View Single Post
Old 02-04-2013, 09:06 AM   #31
Tombstone RJ
Ring of Famer
 
Tombstone RJ's Avatar
 
Old School

Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: In the Tetons!
Posts: 22,309

Adopt-a-Bronco:
WorrellWilliams
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by That One Guy View Post
Part of the problem with the perception of guards is that it sometimes feels like you just plug in a mountain of a man and call the position filled. LTs that can't move go there and that drops the prestige a bit as well. What qualifications exist for guard that makes that a goal for someone to strive for? You could be strong as they come but if you're athletic as well, you'll be an RT or, if you're very athletic, maybe a LT.

So how many good-great tackles would've been all-pro guards if they'd been moved inside? Instead, they had some athleticism so they got bumped outside. For example, see Albert in KC who everyone gushed over as a guard but he's been a solid LT instead.

It's kinda like the special teams of the OL. If you were better, you'd be playing elsewhere.
Point is that football is still a team sport and you can't win without all the players so go ahead and recognize the great players, regardless of if they played on QB or LG. There is absolutely no denying that QBs and RBs and other more recognized positions will get acknowledged and put into the HoF and I agree with that. My argument is that you don't keep out a truly great player simply because he played a less glamorous position in order to prop up a questionable player becaus he played on a good team or in a big media market.

The numbers will always favore the glamorous players and rightly so, it's fun to watch thos positions. However, the HoF is about the best players regardless of which position they played. It's about the best players on a team sport. And I'll continue to say that no team would win a single game, let alone a champion ship without two guys on the oline playing guards.
Tombstone RJ is offline   Reply With Quote