In one of Brian's recent postings about the state of the O-line I noticed that a number of postings (including ones I made myself and corrected by Kaisertown, thanks Kaiser) had to deal with anger over a Twitter post by a former NFL scout. It wasn't so much what he said that the O-Line had no depth this year but the sentence that came before it saying that he came to this opinion after "glancing at the depth charts" Now there are alot of dissenting opinions about the line but as Rumblers we come to these opinions through alot of knowlegdge about the team and the players themselves. It's not so much what the guy said but the knee jerk way he arrived at his conclusion. Now this guy was a pro scout and he is currently unemployed but unfortunatley we as fans have come to see this too often from "experts" who make good bank telling us about our teams based on very superficial "research."There are many examples of this I was watching NFL Live last night and in describing our passing game Darren Woodson said that we would had a good corp of receivers in Evans, Owens and our slot guy Roscoe Parrish, whoops (liked the sentiment but not the inaccuracy), of course a few months ago everyone (not just Bills fans) wanted to string up (and correct me if I'm wrong) Peter King of SI.com for his running back unit rankings where the bills were ranked really low and he didn't even mention Fred Jackson, of course the famous Pete Briscoe quote about Brandon Rodd, the many gaffes of Marshall Faulk, or when Cris Carter while lambasting the Detroit Lions said he knew that Roy Williams and Charles Rodgers would be dissapointments even though coming out of his camp said they would be great before they were drafted. These are just a few examples, and I'm sure you have many more. Do we need these talking heads to tell us about our team when they don't know anything really about our team. And if not why are they getting paid? Or am I being to harsh?