bigthama

There are multiple TE and multiple CB at the top of the board right now - definitely not the time to trade back when need matches value like this

That's incredibly good news. Worst case, out for the year but 100% recovery virtually guaranteed. Good chance he may miss 6-8 weeks and be back later in the year.

I've been very impressed by Sam. Keeps delivering accurate passes with rushers in his face. Accuracy on the money.

Did he get vaccinated? No? Then no, he didn't.

Metcalf vibes here. Absurd physical talent who dropped for kinda stupid reasons.

Picked up ANOTHER 3rd to move down like 7 spots? Seems smart to me.

Obviously if an LT is close to BPA that's the smart pick. But what if there is a run on OTs, and Owusu is sitting there as the clear BPA? I say we grab the guy with star potential even if the positional need is less, as it's not like we are just a player or 2 away from a SB.

Have to think Sewell would have been the pick and the extended time meant no good trade down offers came. If you aren't really convinced by Fields or Slater (and there's reason not to be) then a sure-thing CB isn't the worst option.

Really happy for that kid... but ???

This is the key to everything in draft position. "More important" is generally meaningless when it comes to drafting (except maybe the difference between QB and punter) - it's all about supply of people that can do the job "well enough". You have to have a starting lineup (and preferably a depth chart) made up entirely of players that can do that job well enough to win or you have a major exploitable weakness and you lose unless the opposing coach is Adam Gase. RBs don't get drafted high not because they aren't an important position, but because there are far more people out there that can do the job well enough to win than there are spots on NFL rosters. The difference between an elite and an adequate RB is substantial, but not enough to make up for the difference between an adequate and an inadequate OT. That's why only stupid teams pick elite RBs when sure-thing (even if just adequate) OTs are on the board if both are a roster need. WRs don't have quite the glut of talent to roster position that RBs do (likely because you need more WRs on a roster), but the supply to demand ratio is still favorable enough that taking a WR when you also need an available OT is basically a giant neon sign pointing out which franchises are still run by people that could not possibly have achieved their current position on pure merit.