PDA

View Full Version : Bush hype........


TexansJunkE
01-18-2006, 02:47 PM
Just was thinking about this on the way home. I hear and agree Bush is a great talent, but there are questions about his durability in the NFL. What if we were to trade down and get Brick later in the draft and milk the draft system for everything it is worth, 2nd this year and a 1st next year and go after a certain OU running back by the name of Peterson (should have gone to Texas) Now if anyone resembles the legendary Earl #34 it is that kid. He can certaining be a top NFL RB. :twocents:

swtbound07
01-18-2006, 02:55 PM
Just was thinking about this on the way home. I hear and agree Bush is a great talent, but there are questions about his durability in the NFL. What if we were to trade down and get Brick later in the draft and milk the draft system for everything it is worth, 2nd this year and a 1st next year and go after a certain OU running back by the name of Peterson (should have gone to Texas) Now if anyone resembles the legendary Earl #34 it is that kid. He can certaining be a top NFL RB. :twocents:


thread number 5,323,343,779,453 on this subject....please take your number sir and try again later

A Texan
01-18-2006, 03:00 PM
what it really comes down to is the Texans don't need a running back. They go three deep in good ones. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Big B Texan Fan
01-18-2006, 03:07 PM
I say if there is any trading going on it's with us and the saints.
Pure crystal ball stuff here (sorry jerek, you may wanna close your eyes).
Saints fall in love with bush and want him to become the new face of the franchise as they want to move and since SA is out of the question the owner will eventually succumb to the NFL and move to LA by the 08' season.
They fear with all the talk by us of taking him #1 (smokescreen finally worx 4 us) so they offer up a player (Stallworth maybe, or maybe a DE) and their rd2 pick.
We still get Young and we traded down and we only hurt the bush lovers . The trade down guys are a little happy (very little), the Young guys are very happy.
That leaves us with 2 rd2 pix 2 rd3 pix and Young. We can address OL TE DE OL again. Not in that particular order either.

OK jerek, you can look now.

MorKnolle
01-18-2006, 03:32 PM
I say if there is any trading going on it's with us and the saints.
Pure crystal ball stuff here (sorry jerek, you may wanna close your eyes).
Saints fall in love with bush and want him to become the new face of the franchise as they want to move and since SA is out of the question the owner will eventually succumb to the NFL and move to LA by the 08' season.
They fear with all the talk by us of taking him #1 (smokescreen finally worx 4 us) so they offer up a player (Stallworth maybe, or maybe a DE) and their rd2 pick.
We still get Young and we traded down and we only hurt the bush lovers . The trade down guys are a little happy (very little), the Young guys are very happy.
That leaves us with 2 rd2 pix 2 rd3 pix and Young. We can address OL TE DE OL again. Not in that particular order either.

OK jerek, you can look now.

Interesting idea but I don't see the Saints suddenly deciding to keep Aaron Brooks and replace Deuce McAllister rather than keeping their stud RB and getting rid of the QB that they're displeased with. However, I agree with an earlier post that if we are going to get a RB, it would be nice to trade down and acquire an extra 1st rounder next year and grab Adrian Peterson.

Xman
01-18-2006, 03:34 PM
IF we take that approach (playing for Peterson) - then we should also:
-trade #1 for a much as we can get
-trade for future picks (trades like -#33 and a future 3rd for a future 1st)
-trade what little talent we have for future picks
(Dunta for . . . , AJ for . . . ., sadly that is about all we have that will bring future firsts)
-draft a couple of OL in the third (we could trade them for future picks but we need OL to protect Peterson when he gets here right)

We COULD end up with as many as 10 (or more) first round picks next year (#1 could equal 5 or six through trades, AJ could be 3 and Dunta could be 2), but I doubt we do it.

I don't think the owners could do that with a straight face.

The funny thing will be is fi we take Bush - and then we end up having a chance at Peterson (which I doubt, I think SF has the worst record locked up for a couple of years - no playmakers and no D).

Long-Spurs-Texan
01-18-2006, 04:29 PM
I say if there is any trading going on it's with us and the saints.
Pure crystal ball stuff here (sorry jerek, you may wanna close your eyes).
Saints fall in love with bush and want him to become the new face of the franchise as they want to move and since SA is out of the question the owner will eventually succumb to the NFL and move to LA by the 08' season.
They fear with all the talk by us of taking him #1 (smokescreen finally worx 4 us) so they offer up a player (Stallworth maybe, or maybe a DE) and their rd2 pick.
We still get Young and we traded down and we only hurt the bush lovers . The trade down guys are a little happy (very little), the Young guys are very happy.
That leaves us with 2 rd2 pix 2 rd3 pix and Young. We can address OL TE DE OL again. Not in that particular order either.

OK jerek, you can look now.

Better yet, the saints make a trade with us. We get the #2 & Deuce McAllister, they get Carr & the #1. We draft VY, and have Deuce & DD in the stable.

MorKnolle
01-18-2006, 04:36 PM
Better yet, the saints make a trade with us. We get the #2 & Deuce McAllister, they get Carr & the #1. We draft VY, and have Deuce & DD in the stable.

This thread has quickly gotten out of control. For what it's worth, I would prefer David Carr and Reggie Bush over Vince Young and Deuce McAllister.

Long-Spurs-Texan
01-18-2006, 04:52 PM
Adrian Peterson will be one of the top 3 picks next year. HOPEFULLY, we will not be in a position to take any of these top 5's if we play our cards right this draft. I see it next year as;

#1 - Brady Quinn - ND QB
#2 - Adrian Peterson - OU RB
#3 - Tedd Ginn Jr. - Ohio State WR
#4 - Paul Posluszny - Penn State LB
#5 - Dwayne Jarrett - USC WR

Big B Texan Fan
01-18-2006, 04:52 PM
Interesting idea but I don't see the Saints suddenly deciding to keep Aaron Brooks and replace Deuce McAllister rather than keeping their stud RB and getting rid of the QB that they're displeased with. However, I agree with an earlier post that if we are going to get a RB, it would be nice to trade down and acquire an extra 1st rounder next year and grab Adrian Peterson.
That is what all the carr lovers want to do. Keep the marginal QB yet replace the good RB

txlonghorn14
01-18-2006, 05:04 PM
what it really comes down to is the Texans don't need a running back. They go three deep in good ones. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

damn right. domanick davis will do just fine. reggie is gonna get shalacked in the NFL. :bomb:

Xman
01-18-2006, 05:28 PM
Standard post for all "forget Bush, DD is the man" threads.

Reasons DD is not a solid #1 RB:
1. DD is injury prone.
2. DD has 4 100 rushing games every year. I realize his YPG is high, but we need a RUNNING back. We need someone who can get more 100 yard games and help control the clock. Portis had 9 100 yard games this year which is the reason Washington is in the playoffs (and he can pass block - but he sucks for fantasy because he doesn't score)
3. DD is injury prone.
4. We need a RB that can pass block, which DD can't. If he could block better, Carr would have had a lot more time to throw to WRs instead of dumping off to DD. Side effect: As our OL improves, we should throw more to WRs and less to RBs, which means DD value will decrease
5. DD is injury prone.
6. DD does not break long runs. Even when DD gets a big hole, he gets caught. We need a RB that is threat to take it to the house if he breaks through the line. DD had 2 games this year where he had 44 yard runs, and didn't score (note that both of these games were against Tenn who was terrible this year). His next longest run was 29 yards, and didn't score (against Balt). After that his longest rushing gains per game were: 19, 18, 15, 13, 12, 11, 7, and 6 (nad his previous years are similar). His longest pass catches were 30 and 33 yards. He just isn't fast.
7. DD is injury prone.
8. DD does not score rushing TDs. He had 2 rushing tds all year. Arguably this is an anomaly for this year, or it could be a trend.
9. Did I mention DD is injury prone?

Untrue Bush comparisons:
(I think everyone admits he is fast(4.28 40), can catch and has awesome juke moves - I taped his games against UT and UCLA and watched some of his runs in slow motion, the only thing I could say is WOW) (before watching those games I was in the "trade the pick" category, as I have been since year one)
1. He can't pass block: The dude is a great blocker - as other posters have attested to.
2. He is too small and weak to go inside: He benches over 400 pounds, is 6 foot and 205 pounds (Terrell davis size).
According to CBS: Alexander is 5'11 and 220; LJ is 6'1 and 230; LT is 5'10 and 220; Tiki is 5'10 and 200; EJames is 6' and 215. So, it's not his size or strength that is the problem (Carroll played to the strength of each of his stud RBs - Bush's speed and White's size - but that doesn't mean Bush can't get his inside - watch the UCLA game film for proof). Also, like most RBs, he will add about 20 pounds of bulk over the next two years.
3. He is too . . . . err... that's about it.

DD's limitations aside, I have no problem keeping DD, as a complement to Bush. If we can't get anything for him, keep him (and trade Morency for a 4th or keep him too). It would be nice to have depth and strength at a position (especially RB due to the higher injury % for RBs).

JDizzle
01-18-2006, 05:32 PM
Adrian Peterson will be one of the top 3 picks next year. HOPEFULLY, we will not be in a position to take any of these top 5's if we play our cards right this draft. I see it next year as;

#1 - Brady Quinn - ND QB
#2 - Adrian Peterson - OU RB
#3 - Tedd Ginn Jr. - Ohio State WR
#4 - Paul Posluszny - Penn State LB
#5 - Dwayne Jarrett - USC WR

#1 Troy Smith
#2 Adrian Peterson
#3 Brady Quinn
#4 Dewayne Jarrett
#5 Teddy Ginn

:P

IMO Jarrett would be the best receiver this year if he were able to declare. He's like a faster Mike Williams.

Big B Texan Fan
01-18-2006, 05:39 PM
has awesome juke moves - I taped his games against UT and UCLA and watched some of his runs in slow motion, the only thing I could say is WOW)
Did you slow-mo the portion of the game where he was on the sideline while white was the feature back. While white carried the running game on his back. Was his attempted lateral legal or was it illegal, not that it matters, he pissed away a scoring opportunity for his team. Slow-mo catches everything.

Xman
01-18-2006, 06:02 PM
Did you slow-mo the portion of the game where he was on the sideline while white was the feature back. While white carried the running game on his back. Was his attempted lateral legal or was it illegal, not that it matters, he pissed away a scoring opportunity for his team. Slow-mo catches everything.

So, one mistake and he sucks. Well, DD fumbled a couple of years ago, we should have cut him then?

I gotta admit that White had a great game (Lutui was clearing huge holes). He might even be a good NFL running back. But, that doesn't change the fact that Bush could be great - SPEED KILLS.

Also, it wasn't that Bush had a bad game, Carroll just stuck with White because he was abusing the Texas D (USC scored on 5 straight possession before the last 2 to end the game).
BUT, I bet he wishes he had switched it up a little on that key second to last possession when White DIDN'T get that yardage and even fumbled once:

1st-10, USC34 3:58 L. White rushed up the middle for 3 yard gain
2nd-7, USC37 3:16 M. Leinart passed to D. Jarrett to the right for 10 yard gain
1st-10, USC47 3:08 L. White rushed to the right for 3 yard gain
2nd-7, 50 2:26 M. Leinart incomplete pass to the left
3rd-7, 50 2:22 L. White rushed up the middle for 5 yard gain. L. White fumbled. S. Smith recovered fumble
4th-2, TEX45 2:13 L. White rushed up the middle for 1 yard gain

MorKnolle
01-18-2006, 06:27 PM
That is what all the carr lovers want to do. Keep the marginal QB yet replace the good RB

Carr is better than Aaron Brooks. Domanick Davis is not as good as Deuce McAllister. Reggie Bush would give our offense another playmaker and that "homerun threat" as people like to call it. He could bring some very enticing new things to our offense. That said, I am not in the Reggie Bush camp, my personal preference would be to trade down, but I can understand the point of adding Reggie Bush to our team much more so than bringing Vince Young to the team.

Big B Texan Fan
01-18-2006, 06:45 PM
Carr is better than Aaron Brooks. Domanick Davis is not as good as Deuce McAllister. Reggie Bush would give our offense another playmaker and that "homerun threat" as people like to call it. He could bring some very enticing new things to our offense. That said, I am not in the Reggie Bush camp, my personal preference would be to trade down, but I can understand the point of adding Reggie Bush to our team much more so than bringing Vince Young to the team.
Carr v Brooks. I'm not gonna touch that one.
DD v Duece. I'm with that.

People just think that we've got a good team and all we need is bush and were a playoff contending team.
Wrong answer.
We need a change at QB, not a tweakin' with our current QB
Look, why change everything that you would normally change when you go 2-14 if you're gonna keep the QB who is spiralling downward that Weinke path.

MorKnolle
01-18-2006, 06:51 PM
Carr v Brooks. I'm not gonna touch that one.
DD v Duece. I'm with that.

People just think that we've got a good team and all we need is bush and were a playoff contending team.
Wrong answer.
We need a change at QB, not a tweakin' with our current QB
Look, why change everything that you would normally change when you go 2-14 if you're gonna keep the QB who is spiralling downward that Weinke path.

I don't think Bush is going to magically come in and change our team, but I don't think Vince is either. I think Bush has the ability to make more of an immediate impact than Vince. Like I said, I think the best thing for this team is to trade down, and I don't agree that either Vince or Bush is the one and only solution that will change everything. I do not think we need to change our current QB, but that's my opinion and you obviously think we do need to change it. I also like the fact that Bush can come in and add to our talent core that we've accumulated (granted it is small, but we do have some good players and I count David Carr with that group), whereas Vince will require taking a piece out of what we've established.

nunusguy
01-18-2006, 07:19 PM
what it really comes down to is the Texans don't need a running back. They go three deep in good ones. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Portland didn't need a shooting guard either.

CITY CAT
01-18-2006, 10:07 PM
If you have Gary Kubiak as your head coach, you need many different RBs. Bush and Davis will by far be the best he has ever had to work with.

LORK 88
01-18-2006, 10:56 PM
Portland didn't need a shooting guard either.

This isnt basketball either!

If you have Gary Kubiak as your head coach, you need many different RBs. Bush and Davis will by far be the best he has ever had to work with.

Considering what Kubiak and that running game has done to RBs at Denver and how well everyone has done in that system. Hell, RON DAYNE had afew big games! Why should we draft Bush instead of letting Kubiak work his magic with our big 3 (Morency, Davis, Wells)?

Texans_Chick
01-18-2006, 11:16 PM
This isnt basketball either!

It is quite possible to make comparisons to other sports that do make sense.

Drafting for need versus best player available, especially up high in the draft, is oft a mistake.

The Portland example is just one of the most infamous examples of that point of view.

beerlover
01-18-2006, 11:35 PM
It is quite possible to make comparisons to other sports that do make sense.

Drafting for need versus best player available, especially up high in the draft, is oft a mistake.

The Portland example is just one of the most infamous examples of that point of view.

As far as I know you can blame me. Its been a couple of months but news on these boards does travel fast or maybe its just that other people see the similarties. Having lived through that debacle I can only give testamont to the fact Portland was NEVER ABLE TO RECOVER & STILL TO THIS DATE CANNOT GET OVER IT. you all know that Beaverton is a suburb of Portland & that it happens to be NIKE headquaters. The first Nike store was downtown, people would travel both near and far to visit Nike Town & there was no hotter more esteemed valued garments than those of MJ. take it for what its worth, regardless of sport, a playmaker is a playmaker and a champion is a champion.......:superman:

Spoda
01-19-2006, 07:34 AM
Adrian Peterson will be one of the top 3 picks next year. HOPEFULLY, we will not be in a position to take any of these top 5's if we play our cards right this draft. I see it next year as;

#1 - Brady Quinn - ND QB
#2 - Adrian Peterson - OU RB
#3 - Tedd Ginn Jr. - Ohio State WR
#4 - Paul Posluszny - Penn State LB
#5 - Dwayne Jarrett - USC WR

isn't there some stud WR from GA tech or wake forest?? i think he will go in the top 5...he is supposed to be amazing

Glacier
01-19-2006, 08:24 AM
Bush and Davis will by far be the best he has ever had to work with.

Thats a mighty bold statement considering he coached up Terrell Davis. Bush hasn't even taken an NFL snap yet, has not even survived his first training camp, and you are putting ahead of TD????

Do you not REMEMBER watching Terrel Davis and having the feeling that as long as he was healthy, he was the most dominating runner you had ever seen? During his prime, he was as good as anyone who has played the game. The 2000 yard season is proof, considering only Jamal Lewis, Barry Sanders, OJ Simpson and Eric Dickerson are in the 2000 yard club with Terrell Davis.

See, this is the type of hype I am quite sick of hearing about Reggie Bush. We had to hear all year long about how USC was the greatest team ever. Had to hear all about Bush/Whinart and the unstopple machine that USC was. Then we got to see the clueless media based heisman voters and their propoganda machine award the Heisman to the wrong player. To add FURTHER insult to it all, no one gave Texas a chance to win that game.

Even post Goliath stomping, the effects of the media blitz are still lingering in the minds of people......

Long-Spurs-Texan
01-19-2006, 08:43 AM
What made Terell Davis so good was a mixture of things.

#1 - He was a STUD, as well as a disciplined "1 move" downhill runner
#2 - Denvers Zone Blocking scheme was brand new & unknown to D's.
#3 - Intelligent, quick O-Linemen that would chop block your @$$.
#4 - Hall of fame QB in Elway.
#5 - Shannon Sharpe, Ed McAffrey, & Rod Smith in single coverage.
#6 - D's couldn't load the box on Denver, too many weapons.
#7 - Mile high altitude.

jerek
01-19-2006, 09:24 AM
I say if there is any trading going on it's with us and the saints.
Pure crystal ball stuff here (sorry jerek, you may wanna close your eyes).
Saints fall in love with bush and want him to become the new face of the franchise as they want to move and since SA is out of the question the owner will eventually succumb to the NFL and move to LA by the 08' season.
They fear with all the talk by us of taking him #1 (smokescreen finally worx 4 us) so they offer up a player (Stallworth maybe, or maybe a DE) and their rd2 pick.
We still get Young and we traded down and we only hurt the bush lovers . The trade down guys are a little happy (very little), the Young guys are very happy.
That leaves us with 2 rd2 pix 2 rd3 pix and Young. We can address OL TE DE OL again. Not in that particular order either.

OK jerek, you can look now.

Hahahaha. Dude. Funny stuff, but on a serious note, I'm not sure I see the Saints as drafting Bush, they will be much more inclined to look for a QB, either your boy Vince or I would speculate, more likely Leinart, as Leinart has generally been considered the more immediately NFL-ready QB.

Besides, if we are going to take Vince or Bush, we got to do it with the first pick. Generally by draft day, teams know exactly who they are going to draft as far as the top 3-4 go, and at that point there is very little that is secret about it amongst the NFL and team management.

Still, if Vince is your guy, you have to realize that you are risking a hell of a lot by trading down even 1 or 2 spots, especially if you are dealing with a team like the Saints who will almost certainly be looking to draft rights to a QB this time around.

You gave your take, there is mine.

What made Terell Davis so good was a mixture of things.

#1 - He was a STUD, as well as a disciplined "1 move" downhill runner
#2 - Denvers Zone Blocking scheme was brand new & unknown to D's.
#3 - Intelligent, quick O-Linemen that would chop block your @$$.
#4 - Hall of fame QB in Elway.
#5 - Shannon Sharpe, Ed McAffrey, & Rod Smith in single coverage.
#6 - D's couldn't load the box on Denver, too many weapons.
#7 - Mile high altitude.

All very true

jerek
01-19-2006, 09:33 AM
It is quite possible to make comparisons to other sports that do make sense.

Drafting for need versus best player available, especially up high in the draft, is oft a mistake.

The Portland example is just one of the most infamous examples of that point of view.

The comparisons are not as relevant because basketball is a 5-man game as opposed to a 22-man game. In basketball, if you have two stud SFs, you can play one of them at the PF or the SG, keep both on the floor for a good deal of the game. Tim Duncan and David Robinson were both post players, but the Spurs could play both and not skip a beat.

Positions in basketball are very interchangable: much less so in football. The BPA argument is less relevant because you can't play two quarterbacks. In many systems and with many players, you cannot dual wield two RBs. If you have three stud DEs then it doesn't make much sense to draft a fourth and deal with the cap implications of getting rid of another.

BPA is a valid argument, but it is not the same as it is in the game of basketball, and I think people are making too big a deal out of it, much less with the Michael Jordan comparisons. In basketball, everyone on the court is concerned with scoring, rebounding, and defense. There is a very strong team component, but it is much less than exists in football. Positions are specialized and are coached to do very specific things. If one of your components (blocking, pass rush, coverage, etc.) is out of whack, then your entire team suffers. In basketball, a bad defender or weak ball handler is easy to hide. Not so in football.

When Mike came out of college, he was just an exciting kid with sick athleticism and an attitude. Even when he lead the league in scoring, it took him many years to establish himself as the best all time. Nobody was talking about MJ being one of the very greatest when he declared at UNC. It is easy to look back and say, well of course Portland was stupid, but history is equally full of "BPA's" that went on to do nothing of lasting consequence for the team that drafted them.

Do you really want me to name names?

MorKnolle
01-19-2006, 11:02 AM
As far as I know you can blame me. Its been a couple of months but news on these boards does travel fast or maybe its just that other people see the similarties. Having lived through that debacle I can only give testamont to the fact Portland was NEVER ABLE TO RECOVER & STILL TO THIS DATE CANNOT GET OVER IT. you all know that Beaverton is a suburb of Portland & that it happens to be NIKE headquaters. The first Nike store was downtown, people would travel both near and far to visit Nike Town & there was no hotter more esteemed valued garments than those of MJ. take it for what its worth, regardless of sport, a playmaker is a playmaker and a champion is a champion.......:superman:

First, Jerek is right, the basketball comparisons aren't great because in basketball everyone on the floor has to do basically the same things, and players are much more interchangeable at different positions, and as he said if you have a stockpile of studs at one position you don't just keep drafting at that position because a guy is the "BPA" (look at Detroit the last three years). Back to the NBA though, Portland was quite successful for a long time, they had the longest streak of consecutive playoff appearances for a while in the NBA, at least 19-20 straight years of making the playoffs, they made two NBA Finals during that time and would have made a few more had it not been for the Lakers in the waning years of Showtime and Magic Johnson in the late 1980s, early 1990s, and they were still a strong team thru 2000 when they took the Lakers to game 7 in the Western Finals, after that they kind of split apart and became the team of bad attitudes and rejects (the Raiders of the NBA). They got over not drafting MJ and I don't know how MJ and Drexler would have fit on a team together. Look at what happened to the Lakers a couple years ago when they tried to buy themselves a championship by bringing together four future Hall of Famers in Shaq, Kobe, Karl Malone, and Gary Payton, they brought together the best players available and got beat out in the NBA Finals by Detroit, who is one of the prime examples in all of professional sports of a complete team made up of people that are far from the best at their position but they understand their roles, play together as a team, play to their system of disciplined, boring offense and solid defense, and win games. They won a championship and almost won a second against another great example of a complete team in the San Antonio Spurs.

TexansJunkE
01-20-2006, 12:41 PM
Quit saying we are set at RB. We are not set at anything at this point and time. DD is a good 2 back in a 2 back rotation. We are know in a position to not only help us this year, but the drafts ahead of this one. We must trade down and get that LT for the future otherwise we will be talking about this every year. Look at the A-CARDINALS, they always drafted for the hot player rather than making a plan and building from it. We've been talking about that LT for years and now we have the chance to draft one and now people are going for the hot player. We must build for the future instead of the present. I don't care who you have running the ball or calling the plays in the huddle, without an O-line it won't matter. Did anyone see how DC like Peyton looked this past weekend. VY or RB will not solve that. Scott or brick with some help in the later rounds is the only thing that could help that. I too got caught up in the Bush or Young talk for a moment, but when the whirlwind stops you must regain your senses and ask yourself "what got us here?" O-LINE!

tulexan
01-20-2006, 12:44 PM
But you will be able to get a very good OL in the 2nd round.

TexansJunkE
01-20-2006, 01:06 PM
there will be ol in the later rounds

BigBull17
01-20-2006, 01:16 PM
I agree we are NOT set at RB. DD gets hurt with too many nagging injuries. Hes not fast enough to be speed back and isnt tough enough to be a pound it back. Not saying we have to get Bush but im not sold on Brick either. He has issues size that make you doubt he will be the Pace type LT. AJ Hawk doesnt strike me as that take over a game LB you want to get in the top 5. I think we have 2 options: 1 take Bush 2. Trade the pick to the Jets and try to get Arbaham and then select Mario Williams and make a D line to be feared. But just my :twocents:

MorKnolle
01-20-2006, 01:46 PM
I agree we are NOT set at RB. DD gets hurt with too many nagging injuries. Hes not fast enough to be speed back and isnt tough enough to be a pound it back. Not saying we have to get Bush but im not sold on Brick either. He has issues size that make you doubt he will be the Pace type LT. AJ Hawk doesnt strike me as that take over a game LB you want to get in the top 5. I think we have 2 options: 1 take Bush 2. Trade the pick to the Jets and try to get Arbaham and then select Mario Williams and make a D line to be feared. But just my :twocents:

I agree, I think those are probably our two best options (obviously other possibilities arise in a trade down scenario, but this is one of the better ones), and I agree with your assessment on most of the prospects you mentioned, although I think our RB group is pretty solid and definitely functional at this moment if we'd actually give Domanick a rest every now and then.

BigBull17
01-20-2006, 02:12 PM
It is serviceable and who knows Kub's style may prevent wear and tear on the RB's but To say we are rock solid at RB is a bit of a streach. I really like the way Wells has improved over the years but he leaves ?'s. I think we need to get a decent FA who may run cheap, like a Ron Dayne, and get the power back we have been missing.

swtbound07
01-20-2006, 02:14 PM
It is serviceable and who knows Kub's style may prevent wear and tear on the RB's but To say we are rock solid at RB is a bit of a streach. I really like the way Wells has improved over the years but he leaves ?'s. I think we need to get a decent FA who may run cheap, like a Ron Dayne, and get the power back we have been missing.


rock solid? Maybe not....4 first day picks? yep
Davis - starter, occasionally prone to injury, good for 1000 rushing and 400 recieving
Wells- Solid spot starter, functions well, good backup for if davis goes down
Hollings- Unproven, maybe coaching can salvage him?
Morency- rookie year last year, give him time before grading

BigBull17
01-20-2006, 02:21 PM
Im not saying they arent decent but we dont have that Rb that people fear. In a rotation they may work but to hear people say we are lock down set at RB is a streach. We dont have that guy who defenses are scarred of.

Errant Hothy
01-20-2006, 02:22 PM
Did you slow-mo the portion of the game where he was on the sideline while white was the feature back. While white carried the running game on his back. Was his attempted lateral legal or was it illegal, not that it matters, he pissed away a scoring opportunity for his team. Slow-mo catches everything.

Dude, you sound like a broken record. Yes Bush's lateral was stupid, but..wait for it...wait...just a little longer..SO WAS VINCE-JESUS-YOUNG'S. VY's lateral was just as stupid, just as illiegal, actually more illegal as he was clearly down, to bad or thankfully for the VY fanboy club) the rplay booth f'ed it up royal. As you say "slow-mo cathces everything."

I'm beginning to think the only view you have on Bush is lateral play and teh fact that his dumb-*** coach didn't use him in the most critical play of USC's season.

I'd like to hear your opinion on Bush from before the Rose Bowl, espically now that several posters have tried to dispell some of the myths about Reggie that this place has produced.

Errant Hothy
01-20-2006, 02:25 PM
It is quite possible to make comparisons to other sports that do make sense.

Drafting for need versus best player available, especially up high in the draft, is oft a mistake.

The Portland example is just one of the most infamous examples of that point of view.

Yeah and the Rockets took Hakeem over MJ, how'd that turn out?

You cannot draft solely based on BPA, nor can you draft purly on need. Neither theory works.

thunderkyss
01-20-2006, 02:26 PM
Carr is better than Aaron Brooks. Domanick Davis is not as good as Deuce McAllister. Reggie Bush would give our offense another playmaker and that "homerun threat" as people like to call it. He could bring some very enticing new things to our offense. That said, I am not in the Reggie Bush camp, my personal preference would be to trade down, but I can understand the point of adding Reggie Bush to our team much more so than bringing Vince Young to the team.

And what makes you think Carr is better than Brooks?? You put a good Offensive line in front of Brooks, and he will look like a ProBowler. Keep his Offensive line healthy, and playing well, and he'll hurt you. I don't think his situation is much different than Carr's. But while Carr breaks and runs too early Aaron sits in the pocket too long... from that point on, it's one bad decision after another. His completion percentage is down compared to Carr's, because he actually does throw the ball away quite a bit.

Duece & DD....... pleeeeesssseee. Domanick's going to play 16 games in 2006. In McAllisters five year carreer, he only did that once. DD will have more total rushiing yards after five years than Duece, if he keeps doing what he's doing now for the next two years.... Watching them run, I don't get the idea that DD is any slower.... they both look pretty slow to me. But I don't want a running back who can beat every body to the endzone. I want the guy who'll get me a first down when I need it....... That's why we run the ball. to open the passing game, and to eat up the clock.

Errant Hothy
01-20-2006, 02:34 PM
Domanick's going to play 16 games in 2006.

Please, oh great Carnack; tell me what leads you to beleive this. Becasue I'mpretty sure DD has yet to play a full season.

thunderkyss
01-20-2006, 02:35 PM
It is serviceable and who knows Kub's style may prevent wear and tear on the RB's but To say we are rock solid at RB is a bit of a streach. I really like the way Wells has improved over the years but he leaves ?'s. I think we need to get a decent FA who may run cheap, like a Ron Dayne, and get the power back we have been missing.


Ricky Williams couldn't find a whole in Neworleans to run through. But his numbers weren't really bad.... not as good as DDs. He was also getting hurt, just like DD, Just like Duece. Then when he went to Miami, where those guys were a little better than your average runblockers(Houston, New Orleans). He broke'em off somt'n. He didn't get hurt.... No one was calling him a bust anymore.... well, that was a drug bust, but that's totally different.

My point....... When you see Defensive Backs beatting up on DD and Johnathan Wells, don't say that we were a good run blocking team. Behind Good run blocking, your running back doesn't even know there are Defensive linemen on the field, because he never sees them. One linebacker, a safety and a corner, that's it. the rest of the team takes care of the rest.

thunderkyss
01-20-2006, 02:36 PM
Please, oh great Carnack; tell me what leads you to beleive this. Becasue I'mpretty sure DD has yet to play a full season.


I could tell ya, but I'd have to kil..... forget it.

If you can think David Carr is going to lead us to a winning season, I have every reason to believe Domanick will play 16 games.

BigBull17
01-20-2006, 02:40 PM
Ricky Williams couldn't find a whole in Neworleans to run through. But his numbers weren't really bad.... not as good as DDs. He was also getting hurt, just like DD, Just like Duece. Then when he went to Miami, where those guys were a little better than your average runblockers(Houston, New Orleans). He broke'em off somt'n. He didn't get hurt.... No one was calling him a bust anymore.... well, that was a drug bust, but that's totally different.

My point....... When you see Defensive Backs beatting up on DD and Johnathan Wells, don't say that we were a good run blocking team. Behind Good run blocking, your running back doesn't even know there are Defensive linemen on the field, because he never sees them. One linebacker, a safety and a corner, that's it. the rest of the team takes care of the rest.
Are you agreeing with me or arguing with me? Im unsure.

thunderkyss
01-20-2006, 02:53 PM
Are you agreeing with me or arguing with me? Im unsure.


I'm saying we are rock solid at Running Back. let Kubiak do his job... Running backs normally get hurt, because the Offensive linemen aren't doing their job.

Errant Hothy
01-20-2006, 02:55 PM
Running backs normally get hurt, because the Offensive linemen aren't doing their job.

Wha-Wha-What?

Now I'm really confussed. Please explain this to me? How does the failure of teh O-line lead to injuries to a RB? A QB getting injuried due to a horrid Oline I could understand, but a RB.

thunderkyss
01-21-2006, 08:32 AM
Wha-Wha-What?

Now I'm really confussed. Please explain this to me? How does the failure of teh O-line lead to injuries to a RB? A QB getting injuried due to a horrid Oline I could understand, but a RB.


In the run game, the offensive line is supposed to keep big defensive lineman off the running back. They are supposed to make holes. Your tail back is supposed to take on Linebackers and the secondary, people more his size, or people he has a size advantage on.