John from Riverside]

ROFLOL....Oh how WRONG you are buddy. Manning's first year, 1998, Indy had the #6 overall passing offense and gave up the second fewest sacks in league with 22 vs the worst team that year at 67. THAT is 1/3 the number of sacks of the worst team. Tell me again how his line sucked? Please, please tell me. I want to see if you can speak with your foot in your mouth!!!!!

 

Other posters will whine about my attitude but it's this type of BS misinformation that runs the risk of making people dumber if they don't research a posters claims.

 

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?off...mp;d-447263-p=1

 

 

 

I dont have the stats to back this up.....but I watched a lot of Manning in his first year and he got the crap kicked out of him.

 

Sacks aren't the only stat....pressures and knockdowns count quite a bit to.

[Bill from NYC]

Polian's needs at OL that first year in Indy were great. Manning got destroyed that first year, and a lot of it was because his OL sucked. Yet he didn't pick an LT, he picked a QB.

 

Excuse me. The year before Manning was drafted the Colts selected Tarik Glenn and Adam Meadows, two excellent OTs, in rounds 1 and 2 respectively.

 

Carry on.

[Thurman#1]

I dont have the stats to back this up.....but I watched a lot of Manning in his first year and he got the crap kicked out of him.

 

Sacks aren't the only stat....pressures and knockdowns count quite a bit to.

 

 

 

Bingo!

[Thurman#1]

I'm sorry but those are foolish conclusions. The Jets and the Ravens BOTH made the play offs with the same basic formula. Barring injuries or losing key contributors those teams are set to be good for a while. Sooooo...if by some chance the Ravens or the Jets win the superbowl in 2010 or 11 will you then change your tune and say YES this is how you win a superbowl and that is the only way? OR...will you come to the factual realization that there are many ways to win a superbowl and the last two teams that got there happened to have great QBs AND great offensive lines?

 

 

 

I NEVER said it was the only way. Just the highest percentage way. And it is.

 

But if Nix feels that neither Clausen nor Bradford is a potential franchise guy, I fully expect him to try another way, most likely going LT.

 

If he does think that Clausen or Bradford is the real thing, though, picking that guy will be the highest percentage move, and Nix knows it.

[Bill from NYC]

Bingo!

 

But he still had Tarik Glenn. You don't need a first round OT when you have Tarik Glenn.

[K-9]

Again more hypothetical stuff but let's hope he did have the vision to see that Manning was going to be Manning. That being said that situation has approximately 0% to do with the potential choice the Bills will have to make. The Colts had a great pass blocking line when they drafted Manning. We can not say the same.

 

There is no denying the numbers of sacks allowed and the proficiency of the Colts' passing game in Manning's rookie year.

 

But for an OL so great, it took seven seasons since Manning was drafted for the first of his OLmen (Glen) to be selected to the Pro Bowl. Not that the Pro Bowl selection process is the be all end all but it is telling to some degree. Manning, Faulk, James, Harrison, Dilger all made Pro Bowl and/or All Pro teams during that same span. The Colts' talent WAS recognized. And yet their OL was not honored in the same fashion. Interesting.

 

Manning, in his 13 seasons has always been among the least sacked QBs in the league. That covers many OL combinations. The one constant is Manning himself. He's always been able to get the ball out ON TIME or buy extra time in the pocket. This year they had no running game to speak of, yet Manning was sacked a mere 10 times. 10 TIMES!

 

Taking nothing away from their OLine and the sacks allowed stat, but I submit that the low sack numbers are more a testament to Manning's ability over the years than that of his OL to protect him. He simply gets rid of the ball so quickly.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[KOKBILLS]

IF he falls to us at 9

 

There is just something about him I really like.......Sam Bradford is my guy.

 

Then we look at a guy like the OT from USC in the 2nd round.

 

I doubt he falls...But under the circumstances as they are, I don't see how The Bills can pass on him if he's there at #9...

[Bill from NYC]

There is no denying the numbers of sacks allowed and the proficiency of the Colts' passing game in Manning's rookie year.

 

But for an OL so great, it took seven seasons since Manning was drafted for the first of his OLmen (Glen) to be selected to the Pro Bowl. Not that the Pro Bowl selection process is the be all end all but it is telling to some degree. Manning, Faulk, James, Harrison, Dilger all made Pro Bowl and/or All Pro teams during that same span. The Colts' talent WAS recognized. And yet their OL was not honored in the same fashion. Interesting.

 

Manning, in his 13 seasons has always been among the least sacked QBs in the league. That covers many OL combinations. The one constant is Manning himself. He's always been able to get the ball out ON TIME or buy extra time in the pocket. This year they had no running game to speak of, yet Manning was sacked a mere 10 times. 10 TIMES!

 

Taking nothing away from their OLine and the sacks allowed stat, but I submit that the low sack numbers are more a testament to Manning's ability over the years than that of his OL to protect him. He simply gets rid of the ball so quickly.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

Glenn was a simply superb LT, but he wasn't quite as good as Walter Jones, Orlando Pace and Jonathan Ogden. That said, he was extremely good. Put it this way.....a LT who can play to that level is worth a first overall pick of a draft (in hindsight of course).

[K-9]

Glenn was a simply superb LT, but he wasn't quite as good as Walter Jones, Orlando Pace and Jonathan Ogden. That said, he was extremely good. Put it this way.....a LT who can play to that level is worth a first overall pick of a draft (in hindsight of course).

 

No doubt. Glen was a great, if not elite, LT. Yet it took him eight seasons (seven with Manning) to make the Pro Bowl while others on those teams were well recognized as Manning, Faulk, James, Harrison, Dilger all made Pro Bowl and/or All Pro teams during that span. I find that interesting.

 

I'm not even remotely suggesting that the Colt's OLine didn't/doesn't provide great protection. I'm saying Manning's greatness at getting rid of the ball has made their jobs a hell of a lot easier over the years.

 

Manning was sacked 10 times in 16 games this year. His backup, Painter, was sacked three times in the two games he appeared in, which amounted to about 5 quarters, give or take. It makes a difference when you have an HOFer behind center. That's all I'm saying.

 

GO BILLS!!!

[PDaDdy]

Oh, you replied before I finished that post. I had to go get the quotes. Check it out again.

 

As to your point, I never said he had a lot of sacks. I said he took a pounding, and he did. To this day, Manning is excellent at avoiding sacks, particularly by getting rid of the ball. He did an awful lot of that that first year.

 

The 1998 line:

 

LT Tarik Glenn

LG Steve McKinney

C Jay Leeuwenburg

RG Tony Mandarich

RG Larry Moore

RT Adam Meadows

 

When they started to be a good line is when Polian brought in C Jeff Saturday and a decent RG. That first year they had a young Tarik Glenn, who was already pretty good but got much better as he got experience. Following the Golden Rule, after picking up Manning, Polian shored up LG with Steve McKinney, who was pretty good, but was a rookie, with rookie problems. They also had Meadows, who was pretty good.

 

But after that year, they let Leeuwenburg go for a reason, and he was out of football two years later. Mandarich we all know, that was his last year in football for a reason. Larry Moore, another rookie, (and another proof of Polian's use of the Golden Rule, picking Manning first even though he had needs on the line) wasn't particularly good in replacement of Mandarich.

 

When Polian came, he had weaknesses at RG, C, and LG. He picked Manning first, then two guards later. After fiddling with the middle of that line for two years or so, he brought in Saturday, who was the crucial piece that made them good. That first year, they weren't. Yet Polian went QB first.

 

 

1998 was Manning's rookie year. He was still Peyton Manning but he still had a lot to learn and develop as a player. People have tried to use the "Peyton Manning is good at avoiding sacks" excuse to credit the QB and take away from the accomplishements of his o-line as a 12 year veteran. That excuse doesn't fly for any rookie no matter what their name is.

 

If the guy took the second lowest sacks in the league at 22 he didn't take a pounding and it wasn't his savvy veteran skills as a rookie that made his line better than it was. It is interesting though what positions they picked up before and after Manning. He had a great pass protecting line before and they had BOTH tackles in place before he started game one. After he was already there they got guards and a center. I will say this. I agree with getting the tackles set before the guards. That is why I was against the approach we took last year. Why did we let our tackle positions get SO screwed up and focused on 2 guards. DUMB on our part.