PDA

View Full Version : A quick question for the Bush lovers


BuffSoldier
01-27-2006, 08:50 AM
Now I'm sorry. I know this is the billionth Reggie Bush thread, but I have a question for everyone in the Bush bandwagon. Why would we use the first pick and maybe, with the top 3 players coming out, the most valuable pick in NFL draft history on a back that is going to split carries?

Reggie Bush will split carries with DD if we draft him. So why would we use the first overall pick on someone to do that?

Why would we even draft a back when we have hired a new coach who has shown the ability, with Denver and the scheme he runs, to turn almost any back into a pro-bowl caliber back. Think TD, Portis, Bell have all been very productive back in his zone blocking scheme. We already have a back that is capable of rushing for 1200 yards and averaging about 4 yards a carry in this offense, his stats will have to inflate with a better offensive system. Why so we need antoher back??

Oh and I dont love D'Brick. The Texans dont have to draft him. They could trade down twice and pick up Winston and alot of other picks, or Mario Williams at 4 or AJ Hawk. I just want the Texans to make the smartest decision for the team and not for the fans or for popularity.

swisher
01-27-2006, 09:05 AM
Because with Bush, everyone gets better. DD is better because he won't have to carry the load, AJ is better because there is a legit passing threat coming out of the backfield, the second WR is better because now defenders have to account for Bush coming out of the backfield. I'm not sure about Bush's blocking, but it's gotta be better than Davis', so that makes Carr better.

Just being on the field, even when he doesn't get the ball, makes the Texans better. And maybe the most important, it makes Bush better. Do you really want to run him into the ground like Campbell or Eddie George? He'll last longer when he splits carries.

infantrycak
01-27-2006, 09:13 AM
Oh c'mon, you do love D'Brick, but that is irrelevant so long as you don't fall into the trap so many around here have of unnecessarily runnning down the other options to make him look good.

The basic reason the Texans might take Bush is limited options--there are only so many that make any sense whatsoever for the Texans with the #1 pick:

1) Bush
2) a QB--basically Young
3) D'Brick straight up
4) trade down for good value and pick D'Brick or some other worthy player at the lower spot

At QB or LT you are going to put them among the top paid guys with the #1 pick. With a RB he will be paid as an elite top 3 player. IMO the Texans have to make a decision and take a gamble on Carr--either keep him or let him go if they want a QB. Too much money and too much controversy in taking Young and keeping Carr--pick one or the other. Taking D'Brick at #1 is higher than his value in the draft--more cap than desired and fails to receive additional compensation. Trading down is a good idea IF you can get good value. If the offer isn't there you can't trade for magic beans. If you eliminate all the other options, you end up with Bush--that is how you end up drafting Bush.

edo783
01-27-2006, 11:12 AM
Oh c'mon, you do love D'Brick, but that is irrelevant so long as you don't fall into the trap so many around here have of unnecessarily runnning down the other options to make him look good.

BRAVO, soooo many folks do that. I spend a lot of time responding to those that do that.

Good analysis on WHY we will likely wind up with Reggie. Not a BAD thing, just not what I would prefer. Pick, picks and more picks this year and next is what I want. Why...we are weak on both lines/front 7 and that give us the ability/options needed to get better soonest.

Blake
01-27-2006, 11:12 AM
If nobody gives you a good enough offer, you cant trade down just for the sake of trading down.

Also Bush = mismatches. You put a linebacker on Reggie and we have a 50 yard gain, or a TD. So they put in a nickle back, and we ram it at them, and gain 6 yards a pop. Thats what I see.

Grid
01-27-2006, 11:16 AM
I dont think there is any unspoken rule that says an RB taken #1 overall has to be a workhorse that carries the team.

I mean.. when you draft a WR #1 overall, you dont have to throw to him 30 times a game do you?

when you take an LT #1 overall you dont have to run to the left every time do you?

Bush creates mismatches.. he makes plays..he is the type of player that can hurt defenses if they dont account for him. Besides.. there is no guarantee that he cant carry the ball 20+ times a game.. other backs of similar size have done it.

I wouldnt mind trading down, but if we dont trade down I think we need to take Bush.

Kaiser Toro
01-27-2006, 11:18 AM
I wouldnt mind trading down, but if we dont trade down I think we need to take Bush.

If we do not trade down it is my opinion that the only real value is Bush at #1. That is given that we extend Carr.

jerek
01-27-2006, 11:22 AM
If nobody gives you a good enough offer, you cant trade down just for the sake of trading down.

Also Bush = mismatches. You put a linebacker on Reggie and we have a 50 yard gain, or a TD. So they put in a nickle back, and we ram it at them, and gain 6 yards a pop. Thats what I see.

Reggie is a mismatch on most linebackers, but could we refrain from the "automatic touchdown" line of thinking? If it was that easy, don't you think we'd see a lot of that kind of thing amongst NFL speedbacks?

What I am hearing from the NFL scouts I have been talking to (real ones employed by real NFL teams, not armchair PFTers: not that my guys are infallible, but just so you know, there is a difference.) is that Reggie Bush does indeed have 4.28ish speed. That is scary, and you'd better believe I would love to see that in a Texans uniform. But NFL coverages are slightly more complex than the little league oversimplifications we are constantly hearing about on this board with regard to Bush (and now Young, Rose Bowl champion descended to us from on high Mount Olympus). Even the fantabulous Steve Smith got locked down by ... of all defenses, Seattle. So put Bush in the slot, where he will face the nickel or an LB, but even at that, it's far from assured. No QB in the league can or does hit a guy everytime he gets open, even if he is looking for him, and that assumes Bush is constantly open.

I don't know, maybe you didn't mean it like that. It just rubs me the wrong way to hear this kind of "automatic" hyperbole.

Oh, and I agree with your trade down thought process. It needs to be a good deal, otherwise, we might as well take Bush. It makes the most sense from a team-needs/salary-cap/big-picture standpoint.

Daonly
01-27-2006, 11:30 AM
Tampa Bay got a Crap Load of Picks when they Traded the rights for Tony Dorsett, look what they got for him.. a Crap Load of CRAP!!!

Same with the picks for Ricky Williams, only one of those picks that turn out ok was Lavar Arrington (way over hyped) and I do mean ok as well, and the rest was CRAP!

If you can trade Reggie Bush for a Boat Load of Picks, that's telling you what type of player Reggie Bush is and will be so why not keep him; If his vaule is that high? Draft Bush he'll be a top 10 back before he takes his first snap!

:homer:

infantrycak
01-27-2006, 11:39 AM
Tampa Bay got a Crap Load of Picks when they Traded the rights for Tony Dorsett, look what they got for him.. a Crap Load of CRAP!!!

Same with the picks for Ricky Williams, only one of those picks that turn out ok was Lavar Arrington (way over hyped) and I do mean ok as well, and the rest was CRAP!

Bad use of picks doesn't make the trade bad. SD is looking good on the Eli Manning trade. It is pretty darn silly to act as if no trade would be worth giving up Bush.

Draft Bush he'll be a top 10 back before he takes his first snap!

:homer:

God I hope that was a joke. Well either way it was a joke, but intended I mean.

Kaiser Toro
01-27-2006, 11:41 AM
Tampa Bay got a Crap Load of Picks when they Traded the rights for Tony Dorsett, look what they got for him.. a Crap Load of CRAP!!!

Same with the picks for Ricky Williams, only one of those picks that turn out ok was Lavar Arrington (way over hyped) and I do mean ok as well, and the rest was CRAP!

If you can trade Reggie Bush for a Boat Load of Picks, that's telling you what type of player Reggie Bush is and will be so why not keep him; If his vaule is that high? Draft Bush he'll be a top 10 back before he takes his first snap!

:homer:

http://www.profootballhof.com/history/release.jsp?release_id=789

So Schramm made the proverbial offer "that was too good to turn down" - Dallas' first-round pick (No. 24) and three second-round choices. While the trade gave the Seahawks, in only their second year of operation, an unusual opportunity to build their young team, it gave the Cowboys even more, an explosive running back that could add still another dimension to an already-powerful offense generalled by Roger Staubach.

gtexan02
01-27-2006, 11:44 AM
DD cannot play an entire NFL season being an every down back. If he gets 20+ carries a game, he tires out and gets hurt. Splitting Bush and DD would allow both to have optimal performance

infantrycak
01-27-2006, 11:48 AM
Tampa Bay got a Crap Load of Picks when they Traded the rights for Tony Dorsett, look what they got for him.. a Crap Load of CRAP!!!

Might want to rethink this one.

When the draft came up the Seattle Seahawks, a recent expansion team in the National Football League with scant prospects for immediate success, had the second draft pick and hungered for a running back named Tony Dorsett.

But Dorsett had made it clear he wanted instant success and wouldn’t play for the Seahawks, so a trade was made.

“It was a great draft for Seattle. The Dallas Cowboys may have gotten Dorsett but with the extra draft selections we got as a result of the trade we got three starters.”

Link (http://www.gtrnews.com/greater-tulsa-reporter/1035/steve-august-enjoys-tulsa-after-football-fame)

Daonly
01-27-2006, 11:51 AM
Bad use of picks doesn't make the trade bad. SD is looking good on the Eli Manning trade. It is pretty darn silly to act as if no trade would be worth giving up Bush.



God I hope that was a joke. Well either way it was a joke, but intended I
mean.


Let's Bet on it? Phillp Rivers is a bust waiting to happen, only reason he's not yet cause he didn't step on the filed.I still feel the Giants got the better end of the deal.They have a better chance to reach the Super Bowl than San Diego. :twocents:

jerek
01-27-2006, 11:52 AM
Tampa Bay got a Crap Load of Picks when they Traded the rights for Tony Dorsett, look what they got for him.. a Crap Load of CRAP!!!

Same with the picks for Ricky Williams, only one of those picks that turn out ok was Lavar Arrington (way over hyped) and I do mean ok as well, and the rest was CRAP!

If you can trade Reggie Bush for a Boat Load of Picks, that's telling you what type of player Reggie Bush is and will be so why not keep him; If his vaule is that high? Draft Bush he'll be a top 10 back before he takes his first snap!

:homer:

*sigh*

I was going to respond, but I just lost the heart to. Reading through your statements again, it is clear to me that you either you are intentionally joking around, or anything I say to you would fall on deaf ears any way.

Keep rockin' them fantasy leagues, and be sure to let us know how they turn out for you.

TheOgre
01-27-2006, 12:05 PM
What really surprises me about this draft is just how strongly everyone feels about their uses of the #1 pick (Bush, Young, trade down). Not only do they like their choice, but they actually seem to hate the other selections. I have my preferences but I will be just as excited with the other two avenues. I'm convinced this team will take some big strides in the next couple of seasons.

Xman
01-27-2006, 12:57 PM
Now I'm sorry. I know this is the billionth Reggie Bush thread, but I have a question for everyone in the Bush bandwagon. Why would we use the first pick and maybe, with the top 3 players coming out, the most valuable pick in NFL draft history on a back that is going to split carries?

Reggie Bush will split carries with DD if we draft him. So why would we use the first overall pick on someone to do that?

Why would we even draft a back when we have hired a new coach who has shown the ability, with Denver and the scheme he runs, to turn almost any back into a pro-bowl caliber back. Think TD, Portis, Bell have all been very productive back in his zone blocking scheme. We already have a back that is capable of rushing for 1200 yards and averaging about 4 yards a carry in this offense, his stats will have to inflate with a better offensive system. Why so we need antoher back??

Oh and I dont love D'Brick. The Texans dont have to draft him. They could trade down twice and pick up Winston and alot of other picks, or Mario Williams at 4 or AJ Hawk. I just want the Texans to make the smartest decision for the team and not for the fans or for popularity.

IT TAKES TO TEAMS TO MAKE A TRADE HAPPEN!!!!!!!!

I am tired of hearing all this "trade with the jets" and "after we trade with the Jets" talk. IF YOU were the Jets, would you trade with us? - - - NO.
Why not? Because,
(i) The Jets need a lot of players also
(ii) Jets are WAY over the cap and will suck another year no matter what - which means giving up a #1 next year would be a big mistake (especially with O'Quin and APeterson sitting there),
(iii) the 4th pick fills a need with a stud player (the Jets need a LOT, QB, RB and DE (assuming Abraham is let go or traded because they can't afford to keep him).
(iv) cap problems - they are way over the cap and larger contracts will be harder to deal with.

Why trade up when they can fill a huge need and keep their #1 pick next year.
So, not happening. Unless we deal the #1 pick cheap - which would be a mistake.

The same thing pretty much goes for NO and Tenn also! They are bad teams that may be at the top of the draft next year - you don't take a chance of trading that pick - - too much bad PR. They can sit still and fill their needs without giving up an arm and a leg.

If we can make a GOOD VALUE TRADE - then do it, otherwise take the impact player. Bush is a stud back; we can design an offense to fit his skill so that he can be an everydown weapon.

As far as teams that may pay to trade: Green Bay may deal up - - if Favre plays another year; Or, Oakland (for a qb) and SF (for Bush) or others with lower picks - - but that is a long drop.

tulexan
01-27-2006, 01:00 PM
I'm not sure if Green Bay would trade up. I've heard that they love LenDale White. Niners are not trading up. They have even more holes than we have on our team.

Xman
01-27-2006, 02:41 PM
So, the concensus is . . . . the top 5 teams would like to trade DOWN.

So, its a buyers market meaning lowball offers.

So, unless we want to deal down to 9 or 10, the odds of a deal arent good. Plus, due to the large drop, the other team would have to throw in a quality player to make the deal work (otherwise the cost in draft picks is too great).

That being said, I don't see a good deal with AZ but I do see one with Detroit (#1 for #9, #43 and Roy Williams).

tulexan
01-27-2006, 02:43 PM
There is no way they are going to get rid of Roy Williams. Out of the big 3, he is by far the best. And I wouldn't want either of the other two.

Haams
01-27-2006, 03:49 PM
I really want VY, but I do see the value in trading down. The only thing I don't want is Bush. DD has always been one of our best players and we picked up Morency last year. With the addition of Kubiak he could potentially turn them into superstars. I wouldn't mind getting a few starters out of the draft, cause God knows we need them. But you gotta remember, if we pass on Vince, Tennesse will take him (which is probably the best place for his developement.) For the next decade we will have to lign up and face him twice a year, and when you're talking about Vick's legs and Favre's arm (potentially) that's scary. I'm already glad McNair is retiring soon so we don't have to face him anymore, let's not let 'em substitute in Young.

Kaiser Toro
01-27-2006, 03:51 PM
There is no way they are going to get rid of Roy Williams. Out of the big 3, he is by far the best. And I wouldn't want either of the other two.

I do not want Roy Williams unless it is the one that plays Safety.

Maddict5
01-27-2006, 04:02 PM
For the next decade we will have to lign up and face him twice a year, and when you're talking about Vick's legs and Favre's arm (potentially) that's scary..

its alright alot of people get brett favre and trent dilfer mixed up

Xman
01-27-2006, 05:05 PM
There is no way they are going to get rid of Roy Williams. Out of the big 3, he is by far the best. And I wouldn't want either of the other two.

Thus the old saying, "If you want something, you got to give something"

The NFL Draft value chart has #1 worth 3,000 points and the #9 pick worth 1,350 points. For comparison, the first pick in each round is worth; 2nd=580, 3rd=265, 4th=112 , 5th=43 , 6th=27 , 7th=14. So Detroit could give us every draft pick they have this year (approx 2,225 points worth - - and they are still short). So, draft picks alone will not get it done.

Detroit should be desperate for a QB - and they have decent WRs in CRogers and MikeWilliams give Detroit decent starters with potential (not much trade value to us but should give them decent starters so they can spare RoyW).
So giving up a RoyW - could be their fastest way back to respectability.

Xman
01-27-2006, 05:09 PM
I do not want Roy Williams unless it is the one that plays Safety.

WR Roy Williams would give us another stud at WR. He can be just as good as AJ (possibly better?).

I can't think of a better tandem. Well, at least until Miami puts TO opposite Chambers.