Eh... I'd rather draft a sure thing in the first or second. Screw "potential" or "serviceable" at this point. Just fix it.
But you can't spend a 1st or 2nd every year on an OLman. We spent a top 10 pick on a LT and a late 1st on a OC. We seem to have gotten lucky on a UDFA LG. We spent a 4th rounder on a RT who we developed over a few years. We have another UDFA RT who may or may not pan out but will at least be a serviceable swing tackle. As much as everyone wants to hate all our OL decisions, no team spends a 1st rounder on every OL position. We do need a replacement at RG since Arkin will probably never pan out, but that doesn't mean we have to spend another 1st. DE, DT, S, QB (Romo is getting old) are all more pressing needs.
You are right. DL is a huge need going forward. But there are too many self proclaimed football experts on here who think that "real" football knowledge dictates the need for OGs. So your post will be lost amongst the masses
High round guards pan out so much more than high round DTs. I'd literally never spend a first round pick on a DT. They bust too often and their years of productivity are too limited. A guard, on the other hand, can be productive for 10+ years for literally every snap played. The DT position needs to be rotated and the impact on the game of your average DT is negligible. I put the position in the same category as running back. Just keep a steady rotation of middling players and you're fine.
