Is some of the people in this thread the same people whining and complaining about NOT getting Wilfork?
My argument is not about semantics, it's about logic. For the past year, people have complained about giving up a 4th to get Carey in the 1st round. The argument was to wait and see if he fell. If he didn't, Wilfork was the man. A 1st Round DT. And now, people are making statements that we could use our 2nd round pick on something better? :hmmm:
So, I guess you want to wait YET another year to finally draft the OTHER YOUNG DT, (Vickerson/Rhodes/etc) being the other, we need to fill the Chester/Bowens rotation on a team TRYING to make the transition to a 3-4 hybrid? Oh, and when you DO draft your DT, it's not as much a priority as it used to be (not worth a 2nd now, but was worth a 1st last year). Especially considering a solid DT rotation is NECESSARY for a 3-4 base.... :smackhead
If the kid has the tools now (as graded by the HC and staff), why wait another year simply for principle's sake?
Traylor is a one year solution, two in a reserved role. Why don't you bring in his replacement NOW to begin grooming him while you HAVE Traylor to ease the pain?
Bowens was cut and the word on Chester is not necessarily a reassuring one. So, if Chester doesn't even make the cut AND we suffer an injury during the year... what then? Want another replay of last year when teams ran it down our throat?
If you have the tools to solve an obvious problem NOW that you HAVE to solve later, do it. Pass on Wright now and you might have to use a #1 if things go terribly south with aging vets, injuries and unfulfilled rehabs this year. Not too mention, you set the WHOLE program back a year because you wanted to be firm and not "give away a pick" this year because "that's what we've always done".
It's not about mortgaging your future. It's about solving a problem with the right solution.