Just a way for me to conceptualize the situation McVay and Snead have faced in looking to upgrade our offense.
As we all know to our deep sorrow, we have long needed substantial upgrades to our OL and our WR/TEs. As McVay looks at developing an offense that can express his vision, he faces those 2 roster challenges--both pretty big ones.
Now, it seems to me that, especially without a #1 pick, we could not really address BOTH in the draft. Or, I suppose, we could, but you need numbers of picks to have a reasonable chance at hitting on a couple of guys. It makes sense in a general way to me to devote numbers of picks to 1 or the other.
I think that, at least, that reasoning makes sense of the draft. The brain trust decided to ...
- Pick up some aging FA talent on the OL to supplement some marginal guys on the roster and look to build up that unit next year.
- Pick lots of WRs and TEs and hope a couple hit.
Now, I'd just point out that, assuming the decision was made to focus on 1 or the other, either choice they made would have been hammered. Passing on OL in the draft has been hammered. I submit, however, that had they focused on OL and done little for the receiving corps, that move would have been just as unpopular. If you can't do both, then either way you go will draw heat.
Which of course leaves the question, were they right to go with WR/TEs over OL? I dunno. I make zero promises either way. All I can do is try to imagine what McVay is thinking.
For his system, receivers are probably more crucial than OL. His whole vision is focused on creatively attacking with receiving threats, and with NUMBERS of receiving threats. Suppose he upgraded the OL without doing much at WR/TE (and, apparently, FB ). OK, Goff might be safer, but McVay would not be able to run the system he was hired to implement. It would be like beefing up the suspension of a dragster without adding a powerful engine. Safer but too damn slow.
As I've said before, we have to remember that McVay's vision is very different from Fishers. Fisher had to have a quality, powerful OL. He couldn't do what he wanted without it. WR/TE was less important, as it was with his Titans.
Given a host of good WRs who can quickly get open or make themselves available, however, OL becomes less important. It's always important, of course, but you can get by with less on the OL if you have a quick-hitting, potent passing game. Goff can be protected as much by having a quickly open target as by having a stud LOT.
Well, that's my read. Remember--I promise nothing. I'm just trying to figure how they are thinking.
I would welcome responses to 2 issues:
- The assumption that we faced a choice between upgrading the OL or the receivers.
- The strategy of choosing to subordinate OL upgrades to receiver upgrades.
