But here is the situation about "BPA" when drafting this high, what if it is a position where you are fairly comfortable?
Say Romo was perfectly healthy and was in his prime, but just broke his leg last year and is expected to make a full recovery. And you have a decent backup.
You still stick rigidly to that concept and take the BPA who happens to be a QB? No. Of course you don't.
The phrase should be modified to simply say, DRFN, "don't reach for need".
The lower the pick and the more ambiguous the talent gap becomes, the more "BPA" matters and means something.
QBs also are more high impact than other positions on the field, it almost lends itself to a different set of decisions than simply BPA if there is a need. The supply is so limited and the position so hard to evaluate.
I don't think BPA means necessarily what it indicates to some at any point in the draft. I don't think the No. 1 player on your board is necessarily head and shoulders over the No. 2, etc.
There may be six to eight guys Dallas feels are not separated by much talentwise at the top of the draft. If one of those guys fills a need more than another, then you take him.
There also could be only three guys who are clearly considered better than the rest and if you have a chance at one of those guys, I believe you take him regardless of position rather than reaching for a lesser pick.
Now, I strongly believe in the tiered system Dallas and other teams use for their draft boards because I think it paints a clearer picture than simply ranking them 1, 2, 3, 4, etc. For me, it's just a question of what that top tier looks like.
If Dallas doesn't consider either Goff or Lynch in that top tier then it shouldn't take either at the No. 4 pick over a player who is in that tier. If Dallas can get what it believes to be an elite player at fourth overall, then that's what they should do over any need that it has.
If the next tier down isn't considered much of a drop-off, though, then I can see the team making a slight trade down or taking from that tier to better fill a need.
I'll use Tunsil for an example. Let's say he's the only one in the first tier still available at No. 4 and clearly better than anyone else available. I take him regardless of him being another offensive lineman.
However, if Tunsil is only considered slightly better than someone like Goff in the next tier, then I take Goff to better fill a need. If Tunsil is slightly better than Goff and several other players that better fill a need, then I consider a trade down knowing that I can get one of those players.
Again, I'm looking at Dallas taking advantage of this draft position to get one of the elite talents in this draft. The question will be at what point the talent drops off. Are there two guys, five guys, 10 guys who are on a similar level at the top?
