I don't know if this a Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs thing, but most teams go into each year with some holes in their roster. It's rare that you can fix everything at once. Last year, we did major work on the line and didn't bring in weapons. The Bengals took a QB, but didn't have enough picks to fix everything else... The Patriots brought in a ton of depth, but couldn't secure a QB...
This is normal... unless you are on top.
So I wonder... which needs will we leave unfulfilled this year as we slowly get better? We've pretty much agree that we need, at minimum: 1 Receiver of some kind (maybe 2), a Running Back, a Center, a Tackle or Guard, a DE Edge, an OLB Edge, and another developmental Safety... and we aint getting all of this in one draft. Even if we had that many high round picks... some would bust, some would get injured, and some would end up being just a guy.
How we react to these unfulfilled needs, and whether we lie to ourselves about how they are REALLY are not needs so as to buttress our arguments... define what we are discussing. Is is more important to draft an Edge than a second receiver? If we take a RB, can we still take a Center? If we grab that Tackle, do we have to pass on the second Edge prospect?
That's what we are arguing over... because we CAN'T fill every need here. Something will be left off the list, and when that hole becomes apparent during the season... someone will cry. They'll blame Grier. They'll tell us that they knew this would happen and any idiot could have... blah blah blah...
So I'm challenging people to look at it through this prism... where are you willing to accept a weakness? And are you willing to admit that we've made a choice that made that weakness worse?
