A ‘stunner’ and ‘head-scratcher’: Reaction to Steelers drafting safety Terrell Edmunds |
Breakfast With Benz

A ‘stunner’ and ‘head-scratcher’: Reaction to Steelers drafting safety Terrell Edmunds

Tim Benz
Getty Images
NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell walks past a video board displaying an image of Baker Mayfield of Oklahoma after he was picked #1 overall by the Cleveland Browns during the first round of the 2018 NFL Draft at AT&T Stadium on April 26, 2018 in Arlington, Texas.
Virginia Tech's Terrell Edmunds poses with his Pittsburgh Steelers team jersey during the first round of the NFL football draft, Thursday, April 26, 2018, in Arlington, Texas. (AP Photo/David J. Phillip)

I’ve covered 16 of the last 17 Steelers draft weekends. Rare have been the occasions where I walked away from the facility after the first round and said: “I don’t get what they are thinking.”

Sometimes I’ve preferred one player over another. Other times I valued taking a player at a different position. But rarely have I thought both and been surprised at certain players that were left on the board.

Yesterday, that’s how I felt as the Steelers stood firm at pick No. 28, didn’t move up and took Terrell Edmunds, a safety from Virginia Tech.

I rarely saw evaluations suggesting he’s talented enough for the first round, I don’t see the need for a first round safety and I saw a number of superior players bypassed to take this player.

So, yeah, aside from that I loved the pick.

Here’s what some others thought:’s Ian Rapoport called the pick “a stunner.”

Mel Kiper called Edmunds’ selection a “head scratcher.”

“Virginia Tech’s Terrell Edmunds was my eighth-ranked safety. Eighth,” Kiper said. “And the Steelers took him at No. 28 overall. There’s no doubt that he’s physically gifted like his brother, Tremaine, who went 12 spots ahead of him, but the tape doesn’t show a first-round player. In fact, I thought he might be underrated as a versatile safety who could play in the slot. But that’s when I thought he was more likely to go at the end of Day 2. This is another head-scratcher.”

Luke Easterling of the also used that phrase, and gave the pick a “D.”

“This was a real head-scratcher,” Easterling wrote. “With safeties like Alabama’s Ronnie Harrison and Stanford’s Justin Reid still on the board, the Steelers opted for the second Edmunds brother of this year’s first round. While he’s indeed a big hitter with a physical playing style, Edmunds still has far too many rough edges to smooth out in his game before he’s ready to be a quality starter at the next level. The Steelers needed a defender who would make an immediate and sizable impact here, and they got somewhat of a project instead.”

NFL Media’s Bucky Brooks, a former scout, is a little less harsh.

Ross Tucker of Sirius XM seems to be on board.

Jason La Confora of CBS is one of the few who likes the pick.

Pro Football Weekly doesn’t:.

The fan reactions are all over the place.

Some think the positive reaction to Ryan Shazier walking out to make the pick is overshadowing the questions surrounding the pick itself.

Here’s an optimist.

Gotta love the always popular passive-aggressive hockey fan hot take.

“It’s a reach” guy checks in.

This dude is channeling the Penguins “other brother” school of thought.

Needless to say, Pittsburgh fans are going to need to be “won over” by this selection because the public has some negative preconceived notions. No problem there Terrell, that’s easy to do. Just ask Antti Niemi and Jon Niese.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.