who cares if they didn’t win “because” of their WRs, plenty of teams have great receivers and don’t win shit. it is in an inconsequential position when it comes to wins and losses. see Denver, Carolina, and Atlanta as examples. nobody said it is or should be “good enough” for the bears or the packers, I AM saying that the several holes on their defense are way more important to wins and losses than WR, and are not part of a #1 ranked unit in football.
also it’s not like they ignored WR, they took one in the third round, i think ignoring your shit defense that clearly held you back to add to your #1 ranked offense is foolish. if you disagree with that basic premise this discussion isn’t worth having as we simply have a difference of opinion on how they should have allocated their assets.