Reggie Bush = Michael Vick?

[kastofsna]

different positions, but look at the players themselves. both 6'0 200 pounds. both have good muscle tone, but still very lean. both are great runners with excellent speed who have an innate ability to break opponent's ankles with ease, and turn on a dime anywhere on the field.

now the only reason i bring up the comparison is because vick isn't the most durable guy on the field, and he doesn't get hit nearly as much as bush will be getting hit running the ball. i like bush, but this is definitely a concern.

 

[TreWardTxn]

Even though Bush probably has a bit more upper body bulk than Vick, I think both of their fondness for trying to go over the top and launch themselves around or over defender is what gives them an unecessary risk of injury. Of course, it's always the play you don't expect that gets you. On top of playing SuperBush, he will be taking the weekly punishment of a running back. I think if he can prove productive as a slot receiver, his lack of bulk won't be that big an issue, but he won't ever be (IMO) a 20+ carry back...

There is a possibilty that Vick is a bit injury prone. He was hurt somewhat his sophmore year at Tech, but Bush hasn't had any significant injury i'm aware of, not even an ankle sprain.

 

[infantrycak]

Vick has had a fractured fibula, a hamstring strain (a speed guy rather than size issue) and high ankle sprain--in other words, carrying another 20 lbs around wouldn't have made any difference. See Donovan McNabb, 40 lbs heavier with the same fractured fibula, an ankle injury and a groin strain on his injury resume. Culpepper weighs 65 lbs more and has missed significant playing time due to injury in three different seasons.

 

[TexansLucky13]

different positions, but look at the players themselves. both 6'0 200 pounds. both have good muscle tone, but still very lean. both are great runners with excellent speed who have an innate ability to break opponent's ankles with ease, and turn on a dime anywhere on the field.

now the only reason i bring up the comparison is because vick isn't the most durable guy on the field, and he doesn't get hit nearly as much as bush will be getting hit running the ball. i like bush, but this is definitely a concern.

This is counteracted by the fact that Bush will be sharing the backfield with Domanick Davis. Both Bush and Davis have a less-than-perfect on-field durability. Davis is a tough dude... but if you've ever watched a Texans game, you can tell that he is fatigued by the end of the game. Bush will share ball time with DD, which will help both of them. I agree that it may be a small concern if Bush were alone back there. But he won't be.

I love that we will likely get Bush, mainly because our running game will be unparalleled in the AFC South.

 

[rmartin65]

Bodies build up a resistance to being hit. That is why Bush is not going to be as injury prone as Vick. Bush knows how to take a hit because he is hit more.

 

[TreWardTxn]

Of course there are all the injuries that show up in the weekly reports, i'm also talking about the weekly soreness that builds up, the nagging injuries that can spell doom for a guy that relies so heavily on speed and agility.

Let's remember that Vick was an option QB in college, and I would wager that he got hit more often by a DE making the pitch, then Reggie ever did at USC because his O-line would eat up defenders. I heard some talking head mention (positively) that Bush is so elusive that he never took a hit in college. Of course that's an obvious exaggeration, but it might not be that far off base; when you avg. 8-9 yards a carry you're not getting hit by LBs, but college CBs and safeties. He hasn't taken many square hits from a LB or lineman. Bush will get hit a lot more often by the big boys in the NFL if he gets any significant amount of carries...