PDA

View Full Version : Voices about Vince Young


P_Buchanon
01-20-2006, 02:42 AM
Every college team plays bad teams. It is obvious that you did not watch any of the Texas games either. Vince played only 3 complete games this season. That is right 3( Not including Rose Bowl). He was usually out of the game 2 series into the third quarter. Can you imagine what kind of numbers he could have put up if he was in the 4th quarter of all those games? Also RB ran against some pretty weak defenses. My point is that who some one played against is a pretty lame argument.

I think the anti VY folk just don't get it. As much potential the RB people see in RB is the same as the VY folk see in VY. I just personally think RB can not be an every down back. Why waste the 1st pick of the draft on a RB that won't carry the ball 20+ times a game? I could be wrong but I just think he is going to take a beating in the pros if he carries the rock 20+. With Vince you have a proven winner, leader, unbelievable athletic skills, dominated at every level of the game so far, and oh yeah he is from Houston and is a legend here in Texas.

At any rate if you did not like me before then you are going to love me now. Quotes for all the wonderful Texans out there.

· "There's no question he's the best football player in America. I don't have a vote for the Heisman, but if I did, he'd get it. Nobody does for their team what Vince Young does for his." — Mark Mangino, Kansas Head Coach

· "If they had a 10 dollar bill with Vince Young's picture on it, it would be 'In Vince we trust.'" You can just tell the whole team goes 'Hey, we got him. We have VY, we always have a chance.'" — Brad Nessler, ABC

· “The defenses have no idea how to cover him.” — Craig James, ABC

· “When he’s on, he makes it look easy.” — NFL Hall of Fame QB and ABC broadcaster Dan Fouts

· “They have the scouting report on him, but they still can’t stop him.” — Gary Danielson, ABC

· “How do you defend that?” — Ed Cunningham describing Young’s 34-yard run on third-down and 30 at Missouri

· “He can beat you in so many ways.” — Former NFL lineman and current broadcaster Dave Lapham, FSN

· “He leaves defensive coordinators with that (baffled) look on their face.” — Charles Davis, TBS

· “You come into the game saying he’s the guy you have to stop and you can’t do it.” — Tim Brandt, ABC

· “He wants a National Championship. He can will his team to victory at any point. He can take over a game at any time. He distributes the football because he knows he needs all of his teammates to get to where he wants to be … National Championship. It’s not all about him. That’s a great leader.” — Former NFL lineman and current broadcaster Dave Lapham, FSN

· “You watch his highlights, and they’re so strong, but when you see him in person, his decision-making really pops out.” — Mike Tirico, ABC

· “He’s amazing! I’ve never seen a guy like him with as long of a stride and jack hammer feet. He’s got such an immensely long stride and yet he can choke it down and give you the jackhammer feet and make you miss in space. I’ve never seen anybody able to do both as well as he does.” — Former NFL lineman and current broadcaster Dave Lapham, FSN

· “That’s the difference as Vince Young has matured as a quarterback. He’s picking up all the blitzes and you show him all kinds of stuff, but it doesn’t fool him.” — Mike Tirico, ABC

· “He is what NFL scouts call a two-stepper, when he gets going, every two steps covers over five yards.” — Ed Cunningham, ABC

· “He’s a big, big man. It’s hard to get your arms around this guy. He’s got the wiggle, he’s got the strength and he just bulls you over. He’s an incredibly gifted human being.” — Former NFL lineman and current broadcaster Dave Lapham, FSN

· “He just kind of glides above the surface, doesn’t he?” — Joel Meyer, FSN

· “Let’s face it: Young out-Reggied Reggie (Bush) this week” — Ivan Maisel, ESPN.com, the week after Young’s performance against Oklahoma State.

· “People ask me who he reminds me of. The way he’s playing today, I’d say he doesn’t remind me of anyone. I’ve never seen anybody — running back, quarterback, wide receiver — make the plays that Vince Young has made today.” — NFL Hall of Fame QB and ABC broadcaster Dan Fouts during the 2005 Rose Bowl

· “This is how he can just annihilate a defense. They know he can throw the football, but when he starts running it, you’re in trouble.” — Gary Thorne, ABC

· “He’s the most dangerous and exciting quarterback in all of college football.” — NFL Hall of Fame QB and ABC broadcaster Dan Fouts

· “He had a run in that game where we missed him 13 times. No, really, 13 times. We counted. We had three guys miss him twice.” — OU defensive coordinator Brent Venables on Young as a redshirt freshman

· “He turns an average play into a great play. And he did that several times today.” — Gary Pinkel, Missouri Head Coach

· "You saw it. We had everybody covered and he takes off and scores. You won't have an answer or solution for him ... We sure didn't."— Gary Barnett, Colorado head coach on Vince Young after Big 12 Championship game

· “Twenty-five of 29? Are you kidding me?” Colorado Head Coach Gary Barnett said when told of Young’s final passing line against the Buffaloes. “That’s hard to do against air. Vince made great throws all day.”

· "At this level you see a few guys with capes and S's on their chest and Vince Young is one of them." — Gary Barnett, Colorado Head Coach

· Colorado defensive coordinator Mike Hankwitz described his defense, after defending Texas A&M QB Reggie McNeal the week before playing Vince Young as going “from the frying pan to the fire. And a hot fire … he’s extremely difficult to stop.”

· “Even though we compete against him, Vince has come a long way. It’s not my job to evaluate him, but obviously I watch a lot of tape and just happen to have played that position myself. He plays with poise now. He’s very dangerous. If you watch him during a game he’s very respectful to other players. I have a lot of respect for a guy who does that. He’s not a hot dog; he just goes out there and does his job.” — Mike Gundy, Oklahoma State Head Coach

· When asked the type of quarterback he would prefer at Baylor, Head Coach Guy Morris said: “A guy with a cannon for an arm that runs a 4.4 in the 40 and somebody who can leap tall buildings in a single bound.” When a reporter told him he just described Young, Morris said, “That does sound a lot like him.”

· “Vince Young is the finest athlete I've ever been on the field with.” — Lloyd Carr, Michigan Head Coach

· “He plays hard, and you could see he was getting hit and beat up and kept coming back, and I just have a lot of respect for him.” — Jim Tressel, Ohio State Head Coach

· “I think you always have to be aware of where he is and not turn your back on him. Some teams play man-to-man, turn their back and all of the sudden he's gone; he gets out of the pocket and scrambles. You've got to know where he is and know he can make something out of nothing at any time.” — A.J. Hawk, Ohio State linebacker

· “He is a very elusive runner and he breaks a lot of tackles. The problem with stopping him is he can throw the ball, too.” — A.J. Hawk, Ohio State linebacker

· “Vince Young adds a whole other dimension to their offense, and it killed us.” — Jordan Dizon, Colorado linebacker

· “He’s fast, he’s agile and just a tough guy to stop. He kind of takes the wind out of your sails.” — Oklahoma State safety Chase Holland

· Young is reasonably close to Heisman Trophy incumbent Leinart as a passer...one can conclude that Young might even be in Bush's class as a runner. Bush can't pass like Young. Leinart can't move like Young...if I still voted for the Heisman, my ballot would list Young first, Bush second and Leinart third. — Michael Wilbon, The Washington Post

· He (Vince Young) is the complete package, including leadership. The plaque on the little bronze guy says 'Most Outstanding Player,' but if you even begin to consider ‘MVP’ in your thoughts, then Young emerges as an even stronger candidate. — Ivan Maisel, ESPN.com

· Anyone who saw the Texas highlights ought to realize that the Longhorns are undefeated because of two words – Vince Young. End of discussion. I don’t care if the guy ever plays a down in the NFL, CFL or AFL-CIO. He’s better than Marcus Vick. He might be better than Michael Vick, and not the one who played at Virginia Tech in 1999. The one who plays with the Falcons right now. — Dennis Dodd, CBS Sportsline

· Young was throwing deep balls, outs, crossing routes. He was throwing from the pocket and on the move. This is not a one-dimensional quarterback. Everyone wants to compare him with Michael Vick. It is time to compare him with Tom Brady or Peyton Manning. Young is becoming a classic passer who happens to own exceptional wheels. — Thomas George, Denver Post

· Do you believe yet? How many more improbable, inconceivable moments do we have to witness before we suck it up and admit that, yeah, son of a gun, this incredible athlete has become a quarterback? We’re two weeks into the season, and already we have a clear leader for the Heisman Trophy. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Texas quarterback Vince Young. — Matt Hayes, Sporting News

· Forget Texas’ second-ranked rushing offense. If teams want to stop the Longhorns right now, they have to stop Vince Young’s arm. — Chip Brown, Dallas Morning News

· Before Colorado played Texas, Gary Barnett said it was difficult to remember a guy who could take control of a game like Young can. And it's been played out several times in that game and since with Young's passing and running. — B.G. Brooks, Rocky Mountain News

· Young is a supremely confident quarterback who is a bottom-line kind of playmaker. He brings a sandlot mentality to the game, the ultimate compliment for a player who is immune to pressure. — Kirk Bohls, Austin American-Statesman

· Texas ’ junior quarterback has made a career out of electrifying dashes around defensive linemen, over linebackers, and through the secondary. Young can wreak havoc throwing the ball too. He gashed the Tigers’ defense for 236 yards through the air and picked up 108 yards on 13 carries as Texas rolled. Young was the model of efficiency. — Steve Walentik, Columbia Daily Tribune

· He has dizzying speed, the kind that twists linebackers out of their cleats and makes them nauseated as he flies by. — Suzanne Haliburton, Austin American-Statesman

· (Texas) didn’t seem the least bit surprised by what they had seen. In Vince they trust. His routine is everyone else’s extraordinary. — Richard Justice, Houston Chronicle

· This football season is all about Young. The Longhorns will succeed as they did Saturday because of him. If this turns out to be their magical season, his act will be the reason. — Kevin Blackistone, Dallas Morning News

· Figures only hint at Young's overall dangerousness. He has a strong and accurate arm. He has great foot speed and elusiveness. He has poise and patience, reading defenses and taking only what he is given. And he keeps getting better. — Darnell Mayberry, Akron Beacon Journal

· Young, after all, is Texas' most explosive weapon, a quarterback who can run like an All-American tailback. In the history of college football, there have been few players so tall, so fast and so elusive as the 6-foot-5 Young. — John Maher, Austin American-Statesman

· Even when they trailed by 19 points, the Texas Longhorns said losing never entered their minds. That’s the Vince Young factor at work. — Richard Justice, Houston Chronicle

Nighthawk
01-20-2006, 05:37 AM
The RB folks will hate it, but it's a terrific post. Keep after it. Maybe McNair reads the msg board.

Spoda
01-20-2006, 08:22 AM
has vince cured cancer yet?? just wondering

Peldon
01-20-2006, 10:12 AM
has vince cured cancer yet?? just wondering

Nope, there was a deal made. Reggie Bush is going to handle cancer, VY is going after world hunger.

Big B Texan Fan
01-20-2006, 10:15 AM
has vince cured cancer yet?? just wondering
No but someone sez he ate a Rubiks Cube and pooped it solved. Forget throwing motion, that's real talent.

Big B Texan Fan
01-20-2006, 10:19 AM
One thing that pops out at me (not nessecarily from the thread authors original post) is that the Horns would not be successful without VY. The Trojans would be successful without Bush.

MorKnolle
01-20-2006, 10:43 AM
One thing that pops out at me (not nessecarily from the thread authors original post) is that the Horns would not be successful without VY. The Trojans would be successful without Bush.

Agreed, VY contributed more to UT's success this season than Bush contributed to USC's, that's the nature of comparing a QB vs. a RB. That said, most of these quotes are not really convincing in any way because an equal number of quotes can be said about Reggie Bush, and not many if any of them are really sitting down and taking an objective analysis of his abilities, they're mainly just making cliche statements about him, likely during the middle of a game or after the Rose Bowl and all the mountains of praise and hype that followed for a couple days afterward. Good effort on the post and I applaud the time that went into making it, but you still have to take these quotes with a grain of salt and realize that the same kinds of things could be said about Reggie Bush or a number of other top college players, and to me they don't pull any weight in the decision on who to draft.

thunderkyss
01-20-2006, 12:22 PM
Good effort on the post and I applaud the time that went into making it, but you still have to take these quotes with a grain of salt and realize that the same kinds of things could be said about Reggie Bush or a number of other top college players, and to me they don't pull any weight in the decision on who to draft.
Let's take the quotes out of P_Buch's post....... he made very sound arguments for Vince, and very sound arguments against Bush. Objectively speaking, who would you pick, a winning QB, or a running back that will get 15 maybe 20 touches?? Would you pick Westbrook with the #1 overall pick??

Every college team plays bad teams. It is obvious that you did not watch any of the Texas games either. Vince played only 3 complete games this season. That is right 3( Not including Rose Bowl). He was usually out of the game 2 series into the third quarter. Can you imagine what kind of numbers he could have put up if he was in the 4th quarter of all those games? Also RB ran against some pretty weak defenses. My point is that who some one played against is a pretty lame argument.

I think the anti VY folk just don't get it. As much potential the RB people see in RB is the same as the VY folk see in VY. I just personally think RB can not be an every down back. Why waste the 1st pick of the draft on a RB that won't carry the ball 20+ times a game? I could be wrong but I just think he is going to take a beating in the pros if he carries the rock 20+. With Vince you have a proven winner, leader, unbelievable athletic skills, dominated at every level of the game so far, and oh yeah he is from Houston and is a legend here in Texas.

jerek
01-20-2006, 12:26 PM
While I certainly admire and applaud you for the amount of time you put into this post, I am afraid it does not particularly help your case.

Most of these quotes are insubstantial one-liners offered in the context of a big win that only vaguely allude to Vince's real skill sets, both tangible and intangible, and how they will translate to the NFL, if they even bother to address them at all.

How many hundreds of millions of people live in the U.S., and how many tens of thousands of them are sportscasters, writers, or former winning athletes, many of which would disagree or offer a more complete analysis?

For that matter, there is no denying that many highly credible football minds are excited about the prospect Vince Young, and rightly so. Many of these same minds have also offered cautionary words against the apparent weaknesses in Vince's game, which naturally, you do not address here. Equally many credible football minds are for the Texans drafting Reggie Bush, or keeping David Carr, or even trading the pick away, in light of our team as it stands now and bearing in mind what they believe to be other sources for our overall problem than the quarterback position.

As I say: bravo on the effort, but it only amounts to so many bells and whistles.

MorKnolle
01-20-2006, 12:36 PM
Let's take the quotes out of P_Buch's post....... he made very sound arguments for Vince, and very sound arguments against Bush. Objectively speaking, who would you pick, a winning QB, or a running back that will get 15 maybe 20 touches?? Would you pick Westbrook with the #1 overall pick??

For our current team I'd take Bush over Vince. If I was building a team from scratch then I'd generally go with a QB over a RB, but that's not the case here. In addition, Vince undoubtedly has some great physical gifts, but he still has some questions that in my mind (obviously not significant in the minds of many people, but to me they are) that would make me hesitant to draft him, and I don't see him being able to run a team for at least two years and I would have a hard time waiting around for that to happen, and I would seriously consider taking Leinart over Vince if I felt I needed to build around a new QB, but once again I would have to study more game tape on them, meet them in person for workouts/interviews, and other stuff like that, and I obviously won't be able to do that so I could't make a 100% guaranteed prediction of my decision. I have been watching more stuff on Bush lately and have talked to some people in the football world (people with a team and with football knowledge, not media hearsay) and I am beginning to see more of a case for Reggie Bush than I previously saw, and I think he is more durable than most people give him credit for (he had just as many carries as LenDale White who is being proclaimed as a strong, prototypcial power back), and I still have some big questions on Vince that have not been answered. At this point, from what I know and have seen, I would take Bush over Vince or Leinart for our team, and if I was building a team from ground up and picking a QB to be my franchise, at this moment I'd probably be leaning more towards Leinart than Vince.

As I say: bravo on the effort, but it only amounts to so many bells and whistles.

I agree, I certainly applaud you for the time spent on this and presenting your case, but I agree that I don't see it as much substantial information.

swtbound07
01-20-2006, 12:44 PM
For our current team I'd take Bush over Vince. If I was building a team from scratch then I'd generally go with a QB over a RB, but that's not the case here. In addition, Vince undoubtedly has some great physical gifts, but he still has some questions that in my mind (obviously not significant in the minds of many people, but to me they are) that would make me hesitant to draft him, and I don't see him being able to run a team for at least two years and I would have a hard time waiting around for that to happen, and I would seriously consider taking Leinart over Vince if I felt I needed to build around a new QB, but once again I would have to study more game tape on them, meet them in person for workouts/interviews, and other stuff like that, and I obviously won't be able to do that so I could't make a 100% guaranteed prediction of my decision. I have been watching more stuff on Bush lately and have talked to some people in the football world (people with a team and with football knowledge, not media hearsay) and I am beginning to see more of a case for Reggie Bush than I previously saw, and I think he is more durable than most people give him credit for (he had just as many carries as LenDale White who is being proclaimed as a strong, prototypcial power back), and I still have some big questions on Vince that have not been answered. At this point, from what I know and have seen, I would take Bush over Vince or Leinart for our team, and if I was building a team from ground up and picking a QB to be my franchise, at this moment I'd probably be leaning more towards Leinart than Vince.



I agree, I certainly applaud you for the time spent on this and presenting your case, but I agree that I don't see it as much substantial information.


exactly how bad does a team have to be for you to start from scratch....how about something like this.
Miserable pass blocking o-line
debateably only 3 bona-fide star players (andre, mathis, drob)
2-14 record
1st overall pick in draft for 2nd time in 5 years.
starting qb with 16 wins in 4 years (averages 4 per year, for you math majors.)
I would say we need to start over, and since we dont really seem to be addressing the offensive line, i think we need to upgrade at the qb position. Matt leinart's style of quarterbacking is not a good fit with the pass protection we offer IMO. Thats why we should draft vince. Start over, do it right this time.

MorKnolle
01-20-2006, 12:53 PM
exactly how bad does a team have to be for you to start from scratch....how about something like this.
Miserable pass blocking o-line
debateably only 3 bona-fide star players (andre, mathis, drob)
2-14 record
1st overall pick in draft for 2nd time in 5 years.
starting qb with 16 wins in 4 years (averages 4 per year, for you math majors.)
I would say we need to start over, and since we dont really seem to be addressing the offensive line, i think we need to upgrade at the qb position. Matt leinart's style of quarterbacking is not a good fit with the pass protection we offer IMO. Thats why we should draft vince. Start over, do it right this time.

My opinion and preference at this moment would be Leinart over Young, but as you said those are our opinions. We do not need to start this team from scratch. Yes we had the worst record in the league this year, but we had a bad coaching staff that is now gone and we have several good people on the roster to continue building around. I think David is among those good players and I do not see a reason to replace him, especially with a 2 year project like Vince Young. Obviously you think Carr needs to be replaced but I do not. I also like Domanick Davis, that's why I think our offense is pretty solid with the exception of the OL and would prefer to see us trade down, but at the same time adding Bush into the talent we have and bringing in another playmaker that can play some RB and a lot of WR would be beneficial to our offense and add something to it in my opinion. Drafting Vince and sitting him on the bench for a couple years while he develops and then replacing Carr with him n my opinion does not add anything to the offense and therefore would not be an efficient use of the #1 pick. Drafting Vince will take 2 years to decide if he was worth it and to see if he really does add anything by replacing Carr (which I don't see him adding much if anything), while drafting Bush immediately adds another playmaker that can play some RB and some WR and be on the field almost every snap, so I can at least see how he adds something to the team that we don't currently have, and he adds it immediately rather than waiting a couple years to see if he can actually step in and bring something to the table. That's my view, my opinion on the situation and that's why I think we should draft Bush if we're not going to trade down.

Coach C.
01-20-2006, 12:57 PM
Did Miami start from scratch, If I am not mistaken they got a good coach and brought in a few FAs and had a decent draft and they went 9-7. They had the second pick last year. What about the 49ers. THey had a better record than us, yet they are moving forward with the core. We have a core of players, it has been said, whether coachspeak or not that is what the people that run our team has said. Unless some of you on the board have about a billion dollars that is how it is. Now VY is a talent and I will enjoy watching him in 07 with whatever team he ends up on. Is he best for our team no. Mork you are right there is no reason to take a step back when we already have. Now this is just my opinion, so maybe some of you know more about football, prospects, and operations than I do so I would venture that you should enlighten me.

swtbound07
01-20-2006, 12:58 PM
My opinion and preference at this moment would be Leinart over Young, but as you said those are our opinions. We do not need to start this team from scratch. Yes we had the worst record in the league this year, but we had a bad coaching staff that is now gone and we have several good people on the roster to continue building around. I think David is among those good players and I do not see a reason to replace him, especially with a 2 year project like Vince Young. Obviously you think Carr needs to be replaced but I do not. I also like Domanick Davis, that's why I think our offense is pretty solid with the exception of the OL and would prefer to see us trade down, but at the same time adding Bush into the talent we have and bringing in another playmaker that can play some RB and a lot of WR would be beneficial to our offense and add something to it in my opinion. Drafting Vince and sitting him on the bench for a couple years while he develops and then replacing Carr with him n my opinion does not add anything to the offense and therefore would not be an efficient use of the #1 pick. Drafting Vince will take 2 years to decide if he was worth it and to see if he really does add anything by replacing Carr (which I don't see him adding much if anything), while drafting Bush immediately adds another playmaker that can play some RB and some WR and be on the field almost every snap, so I can at least see how he adds something to the team that we don't currently have, and he adds it immediately rather than waiting a couple years to see if he can actually step in and bring something to the table. That's my view, my opinion on the situation and that's why I think we should draft Bush if we're not going to trade down.

fair enough, we disagree on some key points, but they arent questions of logic, but as you said, opinion
Im not quite ready to put all of our woe's on coaching, and i dont really think david carr has shown us anything to show he is worthy of the money we spent. I like dominack davis too, and i think he is a weapon both recieving and rushing, he is great at catching the screens and making big gains. To me i just think we have the opportunity to take anybody we choose at the one pick, and it doesnt sit well with me to bring in a guy that will at best split carries with an already proven back. To me, what it says when you draft a position to EXCESS (wells, morency, davis, hollings, and now bush?) is that you are just missing that piece, and the other positions are fine. I think we have too many holes in too many positions to supplement our already deep running back corp. I can make a case for REPLACING david carr, but i cant make a case for drafting vince young to augment him and split starts. I think if you arent going to draft vince, you have to draft someone else to fill a hole, not add a 5th first day running back to the roster. JMO

thunderkyss
01-20-2006, 01:08 PM
Great, let's forget about the other thread....

Right here, build your case for Bush.....

In this post, the only Pro I see for Bush, is that he carried the ball as many times as Lendale.

I'm truly open minded. Both you and I think we should trade down. We only disagree with what we should do with the #1 pick, if we don't find value in any trade offers.

My case for Young..........
It was only last year, that we were able to brag about winning two games in a row.
Our win streak, has never got beyond two games.
We've never had a winnng season
We have problems protecting our QB
People who know football believe Vince & Lienart will both have to adjust to playing behind a line that is not as good as the one they played behind in college, if they were drafted by the Texans
I don't see any leaders on the field.... not on offense, not on defense, and definitely not behind the center.
We've got a few good players. But we don't have a team. Carr, or Young, doesn't matter, we are rebuilding. We've got a Good serviceable RB who is signed through 2007. It is easier to cut Carr, owing him nothing, and letting him go. It may be the most Fiscally responsible thing to do.
There is no reason we can't wait 2 years....... we don't have an old coach looking for quick wins. We don't have a Defense that is even near their prime. We don't have a ProBowl QB eyeing retirement. We don't have a city demanding we win, or get out of Dodge. Time, is the only thing on our side.

I think for the most part, at this stage in his development( and I think all players are in development.... 12 year vets, just as much as rookies) he is further ahead than many of the most exciting QBs of the last two decades were when they came out of college.
His poise, his maturity, his manor..... he's off the charts... He knows what it takes to win, he pushes himself from within, more than any outside influence.
He's got talent, and a strong will to win... a deadly combination
He's from Houston.

That's where I'm coming from. Good arguments, bad arguments, don't matter. They're mine, and I'm sticking to them. I don't need to know if you agree, or don't. I just want your arguments for Reggie Bush....

MorKnolle
01-20-2006, 01:11 PM
fair enough, we disagree on some key points, but they arent questions of logic, but as you said, opinion
Im not quite ready to put all of our woe's on coaching, and i dont really think david carr has shown us anything to show he is worthy of the money we spent. I like dominack davis too, and i think he is a weapon both recieving and rushing, he is great at catching the screens and making big gains. To me i just think we have the opportunity to take anybody we choose at the one pick, and it doesnt sit well with me to bring in a guy that will at best split carries with an already proven back. To me, what it says when you draft a position to EXCESS (wells, morency, davis, hollings, and now bush?) is that you are just missing that piece, and the other positions are fine. I think we have too many holes in too many positions to supplement our already deep running back corp. I can make a case for REPLACING david carr, but i cant make a case for drafting vince young to augment him and split starts. I think if you arent going to draft vince, you have to draft someone else to fill a hole, not add a 5th first day running back to the roster. JMO

You put that excellently (the phrase I underlined), and to me drafting Vince does this, whereas with Bush you can play him and Davis together and sub for eachother, which you can't really do with QBs. To me, I think Bush would be best getting 8-10 carries a game, let Davis get his 15-18 carries and still be our main RB, and have Bush line up at WR when he's not in the backfield, I see him having the physical gifts to be a Steve Smith type WR if he develops his hands a little better and can run routes like Smith. Obviously right now Bush is not on the same level as Smith when it comes to skills as a WR, but he's that type of athlete and I wouldn't mind seeing him lined up at WR for 60-70% of our plays, and put in the backfield some to run the ball or catch passes out of the backfield the rest of the time, maybe return punts if Buchanon isn't here (Mathis is obviously good enough at kick returns). To me, bringing in Bush would add something to the offense, an athlete that we don't currently have at RB for 40% of the time and another capable and very fast WR the other 60% of the time, either way he's on the field every play and can do something, and he adds that element to our offense on top of what Carr, Davis, and Johnson already bring. To me, bringing in Vince means paying him $18 million to sit on the bench for two years, then figure out if he's ready to step in at QB and would be a better option there than Carr, so to me we get nothing out of him whatsoever for two years, then maybe he adds a little to the offense in place of Carr, so we'd have him, Davis, and Johnson as the main guys (obviously we'll bring in other people by then, but for this illustration I'm talking about this specific pick and our current roster). I like more immediate results anyways, and to me having Carr at QB and then Davis, Johnson, and Bush all making plays for him starting September 2006 is a lot better of an option than Carr with Davis and Johnson in 2006 and maybe Vince with Davis and Johnson in 2007 and beyond. To me, Bush is the better option in this case, but again it comes down to our opinions of Carr, I think he has all the potential in the world and with a new coach, system, an improved OLine, and more playmakers (Bush definitely helps there), that he can be great. I don't personally see Vince as being a guaranteed great, I think he can possibly develop into the same caliber QB as Carr can with this team, but in this case Carr would have the added bonus of having Reggie Bush making plays for him while Vince would not get that.

I still think trading down and addressing other needs would be best for this team, but I stated why I think Bush would be a better option than Vince if we stay at #1.

Dennis007
01-20-2006, 01:12 PM
The Texans are not going to trade down even though many people believe they should. They are going to take Reggie or Vince, there is just too much talent this year to trade down.

It may be a very good option but they won't do it, they will make a decision of the two top picks and go from there.

thunderkyss
01-20-2006, 01:16 PM
Did Miami start from scratch, If I am not mistaken they got a good coach and brought in a few FAs and had a decent draft and they went 9-7. They had the second pick last year. What about the 49ers. THey had a better record than us, yet they are moving forward with the core. We have a core of players, it has been said, whether coachspeak or not that is what the people that run our team has said. Unless some of you on the board have about a billion dollars that is how it is. Now VY is a talent and I will enjoy watching him in 07 with whatever team he ends up on. Is he best for our team no. Mork you are right there is no reason to take a step back when we already have. Now this is just my opinion, so maybe some of you know more about football, prospects, and operations than I do so I would venture that you should enlighten me.

SanFrancisco is building their Core....... that's why Miami took a Running back, that's their core. SF & Miami both needed a QB, and a RB.... Saban(DD's college Coach) He didn't know he was going to get Ricky when he drafted, and he had no idea what Ricky was going to bring to camp... But he's looking for his QB right now. Same thing in SF, they'll be looking for a RB this go round. They've got a need at RB, unquestionably. But they started over pretty much the same way we are talking about......... Actually, we're saying build on your core..... we're not talking about dumping the whole team, and starting over from scratch.... in due time, but not all at once.

tulexan
01-20-2006, 01:20 PM
SanFrancisco is building their Core....... that's why Miami took a Running back, that's their core. SF & Miami both needed a QB, and a RB.... Saban(DD's college Coach) He didn't know he was going to get Ricky when he drafted, and he had no idea what Ricky was going to bring to camp... But he's looking for his QB right now. Same thing in SF, they'll be looking for a RB this go round. They've got a need at RB, unquestionably. But they started over pretty much the same way we are talking about......... Actually, we're saying build on your core..... we're not talking about dumping the whole team, and starting over from scratch.... in due time, but not all at once.


Actually SF is looking for a WR or OL. Nolan is very impressed with Frank Gore and I don't think they are going to draft a RB very high.

MorKnolle
01-20-2006, 01:20 PM
Actually SF is looking for a WR or OL. Nolan is very impressed with Frank Gore and I don't think they are going to draft a RB very high.

Ordinarily I'd agree with you, I think Gore is pretty solid and they'd like to get a nice WR for Alex Smith to throw to, but there aren't many WRs that are 1st round talent this year, especially at the #6/7 pick. There are several RBs that good (Reggie Bush if they decide to trade up, LenDale White, DeAngelo Williams, Lawrence Maroney), so they could definitely look at RB in the 1st round rather than WR, or they could go for OL since there is an abundance of those this year, but I don't see them getting a WR in the 1st round this year.

The Texans are not going to trade down even though many people believe they should. They are going to take Reggie or Vince, there is just too much talent this year to trade down.

It may be a very good option but they won't do it, they will make a decision of the two top picks and go from there.

I think this is precisely why a trade down is a possibility, plus Kubiak and Denver never took a QB or RB in the 1st round and always put OLine and defense on higher priority. Most of it will depend on Kubiak's evaluation of our talent once he gets here, if he thinks our QBs and RBs are good enough and that our defense and OLine need serious help and have to be addressed early in the draft then they'll look to trade down.

Casserly talked about it a week or two ago on the radio, that they will evaluate our guys, then set up their draft board and group the prospects. Some have said there are 40-50 1st round quality guys this year, so currently we are guaranteed 2 of them, if we trade down maybe we can get a 3rd one. Obviously the talent in the top 3 is above everyone else, but if they don't think any of them are overly necessary to the team that presents a dilemma. From there they figure how many guys are on the next tier, maybe they think another 8 guys will be perennial Pro-Bowlers, so they can trade down but want to stay high enough to guarantee they get one of them, so they could trade down, get one of those top 8 guys that they really want while being able to acquire an extra 1st round quality guy with an additional high 2nd round pick. If they expand it further, they might find another 8-9 guys that they think will still be very good players, maybe not always making the Pro-Bowl, but right there on that level, so maybe they'd be willing to trade down that far so they can still get one of them and get even more additional picks out of it.

That is basically the process they'll have to go through regarding draft picks. Obviously they have to evaluate our guys and go through some free agency first, but once that's done and they've identified their priority needs they'll start the above process. From there, it's just a matter of evaluating how much they want guys within each of those groups, and if they decide they'd be willing to trade down and accept someone one of those levels lower as their top guy, then entertain offers that will still get them one of those guys and see what else you can get out of it, and if all that is more appealing then execute the trade.

Dennis007
01-20-2006, 01:26 PM
When I said too much talent, I was really referring to Reggie and Vince. There is alot of talent but both of the top 2 picks are predicted to be possible Hall of Famers in their career. That is too hard to pass up.

Even though I can agree with the trade down scenario but I think the Texans would rather take the "risk", if you want to call it that, of picking between 2 stellar players than trade down and pass up the opportunity to have that exceptional talent.

I think they will decide on the top pick and then go from there and work their way down to address the O line to ensure they have a good foundation for either pick - RB or VY.

tulexan
01-20-2006, 01:26 PM
True, there are an abundance of good RBs in this draft. But I believe the Niners will take Haloti Ngata in the first round if he is available because they run a 3-4 and he is the ultimate 3-4 NT. If they believe they need a RB, they can pick up a guy like Brian Calhoun or Maurice Drew in the 2nd round.

swtbound07
01-20-2006, 01:37 PM
just a side note....in my scenarios, david carr is not retained if we draft vince young. I dont think you gain anything by sitting him for 2 years and leaving the current ineffective system in place. On another note.

I can see where you would like reggie as a wide reciever/running back hybrid, but i still maintain you cant use the #1 pick on somebody who is going to rotate in, or split time with our other playmakers. We drafted a rotational player (travis johnson) in the first round of last year, as opposed to drafting an every down player (jamaal brown, alex barron, derrick johnson), and to me at the time it sort of said "we are pretty confident in all of our main pieces, we just need depth". Well, 2-14 later, its obvious we could have used another starter. If you draft a Reggie Bush in this draft, you are saying that you need to augment the only 2 positions on the offensive side of the ball that have any strength.

Offensive line =weakness
Tight end= weakness
wide reciever= strength, a solid trio in mathis, gaffney, and andre
running back=strenght, wells, morency, and davis can be used effectively and split carries through good coaching, not even counting whether hollings could be salvaged by kubiak.
quarterback=weakness in my mind, untapped strength in others. Fair enough, i agree that you could upgrade other offensive positions before you touched quarterback, running back, or wide reciever. However, i dont see anybody on the offensive side of the ball warranting the #1 pick excepting bush or young. I've said my piece on matt leinart many times, so i wont get into that here.

So unless you want to get into the defensive side of things, then its pretty much bush or young. I feel like dominack on his own is more of a strength then dominack/bush with david carr

tulexan
01-20-2006, 01:40 PM
Bush may be rotated around, but he will still be on the field for almost all if not all of the offensive plays. He just won't be at one position.

Big B Texan Fan
01-20-2006, 01:47 PM
Bush may be rotated around, but he will still be on the field for almost all if not all of the offensive plays. He just won't be at one position.
He'll definately be in there on 4th and 1 with 2 seconds on the clock, ball on the 1 yard line and down by 4 points to help push carr (jump start) into the endzone for the win. They won't be giving it to him, that's for sure.

LOL, just kidding, please don't beat me up over this, it's funny and you know it.

Ya know though, that's 2 two times this past season with the season on the line that he doesn't get the nod. Hmmmmm. #1 overall? :confused:

tulexan
01-20-2006, 01:53 PM
I think giving the ball to Leinart was the right call in the ND game. He is 6'5 and they needed 1 yard. Why risk fumbling the ball in the handoff when he could just lean forward and get the TD himself.

And in the Rose Bowl, that was Carroll's mistake. Everyone has been criticizing Carroll for having him on the sideline and I'm sure if he had to do it again, he would have Bush on the field even if only as a decoy.

Spoda
01-20-2006, 01:56 PM
Bush may be rotated around, but he will still be on the field for almost all if not all of the offensive plays. He just won't be at one position.


except 4th and 2 with the season on the line

swtbound07
01-20-2006, 01:58 PM
except 4th and 2 with the season on the line


okay, im a vince young fan and even i think ya'll need to let that go. Carroll made a mistake, Reggie doesn't get to hop onto and off of the field at his discretion. If reggie and most of the usc fans had their way, he would have been on the field.

Big B Texan Fan
01-20-2006, 02:22 PM
I think giving the ball to Leinart was the right call in the ND game. He is 6'5 and they needed 1 yard. Why risk fumbling the ball in the handoff when he could just lean forward and get the TD himself.

And in the Rose Bowl, that was Carroll's mistake. Everyone has been criticizing Carroll for having him on the sideline and I'm sure if he had to do it again, he would have Bush on the field even if only as a decoy.
Isn't VY 6'5".
And it wasn't Carroll's mistake, Bush earned to not be in the game in that moment.

thunderkyss
01-20-2006, 02:23 PM
whereas with Bush you can play him and Davis together and sub for eachother, which you can't really do with QBs. Fair enough, point given.
To me, I think Bush would be best getting 8-10 carries a game, let Davis get his 15-18 carries and still be our main RB, and have Bush line up at WR when he's not in the backfield, I see him having the physical gifts to be a Steve Smith type WR if he develops his hands a little better and can run routes like Smith. Obviously right now Bush is not on the same level as Smith when it comes to skills as a WR, but he's that type of athlete and I wouldn't mind seeing him lined up at WR for 60-70% of our plays, and put in the backfield some to run the ball or catch passes out of the backfield the rest of the time, maybe return punts if Buchanon isn't here (Mathis is obviously good enough at kick returns). To me, bringing in Bush would add something to the offense, an athlete that we don't currently have at RB for 40% of the time and another capable and very fast WR the other 60% of the time, either way he's on the field every play and can do something, and he adds that element to our offense on top of what Carr, Davis, and Johnson already bring.
Since I now have your thoughts, feel free to go and offer rebuttal on my opinions, as I am about to for yours.


Your argument sounds fine.... good and fine, if we thought Reggie was the most talented WR in the draft..... I'd be fine drafting another reciever to go opposite AJ, even though I've liked all our recievers in the history of the team. Even Bradford. That makes more sense to me. Work on the passing game. Offensive line, WR, QB....... but the running game with a guy who isn't really a RB??
I still think trading down and addressing other needs would be best for this team, but I stated why I think Bush would be a better option than Vince if we stay at #1.

Thanks for your answer.

swtbound07
01-20-2006, 02:24 PM
Isn't VY 6'5".
And it wasn't Carroll's mistake, Bush earned to not be in the game in that moment.


i dont agree with that....i think when you have a big, powerfull back in lendale white, you use him to pick up a yard. Cadillac Williams is a certified beast in tampa, but when they need one yard they are giving the rock to mike allstott.

awtysst
01-20-2006, 02:26 PM
I think giving the ball to Leinart was the right call in the ND game. He is 6'5 and they needed 1 yard. Why risk fumbling the ball in the handoff when he could just lean forward and get the TD himself.

And in the Rose Bowl, that was Carroll's mistake. Everyone has been criticizing Carroll for having him on the sideline and I'm sure if he had to do it again, he would have Bush on the field even if only as a decoy.


I dont think Carroll would do anything differently. The entire game he had gone for it on fourth down and he was succesful. How was he succesful, handing it off to Lendale and having Reggie watch from the side. Thus in the critical play, he went for something that had worked all game.

thunderkyss
01-20-2006, 02:42 PM
I think giving the ball to Leinart was the right call in the ND game. He is 6'5 and they needed 1 yard. Why risk fumbling the ball in the handoff when he could just lean forward and get the TD himself.

And in the Rose Bowl, that was Carroll's mistake. Everyone has been criticizing Carroll for having him on the sideline and I'm sure if he had to do it again, he would have Bush on the field even if only as a decoy.

When it counts, you put the ball in the hands of your best player..... it's that simple. I don't think Pete Carroll goofed....... heck they'd been calling him a genius all year. At those two times, in those two games, Reggie's Coach didn't think he was the best player on the field. And I'm not blaming Reggie, just saying if his Coach doesn't think he is the best player on the field when it's crunch time, why shoud we think he's the best player in the Draft when the two guys who did get the ball are in the same draft. Lendale's rushing numbers are comparable to Reggie's, he's got more touchdowns(which tells me when they are threatening to score, they trust in Lendale more than Reggie), Reggie has more yards & catches, but lendale has more yards per catch, and just as many touchdowns......... Why is he not a top ten RB in this years draft, and Reggie is a legitemate #1??

I don't profess to be an expert, and maybe that's why it isn't so clear to me. But I just can't see taking an RB/WR #1 overall.

MorKnolle
01-20-2006, 02:58 PM
just a side note....in my scenarios, david carr is not retained if we draft vince young. I dont think you gain anything by sitting him for 2 years and leaving the current ineffective system in place. On another note.

I can see where you would like reggie as a wide reciever/running back hybrid, but i still maintain you cant use the #1 pick on somebody who is going to rotate in, or split time with our other playmakers. We drafted a rotational player (travis johnson) in the first round of last year, as opposed to drafting an every down player (jamaal brown, alex barron, derrick johnson), and to me at the time it sort of said "we are pretty confident in all of our main pieces, we just need depth". Well, 2-14 later, its obvious we could have used another starter. If you draft a Reggie Bush in this draft, you are saying that you need to augment the only 2 positions on the offensive side of the ball that have any strength.

Offensive line =weakness
Tight end= weakness
wide reciever= strength, a solid trio in mathis, gaffney, and andre
running back=strenght, wells, morency, and davis can be used effectively and split carries through good coaching, not even counting whether hollings could be salvaged by kubiak.
quarterback=weakness in my mind, untapped strength in others. Fair enough, i agree that you could upgrade other offensive positions before you touched quarterback, running back, or wide reciever. However, i dont see anybody on the offensive side of the ball warranting the #1 pick excepting bush or young. I've said my piece on matt leinart many times, so i wont get into that here.

So unless you want to get into the defensive side of things, then its pretty much bush or young. I feel like dominack on his own is more of a strength then dominack/bush with david carr

I generally agree with your assessment of our position grades, but I am in the untapped strength group at QB. I have for a long time questioned whether you take a part-time player at #1 (back when Bush was the hot topic that was one of my main arguments), but at the same time I think in that role he would help our offense more than bringing Vince in and sitting him on the bench or trying to play him as a rookie. I definitely don't think Vince is ready to start yet and if that happened I see a combination of Carr and Peyton's rookie seasons with about 50 sacks and 20+ INTs and possibly a lot of nagging injuries from becoming gunshy and running too much. That aside, Bush would still be in on 90% or more of your snaps as a potential playmaker every time, and I think a guy like Kubiak could figure out a way to make him effective in that role, but I agree I have questioned whether you use the #1 pick on a part-time RB, part-time WR. That is one big reason why I think trading down is our best option.

Big B Texan Fan
01-20-2006, 03:01 PM
When it counts, you put the ball in the hands of your best player..... it's that simple.

I don't profess to be an expert, and maybe that's why it isn't so clear to me. But I just can't see taking an RB/WR #1 overall.
I agree whole heartedly.

It's like going out to eat at a fanct restaurant and the host/ess seats you, takes your order, and cooks it, and brings it to you. How is that person gonna focus on the door with other guests, get your order right since he/she isn't a full time server, and even cook it right right since he/she isn't a true cook. This all too often (maybe not this extreme) when we go out to eat and the restaurant is short staffed, you grt a person doing a C- job of three instead an A+ job at the position he/she was hired for. If alot of time on the job has passed then maybe multiple skills can be applied at on time, but that takes time.

Marshall Faulk was not a hybrid coming in and what ever he was used for did not work cuz the team he was drfated by wasn't even the team he went to his SB's with. You earn the distinction of a HYBRIB WR/RB not get it handed to you. Sure passes out of the backfield will happen but not to the degree that everyone else is saying that he will do. Hybrids aren't drafted , they're crafted, and I do not re-call Kubes ever crafting one. The whole part of the host/ess doing the job of many cuz the restaurant is shortstaffed is our situation but we don't throw a rookie into the fracus of being an UFO (unidentified footballplaying object). We need to staff up but we also don't want to pass on good players in our weakspots but we aren't good enough to draft need with a top 3 pic (I say top 3 cuz i expect us to be in it next year). We must take BPA in all 3 rd's in the first day and BPA in the 4th, after that we may be able to fill some needs. Don't forget FA, thats where the needs come in.

swtbound07
01-20-2006, 03:05 PM
I generally agree with your assessment of our position grades, but I am in the untapped strength group at QB. I have for a long time questioned whether you take a part-time player at #1 (back when Bush was the hot topic that was one of my main arguments), but at the same time I think in that role he would help our offense more than bringing Vince in and sitting him on the bench or trying to play him as a rookie. I definitely don't think Vince is ready to start yet and if that happened I see a combination of Carr and Peyton's rookie seasons with about 50 sacks and 20+ INTs and possibly a lot of nagging injuries from becoming gunshy and running too much. That aside, Bush would still be in on 90% or more of your snaps as a potential playmaker every time, and I think a guy like Kubiak could figure out a way to make him effective in that role, but I agree I have questioned whether you use the #1 pick on a part-time RB, part-time WR. That is one big reason why I think trading down is our best option.

Maybe im skeptical, and im surely going to get flamed for this, but i dont think im ready to pencil in reggie as a playmaker yet. He has a lot to prove to me in the nfl, the usual good stuff about size, durability, ability to run up the middle, his speed vs. nfl speed in getting to the outside, his ability to fight through contact, etc. The thing is, to justify taking a combination scatback/wide reciever hybrid, he is going to HAVE to be a superstar. We already have a capable running back, so bush would have to be head and shoulders above dominack for this pick to make sense. We dont IMO have a competent quarterback, so if vince young is even average its better then what we have currently. I would like to trade down for a ferguson, but i dont think it happens this year, so out of the bush vs. young debate, i have to say young. Let me ask you this, would you draft brian westbrook or michael vick #1 overall if they were the draft choices right now.

MorKnolle
01-20-2006, 03:07 PM
Your argument sounds fine.... good and fine, if we thought Reggie was the most talented WR in the draft..... I'd be fine drafting another reciever to go opposite AJ, even though I've liked all our recievers in the history of the team. Even Bradford. That makes more sense to me. Work on the passing game. Offensive line, WR, QB....... but the running game with a guy who isn't really a RB??


If Bush was a WR, I'd have a hard time selecting him at #1 overall, that just isn't a position that you normally use a #1 pick on, and a part-time RB, part-time WR is similar, I'm not sure I'd spend a #1 pick on him. That said, I wouldn't say Bush isn't really a RB, and after rewatching more game tapes on him recently and talking with a few scouts I know I'm not as concerned as I used to be about his size and durability, but it still is a question, and those contribute to my opinion that I think trading down would be the best option.

P.S. I don't like Bradford being here, I think AJ, Gaff, and Mathis should be a solid enough combo to be a good team, but adding Bush would still help.

Maybe im skeptical, and im surely going to get flamed for this, but i dont think im ready to pencil in reggie as a playmaker yet. He has a lot to prove to me in the nfl, the usual good stuff about size, durability, ability to run up the middle, his speed vs. nfl speed in getting to the outside, his ability to fight through contact, etc. The thing is, to justify taking a combination scatback/wide reciever hybrid, he is going to HAVE to be a superstar. We already have a capable running back, so bush would have to be head and shoulders above dominack for this pick to make sense. We dont IMO have a competent quarterback, so if vince young is even average its better then what we have currently. I would like to trade down for a ferguson, but i dont think it happens this year, so out of the bush vs. young debate, i have to say young. Let me ask you this, would you draft brian westbrook or michael vick #1 overall if they were the draft choices right now.

I understand those questions, but I don't think that makes him less of a playmaker, maybe less of an every-down RB, but he still has playmaking ability. His speed won't be as special in teh NFL as it is in college, but he is listed at 4.28 speed and I've asked my scout people I know and they confirm that he's really that fast, so that is still special for the NFL. His size is a bit of a concern to me as an every-down back, but I don't think he would be used as a 20 carry a game back, more like how I've said a 8-10 carry a game back and primarily as a #2 WR that could get anywhere from 3-10 catches a game and take more attention off AJ. My main thing is I think Carr is a good QB if we give him the tools to be successful, and Bush has playmaker athleticism and I think if they use him properly he could help the offense and help Carr become the QB he should be, but again I think trading down and addressing the OLine more heavily and then the defense would be more useful to Carr and the whole team.

swtbound07
01-20-2006, 06:30 PM
If Bush was a WR, I'd have a hard time selecting him at #1 overall, that just isn't a position that you normally use a #1 pick on, and a part-time RB, part-time WR is similar, I'm not sure I'd spend a #1 pick on him. That said, I wouldn't say Bush isn't really a RB, and after rewatching more game tapes on him recently and talking with a few scouts I know I'm not as concerned as I used to be about his size and durability, but it still is a question, and those contribute to my opinion that I think trading down would be the best option.

P.S. I don't like Bradford being here, I think AJ, Gaff, and Mathis should be a solid enough combo to be a good team, but adding Bush would still help.



I understand those questions, but I don't think that makes him less of a playmaker, maybe less of an every-down RB, but he still has playmaking ability. His speed won't be as special in teh NFL as it is in college, but he is listed at 4.28 speed and I've asked my scout people I know and they confirm that he's really that fast, so that is still special for the NFL. His size is a bit of a concern to me as an every-down back, but I don't think he would be used as a 20 carry a game back, more like how I've said a 8-10 carry a game back and primarily as a #2 WR that could get anywhere from 3-10 catches a game and take more attention off AJ. My main thing is I think Carr is a good QB if we give him the tools to be successful, and Bush has playmaker athleticism and I think if they use him properly he could help the offense and help Carr become the QB he should be, but again I think trading down and addressing the OLine more heavily and then the defense would be more useful to Carr and the whole team.


so i would say in summation, the general feeling is
bush is fast, but not an every down back, but supplementable as a wide reciever
Carr could be a good quarterback if we give him a better situation
Bush as a WR would help draw pressure from AJ because of his speed.
Fair enough...i guess we disagree because i find carr to be pretty much done, but nothing we say is going to sway the other.

One Quick question...what scouts do you know? Im not saying that in a sarcastic way, the reason i ask is because im pretty good friends with one of our scouts and i wondered if we knew the same guy.

Tulip
01-20-2006, 07:33 PM
Thanks for compiling all of these quotes. It was very enjoyable read. I may steal one of those quotes for my signature.

MorKnolle
01-20-2006, 09:22 PM
so i would say in summation, the general feeling is
bush is fast, but not an every down back, but supplementable as a wide reciever
Carr could be a good quarterback if we give him a better situation
Bush as a WR would help draw pressure from AJ because of his speed.
Fair enough...i guess we disagree because i find carr to be pretty much done, but nothing we say is going to sway the other.

One Quick question...what scouts do you know? Im not saying that in a sarcastic way, the reason i ask is because im pretty good friends with one of our scouts and i wondered if we knew the same guy.

I know and have talked to a couple different scouts for the Texans but I'd prefer to not give out their names over the MB since that might get back to them in a negative manner if anyone over there checks thru these things.

swtbound07
01-20-2006, 09:24 PM
I know and have talked to a couple different scouts for the Texans but I'd prefer to not give out their names over the MB since that might get back to them in a negative manner if anyone over there checks thru these things.


sure thing...i was just curious...no worries

MorKnolle
01-20-2006, 09:29 PM
sure thing...i was just curious...no worries

I guess to answer your question I'm sure I do know of your friend that is a scout, I've met I think all of them before but I've only really talked a decent amount with a few of them.

thunderkyss
01-20-2006, 09:54 PM
If Bush was a WR, I'd have a hard time selecting him at #1 overall, that just isn't a position that you normally use a #1 pick on, and a part-time RB, part-time WR is similar, I'm not sure I'd spend a #1 pick on him. That said, I wouldn't say Bush isn't really a RB,

His size is a bit of a concern to me as an every-down back, but I don't think he would be used as a 20 carry a game back, more like how I've said a 8-10 carry a game back and primarily as a #2 WR that could get anywhere from 3-10 catches a game and take more attention off AJ. My main thing is I think Carr is a good QB if we give him the tools to be successful, and Bush has playmaker athleticism and I think if they use him properly he could help the offense and help Carr become the QB he should be, but again I think trading down and addressing the OLine more heavily and then the defense would be more useful to Carr and the whole team.

I can't see any one taking him in the top 5, not if they are thinking like this. I really don't think he is top 10 material, but there is a lot of hype. I'll be paying attention, and scanning the net for what eveer knews I can find out about this guy, before Draft day........ Maybe I'll find the answer.... But for a legitimate #1, I shouldn't have to look so hard.

Toro
01-22-2006, 03:21 AM
One thing that pops out at me (not nessecarily from the thread authors original post) is that the Horns would not be successful without VY. The Trojans would be successful without Bush.

Great point..

You take Reggie Bush off USC, they've still got Leinart, they've still got LenDale White, they've still got Jarrett. Although the loss would be significant, I still would have predicted USC to be a National Title contender, even without him.

Take Vince Young off Texas and they're a 9 win team.. Good but not great.

inVINCEable Texan
02-09-2006, 11:24 AM
The Texans are not going to trade down even though many people believe they should. They are going to take Reggie or Vince, there is just too much talent this year to trade down.

It may be a very good option but they won't do it, they will make a decision of the two top picks and go from there.

The voices in my head said the Texans will draft Vince Young!.....For once, I hope these voices are right!!! :brickwall