PDA

View Full Version : Darren Sproles or Reggie Bush?


Splat
09-18-2009, 10:35 AM
Tony Dungy would take Darren Sproles over Reggie Bush (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/09/18/tony-dungy-would-take-darren-sproles-over-reggie-bush/)

Who would you rather have?

YAYareaRB
09-18-2009, 11:03 AM
Right now.. D-Lo.

MiWolves
09-18-2009, 11:11 AM
Personally for me i would rather take Bush because hes more of a receiving threat and you can move him around for mismatched but the fact that he's always injured makes me want to pick Sprioles

tjsunstein
09-18-2009, 11:13 AM
I'll take the "lightning bug", Darren Sproles.

sbh15
09-18-2009, 11:19 AM
Just imagine how far away Houston would be had they taken Bush in the first.

They would definitely not have Mario, and likely not Slaton, either.

Darren for me, as well.

Nalej
09-18-2009, 11:20 AM
They should abandon the Reggie Bush-Running back project.
Make him a full time WR and put him in the slot in a Welker-role.
He'd dominate.

RAVENS/WIZARDS/ORIOLES
09-18-2009, 11:27 AM
I would take Sproles because he is proven.

YAYareaRB
09-18-2009, 11:29 AM
After watching D-Lo play live last monday, he's definitely a threat every time he touches the ball. People got excited every time he'd drop and punt or kick return, than he'd shake someone out their ankles and make something out of the nothing. If Norv Turner has faith in him, he's probably pretty darn good.

NY+Giants=NYG
09-18-2009, 11:31 AM
I like Sproles.. Great player and cheaper too!

E-Man
09-18-2009, 11:39 AM
Right now.. D-Lo.

I think you better recognize....

http://i180.photobucket.com/albums/x310/The_Ultimate_Wrestling_Gallery/D%20Lo%20Brown/DLoBrown005.jpg

Saints 4 Lyfe
09-18-2009, 11:43 AM
They should abandon the Reggie Bush-Running back project.
Make him a full time WR and put him in the slot in a Welker-role.
He'd dominate.
of course thats what should happen. but Sean Payton wants to show the rest of the league how much smarter he is than everyone else so it'll never happen.

diabsoule
09-18-2009, 11:49 AM
of course thats what should happen. but Sean Payton wants to show the rest of the league how much smarter he is than everyone else so it'll never happen.

If Sean Payton was the so-called "genius" some people call him he would have abandoned the Reggie Bush running-between-the-tackles project two years ago and instead studied the Philadelphia Eagles scheme and how they utilized Brian Westbrook and incorporated those concepts to maximize Reggie's potential.

However, I would rather have Darren Sproles. He's an electric kick and punt returner, can run between the tackles, and is better at being Reggie Bush than Reggie Bush is.

Saints 4 Lyfe
09-18-2009, 12:02 PM
If Sean Payton was the so-called "genius" some people call him he would have abandoned the Reggie Bush running-between-the-tackles project two years ago and instead studied the Philadelphia Eagles scheme and how they utilized Brian Westbrook and incorporated those concepts to maximize Reggie's potential.

However, I would rather have Darren Sproles. He's an electric kick and punt returner, can run between the tackles, and is better at being Reggie Bush than Reggie Bush is. love the "genius" shot you took at me, lol.

you cant really say "utilize him like Westbroook" because part of the reason Westbrook is so successful is because he can run between the tackles..

that being said, we have a pass blocking o-line and not a run blocking o-line. the only capable run blockers are Nicks and Evans.

gsorace
09-18-2009, 12:05 PM
How did reggie bush get 3 votes?

Don Vito
09-18-2009, 12:08 PM
Sproles has performed a lot more consistenly and has shown he can be a top end playmaker in this league. Bush could be that type of guy who is a threat to score everytime he touches the ball, but Sproles is right now. Give me Sproles; he may be small but he can run, catch, and return with the best of them.

YAYareaRB
09-18-2009, 12:10 PM
In MNF game, I don't think the first guy on him made a tackle ever. He's so shifty it's ridiculous. The funny thing about it was that he was gettin em with the same ******* move.

bigbluedefense
09-18-2009, 12:28 PM
Darren Sproles. And thats all im saying about the subject bc every Reggie Bush thread turns into a joke.

CC.SD
09-18-2009, 12:33 PM
Obviously you cut the baby in two and give one half to each mother.


No seriously why do you have to divide my loyalties like this. I love Reggie but it's clear, and has been clear for a couple seasons honestly, that Sproles is one of the more dangerous weapons in the league. His 5ness still has a lot to prove in the NFL.

Rosebud
09-18-2009, 12:54 PM
Sproles has shown a lot more and is being used better. That said if Shaun Payton weren't a tard I think Reggie would be looking a lot better.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
09-18-2009, 01:04 PM
Mike Bell, mr. Cut from Denver and not brought back even after having like 35 runningbacks go on IR, straight dominated in week 1 and averaged 5.1 ypc, while Reggie Bush got 2.0. Against the Detroit Lions. Half this forum could do that. I'm taking Darren Sproles.

killxswitch
09-18-2009, 01:32 PM
I picked Bush because the voting option didn't say "Reggie Bush with Sean Payton calling the plays".

wonderbredd24
09-18-2009, 01:43 PM
Darren Sproles can run between the tackles, run outside, catch the ball, and return kicks.

Glorified Eric Metcalf cannot run between the tackles

diabsoule
09-18-2009, 01:48 PM
love the "genius" shot you took at me, lol.

you cant really say "utilize him like Westbroook" because part of the reason Westbrook is so successful is because he can run between the tackles..

that being said, we have a pass blocking o-line and not a run blocking o-line. the only capable run blockers are Nicks and Evans.

It wasn't a shot at you. I think the word "genius" is used too loosely when discussing anyone with above-average talent, which is all I think of Sean Payton has. Reggie can be explosive and has the talent to do so but you can't line him up in the backfield and give it to him to run up the gut. You also can't keep him in to block because his efforts at doing so are just laughable. It just isn't going to work. You have to create mismatches with him. Line him up in the backfield and motion him into the slot, go with 3 wideouts and use him in the slot, use him for screens but make sure you have blockers in front. He can't take a hit again like the one he received from Sheldon Brown during the Saints/Eagles playoff game. Hell, send his scrawny ass downfield on a go route to burn coverage like Devery Henderson does. This isn't rocket science but it's having to accentuate his positives and hide his weaknesses.

bigbluedefense
09-18-2009, 01:49 PM
I mean seriously, 2.0 ypc against the Lions? I don't care if the running system doesn't suit your style, 2.0 ypc is pathetic. And its the lions. And im pretty sure it was against nickel and dime fronts.

At the very least, I think we all have to admit that he's not a RB. There are plenty of slashing RBs who put in work in the pass game that Id take over him.

Maybe he can salvage his career in a Percy Harvin type of role at WR.

FlyingElvis
09-18-2009, 02:00 PM
Sproles has shown a lot more and is being used better. That said if Shaun Payton weren't a tard I think Reggie would be looking a lot better.

I picked Bush because the voting option didn't say "Reggie Bush with Sean Payton calling the plays".

My thoughts exactly. I voted Bush b/c if you swapped them Bush would look great behind SD's line with SD's play selection and Sproles would look pedestrian in the Saints system.

Make the poll question specific - "in their respective system" or "based on talent" and the vote probably changes quite a bit.

CC.SD
09-18-2009, 02:05 PM
My thoughts exactly. I voted Bush b/c if you swapped them Bush would look great behind SD's line with SD's play selection and Sproles would look pedestrian in the Saints system.

Make the poll question specific - "in their respective system" or "based on talent" and the vote probably changes quite a bit.

I doubt it, people seem to have solidified their opinions about Reggie, and Darren just won't stop playing the hero card.

wonderbredd24
09-18-2009, 02:20 PM
Unless the system Bush is put in makes him play with the heart and toughness of Sproles, he's boned

Denver Bronco56
09-18-2009, 02:28 PM
I have no doubt in my mind that Reggie Bush is probably the most talented dynamic running back we have seen coming out of college in QUITE some time....


That being said think about the idea of Olandis Gary being an 1100+ yard rusher for the Broncos years back....


Reggie is in a TERRIBLE running back offense.... Sure him being so dynamic makes it seem like all he can do is catch the ball split out wide....


But the fact is Bush in a Bronco type running offense, would probably be a sure fire future HOFmer


Darren Sproles like wise, is not NEAR as physically talented as bush, but plays in a RUNNING offense hence why Tomlinson, Turner have played great also in that system


Put Bush in an actual running offense and not an offense that has a QB that has a chance yearly or at least in contention to challenge Dan Marino's records, then we might be able to compare them.


This is an inverse of putting like Jerry Rice in his heyday on a team focused on pounding the ball 40 times a game. And i GUARANTEE we wouldn't be holding every good WR to Jerry Rice's record.


and like wise the term "System player" is EXACTLY what it is....Look at Brees putting up ridiculous stats in Sean Peyton's offense....but 4-5 years ago he was labeled as a bust in SD and hence the drafting of River's.


it comes down to Bush is WAYYYY more physically gifted but is playing in an offense known for throwing....


Being a Bronco's fan i love the idea of running the ball, i love the draft pick of Moreno...

That said the question was who would you take, assuming the player is coming to my team..i would take the better athlete...because at this point the better player is a measure of the player performing for there present team.

Sproles in a system that has had Tomlinson, and Turner blaze the NFL

or

Bush in an offense where the only time he really touches the ball is from his QB that is trying to break Marino's records.


Talent wise there is a reason Bush ran a 4.33, and was the 2nd overall pick...
and Sproles went in the 4th round.


But like i said if the player were to come to MY team i would hands down choose Bush.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
09-18-2009, 02:45 PM
I have no doubt in my mind that Reggie Bush is probably the most talented dynamic running back we have seen coming out of college in QUITE some time....


That being said think about the idea of Olandis Gary being an 1100+ yard rusher for the Broncos years back....


Reggie is in a TERRIBLE running back offense.... Sure him being so dynamic makes it seem like all he can do is catch the ball split out wide....


But the fact is Bush in a Bronco type running offense, would probably be a sure fire future HOFmer


Darren Sproles like wise, is not NEAR as physically talented as bush, but plays in a RUNNING offense hence why Tomlinson, Turner have played great also in that system


Put Bush in an actual running offense and not an offense that has a QB that has a chance yearly or at least in contention to challenge Dan Marino's records, then we might be able to compare them.


This is an inverse of putting like Jerry Rice in his heyday on a team focused on pounding the ball 40 times a game. And i GUARANTEE we wouldn't be holding every good WR to Jerry Rice's record.


and like wise the term "System player" is EXACTLY what it is....Look at Brees putting up ridiculous stats in Sean Peyton's offense....but 4-5 years ago he was labeled as a bust in SD and hence the drafting of River's.


it comes down to Bush is WAYYYY more physically gifted but is playing in an offense known for throwing....


Being a Bronco's fan i love the idea of running the ball, i love the draft pick of Moreno...

That said the question was who would you take, assuming the player is coming to my team..i would take the better athlete...because at this point the better player is a measure of the player performing for there present team.

Sproles in a system that has had Tomlinson, and Turner blaze the NFL

or

Bush in an offense where the only time he really touches the ball is from his QB that is trying to break Marino's records.


Talent wise there is a reason Bush ran a 4.33, and was the 2nd overall pick...
and Sproles went in the 4th round.


But like i said if the player were to come to MY team i would hands down choose Bush.

1. Tomlinson is a HOFer. No doubt. He was the 5th overall pick and is still the only RB to go for 1000+ and 100 receptions. And back then the OL wasn't even good.
2.Turner was one of the best RBs in the NFL last season, away from San Diego. He's legit, not a case of being a system RB.
3. Bush in Denver would IMO be terrible. He doesn't have the patience to play in a ZBS, and can't break tackles.
4. Running the ball isn't all about physical talent. It has a lot to do with intelligence. Shaun Alexander wasn't the biggest or the fastest, but he won an MVP as a runner and was an exceptional player for a long time.
5. If Reggie is so good, but his offense is so bad, why have Pierre Thomas and Deuce McAllister(soon to be Mike Bell) been able to have more success than Reggie? Deuce was a great back, but Reggie's entire career has been spent playing with post knee surgery McAllister, Thomas is nothing special, and Mike Bell was undrafted and cut twice. Also, that whole argument goes against conventional wisdom that says a great passing game opens up the running game. If Reggie wasn't getting many carries but was still translating the fact that Drew Brees takes so much pressure off of him into 4.0-4.5 ypc, the fact that he is such a dynamic receiver would silence critics and make him a top 5 RB. Unfortunately for him, even with Drew Brees throwing the ball and backing those safeties off, he's still worthless as a runner, failing to do the most important job at his position.
6. Is that the same reason Ryan Leaf went 2nd overall and Tom Brady went in the 6th round...?

Denver Bronco56
09-18-2009, 03:10 PM
1. Tomlinson is a HOFer. No doubt. He was the 5th overall pick and is still the only RB to go for 1000+ and 100 receptions. And back then the OL wasn't even good.
2.Turner was one of the best RBs in the NFL last season, away from San Diego. He's legit, not a case of being a system RB.
3. Bush in Denver would IMO be terrible. He doesn't have the patience to play in a ZBS, and can't break tackles.
4. Running the ball isn't all about physical talent. It has a lot to do with intelligence. Shaun Alexander wasn't the biggest or the fastest, but he won an MVP as a runner and was an exceptional player for a long time.
5. If Reggie is so good, but his offense is so bad, why have Pierre Thomas and Deuce McAllister(soon to be Mike Bell) been able to have more success than Reggie? Deuce was a great back, but Reggie's entire career has been spent playing with post knee surgery McAllister, Thomas is nothing special, and Mike Bell was undrafted and cut twice. Also, that whole argument goes against conventional wisdom that says a great passing game opens up the running game. If Reggie wasn't getting many carries but was still translating the fact that Drew Brees takes so much pressure off of him into 4.0-4.5 ypc, the fact that he is such a dynamic receiver would silence critics and make him a top 5 RB. Unfortunately for him, even with Drew Brees throwing the ball and backing those safeties off, he's still worthless as a runner, failing to do the most important job at his position.
6. Is that the same reason Ryan Leaf went 2nd overall and Tom Brady went in the 6th round...?

Def. Good counter points


But my point is the system dictates performance, and every now and then you can have a player transcend the system...exe. a John Elway on some TERRIBLE broncos teams early on but still make a HUGE impact.

But Turner was good in SD, showing that there is a common factor that SD has a good Running attack and you can see that with the success of Tomlinson, Turner, and Sproles. I think that fact that Turner is having success in Atlanta, and prior Warrick Dunn was having success also (not taking anything away from Turner) but Atlanta has a system that caters to the Running game, and takes pressure of then rookie Matt Ryan.


And again Running the ball is definitely about vision, patience, and in ALOT of cases having an offense successfully set/call the running game. For instance if you had say a Big Bruiser back and he was DAMN successful, but was then traded to a team that had an offense set up to run sweeps or tosses...his strength would be in between the tackles but he is in a System that is not doing him justice.

In Bush's case, i think its not a talent issue. Its not a vision issue, he had GREAT vision at USC. I think it comes down to the fact that he is playing in a system that is not ideal for his running style, and that doesn't make him any worse then a player playing in a Tailor made system, but shows exactly production is attributed to the system. And in an offense focused on passing the ball majority in most cases would open a running game up...but than again if the running game that the pass SHOULD be setting up is again not designed for the type of player running the ball there is not going to be success.


I guess the way I'm looking at this is for instance, defensively you have a GREAT secondary but with a terrible front 7, then in most cases the secondary even if its super talented is going to get beat time and time again.

or even if you had a terrible secondary and a GREAT front 7, the front 7 would be able to get pressure the QB and make the bad secondary look alot better than it REALLY is...because the scheme allows for a less talented secondary to actually play like a talented group.

So from that example I'm trying to get to the fact that sure it SHOULD work that bush should have all the room in the world to run....but the running game the saint's are trying to employ is not ideal for BUSH.


And I'm not saying he has to play in a specific running attack, but there is a reason the saints are still having dismal running attacks even when Bush is not playing. this goes back to the idea of having a less talented running back but being in a system that fits him and allows him to be successful..exe Olandis Gary in the Broncos Scheme...i would have never argued Gary was better than say at the time a Jamal Lewis, or Ricky Williams...but he was VERY PRODUCTIVE due to the system.


But one last thing the Mike Bell might actually fit what the saints have been trying to find in a HB...does that mean Mike Bell is in any way more talented or a better football player that Bush?


I guess i honestly believe the scheme and system play A LOT into production, exe if you played a 4-3 end as a 3-4 OLB...A LOT of times it just wont work...while a lot of the 3-4 OLBs were 4-3 Ends at one time, they fit better into the 3-4 Scheme, and that said if Dwight Freeney played 3-4 OLB and was not producing...thats a Scheme issue as he is a better 4-3 end.

Stash
09-18-2009, 03:27 PM
3. Bush in Denver would IMO be terrible. He doesn't have the patience to play in a ZBS, and can't break tackles.
4. Running the ball isn't all about physical talent. It has a lot to do with intelligence. Shaun Alexander wasn't the biggest or the fastest, but he won an MVP as a runner and was an exceptional player for a long time.
5. If Reggie is so good, but his offense is so bad, why have Pierre Thomas and Deuce McAllister(soon to be Mike Bell) been able to have more success than Reggie? Deuce was a great back, but Reggie's entire career has been spent playing with post knee surgery McAllister, Thomas is nothing special, and Mike Bell was undrafted and cut twice. Also, that whole argument goes against conventional wisdom that says a great passing game opens up the running game. If Reggie wasn't getting many carries but was still translating the fact that Drew Brees takes so much pressure off of him into 4.0-4.5 ypc, the fact that he is such a dynamic receiver would silence critics and make him a top 5 RB. Unfortunately for him, even with Drew Brees throwing the ball and backing those safeties off, he's still worthless as a runner, failing to do the most important job at his position.

This^

I definitely went with Sproles. About Bush, when you have a player with tons of hype and physical talent combined with a great college career you will get a lot of die hard fans who never hold him accountable for his failures in the NFL. They always find someone else to blame (similar to another player who's last name starts with a V, but that's not what this thread is about;)). We've already seen several people blame the o-line, but as SABF just mentioned, the Saints line seemed fine with Thomas, McCallister and now Bell.

Denver Bronco56
09-18-2009, 03:36 PM
This^

I definitely went with Sproles. About Bush, when you have a player with tons of hype and physical talent combined with a great college career you will get a lot of die hard fans who never hold him accountable for his failures in the NFL. They always find someone else to blame (similar to another player who's last name starts with a V, but that's not what this thread is about;)). We've already seen several people blame the o-line, but as SABF just mentioned, the Saints line seemed fine with Thomas, McCallister and now Bell.


Sure i will agree that Thomas and McCallister and one game Bell has had have been good for the Saints but at the same TIME THEY FIT THE SYSTEM.

If you put Randy Moss on Oakland...oh wait that already happened and was to say the least not productive...or in the College Ranks you take a Option QB and place him in the Pro Style Offense he wont be near as productive as before....


You wouldn't draft a 3-4 DE to play the 4-3 Speed Rusher would you?

You wouldnt draft a 3-4 OLB to play 4-3 OLB

Stash
09-18-2009, 03:41 PM
If you put Randy Moss on Oakland...oh wait that already happened and was to say the least not productive..

Moss failed in Oakland because our pass protection was historically bad and he didn't try so that's really not relevant.
You wouldn't draft a 3-4 DE to play the 4-3 Speed Rusher would you?

You wouldnt draft a 3-4 OLB to play 4-3 OLB
Just like you shouldn't draft a WR/KR to play RB.

Denver Bronco56
09-18-2009, 03:50 PM
This whole thread really is speculatory as NJX said it would have to be an Offense that is tailored for a player like Bush, who is a VERY talented player....I do think he could learn to be a One Cut back, as Bobby Turner is one of the best HB coaches in the NFL, but again that is just speculation who knows if Bush would work out..


But Bush i feel like could have played great in the Marshall Faulk type roll in STL back in the day.


And back the Randy Moss Mention, my point what ever the reason he didn't work in the Oakland Offense...and then he goes to the Patriots offense that is pretty much a perfect fit and breaks records....

The oline could have been the issue, the routes, the play calling.....WHO KNOWS...all im saying the same thing is applicable to Bush, the Oline, The down field blocking, the actual plays...WHO knows why he is getting out performed by Mike Bell who wasn't good enough to be the RUNNING BACK IN DENVER of all places, but obviously fits in the saints attack

Saints-Tigers
09-18-2009, 03:51 PM
Def. Good counter points


But my point is the system dictates performance, and every now and then you can have a player transcend the system...exe. a John Elway on some TERRIBLE broncos teams early on but still make a HUGE impact.

But Turner was good in SD, showing that there is a common factor that SD has a good Running attack and you can see that with the success of Tomlinson, Turner, and Sproles. I think that fact that Turner is having success in Atlanta, and prior Warrick Dunn was having success also (not taking anything away from Turner) but Atlanta has a system that caters to the Running game, and takes pressure of then rookie Matt Ryan.


And again Running the ball is definitely about vision, patience, and in ALOT of cases having an offense successfully set/call the running game. For instance if you had say a Big Bruiser back and he was DAMN successful, but was then traded to a team that had an offense set up to run sweeps or tosses...his strength would be in between the tackles but he is in a System that is not doing him justice.

In Bush's case, i think its not a talent issue. Its not a vision issue, he had GREAT vision at USC. I think it comes down to the fact that he is playing in a system that is not ideal for his running style, and that doesn't make him any worse then a player playing in a Tailor made system, but shows exactly production is attributed to the system. And in an offense focused on passing the ball majority in most cases would open a running game up...but than again if the running game that the pass SHOULD be setting up is again not designed for the type of player running the ball there is not going to be success.


I guess the way I'm looking at this is for instance, defensively you have a GREAT secondary but with a terrible front 7, then in most cases the secondary even if its super talented is going to get beat time and time again.

or even if you had a terrible secondary and a GREAT front 7, the front 7 would be able to get pressure the QB and make the bad secondary look alot better than it REALLY is...because the scheme allows for a less talented secondary to actually play like a talented group.

So from that example I'm trying to get to the fact that sure it SHOULD work that bush should have all the room in the world to run....but the running game the saint's are trying to employ is not ideal for BUSH.


And I'm not saying he has to play in a specific running attack, but there is a reason the saints are still having dismal running attacks even when Bush is not playing. this goes back to the idea of having a less talented running back but being in a system that fits him and allows him to be successful..exe Olandis Gary in the Broncos Scheme...i would have never argued Gary was better than say at the time a Jamal Lewis, or Ricky Williams...but he was VERY PRODUCTIVE due to the system.


But one last thing the Mike Bell might actually fit what the saints have been trying to find in a HB...does that mean Mike Bell is in any way more talented or a better football player that Bush?


I guess i honestly believe the scheme and system play A LOT into production, exe if you played a 4-3 end as a 3-4 OLB...A LOT of times it just wont work...while a lot of the 3-4 OLBs were 4-3 Ends at one time, they fit better into the 3-4 Scheme, and that said if Dwight Freeney played 3-4 OLB and was not producing...thats a Scheme issue as he is a better 4-3 end.

This guy.

Thing is, to get any type of yards, in the Saints running game, you have to be able to fall forward when you get crammed in the backfield. That's Bush's weakness, he doesn't have the leg drive to push huge guys back when he's hit.

If you put all of these guys in a big offensive line (maybe like Dallas or Philly) one that is going to give you plenty of time to get to the second level, then Bush is going to average more yards per carry, because he's so much more dangerous once he hits that point.

Bush isn't a back that can run behind shoddy run blocking where someone gets in and gets a lick every time. Bell/Thomas, those guys are really powerful, they can break a lot of tackles when they don't even have their feet moving yet.

You sure up your line though, and give him time to get out of the backfield, he's going to look amazing, and everyone would be licking his nuts again.

ALSO, send him downfield Sean Payton, every single time a LB is on Bush, he should be motioned out, and sent deep, not used as a checkdown.

His yards per touch is always really high, despite catching everything in the backfield or 1-2 yards past the line of scrimmage. Half of his catches are glorified toss plays, or one where he catches just past the D-line, but just before the linebackers, so then he has to make a linebacker or 2 miss, then get past the DBs, and he's good for 5-10 yards every time... that's our way of getting him past those initial hits in the backfield when Stinch or Goodwin let their man fly in, get him past the line, and great things happen.

I doubt it, people seem to have solidified their opinions about Reggie, and Darren just won't stop playing the hero card.

Yup, people love to try and pile on to highly touted prospects.

Anyway, when Bush was healthy, he was number 1 in the league in touchdowns last year before going down with his injury.

I think the trap people are falling into is thinking his passes are sending him downfield, when they are all basically runs to the outside, or like a run to the middle without having to break the D-Linemen.

Love Sproles, but his sample size is pretty small to be honest, and he's never been gameplanned against like Bush is.

niel89
09-18-2009, 04:26 PM
How do you spell Darren Sproles?



L.T.

yourfavestoner
09-18-2009, 05:41 PM
They should abandon the Reggie Bush-Running back project.
Make him a full time WR and put him in the slot in a Welker-role.
He'd dominate.

I was saying this before he was even drafted. Nobody wanted to listen, though. People were too busy getting ready to induct him into the HOF.

MetSox17
09-18-2009, 06:08 PM
I was saying this before he was even drafted. Nobody wanted to listen, though. People were too busy getting ready to induct him into the HOF.

I 'member.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
09-18-2009, 06:34 PM
I was in that camp as well. I thought he'd be better than this, but I knew he needed to do some adjusting and wouldn't be able to run around against players as athletic as he was. If you look at the Texas game, save a couple of plays, Bush was bottled up pretty well. That was the best defense he faced, and still not nearly as good and athletic as an actual NFL defense.

Shiver
09-18-2009, 06:44 PM
I really wish you could have set up the poll so we could see what 17 people voted for Reggie Bush.

Gay Ork Wang
09-18-2009, 06:45 PM
I really wish you could have set up the poll so we could see what 17 people voted for Reggie Bush.
i did. its easier to find Rbs than incredible slot WRs ;)

Shiver
09-18-2009, 06:48 PM
What I think is amazing is plenty of Running Backs, with less hype, became what Reggie Bush should have been. Not only Sproles, but also Maurice Jones-Drew and Steve Slaton. At least now everyone knows what Reggie Bush is, a Kevin Faulk type, and the hype has all but disappeared.

gsorace
09-18-2009, 06:51 PM
Make the poll question specific - "in their respective system" or "based on talent" and the vote probably changes quite a bit.

"Based on talent" Michael Vick is a better QB than Joe Montana.

People need to stop making excuses for Reggie Bush, he's a great athlete but a bad football player.

gsorace
09-18-2009, 06:51 PM
What I think is amazing is plenty of Running Backs, with less hype, became what Reggie Bush should have been. Not only Sproles, but also Maurice Jones-Drew and Steve Slaton. At least now everyone knows what Reggie Bush is, a Kevin Faulk type, and the hype has all but disappeared.

Don't forget Leon Washington

Malaka
09-18-2009, 06:58 PM
"Based on talent" Michael Vick is a better QB than Joe Montana.

People need to stop making excuses for Reggie Bush, he's a great athlete but a bad football player.

He's not bad but pretty damn mediocre. I think he should be used differently but this has been discussed time and time again.

Bucs_Rule
09-18-2009, 07:28 PM
Bush would make a great slot WR. He's playing out of position.

bigbluedefense
09-18-2009, 07:34 PM
I just don't get it. I really don't.

First off, why should Sean Payton change his offense for Bush? Why? Don't they put up a ******** of points every week? So why should he change the system for a bust RB with a diva attitude who would probably bust anyway?

And for those saying run outside with him, thats not realistic. You can't just run outside all game. Defenses will eat that up in no time. If youre a RB, you have to run between the tackles. Period.

And I don't care what his triangle numbers are, RBs are all about vision. Bush has no vision. So even if you did run outside runs, he'd still suck. The guy has one of the worst visions at RB in the game.

I got an idea, if Bush wants to succeed, why doesn't he learn how to play within the system? Why doesn't he learn how to block? What crime is it to learn how to block?

Let's give it a rest. He is what he is. He's not a very good NFL player. He's a dynamic slot WR/kick returner in a different system. Thats it. Nothing more.

He's not a RB. People need to accept that fact.

wonderbredd24
09-18-2009, 07:46 PM
I just don't get it. I really don't.

First off, why should Sean Payton change his offense for Bush? Why? Don't they put up a ******** of points every week? So why should he change the system for a bust RB with a diva attitude who would probably bust anyway?

And for those saying run outside with him, thats not realistic. You can't just run outside all game. Defenses will eat that up in no time. If youre a RB, you have to run between the tackles. Period.

And I don't care what his triangle numbers are, RBs are all about vision. Bush has no vision. So even if you did run outside runs, he'd still suck. The guy has one of the worst visions at RB in the game.

I got an idea, if Bush wants to succeed, why doesn't he learn how to play within the system? Why doesn't he learn how to block? What crime is it to learn how to block?

Let's give it a rest. He is what he is. He's not a very good NFL player. He's a dynamic slot WR/kick returner in a different system. Thats it. Nothing more.

He's not a RB. People need to accept that fact.

I disagree... Reggie Bush has vision as illustrated by his playmaking ability when he has the ball in his hands, but he is a ***** between the tackles. He's Peter Warrick

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
09-18-2009, 07:55 PM
It's easy to have vision when you catch the ball on the outside and have the phonebooth quickness he has. He'd be a star at WR. Literally, a star. They need to put him there and draft a legit RB.

FUNBUNCHER
09-18-2009, 08:10 PM
Sproles has shown a lot more and is being used better. That said if Shaun Payton weren't a tard I think Reggie would be looking a lot better.

Yeah, it's Sean Payton's fault the 2nd coming of Gayle Sayers is the NFL's biggest bust since Tim Couch.

Sproles all day, every day.

Call me when Reggie rushes for 1000 yards in a season.

EDIT: Bush fans need to be careful about making too many excuses for him, the fact is he lacks the pure running instincts to be successful in the pros.

Take Clinton Portis, he dominated in a ZBS in Denver, then came to the Skins in the NFCE, which is a smash mouth between the tackles division. It didn't make any difference, Portis still wrecked the league.

Personally I think Bush may be soft and runs a little scared. He's not strong and his game speed is not the huge advantage it was for him at USC.

Reggie Bush is about the same size Marshall Faulk was, and yet they aren't even in the same universe as football players. Faulk also played in a pass happy scheme in St. Louis, but when they won the SB, Marshall rushed for 1300+ yards and had over a 1000 yards receiving.

I don't know why, but as a pro Bush doesn't have 'IT'.

wonderbredd24
09-18-2009, 08:20 PM
Yeah, it's Sean Payton's fault the 2nd coming of Gayle Sayers is the NFL's biggest bust since Tim Couch.

Sproles all day, every day.

Call me when Reggie rushes for 1000 yards in a season.

I resent the comparison to Tim Couch. The kid had talent, but was surrounded by might have been the worst football team since McKay's Bucs

You look at that guy's rookie year considering the guys around him and he was pretty damn decent

FUNBUNCHER
09-18-2009, 08:32 PM
YEah, if Couch had been in a different system under a different HC, and also didn't have those nagging injuries, he probably would have experienced a different pro career.

Matter of fact, it was his choice to retire, I still think there are teams who would be interested to have him on their roster.

Still, for whatever reasons, based mainly on draft expectations, Couch did bust.
Which doesn't make him a bad human being!!

Shiver
09-18-2009, 08:44 PM
You cannot just turn him into a WR; to be a successful NFL receiver you need to have the mental game and precise route running, two things Bush does not have. Besides, you don't take someone 2nd overall to switch his position midway through his career. Let's face facts, he was a disaster who didn't even fulfill his "floor" of being Brian Westbrook. (Remember the Bush/Sayers nonsense, ha ha) You can get players who do the same thing in the 2nd and 3rd rounds, except they do it better: see Sproles, Norwood and Washington.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
09-18-2009, 09:13 PM
You cannot just turn him into a WR; to be a successful NFL receiver you need to have the mental game and precise route running, two things Bush does not have. Besides, you don't take someone 2nd overall to switch his position midway through his career. Let's face facts, he was a disaster who didn't even fulfill his "floor" of being Brian Westbrook. (Remember the Bush/Sayers nonsense, ha ha) You can get players who do the same thing in the 2nd and 3rd rounds, except they do it better: see Sproles, Norwood and Washington.

Lol, I remember taking flak for saying Bush had no shot at being as good as Marshall Faulk.

Splat
09-18-2009, 09:15 PM
I picked DS as well as most of you but I'm not going to lie I thought Reggie Bush was going to be a special player and was like WTF when Houston passed I fail.

wonderbredd24
09-18-2009, 09:20 PM
You cannot just turn him into a WR; to be a successful NFL receiver you need to have the mental game and precise route running, two things Bush does not have. Besides, you don't take someone 2nd overall to switch his position midway through his career. Let's face facts, he was a disaster who didn't even fulfill his "floor" of being Brian Westbrook. (Remember the Bush/Sayers nonsense, ha ha) You can get players who do the same thing in the 2nd and 3rd rounds, except they do it better: see Sproles, Norwood and Washington.

After 6 years in Cleveland as a running back, Eric Metcalf was dealt to Atlanta and moved to slot receiver his first year there, 1995.

The Result?

104 catches, 1,189 yards, 8 TDs

So I do think it's possible for Bush to transition to being a wide receiver.

Will they try it? Remains to be seen

Splat
09-18-2009, 09:26 PM
I think it is for sure possible for Bush to transition to being a full time wide receiver if guys can play QB and CB in college and make the switch Bush should be able to as well.

Saints-Tigers
09-18-2009, 09:56 PM
So if Reggie makes a minuscule improvement and actually remains healthy, he could easily go from 3.8 yards a carry to 4.... would that make him a real RB? lol.

FUNBUNCHER
09-18-2009, 10:21 PM
After 6 years in Cleveland as a running back, Eric Metcalf was dealt to Atlanta and moved to slot receiver his first year there, 1995.

The Result?

104 catches, 1,189 yards, 8 TDs

So I do think it's possible for Bush to transition to being a wide receiver.

Will they try it? Remains to be seen

Rep worthy nugget on Metcalf. (IMO he's still the greatest offensive skill player to come out of the Washington, DC Metro Area.)

Maybe it's time for Mr. Bush to dress for games wearing a number in the 80s and work out after practice shagging punts and kickoffs.;)

Saints 4 Lyfe
09-18-2009, 11:27 PM
Moss failed in Oakland because our pass protection was historically bad and he didn't try so that's really not relevant.

Just like you shouldn't draft a WR/KR to play RB.

We drafted an ATH to play RB...Not a true WR...Not a true RB...

Shiver
09-19-2009, 08:12 AM
That is a distortion of reality. When he was at USC he was a great RB, he was much more than just an "athlete." The problem is he relied on his speed and ability to make people miss, which is great, but he did not have the vision or patience necessary for the pro level.

Nalej
09-19-2009, 10:41 AM
Rep worthy nugget on Metcalf. (IMO he's still the greatest offensive skill player to come out of the Washington, DC Metro Area.)

Maybe it's time for Mr. Bush to dress for games wearing a number in the 80s and work out after practice shagging punts and kickoffs.;)

Why? If D. Hester can keep his 23- why wouldn't Reggie be able to keep 25?

aNYtitan
09-19-2009, 11:15 AM
Give me someone who has actually proved something on the NFL level. Not saying Bush can't become a better football player, but asking right now, then Sproles it is

Iamcanadian
09-19-2009, 11:46 AM
They should abandon the Reggie Bush-Running back project.
Make him a full time WR and put him in the slot in a Welker-role.
He'd dominate.

Sounds about right to me. He is a solid receiver but I don't think he will ever be a solid RB. He is also a kick and punt returner supreme.

MetSox17
09-19-2009, 11:47 AM
I love how everyone bashes Bush for his inability to be a pure runner when talking about Sproles, who has had a whole 115 career carries.

He ain't no big deal in between the tackles either, so the day that they're both used the same way, then call me. Athletically speaking, i'd take Bush easily over Sproles.

bigbluedefense
09-19-2009, 12:00 PM
I love how everyone bashes Bush for his inability to be a pure runner when talking about Sproles, who has had a whole 115 career carries.

He ain't no big deal in between the tackles either, so the day that they're both used the same way, then call me. Athletically speaking, i'd take Bush easily over Sproles.

Yet everyone in Dallas was ready to annoit Felix Jones the greatest thing since sliced bread after what....30 carries last season?

Funny stuff.

You can see talent. Felix Jones has talent. Darren Sproles has talent. Reggie Bush doesn't.

MetSox17
09-19-2009, 12:06 PM
Yet everyone in Dallas was ready to annoit Felix Jones the greatest thing since sliced bread after what....30 carries last season?

Funny stuff.

You can see talent. Felix Jones has talent. Darren Sproles has talent. Reggie Bush doesn't.

You quote my post, almost inferring that i was one of those people.

Is that what you're saying, bbd?

bigbluedefense
09-19-2009, 12:23 PM
You quote my post, almost inferring that i was one of those people.

Is that what you're saying, bbd?

im validating their statement. like i said, you can see talent, even if its a small sample size sometimes.

i felt Ahmad Bradshaw would be a beast after his rookie year despite a small sample size, I feel that Felix will be the same, I think Darren is the best RB in SD at the moment, etc etc etc.

I was a big Michael Turner fan before he left SD.

We don't need to see Sproles run it 300 times before we can say he's a good player.

RB is one of the easiest positions to evaluate. The fact that they are dime a dozen, and Bush is struggling as one is just clear evidence to me of what he really is. No scheme change is gonna fix the guy. He just has no vision, and can't use his speed the way he did in college. Thats the truth.

And you can't just throw the guy at WR either. He has to learn the route tree, he has to learn how to read defenses, and he has to learn how to get open on CBs, not LBs. The guy is what he is.

E-Man
09-19-2009, 03:15 PM
BBD is right about RBs. Either you have it, or you don't. It's not exactly a position of rocket science, and there's always good ones available every year in the draft and FA.

Saints-Tigers
09-19-2009, 04:31 PM
No scheme change is gonna fix the guy.

It's funny you say that, because I remember one of a small handful of games where he was used like a true HB, it was his rookie year against the Giants and he ran all over them.

I don't know how talentless, visionless players can have a lot of big games sprinkled in to the poor ones.

I dunno, Sproles has 12 touchdowns in 47 career games. Bush had 8 touchdowns in the first 6 games before he got injured last season.

Edit: One last thing, cuz no one is changing their minds. The one thing I think that can keep Reggie from being a premier player is his injury concerns. I think about how RBs are used, and how a lot of guys get their big plays and up their YPC in the second half, not always of course, but a good bit of the time it seems.

Now, the Saints abandon the run early, and we never really give Bush the amount of carries big time backs get to establish a rhythm, and wear a defense down. Of course, this could be due to Bush's inability to take that amount of pounding as well, and I can see that.

I just think about someone like Adrian Peterson, the most talented pure runner in the league, this guy can get the ball 18 times in the first half, and still only have like 45 yards or so, even HE can get stuffed that much. But in the second half, he can end with 25 carries and almost 180 yards because the defense is worn down, he's warmed up, and he has his rhythm going.

I think Reggie's YPC and productivity would go up heaps with more carries, especially in the second half, where the Saints usually give up on the run completely and go totally to the passing game (They are supposedly making a concerted effort to pound the ball in the second half). I think Sean Payton and his staff know this, they've said before that they know Reggie's production always rises the more he touches the ball, but I think they worry about him getting banged up.

Reggie isn't Barry Sanders at all, but I think if he actually stayed healthy, and was given a bulk of carries, he could get well over 1000 yards, while still being the best receiving back in the league, possibly the most dangerous returner, an exceptional pass protector, and a game changer that the defense has to plan around.

I just worry about the injuries, and how careless he has become with the ball lately. He got a **** ton of touches as a rookie and only fumbled twice, lately it seems to be a mental thing.

He's a unique player that has to be tailored to, but I don't think people are looking much beyond statistics to be honest.

gsorace
09-19-2009, 05:35 PM
I dunno, Sproles has 12 touchdowns in 47 career games. Bush had 8 touchdowns in the first 6 games before he got injured last season.

Yeah but he only had 2 rushing TDs all of last season.

Kyle Orton had 3.

Sniper
09-19-2009, 05:36 PM
Yeah but he only had 2 rushing TDs all of last season.

Kyle Orton had 3.

Are rushing TDs worth more than other TDs?

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
09-19-2009, 05:46 PM
Are rushing TDs worth more than other TDs?

The Elias sports bureau calculated that the average rushing TD is worth 6.2 points, the average return touchdown 5.7, and the average TD through the air at 5.9.

Sniper
09-19-2009, 05:49 PM
The Elias sports bureau calculated that the average rushing TD is worth 6.2 points, the average return touchdown 5.7, and the average TD through the air at 5.9.

Ah, thanks. Appreciate the clarification.

FUNBUNCHER
09-19-2009, 07:01 PM
What hurts Bush is the unbelievable hype surrounding him after he left USC, and the success of other highly touted RBs in recent years, ( AD, DeAngelo WIlliams, Chris Johnson, Matt Forte).
All I heard leading up to Reggie's draft year was Bush = Barry Sanders + Gayle Sayers...blah, blah, blah.
So far he's proven he's not even a credible NFL RB. Maybe he rebounds when he isn't re-signed by NO, maybe he never figures out the pro game at all.
I still think he has the tools to be successful, but he needs to realize he can't out-juke his way to the endzone in the NFL, sometimes a RB has to make one cut and run for daylight and forget all that dancing.

yo123
09-19-2009, 09:24 PM
So if Reggie makes a minuscule improvement and actually remains healthy, he could easily go from 3.8 yards a carry to 4.... would that make him a real RB? lol.



Wouldn't matter. A RB who can only get 4.0 yards a carry still isn't worth the #2 overall pick.

E-Man
09-20-2009, 11:41 AM
just to play devil's advocate:

a lot of people said the same thing about thomas jones after arizona. i'm not suggesting that bush=jones, but blanket statements like this aren't really true (not picking specifically on your comment, your was just the last one i saw expressing the same argument that others have put forward).

I can see what you're saying, and I agree that players can revamp themselves. Jones is a great example of that, but he's more the exception than the rule with RBs. Now Jones was in Arizona, so there was that built in excuse that he was playing for one of the worst franchises at the time. We can't really say how true that is, but it does seem to have some truth. It might be the same with Bush, but he's played in a great offense with productive backs so far in his career. I know he's a totally different player from Pierre Thomas, but if Thomas can be productive behind the Saints' so called crappy line why can't Reggie as a backup? Good backup tail backs average 4.5+ a carry, so his below 4 average is abysmal. There are excuses for his performance, and they may or may not be valid. The fact remains that as a running back he hasn't been what he was advertised as. You can't be an number 2 pick overall, hailed as the second coming of Jesus, and settle for the "he's not a true running back" excuse.

My point was more about the availability of RBs every year though as opposed to just being about Bush. One of the dumbest things said about Bush when the Texans passed on him was that RBs like him come along once every 30 years, but people failed to realize that great runners have been found in almost every draft. Thurman Thomas, Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith, and Ricky Watters were drafted in consecutive drafts. Jerome Bettis, Marshall Faulk, Jamal Anderson, Curtis Martin, and Terrell Davis, Eddie George, Warrick Dunn, Tiki Barber, Priest Holmes, Fred Taylor, Ricky Williams, Edgerrin James, Jamal Lewis, Shaun Alexander, Thomas Jones, LaDanian Tomlinson, Deuce McAllister, Travis Henry, Clinton Portis, Brian Westbrook, and Larry Johnson all came out in consecutive years. Thomas, Sanders, and Smith are Hall of Famers that came out in consecutive years. Same thing with Bettis, Faulk, and Curtis Martin. I love running backs, more so than quarterbacks even. Still, it's easier to find a good or great runner than most positions.

Edit: This is what happens when I wake up too early on a football Sunday. I kill time looking up draft stats. lol

NotRickJames
09-20-2009, 03:21 PM
This shouldn't be a debate.

Darren Sproles is a much better runner and arguably has just as good hands out of the backfield. Plus, Sproles can return kicks....Bush can't. Reggie Bush is a bonafide bust.

Yeah....Sporoles

Saints-Tigers
09-20-2009, 03:32 PM
This shouldn't be a debate.

Darren Sproles is a much better runner and arguably has just as good hands out of the backfield. Plus, Sproles can return kicks....Bush can't. Reggie Bush is a bonafide bust.


Um, no he doesn't have arguably just as good of hands. Sproles has 47 catches for 426 yards in his 47 game career. Bush had 52 catches for 440 yards in 10 games last year, 4 of which he was playing with an injury that required microfracture surgery.

Darren Sproles has 3 touchdowns on 225 total returns in his career(1 td every 75 returns). Reggie has 4 touchdowns on 54 total returns(1 TD every 13.5 returns).

I know people love to hate on Reggie, but the hyperbole is getting ridiculous.

Saints-Tigers
09-20-2009, 03:36 PM
Lol, make that 48 catches for 500+ yards. **** you sproles :D

CC.SD
09-20-2009, 07:51 PM
Hmmm may have to go with Sproles now.

P-L
09-20-2009, 08:11 PM
Like others have said, Sean Payton's stubbornness has hindered Bush. Reggie Bush is not a true running back, he really wasn't even a true running back at USC. The guy would be dynamite if New Orleans used him like Florida used Percy Harvin. It's not Reggie's fault that he's being used as a traditional running back. Sproles is probably the better runner, but if used correctly, Bush would be the better player.

Saints-Tigers
09-20-2009, 08:17 PM
Bush has never been used as a traditional back. That's really where he functions best as a runner. All that toss play, draw play, reverses, and all that other **** is where his worst habits come out and he tries to make a big play. The drive where Mike Bell got hurt is how Bush should be used, and no surprise, it finished with a TD.

Saints 4 Lyfe
09-20-2009, 08:25 PM
I'd trade Bush right now if I could. All i hear though is "I'd hate to see what he does with another team". Well, right now he's rushing for 9 yards a game, returning punts for -8 yards a punt and fumbling punts. It's become clear Payton will not utilize him like he should which is a slot WR. He wants to make him Brian Wesbook when he should be Steve Smith.

Shiver
09-20-2009, 10:30 PM
I think the Saints have gone above and beyond to get Reggie Bush into successful situations. I think it is a copout to say that it is Payton's fault for using him incorrectly. You have to try hard to not succeed in New Orleans' offense. He has been used as a runner and as a receiver, all over the field to create mismatches, he simply hasn't produced up to his alleged talent. Maybe he just isn't that good? Chris Johnson is what Reggie Bush should have been, he is doing to NFL teams what Reggie Bush did to Pac-10 teams.

Saints-Tigers
09-20-2009, 10:33 PM
Eh, he's been a fine receiver, he's the safety net, if all else breaks down, we hit Reggie right around the line and he gets us a first down most of the time, and breaks some off. He has always been successful as a downfield receiver, he doesn't get sent down field at all though, function of the offense though, so it's fine.

Running the ball has been the problem, but the gadget plays exasperate the issue tremendously. That, and lack of carries like I said, you can't break big runs if you only get a handful of carries, especially on a team that isn't opening big holes or wearing down defenses with the run.

Flyboy
09-21-2009, 01:22 AM
I think it'd be silly to trade Bush, however, I do think the team should ask him to reduce his contract.

no bare feet
09-21-2009, 07:56 AM
Sproles and I think it is pretty much a no brainer at this point.