Would you want to Draft Reggie Bush...

[thunderkyss]

Personally, I think Reggie will give the Texans what Cadillac gave to Tampa and Ronnie Brown gave Miami. Both teams completely flip-flopped between the last two seasons, and the effect of rookies on the squad impacted the team. I think the same will happen to the Texans if we bring in Reggie. DD will be retained for the year in the hopes of trading him next season.

Personally, I (and many others) think DD will have a better season than Cadillac & Ronnie Brown did with Kubiaks improved blocking scheme.

DD's first three years were as good as if not better than all the guys I mentioned as a running back(including Ronnie Brown, and Cadillac Williams). That's why I left LT out of the mix. You add his all purpose yards, DD kills those guys................ all of them. That includes games started. It is not uncommon for a RB to get banged up their first three years getting hit by big boys... Especially when you have someone who doesn't avoid contact......

Look at Clinton Portis, Mike Anderson, Terrell Davis, Olandis Gary, (you get the drill) when they were in Denver, they weren't touched, till they got to the second level. Give that opportunity to D, and he will stay healthy a whole season. 1600 yards, easy. and that's just carries... he'll give us 2000 all purpose yards, no question.

 

[Runner]

Isn't that the way the draft went last year? Travis Johnson?
If we had any of those backs and still had the #1 pick(not probable) I think you still go after the top guys at college level. Look at Chargers two years ago. Ended up pick Manning and trading him for value.

Are you saying Mario Williams = Travis Johnson?

no, it's a contraction. You + all = y'all. Y'all is used for a group of people. its a shortened version of "all of you" like "all of you need to clean your lockers out, you're cut"

maybe saying "all y'all" isn't proper, but y'all by itself is fine.

I'm aware of "y'all" being a contraction.

 

[whiskeyrbl]

Personally, I (and many others) think DD will have a better season than Cadillac & Ronnie Brown did with Kubiaks improved blocking scheme.

DD's first three years were as good as if not better than all the guys I mentioned as a running back(including Ronnie Brown, and Cadillac Williams). That's why I left LT out of the mix. You add his all purpose yards, DD kills those guys................ all of them. That includes games started. It is not uncommon for a RB to get banged up their first three years getting hit by big boys... Especially when you have someone who doesn't avoid contact......

Look at Clinton Portis, Mike Anderson, Terrell Davis, Olandis Gary, (you get the drill) when they were in Denver, they weren't touched, till they got to the second level. Give that opportunity to D, and he will stay healthy a whole season. 1600 yards, easy. and that's just carries... he'll give us 2000 all purpose yards, no question.

But DD does'nt have real break away speed.Now put your reference to Portis,Davis,Gary to Bush.There may not be contact at the second level.If you truly believe that our line will be like Denvers as it sounds then you SHOULD want Bush that could be a TD everytime he touches the ball.

 

[tulexan]

Yeah that argument made no sense. If you believe that the line can get Davis to the secondary without contact, then you would want Bush on the team because if they can get Davis there then they can get Bush there, and if Bush can get to the secondary without contact he is going to score a touchdown because he isn't going to be caught from behind by linebackers like Davis.

 

[thunderkyss]

I see what you are saying. But my objection against Bush, is that there are better things we can do with the pick, and I think Bush is just as much a maybe as anyother player in the draft.

I don't see the point in adding another RB.

and though it is nice to score touchdowns out of the running game whenever, and from where ever, I'm more oldschool. I want to threaten the first down, eat up yards and clock with the run game.

I'm looking at 2000 all purpose yards. I'd rather get them in chunks of yards&time, not just chunks of yards.. I don't think Bush is going to give us much more than 2000 all purpose yards, especially not with DD, AJ, and a TE/#2 Reciever.

Taking Bush @ #1, means we won't be getting an AJ Hawk, or a Mario Williams...... and we need either of them, more than we need the ability to break 80 yard touchdown runs.

 

[The Dude Abides]

I see what you are saying. But my objection against Bush, is that there are better things we can do with the pick, and I think Bush is just as much a maybe as anyother player in the draft.

I don't see the point in adding another RB.

and though it is nice to score touchdowns out of the running game whenever, and from where ever, I'm more oldschool. I want to threaten the first down, eat up yards and clock with the run game.

I'm looking at 2000 all purpose yards. I'd rather get them in chunks of yards&time, not just chunks of yards.. I don't think Bush is going to give us much more than 2000 all purpose yards, especially not with DD, AJ, and a TE/#2 Reciever.

Taking Bush @ #1, means we won't be getting an AJ Hawk, or a Mario Williams...... and we need either of them, more than we need the ability to break 80 yard touchdown runs.

I just think we need to outscore the other team.

 

[thunderkyss]

I just think we need to outscore the other team.

We'll do that too. & make it hard for them to fight back, by getting defensive stops, and being stingy with the ball.

 

[Nighthawk]

He's just messin' with ya...it's just funny when talking about Vince's smarts and then using 'irregardless' ...seeing as how it's not a word.

Just funnin' around...

ir-re-gard-less (ir i gärd'lis) adv. Nonstandard
1. regardless.
[1910-15; IR -2 (prob. after irrespective) +
REGARDLESS]
Usage. IRREGARDLESS is considered nonstandard
because of the two negative elements ir- and
-less. Those who use the word, including on
occasion educated speakers, may do so from a
desire to add emphasis. IRREGARDLESS first
appeared in the early 20th century and was perhaps
popularized by its use in a comic radio program of
the 1930s.

 

[DRAMA]

Riiiiiight....

If you check post #18 of this thread, that's kinda what we've been talking about for 3 pages now....

 

[Kaiser Toro]

Yes I would want to draft Reggie Bush. As a fan of the Houston Texans it does not make as much sense to draft him with the #1 this year as it does to trade down or draft Mario Williams at #1.

 

[jerek]

Yes I would want to draft Reggie Bush. As a fan of the Houston Texans it does not make as much sense to draft him with the #1 this year as it does to trade down or draft Mario Williams at #1.

Agreed, I just hope Cass can make the right deal.

 

[swtbound07]

IR-means to take the opposite of the word that follows
regardless means like it's not important, never mind, it doesn't matter

regardless, we can't loose with the #1 pick

ir-regardless, we can't loose with the #1 pick

I do not think that word means what you think it means

 

[whiskeyrbl]

Has anyone heard of Noel Devine?http://www.noeldevine.net/,check this kid out maybe we can get him in 3-4 years.

 

[Texas]

Any of them - Yes.


Then i'd have two good runningbacks and run a split back formation!

 

[Kaiser Toro]

I do not think that word means what you think it means

Inconceivable!

 

[thunderkyss]

I do not think that word means what you think it means

My name is Indigo Montoya......... You killed my father.....



Prepare to dye

 

[thunderkyss]

Yes, it was done on purpose.


die

 

[swtbound07]

glad people got the reference...i hate it when a good joke goes unread

 

[Ryan]

i would still take reggie bush for all of the rbs except alexander or james. As for the Vince Young deal, i would take him only if we had tom brady. Before yall start harassing me, tom brady would not be near the QB in the texans situation as their QB, one bc he would get crushed, and two bc he has more talent around him in NE.

 

[thunderkyss]

i would still take reggie bush for all of the rbs except alexander or james. As for the Vince Young deal, i would take him only if we had tom brady. Before yall start harassing me, tom brady would not be near the QB in the texans situation as their QB, one bc he would get crushed, and two bc he has more talent around him in NE.

This is supposed to be about DD. But, Tom Brady was sacked 41 times his rookie year........... when he won his first SuperBowl.

 

[thunderkyss]

DD's first three years were as good as if not better than all the guys I mentioned as a running back(including Ronnie Brown, and Cadillac Williams). That's why I left LT out of the mix. You add his all purpose yards, DD kills those guys................ all of them. That includes games started. It is not uncommon for a RB to get banged up their first three years getting hit by big boys... Especially when you have someone who doesn't avoid contact......

Look at Clinton Portis, Mike Anderson, Terrell Davis, Olandis Gary, (you get the drill) when they were in Denver, they weren't touched, till they got to the second level. Give that opportunity to D, and he will stay healthy a whole season. 1600 yards, easy. and that's just carries... he'll give us 2000 all purpose yards, no question.

... if we had Shawn Alexander, Edgerin James, Tiki Barber, or Larry Johnson, or Warrick Dunn??

I'm just ask'n, to get a feel for how great you think this Reggie Bush is going to be. My answer, if I had anyone of those guys, would be no........ well... maybe if Dunn was my guy, but I'm kinda biased against little bitty guys. I just don't understand how he and Dante Hall can take those hits, and keep coming back.... it's inconcievable...... but anyway, back to the question. You've got one of those 5 guys on your team........ would you still take Reggie Bush #1 overall??


in return, if I had Peyton Manning, Donovan, Cullpepper, or Tom Brady, no... I wouldn't consider Vince Young at all in the draft.... not one second..

This is the main gist of this thread.