Discussion in 'Draft Zone' started by Cbz40, Dec 16, 2005.
Enough to brush......well almost
Franchise LTs get taken in the first round normally. Yes, it's possible that you could pick up a LT in the second but it's not a certainty.
A trade down may or may not happen. At this point, nobody knows what will happen with any certainty. It is all speculation wheather you care to admit this or not.
People don't always live up to their expectations. What a novel concept. Passing on what 99% believe to be one of the best college players ever? Now that, sarcasm aside, *is* a novel concept. There's a reason for that.
You seem to be very liberal about the numbers you are doling out. I have yet to hear from even 10% of NFL personel people, let alone a consencise of 99%. I think your basing evaluation on opinion, at this point. Is Bush talented? Without question. Is he the most talented player in this draft? Possibly but there is not definative answer at this point. You are basing your evaluations on little more then propaganda put out buy the networks. His production, while impressive, is not the best I've ever seen. His physical skills are impressive but he's not more electric then Barry Sanders was. I would say that even Tony Dorsett had better moves while at Pitt.
He meant in the 40's
Thanks for mischaracterizing my opinion. Perhaps I should have stated early on that I've based MY opinion on him being the best in the upcoming draft on watching him (and most other top prospects) myself. Not only that, but at some point you actually do have to look at stats, which have one clear cut winner. You may think otherwise (but I suspect you don't, and are just arguing for argument's sake), but rest assured that if you do you certainly hold the minority opinion.
As for my "99%" comment, you're right. It's probably closer to 98%. I should have taken those UT homers into account.
All very nice but lets stick to the discussion. I can see you want to take this into the weeds. I have mischaracterized nothing. You said 99% and I'm simply wondering where you get this number from. To my knowledge, the combines have not even taken place so actual physical specs are not available yet. Times and agility are not available yet. While I appriciate your opinion of the player, being the best you've seen, I suspect that you are not an NFL talent evaluator. I suspect you have little to no knowledge of what actually goes into the thought process of one Houston Texans decision process on the 2006 draft. If I'm wrong here, I can be resonable. You are opinionated in the extreme. I can live with that. I'm simply asking you to prove your worth on the statistics you throw out. I will even accept any credible proof on the 98% number. If you would rather consider me to be a UT homer, that's fine. I'm certain it will make your position easier for you to live with.
I think Bush could be an MVP candidate in a few years but it will take a coach that can utilize him well. You can't expect him to pound it between the tackles 30x a game but you can give him a mix of 12-15 carries, a reverse or two, and split him wide and throw the ball to him 5 or 6 more times a game. The guy runs like a mix of Barry Sanders and Michael Vick.
When you dominate top-notch college talent to the extent Bush has....it'll be a coach's fault if Bush doesn't do VERY well in the pros....I think it's silly to knock him given the utter and complete domination he's inflicted on the college ranks. Matt Leinert's name is not widely known and USC has only one split-national championship instead of the 3 back to backs (that they're about to have) without Bush....he's a special player and he'll produce in the pros.....JMO.
Its pretty simple. They draft o-linemen early and often and spend free agency dollars there. With the skill position players they have there, and an o-line they could be a surprise team in 2006. They are more than a year away though so 2007 draft could be spent on defense.
Hyperbole. Look it up. After that, remove the stick. Like I said before, you hold a minority opinion if you don't think, at this moment, Bush is the best player in the coming draft. As far as combines go, many teams have been burned by placing too much emphasis on combine stats. Though certainly necessary in evaluating players, an "NFL talent evaluator" would be exercising poor judgment if s/he relied solely (or heavily) on combine performance.
Exactly. If Sayers played today he could have had a 10 year career. If Willis McGahee played in 1967, his career would have been over after the Orange Bowl.
I'd really like to look it up but I'm to busy trying to confirm your 98 percent claim to fame.
I've been overly kind with you to this point. Now, your just getting tired and I have no inclination to put up with your sophomoric Bullshyt. The burden of proof is on you, not I. I am not so ignorant as to stipulate this player or that player is the best out there. Bush may be the best but that has yet to be seen. At the end of the day, your claims can not be proven one way or the other. Houston may draft him or they may not. Time will tell. One thing is certain, you are not the authority that will be consulted when that decision is made.
Thank you for playing. Please enjoy the rest of your evening.
RE-read your post. Then RE-assess the sophomoric behavior.
I'll get right on that for you there bud.