And the game should simulate that. It should make that P suck horribly so you'd look stupid for doing it. If that doesn't happen, it's a problem.
If they made the block ratings mean a lot more than they do now, this wouldn't even be a discussion - which is the point being made.
No one should use a glitch, true. That doesn't mean we should excuse the glitch being there and say "no one should use it, so let's just act like it's not there."
If a 12 PBL doesn't lose to any DL - that's a sign the ratings are screwed, and that can have serious implications in a ratings based system. Forget position. That's what people are focusing too much on, imo.
12 PBL vs any DL can win. That's the problem.
And the game shouldn't let the damn punter block a DL. If someone does that, the game engine should punish them. It doesn't, because the ratings don't mean enough. That's the problem.
It's perfect because it shows the
ability of the players to block is not reflected well (or at all) via their ratings. Otherwise, why would a 12 or even 40 PBL be able to hold up against even a average pass rusher?
What better way to show that the ratings don't mean enough than to set up a player poor at a rating agaisnt a player that's great at the rating and watch the poor guy win consistently against the great one?