I didn't say "can't". I said it was unlikely. For example, if we had Dominick Davis, I would still take Bush at #1 if I am the Texans. You just can't pass such a talent if you you can't trade out and get a king's ransom. That choice is much tougher if you had LT in your backfield after signing him to a six-year deal. But I agree in that it is ideal for the Titans to take a player of both need and talent. I see a lot of difference in a player you take in the top 10 vs the bottom of round one. Bulluck should have started much sooner, IMO, too. But he was the BPA which supports my argument. I disagree. When do you ever fill your positional needs? I think you have to look at the big picture. You can't JUST draft by need or JUST draft BPA (except for a first-round pick). For example, say the Titans had their third-round pick this year (don't we wish). And when they get to their pick in the second round, there are four LBs remaining on the board Reese graded out as top 50 picks (say 37, 40, 43 and 49). But there is only one S he ranks in the top 50 (say 41). What should he do? He may reach a few spots and take the S with pick 39 because he knows one of those LBs will likely be around in the third. By following your logic, you snag the highest-rated LB in the second and then take another in the third because you one S is likely taken by someone else later in round two. And we need to realize this BPA is based on Reese's grading and who knows just what makes up that grade. The difference between the player ranked 37 and 41 may be very little which means it's a no-brainer taking the position.