Haven't looked at anyone's draft except the Steelers – busy time and the info's not about to go stale anyway; pushing forward always brings more clarity so I don't see any urgency to analyze immediately.

As far as Pgh goes, I might've done things differently but I don't think you can argue with what they did.  Their 1st-rd pick was rated right about where they took him; not a plum but they didn't reach either.  Nothing wrong with that, esp at what appears a "position of need" (more on this to follow).  Assuming you can trust what they say, with their 2nd-rd pick they took the RB they rated highest in the draft – others disagreed with their ranking but at least some agreed with that assessment.  In the 3rd-rd, they got the WR they purportedly had ranked 4th overall in the draft.  If true, that's certainly value in that slot, even given the overall talent available this yr.

They then traded up to pick a safety in the 4th-rd who seemingly by all rights should have been off the board by then.  And followed that up with a decent QB.  Contrary to what the pundits in the 'burgh seem to think, that was an appropriate pickup given their past draft history at the position.  When the time came, scout-tm QB Brian St Pierre was replaced by Dennis Dixon.  Dixon now needed replaced & they did that.  I don't see anything remarkable or unusual there.

The later rd picks were just that – later rd picks.  These are a crapshoot & in general I think the Steelers are much better at that than I would be in their position.  Some will pan out; some won't.  Very seldom will they all be good or all bad (though this latter anomaly did in fact occur several yrs ago).

As far as "positions of need" go, the Steelers 'appear' to have addressed these.  Difficult to say, as I assume they are in a much better position to perceive their needs than I am.  It's all fine and good for Bob Pompeani to say that Jason Woriilds hasn't shown him anything but Pomp isn't who JW needs to show anything to.  The coaching staff & management are hired to do exactly that kind of evaluation, they spend lots of time on it &, overall, seem to be pretty good at it.  They're not in the habit of sharing those evaluations with the media so I guess Pomp has to muddle along as best he can.  I, for one, am more likely to side with Tomlin on the issue.

It's true they were an 8-8 tm last yr, but a .500 club that with a few breaks could have finished much better.  They didn't squeak to an 8-8, they dropped there.  They lost a lot of talent, but the talent they lost almost universally underperformed last season.  So most I see as no great loss at all.  It's all fine and good to point to the talent of Mike Wallace or Mendenhall or Harrison & say they've lost that but in fact they never had it in the 1st place.  Through a combined lack of health or effort or interest, that talent was largely unavailable to them last season.  If they replace them with players at a somewhat lower talent level who actually take the field and show up to play, they'll be better off right from the start.

For the coming season, at an absolute minimum, they've certainly upgraded the special tms & that's no bad thing.  At the max, they've picked up three potential 1st-yr starters & depth across the board.  At least until they take the field in September, we're not gonna be able to pinpoint just where in that range their draft class will fall.  And it could easily take a month or two longer than that.  For the future, we'll just have to wait n' see.  Pretty much business as usual there.

I guess if I had to put a letter grade on it, I'd give 'em a "B".  They addressed their apparent needs with good if not great talent.  But I wish I could've given them an "A" for Eifert (that's a pun, son)…