Originally posted by Waterbear:
Everyone knows my grammar sucks so let's not talk about that lol
There are draft busts ≠ winning this game > getting Bosa.
You and anyone else who have said the above statement can't give evidence to prove your stance because there is none. What there is though are plenty of examples like Garrett vs Thomas and seeing how one win hurt our team and helped the Browns. There are examples of the Jags who won so many games last year and had a "winning culture" that meant nothing this year.
Talent, coaching, and effort is what wins games. We have the coaching and effort imo but we lack the talent to compete for the Superbowl. Getting the highest pick possible gives you the best chance to actually get a game changing player plus getting a chance to coach the senior bowl would be huge. We used that to our advantage to build our last Superbowl team but I'm sure you forget that because anyone who shares your stance has a lack of history.
So I'm sorry but... YOU'RE VERY OFF THE MARK.
Which franchise is the most consistent play-off team over the last decade? New England, they are almost never picking high in the draft. Same with the Steelers, the Seahawks, the Saints, the Chiefs and others.
You mention the Browns, but how were they playing under Hugh? They have turned around because of a culture change brought about by new Coaches. The Vikings and Bears have done the same.
You act is if talent can only be found in the top 5, talent can be found throughout the draft but what a team does with the talent, how they coach it and the expectation they set for it is more important.
Which number one picks of recent years are dominant game changers? You cite Garrett but what about Donald, Watt and Mack? All picked around or later than we are projected to pick.
A winning culture and the coaching expectation is more important than the talent difference between two players selected 5 or 6 picks apart.