Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

The Old Michael Jordan Argument

Can one player have a "Michael Jordan" effect on a football team?

  • Yes

    Votes: 14 34.1%

  • No

    Votes: 27 65.9%
  • Total voters
    41
TexHorns

TexHorns

Waterboy
I attached this pole to the thread just to annoy myself and others.

When the Portland Trailblazers asked Bobby KNight about who they should draft Sam Bowie or Michael Jordan, Bobby Knight said "Draft Michael Jordan." BUt then Portland said, "Bobby we need a center though". Bobby KNight then said, "Then take Michael Jordan and play him at center".

The point is when you get a chance to take someone that can make such an impact on the game in a variety of ways, someone like Bush you have to take and utilize him in an offensive scheme to create problems/mismatches.

If DD is healthy, line Bush up at 3rd WR and mix him in the backfield to rest DD. Sharing touches with multiple weapons is almost better than overloading one weapon throughout the year. Think of the kind of pressure an Antonio Gates takes off of a LaDanian Tomlinson.
Click to expand...

signed anonymous

I understand this point but my main concern is I would rather have a SB win than a 2000 yard RB. I want Houston to win multiple superbowls in the future. IMO Football, unlike basketball, is the ultimate team sport and I just dont see any one person making a "Michael Jordan" impact on football. LT is a great player and I would love to watch him play for the Texans but how many SB wins does he have? Let me name some more: T.O., Manning ect...Your answer might be: its not their fault! My reply is: it does not matter. It might be worth getting him now and worrying about the rest positions later but for how many years are they going to have to stink before we can upgrade the rest of the team. Look at the last five years of superbowls and tell me just one player that was the difference in those seasons. So, my question is, can one player have a "Michael Jordan" effect on a football team?
 
I do believe that a 10 ft. tall, 500 lb. RB could probably take over games (or a bear holding the ball in his mouth). :)

Otherwise, I gotta say that football is a team sport.
 
1 player CAN make a big difference... but only in the right circumstances. If the team has everything and is just lacking in one key area..then yah, that player can have a seemingly "Jordanesque" effect.

But even so... football is alot more team oriented than basketball...and one..or even two..good players cant make a big enough difference to make a winner out of a bad team.

THat being said.. I dont think we are a bad team. I think we are a poorly coached team.. not playing to its own strengths.. but not a bad team in the sense that the 49ers are a bad team.

Alot of people talk about us not having talent.. but we DO have talent.. we have alot of talent.. its just misused talent. We lack talent in a few spots.

RB isnt one of those spots. However, for all of DDs talent (and he is very talented)..he isnt durable. He cant be our RB for 16 games because he just cant taking the pounding. Bush would allow us to be a running team.. a REAL running team...because he could share carries with DD and we would never have a drop off in our ability to run the ball (assuming Bush is as good as advertised).

I dont think bringing in Bush will be like the Bulls getting Jordan.. but.. I do think that not bringing him in could possibly earn us the ridicule of all the people who will say "I told you so" when he becomes a HOF caliber back (if he does..and he has a chance).

Obviously.. drafting someone cause you are afraid they may turn out to be good and you will get laughed at isnt the best idea. But we COULD use Bush..even though we have DD. And our Oline..while really bad... isnt so bad that we HAVE to use our 1st rounder this year on it.. coaching will make a difference..and so will having a health Hodgdon.

But ive said all this already in my thread..so ill stop there.

I voted No.. because one player cant make THAT big a difference... one player can push you over the hill.. but it cant carry you up there.
 
Well let me ask you this Grid. Do you think a player like Bush is worth getting over the trade picks to upgrade multiple positions or is the draft too much of a craps shoot to make the aguement for trading for extra picks. What about swapping 1sts with an extra 2nd and 3rd this year and an extra first next year? I just dont know where I stand on the whole Reggie Bush deal.
 
Two words: Peyton Manning. He is the closest thing to the jordan effect in the nfl. Even when he had a crappy defense the colts were still a top 3 team. I hate to say this, but that guy is going to run the afc south until his skills fade, it sucks, but its the truth.
 
Texhorns.. thats the crux of the problem and I honestly cant say one way or the other.

Ideally.. more picks would be better because we could upgrade multiple positions... and we need to. But, like you said.. its all a crapshoot... and Bush seems to have the best odds.

I think.. if I was the GM.. Id take Bush and roll with it. Because..again..ideally.. we wont have alot of chances to get the first pick in the draft. When we had the 1st pick before..we got Carr. Say what you want about how he has turned out.. but you cant deny that, had we had the Oline and a better RB from year 1, Carr could really have been a playmaker. he has the attitude.. he definatly has all the physical skills..and he is a heck of a guy, and a football player. With the second pick we got Andre Johnson, one of the best young WRs in the league and again..with an Oline..he could become one of the best WRs in the league, period.

Dunta Robinson I really think we got lucky on. Babin and T. Johnson dont look like they are playmakers of the same quality at this point.

What im trying to say is that when you have a really high pick like that.. if you use it, there is nothing stopping you from getting a cornerstone for your team...someone you can build around.

Last year.. if we had been a few spots higher.. I have no doubt that we would have picked Ware.. and look at how good he has turned out for the Cowboys. I dont want to find myself in that situation where the player we really want..who could really make a difference..is taken a spot or two ahead of us.

There is only one team in this years draft that has two first round picks.. Denver.. and I dont see them trading up with us. Even if they did.. I dont think id want to trade down that far. We could possibly trade down just a couple of spots.. but what will that get us? Chances are..from everything ive read.. if Bush isnt available at #2, the 49ers will take Dbrick Ferguson.. so here we are at #3.. who do we want? Hawk? that doesnt help our offense and they need help more than our defense right now. So we could try and trade down with someone that needs Lienart.. and then we are looking at who? Scott..Winston..McNeil.. good tackles no doubt.. but not sure things.. and not on the same level as Bush, talent wise.

I think we may be better off going for Bush.. get that cornerstone for our offense. We really could use him considering DDs durability issues.. and with the depth of this draft class at Tackle.. I think the chances are good that at the 33rd pick we could grab a tackle that is close to Scott/McNeil/WInston in the talent and upside departments.
 
Yeah but patriots owned them for a long time so you cant really say he was a Jordan for the team although he may be the best ever at his position. Maybe the closest prospect though.
 
Barry Sanders was as good as they come, yet he never improved the quality of the rest of the Lions, which is why they never went anywhere in the playoffs.
 
Yah and that has been one of the biggest arguements agianst Bush.. ive used it myself.

But the Lions didnt have the existing talent we already have.. and they never put enough effort into putting alot more talent around Sanders.
 
One player can not make you great since this sport has 22 players on the field at once but you build entire units around the skills of a few players. Certain players make other teams alter their schemes and force them to game plan around their elite talents. When you can combine 2 or 3 of them on one side of the ball you can build a unit that takes teams out of their comfort zones and start making them react to you instead of you having to react to them. Right now we could use one more elite difference maker on offense. Right now teams just double AJ, keep Dom in front of them, and nobody is afraid Carr will light them up.
 
This is a no brainer, it is basketball. Jordan changed the game as he was the MVP for his offensve and defensive prowess. He had the ability to truly effect the game every second he was on the floor. The mental anguish he was able to put on the other team was mind boggling. He could negate the other teams top offensive player as well as torch their best defesinve player. He touched the ball on every offensive possession. He could pass, shoot, post up. The NBA's rules at that time were designed where teams could not play zone and therefore you could isolate him on every play. There were no special teams that could change the game. There was no way an opposing team could stall and the keep the ball out of his hands for great lengths.

No player in football can have the impact a great player in the NBA can have.
 
I really hope you guys win cause i want Reggie Bush on the niners, but he would make you guys atleast an 8 win team next year. If you guys picked up Bush, then spent the rest of your draft workin on your O-line, you'd be a quality team next year. Having Bush and DD takin turns or playin em both in the backfield at the same time would give you a killer running game and your new O-line help would give Carr a decent amount of time to throw. Hopefully you guys stop throwing games so we can get the first pick and you wont have to worry about Bush anymore. TEXANS-42 ARIZONA-34. Go Texans!!!!!
 
Oh yeah, and to answer the question, i dont think one player can have the Jordan affect. But, if anyone could even come close, it would have to be a QuarterBack, they get their hands on the ball every down.
 
Snapple said:
Barry Sanders was as good as they come, yet he never improved the quality of the rest of the Lions, which is why they never went anywhere in the playoffs.
Click to expand...

That is ludicrous to say that Barry Sanders never improved the quality of the Lions. The addition of Barry Sanders instantly improved that team.

The sole addition of Sanders did not make that team good enough to win a Super Bowl (or even reach one) but the fact that they drafted one brilliant talent and then failed to continue improving the rest of the team doesn't reflect negatively on Barry or on the drafting of Barry. It reflects negatively on the Lions and demonstrates that they were a poorly run organization that hadn't a clue how to get better.
 
Hervoyel said:
That is ludicrous to say that Barry Sanders never improved the quality of the Lions. The addition of Barry Sanders instantly improved that team.

The sole addition of Sanders did not make that team good enough to win a Super Bowl (or even reach one) but the fact that they drafted one brilliant talent and then failed to continue improving the rest of the team doesn't reflect negatively on Barry or on the drafting of Barry. It reflects negatively on the Lions and demonstrates that they were a poorly run organization that hadn't a clue how to get better.
Click to expand...
Good post and it amazes me that people blame Sanders for the Lions failure to win it all. That's like blaming Roger Clemens, Roy Oswalt, or Nolan Ryan for why the Astros have never won a WS.
 
Vinny said:
Good post and it amazes me that people blame Sanders for the Lions failure to win it all. That's like blaming Roger Clemens, Roy Oswalt, or Nolan Ryan for why the Astros have never won a WS.
Click to expand...

i've yet to read where anyone blames sanders for the lions' failures, you're letting this board get to you vinny. it's just like herv said though, the lions were too inept to build the rest of the team. the arguement is that one player cant carry an entire team, and probably the best rb ever proved that. as i've said, there are two groups ... one who thinks we've got a bad team with bad coaching, and one who thinks we've got a good team with bad coaching. level headed decisions are being made on those views.

the side you're failing to see, is that during sanders' 10 years, other teams were winning superbowls. winning a sb without the best player ever?? ludicrous! right now the texans are a bad team. the stripped down version of what i see happening is that the texans have 2 options next year. becoming a bad team with a great rb, or hope to increase the overall team talent level without that one piece of greatness. i ask yall to look into the superbowl annals and tell me the last time 1 offensive superstar carried his team to a ring. defense & a consistant balanced offense is what it takes.
 
Scooter said:
the side you're failing to see, is that during sanders' 10 years, other teams were winning superbowls. winning a sb without the best player ever?? ludicrous! right now the texans are a bad team.
Click to expand...
I'm not failing to see this....I was here when we had a horrible offensive line and traded up to take Earl Campbell when we could have used a Tackle. We didn't win the Super Bowl with Earl either but no way I'd ever question the pick or regret all the wonderful non-Super Bowl memories embedded in my mind as an Oiler fan of the 70's. Is Bush Earl? No, but Earl wasn't Earl Campbell "HOF Running back" Campbell till he proved it in the NFL either. It's just tough to pass elite TD makers for guys like Travis Johnson and Jordan Gross.
 
jerek said:
Or not. Peyton Manning's Colts have been decent to bad for close to seven years until this year and last.
Click to expand...
Peyton's first year was 1998 when they were one of the worst teams in the league (the reason they were picking that high). Since Peyton's second season that team has been 76-33. Any of the Colts struggles the last 7 years had to do with the defense...not Peyton Manning.

2005 NFL Indianapolis Colts 13-0-0
2004 NFL Indianapolis Colts 12-4-0
2003 NFL Indianapolis Colts 12-4-0
2002 NFL Indianapolis Colts 10-6-0
2001 NFL Indianapolis Colts 6-10-0
2000 NFL Indianapolis Colts 10-6-0
1999 NFL Indianapolis Colts 13-3-0

1998 NFL Indianapolis Colts 3-13-0 (Peyton's rookie year)

From 1999 to present the Colts are 76 - 33 From 1998 back to 1991 the Colts were 46 - 82

1998 NFL Indianapolis Colts 3-13-0
1997 NFL Indianapolis Colts 3-13-0
1996 NFL Indianapolis Colts 9-7-0
1995 NFL Indianapolis Colts 9-7-0
1994 NFL Indianapolis Colts 8-8-0
1993 NFL Indianapolis Colts 4-12-0
1992 NFL Indianapolis Colts 9-7-0
1991 NFL Indianapolis Colts 1-15-0
 
Regular season success does not always translate to post season success. In each of those terms the Colts played in one AFC Championship.
 
Kaiser Toro said:
Regular season success does not always translate to post season success. In each of those terms the Colts played in one AFC Championship.
Click to expand...
and they have always been known as a team with defensive problems during that span.
 
Vinny said:
it's just tough to pass elite TD makers for guys like Travis Johnson and Jordan Gross.
Click to expand...

very true, but would you pass on eric dickerson, john elway, dan marino, and jim kelly for Bruce Mathews? :D i think both of us have a lot of blue tint in our shades though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top