Slagathor started the thread with the Borges quote of how BB screwed up taking Richard Seymour in the 1st round back in 2001. It made me think. BB and Pioli have been lights out awesome with 1st round picks. Now, we can debate forever if another player looks better to us now. Daniel Graham over Ed Reed is a popular one. But remember, it used to be that we took Graham over Clinton Portis. Two Super Bowl rings later, we have a great group of TEs AND our RB of the future. It's just easy to look at the present state of the team and always see another player out there that would help out. Overall, we really cannot question how incredible our brain trusts have done in the 1st round. We have 7 1st rounders under BB and every one of them is a key player. (excluding Maroney though he has the look that he'll definately be one soon) I choose not to look at who we could have had, I look at what the players we take do for us. That's all that really matters. Let's just say that Tomlinson was still available at the #6 spot back in 2001. Looking at it today, is Richard Seymour a bad pick? One can say that Tomlinson is a better player but would anyone be disappointed that we took Seymour? The best example: Back in 1996 we took Tedi Brushchi in the 3rd round. The pick three spots later: Terrell Owens. There's no debating that Owens has a much better chance of getting in the Hall of Fame and has statistically had a better career. Do any one of you regret having #54 on this team for the past decade? I just look at our 1st rounders and I see players that are great at what they do. Seymour is arguably the best at his position. Graham is the best blocking TE and has been key in our passing game. Warren is a very good DL that happens to have the best on the other side overshadowing him. Wilfork makes us forget Ted Washington. Watson is a big play waiting to happen. Mankins is a tough, hard-nosed lineman and Maroney looks to be a top-flight NFL RB. Whoever else we could have taken, I personally don't care.