1. Like to discuss POLITICS? Come join us at PUNNDITS.com!
    If you like discussing politics and other related topics then your new home (hopefully) for doing just that can be found on Punndits.com! Come join us and help us grow Punndits into a wonderful and safe place to discuss politics with everyone.
    Dismiss Notice

Bush may not be #1 pick

Discussion in 'Draft Zone' started by Verdict, Apr 24, 2006.

  1. Verdict

    Verdict Well-Known Member

    4,418 Messages
    644 Likes Received
    Bush may be the best player available in this draft, but it is hard to envision him as the overall #1. I have a feeling that the Texans might get to trade down one spot and still get Bush at #2.

    The running back position is not a position of longevity in the NFL, so it is really hard to pull the trigger and take one as the overall #1 unless he is just going to dominate the NFL.
     
  2. TheHustler

    TheHustler Active Member

    5,392 Messages
    1 Likes Received
    Well, if you "have a feeling", I'm convinced.

    And why would anyone trade up to one knowing full well that the Texans would take bush at #1 or #2 (in your scenario). Either way, the player they want is available.
     
  3. Q_the_man

    Q_the_man Well-Known Member

    2,476 Messages
    123 Likes Received
    that means NO trade from 2 to 1 in this trade down, I wonder what the Saints would have to give up, knowing that the player they want would be their at 2. Maybe a 1st next year
     
  4. ABQCOWBOY

    ABQCOWBOY Moderator Staff Member

    40,492 Messages
    5,162 Likes Received
    I would not take Bush #1 over all. Is he a great player? Absolutly, he is, no question but I just don't believe that a RB should be the #1 guy overall. To much investment in a position that has an extremely high casualty rate.
     
  5. TheHustler

    TheHustler Active Member

    5,392 Messages
    1 Likes Received
    Yep. Scenario 1: Texans take Bush, NO gets the guy they want.

    Scenario 2: NO trades up to #1. NO gets the guy they want. Texans take Bush.

    So they will trade up to take the same player.... hm...........
     
  6. JonJon

    JonJon Injured Reserve

    11,082 Messages
    275 Likes Received
    I am not trying to be rude, but where is the logic in the Texans trading down to #2 just to draft Bush one spot later? What would New Orleans hope to gain by moving up to the #1 spot and still getting the same player, assuming they are not taking Bush? Wouldn't they in essence be losing out? Please explain if I misunderstood your theory.
     
  7. ABQCOWBOY

    ABQCOWBOY Moderator Staff Member

    40,492 Messages
    5,162 Likes Received

    I think the only way this would work out is if the Jets traded up to get into a position to take a QB. Otherwise, no guarantee that Bush would be there if Texas really wanted that player. To me, I would trade with the Jets, let them take whomever and pick D"Brickshaw at 4. How could you go wrong if you were able to pull that kind of trade off?
     
  8. DBoys

    DBoys New Member

    4,713 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Good post
     
  9. CrazyCowboy

    CrazyCowboy Well-Known Member

    32,230 Messages
    261 Likes Received
    My thoughts exactly.......Bush will be #1 to Texans
     
  10. AbeBeta

    AbeBeta Well-Known Member

    27,973 Messages
    2,578 Likes Received
    How exactly do you trade down 1 spot?

    Really the Saints have all the leverage here.
     
  11. bbgun

    bbgun Benched

    27,868 Messages
    1 Likes Received
    If you believe Bush is the best fit for your offense-starved team, you don't pass on him because he might be "difficult to sign." Worry about that crap later.
     
  12. Chief

    Chief "Friggin Joke Monkey"

    8,541 Messages
    3 Likes Received
    There have been one-spot trades before.

    Houston could be entertaining trade offers from two teams, and play one against the other. New Orleans would move up to keep Houston from trading with someone else who also wants their guy.

    Having said that, I wouldn't dare pass on Reggie Bush if I was Houston.
     
  13. adbutcher

    adbutcher K9NME

    11,112 Messages
    799 Likes Received
    :hammer: If I were a GM I would reserve the number one spot for impact Defensive lineman and QB(s).
     
  14. Doomsday101

    Doomsday101 Well-Known Member

    86,192 Messages
    8,833 Likes Received
    Worked out very nice for Dallas when we gave up picks and players to Seattle for Tony Dorsett. I think it depends on how high a team is on that player in the case of TD Dallas really liked him and in the end it turned out great for Dallas
     
  15. AbeBeta

    AbeBeta Well-Known Member

    27,973 Messages
    2,578 Likes Received
    Sure -- but you generally don't get a great deal -- especially when the other team knows you are going to get the guy you really want anyway.
     
  16. ABQCOWBOY

    ABQCOWBOY Moderator Staff Member

    40,492 Messages
    5,162 Likes Received
    I agree and disagree. TD was a great player for us but when we traded for TD, we had a Hall of Fame QB and a team that was missing very little. Also, the dynamics of taking a playar #1 over all in those days was far less prohibative. If you missed on a player in those days, even on the number one player, it was not a situation that impacted your club for year to come. Today, because of the financial investment the number 1 over all pick represents, it is exactly that. Also consider, in the 70s, a team could win a superbowl with a star RB. In todays game, defense can not dictate to the passing game. RBs are no longer as important to offenses because the modern passing game has opened up the game too much. The investment of a RB 1st over all does not have the same impact in todays game as it did in years past. Lastly, while I agree with you that TD was a great RB, once Roger hung em up for good, how many championships did TD lead us to? Even then, the investment into a RB was not nearly as influencial to a teams overall success as was a quality QB. The NFL is a QB league. Always has been and always will be. I just do not see the value in it.
     
  17. Doomsday101

    Doomsday101 Well-Known Member

    86,192 Messages
    8,833 Likes Received
    I agree with some of your comments but I disagree about the importance of having a great RB. The NFL may promote the passing game more these days with the rules but teams going to SB and winning SB have a solid running game. While some things have changed over the years the importance of a RB in my opinion is still critical.
     
  18. ABQCOWBOY

    ABQCOWBOY Moderator Staff Member

    40,492 Messages
    5,162 Likes Received
    But the Texans already have this in place. I would never say that a RB is not vital in any championship team. Having said that, weight the financial burden, if you will, of taking a RB with the first overall pick in the draft against a DE who could be the next Reggie White or an OT who could be the next Munoz, especially when you already have a top 10 NFL RB on the roster. It just doesn't make sense to me.
     
  19. Doomsday101

    Doomsday101 Well-Known Member

    86,192 Messages
    8,833 Likes Received
    In regards to the Texans I think they are better off trading the overall #1 to get extra picks they have many problems and Bush will not solve that. But in general teams that can run the ball and play defense have the better chance of winning it all. I'm not seeing pass happy teams winning championship. The only one I can think of in recent times has been the Rams but they also had Faulk on that team in his prime and was always a threat to go the distance. Last Pitt won the whole thing and led the league in rushing attempts. I still feel teams who can run and control the clock will have a better chance of going all the way.
     
  20. RealCowboyfan

    RealCowboyfan Championship

    4,587 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Let's just say he last until the 4th and we got the 4th... Do we draft him or trade out of the pick or draft him and trade him?
     

Share This Page