PDA

View Full Version : Perception of Reggie Bush


toonsterwu
09-27-2007, 04:05 PM
Didn't see a thread for this, but I found Mike Freeman's article to be fairly intriguing.

http://www.sportsline.com/columns/story/10373639

Anyhow, short of it is that Freeman says that defensive coordinators think Reggie Bush is overrated (puts up a fairly intriguing list of overrated players, but that's for another thread).

Certainly, the story is far from written. Bush will get a chance to prove himself now that Deuce is out. I do expect Payton to switch up the offense a bit and spread things out a bit more.

But what are people's perceptions of Bush, then and now?

People remember where I stand. I liked him ... but didn't love him. It's interesting to note that, pure speed wise, Reggie Bush didn't have an exceptional time from what I remember. Adjusted, it was something like 4.4ish. I don't remember the exact shuttle or 3-cone time either. I think they were good, but not off the charts great. I thought the Texans made the right decision in passing on Reggie (although I thought they should've gone Vince ... ).

As for his NFL career, it's awfully early, but it seems hard to believe that Reggie Bush can suddenly become a quality everydown back. That said, people knew that coming in, so whether or not he's a disappointment is up to one's own perception, I guess.

Dunno ... just thought this was an interesting topic to discuss.

Green Bay Scat
09-27-2007, 04:06 PM
hes a glorified WR playing RB really

yo123
09-27-2007, 04:07 PM
I dont see Bush getting the full load even now, I think people are underestimating the role Aaron Stecker is going to have with Deuce out.

619
09-27-2007, 04:09 PM
i believe reggie ran a 4.33 at the USC pro day...not sure if it was adjusted tho

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJ4faK6n7lE

Windy
09-27-2007, 04:13 PM
a lot of people loved him during draft time including myself (i will admit it. unlike some) but people act as if he is still being "pimped" as the greatest ever.

Green Bay Scat
09-27-2007, 04:16 PM
i remember he tried to truck Pacman Jones, and got stood up, after that i relized he'll never be a "RB"

LonghornsLegend
09-27-2007, 04:19 PM
he ran his pro day time on track, in spandex shorts with the wind behind him...i think its more impressive when someone like calvin johnson can run a 4.35 at indy on the turf when he wasnt preparing to run...


but regardless, he has his chance now, but the media glorifies him so much its crazy..he's a RB, he should be doing way more then what he does, he cant do what you want a RB to do...


for all that he does for a team, he shouldnt of been drafted until the 2nd rd, not the #2 overall pick, he would of been a bust already by now if Houston took him, and he does have talent you cant deny that but he is way too over hyped getting commercials like peyton manning, yet he averaged 35 yds a game last yr and he plays RB...


for someone with so much big play ability and home run ability, he could only average 35 yds a game?? since when has a rookie rb had trouble rushing when he got to the league because I cant remember one...


the nfl and ads make him look like barry sanders which is sad, he was one of the best college players but when its all said and done he will be just a really fast and explosive NFL player without the tools to play the Rb position...does anyone watch how he tries to return punts still? or hb dives? he doesnt even have the basics down yet, i liked him coming out but he has dissapointed thus far and will be even worse with duece out...


he is averaging like 2.8 ypc this year, i have no reason to believe it gets better without someone like duece in there to wear the defense down, anytime your career rushing average is below 3 then you can be considered a bust, especially when you were known for having huge play ability

SeanTaylorRIP
09-27-2007, 04:19 PM
Well I always laughed when people said that he was the next Marshall Faulk, obviously early in his career and we can't judge but I can't ever see him being a full time back.

Jughead10
09-27-2007, 04:21 PM
Reggie Bush is fast, but he isn't world class fast. Basically he isn't that much faster than everyone in the NFL to pull the crap he did in college. I've never seen Reggie break a tackle. Seems like he goes down with every arm tackle. Probably due to his weak lower half. This was brought up a ton and should be repeated. Lack of height isn't a concern. The difference between someone like Jones-Drew and Bush is the mass in their legs. Right now Reggie has not shown anything to me that makes me believe he can be an every down back in this league. He can't run up the middle, he doesn't hit the hole and dances way too much.

Hawk
09-27-2007, 04:21 PM
i remember he tried to truck Pacman Jones, and got stood up, after that i relized he'll never be a "RB"

and pac isn't even that big

soybean
09-27-2007, 05:02 PM
Seems like the whole 2005 USC team is underachieveing (which hurts because of how much I love USC).

ie. leinart
bush
jarrett
byrd
bing
smith? (not sure bout that)
white (has looked ok, however)
rucker

I think the football gods are punishing each individual player for being deemed the greatest college football team ever. (except the linemen)

BuddyCHRIST
09-27-2007, 05:02 PM
well he's regressed this year compared to late last year, if you watched him the last few games of 2006 and he was 10x better than he was early, his inside running skills looked completely fine as he was using his vision more and taking what was there. This year I think he (and everyone on the Saints for that matter) are just pressing. Another thing to keep in mind, is that this year the Saint's O-Line has been horrible in every facet so he really can't even be judged this year as he has had no where to run.

Green Bay Scat
09-27-2007, 05:06 PM
well he's regressed this year compared to late last year, if you watched him the last few games of 2006 and he was 10x better than he was early, his inside running skills looked completely fine as he was using his vision more and taking what was there. This year I think he (and everyone on the Saints for that matter) are just pressing. Another thing to keep in mind, is that this year the Saint's O-Line has been horrible in every facet so he really can't even be judged this year as he has had no where to run.

stinchcomb(SP?) is garbage to the umpteth degree, Faine looks like his brown days, must be hurt, Brown is on 1 leg, Evans isnt a rookie anymore, and nesbit......i dont know, he played for Miami(?) so that must be bad

SFbear
09-27-2007, 05:06 PM
It really can't be understated how horrble the Saint's line and playcalling has been this year.

619
09-27-2007, 05:13 PM
the holes up the middle just arent there anymore as they were late last year especially against the giants for reggie to run through so it forces him to try to make something out of nothing too often

Ewing
09-27-2007, 05:50 PM
Personally, I think he's one of the top five prospects of the decade but I knew it was going to take awhile before he became an NFL running back. There's no way anybody can look at what he did in college and his combine numbers and say he's terrible. One of the reasons he's looked average this year is because of the Saints offensive line. Jammal Brown, who looked like he best tackle in the NFL last year, is getting his ass handed to him and everyone else on the line is worse. Even if Bush never learns to run between the tackles he'll always be a factor because by simply lining up the defense is more focused on him than anyone else on the field due to his speed and explosiveness.

Geo
09-27-2007, 05:53 PM
I really believe that, with McAllister out of the picture and the ball firmly in Bush's hands, he will ably display his abilities as a all-purpose runningback this season if/when the offensive line in front of him can get its act together. Nobody can run very well behind the line as it is now.

I don't buy the "need to limit Bush's touches" talk though. He's your $60M man, the second overall pick, who can do great things when you put the ball in his hands. The team is 0-3, they can't worry about how fresh Bush would be in the playoffs if they don't get there first. This is exactly what you drafted him for, he's in his second year in the league, give him the ball 25 times a game.

I don't think Reggie resented Deuce in any way, but it's evident from his body language that he wants the ball more and looked even more charged after Deuce went down on MNF.

diabsoule
09-27-2007, 05:58 PM
I agree with Geo. Bush looked like he was out to prove something when Deuce went down and I think that giving him the ball 20-25 times a game will show what he can do.

The offensive line, however, is the problem first and foremost. No one in the NFL right now could run behind that offensive line and until that is fixed I don't think Bush will live up to his potential.

Moses
09-27-2007, 05:58 PM
I can't even begin to understand how people are down on a runningback who put up 1300+ yards in his rookie season.

Basileus777
09-27-2007, 06:00 PM
While I agree with some of his points, this guy obviously knows nothing about basketball.

Chris Webber had an average nba career? Vince Carter is a terrible shooter?

Just ridiculous. I find it difficult to take anything he says serious after reading that.

7-11
09-27-2007, 06:00 PM
Even if Bush never learns to run between the tackles he'll always be a factor because by simply lining up the defense is more focused on him than anyone else on the field due to his speed and explosiveness.

That's what the article is saying but, that defensive coordinators aren't actually that scared of Bush at all.

Little off topic but in his list of over-rated athletes he says Mike Tyson is no. 2 all-time....wow, just wow. Tyson was scary good in his young days, only problem was he did, and still does have the IQ of a carrot

toonsterwu
09-27-2007, 06:01 PM
I'd love to see Sean Payton get creative with his offense and almost put a run and shoot out there. With question marks on the line, a QB that makes good decisions, a runner like Reggie, spread the field and see what they can do. It'd be some good fun ...

Green Bay Scat
09-27-2007, 06:02 PM
I can't even begin to understand how people are down on a runningback who put up 1300+ yards in his rookie season.

when 800 of those come off screen/wheel routes, it doesnt look really good. besides, everyone knows MJD should've been a god last year, but he still didnt get much love. Until he shows me that Killer Instinct to run over someone, not hit and spin, i dont really think of him as a RB as much as a WR that lines up as a RB

Seasonticketholder
09-27-2007, 06:17 PM
Here's the response I gave Reggie on another message board:

Reggie Bush has never gotten the opportunity to be the featured RB for the Saints. That opportunity won't commence until two weeks from now when the Saints play the Panthers. To call him a bust at this point is not only premature, but it also shortsighted. Reggie has only been given the ball 20 times in one game. In that game, he ran for 126 yards (6.3) average and a touchdown. He did not have a run over 18 yards in that game, so it's not like his numbers were skewed. What he did have was a FB blocking in front of him, something he has not had in 95% of the plays he has gotten as a RB. It is difficult to consistently run the ball in this league without a lead blocker.

As well, most of Reggie's plays have been called to the outside where the defense simply knows to play containment. When he has run between the tackles, he has actually had some success. The problem is, teams knew that the Saints were going to run Deuce inside and Reggie outsid, which became predictable and allowed defenses to slow both of them once the initial novelty wore off. Also, it should be noted that Reggie pressed a lot to make big plays generally because Payton never stuck with either him or Deuce for a long period of time. Even if one of them were hot, Payton would take them out just to insure that the other got his touches. You cannot get into a rhythm like that and a RB needs his carries to get into the flow of the game. Even againt the Titans the other night, Reggie only had 7 carries and only two in the second half (one that went for a touchdown). You cannot expect a RB to excel week in and week out off 7 carries. The two-back system is great if you are a team like Jacksonville or Tennessee that strictly relies upon running the football. It hurts if you are a team like New Orleans that loves the vertical passing game. Why? Because you'll never get the 40 carries in a game where you can give both of your RBs an even split and allow them to both find their rhythm. Even more, the two-back system can stymie the effectiveness of the offensive line, particularly when you have two backs with extremely distinct running styles. Why? Because the O-line has to get use to blocking for two different runners who are constantly being rotated in and out of the game. That hurts their continuity and slows the RB's progress down significantly.

Reggie will be harder to defend now as a runner because the Saints won't be able to call of his plays to the outside, where defenders knew to just stretch out the play. That will actually open up some of the opportunities to make big plays running outside. If you notice, when Reggie was at USC, a lot of his runs were made initially between the tackles and then bounced outside. He also had a FB, something he should have now with Deuce having suffered a season ending injury. He will also be harder to defend as a receiver. Why? Well, when Deuce was healthy, Reggie would line up most of the time at WR where teams knew to just cover him with a CB. But now with him playing a more conventional RB role, that will force teams to abandon the use of a nickel back on regular downs. If the Saints motion Reggie out of the backfield, unless you switch a CB on him, there will likey be a mixmatch against a LB or S. But in doing so, you are leaving a WR like Colston or Henderson or Moore or Patten or Meachem (if he ever plays) against a LB or S. Okay, so teams can just keep a nickel back in right? Right, but then that takes an extra LB off the field, which means the Saints can just run the football against the defense until they adjust. In my opinion, Reggie will prove the naysayers wrong about him. He certainly will have the opportunity to do so as the featured back for the team.

Diehard
09-27-2007, 06:19 PM
Bush is a multi-dimensional threat guy, not a power back. Did anyone really think he's going to grind out the tough yards between the tackles on a regular basis? Draws, outside runs, screens and flat routes should be his bread-n-butter, preferably with a number of other receivers clearing out the defense to give him room to work. Which leads to...

I'd love to see Sean Payton get creative with his offense and almost put a run and shoot out there. With question marks on the line, a QB that makes good decisions, a runner like Reggie, spread the field and see what they can do. It'd be some good fun ...

Absolutely. If you've got no defense and your power back is out, hell, go for the wide-open attack. The tools are certainly there to make this work to some degree. Then again, I really enjoyed the old Warren Moon led Oilers with their red gun & run-and-shoot offenses... so my opinion here is definitely biased.

JK17
09-27-2007, 06:45 PM
Here's the response I gave Reggie on another message board:

Reggie Bush has never gotten the opportunity to be the featured RB for the Saints. That opportunity won't commence until two weeks from now when the Saints play the Panthers. To call him a bust at this point is not only premature, but it also shortsighted. Reggie has only been given the ball 20 times in one game. In that game, he ran for 126 yards (6.3) average and a touchdown. He did not have a run over 18 yards in that game, so it's not like his numbers were skewed. What he did have was a FB blocking in front of him, something he has not had in 95% of the plays he has gotten as a RB. It is difficult to consistently run the ball in this league without a lead blocker.

As well, most of Reggie's plays have been called to the outside where the defense simply knows to play containment. When he has run between the tackles, he has actually had some success. The problem is, teams knew that the Saints were going to run Deuce inside and Reggie outsid, which became predictable and allowed defenses to slow both of them once the initial novelty wore off. Also, it should be noted that Reggie pressed a lot to make big plays generally because Payton never stuck with either him or Deuce for a long period of time. Even if one of them were hot, Payton would take them out just to insure that the other got his touches. You cannot get into a rhythm like that and a RB needs his carries to get into the flow of the game. Even againt the Titans the other night, Reggie only had 7 carries and only two in the second half (one that went for a touchdown). You cannot expect a RB to excel week in and week out off 7 carries. The two-back system is great if you are a team like Jacksonville or Tennessee that strictly relies upon running the football. It hurts if you are a team like New Orleans that loves the vertical passing game. Why? Because you'll never get the 40 carries in a game where you can give both of your RBs an even split and allow them to both find their rhythm. Even more, the two-back system can stymie the effectiveness of the offensive line, particularly when you have two backs with extremely distinct running styles. Why? Because the O-line has to get use to blocking for two different runners who are constantly being rotated in and out of the game. That hurts their continuity and slows the RB's progress down significantly.

Reggie will be harder to defend now as a runner because the Saints won't be able to call of his plays to the outside, where defenders knew to just stretch out the play. That will actually open up some of the opportunities to make big plays running outside. If you notice, when Reggie was at USC, a lot of his runs were made initially between the tackles and then bounced outside. He also had a FB, something he should have now with Deuce having suffered a season ending injury. He will also be harder to defend as a receiver. Why? Well, when Deuce was healthy, Reggie would line up most of the time at WR where teams knew to just cover him with a CB. But now with him playing a more conventional RB role, that will force teams to abandon the use of a nickel back on regular downs. If the Saints motion Reggie out of the backfield, unless you switch a CB on him, there will likey be a mixmatch against a LB or S. But in doing so, you are leaving a WR like Colston or Henderson or Moore or Patten or Meachem (if he ever plays) against a LB or S. Okay, so teams can just keep a nickel back in right? Right, but then that takes an extra LB off the field, which means the Saints can just run the football against the defense until they adjust. In my opinion, Reggie will prove the naysayers wrong about him. He certainly will have the opportunity to do so as the featured back for the team.

And do you still think he's going to approach 2500 yards like you were so sure of before the season started?

soybean
09-27-2007, 07:18 PM
seasonticketholder... wow, that was golden. If you made a post on the benefits of killing babies you'd have me convinced with that as well.

Paranoidmoonduck
09-27-2007, 07:25 PM
If you're going to call Bush overrated, then I guess it depends completely on who's being polled.

You ask the average fan, who's seen the highlight film and the commercials, then yeah, I'd say it's safe to say he's overrated. You ask anyone who has watched him with any real depth since his senior year at USC, I don't quite see how anyone is surprised that Bush isn't great at running in between the tackles (especially with how the Saint's interior line is playing right now).

Bush is an explosive, dangerous, and exciting player, and the fact that Deuce is injured doesn't change that. As a runningback, Bush loses some value for not being able to grind out consistent yardage, but he offers so much other value in other facets of the game, I can hardly say that I care.

Bush needs a powerful runner to take pressure off him. He needed it at USC, and he definitely needs it in New Orleans. I'm surprised Sean Payton even tried to use Bush like your standard runner in Deuce's absence, but I've been generally surprised by the Saints this year as it is.

Perhaps Reggie is well on his way to becoming the next Michael Vick (on the football field). He doesn't, nor will he likely ever fit the mold people want him to fit. But in the right offense he will make plays, he will frighten defenses, and he will be an invaluable part to his team. Of that I am absolutely sure.

yourfavestoner
09-27-2007, 07:41 PM
Seems like the whole 2005 USC team is underachieveing (which hurts because of how much I love USC).

ie. leinart
bush
jarrett
byrd
bing
smith? (not sure bout that)
white (has looked ok, however)
rucker

I think the football gods are punishing each individual player for being deemed the greatest college football team ever. (except the linemen)

I was down on all of the bolded players when they were all entering the draft. All were great college players, but I just didn't see their respective skillsets translating to NFL success.

619
09-27-2007, 07:43 PM
I was down on all of the bolded players when they were all entering the draft. All were great college players, but I just didn't see their respective skillsets translating to NFL success.

i could say that bout everyone on that list except bush and leinart

yourfavestoner
09-27-2007, 07:51 PM
i could say that bout everyone on that list except bush and leinart

Yup. It seems like most of the star players at USC are just that: they have dominating collegiate traits, but those traits don't translate to NFL success.

You're from SD huh? Where at? I live in La Mesa, right down the street from Helix.

Seasonticketholder
09-27-2007, 07:58 PM
And do you still think he's going to approach 2500 yards like you were so sure of before the season started?

Well, I do not remember being so sure. I stated he had the capability, not that he would. I thought he could come close and I was actually responding to a thread about Stephen Jackson and his goal of wanting to get 2500 yards. I think with the slow start by Reggie and really the entire team, it would be impossible for him to get to that mark. However, I do think he can still put up some great numbers and I expect that he will do so now that he is the featured back and not sharing the touches with Deuce.

619
09-27-2007, 07:58 PM
Yup. It seems like most of the star players at USC are just that: they have dominating collegiate traits, but those traits don't translate to NFL success.

You're from SD huh? Where at? I live in La Mesa, right down the street from Helix.

o nice i live in chula vista

San Diego Chicken
09-27-2007, 08:06 PM
He is an easy target for a few of reasons -

1- He played for an extremely high profile team in college. He came from the LA market and lives a celebrity lifestyle (middle america tends to dislike these types)

2- Many believe because of the benefits he is alleged to have been given, that he is a person of low character.

3- His running style is atypical and appeals to a younger generation, similar to how Allen Iverson's playing style was atypical (in a different sport).

4- The media set him up to fail by making the expectations so high to start.


I think Bush's biggest mistake after college, was not gaining more weight and getting into the 210-215 range, even at the sacrifice of some speed. He is hurt by his inability to break arm tackles. I actually have observed Bush running pretty well inside the hashes so far this season. It seems like his outside runs are all far too telegraphed and that's where he loses large chunks of yardage. He is also indesisive, which is different from how he was in college. He needs to learn to bounce off of tacklers.

Personally, I still think Bush will be a great player in the NFL. He made a tremendous impact in the playoffs last year... It may just be that he didn't dedicate himself enough in the offseason. I remember hearing that Payton was upset that Reggie was training in LA and not in New Orleans. A solid offseason putting on a few pounds of leg muscle will go a long way in helping him break arm tackles inside of creases.

D-Unit
09-27-2007, 09:48 PM
Ah.... Good thread Toonster!

The key word in this whole discussion is the word "perception". The first thing everybody wants to do is label Reggie Bush a "RB" and then compare him to the Hershel Walkers and Larry Johnsons of the world. His harshest critics will point out that he is not able to perform the duty of a traditional RB and then bash him for it. Even now, people are saying, "Now we'll see if Reggie Bush can carry a full load". There is a perception that Bush has to fit the traditional role of a RB otherwise he's "overrated".

I was a full supporter of Reggie Bush coming out of college and I am to this day. I did not think he was supposed to be the top pick. I thought Vince Young was the right fit for Houston. However, I did think that after Young, that Bush was the better pick for Houston. I will not deny that.

People are deceived by the perception that Bush has to be that traditional RB or he's overrated. To me, that's hogwash. If you add a player like Reggie Bush to your team he can do so many different things. He is a true weapon in every sense of the word. To me you cannot limit him to being a traditional back. That's not using him correctly. You need an offensive genius that can get the most out of him. His speed is above that of a traditional RB, his moves are above that of an traditional RB, his hands are above that of a traditional RB, his vision is above that of a traditional RB, he is an excellent route runner (a traditional RB doesn't even think of that), he has exceptional coordination, he has the ability to change speeds in an instant is uncanny. All these things and more. Yet people want to label him as that typical, traditional RB because that's the closest thing he is and they come away disappointed. That mentality is too narrow minded. Used correctly, Reggie Bush can be the ultimate game breaker. He's like the PS3 when it first came out. It had the capacity perform so much more than the games that came out for it were doing. The technology was ahead of it's time and still is today. Similarly, Reggie Bush can do much more than what Payton has done with him so far.

Comparing him to a traditional RB is a failed perception on the way that his critics want to judge him as. You have to be someone with a vision. Someone who is able to look outside of the box. An innovator. Reggie Bush is the ultimate weapon and if used correctly, can be someone that the NFL has never seen before.

THAT is my perception of Reggie Bush.

Shiver
09-27-2007, 10:59 PM
The problem with Bush is even as a receiver he has only been used as a dump-off option. I wish the Saints used him down the field but the fact is they don't. I thought maybe with a year under his belt they've start using him more as a WR. He had impressive reception totals, but he was thrown to more than any other RB in the NFL. For Bush you'll see a lot of terms thrown around like "explosive," "play-maker," and "dynamic" when he hasn't done any of those things at the NFL level yet. You still have a RB who has yet to notch a 20+ yard run and a receiver who catches almost all of his passes at or behind the L.O.S. He has received the hype and pay-check of someone of elite, transcendent ability and all he's doing is running sweeps, end arounds (for 3.0 ypc) and catching dump off passes. He isn't Gale Sayers and he's a long way off from being a Brian Westbrook either.

Jughead10
09-27-2007, 11:08 PM
Comparing him to a traditional RB is a failed perception on the way that his critics want to judge him as. You have to be someone with a vision. Someone who is able to look outside of the box. An innovator. Reggie Bush is the ultimate weapon and if used correctly, can be someone that the NFL has never seen before.

THAT is my perception of Reggie Bush.

If you replace RB with QB, it sounds like you would be talking about Vick. Problem is football is played the way it is for a reason. Teams want traditional RBs, because thats what works and ultimately helps your team win the most. Right now you have a #2 overall pick who is no more valuable to a team than say Kevin Faulk from the Pats.

Shiver
09-27-2007, 11:10 PM
It isn't like Vick, though. At least Michael Vick was the greatest running QB of all time. The same can hardly be said about Reggie Bush when it comes to being a pass catching RB.

soybean
09-27-2007, 11:15 PM
The problem with Bush is even as a receiver he has only been used as a dump-off option. I wish the Saints used him down the field but the fact is they don't. I thought maybe with a year under his belt they've start using him more as a WR. He had impressive reception totals, but he was thrown to more than any other RB in the NFL. For Bush you'll see a lot of terms thrown around like "explosive," "play-maker," and "dynamic" when he hasn't done any of those things at the NFL level yet. You still have a RB who has yet to notch a 20+ yard run and a receiver who catches almost all of his passes at or behind the L.O.S. He has received the hype and pay-check of someone of elite, transcendent ability and all he's doing is running sweeps, end arounds (for 3.0 ypc) and catching dump off passes. He isn't Gale Sayers and he's a long way off from being a Brian Westbrook either.


well he has... just not on any runs...

San Diego Chicken
09-27-2007, 11:18 PM
The problem with Bush is even as a receiver he has only been used as a dump-off option. I wish the Saints used him down the field but the fact is they don't. I thought maybe with a year under his belt they've start using him more as a WR. He had impressive reception totals, but he was thrown to more than any other RB in the NFL. For Bush you'll see a lot of terms thrown around like "explosive," "play-maker," and "dynamic" when he hasn't done any of those things at the NFL level yet. You still have a RB who has yet to notch a 20+ yard run and a receiver who catches almost all of his passes at or behind the L.O.S. He has received the hype and pay-check of someone of elite, transcendent ability and all he's doing is running sweeps, end arounds (for 3.0 ypc) and catching dump off passes. He isn't Gale Sayers and he's a long way off from being a Brian Westbrook either.


Reggie doesn't have a 20+ run in the regular season, but he had a 25 yard run in the playoff game against the Eagles.

Sports fans annoint hot shot rookies all the time, that's hardly unprecendented. Bush is highly visible so he gets the most flack for it.

Shiver
09-27-2007, 11:21 PM
well he has... just not on any runs...

He's made a few, but hardly enough to warrant being called "the electric one" by Al Michaels, during the game.

Shiver
09-27-2007, 11:25 PM
Sports fans annoint hot shot rookies all the time, that's hardly unprecendented. Bush is highly visible so he gets the most flack for it.

And if said rookies don't progress and live up to the hype then everyone turns on them. That is what is going on now. I'm just proud that I was never on board the "Reggie Bush = 21st century Gale Sayers" bandwagon in the first place. I took a lot of heat when I defended the Texans' decision to pass on Gale Sayers Jr... err Reggie Bush.

San Diego Chicken
09-27-2007, 11:26 PM
And if said rookies don't progress and live up to the hype then everyone turns on them. That is what is going on now. I'm just proud that I was never on board the "Reggie Bush = 21st century Gale Sayers" bandwagon in the first place.

Bush isn't the only young player that has expectations to live up to. Yet and still he's the most talked about. He's the one most under the microscope.

LonghornsLegend
09-27-2007, 11:29 PM
Granted he is a different type of back, but like what was already said, he needs to improve his lower body strength to be the type of talent he was in college, otherwise he will be a celebrated half to a RBBC, he wont make it into marshall faulk, gale sayers, westbrook territory until he improves his lower body strength, and slows down at the point of attack and finds the hole, hits it then hits his stride...sometimes its like he runs full speed when he gets the ball and doesnt know where he wants to go...


with that being said, im sure almost every team would welcome him in their backfield, if we had him back there with Barber we would be something sick :)

BrownsTown
09-27-2007, 11:29 PM
Bush isn't the only young player that has expectations to live up to. Yet and still he's the most talked about. He's the one the most under the microscope.

Umm...that might because he was picked 2nd overall...and it looks like he could be a bust.

Shiver
09-27-2007, 11:30 PM
Bush isn't the only young player that has expectations to live up to. Yet and still he's the most talked about. He's the one the most under the microscope.

That's because Bush was already anointed as the next great ______. ESPN, prior to the '06 draft, showed highlight clips of Reggie Bush and Gale Sayers back to back to compare the two. If your compared to the greatest players of your position you need to live up to it. Reggie Bush was supposed to be the LeBron James of the NFL.

soybean
09-27-2007, 11:33 PM
Umm...that might because he was picked 2nd overall...and it looks like he could be a bust.

eh [shrug], well then we can talk about mario williams, d'brick, cedric benson, alex smith, cadillac etc.

Who, although some are OK, are far from the top billing they got.

soybean
09-27-2007, 11:34 PM
That's because Bush was already anointed as the next great ______. ESPN, prior to the '06 draft, showed highlight clips of Reggie Bush and Gale Sayers back to back to compare the two. If your compared to the greatest players of your position you need to live up to it. Reggie Bush was supposed to be the LeBron James of the NFL.

well, we shouldn't put too much stock into what ESPN says. They're wrong more often than they are right.

just don't expect them to eat crow anytime soon.

San Diego Chicken
09-27-2007, 11:35 PM
Umm...that might because he was picked 2nd overall...and it looks like he could be a bust.

And if he doesn't live up to expectations (expectations do not imply a bust), he would hardly be the first 2nd overall or even 1st overall pick to do that.

JK17
09-27-2007, 11:35 PM
eh [shrug], well then we can talk about mario williams, d'brick, cedric benson, alex smith, cadillac etc.

Who, although some are OK, are far from the top billing they got.

But, like Shiver said, its not so much about where he was picked, but they hype that he came into the NFL with. If people say things like the second you put on an NFL uniform, you're the best in the NFL, you sure as hell better live up to it. That's why other picks in his area haven't had the same criticism.

soybean
09-27-2007, 11:38 PM
But, like Shiver said, its not so much about where he was picked, but they hype that he came into the NFL with. If people say things like the second you put on an NFL uniform, you're the best in the NFL, you sure as hell better live up to it. That's why other picks in his area haven't had the same criticism.

but that's unfair for him to be obligated to live up to what the media said. Of course he's not going to deny those things, but the media in no way should be able to control a player. Say people call brian brohm the next joe montana, is he expected to live up to those unreal expectations?

San Diego Chicken
09-27-2007, 11:39 PM
That's because Bush was already anointed as the next great ______. ESPN, prior to the '06 draft, showed highlight clips of Reggie Bush and Gale Sayers back to back to compare the two. If your compared to the greatest players of your position you need to live up to it. Reggie Bush was supposed to be the LeBron James of the NFL.

But Reggie Bush wasn't the first, nor will he be the last, rookie who is compared to an all time great player. There are many players in his own draft class, the one before his, and the one after that have lofty expectations to live up to. Bush is just the most marketable.

JK17
09-27-2007, 11:41 PM
but that's unfair for him to be obligated to live up to what the media said. Of course he's not going to deny those things, but the media in no way should be able to control a player. Say people call brian brohm the next joe montana, is he expected to live up to those unreal expectations?

Unfair, but it certainly hasn't hurt him to take that kind of hype. He invited it on himself, he took the endorsements, the commercials, and good for him. Who wouldn't have, but he didn't reject this hype. So now he has to live up to it.

Also, say Reggie looked great, and Mario Williams looked terrible. Mario Williams would be under even more scrunity then Bush is right now. At least Bush still has die-hard supporters. Say Bush lit the world on fire, and Mario was average...This forum would be plagued with Mario Williams threads, and how he didn't live up to his #1 expectations.

619
09-27-2007, 11:41 PM
calling reggie bush a bust is WAY too premature....for him to be considered a bust he would need to be given every possible chance needed to succeed and still fail and i dont think that has been the case thus far under sean payton

JK17
09-27-2007, 11:44 PM
calling reggie bush a bust is WAY too premature....for him to be considered a bust he would need to be given every possible chance needed to succeed and still fail and i dont think that has been the case thus far under sean payton

Well first of all no one has called him a bust yet. Second of all what you said isn't true. He doesn't need every chance in the world to succeed and still fail to be called a bust. He'll be a bust if he remains what he is right now.

619
09-27-2007, 11:48 PM
Well first of all no one has called him a bust yet. Second of all what you said isn't true. He doesn't need every chance in the world to succeed and still fail to be called a bust. He'll be a bust if he remains what he is right now.

im just sayin that cuz i dont believe its fair to even mention bust with him when he really isnt being used effectively enough and put in positions where he could succeed especially on a sub .500 team like the saints

San Diego Chicken
09-27-2007, 11:51 PM
Well first of all no one has called him a bust yet. Second of all what you said isn't true. He doesn't need every chance in the world to succeed and still fail to be called a bust. He'll be a bust if he remains what he is right now.

Yes, if he remains what he is the last three games, he will be a massive bust. But last season he was an impact player, especially in the second half and into the playoffs. He had some very good games with 100+ yards from scrimmage.

The entire Saints offense has fallen off of the map this year.

Green Bay Scat
09-27-2007, 11:53 PM
Yes, if he remains what he is the last three games, he will be a massive bust. But last season he was an impact player, especially in the second half and into the playoffs. He had some very good games with 100+ yards from scrimmage.

The entire Saints offense has fallen off of the map this year.

i think if u cant rush for more yards than u recieve, it just doesnt seem right

Paranoidmoonduck
09-27-2007, 11:58 PM
It isn't like Vick, though. At least Michael Vick was the greatest running QB of all time. The same can hardly be said about Reggie Bush when it comes to being a pass catching RB.

I don't think that was said about Vick after his rookie year. ;)

If Reggie has a few more seasons like his rookie one and improves like anyone would expect, he could very well be the best receiving runner of all time. The potential is certainly there.

JK17
09-27-2007, 11:59 PM
Yes, if he remains what he is the last three games, he will be a massive bust. But last season he was an impact player, especially in the second half and into the playoffs. He had some very good games with 100+ yards from scrimmage.

The entire Saints offense has fallen off of the map this year.

I'm just saying, like you agreed with, at this point, if he continued his career this way he'd be a bust. It was in response mainly to 619 asking why peopel could consider him a bust.

JK17
09-28-2007, 12:00 AM
im just sayin that cuz i dont believe its fair to even mention bust with him when he really isnt being used effectively enough and put in positions where he could succeed especially on a sub .500 team like the saints

Please. Again, no one has really mentioned bust but if you don't think the posiibility is there your insane. He's gotta do what he can. Did people not call Ryan Leaf a bust because he was on a terrible Chargers team?

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 12:02 AM
I'm just saying, like you agreed with, at this point, if he continued his career this way he'd be a bust. It was in response mainly to 619 asking why peopel could consider him a bust.

actually i agree that to become a bust he needs to be given every chance to succeed and fail.. hes not your normal prospect, hes already on the big stage. Hes proven hes better than the practice squad and can impact the game. He now needs to show every facet of his game so it can be weighed fairly amongst the rest of the league.. not doing so wouldnt be fair to him, because his fullest potential would never have had been realized and it would not be fair to assess his talents on the same level as other full time starters around the league past and present..

JK17
09-28-2007, 12:08 AM
actually i agree that to become a bust he needs to be given every chance to succeed and fail.. hes not your normal prospect, hes already on the big stage. Hes proven hes better than the practice squad and can impact the game. He now needs to show every facet of his game so it can be weighed fairly amongst the rest of the league.. not doing so wouldnt be fair to him, because his fullest potential would never have had been realized and it would not be fair to assess his talents on the same level as other full time starters around the league past and present..

Where do you draw the line though? How long is it able to be determined when he is and isn't a bust? Give him every opportunity in the world takes years, a huge chunk of his career, when is it to the point that he's wasted enough times.

And also, what other facets does he have to show. He already showed what he can do as a runner and a receiver, and a punt returned. He's showed the world he's a good receiver, a poor runner, and a decent punt returner. The only things he could do is add or subtract from those skills. But what else can he show, his throwing ability?

D-Unit
09-28-2007, 12:13 AM
If you replace RB with QB, it sounds like you would be talking about Vick. Problem is football is played the way it is for a reason. Teams want traditional RBs, because thats what works and ultimately helps your team win the most. Right now you have a #2 overall pick who is no more valuable to a team than say Kevin Faulk from the Pats.
If you want a traditional RB, then get one. But don't take Bush and expect him to be that. Anyone who thinks that is wrong from the start.

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 12:14 AM
Where do you draw the line though? How long is it able to be determined when he is and isn't a bust? Give him every opportunity in the world takes years, a huge chunk of his career, when is it to the point that he's wasted enough times.

And also, what other facets does he have to show. He already showed what he can do as a runner and a receiver, and a punt returned. He's showed the world he's a good receiver, a poor runner, and a decent punt returner. The only things he could do is add or subtract from those skills. But what else can he show, his throwing ability?

um he hasnt showed what he hasnt been allowed to show.. the ability to carry a team, take the load on his own, get in from the goaline, stay healthy, pass block on all downs..

as for giving him every opprotunity.. that could be like 10 games .... lol where are you right now? huge chunk of his career? what are you talkin about?

D-Unit
09-28-2007, 12:14 AM
And if said rookies don't progress and live up to the hype then everyone turns on them. That is what is going on now. I'm just proud that I was never on board the "Reggie Bush = 21st century Gale Sayers" bandwagon in the first place. I took a lot of heat when I defended the Texans' decision to pass on Gale Sayers Jr... err Reggie Bush.
C'mon now, you were in the MAJORITY. Everyone here was like the Texans made "the right football choice". It was like a herd of sheep here.

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 12:16 AM
If you want a traditional RB, then get one. But don't take Bush and expect him to be that. Anyone who thinks that is wrong from the start.

bush isnt a traditional back? who is to say he cant be? who is to say that if you give him 20 carries he turns it around and picks up his ypc.. there are alot of untested waters with bush, its to early to say what he cannot do based on the first 8 games of his career, and the first 3 of his second season on a team with a suffering offense..

D-Unit
09-28-2007, 12:18 AM
Granted he is a different type of back, but like what was already said, he needs to improve his lower body strength to be the type of talent he was in college, otherwise he will be a celebrated half to a RBBC, he wont make it into marshall faulk, gale sayers, westbrook territory until he improves his lower body strength, and slows down at the point of attack and finds the hole, hits it then hits his stride...sometimes its like he runs full speed when he gets the ball and doesnt know where he wants to go...


with that being said, im sure almost every team would welcome him in their backfield, if we had him back there with Barber we would be something sick :)
No he doesn't. USC hardly dumped the ball to him in the backfield 5 yards behind the line of scrimmage. He was catching the ball in front of the LOS. Also, USC's OL was beastly. NOR's line now is worse than USC's line comparatively speaking. NOR's line is sad right now and it's affecting the play of the entire offense. You're not seeing Brees, Bush and Co being critized now for nothing. They aren't getting the protection or the running lanes needed to be a successful team. This is just another byproduct.

This is why I'd take Jake Long before DMAC anyday.

D-Unit
09-28-2007, 12:20 AM
bush isnt a traditional back? who is to say he cant be? who is to say that if you give him 20 carries he turns it around and picks up his ypc.. there are alot of untested waters with bush, its to early to say what he cannot do based on the first 8 games of his career, and the first 3 of his second season on a team with a suffering offense..
That's true as well. He probably could with good OL play. USC ran him frequently with lots of success. If you watch NOR play, opposing defenses are in the backfield at the handoff. No one can have success when that happens. It's not like Deuce was having all this success running behind that line this year. Yet, people will expect Bush to all of sudden do it. It's pretty ridiculous, but you'll see.. it'll happen.

Paranoidmoonduck
09-28-2007, 12:20 AM
bush isnt a traditional back? who is to say he cant be? who is to say that if you give him 20 carries he turns it around and picks up his ypc.. there are alot of untested waters with bush, its to early to say what he cannot do based on the first 8 games of his career, and the first 3 of his second season on a team with a suffering offense..

Yes, there is no proof that were Sean Payton to give Reggie Bush 20 carries a game he wouldn't turn in Walter Payton. However, Bush hasn't shown anything ever to indicate that would happen.

As of right now, the running inside is not part of Bush's game. Period. Anyone with eyes and a stat sheet can see that. I still think that Bush is going to give NFL defenses headaches for the next decade as long as his team bothers to protect him and not force him to do something he can't.

JK17
09-28-2007, 12:23 AM
um he hasnt showed what he hasnt been allowed to show.. the ability to carry a team, take the load on his own, get in from the goaline, stay healthy, pass block on all downs..

as for giving him every opprotunity.. that could be like 10 games .... lol where are you right now? huge chunk of his career? what are you talkin about?

It could be a huge chunk of his career, or it could be a short one. Where am I? The argument was, give him every available chance. Last time I checked that takes more hten ten games.

The ability to carry a team? That's not an on the field thing, and he can step up and take that whenever he wants. No one is stopping him from doing that.

Take the load on his own? We'll see how he handles it.

Get in from the goalline? See above.

Stay Healthy? Whose responisbility is that? Do we not call Charles Rogers a bust because he couldnt stay healthy?

Pass Block? Did you really draft Reggie Bush to pass block? Let him try, with his frame, its likely he won't succeed.

D-Unit
09-28-2007, 12:24 AM
Yes, there is no proof that were Sean Payton to give Reggie Bush 20 carries a game he wouldn't turn in Walter Payton. However, Bush hasn't shown anything ever to indicate that would happen.

As of right now, the running inside is not part of Bush's game. Period. Anyone with eyes and a stat sheet can see that. I still think that Bush is going to give NFL defenses headaches for the next decade as long as his team bothers to protect him and not force him to do something he can't.
When given a sliver of daylight, Bush hasn't been that bad carrying the ball between the hashes this year. OL is the key for NOR's success this year.

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 12:25 AM
Yes, there is no proof that were Sean Payton to give Reggie Bush 20 carries a game he wouldn't turn in Walter Payton. However, Bush hasn't shown anything ever to indicate that would happen.

As of right now, the running inside is not part of Bush's game. Period. Anyone with eyes and a stat sheet can see that. I still think that Bush is going to give NFL defenses headaches for the next decade as long as his team bothers to protect him and not force him to do something he can't.

tiki barber was a little guy when he started...


its too early to say he cant run between the tackles too.. plus who is to say its just an art he hasnt mastered- not because hes not good at it- but beause hes got no experience at it.. lendale white at college, then deuce in the NFL.. maybe all he needs is a couple games to figure it out..

Paranoidmoonduck
09-28-2007, 12:29 AM
When given a sliver of daylight, Bush hasn't been that bad carrying the ball between the hashes this year. OL is the key for NOR's success this year.

I don't think New Orlean's interior line has played up to par either, but even when they were playing pretty damn good last year, Bush's failure to hit the hole falls mostly on his shoulders. He's indecisive and needs to stop stutter stepping before he hits the hole.

I will say this though. Last season, LaMont Jordan ran behind a terrible line and he looked just like Bush has looked this year (only shorter and a great deal wider). I think Bush's inside rushing problem is mostly mental, but I do think that he is much better used a unique role, now and in the future.

Shiver
09-28-2007, 02:34 AM
C'mon now, you were in the MAJORITY. Everyone here was like the Texans made "the right football choice". It was like a herd of sheep here.

I strongly disagree with that assessment that I was in the majority. Second of all unless Bush improves dramatically then the Texans did make the right football choice.

Shiver
09-28-2007, 02:37 AM
I don't think that was said about Vick after his rookie year. ;)

After the first year he actually played, yeah.

If Reggie has a few more seasons like his rookie one and improves like anyone would expect, he could very well be the best receiving runner of all time. The potential is certainly there.Marshall Faulk set the bar very, very high. Including five consecutive 80+ catch seasons, an eight and nine receiving touchdowns season, and a 1,000 yard season.

Geo
09-28-2007, 03:19 AM
Taking a mention to a little side note ...

Roger Craig's 1985 1,000/1,000 season is definitely superior to Marshall Faulk's 1999 1,000/1,000 season, without question in my mind.

Craig played his home games outdoors, in the (muddy) field the 49ers played on as opposed to the dome Faulk played in.
Craig performed his feat with Wendell Tyler carrying the ball over 170 times.
The NFC West wasn't as trashy a division in 1985 as it was in 1999.
The league wasn't as expanded and watered down.
The schedule played by the 1985 49ers was far and away more difficult than the schedule played by the St. Louis Rams in 1999.
1985 Roger Craig
214 rushing attempts for 1050 yards, 4.9 average, 9 touchdowns
92 receptions for 1016 yards, 11.0 average, 6 touchdowns

1999 Marshall Faulk
253 rushing attempts for 1381 yards, 5.5 average, 7 touchdowns
87 receptions for 1048 yards, 12.0 average, 5 touchdowns

Sorry if I derailed.

Paranoidmoonduck
09-28-2007, 04:56 AM
After the first year he actually played, yeah.

The year he ran for 300 yards and a single touchdown? Even after his second season, anyone who claimed he was definitely better than Randall Cunningham would have, at the least, been making a very bold statement.

Marshall Faulk set the bar very, very high. Including five consecutive 80+ catch seasons, an eight and nine receiving touchdowns season, and a 1,000 yard season.

I absolutely agree. However, considering Bush has one 80+ catch season under his belt and has only played one season would seemingly indicate that he is certainly on track to reach that bar.

I'm not trying to be all over Bush, and I do think he is overrated when it comes to general perception, but the kid is a very good receiver and has definitely shown the ability and hinted at the numbers that would suggest he, at the very least, has the potential to be the best receiving runner ever.

OzTitan
09-28-2007, 06:18 AM
The thing that worries me most about Bush is players of his physical skill set can and have succeeded at HB before, but he just hasn't shown the ability to be one of them yet. He had seemingly great vision at USC but he hasn't been able to translate that into the NFL yet. To me, it doesn't really matter a whole lot that he isn't very physical or that he isn't so fast he can outrun NFL defenses all day, because if he had the vision we were all expecting of him he'd still be a successful runner.

He could turn this around, but so far he doesn't just look like a WR playing HB physically but mentally too. He just doesn't seem to have those HB instincts.

Jughead10
09-28-2007, 07:05 AM
If you want a traditional RB, then get one. But don't take Bush and expect him to be that. Anyone who thinks that is wrong from the start.

You are probably right. But I never would have take Bush as high as he was.

Number 10
09-28-2007, 09:45 AM
I think we're gonna learn a lot about Reggie this season.

Addict
09-28-2007, 10:19 AM
Bush will get better in time, if he'll be as great as he was in college, I don't think he will be, I think he's too much of a tweener.

Turtlepower
09-28-2007, 10:29 AM
I wonder how long people can argue the same points about Reggie Bush. At least people now have 1 thread to do it in rather than in any thread concerning a RB, New Orleans, USC, college football, NFL, MLB or NHL

bigbluedefense
09-28-2007, 12:11 PM
Ive never been very high on him, but I didn't think he'd struggle in the NFL either. So Im somewhat surprised by his struggles.

Theres no way I would take him #1 though, and as many of you know, I am a big believer that the Texans made the right decision.

The one thing that should worry Bush boosters is, for a guy who's so "explosive", he never brings long runs to the house, he rarely jukes out NFL players, he gets tackled and goes down far too easily, his ypc is horrible, and his lack of TDs is glaring.

And yeah, you can say that he will learn, but RB is supposed to be a position where your skills immediately translate to the NFL. There's really no learning curve. So these poor statistics should raise some eyebrows. I do feel he will pick it up and improve, but the more I see him, the more I think he won't ever be the player many envisioned him to be at the NFL level.

Nitschke-Hawk
09-28-2007, 12:43 PM
He dances way too much before he hits the line of scrimmage. He's supposed to be great in space but he can't get there enough. Behind the line of scrimmage is not open space, that's no man's land. Don't even try making a move on a running play til you get to a linebacker.

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 12:46 PM
Ive never been very high on him, but I didn't think he'd struggle in the NFL either. So Im somewhat surprised by his struggles.

Theres no way I would take him #1 though, and as many of you know, I am a big believer that the Texans made the right decision.

The one thing that should worry Bush boosters is, for a guy who's so "explosive", he never brings long runs to the house, he rarely jukes out NFL players, he gets tackled and goes down far too easily, his ypc is horrible, and his lack of TDs is glaring.

And yeah, you can say that he will learn, but RB is supposed to be a position where your skills immediately translate to the NFL. There's really no learning curve. So these poor statistics should raise some eyebrows. I do feel he will pick it up and improve, but the more I see him, the more I think he won't ever be the player many envisioned him to be at the NFL level.

so i take it you didnt watch the whole second half of last season... and the playoffs..

bigbluedefense
09-28-2007, 12:54 PM
so i take it you didnt watch the whole second half of last season... and the playoffs..

you mean the pick that they didnt call against the Bears?


He wasn't that impressive in the 2nd half of the season either. Just better than what he was in the 1st half. He has alot to prove in my eyes. Adrian Peterson has proven more to me in 3 games than Bush has so far in over a year.

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 01:07 PM
you mean the pick that they didnt call against the Bears?


He wasn't that impressive in the 2nd half of the season either. Just better than what he was in the 1st half. He has alot to prove in my eyes. Adrian Peterson has proven more to me in 3 games than Bush has so far in over a year.

If bush had started the first half of the season the way he did the first and continued on threw at that pace.. he would have accumulated 1,700 yards 18 touchdowns and at 4.8 yards per carry.. and woudl have had 8 games where he destroyed the 100 total yard per game mark...

but no.. hes a bust because his first 3 games of this season havent been very good..

bigbluedefense
09-28-2007, 01:12 PM
If bush had started the first half of the season the way he did the first and continued on threw at that pace.. he would have accumulated 1,700 yards 18 touchdowns and at 4.8 yards per carry.. and woudl have had 8 games where he destroyed the 100 total yard per game mark...

but no.. hes a bust because his first 3 games of this season havent been very good..

i never said he was a bust. i said he's been disappointing, and the glaring numbers should alarm people.

and if the queen had balls, she'd be the king. projecting numbers like that is silly. I can say the same thing about Eli Manning. You are what you are essentially. Reggie can turn it around, but to say that he hasn't been disappointing is untrue.

Jughead10
09-28-2007, 01:19 PM
He's being outperformed by everyone taken around him in the draft. Including Vince Young who was supposed to have the slowest learning curve when transitioning to the NFL.

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 02:00 PM
i never said he was a bust. i said he's been disappointing, and the glaring numbers should alarm people.

and if the queen had balls, she'd be the king. projecting numbers like that is silly. I can say the same thing about Eli Manning. You are what you are essentially. Reggie can turn it around, but to say that he hasn't been disappointing is untrue.

those projected stats are just to show what he would have done on a full season, because its hard to judge what someone does on a half season.. since most seasons are judged on whole seasons- i was just making it easier for you..

the numers dont lie he had one amazing second half... 9 tds 850 total yards in 8 games.. at 4.8 ypc .. thats very good.. and the playoffs he was even better.. all those numbers just cut them in half.. they're very good.. its not dissapointing whatsoever..

bigbluedefense
09-28-2007, 02:37 PM
those projected stats are just to show what he would have done on a full season, because its hard to judge what someone does on a half season.. since most seasons are judged on whole seasons- i was just making it easier for you..

the numers dont lie he had one amazing second half... 9 tds 850 total yards in 8 games.. at 4.8 ypc .. thats very good.. and the playoffs he was even better.. all those numbers just cut them in half.. they're very good.. its not dissapointing whatsoever..



he played a full season. why take half of that season's stats and project them? And that total yards stat is garbage. They add special teams yards to that. If he runs a kickoff to the 20, you add 20 yards to his stats. Assume he ran 2 kickoffs per game in those 8 games to the 20, thats 40 ypg and 320 completely useless yards to his total of 850.

That stat isn't impressive in the least bit. Look at his yards per catch. Look at his yards per run. Theyre below average.

If he ever wants to become an elite player in this league, he needs to stop dancing, and hit the hole. Until he does that, he will remain an overpaid Jerious Norwood.

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 02:43 PM
he played a full season. why take half of that season's stats and project them? And that total yards stat is garbage. They add special teams yards to that. If he runs a kickoff to the 20, you add 20 yards to his stats. Assume he ran 2 kickoffs per game in those 8 games to the 20, thats 40 ypg and 320 completely useless yards to his total of 850.

That stat isn't impressive in the least bit. Look at his yards per catch. Look at his yards per run. Theyre below average.

If he ever wants to become an elite player in this league, he needs to stop dancing, and hit the hole. Until he does that, he will remain an overpaid Jerious Norwood.

wrong and wrong... those total yards do not include any type of special team yards.. they are a total of rushing yards and passing yards.. i did the second half total beause it is obvious he had matured.. and had figured out a good way to run effectively.. his yards after catch was very high (9.9) his yards per reception was 8.4 which is good for a running back.. and his yards per carry was 4.8 -- all are very very good numbers.. plus he had 8 tds and one punt return td..

his stats were impressive.. hardly anything to be dissapointed with

JK17
09-28-2007, 02:45 PM
wrong and wrong... those total yards do not include any type of special team yards.. they are a total of rushing yards and passing yards.. i did the second half total beause it is obvious he had matured.. and had figured out a good way to run effectively.. his yards after catch was very high (9.9) his yards per reception was 8.4 which is good for a running back.. and his yards per carry was 4.8 -- all are very very good numbers.. plus he had 8 tds and one punt return td..

his stats were impressive.. hardly anything to be dissapointed with

So if he figured out how to mature, and that's what we should extrapolate, what do the first three games of this season indicate? Because it looks like he reverted right back to his early season form. Which is still, a huge problem, and whether or not he played well in the last 8 games last year, would essentially mean nothing at this point.

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 02:45 PM
He's being outperformed by everyone taken around him in the draft. Including Vince Young who was supposed to have the slowest learning curve when transitioning to the NFL.

hes been outpreformed by mario williams? what about d-brick? he hasnt been all that impressive... what about vernon davis? hes been below average..

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 02:47 PM
So if he figured out how to mature, and that's what we should extrapolate, what do the first three games of this season indicate? Because it looks like he reverted right back to his early season form. Which is still, a huge problem, and whether or not he played well in the last 8 games last year, would essentially mean nothing at this point.

why is LT bad the first 3 games of the season.. maybe he reverted back to his rookie season.. OR the team is playing badly and hes suffering.. last time i checked drew brees colston the o-line and the rest of the offense wasnt playing very well.. devery henderson practically lost his job what does that say?

JK17
09-28-2007, 02:58 PM
why is LT bad the first 3 games of the season.. maybe he reverted back to his rookie season.. OR the team is playing badly and hes suffering.. last time i checked drew brees colston the o-line and the rest of the offense wasnt playing very well.. devery henderson practically lost his job what does that say?

Well, you just compared Reggie Bush, an unproven player who struggles severly, to an accomplished, established player for one thing. The main difference would be that LT has learned, and knows how to run between the tackles, and run the ball effectively. Reggie doesn't know how to do that yet, so that's the main difference between the two.

And yes, his offense is struggling. But the opposite holds true also. When the offense was flourishing he could just as easily have been a product of a booming offense. I mean you look at eight games, because they were the most recent, but there's three new games now, more recent then those, where he hasn't seemed to develop any new or better skills at all.

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 03:04 PM
Well, you just compared Reggie Bush, an unproven player who struggles severly, to an accomplished, established player for one thing. The main difference would be that LT has learned, and knows how to run between the tackles, and run the ball effectively. Reggie doesn't know how to do that yet, so that's the main difference between the two.

And yes, his offense is struggling. But the opposite holds true also. When the offense was flourishing he could just as easily have been a product of a booming offense. I mean you look at eight games, because they were the most recent, but there's three new games now, more recent then those, where he hasn't seemed to develop any new or better skills at all.

.. i didnt compare reggie bush to LT i just brought it up because i thought what you said was silly, and i found a comparison between the two- they're both struggling.. THATS IT so calm down

and btw.. to go back to the LT thing.. if your gonna throw out bush's last season, throw out LT's .. why hasnt LT developed any new or better skills..

JK17
09-28-2007, 03:08 PM
.. i didnt compare reggie bush to LT i just brought it up because i thought what you said was silly, and i found a comparison between the two- they're both struggling.. THATS IT so calm down

I love when people say calm down on the internet. Not only was my response, a calm one, but I'd like to know how you could tell my tone even if I didn't write calmly. But as for them both struggling, we know that LT can be an effective back, whereas we don't know that from Reggie.

and btw.. to go back to the LT thing.. if your gonna throw out bush's last season, throw out LT's .. why hasnt LT developed any new or better skills..

Again, Reggie Bush is a developing player. LT is proven, and has developed probably to his peak. That's the difference. If Reggie had all these other weapons you, and others, keep talking about, we really should have started seeing them already. But he hasn't shown he developed. He had to show it to establish himself. LT was already established. They really aren't comprable here.

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 03:13 PM
I love when people say calm down on the internet. Not only was my response, a calm one, but I'd like to know how you could tell my tone even if I didn't write calmly. But as for them both struggling, we know that LT can be an effective back, whereas we don't know that from Reggie.



Again, Reggie Bush is a developing player. LT is proven, and has developed probably to his peak. That's the difference. If Reggie had all these other weapons you, and others, keep talking about, we really should have started seeing them already. But he hasn't shown he developed. He had to show it to establish himself. LT was already established. They really aren't comprable here.


yet again.. im not comparing them im comparing the situation to exaggerate the absurdity of the question...

bush has shown ability.. where we you the last 8 games of last year, and the playoffs? he was dynamite? hes show that.. and he cant now for an unexplainable reason- but most oftenly excused by the poor offense.. LT cant now for an unexplainable reason.. thats the only comparison i will draw..

JK17
09-28-2007, 03:18 PM
yet again.. im not comparing them im comparing the situation to exaggerate the absurdity of the question...

bush has shown ability.. where we you the last 8 games of last year, and the playoffs? he was dynamite? hes show that.. and he cant now for an unexplainable reason- but most oftenly excused by the poor offense.. LT cant now for an unexplainable reason.. thats the only comparison i will draw..

Okay, where were you the first 8 games of the season? I don't understand what makes one excusable and one not excusable. Brees also drew a lot more attention I would say in the second half of the year, which may have given Reggie more room to be a better looking runner. Now with Brees struggling...he doesn't look as effective.

Which brings me I guess to my main point. You remark about how he was dynamite, and assume that there must be some reason not his fault for him struggling now. I say he's looked bad just as often as good. What if he isn't this great player, and the reason he did great, wasn't his fault. How do you know that the only reason he looked good in those last 8 games were becasue of how amazing his teammates were? I mean he was surrounded by talent and the #1 offense last year, and in college...whose to say that without those crutches he can still be effective?

Also again, with the LT comparison you still made. Whose to say LT hasn't regressed this year? Maybe he has also. Who knows. But I know he's much more established then Bush.

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 03:24 PM
Okay, where were you the first 8 games of the season? I don't understand what makes one excusable and one not excusable. Brees also drew a lot more attention I would say in the second half of the year, which may have given Reggie more room to be a better looking runner. Now with Brees struggling...he doesn't look as effective.

Which brings me I guess to my main point. You remark about how he was dynamite, and assume that there must be some reason not his fault for him struggling now. I say he's looked bad just as often as good. What if he isn't this great player, and the reason he did great, wasn't his fault. How do you know that the only reason he looked good in those last 8 games were becasue of how amazing his teammates were? I mean he was surrounded by talent and the #1 offense last year, and in college...whose to say that without those crutches he can still be effective?

Also again, with the LT comparison you still made. Whose to say LT hasn't regressed this year? Maybe he has also. Who knows. But I know he's much more established then Bush.

1. the first few games were an adjustment period. which is common for rookies.

2. all players are products of the talent arond them..

3. lets get away from LT's abilities and experience thats a tangent

4. Bush is effective when hes allowed to be.. hes more effective then say, a regular back would be, when hes allowed. Without the crutches around him he will fall apart like anybody else.. like LJ has, like LT has, and like randy moss- the ablity doesnt go away, as soon as somebody gives you achance your back at the top of your game.. bush is better than most backs because his ceiling is so much higher

JK17
09-28-2007, 03:31 PM
1. the first few games were an adjustment period. which is common for rookies.

But then how do you explain the most recent three games, where he's seemingly regressed to early rookie year form.

2. all players are products of the talent arond them..

I assume, although again, I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but that's how you would respond to the above response I gave you. The thing is though he's struggled more then he should have this year for such a "talented' player. I know when a team is bad, the player will take a hit, but he can't be this ineffective his entire career. Now I'm not guranteeing he will, but there's no real proof he won't.

3. lets get away from LT's abilities and experience thats a tangent

Deal.

4. Bush is effective when hes allowed to be.. hes more effective then say, a regular back would be, when hes allowed. Without the crutches around him he will fall apart like anybody else.. like LJ has, like LT has, and like randy moss- the ablity doesnt go away, as soon as somebody gives you achance your back at the top of your game.. bush is better than most backs because his ceiling is so much higher

But you're also assuming that A) his top game is as strong as those guys (which he hasn't proven yet) and B) the team is actulaly responsible for his fall. I'd also challenge what you mean by be effective when he's allowed. Payton gives him plenty of chances to get in space, albeit often in bad situations or on bad calls, but he has had plenty of chances this year where he could have been much more effective. But he's failed to get the corner, failed to make someone miss, dropped passes, etc. He has the potential to be a huge weapon, but just because he has the potential doesn't mean he will hit it. His ceiling may be higher, but his basement is lower then some of those guys drafted in his class also, like Addai.

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 03:35 PM
But then how do you explain the most recent three games, where he's seemingly regressed to early rookie year form.



I assume, although again, I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but that's how you would respond to the above response I gave you. The thing is though he's struggled more then he should have this year for such a "talented' player. I know when a team is bad, the player will take a hit, but he can't be this ineffective his entire career. Now I'm not guranteeing he will, but there's no real proof he won't.



Deal.



But you're also assuming that A) his top game is as strong as those guys (which he hasn't proven yet) and B) the team is actulaly responsible for his fall. I'd also challenge what you mean by be effective when he's allowed. Payton gives him plenty of chances to get in space, albeit often in bad situations or on bad calls, but he has had plenty of chances this year where he could have been much more effective. But he's failed to get the corner, failed to make someone miss, dropped passes, etc. He has the potential to be a huge weapon, but just because he has the potential doesn't mean he will hit it. His ceiling may be higher, but his basement is lower then some of those guys drafted in his class also, like Addai.

i disagree with the addai thing.. no proof tho so moving on

he has proven what he can do when given the chance- he scored 9 tds in 8 games. thats good. this season he hasnt been given the same chances he has last year.

JK17
09-28-2007, 03:37 PM
i disagree with the addai thing.. no proof tho so moving on

he has proven what he can do when given the chance- he scored 9 tds in 8 games. thats good. this season he hasnt been given the same chances he has last year.

This is going nowhere anymore. You keep valuing those eight games over not only his most recent three, but the eight that preceded it. He's been abysmal in those 11 games. But I really don't see this argument going anywhere else, the Reggie Bush debate will probably never end.

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 03:40 PM
This is going nowhere anymore. You keep valuing those eight games over not only his most recent three, but the eight that preceded it. He's been abysmal in those 11 games. But I really don't see this argument going anywhere else, the Reggie Bush debate will probably never end.

i do value the 8 games because they're more credible.. the first 3 games this season i see as void.. look at the offense.. look at other struggling players.. these 3 mean nothing.. hes a good player playing badly, not the other way around. and the first 8 games of his ROOKIE year should be thrown out as well. its an adjustmetn period. if anything, look at the playoffs those numbers are impressive and thats teh biggest stage there is..

and the reggie bush argument will end, just not today.. hes got the solo act now lets see how he handles it..

JK17
09-28-2007, 03:42 PM
i do value the 8 games because they're more credible.. the first 3 games this season i see as void.. look at the offense.. look at other struggling players.. these 3 mean nothing.. hes a good player playing badly, not the other way around. and the first 8 games of his ROOKIE year should be thrown out as well. its an adjustmetn period. if anything, look at the playoffs those numbers are impressive and thats teh biggest stage there is..

and the reggie bush argument will end, just not today.. hes got the solo act now lets see how he handles it..

Ugh, then explain to me, why his offense struggling can be used as an excuse....but his offense playing amazing doesn't subtract from what he does? And if you go through his entire career voiding games...then he didn't have that great of a career.

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 03:44 PM
Ugh, then explain to me, why his offense struggling can be used as an excuse....but his offense playing amazing doesn't subtract from what he does? And if you go through his entire career voiding games...then he didn't have that great of a career.

the offense excuse is the same one that can be applied to any player in the NFL thats why its okay..

and im not voiding games that shouldnt be voided.. its not my fault he hasnt played that much..

plus if the playoffs are any indication about the direction fo his career, its very very bright.

Shiver
09-28-2007, 03:45 PM
i do value the 8 games because they're more credible.. the first 3 games this season i see as void.. look at the offense.. look at other struggling players.. these 3 mean nothing.. hes a good player playing badly, not the other way around. and the first 8 games of his ROOKIE year should be thrown out as well. its an adjustmetn period. if anything, look at the playoffs those numbers are impressive and thats teh biggest stage there is..

and the reggie bush argument will end, just not today.. hes got the solo act now lets see how he handles it..

Just like Adrian Peterson and Marshawn Lynch have had struggles adjusting to the NFL.... oh wait. :rolleyes: They both have such great supporting casts as well.

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 03:47 PM
Just like Adrian Peterson and Marshawn Lynch have had struggles adjusting to the NFL.... oh wait. :rolleyes:

well what should i say? isnt it obvious he was struggling? he was obviously adjusting, hes a much differnt type of runner than those backs.. does taht make him any less talented?

JK17
09-28-2007, 03:47 PM
the offense excuse is the same one that can be applied to any player in the NFL thats why its okay..

Okay, but if he's relying on an exucse that could go for any NFL RB, don't you think he's not performing up to expectations?

and im not voiding games that shouldnt be voided.. its not my fault he hasnt played that much..

Hasn't played that much? He's been forced the ball at times at expense of the team's best interest. He's played plenty in the games he's been in.

plus if the playoffs are any indication about the direction fo his career, its very very bright.

And if those 11 poor games he's played are any indication, then it certainly will be a long career for him. I don't think he'll play like that his whole career, but you can't jus disregard half his NFL career in judging the player.

soybean
09-28-2007, 03:50 PM
I strongly disagree with that assessment that I was in the majority. Second of all unless Bush improves dramatically then the Texans did make the right football choice.

no they didnt. we'd all like to believe that mario williams is slowly easing his place into a solid #1 pick, but the fact of the matter is the texans should have went with the hometown kid, vy.

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 03:51 PM
Okay, but if he's relying on an exucse that could go for any NFL RB, don't you think he's not performing up to expectations?

he has been preforming up to expectations.. hes been great when the offense was great, and bad when they were bad.. like any other player.. hes not a player than can carry a team on his back.. but does that make him any less talented?


Hasn't played that much? He's been forced the ball at times at expense of the team's best interest. He's played plenty in the games he's been in.

thats just twisting my words.. what i meant is that the proportion to the games he had played well to the voided gaems was high because of the few amount of games he had played..


And if those 11 poor games he's played are any indication, then it certainly will be a long career for him. I don't think he'll play like that his whole career, but you can't jus disregard half his NFL career in judging the player.
why dont you think that his whole career will play out that way? if those 11 games mean so much, shouldnt that be an indication hes horrible!? thats what those numbers mean. OR do you know that hes good because you were alive during those 8 games and playoff games

Shiver
09-28-2007, 03:53 PM
well what should i say? isnt it obvious he was struggling? he was obviously adjusting, hes a much differnt type of runner than those backs.. does taht make him any less talented?

Running Back is the one position, as well as Linebacker, where you aren't supposed to have a learning curve. It's a position where you rely on your physical abilities and natural instincts. That's why those two positions typically win the rookie of the year awards. Reggie Bush was drafted #2 overall and paid 50$ million dollars and all he's done is show he can be a 3DRB and run end around plays. His production has yet to synch up to his status.

Does he have talent? Sure, but it may be overstated. He's 5'11", barely 200-lbs and can run a 4.4, you can succeed in college with those measurables but in the NFL that won't cut it. I remember watching the pre-season game between the Saints and Bills and the announcers showed a play where Reggie Bush had one man to beat to get a long touchdown and he would have done so in college, but Donte' Whitner made an open field tackle and Bush couldn't shake him. Thus far Bush hasn't shaken many NFL defenders. He may have looked like Gales Sayers versus Pac-10 defenses, but it's a whole different speed and talent level in the NFL.

JK17
09-28-2007, 03:55 PM
he has been preforming up to expectations.. hes been great when the offense was great, and bad when they were bad.. like any other player.. hes not a player than can carry a team on his back.. but does that make him any less talented?

No, but talent can only do so much. Ryan Leaf was talented. You need more then just talent to make it in the NFL, and live up to the hype Reggie Bush came in with.


thats just twisting my words.. what i meant is that the proportion to the games he had played well to the voided gaems was high because of the few amount of games he had played..

Or, its because he's a very inconsistent player. Couldn't you say it thats too? Or is it defienitly, 100% only because he's played 19(?) games in his career. Because I think it could be either.

why dont you think that his whole career will play out that way? if those 11 games mean so much, shouldnt that be an indication hes horrible!? thats what those numbers mean. OR do you know that hes good because you were alive during those 8 games and playoff games

Or, just maybe, its because I'm looking at it from a rational prespective, and won't annoint or damn him after 19 games. I was there for the 8 games he played well. I was there for the 11 games he played bad. I've seen both the good and the bad, and I'm not goign to just blindly disregard one half (more then half...) like you did.

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 03:57 PM
Running Back is the one position, as well as Linebacker, where you aren't supposed to have a learning curve. It's a position where you rely on your physical abilities and natural instincts. That's why those two positions typically win the rookie of the year awards. Reggie Bush was drafted #2 overall and paid 50$ million dollars and all he's done is show he can be a 3DRB and run end around plays. His production has yet to synch up to his status.

running back is a commonly the rookie of the year because its usually easy for rbs to translate their skills well to the NFL.. i said reggie bush was a different type of runner and require more time.. is tthat not true? plus he hasnt had featured carries yet, so who knows if hes more than a 3drb or not..


Does he have talent? Sure, but it may be overstated. He's 5'11", barely 200-lbs and can run a 4.4, you can succeed in college with those measurables but in the NFL that won't cut it. I remember watching the pre-season game between the Saints and Bills and the announcers showed a play where Reggie Bush had one man to beat to get a long touchdown and he would have done so in college, but Donte' Whitner made an open field tackle and Bush couldn't shake him. Thus far Bush hasn't shaken many NFL defenders. He may have looked like Gales Sayers versus Pac-10 defenses, but it's a whole different speed and talent level in the NFL.

yeah its the nfl not college.. so hes not gonna average 10 yards per touch.. he hasnt.. its not college he cant return punts for tds and score from 60 yards out nearly every play.. he hasnt..

is it still good, and above the average player? i would say so..

JK17
09-28-2007, 03:59 PM
yeah its the nfl not college.. so hes not gonna average 10 yards per touch.. he hasnt.. its not college he cant return punts for tds and score from 60 yards out nearly every play.. he hasnt..

is it still good, and above the average player? i would say so..

Yes he's better then the average player. And if that's all he is, he's hardly lived up to expectations.

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 04:05 PM
No, but talent can only do so much. Ryan Leaf was talented. You need more then just talent to make it in the NFL, and live up to the hype Reggie Bush came in with.




Or, its because he's a very inconsistent player. Couldn't you say it thats too? Or is it defienitly, 100% only because he's played 19(?) games in his career. Because I think it could be either.



Or, just maybe, its because I'm looking at it from a rational prespective, and won't annoint or damn him after 19 games. I was there for the 8 games he played well. I was there for the 11 games he played bad. I've seen both the good and the bad, and I'm not goign to just blindly disregard one half (more then half...) like you did.


so basically you never disagreed with me whatsover.. i dont know why you argued with me.. maybe just playing devils advocate i guess but i coud have sworn that you didnt feel that reggie bush was a good player..

i thought it was very obvious that i think reggie bush is a good player with the potential to be great.. if you agreed with me the whole time why not just say taht? why argue? do you just like to argue? or did you change your mind?

i apologize for being so confused

JK17
09-28-2007, 04:08 PM
so basically you never disagreed with me whatsover.. i dont know why you argued with me.. maybe just playing devils advocate i guess but i coud have sworn that you didnt feel that reggie bush was a good player..

i thought it was very obvious that i think reggie bush is a good player with the potential to be great.. if you agreed with me the whole time why not just say taht? why argue? do you just like to argue? or did you change your mind?

i apologize for being so confused

Yeah...I just like to argue...

I don't feel Reggie is a good player yet. I feel he's average, and if I had to make a bold prediction I'd say he has a very average career. But I don't want to make such a prediction, because there remains so much to be seen still, which is why I'm not jumping to pick a side either way here. If you want me to though, I'll say there will be periods throughout his career he looks great, and periods where he looks god awful. Ultimately, that won't add up to justify his draft slot or his hype.

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 04:14 PM
Yeah...I just like to argue...

I don't feel Reggie is a good player yet. I feel he's average, and if I had to make a bold prediction I'd say he has a very average career. But I don't want to make such a prediction, because there remains so much to be seen still, which is why I'm not jumping to pick a side either way here. If you want me to though, I'll say there will be periods throughout his career he looks great, and periods where he looks god awful. Ultimately, that won't add up to justify his draft slot or his hype.

well there probably isnt any player that could live up to his kinda hype.. thats enormous..

again i apologize for bein confused..

Shiver
09-28-2007, 04:15 PM
running back is a commonly the rookie of the year because its usually easy for rbs to translate their skills well to the NFL.. i said reggie bush was a different type of runner and require more time.. is tthat not true? plus he hasnt had featured carries yet, so who knows if hes more than a 3drb or not..

I can say he isn't more than a 3drb based on the fact that he's smaller than all of the featured backs in the NFL. He's never had to shoulder the load, even in college, so it's up to him to prove otherwise. He shouldn't be given the benefit of the doubt in that regard.

yeah its the nfl not college.. so hes not gonna average 10 yards per touch.. he hasnt.. its not college he cant return punts for tds and score from 60 yards out nearly every play.. he hasnt..

is it still good, and above the average player? i would say so..How is he "above average"? That's like saying he's a top-16 NFL RB and that his stats aren't below average and right now it's hard to say that he is, regardless of how you decide to look at it.

Average OT LB
09-28-2007, 04:35 PM
I can say he isn't more than a 3drb based on the fact that he's smaller than all of the featured backs in the NFL.


How is he "above average"? That's like saying he's a top-16 NFL RB and that his stats aren't below average and right now it's hard to say that he is, regardless of how you spin it.

oh so because hes smaller hes got no chance at bein a good back? what was barry sanders? i guess warrick dunn is still only a 3drb.. willie parker 5'10 209 no wayy hes big enough to be a good back.. brian westbrook 5'10 203 no way hes a full time starter either.. frank gore is 5'9 btw..

and hes more than above average, but hes not elite... hes not a top 5 rb, but hes def top 16.. hes the fastest player ever to 100 rec besides boldin, thats pretty good..

LonghornsLegend
09-28-2007, 04:51 PM
oh so because hes smaller hes got no chance at bein a good back? what was barry sanders? i guess warrick dunn is still only a 3drb.. willie parker 5'10 209 no wayy hes big enough to be a good back.. brian westbrook 5'10 203 no way hes a full time starter either.. frank gore is 5'9 btw..

and hes more than above average, but hes not elite... hes not a top 5 rb, but hes def top 16.. hes the fastest player ever to 100 rec besides boldin, thats pretty good..

so how do you see him performing being the "primary" back now, other backs will be used, but due to his cieling and talent you should expect him to shoulder the load, its not too much to handle...look at what peterson is doing, carrying a team that has no qb or wrs, caddy did it when he came in, Id say its been more then enough time for Bush to show what he can do this yr now he has his shot...


and i dont get everyone saying "o he needs more time then the traditional rb to develop", Why? and how much time, and who decides he needs more time ?


how many years is it going to take for us to see what he can do, 4-5? was he really worth a pick if he takes that long to develop into what we think we he can be

Shiver
09-28-2007, 05:01 PM
oh so because hes smaller hes got no chance at bein a good back? what was barry sanders? i guess warrick dunn is still only a 3drb.. willie parker 5'10 209 no wayy hes big enough to be a good back.. brian westbrook 5'10 203 no way hes a full time starter either.. frank gore is 5'9 btw..

Smaller, not shorter. All those players you mentioned were shorter than Bush, but they weighed more than he does and thus are bigger in a RB sense. By the way, since when has Warrick Dunn ever been a feature back? The answer is never, not once in his career. Barry Sanders is a once in a lifetime talent and by the way he weighed as much as Bush does while being four inches shorter, meaning he is much denser than Reggie Bush is.

and hes more than above average, but hes not elite... hes not a top 5 rb, but hes def top 16.. hes the fastest player ever to 100 rec besides boldin, thats pretty good..Yet he's averaging 7.8 YPC. He was the most targeted RB in all of football last year as a receiver. Brees throws to the RB more than any other QB in the NFL, so it's no surprise that Bush has great reception totals.

I don't see how you can put Bush as a top-16 RB. It's just not based in reality, but rather only in "potential" and collegiate success. Right now Vince Young and Jason Campbell, both Quarterbacks, are out-rushing him. Let me repeat that, two Quarterbacks are blowing his rushing stats out of the water. I don't even have to mention the Justin Fargas and Ernest Graham's of the NFL who are out-producing the #2 overall draft pick and 50$ million dollar RB. As a receiver he's hardly redeeming himself either, as he is averaging 4.4 y.p.c right now and hasn't shown the capabilities to catch passes deep down the field.

Green Bay Scat
09-28-2007, 05:07 PM
shiver is right again

Shiver
09-28-2007, 05:11 PM
By the way: both Vince Young and Jason Campbell have notched 20+ yard runs.

Green Bay Scat
09-28-2007, 05:15 PM
By the way: both Vince Young and Jason Campbell have notched 20+ yard runs.

i think its kinda unfair cause QB can have bootlegs and the CB cant just run up on them, but does bein sacked ruin their rushing yards?

Shiver
09-28-2007, 05:17 PM
That's college, in the NFL sack yardage doesn't hurt you. Though I think it should hurt the passing yardage.

San Diego Chicken
09-28-2007, 05:30 PM
Nobody is denying that Bush and the Saints entire team for that matter are playing awful football right now. Nobody denies that Bush has lots of expectations that are still unfulfilled. The guy is 22 years old. He's got time to turn it around. He's got time to pack on some more weight, he's got time to slowly increase the his offensive workload and improve his tackle breaking ability. By the time he is 25, if he is willing, he won't look like the player he is right now. The reason people are so hard on him is because of his marketing, I'm convinced. Ronnie Brown actually is 25, was the #2 pick at RB, like Bush, has a large contract, and he's been an average running back, not bad, but not great either. He doesn't have TV commericals though, so critics aren't as willing to tear into him. (I'm not insulting Ronnie Brown, I think he's a good player)

nfrillman
09-28-2007, 05:37 PM
I said before the he was taken that the best case scenario for Reggie Bush would be to be like Brian Westbrook. It seems that assessment is right, except for now I think his best chance is to be a poor man's Brian Westbrook. Note: This is not a knock on Westbrook.

soybean
09-28-2007, 08:42 PM
By the way: both Vince Young and Jason Campbell have notched 20+ yard runs.

cmon you know that's really unfair. When you hand it off to a runningback only rarely does he throw it, you know he's gonna run it. When a quarterback like VY drops back he can do 1 of 2 things.

ks_perfection
09-28-2007, 08:46 PM
I just don't think his vision is good for running inside and finding holes. He's great outside in the open field where you can easily see everyone, but alot of times he's indecisve as when he gets a handoff inside and gets tackled for loss or short gain when he could have gotten more if found the holes quicker.

When Mcallister gets the ball he plows forward and hits holes quickly. Bush doesn't. I think he's just used to bigger holes and being able to outrun and elude slower and less athletic defenders but in the NFL that isn't going to happen as much and you just have to taken 3-6 yard gains.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
09-28-2007, 10:30 PM
Several members of the 06 class have clearly outperformed him, all of them being taken after him(Mario is having a better year than him, but his poor last year means he hasnt had the better career).

Addai
MJD
Maroney
Hawk
Sims
Cutler
Ngata
Wimbley
VY
Holmes
Mangold
Colston
Huff
Whitner

fenikz
09-28-2007, 10:32 PM
By the way: both Vince Young and Jason Campbell have notched 20+ yard runs.

Matt Leinart has a 20+ Yard Run

soybean
09-29-2007, 12:33 AM
Several members of the 06 class have clearly outperformed him, all of them being taken after him(Mario is having a better year than him, but his poor last year means he hasnt had the better career).



mario williams may be outperforming reggie but he's been far from the number 1 pick in the draft, more so than bush.

energizerbunny
09-29-2007, 09:46 AM
mario williams may be outperforming reggie but he's been far from the number 1 pick in the draft, more so than bush.


That may be true but in 2 years time there will be no question that Mario was the correct pick.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
09-29-2007, 09:49 AM
That may be true but in 2 years time there will be no question that Mario was the correct pick.

We can't say that for certain, but historically, DE has a bit of a learning curve, RB does not.

Ewing
09-29-2007, 11:24 AM
By the way: both Vince Young and Jason Campbell have notched 20+ yard runs.

By the way: The Titans and Redskins have an offensive line.

Ewing
09-29-2007, 11:27 AM
I strongly disagree with that assessment that I was in the majority. Second of all unless Bush improves dramatically then the Texans did make the right football choice.

They should have picked Vince Young. It's clear Carr was the problem in Houston now that Schaub is having a great year. Imagine how good they would be if Vince was their quarterback.

BrownsTown
09-29-2007, 11:33 AM
They should have picked Vince Young. It's clear Carr was the problem in Houston now that Schaub is having a great year. Imagine how good they would be if Vince was their quarterback.

Probably worse than if they had Schaub.

Shiver
09-29-2007, 01:55 PM
They should have picked Vince Young. It's clear Carr was the problem in Houston now that Schaub is having a great year. Imagine how good they would be if Vince was their quarterback.

Yes, but I am referring to their decision making process once they gave Carr that large extension. Once they gave him that they couldn't draft Young. Although I think they would not take it back. Their front seven has been very impressive and Matt Schaub is doing a great job.

Average OT LB
09-29-2007, 06:35 PM
By the way: both Vince Young and Jason Campbell have notched 20+ yard runs.

so i guess youd rather have vince young and jason campbell as your running back if you had reggie bush as your starter? becuase clearly, the stats show they are better at running..

Shiver
09-29-2007, 06:41 PM
Well I could have easily mentioned Justin Fargas and Ernest Graham, who are both out-producing Bush.

Average OT LB
09-29-2007, 08:03 PM
Well I could have easily mentioned Justin Fargas and Ernest Graham, who are both out-producing Bush.

so i guess youd rather start both over bush if you were coaching the saints.. right? because they're definitely better options, since they've dominated him 3 games into the season.. last i heard they were doin better than guys like LT and LJ too.. but i guess stats dont mean everything now do they..

JK17
09-29-2007, 08:24 PM
so i guess youd rather start both over bush if you were coaching the saints.. right? because they're definitely better options, since they've dominated him 3 games into the season.. last i heard they were doin better than guys like LT and LJ too.. but i guess stats dont mean everything now do they..

Thats funny...

those projected stats are just to show what he would have done on a full season, because its hard to judge what someone does on a half season.. since most seasons are judged on whole seasons- i was just making it easier for you..

the numers dont lie he had one amazing second half... 9 tds 850 total yards in 8 games.. at 4.8 ypc .. thats very good.. and the playoffs he was even better.. all those numbers just cut them in half.. they're very good.. its not dissapointing whatsoever..

You seem to use stats to justify your argument just as frequently...

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
09-29-2007, 08:47 PM
so i guess youd rather start both over bush if you were coaching the saints.. right? because they're definitely better options, since they've dominated him 3 games into the season.. last i heard they were doin better than guys like LT and LJ too.. but i guess stats dont mean everything now do they..

Guys like LT and LJ have large resumes of spectacular work as the focal point of their offense. Not just 8 games of solid play while having great players take pressure off of you.

Average OT LB
09-29-2007, 08:49 PM
Thats funny...



You seem to use stats to justify your argument just as frequently...

just like our past bouts you twist the argument.. i never said stats were useless- as they can prove many things that are true.. but anybody whose ever been in a stat class knows that they can prove pretty much anything depending how you word it.. i was merely trying to point out a good example of what i felt was a misuse of statistics.. something surely i figured youd pick up on but maybe i gave you too much credit.. or maybe just just feel like arguing again just for the sake of arguing..

Average OT LB
09-29-2007, 08:53 PM
Guys like LT and LJ have large resumes of spectacular work as the focal point of their offense. Not just 8 games of solid play while having great players take pressure off of you.

at least reggie bush has 8 games of solid play, where as graham and fargas dont have any and probably never will..

just to clarify.. i was not takin a shot at LT or LJ...

JK17
09-29-2007, 08:54 PM
just like our past bouts you twist the argument.. i never said stats were useless- as they can prove many things that are true.. but anybody whose ever been in a stat class knows that they can prove pretty much anything depending how you word it.. i was merely trying to point out a good example of what i felt was a misuse of statistics.. something surely i figured youd pick up on but maybe i gave you too much credit.. or maybe just just feel like arguing again just for the sake of arguing..

So then what makes you so certian your not just skewing the stats in your favor, with those arugments? Are those stats now being misused to?

But again, thanks for implying I have no clue what I'm talking about.

Average OT LB
09-29-2007, 09:02 PM
So then what makes you so certian your not just skewing the stats in your favor, with those arugments? Are those stats now being misused to?

But again, thanks for implying I have no clue what I'm talking about.

yes the stats i portrayed have been skewed to favor bush, but i feel its a more accurate representation of how bush plays. If someone honestly feels taht bush is a 2.5 ypc back, who will have a less productive career than graham and fargas, and will never break 50 total yards like his first 3 gaems then pppppleeeeeeeeeasee post it..

I apologize for criticizing your intelligence.. but i feel strongly that someone should not throw stones when they live in a glass house.. and you my friend, do not have a rock-proof house whatsoever..

Ewing
09-29-2007, 09:30 PM
Probably worse than if they had Schaub.

You think Schaub is better than Young?

swagger
09-29-2007, 09:37 PM
Artose Pinner had a longer run last year than Bush.

But man, he is so explosive.

JeffSamardzijaIRISH
09-29-2007, 09:50 PM
Yeah he might be overrated, but how is Reggie Bush NOT a good football player? The media does overhype him to an extent as one of the fastest players in the NFL, but look at his stats last year. 565 yards rushing/6 TD's, 88 receptions/742 yards recieving/2 TD's. He also had 1 return TD.

That was all just his rookie year, and that's fairly impressive for a rookie...

swagger
09-29-2007, 09:51 PM
Not a good football player because he averages 2-some yards per carry and 4-some yards per catch.

Since when do those numbers equate to a good football player?

619
09-29-2007, 09:52 PM
Yeah he might be overrated, but how is Reggie Bush NOT a good football player? The media does overhype him to an extent as one of the fastest players in the NFL, but look at his stats last year. 565 yards rushing/6 TD's, 88 receptions/742 yards recieving/2 TD's. He also had 1 return TD.

That was all just his rookie year, and that's fairly impressive for a rookie...

exactly and his 3.6 ypc as a rookie was the exact same statistic as LT when he was in his first year too

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
09-29-2007, 10:01 PM
exactly and his 3.6 ypc as a rookie was the exact same statistic as LT when he was in his first year too

Tomlinson didn't have the NFL's leading passer or a top flight RB to take pressure off of him, either.

Ewing
09-29-2007, 10:11 PM
Well I could have easily mentioned Justin Fargas and Ernest Graham, who are both out-producing Bush.

If you would rather have Justin Fargas or Ernest Graham instead of Reggie Bush you need to get off whatever drugs you're taking.

BlindSite
09-29-2007, 11:40 PM
I somehow can't see defenses taking hours to break down film of Ernest Graham like they would reggie bush...

Average OT LB
09-29-2007, 11:43 PM
Tomlinson didn't have the NFL's leading passer or a top flight RB to take pressure off of him, either.

tomlinson didnt league get 88 receptions..

Shiver
09-30-2007, 12:22 AM
The Bush fan boys are quick to overreact, wow. Where did I ever state I wouldn't take Bush over Graham or Fargas? That doesn't change the fact that three games into the season Reggie Bush has looked terrible, much like he has in 90% of his games. The fact of the matter is Reggie Bush isn't even an average player right now. Can he improve? Sure, but I personally doubt it. If you all think he will improve and live up to his collegiate billing that's fine, there is nothing wrong with that. It's based solely on what he did in college and projection not at all based on what he's shown in the NFL thus far.

energizerbunny
09-30-2007, 01:03 AM
I'm sure glad the Texans didn't take this 3rd down back with the first pick. Mario will be a top 5 DE in the league in 3 years tops.

Moses
09-30-2007, 01:56 AM
The Bush fan boys are quick to overreact, wow. Where did I ever state I wouldn't take Bush over Graham or Fargas? That doesn't change the fact that three games into the season Reggie Bush has looked terrible, much like he has in 90% of his games. The fact of the matter is Reggie Bush isn't even an average player right now. Can he improve? Sure, but I personally doubt it. If you all think he will improve and live up to his collegiate billing that's fine, there is nothing wrong with that. It's based solely on what he did in college and projection not at all based on what he's shown in the NFL thus far.

Put any RB in NFL history behind the Saints o-line this year and they won't be productive. What is happening there is not Bush's fault. There's simply no running room and the entire offence has been terrible.

Last year, Bush compiled over 1300 yards. For a rookie, that is extremely impressive. People hate on him because he's not like every other back in the league. Who cares? He still does what he does very well. He's an all-around offensive threat who can hurt you in so many ways.

What about Bush has been "terrible" this season? The fact that he has had absolutely zero running room and the whole Saints offence is a mess? Is Tomlinson "terrible" also because he hasn't produced? Or are there other factors at work?

Paranoidmoonduck
09-30-2007, 03:13 AM
The Bush fan boys are quick to overreact, wow. Where did I ever state I wouldn't take Bush over Graham or Fargas? That doesn't change the fact that three games into the season Reggie Bush has looked terrible, much like he has in 90% of his games. The fact of the matter is Reggie Bush isn't even an average player right now. Can he improve? Sure, but I personally doubt it. If you all think he will improve and live up to his collegiate billing that's fine, there is nothing wrong with that. It's based solely on what he did in college and projection not at all based on what he's shown in the NFL thus far.

I think I know and agree with that you're driving at Shiver, but I don't agree with what you're typing.

Bush, despite a few struggles last year, was excellent for a rookie. 1300 yards (no matter how he got them) and 8 touchdowns for a rookie is nothing to scoff at, and it is way above average. Reggie Bush is definitely an above average player and he's definitely looked considerably better than terrible in 90% of his games.

BlindSite
09-30-2007, 03:47 AM
I'm sure glad the Texans didn't take this 3rd down back with the first pick. Mario will be a top 5 DE in the league in 3 years tops.

Kampman, Peppers, Jason Taylor, Osi Umenyiora Freeney, Suggs, Seymor not to mention others is pretty hard group to knock off.

soybean
09-30-2007, 04:11 AM
Kampman, Peppers, Jason Taylor, Osi Umenyiora Freeney, Suggs, Seymor not to mention others is pretty hard group to knock off.

seriously, no offense to all the mario williams fans out there but this lovefest has got to stop. Everyone acts like he's gonna definitely bypass the "learning curve" and become some hall of fame DE. could it happen? of course. could it NOT happen? of course.

CC.SD
09-30-2007, 05:09 AM
Tomlinson didn't have the NFL's leading passer or a top flight RB to take pressure off of him, either.

or anything close to a com0petent offensive line.

soybean
09-30-2007, 03:32 PM
Well I could have easily mentioned Justin Fargas and Ernest Graham, who are both out-producing Bush.

he must've come on here and read you making fun of him.

energizerbunny
09-30-2007, 06:50 PM
seriously, no offense to all the mario williams fans out there but this lovefest has got to stop. Everyone acts like he's gonna definitely bypass the "learning curve" and become some hall of fame DE. could it happen? of course. could it NOT happen? of course.


In 3 years he'll be 25. Just starting to hit his prime, from what i've seen there isn't much to hint that he shouldn't be in the top 5 for his position by that time.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
09-30-2007, 07:04 PM
seriously, no offense to all the mario williams fans out there but this lovefest has got to stop. Everyone acts like he's gonna definitely bypass the "learning curve" and become some hall of fame DE. could it happen? of course. could it NOT happen? of course.


Well of course it might not happen. Reggie Bush might never ever gain 20 yards on a run. Vince Young might also get cocky and not continue progressing and then be stuck as a good, but not great QB. Calvin Johnson might never be the same after his back injury. Anything can happen, but it just seems likely Mario will be a very good player. Reggie may also be a very good player, but so far in his career, he hasn't been efficient with the football.

stephenson86
09-30-2007, 07:53 PM
reggie bush will never progress from being an outside runner who can catch the ball from wideout. He doesnt have the frame to pack on alot more bulk and he does not have the downhill power of a feature back, hes an incredibly talented athlete who will help the saints tremendously if they use him correctly. but they need a power back to do what reggie cant, which is gain tough yard up the middle

Average OT LB
09-30-2007, 08:17 PM
reggie bush will never progress from being an outside runner who can catch the ball from wideout. He doesnt have the frame to pack on alot more bulk and he does not have the downhill power of a feature back, hes an incredibly talented athlete who will help the saints tremendously if they use him correctly. but they need a power back to do what reggie cant, which is gain tough yard up the middle

neither did tiki barber

Moses
09-30-2007, 08:34 PM
reggie bush will never progress from being an outside runner who can catch the ball from wideout. He doesnt have the frame to pack on alot more bulk and he does not have the downhill power of a feature back, hes an incredibly talented athlete who will help the saints tremendously if they use him correctly. but they need a power back to do what reggie cant, which is gain tough yard up the middle

http://www.bossip.com/uploaded_images/reggiebush1-705542.jpg

What about his frame makes him unable to put on additional weight? He's 6 feet tall. There is plenty of room to bulk up if he chooses.

Plus, look at guys like Warrick Dunn (who are much smaller and weaker than Bush) who have had great success running between the tackles. It's not all about breaking tackles and punishing defenders. There are alternative ways to play the runningback position.

Plus, the Saints had their powerback in Deuce before he went down with injury. Now they'll have to make the decision of whether to feature Reggie as their full-time back or if they're going to acquire another back to compliment him. The way Bush plays this season will go a long way in determining that.

cheesehead10790
10-01-2007, 12:42 AM
K but Reggie has never done that in his career. He wasnt a power back in HS.And Lendale was the back that did the dirty work for all 3 years at SC. Reggie has no idea how to run between the taclkes. Blaming it on the O-line is ridiculous. Even if there was a gaping hole down the middle Bush would bounce it outside. I never see him being a premier back or living up to his hype.

BTW Comparing him to LT is way out of line too.

stephenson86
10-01-2007, 06:18 AM
K but Reggie has never done that in his career. He wasnt a power back in HS.And Lendale was the back that did the dirty work for all 3 years at SC. Reggie has no idea how to run between the taclkes. Blaming it on the O-line is ridiculous. Even if there was a gaping hole down the middle Bush would bounce it outside. I never see him being a premier back or living up to his hype.

BTW Comparing him to LT is way out of line too.

props to that

stephenson86
10-01-2007, 06:20 AM
http://www.bossip.com/uploaded_images/reggiebush1-705542.jpg

What about his frame makes him unable to put on additional weight? He's 6 feet tall. There is plenty of room to bulk up if he chooses.

Plus, look at guys like Warrick Dunn (who are much smaller and weaker than Bush) who have had great success running between the tackles. It's not all about breaking tackles and punishing defenders. There are alternative ways to play the runningback position.

Plus, the Saints had their powerback in Deuce before he went down with injury. Now they'll have to make the decision of whether to feature Reggie as their full-time back or if they're going to acquire another back to compliment him. The way Bush plays this season will go a long way in determining that.

its his legs not his upper frame. I never see him getting his legs bulkier and more powerful

Shiver
10-01-2007, 01:43 PM
Way to go Justin Fargas.

Addict
10-01-2007, 01:49 PM
I think Bush will come to his own once they figure out just how to use him. He's a unique type of player, and once they find out just how to use him he'll be fantastic.

I think as a prospect he wasn't quite as NFL ready (at least as a runner) as the experts and analysts claimed he was.

Shiver
10-01-2007, 01:53 PM
I think they need to use him more as a receiver down the field. He had a lot of receiving yards as a rookie, but that was because he was the most thrown to RB in the NFL and caught a billion dump off passes. I want to see run him on more vertical routes, try and utilize his speed, and see how defenses respond.

Windy
10-01-2007, 02:09 PM
Way to go Justin Fargas.

now that's a usc running back http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/images/icons/icon12.gif

Iamcanadian
10-01-2007, 02:15 PM
People just love to hate players whom seem bigger than life. Has Bush been a solid pro, I'd say no and I'm a strong believer in Bush.
Marshall Faulk had to be traded before he blossomed and Bush may find himself in the same position.
Bush is the reincarnation of a Marshall Faulk but he has to be used like Faulk was used which Payton isn't doing. Payton tried to protect Bush as a rookie only utilizing him occassionally as a runner and throwing him short passes and when the Saints won big time I think Payton fell in love with the idea that Bush is best utilized that way. I think he is misusing Bush, he has to use Bush the way Martz used Faulk and make him the centerpiece of the Saints offence. Until Payton changes his offense and builds it around Bush, Bush will continue to put up poor #'s.
I'm just hoping that necessity will make Payton change his viewpoint. I'd run Bush up the gut, yes, up the gut and allow him to use his great cutback ability, then when teams clogged the middle I'd run him wide for a total of 15+ carries a game. I'd continue to throw to him as well just the way Martz utilizxed Faulk. Bush could be a nightmare for DC's if they have to watch him on every possible play and it would free up a huge amount of space for the WR's to operate in. Using Bush to simply run wide and take an occassional pass isn't scaring anybody and is easy to negate.
I think this is a classic case of a HC having to learn how to properly utilize a talent, I think Payton has failed to realize how to properly utilize Bush just the way Indy didn't know how to utilize Marshall Faulk. It took a great offensive mind like Martz's to understand how Faulk could be made great.
WAKE UP PAYTON AND GET ON THE BALL!

Addict
10-01-2007, 02:29 PM
Payton figured Drew Brees was the MVP for that team, but he's got to make Bush his cornerstone and actually BUILD. I think most fans (of the NFL) saw the saints as a finished product, while they are still a big work in progress. They got good building blocks in Bush, Colston and Brown (not sure how Brown is doing), they need defense and go into friggin' building mode, not keeping mode. They're not a solid team quite yet, just well on their way.

Shiver
10-01-2007, 02:31 PM
Brown has looked horrible. He played well at first, but my reservations about him at LT are starting to be realized.

Addict
10-01-2007, 02:33 PM
Brown has looked horrible. He played well at first, but my reservations about him at LT are starting to be realized.

see I remembered one of those guys everyone was all over this year sucking this year.

speaking of last years victims of nuthugging: how's McNeill doing so far?

JK17
10-01-2007, 02:43 PM
People just love to hate players whom seem bigger than life. Has Bush been a solid pro, I'd say no and I'm a strong believer in Bush.

There is a difference between hating and evaluating. People hate Peyton Manning. People hate Tom Brady. But no one says those guys aren't good players. Because as much as they are hated, they are respected for their perofrmances, and the only hate they may get is from the occasional slip up in a press conference, or when they are beating down on someone's team. People may hate Reggie Bush, but it's not all because he's bigger then life...it's because he continues to get passes for things he cannot do.

Marshall Faulk had to be traded before he blossomed and Bush may find himself in the same position.
Bush is the reincarnation of a Marshall Faulk but he has to be used like Faulk was used which Payton isn't doing. Payton tried to protect Bush as a rookie only utilizing him occassionally as a runner and throwing him short passes and when the Saints won big time I think Payton fell in love with the idea that Bush is best utilized that way. I think he is misusing Bush, he has to use Bush the way Martz used Faulk and make him the centerpiece of the Saints offence. Until Payton changes his offense and builds it around Bush, Bush will continue to put up poor #'s.

Except Marshall Faulk is already established as one of the best players there is out there. You're assuming, using Bush in such a role would actually make him succeed. Faulk was better at running between the tackles then Bush has shown he can be. You can't just snap your fingers, say "utilize him like Faulk" and assume it will have the same results. Reggie Bush is best used in the passing game, and only on occasional carries, he's not meant to be a pound between the tackles guy... at least not yet, and there's no indication he can be. He needs that element for you to assume he can be another Faulk.

I'm just hoping that necessity will make Payton change his viewpoint. I'd run Bush up the gut, yes, up the gut and allow him to use his great cutback ability, then when teams clogged the middle I'd run him wide for a total of 15+ carries a game. I'd continue to throw to him as well just the way Martz utilizxed Faulk. Bush could be a nightmare for DC's if they have to watch him on every possible play and it would free up a huge amount of space for the WR's to operate in. Using Bush to simply run wide and take an occassional pass isn't scaring anybody and is easy to negate.
I think this is a classic case of a HC having to learn how to properly utilize a talent, I think Payton has failed to realize how to properly utilize Bush just the way Indy didn't know how to utilize Marshall Faulk. It took a great offensive mind like Martz's to understand how Faulk could be made great.
WAKE UP PAYTON AND GET ON THE BALL!

You say run bush up the gut and allow him to use his cutback ability...you know its funny, because he's gotten runs up the gut...they haven't worked out so well. Again, you can't just snap your fingers and assume that facet of the gmae will be there for him. And then magically, you'll just switch to running him outside when they stuff to the middle? Defenses do adjust, they won't just let that one slide by without doing anything. And he hasn't been all that explosive, no matter where he is running the ball from. If it takes such an incredible offensive mind to figure out how to make Bush an effective player, he's not all that effective. You're making so many assumptions, that he won't get tired, that he'll be effective up the middle, that all of a sudden he'll be effective on the perimeter. The guy's quick and fast, but that hasn't made him run away from anyone so far.

Flyboy
10-01-2007, 03:24 PM
I like how D-Unit made one of the best posts in this thread yet it was completely ignored. Typical.

But, like Shiver said, its not so much about where he was picked, but they hype that he came into the NFL with. If people say things like the second you put on an NFL uniform, you're the best in the NFL, you sure as hell better live up to it. That's why other picks in his area haven't had the same criticism.

I'm still trying to figure out how Bush's hype as a prospect was his fault. Did his play in college not warrant the hype? If anything, Shiver, njx & others should be mad at the media for their hype of Bush.

The argument was: "OMG BUSH WAS OVERHYPED MAKES ME HATE HIM UGH" but on the flipside the constant hating that he receives as a player (and he is constantly being hated around here it seems) is just as annoying if not more annoying than the overhype he received. It's a two-way street.

bigbluedefense
10-01-2007, 03:28 PM
I like how D-Unit made one of the best posts in this thread yet it was completely ignored. Typical.



I'm still trying to figure out how Bush's hype as a prospect was his fault. Did his play in college not warrant the hype? If anything, Shiver, njx & others should be mad at the media for their hype of Bush.

The argument was: "OMG BUSH WAS OVERHYPED MAKES ME HATE HIM UGH" but on the flipside the constant hating that he receives as a player (and he is constantly being hated around here it seems) is just as annoying if not more annoying than the overhype he received. It's a two-way street.

To play devil's advocate for a second, Reggie Bush himself sipped that media Koolaid as well. Wanting #1 pick money because he felt he shouldve gone #1, demanding to play with the #5 in the NFL, etc.

Calling Reggie Bush "overconfident" in his own status in this league isn't a stretch if you ask me.

Shiver
10-01-2007, 03:31 PM
I don't hate Bush. I hate it when people, here in particular, are ignoring his lack of success on the NFL level. Not to mention it allows me to boast since I was never a fan of Bush as a prospect and that the Texans' worst possible decision was to take him at #1. I always thought he'd be more Brian Westbrook than Gale Sayers/Marshall Faulk and he isn't even living up to my (low at the time) projection.

JK17
10-01-2007, 03:38 PM
I'm still trying to figure out how Bush's hype as a prospect was his fault. Did his play in college not warrant the hype? If anything, Shiver, njx & others should be mad at the media for their hype of Bush.

The argument was: "OMG BUSH WAS OVERHYPED MAKES ME HATE HIM UGH" but on the flipside the constant hating that he receives as a player (and he is constantly being hated around here it seems) is just as annoying if not more annoying than the overhype he received. It's a two-way street.

Except you didn't quote on me later on, when I said no its not his fault the meida hyped it up. No, there's nothing he can do if a bunch of idiots on ESPN say he's the best thing since sliced bread. What I did say was that he didn't exactly shy away from all the media attention. I even said he shouldn't have, no one in their right mind would turn it down. And I never even said I hate Bush, I just said he hasn't lived up to the hype, or the expectations, remotely so far.

Actually, in my quote, that you quoted me on, all I did was try to explain why the criticism exists, not if it was justified or not. But at this point yet, even his play does warrant criticism. Hype or not, he hasn't lived up to what he should have done yet. I mean by the way you defended him, I can say the media set the standard for Ryan Leaf, its not his fault he didn't hit the bar....Players are just as responsible for what they don't do, as for the hype that comes with them. If they weren't the term "bust" wouldn't exist. Note; I'm not calling Bush a bust.

But he hasn't been the product he showed in college, which is where the disapointment kicks in.

Flyboy
10-01-2007, 03:39 PM
To play devil's advocate for a second, Reggie Bush himself sipped that media Koolaid as well. Wanting #1 pick money because he felt he shouldve gone #1, demanding to play with the #5 in the NFL, etc.

Bush is an extremely humble player. Wanting #1 pick money? I would surely like to see a credible link for those allegations... sounds very similar to the same people that said Bush was going to sit out the 2006 season because he didn't want to play for New Orleans and re-enter the draft. We saw how that worked out.

And "demanding to play with #5"? He requested it to the league. It got denied and he's playing in the #25. Big whoop.

Neither of those sound highly overconfident to me.

JK17
10-01-2007, 03:45 PM
Bush is an extremely humble player. Wanting #1 pick money? I would surely like to see a credible link for those allegations... sounds very similar to the same people that said Bush was going to sit out the 2006 season because he didn't want to play for New Orleans and re-enter the draft. We saw how that worked out.

What? The reason he was holding out was for the bigger paycheck, what else do you think it would have been? It was common knowledge Bush wanted the #1 money, but again, that's not his fault....get what you can get, but then live up to it. The reason he didn't hold out the year, was because he got money...I don't think many people actually thoguht he would sit out the whole year.

And "demanding to play with #5"? He requested it to the league. It got denied and he's playing in the #25. Big whoop.

Neither of those sound highly overconfident to me.

It's the attitude that he can come in and rewrite the rulebook of the NFL to allow him to wear what he wants. Not the end of the world that he did it, but again, if he's going to value himself importnat enough to be the one to change that, he should justify it.

Average OT LB
10-01-2007, 06:04 PM
I don't hate Bush. I hate it when people, here in particular, are ignoring his lack of success on the NFL level. Not to mention it allows me to boast since I was never a fan of Bush as a prospect and that the Texans' worst possible decision was to take him at #1. I always thought he'd be more Brian Westbrook than Gale Sayers/Marshall Faulk and he isn't even living up to my (low at the time) projection.


how high were your low expectations? i guess the cut off was at 10 touchdowns? maybe 2,000 total yards.... maybe 100 receptions..

he didnt have an LT year, but his year was pretty freakin good

no love
10-01-2007, 06:51 PM
I don't hate Bush. I hate it when people, here in particular, are ignoring his lack of success on the NFL level. Not to mention it allows me to boast since I was never a fan of Bush as a prospect and that the Texans' worst possible decision was to take him at #1. I always thought he'd be more Brian Westbrook than Gale Sayers/Marshall Faulk and he isn't even living up to my (low at the time) projection.

Except that when Brian Westbrook is on his game... he is EVERY BIT the weapon that those two were. Brian Westbrook is the only playmaker on that offense and he still puts up great numbers week in and week out. In the past two years he has shown that he is a complete back, he can run inside and out.

You put Westbrook in Faulks offense (with all of those playmakers) and they put up very similar numbers.

JK17
10-01-2007, 06:55 PM
Except that when Brian Westbrook is on his game... he is EVERY BIT the weapon that those two were. Brian Westbrook is the only playmaker on that offense and he still puts up great numbers week in and week out. In the past two years he has shown that he is a complete back, he can run inside and out.

You put Westbrook in Faulks offense (with all of those playmakers) and they put up very similar numbers.

I'm sorry. What? Brian Westbrook is a great football player. He is not, by any means, a Gale Sayers or Marshall Faulk. You're talking about two of the greatest running backs of all time. Westbrook is good, but he doesn't compare to those two.

And who are you to state as fact that Westbrook puts up similar numbers in Faulk's situation? It's possibel but you cant assume its probable.

He's not in the same league as those guys.

Shiver
10-01-2007, 06:56 PM
I love Westbrook, I think he's a top-5 RB. He is no Gale Sayers and he is no Marshall Faulk.

cheesehead10790
10-01-2007, 07:24 PM
Bush is an extremely humble player.


Bush is arrogant and overconfident. He has yet to prove himself and already calls the shots. How humble was he when he illegally accepted money to go play at USC? Or when he taunted the Bears defense in the playoffs which angered them and became the turning point in the game... Bush is everything but humble.

And Iamcanadian, Bush does get the runs up the middle, you just dont notice because he always bounces it outside. Thats all he's ever done and until he realizes he cant do that in the NFL, he will continue to dissapoint.

ks_perfection
10-01-2007, 08:02 PM
I notice cause he often gets tackled in the backfield hesitating.

Saints-Tigers
10-02-2007, 03:09 AM
People just love to hate players whom seem bigger than life. Has Bush been a solid pro, I'd say no and I'm a strong believer in Bush.
Marshall Faulk had to be traded before he blossomed and Bush may find himself in the same position.
Bush is the reincarnation of a Marshall Faulk but he has to be used like Faulk was used which Payton isn't doing. Payton tried to protect Bush as a rookie only utilizing him occassionally as a runner and throwing him short passes and when the Saints won big time I think Payton fell in love with the idea that Bush is best utilized that way. I think he is misusing Bush, he has to use Bush the way Martz used Faulk and make him the centerpiece of the Saints offence. Until Payton changes his offense and builds it around Bush, Bush will continue to put up poor #'s.
I'm just hoping that necessity will make Payton change his viewpoint. I'd run Bush up the gut, yes, up the gut and allow him to use his great cutback ability, then when teams clogged the middle I'd run him wide for a total of 15+ carries a game. I'd continue to throw to him as well just the way Martz utilizxed Faulk. Bush could be a nightmare for DC's if they have to watch him on every possible play and it would free up a huge amount of space for the WR's to operate in. Using Bush to simply run wide and take an occassional pass isn't scaring anybody and is easy to negate.
I think this is a classic case of a HC having to learn how to properly utilize a talent, I think Payton has failed to realize how to properly utilize Bush just the way Indy didn't know how to utilize Marshall Faulk. It took a great offensive mind like Martz's to understand how Faulk could be made great.
WAKE UP PAYTON AND GET ON THE BALL!

Well put, the o-line doesn't help matters either....

Seasonticketholder
10-02-2007, 10:59 AM
People just love to hate players whom seem bigger than life. Has Bush been a solid pro, I'd say no and I'm a strong believer in Bush.
Marshall Faulk had to be traded before he blossomed and Bush may find himself in the same position.
Bush is the reincarnation of a Marshall Faulk but he has to be used like Faulk was used which Payton isn't doing. Payton tried to protect Bush as a rookie only utilizing him occassionally as a runner and throwing him short passes and when the Saints won big time I think Payton fell in love with the idea that Bush is best utilized that way. I think he is misusing Bush, he has to use Bush the way Martz used Faulk and make him the centerpiece of the Saints offence. Until Payton changes his offense and builds it around Bush, Bush will continue to put up poor #'s.
I'm just hoping that necessity will make Payton change his viewpoint. I'd run Bush up the gut, yes, up the gut and allow him to use his great cutback ability, then when teams clogged the middle I'd run him wide for a total of 15+ carries a game. I'd continue to throw to him as well just the way Martz utilizxed Faulk. Bush could be a nightmare for DC's if they have to watch him on every possible play and it would free up a huge amount of space for the WR's to operate in. Using Bush to simply run wide and take an occassional pass isn't scaring anybody and is easy to negate.
I think this is a classic case of a HC having to learn how to properly utilize a talent, I think Payton has failed to realize how to properly utilize Bush just the way Indy didn't know how to utilize Marshall Faulk. It took a great offensive mind like Martz's to understand how Faulk could be made great.
WAKE UP PAYTON AND GET ON THE BALL!

Quoted for truth!

soybean
10-02-2007, 03:43 PM
Bush is arrogant and overconfident. He has yet to prove himself and already calls the shots. How humble was he when he illegally accepted money to go play at USC? Or when he taunted the Bears defense in the playoffs which angered them and became the turning point in the game... Bush is everything but humble.

And Iamcanadian, Bush does get the runs up the middle, you just dont notice because he always bounces it outside. Thats all he's ever done and until he realizes he cant do that in the NFL, he will continue to dissapoint.

what the hell are you talking about dude? do your research and don't just listen to what the media tells you. Even if all the "supposed" allegations were true, he didn't accpet money from anyone and certainly not USC. USC had nothing to do with anything, it was a marketing firm/agent that yahoo is trying to prove gave free rent to the bush family. Which in turn, bush never lived in the house and all the loaned rent was paid back in full.

About the taunting thing, he was caught up in the moment. Some of the classiest players have taughted some time or another when they made a huge play. not to mention, he apologized RIGHT after the game and said he was just "caught up in the moment."

you're the perfect media drone that gets all their info from ESPN.

Addict
10-02-2007, 04:17 PM
what the hell are you talking about dude? do your research and don't just listen to what the media tells you. Even if all the "supposed" allegations were true, he didn't accpet money from anyone and certainly not USC. USC had nothing to do with anything, it was a marketing firm/agent that yahoo is trying to prove gave free rent to the bush family. Which in turn, bush never lived in the house and all the loaned rent was paid back in full.

About the taunting thing, he was caught up in the moment. Some of the classiest players have taughted some time or another when they made a huge play. not to mention, he apologized RIGHT after the game and said he was just "caught up in the moment."

you're the perfect media drone that gets all their info from ESPN.

ESPN? More like Fox Sports.

Average OT LB
10-02-2007, 04:42 PM
what the hell are you talking about dude? do your research and don't just listen to what the media tells you. Even if all the "supposed" allegations were true, he didn't accpet money from anyone and certainly not USC. USC had nothing to do with anything, it was a marketing firm/agent that yahoo is trying to prove gave free rent to the bush family. Which in turn, bush never lived in the house and all the loaned rent was paid back in full.

About the taunting thing, he was caught up in the moment. Some of the classiest players have taughted some time or another when they made a huge play. not to mention, he apologized RIGHT after the game and said he was just "caught up in the moment."

you're the perfect media drone that gets all their info from ESPN.

haha where the hell did you get your information? the media? lol.. oh wait no .. your actually a private investigator who went and researched yourself like you told that guy to do.. silly drone

soybean
10-02-2007, 05:14 PM
haha where the hell did you get your information? the media? lol.. oh wait no .. your actually a private investigator who went and researched yourself like you told that guy to do.. silly drone

it's a lot different being force fed info from the big boys than it is to read many different sources and cross examing and filtering out the nonsense.

plus, "usc paid reggie bush" is typical hearsay nonsense from the media that has no actual evidence or support behind its claim.

Addict
10-02-2007, 05:43 PM
it's a lot different being force fed info from the big boys than it is to read many different sources and cross examing and filtering out the nonsense.

plus, "usc paid reggie bush" is typical hearsay nonsense from the media that has no actual evidence or support behind its claim.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reggie_Bush

in the 'controversy' section, there is actually a basis for all this. Not too solid, but a basis all the same.

Moses
10-02-2007, 05:55 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reggie_Bush

in the 'controversy' section, there is actually a basis for all this. Not too solid, but a basis all the same.

Even if this were true, why is it relevant to this conversation at all?

soybean
10-02-2007, 06:43 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reggie_Bush

in the 'controversy' section, there is actually a basis for all this. Not too solid, but a basis all the same.

USC didn't have ties with him receiving improper benefits. An arguement can be made for the marketing agent/firm but personally, USC didn't give bush any money.

and yeah, i just brought it up, because cheesehead was questioning his character. What you do off the field has nothing to do with you being a humble player on the field.

JK17
10-02-2007, 06:47 PM
and yeah, i just brought it up, because cheesehead was questioning his character. What you do off the field has nothing to do with you being a humble player on the field.

Well, its nitpicking but your being very hypocritical then. I don't think Bush was wrong to celebrate vs. Chicago, I don't have a probelm with celebrations. But it's certianly not a humble thing to do. He did that on the field, whereas the apology came off the field....I mean its not like the guy never celebrates or gets excited, he does....nothing wrong with it, but he's not all that humble on the field.

Moses
10-02-2007, 06:49 PM
Well, its nitpicking but your being very hypocritical then. I don't think Bush was wrong to celebrate vs. Chicago, I don't have a probelm with celebrations. But it's certianly not a humble thing to do. He did that on the field, whereas the apology came off the field....I mean its not like the guy never celebrates or gets excited, he does....nothing wrong with it, but he's not all that humble on the field.

He rarely celebrates, at least in a way that would be considered boasting. He's very classy. None of this even matters though, because a ton of great players are arrogant, showboating, a-holes.

Who cares if he puts on a big show?

JK17
10-02-2007, 06:51 PM
He rarely celebrates, at least in a way that would be considered boasting. He's very classy. None of this even matters though, because a ton of great players are arrogant, showboating, a-holes.

Who cares if he puts on a big show?

I don't, I said that, I'm just saying its not all that humble. Humble is scoring a touchdown and being quiet, acting like its not a big deal.

I don't care about celebrations, classy and humble are two different things. I know he's given a lot to the New Orleans area, that's a classy thing. Not doubting he's classy, just that him, or any NFL player for that matter, is really "humble".

soybean
10-02-2007, 06:52 PM
maybe humble is the wrong word, he's not "arrogant" though.

Moses
10-02-2007, 06:53 PM
I don't, I said that, I'm just saying its not all that humble. Humble is scoring a touchdown and being quiet, acting like its not a big deal.

I don't care about celebrations, classy and humble are two different things. I know he's given a lot to the New Orleans area, that's a classy thing. Not doubting he's classy, just that him, or any NFL player for that matter, is really "humble".

How many people that play sports at any level show zero emotion during the game? Celebrating with teammates and high fiving each other doesn't make you any less humble.

smittyjs
10-02-2007, 06:54 PM
Bush 80 rushing yards and 2 TD's
Young 96 rushing yards and 1 Td's
and Mario Williams 2 sacks 11 tackles and 1 DEF TD

At this pont i would say
Young>Williams>>Bush

Bush is running much like he did at the start of last season, he need to go back to his running style which he was finding success with toward the end of last season.

JK17
10-02-2007, 06:57 PM
How many people that play sports at any level show zero emotion during the game? Celebrating with teammates and high fiving each other doesn't make you any less humble.

The amount of people who do something doesn't make something humble, or not humble. Humble is a word with a concrete definition: Modest, courteous, respectful.

Celebrating in general isn't a humble act, but its not something I particularly care about, like I said. It's fine, my favorite player gets ridiculed daily for celebrating too much. I have no problem with players getting fired up, having emotion, celebrating...but I'd never consider them humble because other people do it.

Like soybean said, humble may have been the wrong word, and he's not arrogant. I'd agree with that. Confident might be a better way to define it, as confidence is essnential to success. It's just humble I'd disagree with.

Average OT LB
10-05-2007, 11:39 PM
The amount of people who do something doesn't make something humble, or not humble. Humble is a word with a concrete definition: Modest, courteous, respectful.

Celebrating in general isn't a humble act, but its not something I particularly care about, like I said. It's fine, my favorite player gets ridiculed daily for celebrating too much. I have no problem with players getting fired up, having emotion, celebrating...but I'd never consider them humble because other people do it.

Like soybean said, humble may have been the wrong word, and he's not arrogant. I'd agree with that. Confident might be a better way to define it, as confidence is essnential to success. It's just humble I'd disagree with.

making a habit of putting together solid posts are we?

I agree, Merriman and his lights out dance is exciting, but its not humble. But then again, i dont mind the emotion, i could care less if he was humble or not.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
10-05-2007, 11:49 PM
IMO, there are too kinds of celebrations. The ones that guys like Chad and Merriman do, which are celebrating their big play. Then there are ones like the T.O. on the star, Hester against the Rams, and Bush against the Bears that are more "LOL AT THE OTHER TEAM!!!" I think the former are much better for football, although I don't think either Hester or Bush are truly like that, they just need more restraint.

soybean
10-22-2007, 01:54 PM
just brought this up because i was wondering, did anyone see his touchdown and 2 point sunday?

I didn't see it til now but i have to say that was pretty impressive. For such a small guy, he has a lot of power. He didn't have statistically a good rushing game but he is no doubt a very dangerous weapon.

Here's hoping he can get to Brian westbrook's level.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
10-22-2007, 03:59 PM
I saw the TD, it was a pretty impressive play. And I only saw it the once, but it seemed to me like it was also some bad tackling on the Falcons' part. It looked like guys were standing around waiting. Although maybe they didnt wanna push him into the endzone or something.