PDA

View Full Version : Question on Reggie Bush


Hookem Horns
01-27-2006, 12:27 AM
First off, it's pretty obvious the Texans aren't going to draft VY. So, that brings us to Bush whom most think we will take. Some of those NFL scouts that have been ranting and raving about him also say that his main drawback is not being able to run between the tackles due to lack of size and durability. Is this a pretty common assesment? If so, I think that is a pretty big drawback for a runner. Considering the speed in the NFL I doubt he will be able to go to the outside often either. Is he projected to be 3rd down back on passing plays only, or line up as a slot receiver? In the Rose Bowl against a fast Texas defense he was more effective as a receiver than a runner. I admit, I only watched him 3 times this season, so you Bush lovers, do your best to sell him to me I am all ears.

BTW, if this guy is projected to be role player I am not sure that is worth a #1 or is a fringe benefit we can afford. I know the Jets are in love with him and I would think trading the pick to the Jets and grabbing D'Brick would not be a bad move depending on what else we get in that trade.

Bronco Texan
01-27-2006, 12:35 AM
Well I think DD will be the "feature back." But I think Bush will be our "feature game breaker." RB will probably be used in playaction passes alot. Kind of get him the ball and let him work his magic. That said I too believe he is not worth the first pick and would love to trade it to the jet and get D'brick, and maybe even Jon Abrahamn.

LoneStarState
01-27-2006, 12:39 AM
"Flashing uncanny acceleration and ability to change direction, Bush has conjured up memories of Gale Sayers, drawn comparisons to Marshall Faulk, Barry Sanders and Tony Dorsett, and is the favorite to be the No. 1 pick in April's NFL draft." AP 12/10/05

If Reggie Bush is anything like who he's being compared to, he can fit in any scheme. He can score from anywhere on the field. Could be a slot receiver, used in the backfield, used as a decoy. Having him on the field with AJ, DD and perhaps a certain TE from UT would give defenses fits. Reggie Bush's less than perfect performance was his version of Vince against A&M. Both are excellent players - I just think Reggie Bush provides the bigger impact.
:twocents:

kbourda
01-27-2006, 12:44 AM
I'm with you. I think Mr. McNair and Coack Kubiak could have placed tonight on "Dancing with the Stars". They danced around the topic ever so smoothly about VY/Bush. Unless something drastic happens, VY won't be drafted by the Texans. They pretty much said they are convinced that Carr can take us to the Super Bowl.

As far as Bush goes, he's a great RB. I don't doubt him as much as I doubt Carr. I'll be upset that VY won't be a Texan (no scratch that, mad as hell is more like it) but it won't be because of Bush. Either guy desrves to be the #1 pick. Any real (no let me rephrase this), Any TRUE, college football fan knows this. I said before this season started (college season) that I would take VY over any college football player in the country. So really what VY has done or accomplished, is nothing new to me. I saw the Rose Bowl game, I saw Bush, Leinart, and co. do what they do. That wasn't new to me either. Either guy has the chance to be a special talent in the league.

AustinJB
01-27-2006, 12:44 AM
First off, it's pretty obvious the Texans aren't going to draft VY...

:challenge Speak for yourself....I have seen/heard nothing that makes me think it's "pretty obvious the Texans aren't going to draft VY." Kubes saying that he thinks Carr will be a good QB in the NFL does NOT mean that he will be our QB.

Just think for a minute people....IF, IF, IF (see how I'm not jumping to conslusions) the Texans are considering taking VY (and then more than likely looking to trade Carr) what else would a smart HC say? Would he say, "I've been evaluating Carr's game tape and he stinks in every way possible...we must improve at the QB position....hey, btw, does anyone want to trade us a good veteran player and a 1st round pick for Carr?":brickwall :brickwall :brickwall

Hookem Horns
01-27-2006, 12:48 AM
"Flashing uncanny acceleration and ability to change direction, Bush has conjured up memories of Gale Sayers, drawn comparisons to Marshall Faulk, Barry Sanders and Tony Dorsett, and is the favorite to be the No. 1 pick in April's NFL draft." AP 12/10/05

If Reggie Bush is anything like who he's being compared to, he can fit in any scheme. He can score from anywhere on the field. Could be a slot receiver, used in the backfield, used as a decoy. Having him on the field with AJ, DD and perhaps a certain TE from UT would give defenses fits. Reggie Bush's less than perfect performance was his version of Vince against A&M. Both are excellent players - I just think Reggie Bush provides the bigger impact.
:twocents:

That sounds good but all those guys mentioned were effective running between the tackles right? So is that knock of not being able to run between the tackles a common assessment or just the opinion of a couple of scouts?

kbourda
01-27-2006, 12:49 AM
"Flashing uncanny acceleration and ability to change direction, Bush has conjured up memories of Gale Sayers, drawn comparisons to Marshall Faulk, Barry Sanders and Tony Dorsett, and is the favorite to be the No. 1 pick in April's NFL draft." AP 12/10/05

If Reggie Bush is anything like who he's being compared to, he can fit in any scheme. He can score from anywhere on the field. Could be a slot receiver, used in the backfield, used as a decoy. Having him on the field with AJ, DD and perhaps a certain TE from UT would give defenses fits. Reggie Bush's less than perfect performance was his version of Vince against A&M. Both are excellent players - I just think Reggie Bush provides the bigger impact.
:twocents:

Lighten up, Francis! Have YOU SEEN Reggie Bush play? Or are you reading what is said about him? I don't claim to be the talent evaluator of the NCAA but I hardly see him as Faulk or Dorsett. And for sure not Barry. And as far as Gale Sayers, I haven't seen the guy play so Bush is better than him in my eyes.

beerlover
01-27-2006, 12:51 AM
That sounds good but all those guys mentioned were effective running between the tackles right? So is that knock of not being able to run between the tackles a common assessment or just the opinion of a couple of scouts?

he seems to get at least one carry in between the tackles per game, I would be concerned however with what awaits him in the NFL :ouch:

kbourda
01-27-2006, 12:52 AM
:challenge Speak for yourself....I have seen/heard nothing that makes me think it's "pretty obvious the Texans aren't going to draft VY." Kubes saying that he thinks Carr will be a good QB in the NFL does NOT mean that he will be our QB.

Just think for a minute people....IF, IF, IF (see how I'm not jumping to conslusions) the Texans are considering taking VY (and then more than likely looking to trade Carr) what else would a smart HC say? Would he say, "I've been evaluating Carr's game tape and he stinks in every way possible...we must improve at the QB position....hey, btw, does anyone want to trade us a good veteran player and a 1st round pick for Carr?":brickwall :brickwall :brickwall

Come on, Buddy. I want VY here as badly probably even worse than you but they are not getting VY here under this regime. I'd love to be wrong but I doubt that I am.

LoneStarState
01-27-2006, 12:54 AM
That sounds good but all those guys mentioned were effective running between the tackles right? So is that knock of not being able to run between the tackles a common assessment or just the opinion of a couple of scouts?
Maybe they see something in his abilities to think he's comparable to those RBs, whether it's running between the tackles or around end or whatever. Your concern about Reggie Bush's ability to run between tackles is the same as my concern if Vince Young can take a snap from under center and function in a pro-style offense. That's why I am aprehensive of using the first pick on him, just as you concerns about taking Bush. Until we see them in those situations we won't know for sure. That's the risk of the draft...

LoneStarState
01-27-2006, 12:56 AM
he seems to get at least one carry in between the tackles per game, I would be concerned however with what awaits him in the NFL :ouch:
Same could be said for Vince Young (about what awaits him in the NFL). The LBs are faster and hit harder in this league. Look at the physical condition Steve McNair is in and he's not near the runner that Vince is. The more the qb runs - the more likely he is to get injured. Just because he was elusive againts defenses who have few if any pro prospects doesn't mean it will translate to the NFL.

TEXANRED
01-27-2006, 07:31 AM
:challenge Speak for yourself....I have seen/heard nothing that makes me think it's "pretty obvious the Texans aren't going to draft VY." Kubes saying that he thinks Carr will be a good QB in the NFL does NOT mean that he will be our QB.

Just think for a minute people....IF, IF, IF (see how I'm not jumping to conslusions) the Texans are considering taking VY (and then more than likely looking to trade Carr) what else would a smart HC say? Would he say, "I've been evaluating Carr's game tape and he stinks in every way possible...we must improve at the QB position....hey, btw, does anyone want to trade us a good veteran player and a 1st round pick for Carr?":brickwall :brickwall :brickwall
I think if they were not going to keep Carr you would here more things like"We are still evaluating Carr and looking at all of our options at this point. If we do decide to keep Carr we have to make sure that he is the right fit for the system, we are still trying to determine if his abilities will help us accomplish what we trying to do. He is a good QB with good potential, but as I stated earlier, we are keeping all of our options open at this time."

Of somthing like that. From what I have heard nothing that has been said has come anywhere close to that.

HJam72
01-27-2006, 07:58 AM
Here's what I'd say: "Carr is the best QB in the history of the game. He rocks! Anybody wanna take him for the #2 pick in the draft this year?" :)

Bubbajwp
01-27-2006, 08:18 AM
First off, it's pretty obvious the Texans aren't going to draft VY. So, that brings us to Bush whom most think we will take. Some of those NFL scouts that have been ranting and raving about him also say that his main drawback is not being able to run between the tackles due to lack of size and durability. Is this a pretty common assesment? If so, I think that is a pretty big drawback for a runner. Considering the speed in the NFL I doubt he will be able to go to the outside often either. Is he projected to be 3rd down back on passing plays only, or line up as a slot receiver? In the Rose Bowl against a fast Texas defense he was more effective as a receiver than a runner. I admit, I only watched him 3 times this season, so you Bush lovers, do your best to sell him to me I am all ears.

BTW, if this guy is projected to be role player I am not sure that is worth a #1 or is a fringe benefit we can afford. I know the Jets are in love with him and I would think trading the pick to the Jets and grabbing D'Brick would not be a bad move depending on what else we get in that trade.
Clinton Portis Height: 5-11 Weight: 212
RB 6-0 200 and says he is going to gain 10 pounds for the nfl.
If he does gain 10 pounds he would be almost identical in size to portis.

RUSHING

Year Team G GS Att Yards Avg Lg TD 20+
2002 Denver Broncos 16 12 273 1508 5.5 59 15 11
2003 Denver Broncos 13 13 290 1591 5.5 65 14 13

Reggie Bush would be playing in the exact same scheme that portis played in.

Exascor
01-27-2006, 08:20 AM
I think if they were not going to keep Carr you would here more things like"We are still evaluating Carr and looking at all of our options at this point. If we do decide to keep Carr we have to make sure that he is the right fit for the system, we are still trying to determine if his abilities will help us accomplish what we trying to do. He is a good QB with good potential, but as I stated earlier, we are keeping all of our options open at this time." No offense but that is pretty naive. No coach is going to come out and publicly demean, degrade or devalue one of his players...especially on his first day. Carr has been the Face of the Franchise™ for the past 4 seasons. They are going to pick up his option and he'll be a Texan for at least this coming season. No way would the Texans say anything other than that they have complete confidence in him. Even if they wanted to trade Carr, why make him out like he's a possible problem? That improves his trade value? Coach-speak is there for a reason.

That said, I agree that it appears from everything I've seen and heard that you can pencil Vince in on any roster other than the Texans. Bush is intriguing and would seem to create some serious match up concerns for opposing defenses. He scares me though. Size is a concern and he does seem to be a roleplayer more than a dominating starter. Trading down seems better and better to me now.

Maddict5
01-27-2006, 08:24 AM
its great watching these vince young lovers trying to come up with ways that involve him being picked by us. 'when kubiak said he liked what he saw of carr,he was doing it so we'd get more from a trade' lol.
Vince Young =Akili Smith/Mike Vick(or Mc Nair)- do you want to take that risk

Maddict5
01-27-2006, 08:27 AM
Clinton Portis Height: 5-11 Weight: 212
RB 6-0 200 and says he is going to gain 10 pounds for the nfl.
If he does gain 10 pounds he would be almost identical in size to portis.

RUSHING

Year Team G GS Att Yards Avg Lg TD 20+
2002 Denver Broncos 16 12 273 1508 5.5 59 15 11
2003 Denver Broncos 13 13 290 1591 5.5 65 14 13

Reggie Bush would be playing in the exact same scheme that portis played in.

thats dumb- portis is a tough(and great) running back that can do it all. just because they'll be the same size doesnt mean they'll have the same success

SteelBlueToro
01-27-2006, 08:36 AM
Lighten up, Francis! Have YOU SEEN Reggie Bush play? Or are you reading what is said about him? I don't claim to be the talent evaluator of the NCAA but I hardly see him as Faulk or Dorsett. And for sure not Barry. And as far as Gale Sayers, I haven't seen the guy play so Bush is better than him in my eyes.
Yeah, I have a TV and have seen Reggie Bush play! What a concept! None of us are scouts (though most like to think they are) and so this opinion about a players talent are just as valid as yours.

nunusguy
01-27-2006, 08:37 AM
If Reggie Bush is anything like who he's being compared to, he can fit in any scheme. He can score from anywhere on the field. Could be a slot receiver, used in the backfield, used as a decoy. Having him on the field with AJ, DD and perhaps a certain TE from UT would give defenses fits.
:twocents:
"a certain TE from UT". Can't believe, we've actually got a UT guy who has
left the realm of denial and realizes that VY won't be coming to Houston this fall to play football. Welcome to the real world !

Kaiser Toro
01-27-2006, 08:45 AM
"a certain TE from UT". Can't believe, we've actually got a UT guy who has
left the realm of denial and realizes that VY won't be coming to Houston this fall to play football. Welcome to the real world !

No one has said that we will not acquire VY, so there is no denial. However, if we do extend Carr, and not franchise him, then picking up VY would be a monumental blunder in my opinion.

LikeABoss
01-27-2006, 09:09 AM
USC didn't design many plays for Reggie to be a primarily inside runner. If you ask the coaches they would tell you the same thing. They played to each of their RB's strengths. Reggie is the speedy gamebreaker, Lendale is the power short yardage back. It's not that Reggie couldn't do it, the coaches just preferred to use Lendale who is the bigger, heavier runner in short yardage situations. But the question people should really be asking is whether Lendale is the kind of gamebreaking take it to the house kind of runner Reggie is? We know he's a big bruiser, but does he has to the speed to take it the distance whenever the oppourtunity presents itself? Can Lendale outrun a defense, or will he get outchased by a fat ole defensive lineman? Reggie bashers don't want to that about their good ole Lendale though:rolleyes:

And UT's own Cedric Benson was a big tough inside runner for 4 years in college, but he couldn't even beat out little ole Thomas Jones, and he couldn't stay healthy either. What about Cedric Benson's durability Reggie bashers? He's a big between the tackles bruiser that played for 4 years, but gets to the pros and can't even beat out the Thomas Jones nor stay healthy. The UT homer Reggie bashers don't wanna hear that though:rolleyes:

Kaiser Toro
01-27-2006, 09:15 AM
And UT's own Cedric Benson was a big tough inside runner for 4 years in college, but he couldn't even beat out little ole Thomas Jones, and he couldn't stay healthy either. What about Cedric Benson's durability Reggie bashers? He's a big between the tackles bruiser that played for 4 years, but gets to the pros and can't even beat out the Thomas Jones nor stay healthy. The UT homer Reggie bashers don't wanna hear that though:rolleyes:

Benson was a hold out. Jones was the 7th pick in the draft and had an all pro year. Benson getting injured says to me that we should trade down and pick up lineman and defensive players.

LikeABoss
01-27-2006, 09:22 AM
Benson was a hold out. Jones was the 7th pick in the draft and had an all pro year.

You know you is really trying to reach with this.

First, Benson had the whole season to beat out Jones and didn't get the job done. Second, the Bears drafted Benson and intended on him to be their primarily featured back because they lost faith in Jones carrying the load the entire season, but Benson just couldn't get the job done. Jones was considered a BUST from his days in Arizona all the way until he went to Tampa Bay and had a little success under Jon Gruden for a season. After that one season in Tampa, that's when Chicago signed him to a multi year dear kind of similar to DD's contract, but then the next season the Bears drafted Benson as a top five pick. You are not fooling anybody here bruh. Jones was considered a BUST.

SportsJunkie
01-27-2006, 09:22 AM
I kind of feel like Reggie Bush is embarrassed by the Rose Bowl after winning the Heisman. He will be a man on a mission during the combines. He is suppossedly a workout fanatic. I read where this summer he hooked up with LaDamian Tomlinson and took his game to another level. Just watch what he does at the combine and the "beauty contest" for the #1 pick will change again. Just wait!

Kaiser Toro
01-27-2006, 09:29 AM
You know you is really trying to reach with this.

First, Benson had the whole season to beat out Jones and didn't get the job done. Second, the Bears drafted Benson and intended on him to be their primarily featured back because they lost faith in Jones carrying the load the entire season, but Benson just couldn't get the job done. Jones was considered a BUST from his days in Arizona all the way until he went to Tampa Bay and had a little success under Jon Gruden for a season. After that one season in Tampa, that's when Chicago signed him to a multi year dear kind of similar to DD's contract, but then the next season the Bears drafted Benson as a top five pick. You are not fooling anybody here bruh. Jones was considered a BUST.

Or how about the Bears finally understood how to use Jones and make him realize the potential that others had seen? Competition never hurt anyone. He had a pretty good year his first year averaging 4.0 yards per carry. Did you know that in six seasons Jones has improved his yardage every year?

Bush could easily fall into Benson peril if he chooses to hold out as well.

edo783
01-27-2006, 09:29 AM
I also suspect that Reggie will be our pick (preference is trade down). He isn't and never will be a "Move the pile" type back, but he can/could run up the middle. The question then becomes "How effectively" and I think IF he learns to be a 1 cut and go performer in Kubes system, then he could be very effective. If he only seems to break it to the outside, he will NOT be very effective running. That doesn't mean he cn't/won't be very effective on long tosses, swing passes and screens where it get him into the open. Once he is in the open then it's "Katy bar the door" because he could go to the house at anytime. Bottom line, It will depend on how he adapts to the system and how the coaches game plan to use him. Used right...could be amazing.

DRAMA
01-27-2006, 09:38 AM
'Running between the tackles' is used a metaphor as well - the back is a big, plodding back who can move the line a few yards. If that's your offense, yeah, I can see that big boring back playing.

If you're 240 then yes, you must run betwwen the tackles but I think that idea in 2006, along with 4 yards and a pile of $#i+...err....dust, are antiquated. In Kubiaks offense, why must someone run between the tackles when they're required to take a step, read, cut and then go?

Yes, Mike Anderson and 'dumb as rocks' Tatum Bell are pretty good in that offense. However, Reggie's vision IMHO and football instincts are what set him apart from others. I mean, EVERYONE and their mother say we should draft Vince because of his intangibles. Well, if Reggie's vision and instincts and leadership, along with his 'feel' for the game are as good as what EVERY SINGLE SCOUT on the planet thinks, then maybe we have something??

infantrycak
01-27-2006, 10:13 AM
'Running between the tackles' is used a metaphor as well - the back is a big, plodding back who can move the line a few yards. If that's your offense, yeah, I can see that big boring back playing.

It isn't a metaphor, it is reality in the NFL. Nobody is going to make a living on taking it outside in the NFL--the D's are just too fast and it narrows the portion of the field which has to be defended. To be successful in the NFL, Bush is going to have to learn to start inside--he may bounce outside after starting inside, but he has to start inside.

Grid
01-27-2006, 10:18 AM
yah he needs to be able to cut back and shoot up the field.

But Bush said that the only reason he didnt run between the tackles at USC is because they had White to do that. He said that he is more than capable of running between the tackles.

Of course..you would expect him to say that.. but I dont think he would if he didnt honestly think that he can do it. And he doesnt strike me as the kind of guy that would think he is capable of more than he is.. he seems pretty humble.

DRAMA
01-27-2006, 10:28 AM
It isn't a metaphor, it is reality in the NFL. Nobody is going to make a living on taking it outside in the NFL--the D's are just too fast and it narrows the portion of the field which has to be defended. To be successful in the NFL, Bush is going to have to learn to start inside--he may bounce outside after starting inside, but he has to start inside.

I mean, sometimes it's used as a metaphor as a back description. The last running back in the draft could be horrible and if he's 240, he's a 'between the tackles' runner. Reggie may indeed run through the tackles literally and then kick outside or whatever. What I mean by metaphor is Reggie will never, nor should he be, used as a Rudi Johnson type of runner. Also, since we are not using a scheme based on the '4 yards...' mentality, Bush should be fine. I don't think Reggie will a primary sweep carrier but when I think about him actually running a sweep or defenses at least having to be leary of it, I like the thought of what he brings, ya know?

Basically, to be brief - Portis did it and I think Reggie will do it even better IMHO....

tulexan
01-27-2006, 10:29 AM
It isn't a metaphor, it is reality in the NFL. Nobody is going to make a living on taking it outside in the NFL--the D's are just too fast and it narrows the portion of the field which has to be defended. To be successful in the NFL, Bush is going to have to learn to start inside--he may bounce outside after starting inside, but he has to start inside.


A lot of his runs do start from the inside and then bounce outside. Tiki Barber or Warrick Dunn aren't between the tackles runners and they are two of the top running backs in the league. You can get away with it if you have a complimentary player who can be a between the tackles runner (Brandon Jacobs and TJ Duckett).

infantrycak
01-27-2006, 10:42 AM
A lot of his runs do start from the inside and then bounce outside. Tiki Barber or Warrick Dunn aren't between the tackles runners and they are two of the top running backs in the league. You can get away with it if you have a complimentary player who can be a between the tackles runner (Brandon Jacobs and TJ Duckett).

I didn't say Bush couldn't do it. Fact remains you have to be able to start your runs inside and Tiki and Dunn both start the majority of their runs inside. No one in the NFL is a starting RB and initiates more than 20% of his runs outside the tackles.

bigTEXan8
01-27-2006, 10:43 AM
Bush, to me, will be a lot like "Cadillac" Williams of TB. He'll run between the tackles and outside the tackles. One run that I think Bush could be good at, is the quick-hitter runs, where the G and T just start pushing in opposite directions, and then there is just this huge gap. The FB comes in and just takes out the LB. With Bush's speed, it was hard for the safties and corners even to get to the whole before Bush blasted through it. USC ran this play often with Bush. The thing with Bush, he is so talented, we just won't have to have him run the ball. He can be an every-down back, but not necessarily be the RB.

tulexan
01-27-2006, 10:57 AM
I didn't say Bush couldn't do it. Fact remains you have to be able to start your runs inside and Tiki and Dunn both start the majority of their runs inside. No one in the NFL is a starting RB and initiates more than 20% of his runs outside the tackles.


I understand that. No RB can be successful by only running outside, but a lot of Reggie's big highlight reel runs have started from the inside.

DRAMA
01-27-2006, 11:18 AM
I like Tiki B, Warrick and Westbrook...they're all solid backs - Tiki is really coming on. However, I really believe that this Bush kid is going to be something way out there. I really do. Couple his vision with that start/ stop style along with that speed? WoW! I think he's going to be something else...play action with Bush in the backfield is going to be a 8i+cH for those safeties and backers!! Throw in a TE who can run routes and catch? WHOAH!

(paid for by the Bush campaign.....)

LBC_Justin
01-27-2006, 12:08 PM
First off, it's pretty obvious the Texans aren't going to draft VY. So, that brings us to Bush whom most think we will take. Some of those NFL scouts that have been ranting and raving about him also say that his main drawback is not being able to run between the tackles due to lack of size and durability. Is this a pretty common assesment? If so, I think that is a pretty big drawback for a runner. Considering the speed in the NFL I doubt he will be able to go to the outside often either. Is he projected to be 3rd down back on passing plays only, or line up as a slot receiver? In the Rose Bowl against a fast Texas defense he was more effective as a receiver than a runner. I admit, I only watched him 3 times this season, so you Bush lovers, do your best to sell him to me I am all ears.

BTW, if this guy is projected to be role player I am not sure that is worth a #1 or is a fringe benefit we can afford. I know the Jets are in love with him and I would think trading the pick to the Jets and grabbing D'Brick would not be a bad move depending on what else we get in that trade.
everyone keeps saying that Reggie Bush was shut down in the Rose Bowl. LOL no way. Yes his performance was way overshadowed by VY's but he still had a great game, maybe not great by Reggie Bush standards but still great none the less.

Let me put it into perspective.

In the RoseBowl, which was one of his worst games of the year.
He...
averaged 6.3 yard per carry, rushing for 82 yards.
averaged 15.8 yards per catch, receiving for 95 yards.
1 TD

If his stats for the RoseBowl game were exstrapulated into a full 16 game NFL Season.
Recieving: He would be the #2 Wide Reciever in the NFL in total yards and he would be the #5 Wide Reciever in Yards per catch.
Rushing: He would be #1 rusher in yards per carry and he would be the #10 rusher in the NFL in total rushing yards. (All this while only getting 1/2 the carries, because of Lendale.)
Scoring: He would be the #4 in the NFL for most Touchdowns scored by any position.
All purpose yards: He would be #1 in the NFL in All purpose yards.

I know the stats don't convert like that to the NFL but the point is many people think UT shut him down in the Rose Bowl. No they didn't. In fact if Lendale White converts a 4th and 2 or the USC defense makes one 4th down stop, people would view this whole game differently, as USC is the winner.

Keep in mind that the UT defense had a "Spy" on him to keep him from breaking big plays. He still managed to break a few big plays both as a reciever and as a runner.

Reggie Bush is the real deal and he proved it over and over this entire season. He didn't just have one or two big games. He had lots of big games. Is he as big as his hype? no, no one could possible as big as the hype machine that ESPN has created for him. Just like VY is not as good as his hype. In this day and age of 24 hour TV/Radio coverage, no one can live up to the legend that Sports Center can make a player.

Another thing.
Pick any NFL running back, past or present. Compare their Yard per Carry as a college players to Reggie Bush's 8.7 ypc he had his Junior year. That should sell you.

As a Longhorn living in the heart of USC country, I hated all the hype Bush was getting. I watched every USC game looking for reasons this guy isn't the real deal and reasons not to like him. He is the real deal and lucky for the Texans we are going to be in a postion to get one of the best College rusher ever and a guy who will make a huge impact on our team NEXT YEAR. Not 2 years from now but NEXT YEAR.

:redtowel: Go Texans!!:redtowel:

DRAMA
01-27-2006, 12:40 PM
...the point is many people think UT shut him down in the Rose Bowl. No they didn't. In fact if Lendale White converts a 4th and 2 or the USC defense makes one 4th down stop, people would view this whole game differently, as USC is the winner.

Keep in mind that the UT defense had a "Spy" on him to keep him from breaking big plays. He still managed to break a few big plays both as a reciever and as a runner.

If getting almost 200 yards is being shut down, I can't wait for Reggie to get shut down every week next year. God forbid the days when they don't gameplan to stop him.....IMHO! :)

tulexan
01-27-2006, 12:58 PM
I think it is funny how some criticize Reggie on his Rose Bowl performance. Granted, he did have that costly failed lateral, but he did his part. The entire offense did their part. It was the defense which failed in that game.

jdog
01-27-2006, 01:38 PM
I used to think trade down, but after reading some of these quotes about Reggie Bush I am thinking Bush, Bush, Bush! He would be awesome lined up as a receiver with Johnson and Mathis.

http://usctrojans.collegesports.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/bush_reggie00.html

exclude
01-27-2006, 03:07 PM
its great watching these vince young lovers trying to come up with ways that involve him being picked by us. 'when kubiak said he liked what he saw of carr,he was doing it so we'd get more from a trade' lol.
Vince Young =Akili Smith/Mike Vick(or Mc Nair)- do you want to take that risk

C'mon, thats disgraceful!!! Please don't compare VY to Akili smith...cause you know Smith was a better prospect :woot2

Ahh jk folks, jk!!

HeartofHouston
01-27-2006, 04:57 PM
everyone keeps saying that Reggie Bush was shut down in the Rose Bowl. LOL no way. Yes his performance was way overshadowed by VY's but he still had a great game, maybe not great by Reggie Bush standards but still great none the less.

Let me put it into perspective.

In the RoseBowl, which was one of his worst games of the year.
He...
averaged 6.3 yard per carry, rushing for 82 yards.
averaged 15.8 yards per catch, receiving for 95 yards.
1 TD

If his stats for the RoseBowl game were exstrapulated into a full 16 game NFL Season.
Recieving: He would be the #2 Wide Reciever in the NFL in total yards and he would be the #5 Wide Reciever in Yards per catch.
Rushing: He would be #1 rusher in yards per carry and he would be the #10 rusher in the NFL in total rushing yards. (All this while only getting 1/2 the carries, because of Lendale.)
Scoring: He would be the #4 in the NFL for most Touchdowns scored by any position.
All purpose yards: He would be #1 in the NFL in All purpose yards.

I know the stats don't convert like that to the NFL but the point is many people think UT shut him down in the Rose Bowl. No they didn't. In fact if Lendale White converts a 4th and 2 or the USC defense makes one 4th down stop, people would view this whole game differently, as USC is the winner.

Keep in mind that the UT defense had a "Spy" on him to keep him from breaking big plays. He still managed to break a few big plays both as a reciever and as a runner.

Reggie Bush is the real deal and he proved it over and over this entire season. He didn't just have one or two big games. He had lots of big games. Is he as big as his hype? no, no one could possible as big as the hype machine that ESPN has created for him. Just like VY is not as good as his hype. In this day and age of 24 hour TV/Radio coverage, no one can live up to the legend that Sports Center can make a player.

Another thing.
Pick any NFL running back, past or present. Compare their Yard per Carry as a college players to Reggie Bush's 8.7 ypc he had his Junior year. That should sell you.

As a Longhorn living in the heart of USC country, I hated all the hype Bush was getting. I watched every USC game looking for reasons this guy isn't the real deal and reasons not to like him. He is the real deal and lucky for the Texans we are going to be in a postion to get one of the best College rusher ever and a guy who will make a huge impact on our team NEXT YEAR. Not 2 years from now but NEXT YEAR.

:redtowel: Go Texans!!:redtowel:

FREAKIN SWEET POST MAN..

Like I have said over and over people talk about how the Texas Defense shut him down but with taking less than half the carries the whole game he still almost put up 100 yards.. (82 not being far from it..) image what his numbers would have been like with 25 carries that game.. Texas D shutting down Bush i call him bull-ish..

LikeABoss
01-27-2006, 06:21 PM
Or how about the Bears finally understood how to use Jones and make him realize the potential that others had seen? Competition never hurt anyone. He had a pretty good year his first year averaging 4.0 yards per carry. Did you know that in six seasons Jones has improved his yardage every year?

Bush could easily fall into Benson peril if he chooses to hold out as well.

Or how about Thomas Jones went on Quite Frankly and told Stephen A Smith that he was upset with the Bears drafting Cedric Benson, but he wasn't bitter about it and he used it as motivation to play better this season? It doesn't matter how much indenial you want to be about this, just know that the Bears DID NOT draft Cedric Benson at #4 and gave him over $40 million dollars just to be an understudy to Thomas Jones. He was brought in to be the featured back over Thomas Jones but couldn't capitalize on the opportunity. Once again Thomas Jones was considered a bust from his Arizona days all the way up to his 1 average season in Tampa. This is the only season he has rushed for over a thousand yards and he's been in the league for SIX seasons.

run-david-run
01-27-2006, 07:41 PM
:challenge Speak for yourself....I have seen/heard nothing that makes me think it's "pretty obvious the Texans aren't going to draft VY." Kubes saying that he thinks Carr will be a good QB in the NFL does NOT mean that he will be our QB.

Just think for a minute people....IF, IF, IF (see how I'm not jumping to conslusions) the Texans are considering taking VY (and then more than likely looking to trade Carr) what else would a smart HC say? Would he say, "I've been evaluating Carr's game tape and he stinks in every way possible...we must improve at the QB position....hey, btw, does anyone want to trade us a good veteran player and a 1st round pick for Carr?":brickwall :brickwall :brickwall
Take off the burnt orange glasses and hat and take a deep breath.... I think both McNair and Kubiak have used evert possible phrase except "we will not draft VY" to tell its fans they will not take VY. You wouldnt say,
Carr has the potential to be one of the best to play the game" as Kubiak did, with the disclaimer being "on somebody else's team". Carr is our QB, get used to it. Also, it would cost us all of Carr's $8M to trade him, not going to happen!!! This is not the NBA, there is no sign-and-trade...

bad
01-28-2006, 05:59 PM
I used to think trade down, but after reading some of these quotes about Reggie Bush I am thinking Bush, Bush, Bush! He would be awesome lined up as a receiver with Johnson and Mathis.

http://usctrojans.collegesports.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/bush_reggie00.html I hear the NFL talent scouts are rating Reggie Bush higher than any collegiate player. Not just this year, but EVER.

Reading these quotes (and there are more around; I've never seen this much buzz over a college football player, ever) I'm convinced the Texans can't afford to pass this guy up (unless the trade is just ridiculous). Note that these quotes are from all over, not just USC alumnus and coaches, although the ones from his teammates can be pretty insightful. My favorite is the one from Kenechi Udeze.

Washington State head coach Bill Doba:
"If you've got a linebacker covering him, you might as well start singing their fight song."


USC Heisman Trophy-winning quarterback Matt Leinart:
"Every time Reggie touches the ball, anything can happen...He's an awesome weapon...A lot of people think he's an outside runner, but he's tough. He can run in between the tackles...When he first came to USC, he was running all over our first defense in fall camp, cutting back, reversing his field. We knew he was special. Anytime he has the ball, something big could happen. It's unbelievable what he can do."


Former USC All-American defensive end Kenechi Udeze:
"He's fun to watch. I remember his first day of practice, he must have run a circle around the whole defense and sprinted for a touchdown. Then to see it happen in the games was really funny."


Former USC All-American wide receiver Mike Williams:
"Reggie's the ultimate weapon."


Former USC center Norm Katnik:
"He's a special guy. He can shake people like no other. I almost tackled him two times myself. He has the ability to make people miss." USC athletic director and 1965 Heisman Trophy-winning tailback Mike Garrett: "He's going to be one of the best ever. He looks like another Gale Sayers."


USC head coach Pete Carroll:
"I told him, 'You're the most valuable guy on the field for what you're creating by your presence.'...The overriding element of his game is he's just got such fantastic hands. You can look at the speed and all the rest, but few guys catch the ball so well. I'm talking about anybody, not just running backs."


Ivan Maisel, ESPN.com:
"He releases adrenaline in every bloodstream the minute he touches the ball."


Gene Wojciechowski, ESPN.com:
"He's a human highlight tape."


Steve Bisheff, Orange County Register:
"Bush is definitely the most exciting player in college football. Bush with the football in an open space is like Barry Bonds at the plate with the bases loaded. Immediately, your senses heighten. Your pulse races. Your eyes refuse to look anywhere else...No one in college football has anyone like him. No one else is even close...The Trojans' flashy hummingbird of an all-purpose player is an amalgam of all the great USC backs through the years."


Steve Kelley, Seattle Times:
"Bush is one-of-a-kind. So good, so versatile, USC's coaching staff is just beginning to see all the ways he can be used. When he touches the ball, defensive coordinators hold their breath. Every play called for him can be a game-breaker. Every touch can be something you'll never forget...Bush zig-zags through defenses as if he has a sixth sense for the location of the next sliver of daylight. He cuts as sharply as a Ferrari in a chicane. He shimmies like a dancer in a music video. A football field is 53 yards wide, and there are plays where Reggie Bush seems to use every inch from sideline to sideline...'The President' is carving exquisite, artful-dodger runs through desperately grasping and gasping defenses. Re-awakening the echoes of all the great Trojan tailbacks who preceded him. Hail to the Chief."


Dennis Dodd, CBS Sportsline.com:
"They call him "The President." They might soon be calling him The King...He is that rare back with the speed and strength to run through the line and the ability to make defenders miss in space when he goes out for a pass...He is a symbol for what USC was, is and will be."


Randy Youngman, Orange County Register:
"Even if he got to carry or catch the ball on every down, I would never get tired of watching Reggie Bush, USC's electrifying running back. Bush has so many open-field moves, he's more elusive than 'The Fugitive.' Now you see him, now you don't...touchdown, Trojans!"


Arash Markazi, Daily Trojan:
"Reggie Bush looks like a creation from a video game-an almost unreal character created by a kid who finds all the secret codes to make his player faster, quicker and better than everyone else on the field...He always makes the impossible seem possible. The scary thing for USC's opponents is that this creation isn't imaginary. He's not from a video game. He's a living, breathing human joystick who terrorizes defenses with his blinding speed and ankle-breaking shimmies...His speed borders on blinding and his knack for eluding defenders borders on ridiculous."


Former Washington head coach Keith Gilbertson:
"I don't care what formation they're in, you better know where No. 5 is, OK? End of story."


Virginia Teach head coach Frank Beamer:
"If he could throw, he'd be Michael Vick." California head coach Jeff Tedford: "If he's not the best player in the country, he's one of the top, no question...He is so talented than any one-on-one situation, he's going to win. You have to pay attention to where he is."


Former Oregon State quarterback Derek Anderson:
"The kid is unbelievable. I've never seen anything like it, in the NFL or wherever."


Former Stanford head coach Buddy Teevens:
"You can't really stop Bush, to be perfectly honest. He's in a class by himself."


Former Stanford assistant coach Tom Williams:
"He is the most versatile player in the country and, in my opinion, he's the best player in the country."


Arizona State head coach Dirk Koetter:
"He can do it all. Every time he touches the ball, you hold your breath."


Former BYU head coach Gary Crowton:
"He's as good as any receiver on their team, and the next moment, he's running with power, makes one guy miss and he's so fast he can go the distance. He just has the ability to create lots of matchup problems without them changing personnel groups. That's a real luxury they have. It kind of reminds me of Marshall Faulk."


Colorado State head coach Sonny Lubick:
"The thing that makes him so darned good is he's such a confident young guy and he's never out of the play, no matter how bleak it looks, no matter how much you have him surrounded."
Kirk Herbstreit, ESPN:

"The most explosive player in college football is Reggie Bush. The best player in the country wears No. 5 for USC. If you get a chance, check him out. Reggie Bush...He's the most electrifying player in college football. Every time he touches the ball, he can score."
Bud Withers, Seattle Times:

"There is little doubt that Bush is the most dynamic player in the nation. He may not win the Heisman Trophy, but voters ought to think long and hard if defenders' broken ankles, Bush's gasp-inducing cuts and spinning, serpentine dashes matter."
Ted Miller, ESPN.com:


"Bush is Shakespeare. He's gifted with speedy brilliance and flourish. Bush is 200 pounds of sound and fury signifying touchdown. He doth rise from the ground like feathered Mercury striding the heavens...He resembles the elusive Gale Sayers or the versatile Marshall Faulk."


David Leon Moore, USA Today:
"Bush is basically a sworn enemy of a straight line. He's all switchbacks and zigzags, spin moves and ankle-breaking shimmies. Some people even think he is already the most entertaining, and maybe best, college football player in the country...He is a quiet sort, polite, humble, good grades, solid citizen...On a football field, he gets around like nobody else. Here, there, this sideline, that end zone, he's running, receiving, returning, making plays, scoring touchdowns, winning games...He runs with a can't-take-your-eyes-off-him style that seems part Marshall Faulk, part Barry Sanders, part Gale Sayers."


Nick Canepa, San Diego Union-Tribune:
"Bush, who runs like a witch flies, has developed into the most dangerous player in the country."


Jeff Miller, Orange County Register:
"What defenders see are hips and elbows and ankles and forearms and shoe bottoms, all of it twisting and spinning until what remains is a trail of vapor and shadows and empty-armed opponents...USC uses him to create Maalox matchups for the opposition. When Bush is positioned anywhere but the backfield, 10 defenders can be seen pointing and waving, motioning as to his whereabouts."


USC tailback LenDale White:
"He's smooth. He's got mad, crazy speed...If Reggie's not the best there is, he's one of the best. He opens this offense up so much just by being there." Former USC All-American defensive lineman Shaun Cody: "Practicing against him was great training for us. You want to improve your quickness, try chasing a rabbit around."


Former USC tight end Alex Holmes:
"When he's in, you heard linebackers screaming every time. They were all shouting about 'No. 5.' Reggie is a guy who literally changes the game just by being out there."


Former USC All-American linebacker Lofa Tatupu:
"We just sat back on Saturday and watched the show...Not to take credit away from the offensive line because they've done a great job, but Reggie sets up his blocks so well that they can miss their man completely and he still gets through...I've even told guys on the other team, 'Don't feel bad. He got me with that play twice this week in practice, too.'"


Former USC cornerback Kevin Arbet:
"He's the best player I've ever played with or against. When he's running an option route against you, you just have to guess. It's impossible."


Patrick Kinmartin, Daily Trojan:
"His combination of track-sprinter speed and music-video shiftiness makes him a one-man show."


Dan Weber, Riverside Press-Telegram:
"Bush awes his teammates daily with his ability to get to full speed on his second step."


Todd Harmonson, Orange County Register:
"Bush is a highlight-show fixture with physiology-defying, did-he-do-that moves. The easy comparison is to Marshall Faulk because of the similarity in all-around games, but those who saw Gale Sayers recognize the speed, spins and spellbinding cuts...He is a speed demon who sees Christmas morning when a linebacker tries to defend him and a winnable challenge when a quick corner draws the assignment...Off the field, Bush is a quiet leader who is on track to graduate in 3 ˝ years."


Phil Collin, South Bay Daily Breeze:
"Around USC now, they're simply wondering what Reggie will come up with next. The thing is, they know it's coming. Opponents do too...As brilliant as he can be on the football field, Bush is simply that humble off of it. He smiles sheepishly at the mention of his nickname, 'The President.'"


Gary Klein, Los Angeles Times:
"Keith Gilbertson half-jokingly labeled the situation unfair. Bill Doba called the potential problems monstrous. Mike Riley found only one word to describe it-horrible. That's what these Pac-10 coaches said when asked to assess difficulties created for defenses when Reggie Bush lines up as a receiver."


Michael Ventre, MSNBC.com:
"Bush is young and multi-talented. He's a running back. He's a receiver. He's a kick returner. He's a punt returner. He's even a passer. If you try to pigeonhole him, you'd better have lots of pigeonholes...Bush can stop on a dime, give you nine cents change, then blow past you before you can bend to pick it up...When it comes to pure, all-around, pound-for-pound value from a college football player, it's hard to beat what Bush brings to the table...He's a genuine once-in-a-generation player...And he's a good kid-smart, down to earth, respectful of others yet supremely confident...He has turned a run-of-the-mill punt return into an event. He causes teams to kick away from him on kickoffs. When he comes into the game, defenders cast desperate looks at their sideline for advice."

Wolf
01-28-2006, 06:10 PM
I hope his stock skyrockets and we trade down and gain a 2nd this year a first and 2nd next year ..or whatever.. I hope someone overpays for #1 overall and we get some defense.

I still have a sick feeling watching the Texans on national TV against the seahawks and gave up 40 points.. Embarrassing

hollywood_texan
04-12-2006, 12:30 PM
If Reggie Bush is a once in a generation back, why does it apprear that there is no interest in trading up to get him? Or maybe he is that great but he isn't worth the price tag? Think about this, every year in the draft there are running backs in the later rounds that provide decent numbers that can provide probably provide 60% of the production on offense and cost at least a third less. We are going to be paying a premium for Bush yards and mismatches.

Does Reggie Bush fit the within the protypicial model of an NFL system to win Super Bowls? I don't think a team has to have Reggie Bush to win a Super Bowl and I think any team that makes it to the AFC Championship game or Super Bowl will have a good enough defense to limit his production.

I have watched Bush on several occassions, twice in person, and it seems he gets a majority of his yardage on the 2 - 3 plays a game. Therefore, I think is average is misleading. I think an interesting stat on Reggie would be his average offensive play when he is under and over 10 yards. I suspect that his average per play when held under 10 yards is around 3 yards per play or lower.

My point is, we are going to be paying max money on a rookie contract for the potential of 2 - 3 big plays per game from Bush with no proven track record of crunch time yards between the tackles.

Just some points to consider because this is not a slam dunk as a lot people make it to seem.

Further, even if Reggie Bush becomes one of the greatest backs of all time, that doesn't mean we will win a Super Bowl.

Take a look around the NFL, proven systems and coaches win Super Bowls, not players. It is the same teams and the same coaches making runs at the Super Bowl with different players.

I hope Kubiak is focusing more on the best system to win a Super Bowl, evaluating the current talent, and getting the talent that fits that system than slobbering all over Reggie Bush like a lot of other people.

A player can be shut down, not a system.

Bush will probably have an amazing career and provide a lot of marketing dollars, but don't confuse that with winning a Super Bowl.

I pay for my season tickets for the hope of winning a Super Bowl, not to watch some guy play running back or post about him petitioning to use #5 in the NFL.

Frank_The_Tank
04-12-2006, 12:47 PM
I was wondering what the big deal is about Vince Playing in a shotgun offense, and Reggie's ability to run up the middle. Most people are concerned with guys in shotgun style o's because of a lack of speed or footwork, we all know that is one of VY strongest atributes so comming from behind the center should not be a problem. Vince also took snaps from under the center this past year and most of his Jnr. Year, plus all of his high school years, so its not like the guy has never taken snaps from behind the center. Another thing is the comment on Bush inbetween the tackles. I think many questions are asked about him being able to run between the tackles is because he hardly ever ran between the tackles in College. 95% of his runs were sweeps and or inside runs that were bounced outside. Does it mean he can't run inside, heck no, but like Vince in the Shotgun, almost all of the highlight reel plays for Bush were on plays built to utilize his ability to reach the corner andturn it up field. I think people are looking way to hard to find a means to knock these two guys.

hollywood_texan
04-12-2006, 01:46 PM
I was wondering what the big deal is about Vince Playing in a shotgun offense, and Reggie's ability to run up the middle. Most people are concerned with guys in shotgun style o's because of a lack of speed or footwork, we all know that is one of VY strongest atributes so comming from behind the center should not be a problem. Vince also took snaps from under the center this past year and most of his Jnr. Year, plus all of his high school years, so its not like the guy has never taken snaps from behind the center. Another thing is the comment on Bush inbetween the tackles. I think many questions are asked about him being able to run between the tackles is because he hardly ever ran between the tackles in College. 95% of his runs were sweeps and or inside runs that were bounced outside. Does it mean he can't run inside, heck no, but like Vince in the Shotgun, almost all of the highlight reel plays for Bush were on plays built to utilize his ability to reach the corner andturn it up field. I think people are looking way to hard to find a means to knock these two guys.

Good points, but a #1 pick commands top dollar and you need to make sure that player fits your system and can be successful in the NFL.

They are legit issues to bring up, but the further either one of these guys slip in the draft (if at all), the easier it is draft due to their atheletic ability alone.

For example, I would like to draft Reggie Bush at #5 or #6, and if we didn't take him at #1, he could be available at that point because of the needs of the teams selecting behind us..

Bottom line, it is hard to justify any player #1 due to the contarct size and guaranteed amounts. There is a lot risk in that pick and big difference in price 5 picks later.

Furthermore, quarterbacks have generally longer careers but take a little longer to develop, but quarterbacks are less likely to get injured.

Just more things to think about before you make a huge investment.

El Amigo Invisible
04-12-2006, 01:48 PM
Can Reggie B pass block?:stirpot:

Texansfan30
04-12-2006, 02:01 PM
It amuses me to see people punch holes in Reggie Bush. "Too much money for a RB", or "He doesn't run inside". Yet they want to draft VY, and tie up 2 #1 overall picks in the QB position. Or draft Ferguson and sink that kind of money in the T position.

This guy is the most electrifying player in the nation. Possibly the best prospect ever. He's only 20 - so in 7 seasons he'll still be in his prime. Give the kid a break.

My consolation is that Reggie will be a Texan. Whether or not we win a Super Bowl will not rest with Reggie - it will rest with how well they develop the rest of the team.

Oh - and guys, every other team wants Reggie - don't kid yourself. But I bet Casserly/McNair have told them that unless they back the draft truck up and start unloading, don't even bother. You don't let the 'greatest college prospect ever' go for a 1st this year and a 2nd next year.

hollywood_texan
04-12-2006, 02:02 PM
Can Reggie B pass block?:stirpot:

Not sure, but that is a skill that can be coached and it looks like he has the work ethic to learn it.

I think the question is, what is more valuable, Reggie pass blocking or running a route? You probably work in both.

hollywood_texan
04-12-2006, 02:09 PM
It amuses me to see people punch holes in Reggie Bush. "Too much money for a RB", or "He doesn't run inside". Yet they want to draft VY, and tie up 2 #1 overall picks in the QB position. Or draft Ferguson and sink that kind of money in the T position.
This guy is the most electrifying player in the nation. Possibly the best prospect ever. He's only 20 - so in 7 seasons he'll still be in his prime. Give the kid a break.

My consolation is that Reggie will be a Texan. Whether or not we win a Super Bowl will not rest with Reggie - it will rest with how well they develop the rest of the team.

Oh - and guys, every other team wants Reggie - don't kid yourself. But I bet Casserly/McNair have told them that unless they back the draft truck up and start unloading, don't even bother. You don't let the 'greatest college prospect ever' go for a 1st this year and a 2nd next year.

Not sure if your posting is a response to me, but I didn't mention Vince Young's name in my post.

But you bring up a point about investing in two #1 picks into the QB position.

Look at this perspective, we are about have two #1's and #4 draft pick sunk into the QB, WR, and RB. Looking from that perspective, if this offense isn't in the top 5 soon, what is the point?

Also, your posting mentions nothing about winning a Super Bowl.

Reggie Bush may be the best back ever, but I would rather win a Super Bowl than have Reggie Bush. Reggie Bush does not guarantee a Super Bowl picture. Most #1 picks don't ever play in a Super Bowl. How many of the best backs ever have played in the Super Bowl? Not many.

Texans_Chick
04-12-2006, 02:11 PM
Can Reggie B pass block?:stirpot:

It is supposed to be one of his strengths.

MasterC25
04-12-2006, 02:21 PM
If Reggie Bush is a once in a generation back, why does it apprear that there is no interest in trading up to get him? Or maybe he is that great but he isn't worth the price tag? Think about this, every year in the draft there are running backs in the later rounds that provide decent numbers that can provide probably provide 60% of the production on offense and cost at least a third less. We are going to be paying a premium for Bush yards and mismatches.

Does Reggie Bush fit the within the protypicial model of an NFL system to win Super Bowls? I don't think a team has to have Reggie Bush to win a Super Bowl and I think any team that makes it to the AFC Championship game or Super Bowl will have a good enough defense to limit his production.

I have watched Bush on several occassions, twice in person, and it seems he gets a majority of his yardage on the 2 - 3 plays a game. Therefore, I think is average is misleading. I think an interesting stat on Reggie would be his average offensive play when he is under and over 10 yards. I suspect that his average per play when held under 10 yards is around 3 yards per play or lower.

My point is, we are going to be paying max money on a rookie contract for the potential of 2 - 3 big plays per game from Bush with no proven track record of crunch time yards between the tackles.

Just some points to consider because this is not a slam dunk as a lot people make it to seem.

Further, even if Reggie Bush becomes one of the greatest backs of all time, that doesn't mean we will win a Super Bowl.

Take a look around the NFL, proven systems and coaches win Super Bowls, not players. It is the same teams and the same coaches making runs at the Super Bowl with different players.

I hope Kubiak is focusing more on the best system to win a Super Bowl, evaluating the current talent, and getting the talent that fits that system than slobbering all over Reggie Bush like a lot of other people.

A player can be shut down, not a system.

Bush will probably have an amazing career and provide a lot of marketing dollars, but don't confuse that with winning a Super Bowl.

I pay for my season tickets for the hope of winning a Super Bowl, not to watch some guy play running back or post about him petitioning to use #5 in the NFL.

Those 2 or 3 plays he will make he takes them to the house that is 14 to 21 points, your argument is so unreasonable look at any RBs stats that his runs are just under 10 yards there avg. is not oboviusly great. If your a Reggie Bush Hater than just come out and say that, I would give you more respect than trying to tell me 2 or 3 big plays is not that important.

hollywood_texan
04-12-2006, 02:23 PM
It is supposed to be one of his strengths.

Pass blocking in the PAC-10 will be a little different than in the NFL.

Porky
04-12-2006, 02:23 PM
If Reggie Bush is a once in a generation back, why does it apprear that there is no interest in trading up to get him? Or maybe he is that great but he isn't worth the price tag? Think about this, every year in the draft there are running backs in the later rounds that provide decent numbers that can provide probably provide 60% of the production on offense and cost at least a third less. We are going to be paying a premium for Bush yards and mismatches.

Does Reggie Bush fit the within the protypicial model of an NFL system to win Super Bowls? I don't think a team has to have Reggie Bush to win a Super Bowl and I think any team that makes it to the AFC Championship game or Super Bowl will have a good enough defense to limit his production.

I have watched Bush on several occassions, twice in person, and it seems he gets a majority of his yardage on the 2 - 3 plays a game. Therefore, I think is average is misleading. I think an interesting stat on Reggie would be his average offensive play when he is under and over 10 yards. I suspect that his average per play when held under 10 yards is around 3 yards per play or lower.

My point is, we are going to be paying max money on a rookie contract for the potential of 2 - 3 big plays per game from Bush with no proven track record of crunch time yards between the tackles.

Just some points to consider because this is not a slam dunk as a lot people make it to seem.

Further, even if Reggie Bush becomes one of the greatest backs of all time, that doesn't mean we will win a Super Bowl.

Take a look around the NFL, proven systems and coaches win Super Bowls, not players. It is the same teams and the same coaches making runs at the Super Bowl with different players.

I hope Kubiak is focusing more on the best system to win a Super Bowl, evaluating the current talent, and getting the talent that fits that system than slobbering all over Reggie Bush like a lot of other people.

A player can be shut down, not a system.

Bush will probably have an amazing career and provide a lot of marketing dollars, but don't confuse that with winning a Super Bowl.

I pay for my season tickets for the hope of winning a Super Bowl, not to watch some guy play running back or post about him petitioning to use #5 in the NFL.


I'll agree with you on one point. Reggie Bush does not guarantee a SB. The rest of your post is such a mess, I don't really know where to start. So many fallacies and just flat out wrong points, and I am not into writing books, so I will just leave you with this thought.

Welcome to Houston Reggie! :redtowel:

Runner
04-12-2006, 02:25 PM
Those 2 or 3 plays he will make he takes them to the house that is 14 to 21 points, your argument is so unreasonable look at any RBs stats that his runs are just under 10 yards there avg. is not oboviusly great. If your a Reggie Bush Hater than just come out and say that, I would give you more respect than trying to tell me 2 or 3 big plays is not that important.

But realistically, what good are a couple of touchdowns if you haven't had 20 carries and 20 clouds of dust up the middle? :rolleyes:

MasterC25
04-12-2006, 02:25 PM
Can Reggie B pass block?:stirpot:

He is actually a good pass blocker as said by many scouts, he just needs to work on technique which will get better with coaching. But as far a pass blocking he is one of the best in the draft because he can read defenses and is tougher than advertise.

El Amigo Invisible
04-12-2006, 02:26 PM
Not sure, but that is a skill that can be coached and it looks like he has the work ethic to learn it.

I think the question is, what is more valuable, Reggie pass blocking or running a route? You probably work in both.
Texans Chick says that it is one of his strengths. I hope so because Casserely did not sound like he wanted D'Brick and he also said we have adressed the O line problem. DD was not too good at it so I hope RB can be because we wont have a QB for long if he can't. ERRRR.. I mean Sage will be running the offense. :crying:

chuckm
04-12-2006, 02:28 PM
Can Reggie B pass block?:stirpot:


I think that McClain stated last week that Bush is strong in that area ... but if Kubiak's keeping him in to pass block more than a play action pass or two per game, he's using him incorrectly ... :twocents:

Runner
04-12-2006, 02:30 PM
I hope so because Casserely did not sound like he wanted D'Brick and he also said we have adressed the O line problem.

I hadn't heard that - he used the past tense? The team thinks one starter and coaching has solved the problem?

That's what I've been hearing, but not from a published source.

This is either a very interesting piece of info, or I'm reading way too much into an off-the-cuff remark.

hollywood_texan
04-12-2006, 02:36 PM
Those 2 or 3 plays he will make he takes them to the house that is 14 to 21 points, your argument is so unreasonable look at any RBs stats that his runs are just under 10 yards there avg. is not oboviusly great. If your a Reggie Bush Hater than just come out and say that, I would give you more respect than trying to tell me 2 or 3 big plays is not that important.

You are assuming those two three plays will always be touchdowns. If I remeber correctly, he only scored one touchdown in the National Championship game and had three big runs.

I think you are missing my point on the under 10 yards thing. I am sure LenDale White's yards per carry under 10 yards a pop is a lot better than Reggie's while at USC. That is why LenDale White ran on the fourth and short yardage or it was Lienart sneaking with maybe Reggie giving him a push.

I am not a Reggie Bush Hater, I just don't think he is worth max money for three plays a game. That's it.

We don't need Reggie Bush to win a Super Bowl.

I do think Reggie Bush is an amazing athelete with a strong work ethic and will probably have an amazing career.

Bottom line, that doesn't mean I want him on my team. It is matter my philosophy about being successful in the NFL.

Proven coaches and systems win or even get to the Super Bowl. If you look at the last 10 years or so, you should be able to see that pattern.

The best runnings backs have a hard time making it to the Super Bowl.

PokerStar
04-12-2006, 02:39 PM
Casserly and most scouts are not overly fond of D'Brick. He is solid, but his hype machine has worn down and they see him for what he is. Other than that though the Texans are probably pretty happy with how the O-line is. they figure they are in a draft and can get a RT and a G in the 2nd-6th and be fine. Check out the tape of our games, if you know anything about football then you will see why our pass blocking was so bad. Ask a coach about the technique they used on 5-7step drops. It is called jump blocking it sucks. When I was playing football in Arizona in high school our coach had us do that, but only on quick hitches and to set up draws and such. Wow that just made me think I need to get my fat behind in shape, why is we linemen love our steak.

hollywood_texan
04-12-2006, 02:39 PM
I'll agree with you on one point. Reggie Bush does not guarantee a SB. The rest of your post is such a mess, I don't really know where to start. So many fallacies and just flat out wrong points, and I am not into writing books, so I will just leave you with this thought.

Welcome to Houston Reggie! :redtowel:

Then why post anything at all?

Give me your top 3 fallacies.

I don't think that will require a book.

whiskeyrbl
04-12-2006, 02:43 PM
If Reggie Bush is a once in a generation back, why does it apprear that there is no interest in trading up to get him? Or maybe he is that great but he isn't worth the price tag? Think about this, every year in the draft there are running backs in the later rounds that provide decent numbers that can provide probably provide 60% of the production on offense and cost at least a third less. We are going to be paying a premium for Bush yards and mismatches.

Does Reggie Bush fit the within the protypicial model of an NFL system to win Super Bowls? I don't think a team has to have Reggie Bush to win a Super Bowl and I think any team that makes it to the AFC Championship game or Super Bowl will have a good enough defense to limit his production.

I have watched Bush on several occassions, twice in person, and it seems he gets a majority of his yardage on the 2 - 3 plays a game. Therefore, I think is average is misleading. I think an interesting stat on Reggie would be his average offensive play when he is under and over 10 yards. I suspect that his average per play when held under 10 yards is around 3 yards per play or lower.

My point is, we are going to be paying max money on a rookie contract for the potential of 2 - 3 big plays per game from Bush with no proven track record of crunch time yards between the tackles.

Just some points to consider because this is not a slam dunk as a lot people make it to seem.

Further, even if Reggie Bush becomes one of the greatest backs of all time, that doesn't mean we will win a Super Bowl.

Take a look around the NFL, proven systems and coaches win Super Bowls, not players. It is the same teams and the same coaches making runs at the Super Bowl with different players.

I hope Kubiak is focusing more on the best system to win a Super Bowl, evaluating the current talent, and getting the talent that fits that system than slobbering all over Reggie Bush like a lot of other people.

A player can be shut down, not a system.

Bush will probably have an amazing career and provide a lot of marketing dollars, but don't confuse that with winning a Super Bowl.

I pay for my season tickets for the hope of winning a Super Bowl, not to watch some guy play running back or post about him petitioning to use #5 in the NFL.

After these comments, i suppose that back in the day when the Oilers took Earl Campbell,I guess that was a mistake? I would have liked to have won a SB, but no way I would have passed on Earl, just as I don't think you can pass on Bush.I know two different type runners ,but expect same excitement. There are alot of nay-sayers,can't do this can't do that, well when Earl was a rookie there was a certain LB for the Rams that said there was no way a rookie would run over him,well ....he did(literally).

Vinny
04-12-2006, 02:45 PM
After these comments, i suppose that back in the day when the Oilers took Earl Campbell,I guess that was a mistake? I would have liked to have won a SB, but no way I would have passed on Earl, just as I don't think you can pass on Bush.I know two different type runners ,but expect same excitement. There are alot of nay-sayers,can't do this can't do that, well when Earl was a rookie there was a certain LB for the Rams that said there was no way a rookie would run over him,well ....he did(literally).This is a good example of the fact that a RB can be shut down with a scheme. Earl was one of the greatest of all times but a legendary RB can be shut down with a dedicated scheme when you are in the playoffs facing great defenses. Even Earl couldn't carry our team to the big prize.

tulexan
04-12-2006, 02:46 PM
You are assuming those two three plays will always be touchdowns. If I remeber correctly, he only scored one touchdown in the National Championship game and had three big runs.

I think you are missing my point on the under 10 yards thing. I am sure LenDale White's yards per carry under 10 yards a pop is a lot better than Reggie's while at USC. That is why LenDale White ran on the fourth and short yardage or it was Lienart sneaking with maybe Reggie giving him a push.

I am not a Reggie Bush Hater, I just don't think he is worth max money for three plays a game. That's it.

We don't need Reggie Bush to win a Super Bowl.

I do think Reggie Bush is an amazing athelete with a strong work ethic and will probably have an amazing career.

Bottom line, that doesn't mean I want him on my team. It is matter my philosophy about being successful in the NFL.

Proven coaches and systems win or even get to the Super Bowl. If you look at the last 10 years or so, you should be able to see that pattern.

The best runnings backs have a hard time making it to the Super Bowl.


There were several USC games last year where LenDale wasn't getting it done and Reggie had to take over. Fresno State, Notre Dame, even UCLA in the first half are a few examples. LenDale played great in the second half of the UCLA game because USC was winning by 30 or so points and Reggie didn't even play in the second half. He probably could have broken LT's single game rushing record that game if they wanted to, but Carroll likes to spread the wealth and give everyone their fair share.

hollywood_texan
04-12-2006, 03:01 PM
There were several USC games last year where LenDale wasn't getting it done and Reggie had to take over. Fresno State, Notre Dame, even UCLA in the first half are a few examples. LenDale played great in the second half of the UCLA game because USC was winning by 30 or so points and Reggie didn't even play in the second half. He probably could have broken LT's single game rushing record that game if they wanted to, but Carroll likes to spread the wealth and give everyone their fair share.

The UCLA game really doesn't count because USC was all over them from the beginning.

As for Fresno State, that was just a shoot out with little defense.

I didn't watch the Notre Dame game.

Reggie Bush had a spectacular career at USC and desevered the win the Heisman when it was voted on (meaning if they would have voted after the Rose Bowl it probably would have went to Vince, but that is not how it is done, and I am not suggesting they change it).

Philosophically, I am not sold on drafting a running back at #1. I would prefer to trade down and not expect someone to sell the farm for the trade. Just get out of it take what you can get and build the interior lines on either side of the ball. There is a lot of talent out there is year in the top 6 picks or so to do that. We could have won several of those games late in the season and could be sitting at 6 or 7 instead of #1.

Reggie Bush will probably have a spectacular career, and the Texans don't have to him to be successful.

I think the Patriots and Steelers are so successful because they have interchangeable parts because they select personnel to fit a system.

I hope Kubiak is working on building a Super Bowl system that can work with or without Reggie Bush. All the talk about Reggie Bush gives me the impression that building a Super Bowl system is not the focus.

I want to go to Super Bowl and relish a Texans victory.

Porky
04-12-2006, 03:23 PM
Then why post anything at all?

Give me your top 3 fallacies.

I don't think that will require a book.

Originally Posted by hollywood_texan
If Reggie Bush is a once in a generation back, why does it apprear that there is no interest in trading up to get him? Or maybe he is that great but he isn't worth the price tag? Think about this, every year in the draft there are running backs in the later rounds that provide decent numbers that can provide probably provide 60% of the production on offense and cost at least a third less. We are going to be paying a premium for Bush yards and mismatches.

***You will pay a premium for any great player. So are you suggesting we draft a lot of average players so we don't have to pay a premium. Totally baseless and silly argument.

Does Reggie Bush fit the within the protypicial model of an NFL system to win Super Bowls? I don't think a team has to have Reggie Bush to win a Super Bowl and I think any team that makes it to the AFC Championship game or Super Bowl will have a good enough defense to limit his production.

***I don't disagree that a great defense can limit a great player, but stop one? Doubtful. Still, if he isn't your only playmaker, guess what? The D concentrating all of their efforts on stopping Bush, or whomever, will simply open up other opportunities for our other playmakers. Don't you think Tenn tried to stop Marshall Faulk in the SB? Sure, but that also opened up stuff for their great WR's. It isn't about one person, something you fail to account for. One person like this can dictate what the D can do to the other 10 players.

I have watched Bush on several occassions, twice in person, and it seems he gets a majority of his yardage on the 2 - 3 plays a game. Therefore, I think is average is misleading. I think an interesting stat on Reggie would be his average offensive play when he is under and over 10 yards. I suspect that his average per play when held under 10 yards is around 3 yards per play or lower.

**You could say the exact same thing about nearly every great big play RB. Take Barry Sanders. The D would stop him for a 2 yrd loss, then he might make 3, then the next play, he rips one for 25 yards. This argument is easily your most silly. It makes zero sense. So, if Tom Brady throws 4 passes and makes 5 yards a pass, then on the 5th, throws a bomb for 50 yards, somehow we erase the 50 because he doesn't get that every time? That's the whole point. While other backs get 4, 4, 5, 2, and 3, Bush will get that then rip off 50 yards. Big plays change the entire complexion of the game...not too mention his versatility.

My point is, we are going to be paying max money on a rookie contract for the potential of 2 - 3 big plays per game from Bush with no proven track record of crunch time yards between the tackles.

**You might have a point there, but if Bush runs off a couple of big plays to put you ahead, you might not need someone to run off time on the clock. You are putting the cart before the horse. Without a stud to get us the lead, how are we supposed to protect one?


Just some points to consider because this is not a slam dunk as a lot people make it to seem.

Further, even if Reggie Bush becomes one of the greatest backs of all time, that doesn't mean we will win a Super Bowl.

**Nothing is guaranteed, but I guess could have been said of Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, John Elway, Emmit Smith, Tom Brady, Walter Peyton, et al. One player doesn't win it by himself, he needs help. But without great players, you have almost no chance. So, your solution is to draft a bunch of nobody's. Nice.

Take a look around the NFL, proven systems and coaches win Super Bowls, not players. It is the same teams and the same coaches making runs at the Super Bowl with different players.

**Now you have gone off the deep end. Payers don't win super bowls. That will be a shock to John Elway, and a bunch of other guys. Maybe we should just draft a bunch of kids off the local chess club. Ridicioulous statement.

I hope Kubiak is focusing more on the best system to win a Super Bowl, evaluating the current talent, and getting the talent that fits that system than slobbering all over Reggie Bush like a lot of other people.

**Again, major fallacy. Players win. Period. Coaches are there to get the most from the talent they have. Systems don't win jack squat, players do. Ridicoulous statement.

A player can be shut down, not a system.

**Wrong. Systems can be shut down or limited too. See Pittsburgh vs. Indy circa Jan 2006. You have to be willing to change on the fly if thats what it takes. And while great players can be limited, most can never be shut down completely, and as stated above, that just opens up the rest of the offense.

Bush will probably have an amazing career and provide a lot of marketing dollars, but don't confuse that with winning a Super Bowl.

**Who is? Not me.

I pay for my season tickets for the hope of winning a Super Bowl, not to watch some guy play running back or post about him petitioning to use #5 in the NFL.

**Stupid statement. No need to comment further.

wags
04-12-2006, 03:28 PM
This is a good example of the fact that a RB can be shut down with a scheme.

QB's can be shut down as well. Manning consistently picks teams apart and the Steelers schemed against him fairly well.

hollywood_texan
04-12-2006, 04:00 PM
Originally Posted by hollywood_texan
If Reggie Bush is a once in a generation back, why does it apprear that there is no interest in trading up to get him? Or maybe he is that great but he isn't worth the price tag? Think about this, every year in the draft there are running backs in the later rounds that provide decent numbers that can provide probably provide 60% of the production on offense and cost at least a third less. We are going to be paying a premium for Bush yards and mismatches.

***You will pay a premium for any great player. So are you suggesting we draft a lot of average players so we don't have to pay a premium. Totally baseless and silly argument.

Does Reggie Bush fit the within the protypicial model of an NFL system to win Super Bowls? I don't think a team has to have Reggie Bush to win a Super Bowl and I think any team that makes it to the AFC Championship game or Super Bowl will have a good enough defense to limit his production.

***I don't disagree that a great defense can limit a great player, but stop one? Doubtful. Still, if he isn't your only playmaker, guess what? The D concentrating all of their efforts on stopping Bush, or whomever, will simply open up other opportunities for our other playmakers. Don't you think Tenn tried to stop Marshall Faulk in the SB? Sure, but that also opened up stuff for their great WR's. It isn't about one person, something you fail to account for. One person like this can dictate what the D can do to the other 10 players.

I have watched Bush on several occassions, twice in person, and it seems he gets a majority of his yardage on the 2 - 3 plays a game. Therefore, I think is average is misleading. I think an interesting stat on Reggie would be his average offensive play when he is under and over 10 yards. I suspect that his average per play when held under 10 yards is around 3 yards per play or lower.

**You could say the exact same thing about nearly every great big play RB. Take Barry Sanders. The D would stop him for a 2 yrd loss, then he might make 3, then the next play, he rips one for 25 yards. This argument is easily your most silly. It makes zero sense. So, if Tom Brady throws 4 passes and makes 5 yards a pass, then on the 5th, throws a bomb for 50 yards, somehow we erase the 50 because he doesn't get that every time? That's the whole point. While other backs get 4, 4, 5, 2, and 3, Bush will get that then rip off 50 yards. Big plays change the entire complexion of the game...not too mention his versatility.

My point is, we are going to be paying max money on a rookie contract for the potential of 2 - 3 big plays per game from Bush with no proven track record of crunch time yards between the tackles.

**You might have a point there, but if Bush runs off a couple of big plays to put you ahead, you might not need someone to run off time on the clock. You are putting the cart before the horse. Without a stud to get us the lead, how are we supposed to protect one?


Just some points to consider because this is not a slam dunk as a lot people make it to seem.

Further, even if Reggie Bush becomes one of the greatest backs of all time, that doesn't mean we will win a Super Bowl.

**Nothing is guaranteed, but I guess could have been said of Jerry Rice, Joe Montana, John Elway, Emmit Smith, Tom Brady, Walter Peyton, et al. One player doesn't win it by himself, he needs help. But without great players, you have almost no chance. So, your solution is to draft a bunch of nobody's. Nice.

Take a look around the NFL, proven systems and coaches win Super Bowls, not players. It is the same teams and the same coaches making runs at the Super Bowl with different players.

**Now you have gone off the deep end. Payers don't win super bowls. That will be a shock to John Elway, and a bunch of other guys. Maybe we should just draft a bunch of kids off the local chess club. Ridicioulous statement.

I hope Kubiak is focusing more on the best system to win a Super Bowl, evaluating the current talent, and getting the talent that fits that system than slobbering all over Reggie Bush like a lot of other people.

**Again, major fallacy. Players win. Period. Coaches are there to get the most from the talent they have. Systems don't win jack squat, players do. Ridicoulous statement.

A player can be shut down, not a system.

**Wrong. Systems can be shut down or limited too. See Pittsburgh vs. Indy circa Jan 2006. You have to be willing to change on the fly if thats what it takes. And while great players can be limited, most can never be shut down completely, and as stated above, that just opens up the rest of the offense.

Bush will probably have an amazing career and provide a lot of marketing dollars, but don't confuse that with winning a Super Bowl.

**Who is? Not me.

I pay for my season tickets for the hope of winning a Super Bowl, not to watch some guy play running back or post about him petitioning to use #5 in the NFL.

**Stupid statement. No need to comment further.

Well, I got what I asked for.

I am not sure how my statement about paying season tickets for a Super Bowl winner is stupid? Maybe your point is that everyone expects that, so why state it? If that is it, point taken, but with some of the stuff I read I feel like we lose the forest from the trees on this board.

Pittsburgh has a better system than Indy. That is the point. The Pittsburgh defense figured out Payton Manning and he didn't adjust. Payton calls all the plays and Pittsburgh gave him certain packages so Manning would call certain plays. The Pittsburgh coaching staff and system beat the explosive Indy offense that relies on mismatches and individual talent. That game was lost by Indy in the week of preparation and not adjusting during the game.

Players do have to win the games. But if systems and coaches are not more important, then why isn't the same teams/coaches winning year and year out and competing for the Super Bowl? Then why did we fire Capers if the players are more important, maybe with your rationale we should have fired the players?

My point about Bush is he is too expensive in my opinion to draft at #1 for the Houston Texans. We already have Davis. Yes, I think Bush is better than Davis in that he has more explosive ability and has more total upside, but I think it is overkill. You don't need it at that price. That is really my point, this is overkill with all the other talent out there. There are tougher positions to field because of talent level, left tackle and middle linebacker as examples.

You mention Marshall Faulk and the Rams and their explosive offense. They barely beat the Titans but was great victory nonetheless. But, a great coach with a great system/gameplan shut them down in their next Super Bowl. My point, explosive offenses that feed off of mismatches have a hard time winning the Super Bowl. It happens from time to time, but those teams struggle in the playoffs but do great in the regular season, which makes it a little misleading.

You alway mention John Elway. He didn't win a Super Bowl until a coach came in put in a pounding running game that Terrell Davis just exploded on. I believe Terrell Davis was selected in the 5th or 6th round. So, I would attribute John Elway's Super Bowl rings to a coach and winning system. As great as Elway was, he needed help.

I think you have to pay a premium from time to time, and you have to find value as well. The trick is paying for it at the right time and the right price.

We probably both agree that Reggie Bush had an amazing career at USC and will probably have a great career in the NFL. I think where we part is how much is he worth.

Also, I think our philosophies on the NFL are little different. I would prefer to go the route of the Patriots, Steelers, and Broncos, build a system and select players that fit that system and don't get distracted if some player is great but doesn't fit the plan if he is too expensive.

Lastly, you metion my most silly arguement is the average under/over 10 yards. My point is moving the chains on a consistent basis. For example, it is late in the fourth quarter and your offense needs to make one more first down to seal the game. How is that silly? If you can consistently run the football at 3 yards plus, then you theoritically, you will be sitting at around 3 and 3 almost every time. That's my point as well as crunch time yardage.

From you reponse I don't have any fallacies, and neither do you.

We just differ on philosophical styles.

infantrycak
04-12-2006, 04:01 PM
I hadn't heard that - he used the past tense? The team thinks one starter and coaching has solved the problem?

That's what I've been hearing, but not from a published source.

This is either a very interesting piece of info, or I'm reading way too much into an off-the-cuff remark.

IMO that is being overreported. I took Casserly's comment as they were not considering Ferguson at #1 and the new staff felt the players currently on the roster could play significantly better with the new schemes being put in place. IMO he was not making an exclusionary statement that they would not be drafting any OLmen in the draft--just eliminating Ferguson at #1.

Porky
04-12-2006, 04:16 PM
Well, I got what I asked for.

I am not sure how my statement about paying season tickets for a Super Bowl winner is stupid? Maybe your point is that everyone expects that, so why state it? If that is it, point taken, but with some of the stuff I read I feel like we lose the forest from the trees on this board.

The reason I said it's stupid is because you seem to state that the two (having Bush, winning a SB) are somehow mutually exclusive. As if having a great player like Bush somehow makes it less likely we win a SB. I have never heard of anything quite so outlandish before. So, in theory we are more likely to win a SB with Johnathen Wells and 3 yards and a clould of dust because he can get 3 yards when it counts? Jjust because Bush is explosive doesn't mean he can't get the tough yards. And as I say, you actually have to get a lead in order to protect it late. A player like Bush transends a system. You are out of your ever lovin mind if you don't think Bill Billichek wouldn't give his left nad to have a player of Bush's calibur.

hollywood_texan
04-12-2006, 04:41 PM
The reason I said it's stupid is because you seem to state that the two (having Bush, winning a SB) are somehow mutually exclusive. As if having a great player like Bush somehow makes it less likely we win a SB. I have never heard of anything quite so outlandish before. So, in theory we are more likely to win a SB with Johnathen Wells and 3 yards and a clould of dust because he can get 3 yards when it counts? Jjust because Bush is explosive doesn't mean he can't get the tough yards. And as I say, you actually have to get a lead in order to protect it late. A player like Bush transends a system. You are out of your ever lovin mind if you don't think Bill Billichek wouldn't give his left nad to have a player of Bush's calibur.

I re-read my posts and I didn't say anything to effect of getting Bush means not winning the Super Bowl. Your are right, that is crazy. It seems to me from my perspective you are tyring to read certain things into my comments and are totally set on drafting Bush. I have a certain philosophy on the best chances of winning a Super Bowl, no sense in retyping it.

Your characterization of my theory isn't accurate. I never mentioned Johnathen Wells as an example, my point is to follow a proven system not some player. I used the Denver Broncos and the Pittsburgh Steelers to follow for establishing a running game. Take it between the tackles. I believe that is where games are won and lost, especially in the beginning of the game because sets the tempo.

You use the word "transcend" to describe Bush and his position in a system or his superior talents that he is better than any system he is in. That concerns me, the NFL is a team sport where the talent level is not too far apart from team to team (even with or without Reggie Bush), which is where coaching and the system come in and why it so important.

What do you mean by Bellichek would give his left nad for Bush? Give me your opinion of what he would trade to get into the #1 spot. Because I would like to know what your thinking so I can see if I am "out of" my "ever lovin mind." If everyone wants Bush so much, why don't we hear about it?

MasterC25
04-12-2006, 04:46 PM
You are assuming those two three plays will always be touchdowns. If I remeber correctly, he only scored one touchdown in the National Championship game and had three big runs.

I think you are missing my point on the under 10 yards thing. I am sure LenDale White's yards per carry under 10 yards a pop is a lot better than Reggie's while at USC. That is why LenDale White ran on the fourth and short yardage or it was Lienart sneaking with maybe Reggie giving him a push.

I am not a Reggie Bush Hater, I just don't think he is worth max money for three plays a game. That's it.

We don't need Reggie Bush to win a Super Bowl.

I do think Reggie Bush is an amazing athelete with a strong work ethic and will probably have an amazing career.

Bottom line, that doesn't mean I want him on my team. It is matter my philosophy about being successful in the NFL.

Proven coaches and systems win or even get to the Super Bowl. If you look at the last 10 years or so, you should be able to see that pattern.

The best runnings backs have a hard time making it to the Super Bowl.


Yeah Emmitt, Walter, Franco and Marcus Allen really had trouble getting to the Super Bowl. Barry brought the Lions single-handling into the playoffs and we know had bad of a team they had.

hollywood_texan
04-12-2006, 04:48 PM
IMO that is being overreported. I took Casserly's comment as they were not considering Ferguson at #1 and the new staff felt the players currently on the roster could play significantly better with the new schemes being put in place. IMO he was not making an exclusionary statement that they would not be drafting any OLmen in the draft--just eliminating Ferguson at #1.

What does IMO mean?

I think there is another one IMFO or something.

Does it mean "It is my opinion..." That seems to work when applying to the statement above.

Please let me know on this thread. I know this isn't the place but just curious.

hollywood_texan
04-12-2006, 04:50 PM
Yeah Emmitt, Walter, Franco and Marcus Allen really had trouble getting to the Super Bowl. Barry brought the Lions single-handling into the playoffs and we know had bad of a team they had.

I think Emmitt, Walter, and Franco were in great systems. Not really sure about Allen and that Raider team.

But Emmitt, Walter, and Franco had great offensive lines and stiffling defenses on the other side of the ball that helped them out a lot. We don't have those two things right now. Also had some great coaching.

infantrycak
04-12-2006, 04:51 PM
What does IMO mean?


IMO--in my opinion
JMO--just my opinion

Texansfan30
04-12-2006, 05:03 PM
Well, I got what I asked for.

I am not sure how my statement about paying season tickets for a Super Bowl winner is stupid? Maybe your point is that everyone expects that, so why state it? If that is it, point taken, but with some of the stuff I read I feel like we lose the forest from the trees on this board.

Pittsburgh has a better system than Indy. That is the point. The Pittsburgh defense figured out Payton Manning and he didn't adjust. Payton calls all the plays and Pittsburgh gave him certain packages so Manning would call certain plays. The Pittsburgh coaching staff and system beat the explosive Indy offense that relies on mismatches and individual talent. That game was lost by Indy in the week of preparation and not adjusting during the game.

Players do have to win the games. But if systems and coaches are not more important, then why isn't the same teams/coaches winning year and year out and competing for the Super Bowl? Then why did we fire Capers if the players are more important, maybe with your rationale we should have fired the players?

My point about Bush is he is too expensive in my opinion to draft at #1 for the Houston Texans. We already have Davis. Yes, I think Bush is better than Davis in that he has more explosive ability and has more total upside, but I think it is overkill. You don't need it at that price. That is really my point, this is overkill with all the other talent out there. There are tougher positions to field because of talent level, left tackle and middle linebacker as examples.

You mention Marshall Faulk and the Rams and their explosive offense. They barely beat the Titans but was great victory nonetheless. But, a great coach with a great system/gameplan shut them down in their next Super Bowl. My point, explosive offenses that feed off of mismatches have a hard time winning the Super Bowl. It happens from time to time, but those teams struggle in the playoffs but do great in the regular season, which makes it a little misleading.

You alway mention John Elway. He didn't win a Super Bowl until a coach came in put in a pounding running game that Terrell Davis just exploded on. I believe Terrell Davis was selected in the 5th or 6th round. So, I would attribute John Elway's Super Bowl rings to a coach and winning system. As great as Elway was, he needed help.

I think you have to pay a premium from time to time, and you have to find value as well. The trick is paying for it at the right time and the right price.

We probably both agree that Reggie Bush had an amazing career at USC and will probably have a great career in the NFL. I think where we part is how much is he worth.

Also, I think our philosophies on the NFL are little different. I would prefer to go the route of the Patriots, Steelers, and Broncos, build a system and select players that fit that system and don't get distracted if some player is great but doesn't fit the plan if he is too expensive.

Lastly, you metion my most silly arguement is the average under/over 10 yards. My point is moving the chains on a consistent basis. For example, it is late in the fourth quarter and your offense needs to make one more first down to seal the game. How is that silly? If you can consistently run the football at 3 yards plus, then you theoritically, you will be sitting at around 3 and 3 almost every time. That's my point as well as crunch time yardage.

From you reponse I don't have any fallacies, and neither do you.

We just differ on philosophical styles.

I have to jump in here and offer an opinion. Your attitude seems to be 'don't draft explosive players, because they can be stifled by the right game plan'.

Indy was beaten by Pittsburgh, IMO, because Pittsburgh played an incredible game, gameplanned them perfectly, and went on to the Super Bowl. Yet you conveniently forget the fact that they BARELY beat them, and if that CB makes one more cut, Indy goes on and Pitt goes home. What's more, if that CB hadn't been stabbed by his girlfriend, maybe he scores anyway. And if the Indy kicker didn't choke, maybe Indy wins.

In the end, players and coaches win the championships, and gameplanning, adjustments, etc - are very, very important. Belichick has proven that he can win with Brady and good players because of his system. Other coaches maybe need more talent than Belichick does. However, that doesn't mean that you shy away from talent. You need talent AND coaching.

All of the 'Trade Down' crowd seems to take it for granted that someone will back the truck up and start unloading draft picks/players to us for Reggie Bush. I think that's unrealistic. As badly as those other teams want him, they aren't going to pony up a Minnesota Vikings or New Orleans Saints deal. You're not going to get a deal that gives a #1 this year, #1 next year, #2 this year, #3 next year kind of trade. The only teams that would do that are far enough down the draft order so that their #1's aren't worth that much.

Everybody sit down and take off the Rose colored glasses and take a deep breath. Personally, I wouldn't touch a RB other than Reggie Bush in this draft. If he had stayed in school, I wouldn't hesitate to take Mario Williams. We don't need VY, and we don't 'need' a RB. We are taking Reggie Bush because he is SPECIAL.

I would love to see the quotes of the anti-Bush people if we win a SB with him. (And by anti-Bush I mean those who don't want to draft him - not implying you 'hate' him or anything)

Bayern
04-12-2006, 05:06 PM
If everyone wants Bush so much, why don't we hear about it?

Jesus man, do you really think any of us would KNOW about it if other teams wanted him?

Thats kind of showing your cards prematurely don't you think?

I don't think there is a team in the NFL that isn't high on Bush to a certain extent. Of course whether they'd be willing to offer us due compensation for the pick is the million dollar question. I guarantee you come the 29th, there will be several offers to move up for him.

Porky
04-12-2006, 05:10 PM
I re-read my posts and I didn't say anything to effect of getting Bush means not winning the Super Bowl.


Hollywood Texan then:

We don't need Reggie Bush to win a Super Bowl.

The best runnings backs have a hard time making it to the Super Bowl.

Hollywood Texan now:

I didn't say anything to effect of getting Bush means not winning the Super Bowl.

You make the call.

hollywood_texan
04-12-2006, 05:21 PM
I have to jump in here and offer an opinion. Your attitude seems to be 'don't draft explosive players, because they can be stifled by the right game plan'.

Indy was beaten by Pittsburgh, IMO, because Pittsburgh played an incredible game, gameplanned them perfectly, and went on to the Super Bowl. Yet you conveniently forget the fact that they BARELY beat them, and if that CB makes one more cut, Indy goes on and Pitt goes home. What's more, if that CB hadn't been stabbed by his girlfriend, maybe he scores anyway. And if the Indy kicker didn't choke, maybe Indy wins.

In the end, players and coaches win the championships, and gameplanning, adjustments, etc - are very, very important. Belichick has proven that he can win with Brady and good players because of his system. Other coaches maybe need more talent than Belichick does. However, that doesn't mean that you shy away from talent. You need talent AND coaching.

All of the 'Trade Down' crowd seems to take it for granted that someone will back the truck up and start unloading draft picks/players to us for Reggie Bush. I think that's unrealistic. As badly as those other teams want him, they aren't going to pony up a Minnesota Vikings or New Orleans Saints deal. You're not going to get a deal that gives a #1 this year, #1 next year, #2 this year, #3 next year kind of trade. The only teams that would do that are far enough down the draft order so that their #1's aren't worth that much.

Everybody sit down and take off the Rose colored glasses and take a deep breath. Personally, I wouldn't touch a RB other than Reggie Bush in this draft. If he had stayed in school, I wouldn't hesitate to take Mario Williams. We don't need VY, and we don't 'need' a RB. We are taking Reggie Bush because he is SPECIAL.

I would love to see the quotes of the anti-Bush people if we win a SB with him. (And by anti-Bush I mean those who don't want to draft him - not implying you 'hate' him or anything)

Pittsburgh almost lost that game because the person who called that running play should have just had Big Ben just take a knee. As good as their defense was playing, why take that chance? When they set up to not take a knee I started to laugh because I had a feeling something was going to happen. If you ever wonder why Buddy Ryan took that shot at Gilbride (I think that was the offensive coordinator) for running the Chuck in Duck inside Houston's 30 with less than 30 seconds to half during the last game of the season, now you know why. If Buddy would have been the defensive coordinator for the Steelers that day, he would have been laying mushroom clouds all of over the RCA Dome.

Pittsburgh almost lost that game because they forgot who put them in control, their defense.

I agree with you on these blockbuster trades, they are just not going to happen.

I believe we can win a Super Bowl with Reggie Bush, but I think Reggie Bush is too expensive and doesn't fit the best type of system that gives you the best chance to win the Super Bowl.

My main point though is that he will be too expensive for the value in return compared to other players on the roster and what can be drafted in later rounds, more bang for your buck if you will.

I would like him a #5 or #6 in terms of dollars. Think of it as return on investment. The same return in dollars compared to a larger investment will a yield higher return.

hollywood_texan
04-12-2006, 05:29 PM
Hollywood Texan then:

We don't need Reggie Bush to win a Super Bowl.

The best runnings backs have a hard time making it to the Super Bowl.Hollywood Texan now:

I didn't say anything to effect of getting Bush means not winning the Super Bowl.

You make the call.

"We don't need Reggis Bush to win a Super Bowl." That means we can win a Super Bowl with or without him. IMO, it will be easier with out him if we pick him at #1 in the draft because of salary cap issues that will proceed next year with Andre Johnson that will ripple through the entire roster.

The best best running backs have a hard time making it to the Super Bowl. That means less likely for it too happen, or the best running backs don't have any advantage over any other player in making the Super Bowl.

Neither of those statements with explanations say it will not happen.

Maybe I am not writing clearly enough or just don't comprehend the statements.

Texans86
04-12-2006, 05:42 PM
"We don't need Reggis Bush to win a Super Bowl." That means we can win a Super Bowl with or without him. IMO, it will be easier with out him if we pick him at #1 in the draft because of salary cap issues that will proceed next year with Andre Johnson that will ripple through the entire roster.

The best best running backs have a hard time making it to the Super Bowl. That means less likely for it too happen, or the best running backs don't have any advantage over any other player in making the Super Bowl.

Neither of those statements with explanations say it will not happen.

Maybe I am not writing clearly enough or just don't comprehend the statements.

Someone tell Alexander he's not one of the best runningbacks. Pass that on to Jerome Bettis, Terrell Davis, Corey Dillon, and Marshall Faulk while you're at it. Only two starting running backs make the Super Bowl each year. Only one wins it. That means there are at least 31 running backs who don't win a Super Bowl. There are also 31 quarterbacks who don't win. The Denver offense that won the Super Bowl revolved around Terrell Davis and John Elway. Both were necessary and helped each other. Running the ball gave Elway time, and passing helped create some running lanes.

Almost every great offense has a great quarterback and a great running back. We have a chance to land a running back with huge potential that could make an impact this year. We also have a quarterback who only two years ago put up around 3500 yards with a mediocre offense. DD is a solid back, no one doubts that. But how much better can we be with AJ, Moulds, Putzier (and maybe even that other TE Joppru), DD, and Bush. That is leaps and bounds ahead of AJ, Bradford, Bruener/Miller, and DD/Wells. Also, that 3500 came with a defensive minded coach and not much of an O-Line. We have tremendous potential on our offense.

Great Running Backs do help lead teams to the Super Bowl, if only in the fact that they give their quarterback more time to throw. Again I refer to the fact that last season's rushing leader, and new season TD record holder lead the Seahawks to the Super Bowl only three months ago.

hollywood_texan
04-12-2006, 06:15 PM
Someone tell Alexander he's not one of the best runningbacks. Pass that on to Jerome Bettis, Terrell Davis, Corey Dillon, and Marshall Faulk while you're at it. Only two starting running backs make the Super Bowl each year. Only one wins it. That means there are at least 31 running backs who don't win a Super Bowl. There are also 31 quarterbacks who don't win. The Denver offense that won the Super Bowl revolved around Terrell Davis and John Elway. Both were necessary and helped each other. Running the ball gave Elway time, and passing helped create some running lanes.

Almost every great offense has a great quarterback and a great running back. We have a chance to land a running back with huge potential that could make an impact this year. We also have a quarterback who only two years ago put up around 3500 yards with a mediocre offense. DD is a solid back, no one doubts that. But how much better can we be with AJ, Moulds, Putzier (and maybe even that other TE Joppru), DD, and Bush. That is leaps and bounds ahead of AJ, Bradford, Bruener/Miller, and DD/Wells. Also, that 3500 came with a defensive minded coach and not much of an O-Line. We have tremendous potential on our offense.

Great Running Backs do help lead teams to the Super Bowl, if only in the fact that they give their quarterback more time to throw. Again I refer to the fact that last season's rushing leader, and new season TD record holder lead the Seahawks to the Super Bowl only three months ago.

None of those running backs were taken #1 in the draft.

4 of those 5 running backs had their coach take a team previously to the Super Bowl.

My point is, coaching and the system are more important than drafting Reggie Bush at #1. We can do this with him or without him.

IMO we can do it easier without him because of extra draft picks if we trade down and we can develop a system that has interchangeable parts that doesn't rely on a once in a lifetime talent.

Also, IMO Reggie Bush is too expensive at the #1 pick. His contract is going to be huge!

infantrycak
04-12-2006, 08:02 PM
My point is, coaching and the system are more important than drafting Reggie Bush at #1. We can do this with him or without him.

IMO we can do it easier without him because of extra draft picks if we trade down and we can develop a system that has interchangeable parts that doesn't rely on a once in a lifetime talent.

Also, IMO Reggie Bush is too expensive at the #1 pick. His contract is going to be huge!

OK, the same can be said of every single position on the team. Let's reduce this to fundamentals--are you saying trading down is so much more important the Texans should do it no matter how low the offer they receive? If not, they need to have a plan for staying in place. That plan should be to take bpa or in this year's draft--Reggie Bush, Vince Young or maybe Mario Williams.

Nighthawk
04-12-2006, 08:19 PM
First off, it's pretty obvious the Texans aren't going to draft VY. So, that brings us to Bush whom most think we will take. Some of those NFL scouts that have been ranting and raving about him also say that his main drawback is not being able to run between the tackles due to lack of size and durability. Is this a pretty common assesment?

I think Bush will be a bust in the NFL. I just don't see his skill set transferring to the majors. Everything that's good about him relies on the other players being slower and less agile and I don't think that's the NFL.

Mind you, even as a bust he'll be a decent player, but he will not be head and shoulders above D. Davis, for example.

hollywood_texan
04-12-2006, 08:52 PM
OK, the same can be said of every single position on the team. Let's reduce this to fundamentals--are you saying trading down is so much more important the Texans should do it no matter how low the offer they receive? If not, they need to have a plan for staying in place. That plan should be to take bpa or in this year's draft--Reggie Bush, Vince Young or maybe Mario Williams.

I don't think we should give the pick away, likewise I don't think we should expect to have someone give up the house. So to answer question, I don't think we should trade down at any cost. Get value somewhere in the middle.

I think the most important thing is what they are say they are doing. Keep all the options open and seeing what is best for the team.

Understand what all the options cost and evaluate them accordingly. There are a lot of good players available in the top 6 or 7 that could provide an immediate impact for the team, which seems to make this draft unusual and an opportunity for us.

For example, trade down, get some extra value, pay less money for the first pick and still get an impact starter. I don't know the exact value amounts, but I think you have to look at the options, compare that to what Kubiak has in his plans and provides the most value and/or bang for the buck (also meaning salary cap implications).

And I will admit it, I am skeptical taking a running back as the #1 pick, I don't care who it is. I am between the tackles guy.

Also, what if picking the best player for the team is not the best player available in the draft? Just something to think about. I really don't subscribe to the best player in the draft theory because of that thought.

I am not against Bush or that I think he will be a bust (actually I think he will have great career), I just think there is probably a better option if you get creative with this thing. It's like this thing is tunnel vision for the past six months and there seem to be some great opportunities out there.

But I will say this, if I was in the organization and I was in the decision process and someone laid out all the options, taking Reggie Bush or trading down and getting another impact player with additional value, and they showed how Reggie Bush #1 fits the system the best than the other option, I would say go for Reggie.

You have to compare all your options, which seems like some people on this board aren't willing to talk about.

I tried to bring the topic up and I was told am silly or whatever.

RickDenver
04-12-2006, 10:05 PM
The worst argument on this thread is that Bush is to expensive for the #1 Pick. No matter who you take Young, D'Brick, or Williams as the #1 Pick they will want last years #1 plus money. That is the way the NFL works.

Secondly the whole between the tackles runner is code for slow heavy runners like Bettis, Lendale White, Allstott, or any FB.

Terrell Davis made his yards on the toss sweep then cutting it up the field around the hashes. He weighed around 215-220. There is no reason that Bush can not weight the same in a couple of years. Just like Tiki Barber, Warrick Dunn, Reggie Bush will be perfectly fine running up the Middle. Also little known fact is that Kubiak is the one that told Shanahan to draft Davis. So he has an eye for RB talent.

I do believe that Coaches Systems are important as long as there are players that fit the system. So lets just let Kubiak get his system in place and see what players he decides to use.

hollywood_texan
04-12-2006, 10:26 PM
The worst argument on this thread is that Bush is to expensive for the #1 Pick. No matter who you take Young, D'Brick, or Williams as the #1 Pick they will want last years #1 plus money. That is the way the NFL works.

Secondly the whole between the tackles runner is code for slow heavy runners like Bettis, Lendale White, Allstott, or any FB.

Terrell Davis made his yards on the toss sweep then cutting it up the field around the hashes. He weighed around 215-220. There is no reason that Bush can not weight the same in a couple of years. Just like Tiki Barber, Warrick Dunn, Reggie Bush will be perfectly fine running up the Middle. Also little known fact is that Kubiak is the one that told Shanahan to draft Davis. So he has an eye for RB talent.

I do believe that Coaches Systems are important as long as there are players that fit the system. So lets just let Kubiak get his system in place and see what players he decides to use.


How much we pay is important because it sets market price for other players on the team, think about Andre Johnson and he needs a new contract, which then impacts the salary cap.

Let's say we like Bush, Ferguson, and Williams on our draft board for the first round at #4. Trade with the Jets, they take Leinart, Young, or Cutler. You see, we will still get a player that provides great value for the team immediately, we pay less money, and we get compensated to trade down. Maybe Bush is still available. That would be a great a move and with the other guys on our draft board that will be available, maybe it is worth the risk.

You are right, there seems to be an increase from the previous year, but that doesn't mean can't make it work better if we get creative like the above senario.

Paying north of $55 million for 5 years seems excessive.

infantrycak
04-13-2006, 12:16 AM
You have to compare all your options, which seems like some people on this board aren't willing to talk about.

If you look at my posts, you will find me firmly in the consider all options camp. I have no problem with trading down if the value is reasonable even if it is under the chart. I have problems with passing on talent at #1 and with trading down no matter the value. We were looking a lot better for this discussion before New Orleans signed Brees, not because Bush isn't worth a #1 but because the teams just under us (i.e. able to pay a reasonable price) need QB's, DE's and LT's much more than they need RB's.

Tejaspro
04-13-2006, 12:38 AM
I think Bush will be a bust in the NFL. I just don't see his skill set transferring to the majors. Everything that's good about him relies on the other players being slower and less agile and I don't think that's the NFL.

Mind you, even as a bust he'll be a decent player, but he will not be head and shoulders above D. Davis, for example.

Don't think so much. It's painful to watch. (Just joking, don't get upset)

Very few people would agree with you. In fact, I don't know of anyone that believes that Bush will be a bust. If that were true, all of the prognastocators predicting the draft would not have him listed as the #1 player in the draft. As far as "everything that's good about him relies on the other players being slower and less agile"... with that yardstick, you could substitute any player's name into the same sentence and come up with the same statement.... i.e., Vince Young?, yep, that still holds true.... let's see... Mario Williams?... yep,.... D'Brickshaw Ferguson?... yep. In fact, can you name someone where it doesn't work? :challenge

Tex-fan0604
04-13-2006, 12:05 PM
I just dont get it?If Bush is so good and one of the best coming out in a long time why arent other teams fighting to try to get him.Every one talks about him being the total package but nobody is even talking about trading to get him.I know yall think some teams arent in need of a rb but if he's that good as everyone makes him out to be why arent they getting him.Besides we dont need a rb either but we are going to be dumb enough to get him and pass up on our real needs.

kastofsna
04-13-2006, 01:00 PM
you must be from the front office. welcome.

hollywood_texan
04-13-2006, 01:33 PM
If you look at my posts, you will find me firmly in the consider all options camp. I have no problem with trading down if the value is reasonable even if it is under the chart. I have problems with passing on talent at #1 and with trading down no matter the value. We were looking a lot better for this discussion before New Orleans signed Brees, not because Bush isn't worth a #1 but because the teams just under us (i.e. able to pay a reasonable price) need QB's, DE's and LT's much more than they need RB's.

Fair enough. But do we really a RB too? And for over $50 million for 5 years?

All indications point to that Bush will be the highest player on the team if he is drafted #1 by us. IMO that will cause contract/cap problems when we need to renegotiate Andre Johnson's contract. The problem will get worse if Carr lives up to all the high expectations because your quarterback usually is the highest paid player and then it works its way down.

First, I don't want to pay Bush around $55 million for 5 years, but I can understand why some people think it is worth it considering his talent and work ethic. However, the contract/cap problems that will result throughout the roster will be too burdensome for this organization at the current stage of development, which is my biggest concern.

infantrycak
04-13-2006, 01:42 PM
Fair enough. But do we really a RB too? And for over $50 million for 5 years?

Really need?--no but that is the hand we got dealt. If our team was the same and we were dealt this hand in past drafts we might be talking about Ronnie Brown, Robert Gallery, Rogers/AJ, Peppers, etc. as options because they were at the top of the talent pool. This year happens to be a RB. Whoever we draft at #1 will be the highest paid player on the team--the key is getting the most talent for that dollar.

Runner
04-13-2006, 01:54 PM
Really need?--no but that is the hand we got dealt. If our team was the same and we were dealt this hand in past drafts we might be talking about Ronnie Brown, Robert Gallery, Rogers/AJ, Peppers, etc. as options because they were at the top of the talent pool. This year happens to be a RB. Whoever we draft at #1 will be the highest paid player on the team--the key is getting the most talent for that dollar.

Which is why the NFL needs a rookie salary structure - was that even discussed in the recent negotiations?

Porky
04-13-2006, 01:56 PM
I just dont get it?If Bush is so good and one of the best coming out in a long time why arent other teams fighting to try to get him.Every one talks about him being the total package but nobody is even talking about trading to get him.I know yall think some teams arent in need of a rb but if he's that good as everyone makes him out to be why arent they getting him.Besides we dont need a rb either but we are going to be dumb enough to get him and pass up on our real needs.

All bold is annoying. But, two points.

First off, believe this or not...and yes I know this is really hard to believe, but consider for just a moment that a slight possibility exists that other gm's might call Casserly and yet not call you first. I know, I know. Settle down. I hope you were sitting down for that, and it must come as a shock to the system, but in rare instances, people talk on the phone and they don't call you first. An insult? Yes, and it should be investigated. I just hope that you find solace in the fact that CC has promised he will call you before completing any trade. :crying:

2nd point - Have you considered that since Bush IS such a special player that the Texans asking price is extremely high, and other teams don't want to give up their entire draft for one player? Just be glad we are in spot #1 and actually have a chance to take him instead of griping that other teams aren't interested when you have ZERO clue about that. :brickwall

Porky
04-13-2006, 01:58 PM
I think Bush will be a bust in the NFL. I just don't see his skill set transferring to the majors. Everything that's good about him relies on the other players being slower and less agile and I don't think that's the NFL.

Mind you, even as a bust he'll be a decent player, but he will not be head and shoulders above D. Davis, for example.

Your funny dude! Let's see how long you hang onto that bust label. Hilarious.:yahoo:

El Amigo Invisible
04-13-2006, 02:44 PM
Your funny dude! Let's see how long you hang onto that bust label. Hilarious.:yahoo:
He will be fine until he is required to carry the whole load(like Curtis Martin ). He is not capable .We will see. All I know is CC is gone no matter who he drafts.

MasterC25
04-13-2006, 03:07 PM
I just dont get it?If Bush is so good and one of the best coming out in a long time why arent other teams fighting to try to get him.Every one talks about him being the total package but nobody is even talking about trading to get him.I know yall think some teams arent in need of a rb but if he's that good as everyone makes him out to be why arent they getting him.Besides we dont need a rb either but we are going to be dumb enough to get him and pass up on our real needs.


Because everyone knows its a forgone conclusion around the league that Reggie Bush is not gonna be passed on by the Texans. A team would have to sell there souls and more to get Bush away from the Texans and in this years draft the Texans feel that there is not a lot of value from other teams with the amount of picks to give up Bush, and in the era of the game we are in with the cap and everything it is just reasonable to accept the fact that you may have to face this guy(bush) and just add players to your team to combat the process of having to defend him or out score the team cause he is such an dangerous weapon.

Xman
04-13-2006, 04:29 PM
Rumor has it the Saints are holding off on dealing down (but are working on having options in place) until the draft just in case we don't take Bush (or someone deals up for a certain qb). And, they have more depth and quality at RB than we do.

As far as dollars go, I agree that first round picks contracts are expensive - all of them. And, the top ten are really high. But, stars sell tickets.

As far as trading down goes - I think the majority agree to do it for fair value. But, since they have made it clear that they won't drop below the 5 or 6 area, they want a star to sell tickets.

If we could trade the pick for 8 2nd round picks (fair value according to the chart is between 6 and 12 2nd rounders), I would do it. I agree that phiosophy can build a great team (New England had a bunch of 2nds and 3rds from trades as the base of their run - but they also needed a start qb out of nowhere to do it). 16 3rd rounders would work also - but it just isn't doable.

As far as the pick a different position other than RB argument goes; Would I trade LaDainian (or a young Faulk or TDavis) for Ogden (or Pace) and a 2nd round pick? No. For arguments sake, we have to compare them to the best at their position if you want to talk trade values, except for QBs which are harder to guesstimate and have a higher bust factor (common sense we take into account their rankings also but to keep it simple for here assume close to the best at their position). So, we can compare Mario to Peppers, Hawk to Urlacher, VDavis to Gates - - because that is what is expected (at least by us fans of whatever team drafts them who will blissfully ignore the "bust factor"). Which would you take?
Which would you prefer to have to build a team around?

I would take a young MFaulk over Peppers/Gates//Urlacher.
(I admit I would take a young Ray Lewis over anybody, but I don't think Hawk is comparable - with Peyton in a distant 2nd but QBs have to be evaluated differently)