ShareThis Page
Tim Benz, Joe Rutter discuss the Steelers’ selection of Devin Bush | TribLIVE.com
Breakfast With Benz

Tim Benz, Joe Rutter discuss the Steelers’ selection of Devin Bush

Tim Benz
1077219_web1_AP_18287044467210
AP
Wisconsin quarterback Alex Hornibrook (12) is sacked by Michigan linebacker Devin Bush (10) in the first quarter in Ann Arbor, Mich., Saturday, Oct. 13, 2018.

In Thursday’s NFL Draft, the Steelers did what so many people hoped they would do. They traded up to draft Michigan inside linebacker Devin Bush.

For Friday’s Sided.co podcast, Steelers beat writer Joe Rutter joins me to talk about how general manager Kevin Colbert made the deal with Denver, what he will do next and why Bush is being leveraged as justification for the Antonio Brown trade.


LISTEN: How the Steelers pulled off drafting Devin Bush

Bush appears to be the answer to replace Ryan Shazier. We discuss his strengths and weaknesses. The strengths appear to be smarts, instinct and athleticism.

The weaknesses are size — and maybe not much else.

A lot happened to allow the Steelers to make the move. Joe and I try to figure out some of the moments within the top nine that paved the way.

Then we kick around ideas as to what the Steelers may do with their two third-round picks Friday. Might they trade into the second round again?

Tim Benz is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Tim at [email protected] or via Twitter. All tweets could be reposted. All emails are subject to publication unless specified otherwise.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com 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.