Reggie Bush

[jimmy40]

But I'm thinking we got several picks for him, including a first rounder.

Yep, but what players did we take? I sure don't remember.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Depends on the offense he went to. If it were the Rams or KC, I'd say yes, absolutly. Washington fits that bill as well. Yes, he would be worth it because he would be used in such a way as to maximis his talents. If I'm the Houston Texans, I don't think so. There offense does not fit his skills. In order to make him worth the 1st overall pick, they would have to change it IMO. I would not take any RB 1st overall. Not because there not worth it but because it's to easy for them to get injured. Average life expectancy of a RB in the NFL is 6 years. That's just too short for the investment IMO.

 

[Chuck 54]

The question I pose is "Is Reggie Bush really worth the overall number 1 pick?"

I am thinking that in the long run the answer might be "no". The reason I say this is I don't see him being used as an every down running back (in the traditional sense). He doesn't have the body mass to pound the line like an NFL back has to do.

Therefore, he will either be situationally used as a running back (in the traditional role) or used as more of a receiver, which he is capable of doing on a regular basis. The team that drafts him might be able to use him every down, IF.... IF mind you, they dont try to use him in the traditional running back role.

If he is used situationally, he wont be worth top 5 money. If he is used extensively, I doubt he will hold up to an NFL beating he will take year in and year out.

Of course he's worth the #1 pick....he's better in college than Marshall Faulk. Faulk didn't have the body or power to run the ball 25-30 times a game either, but they built an offense around him and his skills. Faulk never led the league in rushing, but total yards were always impressive.

The big, powerful 220 lb backs who carry the ball 25 times a game are actually becoming more 2-down backs replaced by someone else for 3rd down.

Bush is an every down back who will only be replaced, possibly, on short yardage carries, but his ability to bounce it outside will make it easier for his OL to get their blocks because the defense has to play honest. Barry Sanders wasn't much of a pound it in there back either, but he did pretty well. Dorsett spent most of his career being protected by Landry, often running the ball fewer than 20 times a game...he did okay too.

The interesting thing will be to see if Bush has an immediate impact on the W-L record of a lousy team with a lousy line...but he's going to be a great, great back in the NFL because guys with his speed and moves and great hands just don't fall off trees very often.

Many people argue that the TExans should trade down and stockpile picks...that might possibly be the best thing to do since they are so crappy, but that's also arguing that Bush is so good that there are teams willing to offer quite a bit to get up to that #1 spot. Didn't see much of that talk going on last year.

 

[Chuck 54]

If I have the #1 overall pick, I take D'Brickashaw Ferguson.

Don't even think twice.

That would really be foolish, and I'm not insulting you. If he's the #1 guy you want, then you should trade down...you don't pay an OL the top money in the entire draft...no way, no how.

Take the best OL in the league right now and you'll see a ton of guys making much much more money...you don't ever want to take an OL up in the top selections, imo.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Of course he's worth the #1 pick....he's better in college than Marshall Faulk. Faulk didn't have the body or power to run the ball 25-30 times a game either, but they built an offense around him and his skills. Faulk never led the league in rushing, but total yards were always impressive.

The big, powerful 220 lb backs who carry the ball 25 times a game are actually becoming more 2-down backs replaced by someone else for 3rd down.

Bush is an every down back who will only be replaced, possibly, on short yardage carries, but his ability to bounce it outside will make it easier for his OL to get their blocks because the defense has to play honest. Barry Sanders wasn't much of a pound it in there back either, but he did pretty well. Dorsett spent most of his career being protected by Landry, often running the ball fewer than 20 times a game...he did okay too.

The interesting thing will be to see if Bush has an immediate impact on the W-L record of a lousy team with a lousy line...but he's going to be a great, great back in the NFL because guys with his speed and moves and great hands just don't fall off trees very often.

Many people argue that the TExans should trade down and stockpile picks...that might possibly be the best thing to do since they are so crappy, but that's also arguing that Bush is so good that there are teams willing to offer quite a bit to get up to that #1 spot. Didn't see much of that talk going on last year.

Not as good as Marshall Faulk in college? What would make you say this Wayne?

I don't believe he's an every down back. I think he's got serious question marks about his ability to sustain a running game that's forced to run between the tackles. Can he do it? Possibly but I don't think he's shown he can do it in college. How long can he do it? Another question that can only be answered once he's forced to play that sort of game consistantly.

 

[Chuck 54]

FYI....


Tony Dorsett.... 5'11" and only 192.

Reggie Bush has Dorsett speed and better moves and hands.... 6' 200 .... and the kid is only 20 years old. He's not even finished growing yet...lol. 20 years old !!! according to his espn card.

This kid is worth the money a #1 pick gets not only for what he can do now and what he may do as he matures and puts on muscle, but one must also consider the draw and the tickets sold as a return on your investment. Whoever drafts him will instantly sell more tickets...bank it.

That won't happen with a lineman or any defensive player, imo.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

That would really be foolish, and I'm not insulting you. If he's the #1 guy you want, then you should trade down...you don't pay an OL the top money in the entire draft...no way, no how.

Take the best OL in the league right now and you'll see a ton of guys making much much more money...you don't ever want to take an OL up in the top selections, imo.

I would take an OL if he were the best rated player in the draft high. If you don't, somebody else might. If he's that good and he fits a need, then you take him. LOT is a cornerstone position in the NFL.

 

[Chuck 54]

Not as good as Marshall Faulk in college?

Actually, I said he was better than Faulk.

 

[Chuck 54]

I would take an OL if he were the best rated player in the draft high. If you don't, somebody else might. If he's that good and he fits a need, then you take him. LOT is a cornerstone position in the NFL.

I understand your reasoning, but it's all about business too. I don't think an OL has ever been selected that high. The only two I know of ever even going #2 were Mandarich...totally bust, and Samuels...good, but not that good with the Commanders.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

FYI....


Tony Dorsett.... 5'11" and only 192.

Reggie Bush has Dorsett speed and better moves and hands.... 6' 200 .... and the kid is only 20 years old. He's not even finished growing yet...lol. 20 years old !!! according to his espn card.

This kid is worth the money a #1 pick gets not only for what he can do now and what he may do as he matures and puts on muscle, but one must also consider the draw and the tickets sold as a return on your investment. Whoever drafts him will instantly sell more tickets...bank it.

That won't happen with a lineman or any defensive player, imo.

FYI, Dorsett was 5'11 192 thirty years ago. That, to me, doesn't translate into todays game. Also, I don't know that Bush is as quick as TD was. To me, he is much more like Sayers.

As for the draw factor, you don't draft based on that if your smart IMO. You draft according to team needs. If your going to make a case that tickets and draw are significant in the decision making process, then you have to draft Young if your Houston. He's clearly the bigger draw and possibly the better long term player. I just don't think that should be a major factor in the decision making process.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Actually, I said he was better than Faulk.

OK, what's your reasoning based on?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

I understand your reasoning, but it's all about business too. I don't think an OL has ever been selected that high. The only two I know of ever even going #2 were Mandarich...totally bust, and Samuels...good, but not that good with the Commanders.

Robert Gallary was taken 2nd over all in 2004.
Jordan Goss was taken 8th over all in 2003.
Mike Williams was taken 4th over allin 2002.
Bryant McKinnie was taken 7th over all 2002.
Levi Jones was taken 10th over all 2002.
Leonard Davis was taken 2nd over all 2001.
Samuels was taken 3rd over all 2000.
Kyle Turley 7th over all in 1999.
Orlando Pace 1st over all in 1998.
Walter Jones 6th over all in 1998.
John Ogden 4th over all in 1997.
Willie Anderson 10th over all in 1997.
Tony Basselli 2nd over all in 1996.
Willie Roaf 8th over all in 1993.
Lincoln Kennedy 9th over all in 1993.
Bob Whitfield 8th over all in 1992.
Ray Roberts 10th over all in 1992.
Charles McRae 7th over all in 1991.
Antonio Davis 8th over all in 1991.
Richmond Webb 9th over all in 1990.
Tony Madarich 2nd over all in 1989.
Paul Gruber 4th over all in 1988.
Dave Cadigan 8th over all in 1988.
Eric Moore 10th over all in 1988.
Jim Dombrowski 6th over all in 1986.
Brian Jozwiak 7th over all in 1986.
Bill Fralic 2nd over all in 1985.
Lomas Brown 6th over all in 1985.
Ken Ruettgers 7th over all in 1985.
Kevin Allen 9th over all in 1985.
Mark Adickes 5th over all 1984 supplemental.
Dean Steinkuhler 2nd over all 1984.
Chris Hinton 4th over all 1983.
Jimbo Covert 6th over all 1983.
Anthoney Munoz 3rd over all 1980.
Ken Dorney 10th over all 1979.
Chris Ward 4th over all 1978.
Gordon King 10th over all 1978.
Marvin Powell 4th over all 1977.
Warren Bryant 6th over all 1977.
Dennis Lick 8th over all 1976.
Jerry Sisemore 3rd over all 1973.
Lional Antonie 3rd over all 1972.


These are all the top 10 picks at OT going back some 35 years. I think that teams do invest in the position but certainly some have been worth the pick and some haven't. If the player graded out well and you felt like he was your guy, I would take an OT high.

 

[silver]

Here are some Hall of Famers that have similar size

Gale Sayers 6-0, 198
Leroy Kelly 6-0, 202
Walter Payton 5-10, 200
Hugh McElhenny 6-1, 195
Jonh (Blood) McNally 6-1, 188
Lenny Moore 6-1, 191
Ernie Nevers 6-0, 204
Joe Perry 6-0, 200
Tony Dorsett 5-11, 192

 

[Derinyar]

Here are some Hall of Famers that have similar size

Gale Sayers 6-0, 198
Leroy Kelly 6-0, 202
Walter Payton 5-10, 200
Hugh McElhenny 6-1, 195
Jonh (Blood) McNally 6-1, 188
Lenny Moore 6-1, 191
Ernie Nevers 6-0, 204
Joe Perry 6-0, 200
Tony Dorsett 5-11, 192

And theres the problem, they are Hall of Famers. That means they played at least 5 years ago, but most of these guys are 80's and older guys. They weren't regularly seeing 300 pound linemen and 250 pound LBs and 220 pound safties coming at them almost as fast as they are. In his time I'd be Dorsett was considered a average or above average back in terms of size.

I won't say that a small back can't have success in the NFL any more, but I will say they are less likely for prolonged success. Reggie Bush and Vince Young, in my mind, are higher talents than Leinart, but also needing much more work or scheming around to make them successful. The question I guess then becomes do you take the guy with the highest talent potential or the one most likley to make an impact. Houston needs D'Brickshaw Ferguson much more than they need Reggie Bush. But they probably can't afford to trade down past 3 if they want to get Ferguson, as I'll bet one of Bush, Leinart or Young begin to slide here somewhat soon.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Here are some Hall of Famers that have similar size

Gale Sayers 6-0, 198
Leroy Kelly 6-0, 202
Walter Payton 5-10, 200
Hugh McElhenny 6-1, 195
Jonh (Blood) McNally 6-1, 188
Lenny Moore 6-1, 191
Ernie Nevers 6-0, 204
Joe Perry 6-0, 200
Tony Dorsett 5-11, 192

Some of these guys were really more of a flanker then a true HB.

 

[kevwun]

Reggie Bush avoids running inside with a passion. He bounces everything wide. In the rose bowl, Texas' defense was fast enough that he rarely got the corner. NFL defenses are bigger and faster. Lendale White was gashing Texas up the middle through huge holes, but Reggie never did. The heisman trophy winner/next Gale Sayers was also on the bench during not 1, but 2 crucial 4th downs. Bush is electriying in the open field, but how many times in an NFL game will that happen?

 

[jbsg02]

Unless he bulks up a little and start to run inside the tackles on occassion. He will be grossly overpaid as a RB.

If he plays lines up at WR and their goal is to use him like say...Brian Westbrook, he will still be grossly overpaid.

I hate the way that 1st rounders get paid. No wonder veteran guys are holding out every year.

you are soo right about that

 

[Jay9508]

The question I pose is "Is Reggie Bush really worth the overall number 1 pick?"

I am thinking that in the long run the answer might be "no". The reason I say this is I don't see him being used as an every down running back (in the traditional sense). He doesn't have the body mass to pound the line like an NFL back has to do.

Therefore, he will either be situationally used as a running back (in the traditional role) or used as more of a receiver, which he is capable of doing on a regular basis. The team that drafts him might be able to use him every down, IF.... IF mind you, they dont try to use him in the traditional running back role.

If he is used situationally, he wont be worth top 5 money. If he is used extensively, I doubt he will hold up to an NFL beating he will take year in and year out.

yes, the texans should trade down and let somebody who actually needs a runningback draft him