I know this is nitpicky but I hate terms like "our first round needs are..."
And that is just because I hate drafting for IMMEDIATE need. I mean, it ends up happening one way or the other I guess...but I try more to whittle down the positions rather than whittle up the positions. Like, ok, who AREN'T we going to draft? Probably not a tight end. Probably not a RB. Probably not a WR. Probably not an OG (valuation call, I don't believe in drafting OGs that high). Probably not a Jason Taylor clone. Probably not another undersized MLB (we've already got three MLBs...zach, channing, pope). And, lol, probably not a K or P. Everything else is open for drafting based on long term needs. I guess that means you COULD call QB, OT, C, DE/DT, DT/NT, OLB, CB, and S our first round "needs" but I just get itchy when I hear the term. It's more like the positions I'd be willing to invest a first round pick in.
IMO, in round 1 the possibilities are going to end up being Jay Cutler, Marcus McNeil, Winston Justice, Mario Williams, Claude Wroten, Rodrique Wright, Chad Greenway, Demeco Ryans, Ahmad Brooks, Michael Huff, Jimmy Williams, and Laron Landry. Whenever I come out with a list like this I usually have people getting on me about how so and so won't be available but I mean, this is just a watch list. You never know who will be available until it happens. Certainly whoever picked #16 last year couldn't have imagined that Aaron Rodgers would be available.
The position where I'm a bit more hazy is OT. I'm really not sure which guys aside from Ferguson are going to grade all the way to the top and I've seen guys like Joe Thomas and Jon Scott reach up as high as where we pick.