junk said:
That is a weak argument.
Just because it is a recent trend, that doesn't make it the rule.
Dallas used #1s on Aikman, Smith and Irvin. Turned out OK.
NE used a #1 on a RB this year. Pittsburgh a #1 on a WR.
Losers last year used a #1 on a RB and swapped one for a QB. Tried to use one on a WR.
Plenty of ways to build a team. That has been the basic point of the discussion on my part.
Yes, it's such a weak argument it hasn't worked since we did it over 10 years ago.
There's this little thing called a salary cap now.
Note: Our team was dismantled trying to keep the triplets together.
I'm not interested in what positions they drafted in first round after they've won (NE/Pitt).
I wanna see the team that drafted QB, WR and RB in first round in recent history and won the Super Bowl.
When you strike out on that find a team that won a SB while drafting
ONE of those positions in the first round (I'll spot you STL).
While their is more than one way to build a team (AZ, Indy, Clev, Pitt, SEA, SF, Oak, NE, TEN).........
How many of those are really worth emulating?