PDA

View Full Version : Mr. McNair, Kubiak, Casserly - Too Smart for Bu$h hype!


elgie
04-23-2006, 11:59 AM
The following is a compilation of arguments from myself and many other sources together in one place for easy reference:

I contend that Reggie Bu$h should not be the #1 pick for the Houston Texans, despite the fact there is no denying heís one of the most talented and exciting players to enter the draft. He is not an ideal fit for the running scheme they will employ. There are real issues about his durability in that system. Itís an unwise financial decision given the salary cap space and money necessary to sign: such a highly-touted Hei$man Trophy that youíve led everyone including Bu$hís agent to believe youíll pick, and a Tailback that will still require yet another good Tailback to help share the workload (but not share the salary!) He will not directly impact the offense to the degree an Offensive Lineman or Quarterback would. He will not be as much of an upgrade over current options at Tailback that 2 or even 1 lineman (2 via trade-down) would be at their positions. The current Tailback position is the most productive part of the offense, so why would you start tinkering there first when you have so many other glaring needs elsewhere? Weak leaders too often make decisions based on public opinion, right or wrong. But real leaders make decisions by weighing the risk/reward ratio, and with Bu$h itís too high to justify his selection at #1 for Houston.

An expansion of the above points for clarification follows:

Running scheme Ė Everyone knows this system turns moderately-touted tailbacks into 1200yd.+ rushers. Donít need a high-priced hyped Hei$man tailback. Donít want one. Too espensive.
Look at Denver's tailback history. They saved money by plugging in moderately priced, durable tailbacks, then when the tailbacks performed at the highest level, they wanted to get paid, naturally. They either got the contract or they got replaced by another moderately-priced tailback. With Bu$h, you don't get to first reap the benefits of low-cost production, instead you pay top Hei$man dollars right out of the gate without him having first proved himself in your system.


Imact on offense Ė Forget about Bu$h returning kicks (technically defense.) You donít use your expensive Ferrari to run across town at rush hour to buy that loaf of bread. Also forget about runs up the middle when people know itís coming. So weíre talking about a part-time role player. We're talking about dilution of practice time and playbook/chalktalk study among Tailback duties and Receiver duties. At least a lineman plays most snaps and is directly involved in the outcome of the play. Bu$h will not make the players around him better nearly to the extent that a standout lineman will. If an Offensive Lineman plugs a hole in a porous line, then all of a sudden Carr stays upright, has more time to find receivers who have more time to get into their routes and get open. Suddenly opposing linebackers aren't stacking the box, and suddenly Davis, Morency, and Wells have better holes and running lanes. Suddenly opposing defenses stay on the field longer and tire, increasing the possibility of defensive mistakes and bigger offensive plays. Look at Priest Holmes, Terrell Davis, Emmitt Smith (just 3 of so many others I could mention.) None had the fastest wheels. Didn't need them. They had the patience, vision, and power to run behind superior lines that lifted them to greatness.


Big upgrade at the tailback position? When Bu$h pushers talk about how much better Bu$h will be than Davis alone, we never hear about production numbers. Thatís because in order to be a large upgrade, heíd need to put up CRAZY numbers. Sorry, this isnít USC vs. Fresno State. This is the NFL where much greater parity exists. If youíre expecting 3-4 TDs and 400 all-purpose yards each game, prepare to be disappointed.


So many glaring needs elsewhere. Despite what beat writers say, Iím not convinced the free-agent acquisitions are enough. Why take a chance at finding a sleeper at those needy positions in the 2nd, 4th, 5th rounds or later? Each round later represents a drop-off in talent. When you have a big need, why wouldn't you want the best talent available? I've read magazines as far back as 3 years ago stating that Houston has done little to improve their pass protection. Funny (not) how some things never change. How many sacks does Carr need to take before he's given the best left guard money can buy? How many 1st round skill-players are underperforming for the Texans? Could it be the lines are keeping them from reaching their potential? Of course! Rather than give the lines the first priority, with the lone exception of Travis Davis, Houston has kept throwing good money after bad on skill players, yet ignored key line positions until the 3rd, 4th, 5th rounds or later. How has that strategy been working, Texans fans? Drafting Bu$h onto this team is almost like installing a top-of-the-line boutique home theater system into a house with a leaky roof, broken windows, and faulty furnace. Youíll never be able to fully appreciate the sound quality, and your money will be wasted. Want another metaphor? Itís almost like a female car-crash victim going into the ER and coming out with a set of breast imlants. Nice to look at, but not the smart thing to do.


Public Opinion. Donít believe the hype. As usual with a Hei$man trophy winner and flashy player, there seems to be a national sportmedia drumbeat for Reggie Bu$h to be the first pick by the Texans. By one writer's own admission this pick would create more buzz for the Texans than say, a defensive lineman would. This writer also knows a flashy Hei$mann trophy winner will provide more interesting articles than a lineman would. Seems
to me the Texans should be most concerned with which players will provide more improvement and more wins, not more buzz. However, nothing creates buzz and sells like a winner does. Media and fans alike always fall into what I call ďteenagerĒ mode this time of year. A typical teenager is too easily seduced by marketing, publicity, and what the crowd thinks is the hot thing. Right now, that is Reggie Bu$h. Teenagers are impulsive-driven and typically go after the sexy thing, not the smart thing. A common argument is that no GM wants to be the one to turn down Bush and have him go to another team and turn out to be an all-pro. Counter-argument: you can also say that any pick Houston makes is a potential all-pro that another team misses out on. So it's irrelevant. Also, again, do you make this decision based on fear of what others will think or from fear of missing out on what might be? No, you do it based on fit and how it makes your team better. I trust Houston will see through the hype and do the smart thing, not the sexy thing.

thunderkyss
04-23-2006, 12:16 PM
Wow........

I wish I would have had a first post like that.

kastofsna
04-23-2006, 12:22 PM
everything you said is discredited for the "bu$h" thing.

elgie
04-23-2006, 12:38 PM
everything you said is discredited for the "bu$h" thing.

Why? Bush will (and rightfully should) ask for a humongous signing bonus/salary, and we've heard the rumoured reports that his agent and the Texans may have talked numbers but are very far apart, thus leading the Texans to look toward Mario Williams. So why would a little dollar sign for emphasis change everything? Please discredit the arguments presented with actual reasons, insead of dismissing everything with one blanket 'huffy' retort.

Hottoddie
04-23-2006, 12:48 PM
Now that's a well thought out post. Welcome to the board & keep it coming. There's a lot of posters on this board that have crossed over to the dark side of the media hype.

bad
04-23-2006, 12:57 PM
Great job elgie, welcome to the boards.

Very seldom do I read that large of a posting, but then again very seldom does a posting that large contain punctuation.

Could've done without the dollar signs in Bush's name though. Any agent that doesn't try to get the maximum deal for his client would be justifiably fired. That shouldn't be a knock on Bush.

I have slowly warmed up to the idea of a trade down (though I don't trust the Texans to do this without getting fleeced). I'm a huge Reggie Bush fan but Barry Sanders taught me that you can love a player while hating his team. I can be a Texans fan and still be a Bush fan even if he winds up (shudder) a flaming thumbtack.

I can't help feeling that the Texans may yet find a way to come out of this draft without one of the truly elite players. It's Casserley's version of Aversion Therapy I suppose.

GP
04-23-2006, 12:58 PM
What we think they shoudl do, and what they WILL do are two separate things.

I like your ability to spell, as well as the concept of paragraphs. There's a lot of posters who have 1,000 posts and don't know how to spell or break the text up with (Gasp!) the "enter" button on the keyboard.

Back to topic: We're drafting Bush because he's the guy you pick at number 1. I wish we'd trade out and grab 'Brick. But...we don't have that luxury because the Saints acquired a veteran QB and that makes getting 'Brick very hard because the Saints can get him to protect Brees' blindside.

No, after all the hoping and wishing...it's goig to Bush unless we get a deal from the Jets, and what's scary is that we might even entertain San Fran. Now wouldn't that be a kick in the pants if the team we beat last year to GET the No. 1 pick actually comes out and gets the guy we were GOING to get? Ouch. That would make us look verrrrrrrry dumb, if you ask me.

Anyways, welcome to the board.

thunderkyss
04-23-2006, 12:59 PM
Could've done without the dollar signs in Bush's name though. Any agent that doesn't try to get the maximum deal for his client would be justifiably fired. That shouldn't be a knock on Bush.


True..... True

kastofsna
04-23-2006, 01:06 PM
Why? Bush will (and rightfully should) ask for a humongous signing bonus/salary, and we've heard the rumoured reports that his agent and the Texans may have talked numbers but are very far apart, thus leading the Texans to look toward Mario Williams. So why would a little dollar sign for emphasis change everything? Please discredit the arguments presented with actual reasons, insead of dismissing everything with one blanket 'huffy' retort.
seems pretty childish to me. but i've been called the same thing...MANY times. or time$.

whiskeyrbl
04-23-2006, 01:08 PM
The following is a compilation of arguments from myself and many other sources together in one place for easy reference:

I contend that Reggie Bu$h should not be the #1 pick for the Houston Texans, despite the fact there is no denying heís one of the most talented and exciting players to enter the draft. He is not an ideal fit for the running scheme they will employ. There are real issues about his durability in that system. Itís an unwise financial decision given the salary cap space and money necessary to sign: such a highly-touted Hei$man Trophy that youíve led everyone including Bu$hís agent to believe youíll pick, and a Tailback that will still require yet another good Tailback to help share the workload (but not share the salary!) He will not directly impact the offense to the degree an Offensive Lineman or Quarterback would. He will not be as much of an upgrade over current options at Tailback that 2 or even 1 lineman (2 via trade-down) would be at their positions. The current Tailback position is the most productive part of the offense, so why would you start tinkering there first when you have so many other glaring needs elsewhere? Weak leaders too often make decisions based on public opinion, right or wrong. But real leaders make decisions by weighing the risk/reward ratio, and with Bu$h itís too high to justify his selection at #1 for Houston.

I disagree completely. At USC they ran a form of the Zone Blocking, so RB would be coming into a familiar scheme. The only issues of durability come from people writing newspaper articles,talking on sportcenter, and posting on MB's. Just because he played with another talented back he shared plays. Not a bad idea either considering it lessened chances for injuries for both. And you are right he will not have the same impact as an OL, or QB. He will have all 11 on defenses attention.Not knowing where or how he is going to be used on the play or if at all. And anyone drafted #1 is gonna cost $$$$.


An expansion of the above points for clarification follows:

Running scheme Ė Everyone knows this system turns moderately-touted tailbacks into 1200yd.+ rushers. Donít need a high-priced hyped Hei$man tailback. Donít want one. Too espensive.
Look at Denver's tailback history. They saved money by plugging in moderately priced, durable tailbacks, then when the tailbacks performed at the highest level, they wanted to get paid, naturally. They either got the contract or they got replaced by another moderately-priced tailback. With Bu$h, you don't get to first reap the benefits of low-cost production, instead you pay top Hei$man dollars right out of the gate without him having first proved himself in your system.

This is a "Houston Scheme not Denver". Expect different formations and plays.


Imact on offense Ė Forget about Bu$h returning kicks (technically defense.) You donít use your expensive Ferrari to run across town at rush hour to buy that loaf of bread. Also forget about runs up the middle when people know itís coming. So weíre talking about a part-time role player. We're talking about dilution of practice time and playbook/chalktalk study among Tailback duties and Receiver duties. At least a lineman plays most snaps and is directly involved in the outcome of the play. Bu$h will not make the players around him better nearly to the extent that a standout lineman will. If an Offensive Lineman plugs a hole in a porous line, then all of a sudden Carr stays upright, has more time to find receivers who have more time to get into their routes and get open. Suddenly opposing linebackers aren't stacking the box, and suddenly Davis, Morency, and Wells have better holes and running lanes. Suddenly opposing defenses stay on the field longer and tire, increasing the possibility of defensive mistakes and bigger offensive plays. Look at Priest Holmes, Terrell Davis, Emmitt Smith (just 3 of so many others I could mention.) None had the fastest wheels. Didn't need them. They had the patience, vision, and power to run behind superior lines that lifted them to greatness.

Agree on returns,but thats it. Listen to the people who coached and played against and with him. He hits full speed at 2- 3 step, has great vision to hit the hole and get thru.


Big upgrade at the tailback position? When Bu$h pushers talk about how much better Bu$h will be than Davis alone, we never hear about production numbers. Thatís because in order to be a large upgrade, heíd need to put up CRAZY numbers. Sorry, this isnít USC vs. Fresno State. This is the NFL where much greater parity exists. If youíre expecting 3-4 TDs and 400 all-purpose yards each game, prepare to be disappointed.

Correct this is not college. Just as people say" Don't say he can do it,till he has played.Don't say he can't till they prove he can't!


So many glaring needs elsewhere. Despite what beat writers say, Iím not convinced the free-agent acquisitions are enough. Why take a chance at finding a sleeper at those needy positions in the 2nd, 4th, 5th rounds or later? Each round later represents a drop-off in talent. When you have a big need, why wouldn't you want the best talent available? I've read magazines as far back as 3 years ago stating that Houston has done little to improve their pass protection. Funny (not) how some things never change. How many sacks does Carr need to take before he's given the best left guard money can buy? How many 1st round skill-players are underperforming for the Texans? Could it be the lines are keeping them from reaching their potential? Of course! Rather than give the lines the first priority, with the lone exception of Travis Davis, Houston has kept throwing good money after bad on skill players, yet ignored key line positions until the 3rd, 4th, 5th rounds or later. How has that strategy been working, Texans fans? Drafting Bu$h onto this team is almost like installing a top-of-the-line boutique home theater system into a house with a leaky roof, broken windows, and faulty furnace. Youíll never be able to fully appreciate the sound quality, and your money will be wasted. Want another metaphor? Itís almost like a female car-crash victim going into the ER and coming out with a set of breast imlants. Nice to look at, but not the smart thing to do.


Public Opinion. Donít believe the hype. As usual with a Hei$man trophy winner and flashy player, there seems to be a national sportmedia drumbeat for Reggie Bu$h to be the first pick by the Texans. By one writer's own admission this pick would create more buzz for the Texans than say, a defensive lineman would. This writer also knows a flashy Hei$mann trophy winner will provide more interesting articles than a lineman would. Seems
to me the Texans should be most concerned with which players will provide more improvement and more wins, not more buzz. However, nothing creates buzz and sells like a winner does. Media and fans alike always fall into what I call ďteenagerĒ mode this time of year. A typical teenager is too easily seduced by marketing, publicity, and what the crowd thinks is the hot thing. Right now, that is Reggie Bu$h. Teenagers are impulsive-driven and typically go after the sexy thing, not the smart thing. A common argument is that no GM wants to be the one to turn down Bush and have him go to another team and turn out to be an all-pro. Counter-argument: you can also say that any pick Houston makes is a potential all-pro that another team misses out on. So it's irrelevant. Also, again, do you make this decision based on fear of what others will think or from fear of missing out on what might be? No, you do it based on fit and how it makes your team better. I trust Houston will see through the hype and do the smart thing, not the sexy thing.

We will know in a Week!!!!

Kaiser Toro
04-23-2006, 01:15 PM
We march to the same kazoo elgie. Welcome to the terrordome. :)

BornOrange
04-23-2006, 01:16 PM
everything you said is discredited for the "bu$h" thing.
Not when you consider that Bu$h and his family jeopardized USC's run for a "third" straight MNC and his Heisman chances for a house paid for by his agent.

bkimble
04-23-2006, 01:26 PM
The following is a compilation of arguments from myself and many other sources together in one place for easy reference:

I contend that Reggie Bu$h should not be the #1 pick for the Houston Texans, despite the fact there is no denying he’s one of the most talented and exciting players to enter the draft. He is not an ideal fit for the running scheme they will employ. There are real issues about his durability in that system. It’s an unwise financial decision given the salary cap space and money necessary to sign: such a highly-touted Hei$man Trophy that you’ve led everyone including Bu$h’s agent to believe you’ll pick, and a Tailback that will still require yet another good Tailback to help share the workload (but not share the salary!) He will not directly impact the offense to the degree an Offensive Lineman or Quarterback would. He will not be as much of an upgrade over current options at Tailback that 2 or even 1 lineman (2 via trade-down) would be at their positions. The current Tailback position is the most productive part of the offense, so why would you start tinkering there first when you have so many other glaring needs elsewhere? Weak leaders too often make decisions based on public opinion, right or wrong. But real leaders make decisions by weighing the risk/reward ratio, and with Bu$h it’s too high to justify his selection at #1 for Houston.

An expansion of the above points for clarification follows:

Running scheme – Everyone knows this system turns moderately-touted tailbacks into 1200yd.+ rushers. Don’t need a high-priced hyped Hei$man tailback. Don’t want one. Too espensive.
Look at Denver's tailback history. They saved money by plugging in moderately priced, durable tailbacks, then when the tailbacks performed at the highest level, they wanted to get paid, naturally. They either got the contract or they got replaced by another moderately-priced tailback. With Bu$h, you don't get to first reap the benefits of low-cost production, instead you pay top Hei$man dollars right out of the gate without him having first proved himself in your system.


Imact on offense – Forget about Bu$h returning kicks (technically defense.) You don’t use your expensive Ferrari to run across town at rush hour to buy that loaf of bread. Also forget about runs up the middle when people know it’s coming. So we’re talking about a part-time role player. We're talking about dilution of practice time and playbook/chalktalk study among Tailback duties and Receiver duties. At least a lineman plays most snaps and is directly involved in the outcome of the play. Bu$h will not make the players around him better nearly to the extent that a standout lineman will. If an Offensive Lineman plugs a hole in a porous line, then all of a sudden Carr stays upright, has more time to find receivers who have more time to get into their routes and get open. Suddenly opposing linebackers aren't stacking the box, and suddenly Davis, Morency, and Wells have better holes and running lanes. Suddenly opposing defenses stay on the field longer and tire, increasing the possibility of defensive mistakes and bigger offensive plays. Look at Priest Holmes, Terrell Davis, Emmitt Smith (just 3 of so many others I could mention.) None had the fastest wheels. Didn't need them. They had the patience, vision, and power to run behind superior lines that lifted them to greatness.


Big upgrade at the tailback position? When Bu$h pushers talk about how much better Bu$h will be than Davis alone, we never hear about production numbers. That’s because in order to be a large upgrade, he’d need to put up CRAZY numbers. Sorry, this isn’t USC vs. Fresno State. This is the NFL where much greater parity exists. If you’re expecting 3-4 TDs and 400 all-purpose yards each game, prepare to be disappointed.


So many glaring needs elsewhere. Despite what beat writers say, I’m not convinced the free-agent acquisitions are enough. Why take a chance at finding a sleeper at those needy positions in the 2nd, 4th, 5th rounds or later? Each round later represents a drop-off in talent. When you have a big need, why wouldn't you want the best talent available? I've read magazines as far back as 3 years ago stating that Houston has done little to improve their pass protection. Funny (not) how some things never change. How many sacks does Carr need to take before he's given the best left guard money can buy? How many 1st round skill-players are underperforming for the Texans? Could it be the lines are keeping them from reaching their potential? Of course! Rather than give the lines the first priority, with the lone exception of Travis Davis, Houston has kept throwing good money after bad on skill players, yet ignored key line positions until the 3rd, 4th, 5th rounds or later. How has that strategy been working, Texans fans? Drafting Bu$h onto this team is almost like installing a top-of-the-line boutique home theater system into a house with a leaky roof, broken windows, and faulty furnace. You’ll never be able to fully appreciate the sound quality, and your money will be wasted. Want another metaphor? It’s almost like a female car-crash victim going into the ER and coming out with a set of breast imlants. Nice to look at, but not the smart thing to do.


Public Opinion. Don’t believe the hype. As usual with a Hei$man trophy winner and flashy player, there seems to be a national sportmedia drumbeat for Reggie Bu$h to be the first pick by the Texans. By one writer's own admission this pick would create more buzz for the Texans than say, a defensive lineman would. This writer also knows a flashy Hei$mann trophy winner will provide more interesting articles than a lineman would. Seems
to me the Texans should be most concerned with which players will provide more improvement and more wins, not more buzz. However, nothing creates buzz and sells like a winner does. Media and fans alike always fall into what I call “teenager” mode this time of year. A typical teenager is too easily seduced by marketing, publicity, and what the crowd thinks is the hot thing. Right now, that is Reggie Bu$h. Teenagers are impulsive-driven and typically go after the sexy thing, not the smart thing. A common argument is that no GM wants to be the one to turn down Bush and have him go to another team and turn out to be an all-pro. Counter-argument: you can also say that any pick Houston makes is a potential all-pro that another team misses out on. So it's irrelevant. Also, again, do you make this decision based on fear of what others will think or from fear of missing out on what might be? No, you do it based on fit and how it makes your team better. I trust Houston will see through the hype and do the smart thing, not the sexy thing.

WoW! This is a great post. I disagree only on one point CC isn't to smart for the Bu$h hype. In fact, he think it make sense to draft Bu$h with the first pick in the draft. A part-time slot back who average only 13 carries per game. And who wasn't even the best running back on his college team. All I can say is this is unbeliveable! Crazy! But, maybe this is why we have the first pick in this year's draft. :superman:

HeroTime
04-23-2006, 01:28 PM
Totally disagree with Elgie. If he posted it about 3 months ago then it would have made sense but not after every hole has been filled. Now the draft is about BPA with every pick regardless of position. It is obvious that burnt orange is the color of choice for Elgie.

HeroTime
04-23-2006, 01:28 PM
Not when you consider that Bu$h and his family jeopardized USC's run for a "third" straight MNC and his Heisman chances for a house paid for by his agent.
Maybe you should actually read the article first, because what you said makes no sense at all.

kastofsna
04-23-2006, 01:38 PM
Not when you consider that Bu$h and his family jeopardized USC's run for a "third" straight MNC and his Heisman chances for a house paid for by his agent.
:confused: i think you're a bit lost with the story.

elgie
04-23-2006, 02:32 PM
Totally disagree with Elgie. If he posted it about 3 months ago then it would have made sense but not after every hole has been filled. Now the draft is about BPA with every pick regardless of position. It is obvious that burnt orange is the color of choice for Elgie.


Nope. Vince Young is also the wrong pick. Why must it be either Bush or VY with some people? For the record, Texans should forego the #1 pick for additional picks/players that will fix problems. As for every hole having been filled, that's a matter of opinion and mine is they haven't. Flanagan has seen the Pro Bowl, but I fear he's damaged goods coming off knee surgery and being 33 this season. Is he going to be the athletic, mobile O-linemen this system requires? Kubiak apparently hopes so otherwise he wouldn't be here? Point being though, their free agency pickups were not the best available, IMO.

Thanks for the welcome, nice to be here. I've learned some things here and have been entertained, for better or worse!

MONARCH
04-23-2006, 02:36 PM
Greetings elgie,

What a dynamic as well as beautifully written post. Your sort of talent, just does not come along very often upon this great website.....

WELCOME TO THE CLUB! .....for the once seemingly ominous clouds above, seem to be parting at just the proper occasion -- for we really have not seen anything just yet.....

OUR NATIVE SON VINCE YOUNG, IS INDEED COMING HOME TO PLAY KIND ELGIE!

....cannot wait to feast my eyes upon your written articulation then.....
MONARCH

BornOrange
04-23-2006, 03:00 PM
:confused: i think you're a bit lost with the story.
Yeah, I skimmed through the article and didn't read it in its entirety before linking to it. Michaels may not have been technically an agent. However, if he was a USC booster the same would apply.

However, if the family did nothing wrong then why did they move out within 24 hours of being approached by a reporter?

el toro
04-23-2006, 03:46 PM
The Texans were clearly on the lookout for a motherlode offer for that #1. I think the reported interest in Williams served two purposes: (1) leverage for the negotiations with Bush and (2) signalled that they were entertaining trading the pick. They didn't receive any offers to their liking, so now they're buckling down and trying to get Bush signed, which makes sense as you don't want to create any animosity by not having the #1 player in the draft signed before draft day.

As for ignoring public opinion...well, the public wants VY. So that's taken care of.

Anyways, the original post contains a variety of arguments already discussed, chopped, dissected, hashed, re-hashed and chewed on in this forum. Time to move along.

Frank_The_Tank
04-23-2006, 03:49 PM
Young at number 4, plus additional picks. Every one is happy. bush goes number one, Vince come to Houston, 90 % of Houston is happy, Texans finnaly get a QB that does not choke under a pass rush.

el toro
04-23-2006, 03:51 PM
Young at number 4, plus additional picks. Every one is happy. bush goes number one, Vince come to Houston, 90 % of Houston is happy, Texans finnaly get a QB that does not choke under a pass rush.

Right, because Young can outrun a USC defense.

Frank_The_Tank
04-23-2006, 03:52 PM
No- Because Vince out ran every defense.

Frank_The_Tank
04-23-2006, 03:54 PM
Even if he only escapes the rush for a 6 to 8 yard gain it is better than the negative 7 yards you get every time Carr takes a snap.

thunderkyss
04-23-2006, 04:18 PM
Totally disagree with Elgie. If he posted it about 3 months ago then it would have made sense but not after every hole has been filled. Now the draft is about BPA with every pick regardless of position. It is obvious that burnt orange is the color of choice for Elgie.

Even with Every whole being filled, we are not out of the woods yet. It is my contention, and from the looks of it... Kubiak's also, that our problem is not, and has not been our offensive personell... but our lack of depth.. We generally start off pretty well, all things considered.... then one of our front 5 would get hurt. Capers, Palmer, & Pendry, in their wisdom thought it better to move a good player at his position to another, thereby weekening 2 positions by default, and all the surrounding positions by proxy. If we can get a true LT, and a true Gaurd that are strong at their natural position, and an alternate position, then we won't have this musical Offensive Line, that has been the root of all our problems.

as it stands, I like our Deffensive rotation..... I would be willing to go into the season with Peek, Babin, Kalu, & Weaver.... holding down the ends.. TJ, Smith and Payne holding the inside.

We started with too many LBs, and acquired more. We've got Dunta, and PBuch( a First Round Corner) I like Glenn, and CC, but I can see us making a move on a safety in the third round.

With the high Tender we put on Peek, I find it hard to believe we would take a DE with the #1 overall. Especially since I think Babin would be a better Pass Rusher.

So what am I saying??

That I kinda agree with you. Our #1 overall can be used on BPA...... even on someone not expected to play a down in 2006, if you feel very strongly about that one special player. & it is not unheard of for a Quarterback, especially on a team with a new coach.

But everything points towards Reggie Bush........ other than having a running back I hope will retire on our teams ring of Honor.... I have no problem with that.

HeroTime
04-23-2006, 04:26 PM
However, if the family did nothing wrong then why did they move out within 24 hours of being approached by a reporter?Because they just found out themselves.

thunderkyss
04-23-2006, 04:50 PM
Young won't be there at 4. We have to pick before Tennessee

pskinny
04-23-2006, 04:53 PM
Nope. Vince Young is also the wrong pick. Why must it be either Bush or VY with some people? For the record, Texans should forego the #1 pick for additional picks/players that will fix problems. As for every hole having been filled, that's a matter of opinion and mine is they haven't. Flanagan has seen the Pro Bowl, but I fear he's damaged goods coming off knee surgery and being 33 this season. Is he going to be the athletic, mobile O-linemen this system requires? Kubiak apparently hopes so otherwise he wouldn't be here? Point being though, their free agency pickups were not the best available, IMO.

Thanks for the welcome, nice to be here. I've learned some things here and have been entertained, for better or worse!

Well sorry, but it takes two in order to make a trade. Casserly is on the record saying they haven't received any offers for the #1 pick. I firmly believe if the Texans where to get an offer like what was being speculated the Jet's were willing to part with, (#4, 29, 35, 103) they snatch it up like a hobo finding a Big Mac.

So you pretty much wasted you time with that whole "don't believe the hype" rant. If you don't get an acceptable offer, we still got the number 1 pick, we still got to draft a player in that slot, so what do you suggest we do at that point? We were 2-14 last season and DD missed 5 games, but we don't "need" Bush according to you.

You ask me, there is only one decision to make at that point, and that is to take the best player available. And you know his name is Reggie.

bad
04-23-2006, 05:17 PM
Young at number 4, plus additional picks. Every one is happy. bush goes number one, Vince come to Houston, 90 % of Houston is happy, Texans finally get a QB that does not choke under a pass rush.With #4 we'd take, in order, Mario Williams, D'Brickashaw Ferguson or A.J. Hawk. At least one of these will still be on the board as we all know Bush goes #1.

Vince Young does not seem to be in the Texan's plans.

wolf123
04-23-2006, 05:26 PM
He (RB) will not directly impact the offense to the degree an Offensive Lineman or Quarterback would.

Welcome Elgie!

Good post, but I respectfully disagree with several points that you made. First being, the quote stated above. The average rookie quarterback has little to no immediate impact, as many sit on the bench the initial season. OLineman usually do not have an incredible immediate impact (i.e. Robert Gallery, Vernon Carey, George Foster).

Also, you commented that "Why take a chance at finding a sleeper at those needy positions in the 2nd, 4th, 5th rounds or later? " Usually, players in the 2nd round and even 3rd round are not sleepers.(i.e. LeCharles Bentley-2nd, Clinton Portis-2nd, Tiki Barber-2nd, Samari Rolle-2nd, Deion Branch-2nd, Joey Porter-3rd, Steve Smith-3rd, Terrel Owens-3rd, Jason Witten-3rd, Ronde Barber-3rd, DD-4th, Juran Bolden-4th) Don't forget that are position in the draft has a selecting 1st round talent in the 2nd round and 2 second round talent in the 3rd round. I agree that with each round usually comes a decrease in talent, but with that being said, each "round" is an arbitrary number. Even within the 1st round there is a drop in talent after the top 6 are selected. The next drop in talent might not be till pick 37 and the next till pick 67. Each draft pool has different talent. For this years draft it is evident that their are arguably 4-5 amazing talents. After these picks, the talent drops. Trading down and missing out on either of these 5 players would be costly.

About trading down -
I was fond of the opportunity of trading down within the top 4, but I, personally, would want a lot out of such a trade. I don't believe that any team with the following 3 picks wants to give up enough to jump up. Therefore, by dropping down in the 1st for an additional 2nd and 3rd pick would be counter productive. Yes, you have more picks, but less talent to choose from. No one will offer us the necessary compensation to move down. If the Jets said will give you both 1st's and next year's 1st, I'd jump on it in the blink of an eye, mainly b/c they will be horrible again next year, no matter who they choose. But they will most likely not do something like this. I believe that Mario is an amazing talent and Brick looks pretty good as well, but if you could get the 3rd best OL in the draft with your 33rd pick and arguably the BPA in the Draft with the 1st overall, why not pull the trigger.

I also do not see how you believe that Bush would have no impact on the offense, at all. I feel you may be looking at this quite ignorantly. I agree that anyone who believes he will come out with 400 all purpose yards and 3-4 TD's a game is mistaken. But how you can't think that he may have 60-90 rushing yards per game with 3-4 receptions and .5 TD a game is poor for a season. These numbers would be solid additions for a rookie. That's 8TD's for his initial season. That's a 1,000 yds for a running back splitting carries. I think that is very respectable.

Like I said above, good post. I definitely enjoyed reading it, but I also disagreed with some of it.

Mike Kerns
04-23-2006, 05:27 PM
Even if he only escapes the rush for a 6 to 8 yard gain it is better than the negative 7 yards you get every time Carr takes a snap.
...........Just one more week.....

HoustonFrog
04-23-2006, 05:31 PM
I have a few things to say about Elgie. First, nice post. As stated above, the $ can go but in general, well thought out. That is appreciated no matter your side. Secondly, I'll preface the rest by saying that before FA I started leaning towards trading down to take Williams and getting the picks to fill more holes. I think both VY and Bush are studs and will be great players. People are taking that side of the argument too personally and need to let go. I agree with you Elgie on how Denver ran their system. There is a part of me that thinks Kubiak can find a back in later rounds and can use the first pick on trading down or getting D or whomever else. As for this post:

"If he posted it about 3 months ago then it would have made sense but not after every hole has been filled. Now the draft is about BPA with every pick regardless of position."

I could not disagree more. Yes you take BPA but it has to be position specific. You are crazy if you think our FA signings filled every hole. This is a team that has never had a winning record and just came off 2-14. There are ALWAYS holes to fill. I love that Moulds is here but he is older and with the immaturity of Mathis you can always use a true up and coming #2. We have no guarantees with Weaver or any of those guys will be special either. We did alot of good things but can not be satisfied. I still think OT, safety, LB and DE are tops on our list.

While I don't agree with some things Elgie, welcome, an enjoyable read.

thunderkyss
04-23-2006, 06:35 PM
Welcome Elgie!

Good post, but I respectfully disagree with several points that you made. First being, the quote stated above. The average rookie quarterback has little to no immediate impact, as many sit on the bench the initial season. OLineman usually do not have an incredible immediate impact (i.e. Robert Gallery, Vernon Carey, George Foster).
IMHO, anything Reggie Gets, will be taking away from what DD, Moulds, AJ, Mathis, Putz, Cook, Morency & Walter should be getting... We've got a very potent offense on paper, right now. David, if kept upright, should have a 3800 yard passing season... we should have 2000 yards rushing, with no help from the QB....... we've got the players now, to make that happen. Reggie will not likely add to this total, but be a part of it.


Also, you commented that "Why take a chance at finding a sleeper at those needy positions in the 2nd, 4th, 5th rounds or later? " Usually, players in the 2nd round and even 3rd round are not sleepers.

About trading down -
Yes, you have more picks, but less talent to choose from. No one will offer us the necessary compensation to move down.
To me, this sounds contradictory.... is the talent there or not??


I believe that Mario is an amazing talent and Brick looks pretty good as well, but if you could get the 3rd best OL in the draft with your 33rd pick and arguably the BPA in the Draft with the 1st overall, why not pull the trigger.

hard to argue with this, as long as the 3rd best OL in the draft isn't a big drop off in talent.

I also do not see how you believe that Bush would have no impact on the offense, at all. I feel you may be looking at this quite ignorantly. I agree that anyone who believes he will come out with 400 all purpose yards and 3-4 TD's a game is mistaken. But how you can't think that he may have 60-90 rushing yards per game with 3-4 receptions and .5 TD a game is poor for a season. These numbers would be solid additions for a rookie. That's 8TD's for his initial season. That's a 1,000 yds for a running back splitting carries. I think that is very respectable.

Like I said above, good post. I definitely enjoyed reading it, but I also disagreed with some of it.
& I enjoy reading your post.....

But I disagree.....

When I think of DD with a Denver type offense, I'm thinking Terrell Davis. Another 4th round pick.... with fair speed, and power to boot. I do not expect Davis to have a 2000 yards rushing season, but I do believe he will have over 2000 yards of total offense. I'm thinking 1700 on the ground, and over 400 recieving....... somewhere between 16 & 20 touchdowns total.

Reggie Bush will most likely make the numbers you've mentioned, but at the expense of the numbers I expect to see DD to get........ to some extent. Morency's production would be totally negated.... because bush will be getting those Carries.

================================================== =========

But you're saying DD will get his...... and Reggie will take Morency's spot...

We'd have 2700 yards total rushing, with no help from the QB...

ohhh, that is intriguing.....

But how long will it be before DD becomes trade Bait??

Then with/without Bush, how much does Kubiak value running backs?? How long will it be before DD becomes trade bait anyway??

now that screws everything up..

HeroTime
04-23-2006, 06:50 PM
I have a few things to say about Elgie. First, nice post. As stated above, the $ can go but in general, well thought it. That is appreciated no matter your side. Secondly, I'll preface the rest by saying that before FA I started leaning towards trading down to take Williams and getting the picks to fill more holes. I think bith VY and Bush are studs and will be great players. People are taking that side of the argument too personally and need to let go. I agree with you Elgie on how Denver ran their system. There is a part of me that thinks Kubiak can find a back in later rounds and can use the first pick on trading down or getting D or whomever else. As for this post:

"If he posted it about 3 months ago then it would have made sense but not after every hole has been filled. Now the draft is about BPA with every pick regardless of position."

I could not disagree more. Yes you take BPA but it has to be position specific. You are crazy if you think our FA signings filled every hole. This is a team that has never had a winning record and just came off 2-14. There are ALWAYS holes to fill. I love that Moulds is here but he is older and with the immaturity of Mathis you can always use a true up and coming #2. We have no guarantees with Weaver or any of those guys will be special either. We did alot of good things but can not be satisfied. I still think OT, safety, LB and DE are tops on our list.

While I don't agree with some things Elgie, welcome, an enjoyable read.


There is not a glaring hole on the team, that is not to say that upgrades can't be made.

wolf123
04-23-2006, 07:50 PM
IMHO, anything Reggie Gets, will be taking away from what DD, Moulds, AJ, Mathis, Putz, Cook, Morency & Walter should be getting... We've got a very potent offense on paper, right now. David, if kept upright, should have a 3800 yard passing season... we should have 2000 yards rushing, with no help from the QB....... we've got the players now, to make that happen. Reggie will not likely add to this total, but be a part of it.

W/o Bush, I do not foresee us having 2000 rush yards. DD has yet to remain healthy for an entire season and is in need of a legitimate back to split the burden with. Also, this has been said way to often but, DD cannot score from anywhere on the field the way that Reggie can. There is a reason that Reggie has been rated by EVERYONE significant as the #1 BPA in the draft. He is legit. Bush would not take away from everyone you named above. In reality he only takes away from Morency and DD. We dumped off to DD a lot since we have had him and this is where someone with Reggie's speed to be an upgrade. Remember that we are not trying to have individuals with amazing stats, but a team of players with goods stats that result in wins. There is no way that DD would run for 1700 yds next season. Even when he started 15 games, the highest he has had is 1188 yds, and you are expecting 500+ yds just because of the new OL scheme. No, not very likely. Denver, with the scheme, also runs TWO backs. This allows them to stay healthy and fresh. Overall, this would increase the TEAMS rush yards to 2000+ most likely.

Also, Cook, Walter, and Mathis will most likely not be in very often. I would hope Walter would be in as the 3rd WO whenever possible, but Bush would rarely keep him out. I'm sure the coaches could determine when to have a 3rd WO in and when Bush would be in, or even when both are in, depending on who the opponent is and who is playing well.

hard to argue with this, as long as the 3rd best OL in the draft isn't a big drop off in talent.

Eric Winston was at one time rated in the TOP 10 in the draft before his injury. He has shown that he is in excellent shape, running the one of the fastest 40's and having an amazing long jump. He also had a great Senior Bowl. So, I do not see him as a big drop off in talent.

HoustonFrog
04-23-2006, 08:22 PM
There is not a glaring hole on the team, that is not to say that upgrades can't be made.

We were 2-14 and not a game has been played. Signing guys does make an automatic better team. We also have a new coach. This isn't a negative post at all. In fact I like the talent in some areas. But the WHOLE team is a glaring need. When you have the chance to upgrade...you do. We have no proven DE, S, LB, and there are more. You are 2-14 because of coaching and lack of talent. We were successful in both areas. Signing a few guys does not make for no needs. Pittsburgh just won the SB and they have needs. A WR to replace Randal El, another LB since the run 4, etc. Every team has glaring needs somewhere. It is the reality of the NFL. Don't fool yourself and act like we are set.

MasterC25
04-23-2006, 08:27 PM
The following is a compilation of arguments from myself and many other sources together in one place for easy reference:

I contend that Reggie Bu$h should not be the #1 pick for the Houston Texans, despite the fact there is no denying heís one of the most talented and exciting players to enter the draft. He is not an ideal fit for the running scheme they will employ. There are real issues about his durability in that system. Itís an unwise financial decision given the salary cap space and money necessary to sign: such a highly-touted Hei$man Trophy that youíve led everyone including Bu$hís agent to believe youíll pick, and a Tailback that will still require yet another good Tailback to help share the workload (but not share the salary!) He will not directly impact the offense to the degree an Offensive Lineman or Quarterback would. He will not be as much of an upgrade over current options at Tailback that 2 or even 1 lineman (2 via trade-down) would be at their positions. The current Tailback position is the most productive part of the offense, so why would you start tinkering there first when you have so many other glaring needs elsewhere? Weak leaders too often make decisions based on public opinion, right or wrong. But real leaders make decisions by weighing the risk/reward ratio, and with Bu$h itís too high to justify his selection at #1 for Houston.

An expansion of the above points for clarification follows:

Running scheme Ė Everyone knows this system turns moderately-touted tailbacks into 1200yd.+ rushers. Donít need a high-priced hyped Hei$man tailback. Donít want one. Too espensive.
Look at Denver's tailback history. They saved money by plugging in moderately priced, durable tailbacks, then when the tailbacks performed at the highest level, they wanted to get paid, naturally. They either got the contract or they got replaced by another moderately-priced tailback. With Bu$h, you don't get to first reap the benefits of low-cost production, instead you pay top Hei$man dollars right out of the gate without him having first proved himself in your system.


Imact on offense Ė Forget about Bu$h returning kicks (technically defense.) You donít use your expensive Ferrari to run across town at rush hour to buy that loaf of bread. Also forget about runs up the middle when people know itís coming. So weíre talking about a part-time role player. We're talking about dilution of practice time and playbook/chalktalk study among Tailback duties and Receiver duties. At least a lineman plays most snaps and is directly involved in the outcome of the play. Bu$h will not make the players around him better nearly to the extent that a standout lineman will. If an Offensive Lineman plugs a hole in a porous line, then all of a sudden Carr stays upright, has more time to find receivers who have more time to get into their routes and get open. Suddenly opposing linebackers aren't stacking the box, and suddenly Davis, Morency, and Wells have better holes and running lanes. Suddenly opposing defenses stay on the field longer and tire, increasing the possibility of defensive mistakes and bigger offensive plays. Look at Priest Holmes, Terrell Davis, Emmitt Smith (just 3 of so many others I could mention.) None had the fastest wheels. Didn't need them. They had the patience, vision, and power to run behind superior lines that lifted them to greatness.


Big upgrade at the tailback position? When Bu$h pushers talk about how much better Bu$h will be than Davis alone, we never hear about production numbers. Thatís because in order to be a large upgrade, heíd need to put up CRAZY numbers. Sorry, this isnít USC vs. Fresno State. This is the NFL where much greater parity exists. If youíre expecting 3-4 TDs and 400 all-purpose yards each game, prepare to be disappointed.


So many glaring needs elsewhere. Despite what beat writers say, Iím not convinced the free-agent acquisitions are enough. Why take a chance at finding a sleeper at those needy positions in the 2nd, 4th, 5th rounds or later? Each round later represents a drop-off in talent. When you have a big need, why wouldn't you want the best talent available? I've read magazines as far back as 3 years ago stating that Houston has done little to improve their pass protection. Funny (not) how some things never change. How many sacks does Carr need to take before he's given the best left guard money can buy? How many 1st round skill-players are underperforming for the Texans? Could it be the lines are keeping them from reaching their potential? Of course! Rather than give the lines the first priority, with the lone exception of Travis Davis, Houston has kept throwing good money after bad on skill players, yet ignored key line positions until the 3rd, 4th, 5th rounds or later. How has that strategy been working, Texans fans? Drafting Bu$h onto this team is almost like installing a top-of-the-line boutique home theater system into a house with a leaky roof, broken windows, and faulty furnace. Youíll never be able to fully appreciate the sound quality, and your money will be wasted. Want another metaphor? Itís almost like a female car-crash victim going into the ER and coming out with a set of breast imlants. Nice to look at, but not the smart thing to do.


Public Opinion. Donít believe the hype. As usual with a Hei$man trophy winner and flashy player, there seems to be a national sportmedia drumbeat for Reggie Bu$h to be the first pick by the Texans. By one writer's own admission this pick would create more buzz for the Texans than say, a defensive lineman would. This writer also knows a flashy Hei$mann trophy winner will provide more interesting articles than a lineman would. Seems
to me the Texans should be most concerned with which players will provide more improvement and more wins, not more buzz. However, nothing creates buzz and sells like a winner does. Media and fans alike always fall into what I call ďteenagerĒ mode this time of year. A typical teenager is too easily seduced by marketing, publicity, and what the crowd thinks is the hot thing. Right now, that is Reggie Bu$h. Teenagers are impulsive-driven and typically go after the sexy thing, not the smart thing. A common argument is that no GM wants to be the one to turn down Bush and have him go to another team and turn out to be an all-pro. Counter-argument: you can also say that any pick Houston makes is a potential all-pro that another team misses out on. So it's irrelevant. Also, again, do you make this decision based on fear of what others will think or from fear of missing out on what might be? No, you do it based on fit and how it makes your team better. I trust Houston will see through the hype and do the smart thing, not the sexy thing.


At the scounting combine they asked Coach Shanahan if Reggie Bush could fit the zone blocking scheme so famously developed in Denver, he replied saying " Are you kidding me, he would be the ideal fit not only cause his speed and ability to find the cut back lanes but also because of his tremedous vision and patience of unlike any back that has came through the league in the past 10-15 years." Secondly I would like to believe the G.Ms and scouts of the league that are getting paid on the fact that they are able to recongize the players that can or cannot play, know whats best for are team then you do.
Finally, I have just on question for all the Bush bashers on the board. Come Saturday after the fact the Texans will make Reggie Bush the conerstone of our franchise will you be a real supporter of Texans and get behind our team and Reggie? Or will you be hoping for failure on both sides?

MasterC25
04-23-2006, 08:33 PM
No- Because Vince out ran every defense.

The same way you say Bush faced college defenses, so did Vince doesn't have the elite speed to out run any defense in this league, he is not Vick he does not have the ability to break 40 yards or maybe even 20 yards withe these defenses he will face. Secondly don't you think defenses will scheme to take tha run away from him the same way they do to a scrambling QBs and make him pass with accuracy which by the way is going to be his biggest weakness.

GP
04-23-2006, 08:36 PM
At the scounting combine they asked Coach Shanahan if Reggie Bush could fit the zone blocking scheme so famously developed in Denver, he replied saying " Are you kidding me, he would be the ideal fit not only cause his speed and ability to find the cut back lanes but also because of his tremedous vision and patience of unlike any back that has came through the league in the past 10-15 years." Secondly I would like to believe the G.Ms and scouts of the league that are getting paid on the fact that they are able to recongize the players that can or cannot play, know whats best for are team then you do.
Finally, I have just on question for all the Bush bashers on the board. Come Saturday after the fact the Texans will make Reggie Bush the conerstone of our franchise will you be a real supporter of Texans and get behind our team and Reggie? Or will you be hoping for failure on both sides?

They already believe that we DESERVE to be in misery if we pass on the almighty Vince Young. So, the answer is "Yes" they will definitely smirk if the chance presents itself because all they care about is "their guy," not the guy is the MOST LIKELY to translate into immediate success in the NFL.

Anybody thinking a slow scrambling QB in today's NFL can outwit defenses and walk away unscathed should ask Donovan McNabb why he's turned into a pocket passer on his own volition. Falcons "tried" to get Vick to settle into the pocket via a new passing scheme that asked him to throw the ball more than he runs it...and look at the results: Not too bueno.

You're wasting your time trying to prove to VY homers that Bush is the best player in terms of potential to succeed in the NFL. They hate Carr too much, and they love their hometown hero too much, as well.

Trenches
04-23-2006, 08:40 PM
There is not a glaring hole on the team, that is not to say that upgrades can't be made.


lol. I disagree with that statement. this team sucked last year. yeah yeah it was the coaching. whatever. good players have the ability, drive and pride to at least show up and compete.

until I see this same group of spares on the OL actually pass block then I say this is as a glaring hole as you cant get. Is Flanigan an upgrade? Hopefully. He is old and injury prone. Better have somebody ready to get some playing time behind him. And McKinney? I'm sick and tired of hearing how great he is going to be at his 'natural position' at guard. As far as I am concerned, he was the anchor of one of the worst lines in the histroy of the NFL. How do we know this guy is any good ANYWHERE? Until I see him excel at RG then he is just as bad as the rest of them.

we still have very little at LB. signing a MLB towards the end of his career is a nice stopgap, but you need to be grooming a leader in that position. a guy who will run the d and make plays. and the secondary? laughable. Robinson is great but after that its NFL Europe material.

this team has plenty of holes. maybe even ones we dont see. who knows what we have at DE? Babin and Peek may be good. Maybe not. Who even knows if we have a QB? This is why I prefer to trade down and draft D'Brick. He is the safest pick in the top 5. Even is we dont get the motherload, we are still better off getting at least one line in better shape and drafting some actual players that can contribute.

elgie
04-23-2006, 09:56 PM
At the scounting combine they asked Coach Shanahan if Reggie Bush could fit the zone blocking scheme so famously developed in Denver, he replied saying " Are you kidding me, he would be the ideal fit not only cause his speed and ability to find the cut back lanes but also because of his tremedous vision and patience of unlike any back that has came through the league in the past 10-15 years." Secondly I would like to believe the G.Ms and scouts of the league that are getting paid on the fact that they are able to recongize the players that can or cannot play, know whats best for are team then you do.

Well, here we have it from the horse's mouth. Do you happen to have the soure for Shanahan's quote? I can never prove this, but there's very little upside and some downside by NOT speaking highly of ALL prospects, particularly those of Bush's stature. Politics. Maybe some coaches tell it like it is though, and Shanahan's praise didn't have to be that glowing if he didn't mean it, so I very well could be wrong. However, Shanahan's comments are contradictory to what I've seen and read about this system and the durabilty necessary to fight for positive yards on every carry and set up the play action pass with a plodding, jabbing running game. 3 tough yards here, 5 there, 4 there. Bush is a haymaker. Defining system-fit in that context, on Bush's relatively tall/light frame, and on financial considerations, Bush is not ideal. But hey, Shanahan should know, taking him at face value of coure. Even so, I still question the need of running back and throwing all that cap space at a part-time tailback that doesn't fit an urgent need. So, the BPA or the BPN (best player needed) philosophies have been debated to death and if each side hasn't been swayed we may never be.


Finally, I have just on question for all the Bush bashers on the board. Come Saturday after the fact the Texans will make Reggie Bush the conerstone of our franchise will you be a real supporter of Texans and get behind our team and Reggie? Or will you be hoping for failure on both sides?

I will hope for the best but not be shocked if Bush's contribution does not greatly improve their record in the next few years. It will be difficult to imply causality with correlation however, given the coaching changes and other variables.

elgie
04-23-2006, 10:25 PM
Welcome Elgie!

Good post, but I respectfully disagree with several points that you made. First being, the quote stated above. The average rookie quarterback has little to no immediate impact, as many sit on the bench the initial season. OLineman usually do not have an incredible immediate impact (i.e. Robert Gallery, Vernon Carey, George Foster).

You are correct, I was thinking impact over a 5 year span for example, I should have clarified that.


I also do not see how you believe that Bush would have no impact on the offense, at all. I feel you may be looking at this quite ignorantly. I agree that anyone who believes he will come out with 400 all purpose yards and 3-4 TD's a game is mistaken. But how you can't think that he may have 60-90 rushing yards per game with 3-4 receptions and .5 TD a game is poor for a season. These numbers would be solid additions for a rookie. That's 8TD's for his initial season. That's a 1,000 yds for a running back splitting carries. I think that is very respectable.

I was thinking about total tailback/receiver production with Bush vs. without him, not his stats on their own. My point is that adding Bush will not do anything like double total rushing and receiving production, because Davis and company are already doing fairly well. Looking similarly at Olinemen for example, by contrast, the best available O-linemen, after they're up to speed, could potentially cut sacks by more than half and give Carr more time. This alone could have a ripple effect on the total offense, more of an effect than Bush's touches alone I believe.

i also enjoyed your post. I appreciate that you actually went out on a limb with projected stats for Bush, which is something I've rarely seen. This allows us to objectively look at his contribution, a nice alternative to saying he'll be able to leap tall buildings with a single bound. For the sake of argument, anyone want to project his stats in say, 3 years assuming he gets the majority of carries?

elgie
04-23-2006, 10:43 PM
IMHO, anything Reggie Gets, will be taking away from what DD, Moulds, AJ, Mathis, Putz, Cook, Morency & Walter should be getting... We've got a very potent offense on paper, right now. David, if kept upright, should have a 3800 yard passing season... we should have 2000 yards rushing, with no help from the QB....... we've got the players now, to make that happen. Reggie will not likely add to this total, but be a part of it.


hard to argue with this, as long as the 3rd best OL in the draft isn't a big drop off in talent.

Yes you're spot-on thynderkyss, this is my point. He and many Bush proponents want the best available tailback and the 3rd best OL. Why not the other way around, particularly when OLs are the greater need and it's been proven that with certain OLs in this system, you can plug-in the 3rd best or much lower tailback. Why not? Because they've been seduced by the hype, by the highlight reel. How many highlight reels have you seen of all the Olinemen in history that played a huge role in their teams' playoff and SuperBowl victories? How many jerseys and Wheaties do they grace? None. They're not 'sexy' and they're not fun to watch, but are they important? Just ask the Vikings who gave Steve Hutchinson the bank. Yeah, Shaun Alexander got paid too, but we'll see how his #s drop off from last year without Hutchinson.

TreWardTxn
04-24-2006, 01:30 AM
Here's my best pro-Bush argument...

By retaining Davis (and any servicable back after he is replaced) the Texans could have something similar to what the Broncos had last year in Andersen and Bell. Bell (Bush) had only 175 carries, but 10 were for 20+ yards and he averaged 5.3 a tote. Shaun Alexander: 370 carries 14 for 20+ (not a slow guy either), and Barber: 357 and 16 for 20+.

I can only assume that with Bush's advanced athleticism and ability to catch passes (Bell=stonehands), he would easily outperform those numbers and create even a larger amount of big plays for the offense, remember, run blocking is not an issue, and you've got to assume that Carr will be able to pass against 8-9 man fronts with the new weapons.

Shanhan did mention that Bell had his best performances when he was fresh, within the first 7 carries, he avg'd over 8 yards per carry, but the last 7 carries he avg'd something dismal, less than 3. So it is possible that he fatigued. However, Bush being able to lineup in the slot and catch downfield will allow him to get the ball in open space immediately, where he won't have to worry about running through D-lineman, and taking LBs head on.

Not that the Texans running game is anything like Denver's, but that is the goal, and if so, I don't see any reason why Bush wouldn't be a 1500 yard performer rushing and receving, with more than a few of his plays being huge gamebreakers...

infantrycak
04-24-2006, 10:41 AM
Yes you're spot-on thynderkyss, this is my point. He and many Bush proponents want the best available tailback and the 3rd best OL. Why not the other way around, particularly when OLs are the greater need and it's been proven that with certain OLs in this system, you can plug-in the 3rd best or much lower tailback. Why not? Because they've been seduced by the hype, by the highlight reel.

Has nothing to do with hype. The other defining characteristic of the system you are talking about is not taking OLmen high. The two classic examples for the system are Atlanta and Denver--last year between them they fielded only 1 1st round pick and 1 2nd round pick from the 1st day. They started four guys who were either 7th rounders or undrafted.

kastofsna
04-24-2006, 10:53 AM
it is funny that some think bush is merely a product of hype and isn't that good of a prospect.

Texansfan30
04-24-2006, 11:53 AM
It's funny to me how everyone is saying, 'Trade down!!! Trade down!!! That's the answer!!!'

To me it is more like, 'Trade down IF there is an offer worthwhile.' The word on the street is that there is NOT an offer worth it being given. Let's face it, you're not going to trade the overall #1 for the overall #4 and a 3rd round pick. That would signify that you were desperate. You have to go off the chart, and get the value of the pick.

I just don't think there are a ton of people willing to trade away the farm for Bush. And it's not b/c they don't want him - it's because they see how deep this draft is. They would have to give away so much, they would miss out on the deepest draft in years.

Also, why does everyone knock Bush on his durability? Durability is an issue when you get hurt - see Domanick Davis. That guy hasn't played a full season yet. Bush hasn't been hurt - he played on a team with a lot of other talented people, and shared the load with LenDale White.

Wait until the guy gets hurt before labeling him a 'durability issue'. Geez - the guy returned punts and kicks - one of the most hazardous duties there is in football. Imagine getting hit 1/10th of a second after catching a punt, or going full speed into the line on a kickoff with people coming after you full speed.

THAT is hazardous.

You may not want Bush to be the pick, but be honest in the criticism. He's not worth it? OK. He's not enough of a difference maker? OK. But forget the durability thing.

champ1234
04-24-2006, 12:48 PM
It's funny to me how everyone is saying, 'Trade down!!! Trade down!!! That's the answer!!!'

To me it is more like, 'Trade down IF there is an offer worthwhile.' The word on the street is that there is NOT an offer worth it being given. Let's face it, you're not going to trade the overall #1 for the overall #4 and a 3rd round pick. That would signify that you were desperate. You have to go off the chart, and get the value of the pick.

I just don't think there are a ton of people willing to trade away the farm for Bush. And it's not b/c they don't want him - it's because they see how deep this draft is. They would have to give away so much, they would miss out on the deepest draft in years.

Also, why does everyone knock Bush on his durability? Durability is an issue when you get hurt - see Domanick Davis. That guy hasn't played a full season yet. Bush hasn't been hurt - he played on a team with a lot of other talented people, and shared the load with LenDale White.

Wait until the guy gets hurt before labeling him a 'durability issue'. Geez - the guy returned punts and kicks - one of the most hazardous duties there is in football. Imagine getting hit 1/10th of a second after catching a punt, or going full speed into the line on a kickoff with people coming after you full speed.

THAT is hazardous.

You may not want Bush to be the pick, but be honest in the criticism. He's not worth it? OK. He's not enough of a difference maker? OK. But forget the durability thing.

Right on! :ok:

TreWardTxn
04-24-2006, 12:53 PM
Also, why does everyone knock Bush on his durability? Durability is an issue when you get hurt - see Domanick Davis. That guy hasn't played a full season yet. Bush hasn't been hurt - he played on a team with a lot of other talented people, and shared the load with LenDale White.

Wait until the guy gets hurt before labeling him a 'durability issue'

I think you are confusing durability with being "injury prone." The NFL regular season is 16 games, college teams play a max of 13 games, one of those being a month after all the others. Throw in a 4 game preseason (which starters get some action), mini-camps, practices, and then a potential 3-4 game post-season, and you see where durability becomes an issue.

There isn't a player in the league that isn't hurting by midseason, but running backs take a lot of punishment, and for a guy who's game relies on speed and quickness, something as simple as a hamstring strain (which happens to fast guys) could hamper his game to the point of ineffectiveness

Davis didn't miss much time at LSU, but the NFL is a bigger, nastier beast. Cadillac split time with Brown at Auburn, but when he got to Tampa and 'carried the load' he got knicked up, and he had a back comparable to Davis to split time with in Michael Pittman...

thunderkyss
04-24-2006, 01:27 PM
Davis didn't miss much time at LSU, but the NFL is a bigger, nastier beast. Cadillac split time with Brown at Auburn, but when he got to Tampa and 'carried the load' he got knicked up, and he had a back comparable to Davis to split time with in Michael Pittman...

Right..... it's not that people on this board are making this up. It's one of Bush's negatives on his scout report.

Sure it's possible, that a big back like Shaun Alexander, or DD will get nicked up every now and again.... usually that's all worked out by year four.... sometimes, five.

but from experience, leaner guys can't handle the 20+ carries life of an NFL back, without bulking up. There are exceptions, but generally speaking they'll have to bulk up, if they will be used in this manner.

WRs can get away with being slim, they don't take the pounding up the middle like RBs do.

(as a side note, I haven't questioned his durabilty in relation to his height/weight ratio, because I don't know if there is an accurate measure yet. He's been as short as 5'10" to as tall as 6'0" since the RoseBowl.)

infantrycak
04-24-2006, 02:19 PM
Right..... it's not that people on this board are making this up. It's one of Bush's negatives on his scout report.

Until Reggie Bush actually gets injured, people are making it up. In any event, it is by no means a certainty he will have problems--at this point is at most a potential negative rather than an actual one.

but from experience, leaner guys can't handle the 20+ carries life of an NFL back, without bulking up. There are exceptions, but generally speaking they'll have to bulk up, if they will be used in this manner.

It's a lot more than exceptions. Barry Sanders only missed 10 games over 10 years. Emmitt Smith only missed 7 games over his first 12 years. Tony Dorsett missed 17 games in 11 seasons and 7 of those came in a single season. Walter Peyton missed 12 games over 13 seasons. Curtis Martin missed 10 games over 11 seasons. Someone who wants to keep harranging this durability concern should step up and find a bunch of small backs who are consistantly unable to perform due to pounding that would have been saved by carrying an extra 20 lbs, i.e. not ankle and knee injuries which are the most common injuries for RB's. See Jamal Lewis 25 games missed in 6 seasons, Fred Taylor 35 games missed over 8 seasons, Deuce McAllister 26 games over 5 seasons, Jerome Bettis 23 games over his 1st 10 seasons.

Double Barrel
04-24-2006, 02:24 PM
It's a lot more than exceptions. Barry Sanders only missed 10 games over 10 years. Emmitt Smith only missed 7 games over his first 12 years. Tony Dorsett missed 17 games in 11 seasons and 7 of those came in a single season. Walter Peyton missed 12 games over 13 seasons. Curtis Martin missed 10 games over 11 seasons. Someone who wants to keep harranging this durability concern should step up and find a bunch of small backs who are consistantly unable to perform due to pounding that would have been saved by carrying an extra 20 lbs, i.e. not ankle and knee injuries which are the most common injuries for RB's. See Jamal Lewis 25 games missed in 6 seasons, Fred Taylor 35 games missed over 8 seasons, Deuce McAllister 26 games over 5 seasons, Jerome Bettis 23 games over his 1st 10 seasons.

Hey, let's not let facts get in the way of a good debate, o.k.? :challenge

Good post, tho'. I'm going to c&p your quote for future reference.

thunderkyss
04-24-2006, 02:54 PM
It's a lot more than exceptions. Barry Sanders only missed 10 games over 10 years. Emmitt Smith only missed 7 games over his first 12 years. Tony Dorsett missed 17 games in 11 seasons and 7 of those came in a single season. Walter Peyton missed 12 games over 13 seasons. Curtis Martin missed 10 games over 11 seasons. Someone who wants to keep harranging this durability concern should step up and find a bunch of small backs who are consistantly unable to perform due to pounding that would have been saved by carrying an extra 20 lbs

I'm not that someone, as I've no idea how small Reggie is.

But none of the guys you mentioned are small by comparison. NFL backs who are 5'10" should weigh 200lbs...... any lighter, and he is considered small.
5'11" should weigh 210lbs....... any lighter, and he is considered small.
6'0" should weigh 215lbs........ any lighter, and he is considered small.
6'1" should weigh 220........ any lighter, and he is considered small.
6'2" should weigh 225..... any lighter, and he is considered small.
6'3" should weigh 230........ any lighter, and he is considered small.

any taller than 6'3", and we would call him a tight end.

In your list, Walter Payton is small....... he is the exception.

infantrycak
04-24-2006, 03:08 PM
But none of the guys you mentioned are small by comparison.

Everyone of those guys had size concerns coming into the NFL.

NFL backs who are 5'10" should weigh 200lbs...... any lighter, and he is considered small. ...

This might mean something (other than you have created another arbitrary standard to discount an alternate to your priority of VY or Mario) if it (a) was an opinion/standard used by anyone connected to the NFL and (b) if there was even a smidgen of proof to show 200 lb 5' 11" backs were consistantly more injury prone than 5' 10" backs--otherwise it is just conjecture which doesn't appear to have any basis in fact.

In your list, Walter Payton is small....... he is the exception.

Have fun reading McClain's article on Wednesday where he provides combine weights for 10 RB's who were full timers and successful. By the way--Dorsett was smaller than Payton--5' 11" 190 lbs.

TreWardTxn
04-24-2006, 04:42 PM
I think we can agree that the size, strength, and speed of defenders and the "standard" NFL back size has changed since the days of Dorsett and Payton. I don't care how big (or little) Payton was, he was one of the most physical guys on the field, Bush is not that guy.

I honestly believe if the Texans try to make Bush a 20 carry guy, he will have endurance/durability issues. The great part though is, if Bush has a shoulder injury or something, you can simply move him to wideout and limit him to a handful of carries. Other backs don't offer or have that luxury...

Mailman04
04-24-2006, 04:50 PM
The public doesn't want Vince Young, only some Texas Longhorn fans. The Texans don't need a QB, how hard is that for some of you to understand. You say Bush is going to be a bust, are you sure Young, Leinart and Cutler won't be a bust? Reggie Bush dominated far more at USC than Mario Williams did at NC State. I have serious questions about Young, but any player could be a bust. But, the people insisting Bush will be a bust have nothing to back that up other than they,. not the public, want Bush.

swtbound07
04-24-2006, 04:52 PM
The public doesn't want Vince Young, only some Texas Longhorn fans. The Texans don't need a QB, how hard is that for some of you to understand. You say Bush is going to be a bust, are you sure Young, Leinart and Cutler won't be a bust? Reggie Bush dominated far more at USC than Mario Williams did at NC State. I have serious questions about Young, but any player could be a bust. But, the people insisting Bush will be a bust have nothing to back that up other than they,. not the public, want Bush.

Am i not the public??? Im not a longhorn fan. That is a myth perpetuated on this board. We do need a new qb. PERIOD. How hard is that for you to get through your head. Bush will be a bust, and im sure young wont. I have serious questions about bush......see how this post in reverse is just as obnoxious?

TreWardTxn
04-24-2006, 04:52 PM
At least one of those guys coming out of USC is going to be a bust. Somebody give me an early line on Leinart...

BradK10
04-24-2006, 06:19 PM
Greetings elgie,

What a dynamic as well as beautifully written post. Your sort of talent, just does not come along very often upon this great website.....

WELCOME TO THE CLUB! .....for the once seemingly ominous clouds above, seem to be parting at just the proper occasion -- for we really have not seen anything just yet.....

OUR NATIVE SON VINCE YOUNG, IS INDEED COMING HOME TO PLAY KIND ELGIE!

....cannot wait to feast my eyes upon your written articulation then.....
MONARCH

God, this guy is on whatever killed Hendrix.

BradK10
04-24-2006, 06:22 PM
IMHO, anything Reggie Gets, will be taking away from what DD, Moulds, AJ, Mathis, Putz, Cook, Morency & Walter should be getting... We've got a very potent offense on paper, right now. David, if kept upright, should have a 3800 yard passing season... we should have 2000 yards rushing, with no help from the QB....... we've got the players now, to make that happen. Reggie will not likely add to this total, but be a part of it.

Thunderkyss, that's a damned good point.

MorKnolle
04-24-2006, 10:15 PM
IMHO, anything Reggie Gets, will be taking away from what DD, Moulds, AJ, Mathis, Putz, Cook, Morency & Walter should be getting... We've got a very potent offense on paper, right now. David, if kept upright, should have a 3800 yard passing season... we should have 2000 yards rushing, with no help from the QB....... we've got the players now, to make that happen. Reggie will not likely add to this total, but be a part of it.

I somewhat agree. Bush definitely adds a new dimension to the offense and would increase my expectations for yards, scoring, ability to sustain drives, and ability to create matchup problems. Either way, I wouldn't expect 3800 passing yards and 2000 rushing yards, that puts us in the top 3 overall offenses last year and with or without Bush I don't expect us to beat out Indianapolis, Denver, Cincinnati, NY Giants, Kansas City, Seattle, etc. just yet, but I do expect Bush will add to the offensive output. However, I do agree that I think the offense can be solid without him and that he doesn't bring an amazing amount of new production in this scheme, which is one big reason why I think Mario Williams would bring more to our defense than Bush brings to our offense.