I really like Davis and I really like Williams.
But there is not one example of a successful franchise that has ever invested 2 top 10 picks on WRs 5 years apart.
You've made this point before and, although there might be some truth to it, I don't think it's a reason not to take Williams, Davis or Ross if one of them happens to be the best player on the board when the Bills pick comes up.
First, I can think of a few successful teams that have invested heavily in the position. For example, Atlanta made a huge investment in the position when they traded up for J. Jones (one of the only instances I can think of where a first round trade-up actually worked) and Houston has recently used two first round picks on WR. More importantly, though, there is no logical reason a team shouldn't invest heavily in the position. Which team is better off, a team that landed two outstanding WRs with their first-round picks in successive years, or a team who landed an outstanding WR with their first round pick two years ago but then drafted a mediocre front seven player with their first rounder the year after?
Also, I disagree that WR is a "dependent position" in the NFL. Having one or more game-breaking WRs opens up the field and creates opportunities for the entire offense, not just in the passing game. You don't need a "franchise QB" for your offense to benefit enormously from having WRs who can create mismatches for the defense. And vice versa: Look at what happened to the Bills offense the past two years when Watkins was sidelined.
Lastly, in the Bills' case, the cupboard is bare at WR, other than the oft-injured Sammy. It's clearly an area of need. And don't forget, teams DO need lots of WRs. They aren't like QBs--teams generally carry six of them and there are often three on the field at the same time. And as a bonus, many of them also contribute heavily on special teams.
IMO, the only reason for the Bills NOT to draft a WR at 10 this year would be if none those guys is the BPA.
Edited by mannc, 07 April 2017 - 01:17 PM.