PDA

View Full Version : Michael Bush


leroyisgod
04-12-2007, 08:51 AM
I've heard some rumors that he had a setback with the broken leg and a lot of experts are calling him a second day pick now. I'm trying to find the article I read yesterday. At any rate, it would be intriguing to spend a 5th round pick or later on him.

KILLERSANTA
04-12-2007, 08:54 AM
I've heard some rumors that he had a setback with the broken leg and a lot of experts are calling him a second day pick now. I'm trying to find the article I read yesterday. At any rate, it would be intriguing to spend a 5th round pick or later on him.

If he's there in the 3rd, Draft him..BPA!!!!

M.O.T.H.
04-12-2007, 08:55 AM
we dont need him.

KILLERSANTA
04-12-2007, 08:57 AM
we dont need him.

Agree, But if you can get skill players like him in the 3rd or 4th. You gotta do it!

M.O.T.H.
04-12-2007, 09:00 AM
Agree, But if you can get skill players like him in the 3rd or 4th. You gotta do it!

This is going to be an interesting draft for us... BPA is most likely going to play a very large role... We're set at a number of positions. So, it could happen.

FinChase
04-12-2007, 09:07 AM
JJ probably only has 1 year left on his rookie contract. If we could get a guy the quality of Michael Bush cheaply, I say do it. He can be used sparingly this year while he fully heals because we've already got two capable guys in JJ and Barber.

M.O.T.H.
04-12-2007, 09:21 AM
JJ probably only has 1 year left on his rookie contract. If we could get a guy the quality of Michael Bush cheaply, I say do it. He can be used sparingly this year while he fully heals because we've already got two capable guys in JJ and Barber.

I'd rather have a speed guy to complement Barber... if we do indeed go in that direction.

Macarthur
04-13-2007, 01:54 PM
Bush would be a huge value pick on day two. He is a talent. NOthing wrong with letting him heal this year and then picking up the slack when JJ goes away after this year.

JJJ888
04-13-2007, 05:32 PM
I would take him in a heartbeat if he reached us in the 5th. If it were not for his injury, he would easily be my #3 running back in the draft, possibly #2. At that point in the draft, it isn't about need, it's about getting the best player you can. If Bush can regain the form he had in college, we'll either get a great runningback or great trade bait.

Staubach12
04-13-2007, 06:23 PM
No need at RB. I don't see why we would. RB is one of our strong points. It would be a wasted pick. I understand saying BPA, but we don't have a place for him on the team.

JJJ888
04-13-2007, 06:55 PM
You don't draft for need, especially in this draft, especially on the 2nd day. If you can find a player like Bush who you believe is going to be a star, or even a good starter, then you take him. I'm sure all of you would have loved to have taken Marques Colston in the 6th round this year, despite the lack of need. At the very worst, Bush can be trade bait in a couple of years.

D-Fence
04-13-2007, 10:31 PM
A healthy Michael Bush is better than Marshawn Lynch. I understand we've got depth at RB, but that's perfect considering Michael probably wouldn't be ready to play much for another year or so. Take him, give him the time to get healthy and back in football shape, and either let Julius walk after 2007, or re-sign him and use either Barber or Bush as trade-bait somewhere down the line...

M.O.T.H.
04-14-2007, 12:37 AM
[QUOTE=D-Fence;302979]A healthy Michael Bush is better than Marshawn Lynch. QUOTE]

That is just not true. Bush was a great RB but, he does not possess the abilities of a Lynch. Lynch is better in nearly every aspect.

jetBLACK08
04-14-2007, 11:25 AM
If he is available in the 4th , you totally HAVE to go for him

JJJ888
04-16-2007, 01:50 PM
From Dallascowboys.com:

That is unless the Cowboys are thinking down the road. Jones is entering the final year of his contract and Barber will become a restricted free agent after the season. For those reasons alone, the Cowboys might just consider grabbing a running back, possibly in the middle rounds, especially if one happens to fall in their lap.

D-Unit
04-17-2007, 06:05 AM
With the RB situation so poor in Atlanta, I would find it hard to believe Petrino would allow Bush to fall that far. Norwood was promising, but it doesn't rule out RB by any means.

Modano
04-17-2007, 01:47 PM
If Lynch somehow fall to us, do you think we should take him?
I'd take him without an esitation, him and Barber in the same backfield, damn, it's could be so sweet!

M.O.T.H.
04-17-2007, 01:59 PM
If Lynch somehow fall to us, do you think we should take him?
I'd take him without an esitation, him and Barber in the same backfield, damn, it's could be so sweet!

Wont happen considering the need of a quality back for the Bills and Packers but if it somehow did........ I'd want him. He's one of my fav prospects...would it be the best pick...of course not but, as a Lynch fan... i'd jump all over it. That's just me being a fan though. :)

D-Unit
04-17-2007, 03:16 PM
I thought this thread was about Michael Bush? Oh well... just like every other thread we have here, I guess another one that goes off tangent is fine...

I've said Lynch will be a better RB than AD... so yeah, I would be intrigued by the thought of drafting him. However, it might not be the smartest move... Could be... but it couldn't be at the same time...

LSUALUM99
04-17-2007, 04:28 PM
I think Lynch will be drafted by the Packers at the earliest, and even then with his questionable character and possible lingering back problems he may not be. I think a team like the NYG would have a hard time passing on him, more so than the cowboys. I could see us trading down if he's there to a team that wants him.

I wouldn't mind having him on the team, but I'm not sold on the idea.

thule
04-17-2007, 04:34 PM
I would hate having lynch on the team. He is the definition of a thug.

D-Unit
04-17-2007, 05:01 PM
I would hate having lynch on the team. He is the definition of a thug.
As is Ray Lewis. I think it's ok, if it's controlled.

LSUALUM99
04-17-2007, 08:30 PM
I do think that the recent actions by the commissioner with player suspensions makes a player with questionable character a much bigger risk.

It's hard to draft a guy that may or may not be suspended for half the season if he's in trouble off the field. I'm not specifically saying Lynch is that guy, just as a generality though.

LSUALUM99
04-17-2007, 08:33 PM
As is Ray Lewis. I think it's ok, if it's controlled.


I would disagree with this statement. Other than the one incident with the law, of which he was not convicted btw, I cannot think of another time when Lewis was in trouble off the field.

Lewis is for all intents and purposes the face of the NFL with his demeanor, charisma, and TV spots on NFL network and the like. Peyton gets more national endorsements by private companies, but Lewis is constantly on the NFL network and the 'in his own words' shows.

thule
04-17-2007, 09:46 PM
As is Ray Lewis. I think it's ok, if it's controlled.

Well as everyone around here knows I love smarts in a player. Lynch plays good on the field...but his intellectual capacity on television interviews is next to nothing. I want smart players as much as i bag on JJ...he isn't a thug. I wasn't even trying to touch on the off the field character concerns but sure that adds to it.

Modano
04-18-2007, 01:36 AM
I would hate having lynch on the team. He is the definition of a thug.

Do you mean:

As Tupac defined it, a thug is someone who is going through struggles, has gone through struggles, and continues to live day by day with nothing for them. That person is a thug. and the life they are living is the thug life. A thug is NOT a gangster. Look up gangster and gangsta. Not even CLOSE, my friend.

:P

Ward
04-18-2007, 02:33 AM
Do you mean:

As Tupac defined it, a thug is someone who is going through struggles, has gone through struggles, and continues to live day by day with nothing for them. That person is a thug. and the life they are living is the thug life. A thug is NOT a gangster. Look up gangster and gangsta. Not even CLOSE, my friend.

:P

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/thug

1. a cruel or vicious ruffian, robber, or murderer.

robert_in_bigd
04-18-2007, 08:57 AM
Do you mean:

As Tupac defined it, a thug is someone who is going through struggles, has gone through struggles, and continues to live day by day with nothing for them. That person is a thug. and the life they are living is the thug life. A thug is NOT a gangster. Look up gangster and gangsta. Not even CLOSE, my friend.

:P

So Tupac is replacing Webster's and Wikipedia?

I think we know what a Thug is and I am sure Tupac definition while fascinating is not "generally acceptable."

LOL.

Modano
04-18-2007, 09:24 AM
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/thug

Ward, I was kidding...

robert_in_bigd
04-18-2007, 09:44 AM
Ward, I was kidding...

Sarcasm is hard to communicate in writing.

thule
04-18-2007, 01:43 PM
I was talking about him eating muskrats out of the gutter :P

robert_in_bigd
04-18-2007, 01:48 PM
I was talking about him eating muskrats out of the gutter :P

Tasty treats they are to the starving. A little salt, pepper and steak sauce.