bad said:
No?
How can someone be the best player available without being the best at his position? That's pretzel logic.
Aside from that, every ranking I've seen has Bush as the top running back. Not just a majority. ALL of them. A decent percentage of those add "could be the best ever".
You might dig one up somewhere that says otherwise, but you'll have to work for it. That should speak volumes by itself.
No offense, but I'll take their word over any fan's.
take away all the plays, where Reggie was lined up in the slot, or as a widereciever, take away all the touchdowns. Take away all the all purpose special teams yards and touchdowns... on his stats where does he stand??
Did he ever carry the ball 20+ times during a game?? Look back in history... has there ever been a runnngback selected with the #1 overall, who did not carry the ball 20+ times??
He's an explosive running back, but fair in comparison to the pure runners.
He's an explosive reciever, but fair in comparison to a pure reciever...
As it stands right now, there is no reason to believe that Reggie can be the primary back in a one back system. There is no evidence to support Reggie could be the #1 go to reciever in your normal NFL system.
If USC had listed him as a Wide Reciever, he'd be in this draft as a wide reciever.
bad said:
He's definitely no Ricky Williams in terms of emotional/intellectual maturity. Not even close.
Ricky looked perfectly sane prior to being drafted.
bad said:
You came in crystal clear the first time. I'm just disagreeing with you. For all anyone knows Bush could handle 20 carries a game. For all we know Bush can't. We'll just have to agree to disagree.
this is exactly the same as Vince Young. I hope you can see that. Vince did not struggle in a pro offense even though that is what everyone would have you beleive. he performed just as well as Chris Simms in that same offense, with less talent at WR. But Vince has got to prove that he can excell in that offense. I'm not saying Vince excelled in that offense, but that he performed well, and comparable to pure a pocket passer....
on the other hand, Reggie has not been the guy.... he has been one of two guys on an all star team for 5 years running. He has not carried the ball 20+ times. something he won't have to prove, because no one is talking about making him the guy..... but one of the guys.... another oddity for a #1 overall runningback...... not so strange, if you look at him like a WR though.
bad said:
Your opinion is that there are better pure running backs in this draft and I'm saying that Bush is both the best player in the draft and the best running back. I'll take it one step further; I think Bush is the best wide receiver in this draft to boot.
Well that's fine.... you can think that. But you shouldn't use expert mock drafts as your proof. If we'd have said 6 weeks ago that we were taking D'Brickshaw ferguson with the #1 Overall, those mocks would have reflected that...... & they'd be saying D'Brick is the BPA overall. Those guys report what has happened, not what will.
bad said:
I think we can come to a consensus on one thing at least; we love the Texans and want the best for them. We just don't agree on what would be the best for them, and we really don't know.
At least we're here, and we care enough about the Texans to argue about crap like this on a message board.
Football is more than a sport. It's a passion.
True.
LCROD said:
Reggie Bush and Clinton Portis have the same physical build, put up similiar combine numbers (bush being faster); and Portis holds up with his 22 carries a game just fine. All he did in Denver was run for 1500 twice, and 3 of his 4 years in the league. Reggie will be just fine.
Clinton Portis also rated as a 3rd round draft pick.
el toro said:
When it comes to such a top flight talent, take the talent, then adjust. Drafting for needs at #1 is a surefire way to make a major mistake.
When have we drafted #1 overall before to fill a need......... hmmm..... umm..
It's on the tip of my tongue...
LCROD said:
So is that your newest line? Now he's not fast enough? Go do some research and come back with some solid facts. Go ahead and take off the .08 for RB's 40 time and what does that leave you?
Can we take .08 off Vince's time too??