3. Snead said we have needs a specific positions (hint, hint) but they wouldn’t violate their board if something blatant was staring them in the face. He gave an example of a player being available at 41 who they were blown away was there but not at a position of need. They would not pass on that player, that is a sure way to screw up.
Sorry. Not buying it.
The whole strategy of BPA has, of course, good reason behind it. In a general way.
– You can miss great opportunities.
– You can reach for a bust.
However, no abstract strategic principle is ever an absolute.
– Not all guys you reach for are busts.
– You can miss great opportunities TO FILL THE HOLES IN YOUR ROSTER.
– A whole team effort can be undermined by a gaping roster hole … especially when the hole is an entire unit.
As I’ve argued elsewhere, our FO has had 3 years to fix the OL and has failed to do so. As such, they cannot afford to fail to add at least one solid OL member during the draft. They still might do so, but the talent opportunities are dwindling rapidly.
And they are risking the entire year by not acting decisively to shore up the OL.
My good friend WV has repeatedly posted that, since A) the season depends on OL solutions and B) the FO is smart enough to understand that, then, C) they will prioritize the OL this off season.
I don’t think Snead and Fisher got the WV memo.
By virtue of the absurd ...
.
