The 2023 - ??? Edmunds Report

[pigpen65]

1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I agree with a lot of your post and was always one who lent away from signing him long term. But he was not a "liability more often than not." And that statement is indicative of the hyperbole that always existed on both sides of the Edmunds debate and persists even post his departure. 

 

Tremaine and up and down first year, a good second year, a disappointing year 3 and 4 and a bounce back in year 5. He was more often than not a solid, effective middle linebacker. The knock on him for the most part was that he just never managed to make enough of the game altering plays that you want. And to pay a middle linebacker they can't just be "solid" they have to make a difference because it isn't a premium position. Edmunds was not a difference maker for the majority of his 5 seasons. That is different than being a liability. 

 

Liability is what you saw from Dodson and Klein in pre-season. It is what we feared we might be stuck with this season when, in actual fact, Bernard has got better each game and yesterday was a true difference maker. But even if Bernard had just got to "average" I'd rather have average on a 3rd rounder rookie deal than just a tick above on a $15m deal, let alone the $18m AAV that the Bears gave him. 

Edmunds ***** sucked. And it's not something that took advanced statistical analysis to see. A big run would go up the middle, you would watch the replay, and the reason the run went right up the middle was because Edmunds had been blown 10 yards deep into the defensive backfield by a TE or receiver. I never read the weekly Edmunds apology threads because I always assumed they were started by a PR firm Edmunds agent had paid for. Those threads were ridiculous 

[GunnerBill]

24 minutes ago, pigpen65 said:

Edmunds ***** sucked. And it's not something that took advanced statistical analysis to see. A big run would go up the middle, you would watch the replay, and the reason the run went right up the middle was because Edmunds had been blown 10 yards deep into the defensive backfield by a TE or receiver. I never read the weekly Edmunds apology threads because I always assumed they were started by a PR firm Edmunds agent had paid for. Those threads were ridiculous 

 

There were definitely run plays throughout his time here where he would shoot the wrong gap, run into blockers and generally make little impact on the play. No disputing that. But do you really think his overall play as a Bill "[expletive] sucked?"

 

What is your standard for sucking? Like do you think he was one of the worst starting MLBs in football or something? Because to me that is what sucking means. And he wasn't that. He was just what he was an average player who underwhelmed as a first round pick and got overpaid in free agency. 

 

I pushed back on the Edmunds excuse threads as well because they'd say stupid things like "his job wasn't to make those plays like Milano" or "you don't understand his role in the scheme." I did. And I do. The Bernard interception yesterday was a Tampa 2 deep drop that Tremaine was asked to do plenty here. We never saw him climb the ladder and come down with one like that despite hia wing span. But when people say he "sucked" or was a "liability" they are as guilty as the excuse makers of hyperbole.

Edited September 25, 2023 by GunnerBill

[GaryPinC]

7 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

There were definitely run plays throughout his time here where he would shoot the wrong gap, run into blockers and generally make little impact on the play. No disputing that. But do you really think his overall play as a Bill "[expletive] sucked?"

 

What is your standard for sucking? Like do you think he was one of the worst starting MLBs in football or something? Because to me that is what sucking means. And he wasn't that. He was just what he was an average player who underwhelmed as a first round pick and got overpaid in free agency. 

 

I pushed back on the Edmunds excuse threads as well because they'd say stupid things like "his job wasn't to make those plays like Milano" or "you don't understand his role in the scheme." I did. And I do. The Bernard interception yesterday was a Tampa 2 deep drop that Tremaine was asked to do plenty here. We never saw him climb the ladder and come down with one like that despite hia wing span. But when people say he "sucked" or was a "liability" they are as guilty as the excuse makers of hyperbole.

Edmunds sucks for two reasons:  1. He has little to no instincts for the game.2.  He'll put effort into making a play right in front of him, but mails it in otherwise.

 

Last year was a contract year and he put more effort into fighting through contact, getting to and making plays.  It was the only year I felt he was "average" at his position.

 

Having now gotten paid, he's reverted to baseline, allowing blockers to easily push him backwards, loping along the fringes of the ballcarrier when other teammates are closer.  Jumping in on a tackle already being made.  Continued poor instincts about where the ball is going.

 

He lacks the appetite for aggression and violence that is especially crucial at his position.

 

Those of us who played the game know it makes him a liability on the field.  The fact that he's gone to two pro bowls makes it even more vexing.  

 

Chicago believed the hype.  No excuses for them.

[GunnerBill]

7 minutes ago, GaryPinC said:

Edmunds sucks for two reasons:  1. He has little to no instincts for the game.2.  He'll put effort into making a play right in front of him, but mails it in otherwise.

 

Last year was a contract year and he put more effort into fighting through contact, getting to and making plays.  It was the only year I felt he was "average" at his position.

 

Having now gotten paid, he's reverted to baseline, allowing blockers to easily push him backwards, loping along the fringes of the ballcarrier when other teammates are closer.  Jumping in on a tackle already being made.  Continued poor instincts about where the ball is going.

 

He lacks the appetite for aggression and violence that is especially crucial at his position.

 

Those of us who played the game know it makes him a liability on the field.  The fact that he's gone to two pro bowls makes it even more vexing.  

 

Chicago believed the hype.  No excuses for them.

 

Again.... liability according to what standard? It is certainly not compared to the average NFL standard. 

 

I'm sorry he was never a liability and he never sucked. Roger Saffold last year was a liability who sucked. If you want to say Edmunds was a JAG... fair enough. If you want to say he never lived up to his draft status - I agree. If you want to say he was never worth what Chicago gave him - I agree. If you were arguing for the Bills to let him walk - so was I. 

 

But "sucks" and "liability" I'm sorry they are not accurate statements.

[Since1981]

Bears had the tapes. Is NOT Urlacker. Edmunds MLB never had big plays. As MLB his pure field location should have driven big plays

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

5 hours ago, syhuang said:

 

this is really alarming. I think his strength was zone coverage. His weaknesses really related to run D. That he laid this sort of egg has to be a bad sign for chicago.

[Since1981]

In many ways Edmunds was lucky to have Milano. I’m not sure I’ve ever heard the man speak. Milano is quintessential quiet LB, does his job type. 

[Chaos]

The really remarkable thing is that the bears traded away Roquan Smith

[colin]

i made excuses for him because i saw him with big potential and making plays here and there.  the issue is he never made BERNARD level plays, and he also sucks enough of the time vs good teams to be a liability.

 

he can be tricked and good qbs do that and target him.  that happened to him in his first few games as a bill, he was the biggest hole on the pitch.  he cleaned it up, but reverts to just no knowing how to play way too often.

[eball]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

But when people say he "sucked" or was a "liability" they are as guilty as the excuse makers of hyperbole.

 

Welcome to Two Bills Drive and The Stadium Wall!  Pull up a seat and take a load off!

 

[balln]

It’s just so simple.

edmunds didn’t make plays. Forget about impact plays. That’s it. Now Bernard in 3 games has made more impact plays than edmunds entire career. 

 

if you apologists are straining to explain his value in nebulous terms ….. age , wingspan , his range , “taking away the middle”

lmao

[Doc]

The Bears made the decision (easy) for the Bills to look to upgrade the MLB position.  Keeping TE would have been spinning wheels and his contract would have been an anchor.

[Chaos]

44 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Again.... liability according to what standard? It is certainly not compared to the average NFL standard. 

 

I'm sorry he was never a liability and he never sucked. Roger Saffold last year was a liability who sucked. If you want to say Edmunds was a JAG... fair enough. If you want to say he never lived up to his draft status - I agree. If you want to say he was never worth what Chicago gave him - I agree. If you were arguing for the Bills to let him walk - so was I. 

 

But "sucks" and "liability" I'm sorry they are not accurate statements.

While Edmunds may not have been a liabilty in general, I have no memories of him stepping up in a clutch situation.  

General Patton is credited with the quote "Lead, follow, or get out of the way".  

I think it is possible Edmunds was "in the way" of the defense reaching its potential.  It may have been Leslie Frazier's play calling. 

[GunnerBill]

11 minutes ago, Chaos said:

While Edmunds may not have been a liabilty in general, I have no memories of him stepping up in a clutch situation.  

General Patton is credited with the quote "Lead, follow, or get out of the way".  

I think it is possible Edmunds was "in the way" of the defense reaching its potential.  It may have been Leslie Frazier's play calling. 

 

The bolded is fair. And I agree. But not stepping up in the clutch does not equal liability. That is my entire point. 

 

And if Edmunds and / or Frazier were in the way they did a hell of a job to keep being a top 10 defense year in year out.

[starrymessenger]

30 minutes ago, Chaos said:

The really remarkable thing is that the bears traded away Roquan Smith

And what's worse is that Bears wouldn't have had to top up what they paid Tremaine very much to meet Smith's demands. The contracts are similar. The players are not. Look what Smith has done for Raven's D. If I were a Bears fan I'd be livid.

[stosh64]

Chicago fans are starting to catch on...

Bears Message Board

 

Quote

Is it me or Edmunds always out of position? Hell, the whole defense is. Haha

Quote

Edmunds missing tackles now. Fitting right in

Quote

Can we stunt these over priced LB’s?!?

Quote

WestsideResider said:

Edmunds missing tackles now. Fitting right in

He was fools gold and they bought it.

Quote

Edmunds missing tackles now. Fitting right in

Huge step down from roquan. Can’t believe they spent the money on him.

Quote

Is it me or Edmunds always out of position? Hell, the whole defense is. Haha

The LB’s are bad

 

[Irv]

Edmunds oversized safety.  Ball of suck.  Glad he's gone.  

[Chaos]

20 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

The bolded is fair. And I agree. But not stepping up in the clutch does not equal liability. That is my entire point. 

 

And if Edmunds and / or Frazier were in the way they did a hell of a job to keep being a top 10 defense year in year out.

So you think the defense reached its full potential?

[GaryPinC]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Again.... liability according to what standard? It is certainly not compared to the average NFL standard. 

 

I'm sorry he was never a liability and he never sucked. Roger Saffold last year was a liability who sucked. If you want to say Edmunds was a JAG... fair enough. If you want to say he never lived up to his draft status - I agree. If you want to say he was never worth what Chicago gave him - I agree. If you were arguing for the Bills to let him walk - so was I. 

 

But "sucks" and "liability" I'm sorry they are not accurate statements.

I'm sorry, let me clarify.  I am not saying that Edmunds is a complete liability out there, in agreement with your arguments.  He will make most of the basic plays he is responsible for or he wouldn't be in the league.

 

His lack of instincts frequently results in him making poor decisions either putting him in the wrong spot for the play being run or taking bad angles.  His frequent unwillingness to attack the ball carrier away from his primary responsibilities is another one.   I've never seen him fight through or even put up much resistance to a second level block on him, only at the line of scrimmage.  All of these things make him a liability that his teammates have to account for.

 

Given his draft position and physical attributes, this is why I say he sucks.  He could and should be much better but IMO he doesn't have the heart for it.  He did a bit better last year when a big fat contract was riding on it but he's returned to baseline.

[FireChans]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

There were definitely run plays throughout his time here where he would shoot the wrong gap, run into blockers and generally make little impact on the play. No disputing that. But do you really think his overall play as a Bill "[expletive] sucked?"

 

What is your standard for sucking? Like do you think he was one of the worst starting MLBs in football or something? Because to me that is what sucking means. And he wasn't that. He was just what he was an average player who underwhelmed as a first round pick and got overpaid in free agency. 

 

I pushed back on the Edmunds excuse threads as well because they'd say stupid things like "his job wasn't to make those plays like Milano" or "you don't understand his role in the scheme." I did. And I do. The Bernard interception yesterday was a Tampa 2 deep drop that Tremaine was asked to do plenty here. We never saw him climb the ladder and come down with one like that despite hia wing span. But when people say he "sucked" or was a "liability" they are as guilty as the excuse makers of hyperbole.

But isn't that the point. If you are incapable of making splash plays in coverage.... what are you even doing in coverage?  You aren't really a deterrent.