Quote:
Originally Posted by kcchiefsus
So for you anti-offensive line people, let's try to analyze this. This scenario probably wouldn't happen but humor me and go along with it.
What happens if in the next 3 drafts for one reason or another the BPA in the first few rounds is never an offensive lineman? Do you simply keep ignoring a HUGE need? At what point do you finally say "our line is bad enough that we have no choice but to reach"?
I understand not wanting to reach in the 1st round. Getting a player like Ellis or Dorsey is probably more preferable to an Otah or Clady. But I am of the opinion that after the first round it gets more and more acceptable to reach for a need. But let's define the term "reach". There is the kind of reach where you have a need and you panic and take the best player at a position available. That is a mistake in my opinion. But what if you really like a player and feel he can help your team but he might be a slight reach at your spot? What if the Chiefs are really high on Sam Baker, just for an example. They feel he can be a very good offensive tackle for us. But they feel he is a mid to late 2nd round pick. Obviously, they probably don't think he would be there at our 3rd round pick. So if you want that player is it such a mistake to reach for him? Personally, I don't think it is. If you like a player and you think he can help you then you should draft him.
|
There's the problem.
It's being implied by many, and now stated by you, that not drafting an OL in the first 2 rounds is "ignoring a huge need."
The two staples of our great OL were a 3rd round pick and an undrafted FA.