PDA

View Full Version : Would you want to Draft Reggie Bush...


thunderkyss
03-07-2006, 09:24 AM
... if we had Shawn Alexander, Edgerin James, Tiki Barber, or Larry Johnson, or Warrick Dunn??

I'm just ask'n, to get a feel for how great you think this Reggie Bush is going to be. My answer, if I had anyone of those guys, would be no........ well... maybe if Dunn was my guy, but I'm kinda biased against little bitty guys. I just don't understand how he and Dante Hall can take those hits, and keep coming back.... it's inconcievable...... but anyway, back to the question. You've got one of those 5 guys on your team........ would you still take Reggie Bush #1 overall??


in return, if I had Peyton Manning, Donovan, Cullpepper, or Tom Brady, no... I wouldn't consider Vince Young at all in the draft.... not one second..

HeartofHouston
03-07-2006, 09:35 AM
Alexander, James and Johnson - No
Barber and Dunn - Yes

BeReal
03-07-2006, 09:57 AM
Alexander, James and Johnson - No
Barber and Dunn - Yes

Ditto. Although I don't get the point of this thread if there is one?

thunderkyss
03-07-2006, 10:02 AM
Exactly what I said........ I want to see how explosive you think Reggie Bush is, and where you guys rank DD...... that's all. just trying to understand my fellow Texans fan.

chuckm
03-07-2006, 10:02 AM
Ditto. Although I don't get the point of this thread if there is one?

The eyes of Texas are upon you,
All the live-long day.
The eyes of Texas are upon you,
You cannot get away.
Do not think you can escape them,
At night or early in the morn.
The eyes of Texas are upon you,
Till Gabriel blows his horn.

Big B Texan Fan
03-07-2006, 10:08 AM
Total "Catch 22"
On one hand we have an underachieving QB that is pretty durable yet has all/most the ability to make all the throws at an NFL level but has a propensity to getting sacked often.

On the other we have an overachieving RB that isn't very durable yet has all/most the ability to be a Pro-Bowler at the NFL level but has the propensity of getting injured and missing 4-6 games a season.

What to do?
Trade down and get D'Brick or Williams.
or
Roll the dice and go with Scat Back extrodinaire or VY the Tacklin' Dummy (emphesis on the Dummy).

PS. I'm in VY's corner irregardless of his brains but I am leaning on trading down and taking what falls to us, hopefully it's VY but at this point I'd be happy with just getting 04/29 behind us and moving on.

Runner
03-07-2006, 10:09 AM
Exactly what I said........ I want to see how explosive you think Reggie Bush is, and where you guys rank DD...... that's all. just trying to understand my fellow Texans fan.

I think it is an interesting question. I don't want to draft where we already have players who are around average. I think we need to draft in an area that meets two criteria:

1) It is a position where we are well below average

2) There is an exceptional player available at that position



Therefore to answer your question: I think most of the backs you listed do not meet my first criteria, so I wouldn't draft Bush.

infantrycak
03-07-2006, 10:11 AM
(emphesis on the Dummy).

Maybe it's just me, but when I use words like dummy, I try to place an emphasis on spelling them and the words around them correctly.

chuckm
03-07-2006, 10:14 AM
Maybe it's just me, but when I use words like dummy, I try to place an emphasis on spelling them and the words around them correctly.


yea that was funny but not nearly as funny as seeing one of Young's biggest Texan's Message Board backers turning on him for something that "never happened" ....

Big B Texan Fan
03-07-2006, 10:15 AM
Maybe it's just me, but when I use words like dummy, I try to place an emphasis on spelling them and the words around them correctly.
Yeah maybe that's just you. You know though, with as many posts as you have and as many of your posts that I've read (most of them elementary), I believe I've seen a mispelled word or two but never called you out on it.

Big B Texan Fan
03-07-2006, 10:19 AM
yea that was funny but not nearly as funny as seeing one of Young's biggest Texan's Message Board backers turning on him for something that "never happened" ....
Not referring to the alleged 6, more so the 16.

Was trying to be less VY heavy since that's all I've spewed lately. But if it makes you happy I'll go back to the:
Carr sux
VY rulz
Bush is ty-nee

DRAMA
03-07-2006, 10:24 AM
Total "Catch 22"
...I'm in VY's corner irregardless of his brains...

He's just messin' with ya...it's just funny when talking about Vince's smarts and then using 'irregardless' ...seeing as how it's not a word.

Just funnin' around... :)

Corrosion
03-07-2006, 10:29 AM
I dont want Bush .... and all we have is poor ole disrespected DD :stirpot:


V.Davis , M.Williams or D-Brick .....in that order

cuppacoffee
03-07-2006, 10:30 AM
... if we had Shawn Alexander, Edgerin James, Tiki Barber, or Larry Johnson, or Warrick Dunn??

I'm just ask'n, to get a feel for how great you think this Reggie Bush is going to be. My answer, if I had anyone of those guys, would be no........ well... maybe if Dunn was my guy, but I'm kinda biased against little bitty guys. I just don't understand how he and Dante Hall can take those hits, and keep coming back.... it's inconcievable...... but anyway, back to the question. You've got one of those 5 guys on your team........ would you still take Reggie Bush #1 overall??


in return, if I had Peyton Manning, Donovan, Cullpepper, or Tom Brady, no... I wouldn't consider Vince Young at all in the draft.... not one second..


Yes I would.

I don't know if you can remember the Cowboys back in their real glory years when Murchison, Schramm and Landry were running things. sp?


Anyhoo...The boys would draft good players for positions where they already had good players. Then they would trade the older/current player for a draft choice equal to or better than they spent on the new player. :whew

Seems like this happened almost on a yearly basis. Back then many teams would stand in line to trade for or sign up Cowboy castoffs. ( Before Jerruh started running things. :D )

At least that's the way I remember it...:confused:

Point being, you can never have too many good players for the same position, rb's, qb's. They are like currency to your team.

It is my opinion that you keep drafting the 'apparent elite/can't miss' prospects and sooner than later you will have built a winning franchise.

It would then be a rare occasion that you must draft for a need position.

But like I stated..that's just my opinion.

:coffee:

infantrycak
03-07-2006, 10:30 AM
Yeah maybe that's just you. You know though, with as many posts as you have and as many of your posts that I've read (most of them elementary), I believe I've seen a mispelled word or two but never called you out on it.

Dude, go buy a sense of humor. And while you are at the store, buy an "s" to stick in misspelled.

jerek
03-07-2006, 10:33 AM
yea that was funny but not nearly as funny as seeing one of Young's biggest Texan's Message Board backers turning on him for something that "never happened" ....

Oh, the delicious irony.

Dude, go buy a sense of humor. And while you are at the store, buy an "s" to stick in misspelled.

Maybe Vince will give you the one off his chest.

And TK, to answer your question, I'm still not 100% sold on the idea of drafting a split-carries back/offensive "specialist" at that price tag, simply because we already have Davis, who despite injury problems has been effective for us. I would like the trade down, but I guess I am not convinced we will be able to finagle a worthwhile deal.

Big B Texan Fan
03-07-2006, 10:40 AM
Dude, go buy a sense of humor. And while you are at the store, buy an "s" to stick in misspelled.
I've got plenty of humor. Just didn't understand why someone who misspells stuff all the time is calling someone out about misspelling. But if it makes you happy I'll work on it Oh Mr. Moderator Sir.

cuppacoffee
03-07-2006, 10:41 AM
He's just messin' with ya...it's just funny when talking about Vince's smarts and then using 'irregardless' ...seeing as how it's not a word.

Just funnin' around... :)

Main Entry: ir·re·gard·less
Pronunciation: "ir-i-'gärd-l&s
Function: adverb
Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless
Date: circa 1912
nonstandard : REGARDLESS
usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that "there is no such word." There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead.

Better call Webster. :rolleyes:

Just funnin' too. :)

Big B Texan Fan
03-07-2006, 10:44 AM
Main Entry: ir·re·gard·less
Pronunciation: "ir-i-'gärd-l&s
Function: adverb
Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless
Date: circa 1912
nonstandard : REGARDLESS
usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that "there is no such word." There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead.

Better call Webster. :rolleyes:

Just funnin' too. :)
Now I'll drink (a "cuppacoffee") to that.

infantrycak
03-07-2006, 10:47 AM
I've got plenty of humor. Just didn't understand why someone who misspells stuff all the time is calling someone out about misspelling. But if it makes you happy I'll work on it Oh Mr. Moderator Sir.

Pull your knickers out of your crevice and go back and look at the unique juxtaposition commented on originally--misspelling something in the same sentence as calling someone a dummy. You weren't "called out" and it wasn't just a drive by on a plain misspelling. And the childish retort about my spelling sure is a classic case of a gun kicking a whole lot harder than it shoots.

thunderkyss
03-07-2006, 11:02 AM
Pull your knickers out of your crevice and go back and look at the unique juxtaposition commented on originally--misspelling something in the same sentence as calling someone a dummy.

I'm with Infantrycak on this one....... it's ironic...... hard to pass up on.


now back to the question at hand.

I'd like to hear from more Bush Backers...


God I hope I spelled everything correctly.

Big B Texan Fan
03-07-2006, 11:02 AM
Pull your knickers out of your crevice and go back and look at the unique juxtaposition commented on originally--misspelling something in the same sentence as calling someone a dummy. You weren't "called out" and it wasn't just a drive by on a plain misspelling. And the childish retort about my spelling sure is a classic case of a gun kicking a whole lot harder than it shoots.
Let's chronicle the events as they happened.
1. I made a post
2. There was a word misspelled
3. You noticed it
4. You wet yourself over it
5. You replied to my post and my misspelling. Somehow you thought it was funny.
6. I replied back
7. Your VY hating buddies (jerek & chuckm) jumped on your coat tails.
8. You replied back again telling me to get my knickers out of my crevice.

Dude, drop it. You're the master speller and I'm the dork who uses misspelled words in a sentence where I call someone a Dummy.

And as far as the chilish retort......you started it.

chuckm
03-07-2006, 11:07 AM
Let's chronicle the events as they happened.
1. I made a post
2. There was a word misspelled
3. You noticed it
4. You wet yourself over it
5. You replied to my post and my misspelling. Somehow you thought it was funny.
6. I replied back
7. Your VY hating buddies (jerek & chuckm) jumped on your coat tails.
8. You replied back again telling me to get my knickers out of my crevice.


for the record, I'm perfectly capable of hating Young all by myself ... I'm waiting to see him in a Titan uniform before I do though ...

Big B Texan Fan
03-07-2006, 11:12 AM
for the record, I'm perfectly capable of hating Young all by myself ... I'm waiting to see him in a Titan uniform before I do though ...
I know you are, just wanted to get you in on the fun.
Now where did I pack all my old Titan stuff?

CITY CAT
03-07-2006, 11:13 AM
People seem to think that if we draft Bush it is the end of DD. I want Bush and DD. That would cause a nightmare for opposing DCs because both are excellent recievers out of the backfield. It is not a crime to have 2 good RBs, especially if GK is the HC.

chuckm
03-07-2006, 11:14 AM
Now where did I pack all my old Titan stuff?

touche'

Big B Texan Fan
03-07-2006, 11:14 AM
I'm with Infantrycak on this one....... it's ironic...... hard to pass up on.


now back to the question at hand.

I'd like to hear from more Bush Backers...


God I hope I spelled everything correctly.
You did spell everything correctly but infantrycak is with a lower case i, not an upper case I.
Watch yourself, we're being babysat.

Frills
03-07-2006, 11:14 AM
If we had an elite back we'd never have the chance at Bush.

Most the Elite backs have taken a ton of hits, and I'd draft Bush for what he can give 5 years down the road when the Elite of today is headded downhill.


Course trading down for a 1st next year and hoping to get Peterson is another fine option.

Runner
03-07-2006, 11:18 AM
People seem to think that if we draft Bush it is the end of DD. I want Bush and DD. That would cause a nightmare for opposing DCs because both are excellent recievers out of the backfield. It is not a crime to have 2 good RBs, especially if GK is the HC.

Great! A post on topic.

Do you think having the "2 good RBs" is worth the percentage of cap space they'll use, given we have other areas of great need?

DRAMA
03-07-2006, 11:25 AM
Main Entry: ir·re·gard·less
Pronunciation: "ir-i-'gärd-l&s
Function: adverb
Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless
Date: circa 1912
nonstandard : REGARDLESS
usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that "there is no such word." There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead.

Better call Webster. :rolleyes:

Just funnin' too. :)

The fact is that it was used at one time in our culture, albeit wrongly, but with it being a double negative, it is not a word that can be used in the standard English language because it has no single use. It is a word that has no correct usage and no definition. Hence, it is not a word. It was listed as a word because it was used so improperly by uneducated people in the 1800's. It is acknowledged as a word to show that it is NOT a word. The ultimate grammatical papradox, if you will. (The above has not been copied and pasted from Google) :)

thunderkyss
03-07-2006, 11:34 AM
People seem to think that if we draft Bush it is the end of DD. I want Bush and DD. That would cause a nightmare for opposing DCs because both are excellent recievers out of the backfield. It is not a crime to have 2 good RBs, especially if GK is the HC.


So if you had Shawn(sp) Alexander, you'd still want Reggie Bush, is that correct.

chuckm
03-07-2006, 11:40 AM
http://www.mcrw.com/lovenotes/irregardless.htm

my little contribution to this lunacy

Runner
03-07-2006, 11:47 AM
Although I consider myself a bit of a logophile, I'm staying out of the word discussion.

CITY CAT
03-07-2006, 01:24 PM
Yes we have other holes to fill, but do you fill it in a draft? No, putting a bunch of rookies at places like MLB, DB and other places isn't exactly filling holes. Yo Frills, why did you get demoted to the "practice squad"?

Runner
03-07-2006, 01:47 PM
Yes we have other holes to fill, but do you fill it in a draft? No, putting a bunch of rookies at places like MLB, DB and other places isn't exactly filling holes. Yo Frills, why did you get demoted to the "practice squad"?

Well, if we tie too much money up at one position (RB in this case), we aren't going to fill them through free agency either.

I've never been a proponent of starting "a bunch of rookies". However, I do think there is a rookie DE available to us that could make an immediate, positive impact at a lower risk than some of the names talked about for the first pick.

Big B Texan Fan
03-07-2006, 02:49 PM
but with it being a double negative, it is not a word that can be used in the standard English language because it has no single use.
I thought double negatives were the usage of TWO words in a negative sense in the same sentence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_negative
Example:
I don't think we will be any good next year if we don't draft VY.

What about words like ain't and ya'll? We see those regularly on these MB's since most of us are from the South.

I agree it (irregardless) may not be a true word but we say it all the time.

David's Busted Carr
03-07-2006, 03:23 PM
The only current RB that I would rather have over Reggie Bush is Ladainian Tomlinson. He is still young enough and has alot of solid years ahead of him. I think this year was Shaun Alexander's pinnacle of his career and now that he got his money you will see a huge decline in his production. And he is getting up there in age too. Edge is solid, but getting older and has a surgically repaired knee. Funny how Indy doesn't even want him anymore if he was THAT good....

infantrycak
03-07-2006, 03:23 PM
What about words like ain't and ya'll? We see those regularly on these MB's since most of us are from the South.

Y'all is an ordinary contraction (although many english teachers hate it):

y'all
One entry found for y'all.
Main Entry: y'all
Pronunciation: 'yol
variant of YOU-ALL

Ain't is strange because isn't really a contraction--it is just a made up word to convey one of several possible contraction like meanings:

ain't
One entry found for ain't.
Main Entry: ain't
Pronunciation: 'Ant
Etymology: contraction of are not
1 : am not : are not : is not
2 : have not : has not
3 : do not : does not : did not -- used in some varieties of Black English
usage Although widely disapproved as nonstandard and more common in the habitual speech of the less educated, ain't in senses 1 and 2 is flourishing in American English.

Link (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/ain't)

travfrancis
03-07-2006, 03:45 PM
Shaun Alexander's pinnacle of his career and now that he got his money you will see a huge decline in his production. And he is getting up there in age too. Edge is solid, but getting older and has a surgically repaired knee. Funny how Indy doesn't even want him anymore if he was THAT good....

also funny how these top tier rbs seem to lose their value pretty quickly. (SP?, just in case).

thunderkyss
03-07-2006, 03:46 PM
I thought double negatives were the usage of TWO words in a negative sense in the same sentence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_negative


IR-means to take the opposite of the word that follows
regardless means like it's not important, never mind, it doesn't matter

regardless, we can't loose with the #1 pick

ir-regardless, we can't loose with the #1 pick

I think they both mean the same thing to most people..... one is just less straight forward if you think about it, but most of us don't... we couldn't care less.


The only current RB that I would rather have over Reggie Bush is Ladainian Tomlinson. He is still young enough and has alot of solid years ahead of him. I think this year was Shaun Alexander's pinnacle of his career and now that he got his money you will see a huge decline in his production. And he is getting up there in age too. Edge is solid, but getting older and has a surgically repaired knee. Funny how Indy doesn't even want him anymore if he was THAT good....

irregardless........

just joking...

Thankyou for staying on track.

BeReal
03-07-2006, 03:51 PM
IR-means to take the opposite of the word that follows
regardless means like it's not important, never mind, it doesn't matter

regardless, we can't loose with the #1 pick

ir-regardless, we can't loose with the #1 pick

I think they both mean the same thing to most people..... one is just less straight forward if you think about it, but most of us don't... we couldn't care less.




irregardless........

just joking...

Thankyou for staying on track.


Kind of like saying why or why not?

Runner
03-07-2006, 03:53 PM
Y'all is an ordinary contraction (although many english teachers hate it):



Y'all is redundant. All y'all doubly so.

Texans Horror
03-07-2006, 04:01 PM
Personally, I think Reggie will give the Texans what Cadillac gave to Tampa and Ronnie Brown gave Miami. Both teams completely flip-flopped between the last two seasons, and the effect of rookies on the squad impacted the team. I think the same will happen to the Texans if we bring in Reggie. DD will be retained for the year in the hopes of trading him next season.

Scooter
03-07-2006, 04:01 PM
super mod why do you have several posts soliciting an off-topic arguement? :stirpot:

no, i wouldnt take bush if i had those backs for the same reason i wouldnt take him with DD. all have shown consistantly that they're good or great at the position. reggie bush is potential, some folks cant comprehend that reggie has yet to even attend training camp. he might be better than those guys, but it wont be by much (you've listed the current TD record holder ... something reggie couldnt do on a bad team nomatter how good he is), he's also got the potential to be worse and very possibly MUCH worse. it works in madden, but unlike madden steve mckinney isnt as good as every other center in the league.

also, the draft should be the main focus as where to fill holes ... i'm not sure why anyone would think otherwise. the steelers started 10 players on offense who've only played in pittsburgh (including an undrafted running back), and i dont see any holes in their offense.

stevo3883
03-07-2006, 05:07 PM
Y'all is redundant. All y'all doubly so.


no, it's a contraction. You + all = y'all. Y'all is used for a group of people. its a shortened version of "all of you" like "all of you need to clean your lockers out, you're cut"

maybe saying "all y'all" isn't proper, but y'all by itself is fine.

infantrycak
03-07-2006, 05:17 PM
super mod why do you have several posts soliciting an off-topic arguement? :stirpot:

It was meant as one tiny joke but I am leaving it because it appears to be keeping the thread from devolving into VY vs. Carr.

texplayer2
03-07-2006, 08:03 PM
Well, if we tie too much money up at one position (RB in this case), we aren't going to fill them through free agency either.

I've never been a proponent of starting "a bunch of rookies". However, I do think there is a rookie DE available to us that could make an immediate, positive impact at a lower risk than some of the names talked about for the first pick.

Isn't that the way the draft went last year? Travis Johnson?
If we had any of those backs and still had the #1 pick(not probable) I think you still go after the top guys at college level. Look at Chargers two years ago. Ended up pick Manning and trading him for value.

Mightymike
03-07-2006, 08:14 PM
Alexander, James and Johnson - No
Barber and Dunn - Yes

tiki barber is straight sick.
how can you leave him out

TexanFan881
03-07-2006, 08:23 PM
Honestely, I pray to god that we trade down. I am very confident in DD, and he can get the job done for us. I don't feel we need Reggie Bush.

I think if we want a RB we should trade down and get DeAngelo Williams because I think he will be just as good if not better than Reggie Bush as a pro and will save us some money along with some more picks if we trade down. I think it is more important that we address our needs instead of positions where we have players that can get the job done.

disaacks3
03-07-2006, 08:35 PM
... if we had Shawn Alexander, Edgerin James, Tiki Barber, or Larry Johnson, or Warrick Dunn??

... but anyway, back to the question. You've got one of those 5 guys on your team........ would you still take Reggie Bush #1 overall??

Yes, I STILL would. None of the backs you list has the open-field speed or WR ability of Bush (thus far). I like the potential of messing with the opposing D's mind a little as we play the "Where is he gonna line up THIS play?" game.

Do I think he's truly worth the #1 pick? - NOPE. Is he one of the SAFEST bets? - YES.

Ditto on that for VY (No Pro-Set experience) & possibly Lineart (nagging injuries / mobility) as well.

I'm still too afraid that CC will foul-up any good trade down scenario, which is a shame given the very good talent available in the 1st round this year at OT, LB, TE, etc.

thunderkyss
03-07-2006, 10:37 PM
Personally, I think Reggie will give the Texans what Cadillac gave to Tampa and Ronnie Brown gave Miami. Both teams completely flip-flopped between the last two seasons, and the effect of rookies on the squad impacted the team. I think the same will happen to the Texans if we bring in Reggie. DD will be retained for the year in the hopes of trading him next season.

Personally, I (and many others) think DD will have a better season than Cadillac & Ronnie Brown did with Kubiaks improved blocking scheme.

DD's first three years were as good as if not better than all the guys I mentioned as a running back(including Ronnie Brown, and Cadillac Williams). That's why I left LT out of the mix. You add his all purpose yards, DD kills those guys................ all of them. That includes games started. It is not uncommon for a RB to get banged up their first three years getting hit by big boys... Especially when you have someone who doesn't avoid contact......

Look at Clinton Portis, Mike Anderson, Terrell Davis, Olandis Gary, (you get the drill) when they were in Denver, they weren't touched, till they got to the second level. Give that opportunity to D, and he will stay healthy a whole season. 1600 yards, easy. and that's just carries... he'll give us 2000 all purpose yards, no question.

Runner
03-07-2006, 11:04 PM
Isn't that the way the draft went last year? Travis Johnson?
If we had any of those backs and still had the #1 pick(not probable) I think you still go after the top guys at college level. Look at Chargers two years ago. Ended up pick Manning and trading him for value.

Are you saying Mario Williams = Travis Johnson?


no, it's a contraction. You + all = y'all. Y'all is used for a group of people. its a shortened version of "all of you" like "all of you need to clean your lockers out, you're cut"

maybe saying "all y'all" isn't proper, but y'all by itself is fine.

I'm aware of "y'all" being a contraction.

whiskeyrbl
03-07-2006, 11:26 PM
Personally, I (and many others) think DD will have a better season than Cadillac & Ronnie Brown did with Kubiaks improved blocking scheme.

DD's first three years were as good as if not better than all the guys I mentioned as a running back(including Ronnie Brown, and Cadillac Williams). That's why I left LT out of the mix. You add his all purpose yards, DD kills those guys................ all of them. That includes games started. It is not uncommon for a RB to get banged up their first three years getting hit by big boys... Especially when you have someone who doesn't avoid contact......

Look at Clinton Portis, Mike Anderson, Terrell Davis, Olandis Gary, (you get the drill) when they were in Denver, they weren't touched, till they got to the second level. Give that opportunity to D, and he will stay healthy a whole season. 1600 yards, easy. and that's just carries... he'll give us 2000 all purpose yards, no question.
But DD does'nt have real break away speed.Now put your reference to Portis,Davis,Gary to Bush.There may not be contact at the second level.If you truly believe that our line will be like Denvers as it sounds then you SHOULD want Bush that could be a TD everytime he touches the ball.:drool:

tulexan
03-07-2006, 11:58 PM
Yeah that argument made no sense. If you believe that the line can get Davis to the secondary without contact, then you would want Bush on the team because if they can get Davis there then they can get Bush there, and if Bush can get to the secondary without contact he is going to score a touchdown because he isn't going to be caught from behind by linebackers like Davis.

thunderkyss
03-08-2006, 01:12 PM
I see what you are saying. But my objection against Bush, is that there are better things we can do with the pick, and I think Bush is just as much a maybe as anyother player in the draft.

I don't see the point in adding another RB.

and though it is nice to score touchdowns out of the running game whenever, and from where ever, I'm more oldschool. I want to threaten the first down, eat up yards and clock with the run game.

I'm looking at 2000 all purpose yards. I'd rather get them in chunks of yards&time, not just chunks of yards.. I don't think Bush is going to give us much more than 2000 all purpose yards, especially not with DD, AJ, and a TE/#2 Reciever.

Taking Bush @ #1, means we won't be getting an AJ Hawk, or a Mario Williams...... and we need either of them, more than we need the ability to break 80 yard touchdown runs.

The Dude Abides
03-08-2006, 01:33 PM
I see what you are saying. But my objection against Bush, is that there are better things we can do with the pick, and I think Bush is just as much a maybe as anyother player in the draft.

I don't see the point in adding another RB.

and though it is nice to score touchdowns out of the running game whenever, and from where ever, I'm more oldschool. I want to threaten the first down, eat up yards and clock with the run game.

I'm looking at 2000 all purpose yards. I'd rather get them in chunks of yards&time, not just chunks of yards.. I don't think Bush is going to give us much more than 2000 all purpose yards, especially not with DD, AJ, and a TE/#2 Reciever.

Taking Bush @ #1, means we won't be getting an AJ Hawk, or a Mario Williams...... and we need either of them, more than we need the ability to break 80 yard touchdown runs.

I just think we need to outscore the other team.:rolleyes:

thunderkyss
03-10-2006, 12:34 AM
I just think we need to outscore the other team.:rolleyes:


We'll do that too. & make it hard for them to fight back, by getting defensive stops, and being stingy with the ball.

Nighthawk
03-10-2006, 01:05 AM
He's just messin' with ya...it's just funny when talking about Vince's smarts and then using 'irregardless' ...seeing as how it's not a word.

Just funnin' around... :)

ir-re-gard-less (ir i gärd'lis) adv. Nonstandard
1. regardless.
[1910-15; IR -2 (prob. after irrespective) +
REGARDLESS]
Usage. IRREGARDLESS is considered nonstandard
because of the two negative elements ir- and
-less. Those who use the word, including on
occasion educated speakers, may do so from a
desire to add emphasis. IRREGARDLESS first
appeared in the early 20th century and was perhaps
popularized by its use in a comic radio program of
the 1930s.

DRAMA
03-10-2006, 09:59 AM
Riiiiiight....

If you check post #18 of this thread, that's kinda what we've been talking about for 3 pages now....

:)

Kaiser Toro
03-10-2006, 10:14 AM
Yes I would want to draft Reggie Bush. As a fan of the Houston Texans it does not make as much sense to draft him with the #1 this year as it does to trade down or draft Mario Williams at #1.

jerek
03-10-2006, 10:37 AM
Yes I would want to draft Reggie Bush. As a fan of the Houston Texans it does not make as much sense to draft him with the #1 this year as it does to trade down or draft Mario Williams at #1.

Agreed, I just hope Cass can make the right deal.

swtbound07
03-10-2006, 12:44 PM
IR-means to take the opposite of the word that follows
regardless means like it's not important, never mind, it doesn't matter

regardless, we can't loose with the #1 pick

ir-regardless, we can't loose with the #1 pick



I do not think that word means what you think it means

whiskeyrbl
03-10-2006, 01:02 PM
Has anyone heard of Noel Devine?http://www.noeldevine.net/,check this kid out maybe we can get him in 3-4 years.

Texas
03-10-2006, 01:23 PM
Any of them - Yes.


Then i'd have two good runningbacks and run a split back formation!

Kaiser Toro
03-10-2006, 01:57 PM
I do not think that word means what you think it means

Inconceivable!

thunderkyss
03-10-2006, 02:02 PM
I do not think that word means what you think it means

My name is Indigo Montoya......... You killed my father.....



Prepare to dye

thunderkyss
03-10-2006, 02:24 PM
Yes, it was done on purpose.:redtowel:


die

swtbound07
03-10-2006, 02:33 PM
glad people got the reference...i hate it when a good joke goes unread

Ryan
03-12-2006, 02:07 PM
i would still take reggie bush for all of the rbs except alexander or james. As for the Vince Young deal, i would take him only if we had tom brady. Before yall start harassing me, tom brady would not be near the QB in the texans situation as their QB, one bc he would get crushed, and two bc he has more talent around him in NE.

thunderkyss
04-20-2006, 01:10 PM
i would still take reggie bush for all of the rbs except alexander or james. As for the Vince Young deal, i would take him only if we had tom brady. Before yall start harassing me, tom brady would not be near the QB in the texans situation as their QB, one bc he would get crushed, and two bc he has more talent around him in NE.

This is supposed to be about DD. But, Tom Brady was sacked 41 times his rookie year........... when he won his first SuperBowl.

thunderkyss
04-20-2006, 01:22 PM
DD's first three years were as good as if not better than all the guys I mentioned as a running back(including Ronnie Brown, and Cadillac Williams). That's why I left LT out of the mix. You add his all purpose yards, DD kills those guys................ all of them. That includes games started. It is not uncommon for a RB to get banged up their first three years getting hit by big boys... Especially when you have someone who doesn't avoid contact......

Look at Clinton Portis, Mike Anderson, Terrell Davis, Olandis Gary, (you get the drill) when they were in Denver, they weren't touched, till they got to the second level. Give that opportunity to D, and he will stay healthy a whole season. 1600 yards, easy. and that's just carries... he'll give us 2000 all purpose yards, no question.


... if we had Shawn Alexander, Edgerin James, Tiki Barber, or Larry Johnson, or Warrick Dunn??

I'm just ask'n, to get a feel for how great you think this Reggie Bush is going to be. My answer, if I had anyone of those guys, would be no........ well... maybe if Dunn was my guy, but I'm kinda biased against little bitty guys. I just don't understand how he and Dante Hall can take those hits, and keep coming back.... it's inconcievable...... but anyway, back to the question. You've got one of those 5 guys on your team........ would you still take Reggie Bush #1 overall??


in return, if I had Peyton Manning, Donovan, Cullpepper, or Tom Brady, no... I wouldn't consider Vince Young at all in the draft.... not one second..

This is the main gist of this thread.