Quote:
Originally Posted by jd1020
Here you go bud. I'll quote it for ya.
This was all directed at someone shooting down the idea of going after a QB in round 1. That's why I was only focused on the offensive side of the ball. We can afford to pick a QB in the first, if one falls or we trade up for one, and still walk away with every single need. There are still going to be WR's when our second or third pick comes around, because there are so many of them, that will be more than serviceable opposite Bowe. No one is picking OL in the first because there are far more important and game changing positions in football...
All caught up now?
|
Thanks, I read that the first time. I don't understand why you insist that we draft an offensive player with that first pick though. I also don't understand why you take OL off the table. I understand, but don't agree with, your rationale for waiting to take a WR later in the draft.
Here are the positions I'd lean toward in the first round: WR, OL, LB, NT. If a guy as coveted as Andrew Luck somehow fell to us, I'd be willing to take him just like I'd be willing to take an unbelievable value at CB, RB, or DE. It would be hard for me to consider taking a TE, FB, or S with that pick. I'm not particularly interested in trading up. I'd trade down if we got a favorable return and if we believe the guy we want will still be there when we pick.