2016 NFL Draft team needs: Ranking position units of all 32 teams

What is each NFL team's biggest deficiency heading into the draft?

There are a whole lot of "team needs" lists floating around this time of year, but we wanted to figure out how serious those needs are compared to the rest of the league. To do that, we recently asked the Eye on Football staffers (myself, Will Brinson, Ryan Wilson, John Breech, and Sean Wagner-McGough) to rank each of the league's 32 teams in the following position groups: quarterbacks, running backs, wide receivers and tight ends, offensive line, defensive line, linebackers, and defensive backs. By averaging out the rankings from all five voters, we arrived at consensus position rankings for every team to help us zero in on which areas teams should address in next week's NFL Draft.

A few things to note before we get started:

• Backups were taken into heavy consideration for the quarterback and running back rankings. It is not a ranking of merely starting quarterbacks and running backs.
• Who teams are expected to pick in the draft was not taken into consideration. The Rams and Eagles don't get credit for having Jared Goff or Carson Wentz.
• Yes, the reason your favorite team is ranked so low in [insert position group here] is because we are all personally biased against them. (Just kidding.)

Quarterback

Some notes:

• The Rams and Eagles, two of the bottom seven here, are expected to take Goff and Wentz at 1-2, in some order.
• The Browns, who are the second-neediest team on our list, traded out of the second pick in the draft. Symmetry!
• The Texans made a big splash by signing Brock Osweiler away from the Broncos in free agency, but still wound up 28th in these rankings.
• The Cowboys had four top-10 votes but were pushed down to No. 13 overall because their fifth vote was a No. 30 ranking.
• Four voters had the Patriots and Packers 1-2 in their rankings. The fifth voter had Cardinals-Patriots 1-2, with the Packers down at No. 9.

Running backs

Some notes:

• The Steelers received four of five No. 1 votes; the other went to the Vikings.
• The Steelers, Rams, Vikings, Bengals, Chiefs and Bills got top-10 rankings from everyone.
• San Diego had the lowest average despite not being voted No. 32 by any voter.
• The Bears were ranked as high as No. 7 and as low as No. 28, while the Patriots were ranked as high as No. 8 and as low as No. 25.
• Despite trading DeMarco Murray to the Titans, the Eagles finished up with a ranking 2.6 spots better, on average.

Wide receivers and tight ends

Some notes:

• The Rams were ranked No. 31 by every voter.
• The Steelers, Cardinals, and Patriots were voted in the top four by every voter.
• The Seahawks finished with a No. 6 ranking in quarterbacks, running backs, and wide receivers/tight ends.
• The Bears ranked as high as No. 6 and as low as No. 24, while the Jaguars also ranked as high as No. 6 and as low as No. 21. The Cowboys, meanwile had three top-12 votes but also were ranked No. 32 by one voter.
• The Bengals snuck in the top 10 despite losing both Marvin Jones and Mohamed Sanu in free agency, while the Chargers earned a top-five ranking partly on the strength of the Travis Benjamin signing.

Offensive line

Some notes:

• Unsurprisingly, the bottom five teams on this list have been heavily connected to offensive linemen in the draft process, with four of the five (Titans, Colts, Chargers, 49ers) rumored to be targeting tackles as soon as the first round.
• Dallas finished second in the overall rankings despite receiving three No. 1 votes. 
• Oakland would have been much higher were it not for a sole No. 19 vote.
• This is the only offensive category in which the Seahawks were not ranked No. 6.
• It appears the EOF crew bought into the improvement shown by the Panthers' offensive line last season, giving them a No. 8 overall ranking.

Defensive line

Some notes:

• As you can see, the Jets were unanimously ranked No. 1.
• The Broncos retained a high ranking despite losing Malik Jackson, while the Jaguars jumped into the top 10 with his signing and the return of Dante Fowler Jr.
• The Mario Williams signing seemed to offset the loss of Olivier Vernon for the Dolphins, while not everyone bought into the free agency splash of the Giants, who ranked in the No. 13 spot.
• Personal opinion: The Eagles are at least a few spots too low here. Same with the Vikings.
• San Francisco and Cleveland sure do rank at or near the bottom of a lot of these lists, huh?

Linebackers

Some notes:

• The Panthers, on the strength of Luke Kuechly and Thomas Davis, were a unanimous No. 1 selection.
• You have to think the Packers would be higher on this list if we knew Clay Matthews was going to be rushing the passer from his outside linebacker spot rather than playing inside.
• The Bears were ranked as high as No. 5 and as low as No. 31. They were a very volatile team at pretty much every position.
• The Colts received only votes as No. 30, 31, or 32.
• Cleveland, which finished 30th, is in pretty decent position to take someone like Myles Jack after trading down to No. 8.

Defensive backs

Some notes:

• Despite jettisoning Brandon Browner, the Saints unanimously finished last in the DB rankings.
• How the Cowboys are up at No. 20 is beyond my personal comprehension.
• The Seahawks, Broncos, Cardinals, and Chiefs were all in the top five of every ranking.
• San Diego, at No. 28, can address the secondary early by taking Florida State's Jalen Ramsey.
• These rankings were compiled before Carolina rescinded its franchise tag offer to Josh Norman and before Norman signed with Washington. I'd slot Washington near the top 10 with Norman aboard and place Carolina in the 18-22 range.

After all that, we can identify which position group is the biggest area of need for each team by taking their lowest ranking, as well as the "strength" of that need by showing you their average ranking in that specific category. Here's the full list:

Some notes:

• Some of these "needs" are things that aren't really needs at all, just the position group that teams happened to rank lowest in. Nobody thinkts the Cardinals are in need of a running back, for example.
• The Cardinals, Panthers, Bengals, Packers, Patriots, Raiders, and Seahawks did not rank in the 20s or 30s in any of the position groups. The Cardinals ranked in the top 10 in every single position group.
• The Cowboys (DL/LB) and Chargers (RB/OL) each had two position groups qualify as their biggest need, but the Chargers just drafted a running back (Melvin Gordon) in the first round last year, so they seem more likely to address the offensive line early in the draft. Dallas could be in position to address either of its biggest needs early on, especially if the Chargers opt for Laremy Tunsil at No. 3.
• Comparing these needs to the mock drafts on CBSSports.com can be useful as well. The Bucs are unanimously taking a defensive back (Vernon Hargeaves III) in all five mocks, which matches up with their biggest need here. The Vikings are unanimously expected to take a wide receiver, as are the Bengals. The Packers select a defensive lineman in all five. The Chargers grab an offensive lineman (Tunsil) in four of five mocks, and so do the Seahawks. The Falcons take a linebacker in three of five, while the same is true of the Bills with a defensive lineman and the Broncos with a quarterback.