PDA

View Full Version : RB acquisition


Dr. Toro
02-08-2006, 09:29 PM
DD is very good, and Wells is my favorite Texans back/unsung hero, but if we wanted to upgrade this position, what's the best course?

Option 1: Bush
We've talked about this plenty. Stud. Versatile. Bush+Davis salary is a little onerous for the position. Opportunity cost of Young/trade down option.

Option 2: Free Agency
In addition to James, Lewis, Alexander, Ahman Green, DeShaun Foster, et al. PFW is saying Warrick Dunn may get cut. I don't like free agency unless we can get Foster or Dunn for a bargain, as they offer a big change of pace from Davis. With money tied up in Davis, I doubt any of the big name FAs are on our radar.

Option 3: Trade
Ricky Williams seems like the only realistic option here. He works cheap, is durable and has a little better speed than Davis. In a trade down scenario he might be a great fit, if he only costs a 2nd or 3rd rounder. I imagine Denver thinks he can run for 1600 yards again, so he could put Davis out of a job if we decided to make him our feature back. A trade down/Williams acquisition and Carr making huge strides could put this team back near .500. I'm not overly concerned about substance abuse risk, but it's there.

Vinny
02-08-2006, 09:31 PM
We don't need a back since we took a first day back last year (Morency). Bush would just be BPA...but it's not a need position with Davis and Morency under contract.

Dr. Toro
02-08-2006, 09:33 PM
Agreed it's not a need... but if there ever were a year to get a RB this would be it. I think what we have now can be excellent under Kubiak. This draft/FA/trade crop just makes you wonder/salivate.

Kaiser Toro
02-08-2006, 09:34 PM
I am with the way the wind is blowing and that is the offense will get drastically better with Kubiak. If that logic takes hold then why can't Dom Davis have that type of incremental growth on his numbers that we are expecting others to have?

YoungTexanFan
02-08-2006, 09:39 PM
I am with the way the wind is blowing and that is the offense will get drastically better with Kubiak. If that logic takes hold then why can't Dom Davis have that type of incremental growth on his numbers that we are expecting others to have?

because he's not reggie bush. :brickwall :spy:

Runner
02-08-2006, 09:40 PM
I am with the way the wind is blowing and that is the offense will get drastically better with Kubiak. If that logic takes hold then why can't Dom Davis have that type of incremental growth on his numbers that we are expecting others to have?

I hope we will see that improvement. He'll probably get less opportunites with a better, more balanced offense, but his per carry/catch numbers may well go up.

Dr. Toro
02-08-2006, 09:42 PM
I think durability is a valid concern with DD, it might be tough for him to bear the load alone. Wells probably doesn't have the speed/cutback ability Kubiak is looking for, but I thought he improved with more work this year. I haven't seen enough of Morency to know if he can be that #2 guy.

hot pickle
02-08-2006, 09:43 PM
because he's not reggie bush.


DD is better, and he needs a good o-line to get the numbers yall want, its a team game, and when the line isn't doing there job it makes it tough on the back

hot pickle
02-08-2006, 09:45 PM
I think durability is a valid concern with DD, it might be tough for him to bear the load alone. Wells probably doesn't have the speed/cutback ability Kubiak is looking for, but I thought he improved with more work this year. I haven't seen enough of Morency to know if he can be that #2 guy.

but mike anderson wasn't the best speed and cutback back either and he did well, but i don't know if kubiak was the one that wanted to have him in the game

YoungTexanFan
02-08-2006, 09:48 PM
DD is better, and he needs a good o-line to get the numbers yall want, its a team game, and when the line isn't doing there job it makes it tough on the back

I was being sarcastic. I think Bush is the worst way we could go...second worst, VY would be the first. Great players but they need to go to teams who are more developed than ours.

I will try to put in a :sarcasm: next time. I just thought the :brickwall might be enough of a hint. :thud:

Dr. Toro
02-08-2006, 09:50 PM
but mike anderson wasn't the best speed and cutback back either and he did well, but i don't know if kubiak was the one that wanted to have him in the game

I like Wells, I appreciated how he answered when called upon this season. I just wonder about a guy whose 250 and longest carry in the past three years is 14 yards. I think Marine Mike is a little faster. He's 20 pounds lighter and has a ton of carries over 40 yards. By no means am I writing Wells off, but I'm not sure how big his upside is in this system.

keyfro
02-08-2006, 09:52 PM
if we focus on our NEEDS like the O-LINE, TE, and defense...then davis or wells or morency will flourish...good strong runningbacks can be found all over the place...most of the time it's not the back it's the o-line in front of him that make the difference...i seriously hope the texans remember that on draft day and trade down...let the jets or the 49ers make the mistake

TreWardTxn
02-08-2006, 10:09 PM
if we focus on our NEEDS like the O-LINE, TE, and defense...then davis or wells or morency will flourish...good strong runningbacks can be found all over the place...most of the time it's not the back it's the o-line in front of him that make the difference...i seriously hope the texans remember that on draft day and trade down...let the jets or the 49ers make the mistake

In actuality, the Jets may be the best, worst team I've seen in awhile. When they get back all-pro C Mawae and if Pennington can throw the ball at all, they could be a scary team with an added talent like Bush, but they're in the AFC East, so I don't care...(too much)

Dr. Toro
02-08-2006, 10:17 PM
Morency is actually a prototypical Denver back, but he's already 26 and needs to get in there and prove himself. I doubt the position will be open to competition come training camp, but I wouldn't be surprised to see Morency got his fair share of time and opportunity to earn more carries early in the season.

Double Barrel
02-08-2006, 10:28 PM
Given a solid offensive line that can consistently open up running gaps, our current backs would be servicable enough to get us on the right track. And seeing how long it can take to build an o-line into a cohesive unit, this should be the priority over BPA. Getting decent RBs is a secondary concern. Teams can have winning seasons with an all-pro line and a servicable back (and the flip side of the coin is an all-pro back behind a bad line, which usually results in a losing season).

Vinny
02-08-2006, 10:33 PM
I like Wells, I appreciated how he answered when called upon this season. I just wonder about a guy whose 250 and longest carry in the past three years is 14 yards. I think Marine Mike is a little faster. He's 20 pounds lighter and has a ton of carries over 40 yards. By no means am I writing Wells off, but I'm not sure how big his upside is in this system.Wells contract is up so he may not be back.

vtech9
02-08-2006, 11:24 PM
We don't need a back since we took a first day back last year (Morency). Bush would just be BPA...but it's not a need position with Davis and Morency under contract.
Like Vinny said, RB is not a need position, and IMHO, Bush is going to be a bust anyway. I think if we can improve the O-Line, our current stable of RB's will do us well. If we do need a RB this year, there are always value picks later in the draft or we could re-sign Wells. Honestly, I think we should hold off on trying to get a high round RB until we know how our current RB's will do in this system. If they don't work out, try and get Adrian Peterson if he comes out next year. IMHO, "All Day" is now, and will be, a better NFL RB than Bush.

keyfro
02-09-2006, 09:16 AM
i don't think bush will be a bust...i just think that it would be better served if we stuck with the RB's we have...if we can re-sign wells...and focus on our needs...offensive line is the main problem on this team...kubiak needs to come in and decide what position pitts is best suited for...if he wants to keep guys like mckinney, weigert, or wade...if he brings back m. brown, weary, and wand...techniquely g. jones has already been signed to the falcons so he shouldn't be on our roster anymore...so that leaves us with two official tackles...wand and wade...we need more tackles...we need to figure out the center position...i mean right now there isn't a set player on the o-line...i honestly think only two of last years starters has a chance at starting this year but probably at different positions...and once we get this o-line figured out we'll need a solid tight end...forget rivers, forget joppru...start over at that position and draft a solid TE this year in day one of the draft

bigTEXan8
02-09-2006, 10:43 AM
It really seems like some people are starting to turn to the "trade down" movement for the upcoming draft.

I think that DD, Morency, and Wells is going to be back, so I think that the Texans have a healthy stable of RBs. I'm looking for Kubiak to spread the carries out between the three. Even if one goes down, there is still two solid backs.

Frills
02-09-2006, 10:47 AM
When has DD lasted a full season?

MorKnolle
02-09-2006, 10:51 AM
I honestly don't see Ricky Williams adding much to the team other than just more depth with a solid RB. If we can keep him on cheap it would be ok but I don't want to have to give anything up to get him, signing him as a free agent for cheap would be alright with me though. Either way, unless it's drafting Bush I don't see the Texans adding another RB this offseason.

vtech9
02-09-2006, 11:15 AM
I honestly don't see Ricky Williams adding much to the team other than just more depth with a solid RB. If we can keep him on cheap it would be ok but I don't want to have to give anything up to get him, signing him as a free agent for cheap would be alright with me though. Either way, unless it's drafting Bush I don't see the Texans adding another RB this offseason.
I can see them adding another RB in the draft, just not with a high pick. I can see them taking someone like a Taurean Henderson in the 4th round or later.

HoustonFrog
02-09-2006, 11:29 AM
I just don't see it. Unless Morency turns out to be Terrell Davis, we have a bunch of middle fo the road backs. I'm not just going on my assessment on this. The guy is constantly banged up. Even the weeks he plays he is listed as Probable or Questionable. He doesn't practice all week during these times which is not allowing us to have a cohesive unit. Practice isn't as big when you have a complete stud back but it is with our team. I have heard ESPN interviews, local interviews, opinions and I have yet to hear one person, NFLer, NFL expert say anything but DD is a "good" back but not a franchise back. You have a chance to upgrade. Why wouldn't you? IMHO DD isn't going to take us to the bowl. He is a hard working guy but he is not a game changer or breaker.

Texans_Chick
02-09-2006, 11:50 AM
I like Wells, I appreciated how he answered when called upon this season. I just wonder about a guy whose 250 and longest carry in the past three years is 14 yards. I think Marine Mike is a little faster. He's 20 pounds lighter and has a ton of carries over 40 yards. By no means am I writing Wells off, but I'm not sure how big his upside is in this system.


IIRC, Wells showed some quicks on a kickoff return that was kicked away from Mathis late in the season. More than 14 yards. Maybe during the Rams' game?

He may not be back because of his contract situation, but I appreciate his durability, his work ethic, and his flexibility of playing multiple positions for the team.

I'm not really interested in the RB position so much for the Texans if we don't take Bush as someone they might deem the BPA. Too many needs all over the team.

Cjeremy635
02-09-2006, 12:28 PM
I don't claim to be a position guru by any means and this might be way out there, but could Wells play the tight end position? I say that because he has decent hands and I'm sure his speed is OK for that position. I don't know too much about his blocking abilities though...I'm sure this would be the major problem for that type of positional player. Anyways, just a thought...don't castrate me for it. Do NFL players even change positions like that after being in the league as long as he has?

Texans_Chick
02-09-2006, 12:35 PM
I don't claim to be a position guru by any means and this might be way out there, but could Wells play the tight end position? I say that because he has decent hands and I'm sure his speed is OK for that position. I don't know too much about his blocking abilities though...I'm sure this would be the major problem for that type of positional player. Anyways, just a thought...don't castrate me for it. Do NFL players even change positions like that after being in the league as long as he has?

The short polite answer is no.

He works hard, and is willing to do what the coaches say, but TE doesn't suit his skills set and height.

bigTEXan8
02-09-2006, 12:51 PM
I hope Wells sticks around because I think he would be great in Kubiak's system. He could be the Texans' Mike Anderson. Just pound the rock deep into the trenches. JM:twocents:

DRAMA
02-09-2006, 12:51 PM
There IS the possibility that the Texans MAY ACTUALLY use their other picks on these 'need' positions as well. We always talk like if we take Bush/VY that we're done - that's it - no free agency - no trades - no more picks - etc...

We still have other picks. Add a DYNAMITE pick with the #1 and then simply address the TE, OL, and/or DE/LB with 2,3,3 picks. OMG - there's Free Agency too.

MAN!! All these options and we only have the #1 pick. Maybe we should trade down? :brickwall

DRAMA
02-09-2006, 12:53 PM
DD is a solid little back - as is Wells. But, there IS the possibility that the Texans MAY ACTUALLY use their other picks on these 'need' positions as well. We always talk like if we take Bush/VY that we're done - that's it - no free agency - no trades - no more picks - etc...

We still have other picks. Add a DYNAMITE pick with the #1 and then simply address the TE, OL, and/or DE/LB with 2,3,3 picks. OMG - there's Free Agency too.

MAN!! All these options and we only have the #1 pick. Maybe we should trade down? :brickwall

El Tejano
02-09-2006, 01:03 PM
I've maintained that the Texans have a great situation on their hands with having the #1 pick. There are so many ways they can go with this and either way will improve our team.

BigBull17
02-09-2006, 01:12 PM
If we lose Wells, the RB Id want to go after is Ron Dayne. He has a little more in his step and showed improvement in his fill in role last year.

jerek
02-09-2006, 01:14 PM
It really seems like some people are starting to turn to the "trade down" movement for the upcoming draft.

I think that DD, Morency, and Wells is going to be back, so I think that the Texans have a healthy stable of RBs. I'm looking for Kubiak to spread the carries out between the three. Even if one goes down, there is still two solid backs.

I like Bush as BPA but I'm still not convinced that we need help at RB.

I like trading down the most, but only if it means that Kubes, Cass and Co. get a good deal and use the extra picks wisely.

I think Bush/Davis will make for a phenomenal tandem in a Kubiak-designed offense, but Bush will cost a lot of moolah and we still lose out on the chance to get more first-day pickups.

I still say Vince will be a good NFL player but Carr here/Vince's downtime for NFL prep/huge contract make him a good NFL player on some other team, not ours.

In my thought, do not look for us to do much in this year's FA. We have always been pretty much a no-show as far as any big names are concerned, tending only to go for no-rep utility players behind the scenes. Somebody listed a ton of FA RBs earlier, but I would be very surprised if any more than two of them do not end up being resigned.

I would not mind us getting Bush, but I think Davis/Wells/Morency are plenty good as it is.

whiskeyrbl
02-09-2006, 01:21 PM
I truly believe in a "denver" type offense which uses a revolving backfield,and motion to the slot with the RB,s Bush is the right choice.I know alot of you are saying that we are deep at RB,and Bush is not a proven NFL back yet.Well neither are Hollings or Moreancy.Due to lack of play.Imagine if you take some load of DD,maybe a full season for him,for Bush and DD maybe this prolongs their careers and makes them even better.I would like to see a Three rotation at RB with Bush/DD/Moreancy.:drool:

MorKnolle
02-09-2006, 01:21 PM
There IS the possibility that the Texans MAY ACTUALLY use their other picks on these 'need' positions as well. We always talk like if we take Bush/VY that we're done - that's it - no free agency - no trades - no more picks - etc...

We still have other picks. Add a DYNAMITE pick with the #1 and then simply address the TE, OL, and/or DE/LB with 2,3,3 picks. OMG - there's Free Agency too.

MAN!! All these options and we only have the #1 pick. Maybe we should trade down? :brickwall

Believe me I understand the desire to have a dynamite playmaker on offense, I would love to get one as well. However, a key part of my stance on trading down is that we are pretty solid at RB and QB (that view will vary with your personal opinion on the talent we have there or how much you really want Vince/Bush), and we have huge needs elsewhere. We likely need at least two OLinemen, a TE, and we need one guy at each of the three major defensive areas, one DL (DE), one LB (MLB), and one, probably two DBs (CB and/or S). If we take Bush/Young, we can only address 3 of these 6-7 needy areas in the first day of the draft. If we trade down, we can likely address 5 of these needy areas with first day picks, and we're still getting a stud player for one of those needy positions (Mario Williams at DE or D'Brick who is should to be a stud LT, even though I'd rather have Eric Winston) rather than adding a very expensive (albeit good player and potential star) at a position that we're already pretty strong at.
We do have free agency, but there aren't going to be a whole lot of good players available in free agency, and we don't have the cap room to pursue many of them, we can probably only get one good player (a LeCharles Bentley type that would easily start for us) or a couple decent guys that could probably compete for a starting spot, especially if we're going to have the contract of another #1 pick on our roster.
We do have free agency and other picks to address our more pressing team needs, but trading down allows us to use our top pick (and have an additional 2nd or 3rd rounder from the trade) on our needs rather than postponing fixing those needs until later rounds. Either way we do have the top pick of every round and the top two in the 3rd round, so we should be able to address many needs on our team with guys that should be able to fix those problems, but I think we can do a better job of addressing our needs and improving our overall team by trading down.

whiskeyrbl
02-09-2006, 01:24 PM
I think we all agree that this is a deep draft for OL this year,I think through FA and 2-5 rd of draft we can build an above average OL,and still use the #1 on Bush.

DRAMA
02-09-2006, 01:44 PM
I'm not totally against us trading down, but I really want that 'electric-we must always scheme against this guy' type of player with the #1. I just don't think a 3rd rounder will help us in skill areas whereas 3rd rounders will definitely let us fill holes in the line (DL & OL). I believe OL guys can be coached up as opposed to skill players. I don't see Hollings being able to be coached up - he just doesn't seem to have the instincts.

I think Bush and Young have these superstar skill instincts and that's why I'd prefer to address the OL (assuming not one FA is signed) through the draft. Again, it depends on Kubiaks assessment because honestly - we don't really know what we have. Milford Brown, Seth Wand, Todd Washington may be better than we know. I'm reeeally down on what that last staff has done to our team - seriously.

So, if it was me, based on what I know as an outsider and an observer, I'd take the DYNAMITE with the #1 and then get my TE, OL, OL, DE, LB, (in no order) with my other picks. Granted, as much as I like VY and Bush, I would jump all over a 'Hershel' deal but I'd want players and picks. For some reason, I think we're going to be active in Free Agency. Do you sign a Shaun Alexander and then draft Vince? Maybe...we have a lot of options. I just want people to remember that that second round pick is a GREAT pick as well.

I've actually started to narrow the gap between Bush and Vince (I may need to change my AVATAR to a fence-straddler!). But I LOVED watching Mathis return kicks last year. And I want to 'feel' that excitement when Bush gets the ball or Vince drops back, ya know?

Kaiser Toro
02-09-2006, 01:52 PM
but I really want that 'electric-we must always scheme against this guy' type of player with the #1.

There lies the disagreement. Many of us are looking for wins first. Electricity is usually a by prodcut of chemistry through winning.

MorKnolle
02-09-2006, 01:56 PM
I think we all agree that this is a deep draft for OL this year,I think through FA and 2-5 rd of draft we can build an above average OL,and still use the #1 on Bush.

I agree that it is a deep draft on OLine, in fact my favorite OLine prospect (Winston) could fall to the 2nd round and that I would rather use the 2nd and 3rd rounds on OLine, but then that delays our acquisition of defensive players even more. If we trade down we can also probably add another 2nd rounder to that as well, here are two hypothetical draft scenarios:

Option 1)
1st: Reggie Bush (RB)
2nd: OT (Hopefully Eric Winston, if not next best one)
3rd: OG/C (Hopefully Nick Mangold could fall this far, if not maybe get Davin Joseph)
3rd: TE (Maybe Dominique Byrd will fall, otherwise Fasano, David Thomas, or my new rising prospect T.J. Williams)
4th: DB/DE/WR (Best CB/S/DE available, CB Danieal Manning is a rising prospect to me and could be under the radar enough to fall this far, not sure what DEs or WRs will be left)
5th: LB/DB/WR (Schlegel or Rocky McIntosh could be here, or look for another CB/S/WR depending on 4th round pick)
6th: BPA among WR/OL/DE/LB/DB somewhat depending on previous picks and who's available
7th: BPA among WR/OL/DE/LB/DB somewhat depending on previous picks and who's available

This yields your dynamite playmaker (Bush), a good OT, good OG, and good TE that should all be able to start for us, then it gives us four guys between WR/OL/DE/LB/CB/S that could compete for a starting spot. Hopefully our 4th is good enough that they should start for us and the other three can be depth/compete for playing time. We can look for other players at these positions in free agency, but I'm not sure how much talent we can afford after having to fill our remaining roster spots, and especially with Bush's $50+ million deal on there.

Option 2)
Trade down to #4/5, add this year's 2nd and a combination of players/future draft picks to make the deal even.
1st: Mario Williams (DE)
2nd: OT (Hopefully Eric Winston, if not next best one)
2nd: OG/C/CB (Grab Mangold here to play OG/C or else look for 1st round quality CB that falls)
3rd: CB/OG/C/WR (Grab best CB/OL depending on 2nd round pick or grab a WR if a top one falls)
3rd: TE (Maybe Dominique Byrd will fall, otherwise Fasano, David Thomas, or my new rising prospect T.J. Williams)
4th: DB/WR (Depending on 2nd and 3rd round picks, grab best CB/S/WR available, maybe Bullocks for S or a good WR that falls)
5th: LB/DB(Schlegel or Rocky McIntosh could be here, or look for another CB/S/WR depending on 4th round pick)
6th: BPA among WR/OL/DE/LB/DB somewhat depending on previous picks and who's available
7th: BPA among WR/OL/DE/LB/DB somewhat depending on previous picks and who's available

This plan gets us a monster DE, which is a position of great need for us since we're switching to a 4-3. The rest of our picks essentially remain the same, although in the 2nd we can guarantee we get Mangoldrather than hoping he falls to the 3rd or else grab a top CB (another need) that falls out of the 1st, then use that 3rd rounder to address CB or OLine depending on what we do in the 2nd. Then for many of our remaining needs we bump up the round in which we can look at them, so we'll be getting better guys for each of those spots.

Again, these are our top needs (in my order of importance) and where we address them in the two plans:
.......................................Plan 1.................................Plan 2
OT................................2nd Round...........................2nd Round
DE.........................4th Round or Lower......................1st Round
OG/C.............................3rd Round.........................2nd/3rd Round
Offensive Playmaker.......1st Round (RB)..................WR in 3rd/4th Round
CB.........................4th Round or Lower.............2nd/3rd, maybe 4th Round
TE................................3rd Round............................3rd Round
MLB.......................4th Round or Lower.................4th Round or Lower
S..........................4th Round or Lower..................4th Round or Lower
.................................................. ..............Additional Pick Available for Depth

In the Bush option you obviously get your RB/WR playmaker there, but in the other option you bump DE up from proabably a 4th rounder to the 1st round, OG/C you can grab in either the 2nd or the 3rd rather than getting the best available in the 3rd, CB rather than waiting until the 4th or later you can grab either in the 2nd or 3rd, you still get a playmaking WR (either a good fast one or else my preference would be a bigger, possession WR) in the 3rd or 4th round. With the trade down, you can look at MLB and S in the 4th and 5th rounds then depth/skill in the 6th and 7th, rather than having a CB, MLB, and S in the 4th-6th rounds (CB presumably taking the highest priority). So by trading down, take a DE three rounds higher and get the best DE prospect in four years, you have the option of taking OG/C in the 3rd like before or getting a better one in the 2nd, you can take a CB in the 2nd or 3rd rather than in the 4th. You still get your TE in the 3rd, and then MLB and S can be addressed in the 4th and 5th rather than the 5th and 6th. You then have your 6th and 7th round picks (rather than just the 7th) to add depth and more options at these positions of need, or you could take a chance on a guy like Reggie McNeal to play WR/QB and fill a role similar to Randle El's on the Steelers. So this way you can look for 3-4 of your needs one round higher in the draft and get better players at all of those spots, you still get a playmaker (WR) to help out the offense, and you have an additional pick in there to add another guy. To me this seems like a much better plan for improving the rest of the talent on the team.

DRAMA
02-09-2006, 02:08 PM
There lies the disagreement. Many of us are looking for wins first. Electricity is usually a by prodcut of chemistry through winning.

True - this is where the disagreement lies. First, you assume that those of us who want Bush would be sacrificing wins - which I am in complete disagreement with. I feel like adding the best RB in recent memory and a #2 WR actaully WILL help us to more wins.

I like Bush and I LOVE his electric style. And any player, Vince included, that makes you scheme for him on every single play, simply adds depth and possibilties to a team. With more great possibilities, there are more great options. If you have more great options, you have a better chance of succeeding.

I do not want Bush with the #1 because he looks cool running the ball. :)

Kaiser Toro
02-09-2006, 02:18 PM
True - this is where the disagreement lies. First, you assume that those of us who want Bush would be sacrificing wins - which I am in complete disagreement with. I feel like adding the best RB in recent memory and a #2 WR actaully WILL help us to more wins.

I like Bush and I LOVE his electric style. And any player, Vince included, that makes you scheme for him on every single play, simply adds depth and possibilties to a team. With more great possibilities, there are more great options. If you have more great options, you have a better chance of succeeding.

I do not want Bush with the #1 because he looks cool running the ball. :)

Your thinking and mine are different in how do we get this thing on the road to success, but we are both fanatics and want a mutual result.

I am concerend about 22 million of 93 million cap being swallowed by three offensive skill players. I understand your strategy in wanting to have a team scheme against an individual player, but I do not understand drafting a player who has not proven themselves and paying him like he has been an NFL stud to possibly have other teams scheme against. It is to thin of an argument for that price tag.

As far as best RB in recent memory goes, Adrian Peterson is available next year.

Texan Asylum
02-09-2006, 02:28 PM
Bush adds a depth of flexibility that other teams will find hard to plan a game plan around. His talent is spread out over a number of positions that could only make us that much more unpredictable. Up to that point we were extremely predictable, so we were easy to plan for. But I wouldn't rule out any other options to choose from. This is just one of the many premium choices we have the luxury to choose from this year.

DRAMA
02-09-2006, 02:34 PM
Your thinking and mine are different in how do we get this thing on the road to success, but we are both fanatics and want a mutual result.

Very true...I really think this year's gonna be a blast to watch.

I am concerend about 22 million of 93 million cap being swallowed by three offensive skill players. I understand your strategy in wanting to have a team scheme against an individual player, but I do not understand drafting a player who has not proven themselves and paying him like he has been an NFL stud to possibly have other teams scheme against. It is to thin of an argument for that price tag. .

Again, this is true. Hopefully, they will be able to find out a way to work around this through trades. If DD and Bush can both play, with Bush lining up in the slot some times, that cap hit will be for "4 players" instead of 3. As for Bush proving himself, he can only do what he can do. For every Julius Peppers there's a Jamal Reynolds - for every LaDanian there's a KiJana Carter - and an Akili Smith for every Peyton Manning. We have to take a chance and safe may or not be safe. Safe could be a bust or safe could be greatness - we'll see....

As far as best RB in recent memory goes, Adrian Peterson is available next year.

As is Brady Quinn...I've already been seeing it in my head! :)

HoustonFrog
02-09-2006, 02:43 PM
Drama, I'm with you. I've never been able to understand why people act like we have one pick and then we go home. We fell into a perfect draft for our team. It is top heavy with skill players and deep overall and on O-line. You can get the Skill AND the line. DD is not a franchise back. Denvers system used multiple backs to keep them fresh. You will have Bush and DD and Morency third. You lose Wells to FA. Bush has the type of break away ability to force teams to concentrate on him. I like VY and can't stand Carr but I don't think the team is going there. If we moved down I still would want the playmaker DE or LB and then go O-line.

Kaiser Toro
02-09-2006, 02:49 PM
I've never been able to understand why people act like we have one pick and then we go home.

That is exactly how many of us feel when it comes to those who want Bush.

Meloy
02-09-2006, 02:51 PM
I think we all agree that this is a deep draft for OL this year,I think through FA and 2-5 rd of draft we can build an above average OL,and still use the #1 on Bush.
How many "above avg" olinemen are starting in the NFL that came after round 1? I think this has been addressed on other threads. As Bush stands above other backs in draft, D. Ferguson stands above other OT. Winston is good. Ferguson is considered best in 10 years.

MorKnolle
02-09-2006, 03:00 PM
Your thinking and mine are different in how do we get this thing on the road to success, but we are both fanatics and want a mutual result.

I am concerend about 22 million of 93 million cap being swallowed by three offensive skill players. I understand your strategy in wanting to have a team scheme against an individual player, but I do not understand drafting a player who has not proven themselves and paying him like he has been an NFL stud to possibly have other teams scheme against. It is to thin of an argument for that price tag.

As far as best RB in recent memory goes, Adrian Peterson is available next year.

Unfortunately that is what has become of the #1 draft pick in recent years no matter who you draft there. Trading down would help with this problem and give us the opportunity to snag our stud DE (which teams will also have to game plan around) in the 1st and start fixing the OLine in the 2nd and on. If we do stay at #1 I don't have a problem at all with getting Bush, I would love to see how Kubiak can use him in the offense, but I still think the best option for our team as a whole is to trade down and wisely use those picks.

Meloy
02-09-2006, 03:00 PM
Your thinking and mine are different in how do we get this thing on the road to success, but we are both fanatics and want a mutual result.

I am concerend about 22 million of 93 million cap being swallowed by three offensive skill players. I understand your strategy in wanting to have a team scheme against an individual player, but I do not understand drafting a player who has not proven themselves and paying him like he has been an NFL stud to possibly have other teams scheme against. It is to thin of an argument for that price tag.

As far as best RB in recent memory goes, Adrian Peterson is available next year.
If we want Bush, we got him. If we want Peterson in 07, there is no guarantee and I'd say the odds way against.

Kaiser Toro
02-09-2006, 03:03 PM
If we want Bush, we got him. If we want Peterson in 07, there is no guarantee and I'd say the odds way against.

I am not making an arguement for us to wait, it is more of an exercise to diffuse the notion that there will never be another prospect like the Talented Mr. Bush.

I am sure you know that I feel that way, but wanted to get the point across as I left myself exposed.

HoustonFrog
02-09-2006, 03:09 PM
That is exactly how many of us feel when it comes to those who want Bush.

Kaiser, I have been with you on almost every post I have seen. We both have a disdain for one guy. I have not been a big Bush honk on here. I just thought it was the same move. If we went someone else like VY, I wouldn't be mad. My only bad scenario is moving down to get Brick.

HoustonFrog
02-09-2006, 03:11 PM
How many "above avg" olinemen are starting in the NFL that came after round 1? I think this has been addressed on other threads. As Bush stands above other backs in draft, D. Ferguson stands above other OT. Winston is good. Ferguson is considered best in 10 years.

It has been discussed but we aren't running an average run blocking scheme adn we are running a unique system. Our new O-ccordinator was on 610 the other day and he talked about how Denver took smaller, scrappier guys who love to play the game and put them into the zone blocking scheme. He did say he wants to fit the guys we have into the right places but all in all we would have the Broncos offense being put in. Their O-line is one first rounder which was the 20th pick, a rookie free agent, 2 fourth rounders and a 7th rounder. Obviously Denver picked lower but I doubt we would take a guy with a Top 5 pick for our O-line when this is one of the deepest drafts for O-lineman. We can do both skill and lineman in this draft if they scout like they did in Denver. He said that they mold guys into their system. That could be the guys we have now or ones we draft with our second pick or below. Add the fact that many scouts said Brick had an inconsistent senior year and was nicked up and I think he is as big a what if than anyone else we are talking about. Just because he is an O-lineman doesn't make him automatic. Look at Gallery for the Raiders.

El Tejano
02-09-2006, 03:13 PM
There were games where all we needed was another play maker to win. I say go for the play maker and draft OL and TE in the later rounds.

Kaiser Toro
02-09-2006, 03:19 PM
I have not been a big Bush honk on here.

You have not. Many times thoughts we put down on virtual paper gets taken out of context. As said before, 99% of the people on here share the same goal we just have a different map and on how to get there. :)

chuckm
02-09-2006, 03:22 PM
I have not been a big Bush honk on here.

I'm too crappy a typist to dare to post this sentence ..... congrats man

DRAMA
02-09-2006, 03:38 PM
I have not been a big Bush honk on here.

Do we HONK if we love Bush?? :redtowel:

(Sorry! Sometimes my inner 12 year old SCREAMS to come out!!)

HoustonFrog
02-09-2006, 03:49 PM
I'm too crappy a typist to dare to post this sentence ..... congrats man

:) Sorry guys, geese flocking together reference. If you didn't need that explained...sorry I'm a moron today.:homer: