PDA

View Full Version : A Peterson vs Bush


Meloy
01-24-2007, 04:03 PM
With all the hysteria about Reggie last year, why are not more Texans fans clamoring for Adrian? I've read where he was considered a stronger rusher before the collar bone than Bush and was acceptable coming out of backfield on "dumps". Doesn't have the hands or speed of Reggie but seems to be a great match up for our offense. Has any one compared rushing only stats of the two? To be honest after selecting Johnson then Mario and signing Weaver, it is time to tell the dline to stand up and get a few sacks. I can see a corner in F/agency and maybe a line backer in mid rounds but the first two picks should be offense.

real
01-24-2007, 04:05 PM
the first two picks should be offense.

The first two picks should be the most valuable left on the board...

Ole Miss Texan
01-24-2007, 04:12 PM
I would rather have AP play for us than Reggie Bush. I think most teams would. esp. if he's going to be you're feature back...bush has worked very well in NO because the way he's being used.

real
01-24-2007, 04:14 PM
...bush has worked very well in NO because the way he's being used.


Shouldn't you use any player you have in a way that showcases their best attributes ?

real
01-24-2007, 04:16 PM
I'd rather have Bush.

I think a player like RB gives your offense mucho flexibility.

mexican_texan
01-24-2007, 04:18 PM
I'm taking AP. He is amazing...speed and power. On the same track, I'd take LJ over Westbrook.

real
01-24-2007, 04:20 PM
On the same track, I'd take LJ over Westbrook.

I'm not sure how thats the same...

Would you take L.J over Marshall Faulk ?

Or would it depend on what kind of offense you ran :lightbulb:

kastofsna
01-24-2007, 04:23 PM
bush is nothing like faulk, not even close. i'm not sure why those comparisons are even made, yet i see them all the time. faulk is pretty much just like ladanian tomlinson. bush is a younger version of brian westbrook at best.

and peterson doesnt compare well to LJ. johnson is very patient, peterson certainly isn't.

Mr. White
01-24-2007, 04:24 PM
All other things equal, I'd rather have Peterson.

I'm more impressed with runners that run over people than ones that dance around them.

Bush is more versatile, but Peterson gets the tough yards.

real
01-24-2007, 04:25 PM
bush is a younger version of brian westbrook at best.


Check the pressure on your fire extinguishers...

Reggie is about to set the leauge on fire...

Ole Miss Texan
01-24-2007, 04:31 PM
Shouldn't you use any player you have in a way that showcases their best attributes ?

Yea you should...they are using him for dump offs and as a slot receiver more than a running back....that was my point. I'm not blaming them for doing that I'm just saying I'd rather have a true running back than that...unless I already had one.

look at bush's touchdown in the playoff game they lost....i liked that it was a reception from 90 yards away...where he ran just about all of it. it was a heck of a juke and he was gone. nothing against bush or payton...but that is the best way to utilize bush. i'd rather have a running back that tallied up 15TD's a season...on the ground. Bush shouldn't have taunted urlacher either...that lit a fire in the entire chicago D.

Adrian seems a lot more humble to me than Reggie too. Not that that says anything about their play, they are both outstanding...but that is something in the locker room that you should look at...adrian seemed like he was more of a leader at OK even when he was injured than Bush was at USC.

Again I don't want to sound like i'm taking anything away from either of them though.

real
01-24-2007, 04:35 PM
bush is nothing like faulk, not even close. i'm not sure why those comparisons are even made, yet i see them all the time. faulk is pretty much just like ladanian tomlinson. bush is a younger version of brian westbrook at best.

and peterson doesnt compare well to LJ. johnson is very patient, peterson certainly isn't.

Why does everything have to be so complicated ?

The comparison is between two players that are mostly straight ahead runners, with limited recieving skills vs two guys who rely on speed and agility and good/great hands for a running back...simple as that....

I'm sorry we couldn't find a Reggie or L.J clone that copied their running style to the exact step and ran EXACTLY like the real Reggie and L.J..

ATX
01-24-2007, 04:35 PM
Peterson is more of the classic run between the tackles kind of back while Bush is more of an outside threat (ie sweep, off tackle, lining up as a WR). Bush is probably faster, but Peterson still has that break away speed that none of our starting RBs have ever had. Maybe Taylor has the speed, but not the skill of AP.

I think AP would better fit the Texans scheme than Bush would any day. If any of you look at the AP videos, you'll see how quick he is to make that first step then find the hole and go. AP would do great in our zone blocking scheme, he hits the hole extremely fast and turns on the afterburners when he's free.

real
01-24-2007, 04:39 PM
Again I don't want to sound like i'm taking anything away from either of them though.

Why would anybody think that....:rolleyes:


I honestly believe it comes down to your style as a playcaller, and your needs...

unless of course we're looking at this situation in a vaccum...

real
01-24-2007, 04:50 PM
Wali Lundy or Tom Brady ?

Ole Miss Texan
01-24-2007, 04:56 PM
Why would anybody think that....:rolleyes:


I honestly believe it comes down to your style as a playcaller, and your needs...

unless of course we're looking at this situation in a vaccum...

lol, yea don't want anyone to think I'm a bush hater.

Agreed, I think most playcallers in the nfl would control the clock with AP. The nfl does seem to be changing tough with more passing than classic running.. I don't think Bush is going to light the nfl on fire like a lot of people think. There's no arguing about his talent, but dont see him a few years down the road being the guy everyone is scared of. No one is scared of Vick anymore...he still has his scrambles and huge plays with his feet..but teams just try to contain him and then they will win. I think teams will just contain bush.

I am also concerned about his durability. That shot he took in the championship game was one of the biggest hits I've ever seen. I was really impressed at the extent he contributed the rest of the game. That wasn't going to be the last hit like that...and it's going to wear on his body unfortunately.

TheOgre
01-24-2007, 05:11 PM
I have to admit, I would rather have Peterson than Bush.

Question: Would you rather have Mario and Peterson OR Bush and whoever we could draft with our 8th (other than a RB) this year?

ATX
01-24-2007, 05:27 PM
VY and Peterson would have been sick.

Ole Miss Texan
01-24-2007, 05:45 PM
VY and Peterson would have been sick.

Yea that would have been reeally sick.

i'd rather have mario and peterson than Bush and Gaines Adams (although we're not guaranteed to get peterson.)

I'd also rather have VY and AP than Bush and Russell.

dalemurphy
01-24-2007, 05:55 PM
because the media-machine isn't hyping him up like it did Bush last year. And, apparently, most Texan fans are sheep and follow whatever they hear the most.

Everyone clamored and screamed for Bush until early November, then they all screamed about Vince Young. Three years ago everyone loved David Carr now everyone thinks he's the worst QB in the history of the NFL.

hot pickle
01-24-2007, 07:03 PM
hes a better runnin back then Reggie, and the reason the texans didnt draft reggie is cuz they didnt want a wide reciever, passing on reggie might have been a great move by the texans if we get peterson

Ole Miss Texan
01-24-2007, 07:23 PM
hes a better runnin back then Reggie, and the reason the texans didnt draft reggie is cuz they didnt want a wide reciever, passing on reggie might have been a great move by the texans if we get peterson

Especially if Peterson does well when we play the saints next season, and mario stops reggie.

Wolf
01-24-2007, 07:30 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwSVBX-rirM

this is why ... 2nd half baby and yards after contact

Wolf
01-24-2007, 07:32 PM
I know the Texans aren't going to draft him, but ....this franchise never has seen anyone like that even as big as Ron Dayne is.. no.. J. Wells had the size of Eddie George but didn't run like him.

*edit* is what i put in bold

Anguyen
01-24-2007, 07:42 PM
VY and Peterson would have been sick.

We could be looking at AP and Troy Smith combo in 2007 :drunk:

thunderkyss
01-24-2007, 07:42 PM
bush is nothing like faulk, not even close. i'm not sure why those comparisons are even made, yet i see them all the time. faulk is pretty much just like ladanian tomlinson. bush is a younger version of brian westbrook at best.

and peterson doesnt compare well to LJ. johnson is very patient, peterson certainly isn't.

I agree with Bush=Westbrook........ but that isn't a bad thing. Westbrook had a great year.

Bush is no Marshall Faulk...... but Marshall wasn't always Marshall either.

& LJ wasn't always that patient runner. I believe his coach used to question his manhood even......

infantrycak
01-24-2007, 07:44 PM
Check the pressure on your fire extinguishers...

Reggie is about to set the leauge on fire...

Could be, in fact he probably will be very successful as an offensive weapon, but a full year in he has not proven himself comparable as a runner to any top flight RB. Bush averaged 3.6 ypc behind the same line that McAllister averaged 4.3 ypc behind and what he was supposed to give (take it to the house) resulted as a runner in zero runs over 20 yards vs. 6 for McAllister. Heck, the always gets caught from behind DD had 5 runs over 20 yards his rookie season and got more 1st downs than RB did his rookie season on about the same number of touches as either a runner or combined. Doesn't mean Bush isn't a great offensive weapon--only that he isn't a real RB and a team will have to have another prime RB as well--which will result in an awesome and flexible duo.

thunderkyss
01-24-2007, 07:49 PM
Could be, in fact he probably will be very successful as an offensive weapon, but a full year in he has not proven himself comparable as a runner to any top flight RB. Bush averaged 3.6 ypc behind the same line that McAllister averaged 4.3 ypc behind and what he was supposed to give (take it to the house) resulted as a runner in zero runs over 20 yards vs. 6 for McAllister. Heck, the always gets caught from behind DD had 5 runs over 20 yards his rookie season and got more 1st downs than RB did his rookie season on about the same number of touches as either a runner or combined. Doesn't mean Bush isn't a great offensive weapon--only that he isn't a real RB and a team will have to have another prime RB as well--which will result in an awesome and flexible duo.

definitely not worthy of the #1 overall pick......

nunusguy
01-24-2007, 08:29 PM
Doesn't mean Bush isn't a great offensive weapon--only that he isn't a real RB and a team will have to have another prime RB as well--which will result in an awesome and flexible duo.
Bush really is very unusual. He is for sure an offensive playmaker of the first degree, and a real home-run threat as witnessed in the NFC championship game against the Bears. But so far it appears the primary, perhaps only method of delivery is thru a forward pass. But Bush is not really a WR either,
as I've never seen him run a post or a slant pattern. They just flip it out to him in the flat and let him do his thing. Maybe the play Sunday was sorta a fly patter ? Sorta.
But what he's clearly not is a running back of the first degree. He can bounce it outside, but thats all he can do. He's not a banger, not the kinda ball-carrier that can get you yardage up the middle. All Bush knows is to flee for
open space where he knows how to operate, and an elite NFL running back has to be much more versatile.

LORK 88
01-24-2007, 09:13 PM
Bush isn't a pure runner like AD is. He is a dual threat which is where his value comes from. AD is a pure runner who can punish players, breaks tackles, and has incredible balance when running. He might not be the receiver Bush is, but he's twice the runner Bush is. It's scary thinking the size, speed, and power AD has and what that can be.

BattleRedToro
01-24-2007, 09:22 PM
.... but Marshall wasn't always Marshall either.

Dumbest statement ever. :winky:

run-david-run
01-25-2007, 01:44 AM
I'm not sure how thats the same...

Would you take L.J over Marshall Faulk ?

Or would it depend on what kind of offense you ran :lightbulb:

Umm, there is not way Reggie is in Westbrooks class in terms of running the ball, lets alone Marshal Faulk. Right now, all of Regge's big plays are in the slot or passes out of the backfiled, for that reason he is a complementary player and not a feature back, which is why the Deuce factor is so important. Without Deuce getting yardage on the ground, there would be no balance at all in the offense (very much like in the Bears game, and notice the offesense was terrible). Ill take the 25 carries for 4.5 a pop over what Reggie brings.

ESAD2-14
01-25-2007, 08:06 AM
Bush is not a "every" down back. Even when he was with USC he shared alot of time with Lendale White. If not for Deuce the Saints would probably not have had that great of a running game. RB does make a great receiver out of the back field, if he gets past you he is gone. However if I needed to get a yard for a first down I would not hand off to Reggie. Also when Bush was so hyped as a football messiah, how many of those "wow" statistics were on kick-off and punt returns? I am no stat hound, but I am willing to bet alot of yards.

AP on the other hand is more of a pure running back then Bush. Can take hits and delivers them right back. I would take AP any day over Bush as a featured running back. JMO.

Silver Oak
01-25-2007, 08:32 AM
Amazing to me that we all agree on what kind of back Reggie is now, but before last years draft, all of the so called experts were telling anyone who would listen to them that Bush was a "once in a lifetime" running back.

Seems like a short lifetime as we're now going to be told the same thing with Peterson....but this time I think I'll be more inclined to believe them.

Go Texans!

real
01-25-2007, 09:19 AM
Could be, in fact he probably will be very successful as an offensive weapon, but a full year in he has not proven himself comparable as a runner to any top flight RB. Bush averaged 3.6 ypc behind the same line that McAllister averaged 4.3 ypc behind and what he was supposed to give (take it to the house) resulted as a runner in zero runs over 20 yards vs. 6 for McAllister. Heck, the always gets caught from behind DD had 5 runs over 20 yards his rookie season and got more 1st downs than RB did his rookie season on about the same number of touches as either a runner or combined. Doesn't mean Bush isn't a great offensive weapon--only that he isn't a real RB and a team will have to have another prime RB as well--which will result in an awesome and flexible duo.

.....................RB.....................DM
CLE.................4.5..................4.1
GB..................0.8..................3.9
ATL................4.1..................4.3
CAR................2.0.................3.5
TB..................2.6.................8.2
PHI.................2.4................5.3
BAL................3.2.................2.2
TB..................-.5.................2.1
PIT.................4.9................4.0
CIN................3.9.................4.0
ATL................4.8.................3.6
SF.................3.7.................5.2
DAL................6.2.................5.3
WAS...............2.0.................3.2
NYG................6.3.................4.0
CAR................6.7.................Did Not Play
PHI.................4.3.................6.8
CHI.................4.8.................3.0

I can gather three things by looking at RB's and DM's game by game rushing average....

1) Some of the same games Reggie did poorly in, Deuce did poorly in as well; with most coming at the beggining of the season. When the season began Reggie played like a rookie.

2) As the season progressed, Reggie got better. As I said, at the beggining of the season, Reggie ran like what he was; a rookie. As the season wore on, and he realized how to use his blocking better, his numbers increased.

3) He Stepped up in the play-offs.



definitely not worthy of the #1 overall pick......

Did Mario fulfill his legacy as a number 1 overall pick in one year ? Why is it that Mario can get better, but Reggie can't ? Reggie started the year off slow, but he gained speed towards the end and into the playoffs. Why do you think he won't be better next year ? IMHO, Reggie is going to keep improving and turn into a really special player.

I know Texan fans are afraid of that happening...:hides:

but oh well...whatever....:rolleyes:

real
01-25-2007, 09:33 AM
Umm, there is not way Reggie is in Westbrooks class in terms of running the ball, lets alone Marshal Faulk. Right now, all of Regge's big plays are in the slot or passes out of the backfiled, for that reason he is a complementary player and not a feature back, which is why the Deuce factor is so important. Without Deuce getting yardage on the ground, there would be no balance at all in the offense (very much like in the Bears game, and notice the offesense was terrible). Ill take the 25 carries for 4.5 a pop over what Reggie brings.

I find it utterly ridiculous that you complain "where his big plays come from"....

That is so silly.....

You're complaining about a guy that takes a 7 yard swing pass 80 yards on one of the best defenses in the leauge ? C'mon...you can do better...We don't have a guy on our team that can provide those kinds of plays. A better argument is one where you talk about his running style, and toughness, and between the tackles.....yada.....yada......yada....

If any other rookie not named Reggie Bush would have had his exact same reg. and post season there wouldn't be this heated debate because we'd all be in agreeance that the rookie was well on his way to being outstanding. Your perspective would change, and instead of all the criticism you'd be talking about the few things he needs to improve upon. You'd be talking about how he's on his way to becoming one of the most dynamic weapons in the leauge once he learns how to utilize his talents, and read his blocks better(which he obviously showed signs of doing so later in the year). But since Houston passed on him, and the "media" (and a lot more people) called Houston out and said it was a bad move, we must forever wish bad things upon Reggie. We must criticize, nit-pick, and tear apart his game, and complain about "where his big plays come from"...Instead of judging him like the rookie he is, we must take this one season, his initial season, and scrutinize it to no end, despite the fact that he was an intergal part of the most potent offense in the leauge........Gotcha....:ok:

thunderkyss
01-25-2007, 10:28 AM
Did Mario fulfill his legacy as a number 1 overall pick in one year ? Why is it that Mario can get better, but Reggie can't ? Reggie started the year off slow, but he gained speed towards the end and into the playoffs. Why do you think he won't be better next year ? IMHO, Reggie is going to keep improving and turn into a really special player.

I know Texan fans are afraid of that happening...:hides:

but oh well...whatever....:rolleyes:

Great post... I can't give you any rep though...... must spread some love.

But.. I Know what I expect from a WR taken #1 overall... & I know what I'd expect from a RB taken #1 overall. Reggie hasn't shown me that he could be either in college, and to me, his rookie season is more of the same. I see no difference in Reggie Bush, and Michael Westbrooke...... if Reggie can avoid the injuries that Westbrook encountered, then yeah, I can see him as a viable top ten pick..... if he gets the magical 2000 total yards from scrimmage(not counting punt & kick-off returns) then yeah, he was definitely a top 5 pick, definitely a #1 overall.

But from what he did in college.... the way he did it, I don't see it happening unless Duece gets hurt. Which brings me back to my main point, we didn't need him, just like the Saints didn't need him. He provides them with depth, and you don't spend top 5 picks on depth..... of course DD/DW didn't play in '06, and Reggie would have been a welcome addition to our team, but that's a different story.

& while we are talking about DD/DW.... his rookie season was better than Reggie's, and he's seen as mediocre talent..... sure he didn't break off an 88 yard touchdown pass, or a 70 yard reception fumbling the ball out of bounds, but he produced on a more consistant basis....... he didn't have to compete with McAllister, Colston, Horn, & Henderson for attention....... but that led to his knee problems, & we'll never know how Reggie would do being "The Man"

But..... I don't see Peterson any differently. Yes, he's more of a traditional running back. But his health issues makes it impossible(IMHO) for anyone to take him in the top 5..... IMHO, you'd have to be pretty desperate to take him in the top 10, but that's me.

Think about it...... Joseph Addai & Thomas Jones will be the feature backs in the SuperBowl. NOt LT, LJ, Shaun Alexander, Edgerin James, Stephen Jackson, Jamal Lewis..... etc...

If the Texans would've drafted Reggie...... I'd have been okay with that. the only thing I wouldn't have liked, would be that it would look as though the Houston Texans let bad fans & ESPN make their pick.

If the Texans draft Adrian Peterson.... I'd be okay with that. @ #8, I think it would be a bit of a reach, then we'll be too heavy at the RB position, and have to move someone.... & still have to address real needs elsewhere on the team.

real
01-25-2007, 11:04 AM
Great post... I can't give you any rep though...... must spread some love.

But.. I Know what I expect from a WR taken #1 overall... & I know what I'd expect from a RB taken #1 overall. Reggie hasn't shown me that he could be either in college, and to me, his rookie season is more of the same. I see no difference in Reggie Bush, and Michael Westbrooke...... if Reggie can avoid the injuries that Westbrook encountered, then yeah, I can see him as a viable top ten pick..... if he gets the magical 2000 total yards from scrimmage(not counting punt & kick-off returns) then yeah, he was definitely a top 5 pick, definitely a #1 overall.

But from what he did in college.... the way he did it, I don't see it happening unless Duece gets hurt. Which brings me back to my main point, we didn't need him, just like the Saints didn't need him. He provides them with depth, and you don't spend top 5 picks on depth..... of course DD/DW didn't play in '06, and Reggie would have been a welcome addition to our team, but that's a different story.

& while we are talking about DD/DW.... his rookie season was better than Reggie's, and he's seen as mediocre talent..... sure he didn't break off an 88 yard touchdown pass, or a 70 yard reception fumbling the ball out of bounds, but he produced on a more consistant basis....... he didn't have to compete with McAllister, Colston, Horn, & Henderson for attention....... but that led to his knee problems, & we'll never know how Reggie would do being "The Man"

But..... I don't see Peterson any differently. Yes, he's more of a traditional running back. But his health issues makes it impossible(IMHO) for anyone to take him in the top 5..... IMHO, you'd have to be pretty desperate to take him in the top 10, but that's me.

Think about it...... Joseph Addai & Thomas Jones will be the feature backs in the SuperBowl. NOt LT, LJ, Shaun Alexander, Edgerin James, Stephen Jackson, Jamal Lewis..... etc...

If the Texans would've drafted Reggie...... I'd have been okay with that. the only thing I wouldn't have liked, would be that it would look as though the Houston Texans let bad fans & ESPN make their pick.

If the Texans draft Adrian Peterson.... I'd be okay with that. @ #8, I think it would be a bit of a reach, then we'll be too heavy at the RB position, and have to move someone.... & still have to address real needs elsewhere on the team.

I understand where you're coming from with everything you said. I just don't agree with saying Reggie wasn't worth their pick because they didn't need him. Does that mean if someone who needed him would have picked him, that would make him more valuable ? I don't understand that....Talent is talent...no matter who you play for or where you go...If you're talented your talented....They may have had other pressing needs, but adding a Reggie Bush to that offense gives them a special element.

Meloy
01-25-2007, 11:05 AM
Could AP be a franchise type back for Texans? If yes, he is definitely worth 8th pick.My question was not which back fans would have but why isn't AP getting a tidal wave of chatter to be our first pick? Denver offense had a number of backs on roster and so do we. I think AP, Dayne, Lundy, Taylor or Gado would be great. All would be stronger 2nd half of season and we have better depth to resort to as injuries have plagued the position. Second round pick is where the excitement will be. Do we go with a QB even if Carr stays as I think he will? DC will be in his 6th year so preparing a future starter is logical. Smith or Kolb seem possible. Or do we draft a corner there? This seems to be mandatory if none taken in free agency. Some think a LT is necessary in that round, some say not til later as you can get that 2nd tier lineman @ 3rd. Will we have a clear picture on Spencer's health by the draft?

thunderkyss
01-25-2007, 11:41 AM
I understand where you're coming from with everything you said. I just don't agree with saying Reggie wasn't worth their pick because they didn't need him. Does that mean if someone who needed him would have picked him, that would make him more valuable ? I don't understand that....Talent is talent...no matter who you play for or where you go...If you're talented your talented....They may have had other pressing needs, but adding a Reggie Bush to that offense gives them a special element.

That was the #1 rated offense in large part in spite of Reggie. Imagine them handing the ball to Duece to replace Reggie's negative yards, or tossing it out to Henderson a couple of times, instead of trying to get Reggie involved. & instead of having to rely on Mark Seminoe(the Only LB that should start for them in '07) & Scott Fujita & Shanle(Cowboy Rejects) but having AJ Hawk instead.... then trading Stallworth for Michael Lewis instead of Seminoe(sp) to replace Fred Thomas..... They still would have had the 1st round bye, and a better chance at beating Chicago.

It's all speculation, I know. & it may pay off for them....... Duece may get hurt again next year..... Horn may not be the same again.... he might be hanging them up..... Colston may get into a sophmore slump(now that teams will plan against him)...... But then again, they did have Michael Bennette...

& me saying the Saints shouldn't have picked him because they didn't need him is not a judgement of Reggie's talent. They're all talented, getting to play in the NFL means they're pretty dadgum talented. But his value to the Saints isn't(or at least shouldn't have been) as great as his value to the NYJets, Oakland, or Buffalo. IMHO, the Saints should have seen more value in AJ Hawk, or D'Brickshaw or even Huff at the #2 spot(might be a bit of a stretch for Huff).

The #1 pick isn't always about the most talented player in the draft, there is always an element of need associated with the pick. Right now, a lot of pundits feel the Raiders have a dire need at QB..... they feel the same way about Detroit, and as a result, they have Jamarcus Russell & Brady Quinn at the top of their mocks.

In my mind, Quinn isn't more talented than AD...... & Detroit would be better served taking a defensive player in that spot...... Gaines Adams would be my best guess..

& Jamarcus Russell(who shot up in the draft much like Vince did, but you don't hear anyone calling foul) isn't as talented IMHO as Calvin Johnson..... but the Raiders would have to deal either Moss or Porter to make it work. IMHO, Joe Thomas should be their pick.......

I guarantee..... if the Raiders or the Lions pick QBs, they won't do much better in '07, and if Brady Quinn goes to Detroit you can go ahead and mark Brady Quinn down as another has been that never was.

run-david-run
01-25-2007, 04:48 PM
I find it utterly ridiculous that you complain "where his big plays come from"....

That is so silly.....

You're complaining about a guy that takes a 7 yard swing pass 80 yards on one of the best defenses in the leauge ? C'mon...you can do better...We don't have a guy on our team that can provide those kinds of plays. A better argument is one where you talk about his running style, and toughness, and between the tackles.....yada.....yada......yada....

If any other rookie not named Reggie Bush would have had his exact same reg. and post season there wouldn't be this heated debate because we'd all be in agreeance that the rookie was well on his way to being outstanding. Your perspective would change, and instead of all the criticism you'd be talking about the few things he needs to improve upon. You'd be talking about how he's on his way to becoming one of the most dynamic weapons in the leauge once he learns how to utilize his talents, and read his blocks better(which he obviously showed signs of doing so later in the year). But since Houston passed on him, and the "media" (and a lot more people) called Houston out and said it was a bad move, we must forever wish bad things upon Reggie. We must criticize, nit-pick, and tear apart his game, and complain about "where his big plays come from"...Instead of judging him like the rookie he is, we must take this one season, his initial season, and scrutinize it to no end, despite the fact that he was an intergal part of the most potent offense in the leauge........Gotcha....:ok:

When comparing running backs, the purpose of this thread, the area of the field where they make most of their impact plays is very significant. Reggie had 0 runs of more then 20 yards! Wali Lundy beat that in 1 game against Jacksonville. The point of my post is to show that Reggie is not a feature back, he is barely a RUNNING back at all. With Deuce McAllister, he makes a very good combo, but what would fans say when its Ron Dayne and Wali Lundy splitting carries with Bush instead of a proven ProBowler? Bush ended up in the best situation possible for his skill set. While it would be fun to have him catching DC's endless arrays of dump off passes, he would not be anywhere near effective enough as a runner to warrant $60M. To this end, I claim that AP would be a far better option for the Texans to choose, as he is both a decent receiving threat and a very very good RUNNING back.

real
01-25-2007, 05:41 PM
When comparing running backs, the purpose of this thread, the area of the field where they make most of their impact plays is very significant. Reggie had 0 runs of more then 20 yards! Wali Lundy beat that in 1 game against Jacksonville. The point of my post is to show that Reggie is not a feature back, he is barely a RUNNING back at all. With Deuce McAllister, he makes a very good combo, but what would fans say when its Ron Dayne and Wali Lundy splitting carries with Bush instead of a proven ProBowler? Bush ended up in the best situation possible for his skill set. While it would be fun to have him catching DC's endless arrays of dump off passes, he would not be anywhere near effective enough as a runner to warrant $60M. To this end, I claim that AP would be a far better option for the Texans to choose, as he is both a decent receiving threat and a very very good RUNNING back.

You're trying to make him fit into your own personal box and opinion of what he "should be"....

How do you know the Saints ever intended to use him as an everydown back? I'm not going to get into whether or not he was worth his contract because that point is moot....A lot of players are not worth their contract so IMO, that statement doesn't mean much....

Just because he doesn't play how you think he should play, or run the ball up the middle 30 times a game doesn't make him any less a weapon in that offense...The guy makes plays....period....

real
01-25-2007, 05:45 PM
That was the #1 rated offense in large part in spite of Reggie. Imagine them handing the ball to Duece to replace Reggie's negative yards, or tossing it out to Henderson a couple of times, instead of trying to get Reggie involved. & instead of having to rely on Mark Seminoe(the Only LB that should start for them in '07) & Scott Fujita & Shanle(Cowboy Rejects) but having AJ Hawk instead.... then trading Stallworth for Michael Lewis instead of Seminoe(sp) to replace Fred Thomas..... They still would have had the 1st round bye, and a better chance at beating Chicago.

It's all speculation, I know. & it may pay off for them....... Duece may get hurt again next year..... Horn may not be the same again.... he might be hanging them up..... Colston may get into a sophmore slump(now that teams will plan against him)...... But then again, they did have Michael Bennette...

& me saying the Saints shouldn't have picked him because they didn't need him is not a judgement of Reggie's talent. They're all talented, getting to play in the NFL means they're pretty dadgum talented. But his value to the Saints isn't(or at least shouldn't have been) as great as his value to the NYJets, Oakland, or Buffalo. IMHO, the Saints should have seen more value in AJ Hawk, or D'Brickshaw or even Huff at the #2 spot(might be a bit of a stretch for Huff).

The #1 pick isn't always about the most talented player in the draft, there is always an element of need associated with the pick. Right now, a lot of pundits feel the Raiders have a dire need at QB..... they feel the same way about Detroit, and as a result, they have Jamarcus Russell & Brady Quinn at the top of their mocks.

In my mind, Quinn isn't more talented than AD...... & Detroit would be better served taking a defensive player in that spot...... Gaines Adams would be my best guess..

& Jamarcus Russell(who shot up in the draft much like Vince did, but you don't hear anyone calling foul) isn't as talented IMHO as Calvin Johnson..... but the Raiders would have to deal either Moss or Porter to make it work. IMHO, Joe Thomas should be their pick.......

I guarantee..... if the Raiders or the Lions pick QBs, they won't do much better in '07, and if Brady Quinn goes to Detroit you can go ahead and mark Brady Quinn down as another has been that never was.

Honestly I do understand everything you're saying....

But my main point is that Reggie had a pretty dag-um good ROOKIE year...

In your post it's like you're speaking in absolutes....Like what we saw out of Reggie this year, will be what he gives them every year....

Why do we expect other rookies to get better but not Reggie ? If his production towards the end of the season is any indication of the rate in which he'll improve, IMHO, I think he's going to be one of the top 10 offensive players in the leauge for a long time....

thunderkyss
01-25-2007, 05:52 PM
Just because he doesn't play how you think he should play, or run the ball up the middle 30 times a game doesn't make him any less a weapon in that offense...The guy makes plays....period....

You know what impressed me most about Reggie this year??

When he got up after that brutal hit(had to be #1 Jacked up hit of the year)... he had a solid game.... ok, he had a damn good game after that hit..

#2 pick in the draft though...... I would think he should be the central point of the offense. Not the Decoy.

Keyshawn Johnson..... Peyton...... Vick..... Palmer..... LT....... McNabb...... Faulk....

Reggie is #2 on the depth charts.... # 3 option on the play charts..... & will be in '06.

PapaL
01-25-2007, 07:01 PM
I'll take the other Bush. Read the sig...

Ole Miss Texan
01-25-2007, 07:23 PM
You know what impressed me most about Reggie this year??

When he got up after that brutal hit(had to be #1 Jacked up hit of the year)... he had a solid game.... ok, he had a damn good game after that hit..
#2 pick in the draft though...... I would think he should be the central point of the offense. Not the Decoy.

Keyshawn Johnson..... Peyton...... Vick..... Palmer..... LT....... McNabb...... Faulk....

Reggie is #2 on the depth charts.... # 3 option on the play charts..... & will be in '06.

Yea, that's the same for me. On top of that it was the 2nd play of the game. 1st touch Reggie got, and it was one of the biggest hits I've seen. He's a tough dude, and it really didn't seem to rattle him too much..I was impressed be that more than anything else.

Silver Oak
01-26-2007, 08:08 AM
Maybe y'all are right. The kid is so tough, he still managed to taunt Urlacher and hotdog it before summersaulting into the end zone on his good catch and run.

Now that's showing toughness.

run-david-run
01-26-2007, 01:34 PM
You're trying to make him fit into your own personal box and opinion of what he "should be"....

How do you know the Saints ever intended to use him as an everydown back? I'm not going to get into whether or not he was worth his contract because that point is moot....A lot of players are not worth their contract so IMO, that statement doesn't mean much....

Just because he doesn't play how you think he should play, or run the ball up the middle 30 times a game doesn't make him any less a weapon in that offense...The guy makes plays....period....

You seem to be missing the comparisson part..AP vs Bush, Im pretty sure thats the purpose of this thread. My point is that Reggie does make plays, but mostly on the outside, (yet again I point out that he had 0 runs of 20 yards or more) while Peterson is an indside runner. I have also said NO has the perfect system for him because it allows him to make those plays and draw defenses while Deuce gets the inside yardage on the ground. Since the Texans do not have a Deuce-like running back, Reggie's role with us would be differant and he would be foreced to run the ball more ofetn (which he has not done well), as a result, his value to us is not the same as it is to the Saints, who's offensive personel allow him to be very effective at his role.

Meloy
01-26-2007, 03:06 PM
You seem to be missing the comparisson part..AP vs Bush, Im pretty sure thats the purpose of this thread. My point is that Reggie does make plays, but mostly on the outside, (yet again I point out that he had 0 runs of 20 yards or more) while Peterson is an indside runner. I have also said NO has the perfect system for him because it allows him to make those plays and draw defenses while Deuce gets the inside yardage on the ground. Since the Texans do not have a Deuce-like running back, Reggie's role with us would be differant and he would be foreced to run the ball more ofetn (which he has not done well), as a result, his value to us is not the same as it is to the Saints, who's offensive personel allow him to be very effective at his role.I can see AP lined up with Leach as both can catch the ball. I can see AP lined up with Dayne. I can see me drooling.