this was probably covered before, but I am too lazy to go back and read all the Bush threads, so here goes:Of the 5 potential teams that can end up with the first pick in the draft, it can be argued that none of them truly need a RB. In fact if Bush were not available to them, it is highly unlikely that any of them would be drafting a RB in the first round or two.Houston has Davis & WellsJets have Martin & HoustonSaints have McAllisterSF has Gore & BarlowGB has Green, Davenport, & GadoNow, granted Bush is a probable upgrade over most if not all of these guys (if all the hype is to be believed). And over half of the guys above are injured, but when healthy they are all highly capable backs, the most suspect of the group would be the guys in SF. However, all these teams have other issues which would seem more urgent in addressing via the draft than RB.I should preface my comments by stating that I do not watch much college ball and have not seen Bush play. But, how many guys have come out of college with promises of being the next Barry Sanders/Walter Payton/Jim Brown/Marshall Faulk/etc..., the next all-world player, the next franchise, etc... As far as I am concerned he is just another promising rookie. Based on the hype I am sure he will be drafted #1 no matter what, probably by one of these 5 teams, but is it the wisest thing for them to do?Shouldn't they be addressing what it is they their team actually needs?Should they be forced to draft a player because of peer pressure? If another team jumped off a bridge would they do it to?I guess what I am trying to get at is, these teams would be better off trading the #1 pick to another team for a whole basket of goodies (i.e. multiple draft picks and veteran players). But it is unlikely to happen, what other teams (if any) will step up and try to trade for the pick? Will the top team have the courage not to draft him?Talk amongst yourselves.TIA