PDA

View Full Version : McFadden vs Bush


supermario86
05-25-2007, 08:58 AM
I'm gonna have to say Reggie just because of his athletic ability and sheer versatility

schmiddog
05-25-2007, 09:32 AM
McFadden all day, every day.


He's a full time back in the NFL, Reggie is not.

McFadden's potential exceeds Peterson's

islandboy843
05-25-2007, 09:37 AM
I got to with Mcfadden. If Bush can put everything together than he will be better.

bernbabybern820
05-25-2007, 10:00 AM
McFadden all day, every day.


He's a full time back in the NFL, Reggie is not.

McFadden's potential exceeds Peterson's

And Reggie's potential exceeds McFadden's.

princefielder28
05-25-2007, 10:46 AM
I'm suprised that this is even a competition; Reggie absolutely unbelieveable and the only reason people pick McFadden would be becuase he's still in colleeg and is fresher in people's minds

TPFKA#1SaintsFan
05-25-2007, 11:11 AM
I'm suprised that this is even a competition; Reggie absolutely unbelieveable and the only reason people pick McFadden would be becuase he's still in colleeg and is fresher in people's minds

B-I-N-G-O, and Bingo was his name-oh.

Bengals1690
05-25-2007, 11:41 AM
Reggie Bush. easily.

Phrost
05-25-2007, 11:57 AM
McFadden has the combination of speed and power at a level we haven't seen in quite some time.

He is ALWAYS a homerun threat and he is better between the tackles than Bush will ever be. Bush has better hands and overall athleticism.

reese
05-25-2007, 12:58 PM
bush has the tool to be one of the most vers backs of all time i think...think about all the yards from scrimmage marshall faulk put up in stl when he was catchin passes and runnin the ball too...reggie will have the chance to do that his entire career and he is only gonna get better

soybean
05-25-2007, 01:26 PM
McFadden has the combination of speed and power at a level we haven't seen in quite some time.

He is ALWAYS a homerun threat and he is better between the tackles than Bush will ever be. Bush has better hands and overall athleticism.

and bush wasn't in college?

ok, he's better between the tackles but how bout the outside? how bout with screen passes? how bout catching out of the slot?

i forgot who said it but, theres more to being a running back than just ground and pounding.

Staubach12
05-25-2007, 01:48 PM
Reggie Bush, no question. The sheer talent is immeasurable. He's just incredible. McFaddens come around every few years. You see a Reggie Bush every few decades.

draftguru151
05-25-2007, 02:20 PM
Wow, some pretty bad McFadden disrespect in here. Easily? No question? I think McFadden still has stuff to prove but he is already very close to Bush in terms of pro potential. He has great size, amazing inside and outside running ability, great speed and breakaway ability, receiving ability, he can even throw the ball. As a pro prospect, McFadden is a much more complete player. As of now I'd still have Bush higher, but it's a very small margin, and after McFadden's junior year there is a very good change he will be above Bush.

Phrost
05-25-2007, 02:22 PM
Wow, some pretty bad McFadden disrespect in here. Easily? No question? I think McFadden still has stuff to prove but he is already very close to Bush in terms of pro potential. He has great size, amazing inside and outside running ability, great speed and breakaway ability, receiving ability, he can even throw the ball. As a pro prospect, McFadden is a much more complete player. As of now I'd still have Bush higher, but it's a very small margin, and after McFadden's junior year there is a very good change he will be above Bush.

I agree with all points, We should remember McFadden was only a Sophomore. Bush had his best season as a junior on a loaded USC offense.

bored of education
05-25-2007, 02:34 PM
I agree with all points, We should remember McFadden was only a Sophomore. Bush had his best season as a junior on a loaded USC offense.

Is that in favor of Bush or McFadden. Explain why?

Phrost
05-25-2007, 02:37 PM
Is that in favor of Bush or McFadden. Explain why?

Its a little of both. It means the best is yet to come for Micky but without too many others weapons on the field don't expect a heisman winner or anything like that.

SenorGato
05-25-2007, 02:41 PM
You know I like Peterson more than both, but I've always been a fan of guys who run like him.

Then again, I can't say that I have a true feel for McFadden as a project.

Bush was a sick prospect, but I don't think he'll ever be a full time RB or the Faulk clone many think he'll become.

Phrost
05-25-2007, 02:45 PM
You know I like Peterson more than both, but I've always been a fan of guys who run like him.

Then again, I can't say that I have a true feel for McFadden as a project.

Bush was a sick prospect, but I don't think he'll ever be a full time RB or the Faulk clone many think he'll become.

Agreed.

Same here. With the way offenses are run in the NFL today, I would take a pounder every time.

McFadden is a slightly puzzling one. He has had a major injury I think and I really can't think of a player today or from the past that fits his mold closely.

draftguru151
05-25-2007, 03:18 PM
The only injuries McFadden has had are the toe injury and the ankle injury at the end of this past season.

-black
05-25-2007, 03:29 PM
lol every year people will get a new favorite rb that totally erases the memory of their past favorite......next off seasons question

CJ Spiller vs Bush

islandboy843
05-25-2007, 03:33 PM
I love Spiller with a passion.

Paranoidmoonduck
05-25-2007, 03:42 PM
At this point I can't accurately assess them as prospects, and although McFadden looks primed for a monster year, you never know.

I have Bush ahead by a small margin, but both look like special players.

Acreboy
05-25-2007, 03:45 PM
McFadden has the combination of speed and power at a level we haven't seen in quite some time.

He is ALWAYS a homerun threat and he is better between the tackles than Bush will ever be. Bush has better hands and overall athleticism.Bush was too.

It's Bush but it is closer than people think.

draftguru151
05-25-2007, 03:50 PM
Bush was too.

It's Bush but it is closer than people think.

The 2nd part on his line was the point, he has breakaway ability, but he is also a guy who can get the tough yards and run inside.

dabears10
05-25-2007, 03:51 PM
I think McFadden and AP are more comparable than Bush and DMC.

You really can't make this comparison yet, as of now the edge should go to Bush.

Kurve
05-25-2007, 04:05 PM
i think both coming out of college Bush would still be the higher prospect by a big margin. Bush was compared to Gale Sayers in college how many get compared to someone of that caliber ever coming out of college? Yeah he was in a stocked USC team but the stuff he did was all him no matter if he had help or not the play was his. As for pro level well reggie didnt do to bad most rec for a rookie and really ended up showing the flashes of talent in the later part of the season. Next year reggie will have a huge season i think he will prove everyone wrong that things he cant be a full time back. So i say Bush would be picked before Mcfadden in any draft. Dont get me wrong McFadden is a great back probably the number 1 back in next years draft but he isnt a Reggie Bush.

soybean
05-25-2007, 04:12 PM
I agree with all points, We should remember McFadden was only a Sophomore. Bush had his best season as a junior on a loaded USC offense.

yeah, but then again, all of arkansas' offensive schemes run through mcfadden. USC was more than a one trick pony. Bush did have the best blocking in college football though.

Acreboy
05-25-2007, 04:55 PM
The 2nd part on his line was the point, he has breakaway ability, but he is also a guy who can get the tough yards and run inside.Bush can run inside too and get the tough yards.

See the 49'ers game and the Giants game.

Phrost
05-25-2007, 04:56 PM
Bush can run inside too and get the tough yards.

See the 49'ers game and the Giants game.

Because their run D's are TREMENDOUS!

Acreboy
05-25-2007, 05:01 PM
Because their run D's are TREMENDOUS!When he was given the opportunity to be the full time back he showed up and performed well.

That's it.

San Diego Chicken
05-25-2007, 05:07 PM
I don't think McFadden will surpass his 2006 numbers, so I'll go with Bush. Bush put up over 1,750 yards rushing in 05, McFadden 1,650 in 06 on more carries.

draftguru151
05-25-2007, 05:17 PM
I don't think McFadden will surpass his 2006 numbers, so I'll go with Bush. Bush put up over 1,750 yards rushing in 05, McFadden 1,650 in 06 on more carries.

With Matt Leinart, 4 current NFL offensive lineman, 1 future first rounder, 2 2nd round WRs, and a 2nd round back up RB. McFadden has Felix Jones, Tony Ugoh, Marcus Monk and Casey Dick. Yea those a real comparable situations.

Phrost
05-25-2007, 05:27 PM
With Matt Leinart, 4 current NFL offensive lineman, 1 future first rounder, 2 2nd round WRs, and a 2nd round back up RB. McFadden has Felix Jones, Tony Ugoh, Marcus Monk and Casey Dick. Yea those a real comparable situations.

Thats why he is a legend people.

San Diego Chicken
05-25-2007, 05:40 PM
With Matt Leinart, 4 current NFL offensive lineman, 1 future first rounder, 2 2nd round WRs, and a 2nd round back up RB. McFadden has Felix Jones, Tony Ugoh, Marcus Monk and Casey Dick. Yea those a real comparable situations.

Obviously, Bush was surrounded by great players, but he still averaged 8.7 yards per carry in 05. Some of that had to be by virtue of his own ability, don't you think?

draftguru151
05-25-2007, 05:43 PM
Obviously, Bush was surrounded by great players, but he still averaged 8.7 yards per carry in 05. Some of that had to be by virtue of his own ability, don't you think?

Well obviously Bush is talented, it just doesn't make much sense to say Bush is better because he had 1000 more yards on arguably the most talented offense ever. There are reasons Bush is better than McFadden, his running yards isn't one of them.

San Diego Chicken
05-25-2007, 05:51 PM
Well obviously Bush is talented, it just doesn't make much sense to say Bush is better because he had 1000 more yards on arguably the most talented offense ever. There are reasons Bush is better than McFadden, his running yards isn't one of them.

It could be that Bush had better rushing stats because he played in a better offense. Or, it could mean that Bush put up better stats because he is better. It's at least possible that he put up better stats because he is better. McFadden still has time to put up monster numbers though.

Phrost
05-25-2007, 05:54 PM
SAN DIEGO chicken

This explains alot.

etk
05-25-2007, 06:09 PM
Bush is a better player but McFadden does more to help a team win. I'd go with McFadden all day.

San Diego Chicken
05-25-2007, 06:23 PM
SAN DIEGO chicken

This explains alot.

I think I'm being fair.

Phrost
05-25-2007, 06:26 PM
I think I'm being fair.

You are I just know why you are defending him now. Nothing malicious.

Sportsfan486
05-25-2007, 06:27 PM
McFadden is the better RB prospect, no question.

Right now Bush was probably the better OVERALL prospect thanks to his versatility.

McFadden already runs the rock better than Bush ever did, though.

TouchdownUSC
05-25-2007, 06:33 PM
Reggie Bush by quite a margin although I have DMac ahead of Peterson

fenikz
05-25-2007, 07:41 PM
this is just liek the AD & Bush arguments, they are 2 completely different kind of backs


but since AD>Run DMC

im still going bush

marks01234
05-25-2007, 08:16 PM
I going to say McFadden.

He's running behind a line with half as much talent as USC's. He's also facing much tougher defenses. Bush might be an overall better athlete but I would favor McFadden's size and between the tackle running.

Freddy G
05-25-2007, 08:47 PM
Peterson is easily better RUNNINGBACK than both of them, Bush is by far the most versatile and explosive of the lot, and McFadden has the best arm lol.

In terms of prospects:
1. Bush
2. AD
3. McFadden

Don't get me wrong, McFadden is a tremendous player and i would welcome him with open arms to my team anyday, but i think top 3-5 may be overrating him a tad. If he proves he can add a little weight and get those shoulders lower, he may be able to get in that top 3.

ripdw27
05-25-2007, 09:08 PM
D Mac... more versatile

Sniper
05-25-2007, 09:22 PM
D Mac... more versatile

More versatile than who? Bush? Are you out of your mind?

Phrost
05-25-2007, 09:44 PM
More versatile than who? Bush? Are you out of your mind?

Just let him bask in his genius...

schmiddog
05-25-2007, 09:58 PM
McFadden is the better RB prospect, no question.

Right now Bush was probably the better OVERALL prospect thanks to his versatility.

McFadden already runs the rock better than Bush ever did, though.

Here are the reason's McFadden should have the edge

-He profiles as a full time back at the next level. He has outstanding running skills inside, a fact that escapes a fair number of people when evaluating him. His top gear is almost as good as Bush's, perhaps equal.

-Bush doesn't profile as a full time back. His proponents in this argument may concede this, but still counter with the arguments about his versatility putting him ahead of McFadden. I think the reason it doesn't is because the type of success Bush will have to maintain in order to be ultimately better than McFadden (i.e. off trick plays, screens, returns, etc.) is often times very hard to sustain and transient in nature. Now, Bush has the type of athletic talent to transcend a pattern like that to a certain degree, but I don't see him being productive enough in that role in the future to justify taking him over McFadden at this point. McFadden profiles as a 25 carry a game workhorse between the tackles with home run ability to boot, and I really think he is a superior prospect to Adrian Peterson.

It's relatively close, but IMO it's McFadden.

soybean
05-25-2007, 10:39 PM
McFadden is the better RB prospect, no question.

Right now Bush was probably the better OVERALL prospect thanks to his versatility.

McFadden already runs the rock better than Bush ever did, though.

not really, you're comparing mcfadden college vs. bush nfl.

bush ran it really well at USC, he even ran it up the middle because that line of his gave him huge holes.

Addict
05-26-2007, 08:40 AM
SAN DIEGO chicken

This explains alot.

translation: I've ran out of arguments, so I'll just call you a homer and get it over with.

Acreboy
05-26-2007, 02:01 PM
McFadden is the better RB prospect, no question.

Right now Bush was probably the better OVERALL prospect thanks to his versatility.

Agree entirely

McFadden already runs the rock better than Bush ever did, thoughDisagree with this though.

CC.SD
05-26-2007, 02:30 PM
Agree entirely

Disagree with this though.

Reggie had like a 10 yard per carry average in college. No single player was more dominant in college football this decade, I'd wager. What did he end up having, 1300 total yards as a rookie? And that's splitting time with Deuce McFreakingCallister! Talk about only seeing the tip of the iceberg.

Acreboy
05-26-2007, 02:35 PM
Reggie had like a 10 yard per carry average in college. No single player was more dominant in college football this decade, I'd wager. What did he end up having, 1300 total yards as a rookie? And that's splitting time with Deuce McFreakingCallister! Talk about only seeing the tip of the iceberg.

Reggie averaged 10 yards per touch, not carry.

That's all purpose yards. He had 565 yards rushing and 742 receiving. Also had 216 yards returning kicks.

Bush is the better player but McFadden is the better RB hands down.

Sniper
05-26-2007, 02:50 PM
Reggie averaged 10 yards per touch, not carry.

That's all purpose yards. He had 565 yards rushing and 742 receiving. Also had 216 yards returning kicks.

Bush is the better player but McFadden is the better RB hands down.

I still can't believe Reggie averaged 8.7 ypc at SC. That's unbelievable.

etk
05-26-2007, 02:58 PM
I still can't believe Reggie averaged 8.7 ypc at SC. That's unbelievable.

There's a major difference in game speed from college to the pros, especially in the Pac-10 (outside of USC).

Sniper
05-26-2007, 03:02 PM
This is indeed true. But still, nearly a first down per carry?

etk
05-26-2007, 03:07 PM
This is indeed true. But still, nearly a first down per carry?

No knock against Reggie because he's obviously unstoppable in the open field, but 8.7 yards per carry is a lot easier with big holes and cutback lanes to run through against slower defenses. McFadden could be equally dominant on that USC team (more yards less YPC).

soybean
05-26-2007, 03:08 PM
There's a major difference in game speed from college to the pros, especially in the Pac-10 (outside of USC).

if that's the case, why can't ever other running back do that then?

etk
05-26-2007, 03:09 PM
if that's the case, why can't ever other running back do that then?

Because Reggie Bush obviously isn't "every other" RB. 8.7 YPC is impressive but not godly like it's made out to be.

hugegmenfan
05-26-2007, 04:05 PM
reggie is a playmaker- but what else? occassionally he runs/catches the big one but is not an everydown back and cant run between the tackles and fumbles A LOT. mcfadden is the better runner

princefielder28
05-26-2007, 04:11 PM
reggie is a playmaker- but what else? occassionally he runs/catches the big one but is not an everydown back and cant run between the tackles and fumbles A LOT. mcfadden is the better runner

He fumbled twice this past season. I wouldn't consider that ALOT

Acreboy
05-26-2007, 04:30 PM
There's a major difference in game speed from college to the pros, especially in the Pac-10 (outside of USC).And Reggie seemed to adjust nicely.

etk
05-26-2007, 04:34 PM
And Reggie seemed to adjust nicely.

Yes, but his speed is almost exclusively limited to special teams and swing passes/screens. The speed and size of NFL defenses makes it far too difficult for a back with Bush's style to run up the middle and rack up good yardage consistently. On USC they could run dive plays with Bush and he would get to the 2nd level and burst one way or the other. He has trouble getting to the 2nd level in the NFL which is why New Orleans needs to be even more creative in their playcalling with Reggie.

Acreboy
05-26-2007, 04:43 PM
Yes, but his speed is almost exclusively limited to special teams and swing passes/screens. The speed and size of NFL defenses makes it far too difficult for a back with Bush's style to run up the middle and rack up good yardage consistently. On USC they could run dive plays with Bush and he would get to the 2nd level and burst one way or the other. He has trouble getting to the 2nd level in the NFL which is why New Orleans needs to be even more creative in their playcalling with Reggie.Well, this was only his rookie year. He's getting better and I hope you don't think he won't even be an every down back.

Matthew Jones
05-26-2007, 04:48 PM
I went with Reggie Bush. The best way to win in the NFL is to create mismatches, and with Bush you can create some big mismatches by playing him all around, whether it's at running back, wideout, or returner.

etk
05-26-2007, 04:52 PM
Well, this was only his rookie year. He's getting better and I hope you don't think he won't even be an every down back.

He can get his frame up to about 210 while retaining his speed and quickness, so maybe. I guess he can only improve but I don't want him to. Deuce is enough to deal with twice a year.

etk
05-26-2007, 04:54 PM
I went with Reggie Bush. The best way to win in the NFL is to create mismatches, and with Bush you can create some big mismatches by playing him all around, whether it's at running back, wideout, or returner.

That is a good point, but don't forget how McFadden can play tailback in any formation, wide receiver and even quarterback in the redzone. He can run, catch and throw well, plus I bet he can play linebacker if your team is depleted! He's built like a linebacker anyway.

fenikz
05-26-2007, 05:06 PM
he has like 20 career catches i dont think that qualifies him to play WR

22,895
05-26-2007, 06:43 PM
We own Arkansas in everything so Reggie Bush easy. Plus, DMC isn't even in the Pros what if he breaks his ankle like Joe did and can't play? Everybody talks about Potential too much.

Komp
05-26-2007, 07:25 PM
Maybe I'm alone in this opinion, but I think AD will be a better NFL RB than either of them, IF he stays healthy.

As for Bush vs McFadden, I think we need to see McFadden play one more year before we can compare them with any accuracy.

I'm not in favor of one or the other but one other thing people need to consider is that McFadden is playing against the best defenses in the country week in and week out, whereas the Pac 10 isn't known for its defense [other than USC's].

Acreboy
05-26-2007, 07:32 PM
Maybe I'm alone in this opinion, but I think AD will be a better NFL RB than either of them, IF he stays healthy.Yep I agree

SenorGato
05-26-2007, 08:36 PM
I also agree on the AD > McFadden/Bush as a pure RB comp.

IMO McFadden is a way better pro RB prospect than Bush is, but Bush is so ridiculously talented he's the better overall prospect.

Now, if Reggie Bush and AD/McFadden got together and had a kid that combined their abilities somehow...

*Edit* I figured out that that would be LT.

Sniper
05-26-2007, 09:56 PM
I agree with Gato on the LT part. God himself plays for the Chargers and wears #21

doingthisinsteadofwork
05-26-2007, 11:01 PM
I'll say Bush.
From what Ive heard is that McFadden has bulked up quite a bit.He has good size,speed,power,and hands.Hes better between the tackles than Reggie.Reggie is better though.I'll take him over McFadden.But I'll have to say that McFadden is getting closer.He could easily be better than AD as a prospect.

soybean
05-27-2007, 03:02 AM
We own Arkansas in everything so Reggie Bush easy. Plus, DMC isn't even in the Pros what if he breaks his ankle like Joe did and can't play? Everybody talks about Potential too much.

you really didn't need to add that.

terman
05-27-2007, 03:27 AM
"On USC they could run dive plays with Bush and he would get to the 2nd level and burst one way or the other."

Except Lane Kiffen would almost never call dives for Reggie. Most of the time you saw Reggie Bush explode between the tackles was because of a draw or a misdirection call where the holes would open up before he even got the ball and he could choose where to go. Reggie Bush, as much as I loved him in college, was not the most complete in terms of running the football and really has limited ability between the tackles so I'd say that Darren McFadden is better in terms of running the football. However, I'd say that Bush is much more explosive and elusive than McFadden is in the passing game/special teams area. I've never seen a player with as good of vision, agility and burst in the open field as I've seen with Reggie, and it was like watching poetry in motion.

So as a runningback, I'd give McFadden the edge, but I don't think he's at the level of Reggie in terms of overall talent just yet.

draftguru151
05-27-2007, 09:58 AM
you really didn't need to add that.

The whole post was pretty much useless. What if Reggie Bush retires tomorrow and decides he wants to pursue a career in dancing, it's useless speculating that has nothing to do with either player.

HoopsDemon12
05-27-2007, 03:48 PM
ya i love bush... but he hasnt proven anyhting to me yet, wait then again niether has mcFadden. hmmm bush will be better if he can start to be a RUNNING back, but i like mcFaddens potential. Not saying its better than bushes, i just see him putting it together quicker in the pro's than bush will.

detroit4life
05-27-2007, 04:45 PM
you cant really make this comparison right now bush has one year down already in the NFL while Mcfadden still has another year in college. Right now Mcfadden ahs a ton of room to grow before he even enters the draft. The only thing right now that i see as an advantage for Mcfadden is that he can actually be a franchise back where as bush will always need another RB to take atleast 10-15 carries a game

stephenson86
05-27-2007, 04:57 PM
i like my backs to run run run run the ball through the middle to the sides and do it well, bush for me cant command the insides so i take mcfadden all day

LonghornsLegend
05-27-2007, 08:14 PM
its really your cup of tea, take your pick...everyone could sit here all day and argue over whose better or has more potential...

its almost like asking whose a better WR, andre johnson, or calvin johnson...i dont think its a wrong answer, depends on how you like to see an offense run...


and lets not throw out the window that mcfadden will be drafted to be the SOLE back in the system from the get go, with as many teams going dual backs none of us know how he'll work out...

bush is good at what he does, he does thinks really well mcfadden cant, and vice versa so its almost a split, until we see mcfadden play one year...

but i also agree if healthy, AD is the better pure RB then the two with more talent and potential

Acreboy
05-27-2007, 08:25 PM
you cant really make this comparison right now bush has one year down already in the NFL while Mcfadden still has another year in college. Right now Mcfadden ahs a ton of room to grow before he even enters the draft. The only thing right now that i see as an advantage for Mcfadden is that he can actually be a franchise back where as bush will always need another RB to take atleast 10-15 carries a gameI don't think that will prove to hold true.

MP123
05-27-2007, 10:47 PM
its really your cup of tea, take your pick...everyone could sit here all day and argue over whose better or has more potential...

its almost like asking whose a better WR, andre johnson, or calvin johnson...i dont think its a wrong answer, depends on how you like to see an offense run...


and lets not throw out the window that mcfadden will be drafted to be the SOLE back in the system from the get go, with as many teams going dual backs none of us know how he'll work out...

bush is good at what he does, he does thinks really well mcfadden cant, and vice versa so its almost a split, until we see mcfadden play one year...

but i also agree if healthy, AD is the better pure RB then the two with more talent and potential

I have to agree. It depends on what you're looking for.

J-Mike88
02-22-2011, 12:12 PM
Alright, some Bush-haters turned that other thread into a Bust-debate.... let's keep that thread about guys Scott misjudged on as the OP intended, and let's pick up the Bush talk here.... this was a funny thread I see... good stuff. I got some catching up to do here....some classic comments by some people here now looking back.

.....Interesting how McFadden has all of a sudden blossomed this season.

vidae
02-22-2011, 01:18 PM
Thank god you bumped this almost 4 year old thread.

J-Mike88
02-22-2011, 09:55 PM
Thank god you bumped this almost 4 year old thread.
I bumped a old McFadden thread I think before this season started, about him being a bust or something along those lines, and then he blossomed into a stud this year finally. Coincidence? I think so.

But the Scott Wright Wrong thread was becoming all Bush, better to move it to a Bush-specific thread, and I know some people's feelings get hurt when I create a new thread, so here we go. Plus it's interesting to me that it's Bush and McFadden, two guys taken sky high.... if Bush is a bust, then so was McFadden. Until this season.

ellsy82
02-23-2011, 12:25 AM
Going off just success rate per season, I've gotta go with McFadden. He's been in the league less longer, and has compable states to Bush's already. I can only imagine his body of work will be much better at the end of his career than the end of Bush's.

RaiderNation
02-23-2011, 01:17 AM
DMC was a beast last year for us. 1,157 yards in 13 games. Ranked 4th in yards per game as well.

Rabscuttle
02-23-2011, 07:43 AM
McFadden learned to compete last year. He was looking like a waste of a pick when the lights suddenly went on for him. He went to a high level performance camp in the off-season and perhaps they got into his head what he needed to succeed. How long he lasts will be another question. Limiting his carries and keeping a good number to the outside will be important for his career longevity. He's still slight in the lower body to be asked to pound it inside for 300 plus carries a season.

jrdrylie
02-23-2011, 08:33 AM
I never had a chance to say it in the other thread, but I do not consider Reggis Bush an example of Scott missing on a guy. Everybody had him rated that highly. For Scott to be wrnog about a guy, he needs to have a guy much higher or lower than others. You can't overrate a guy by ranking him at the same spot as everybody else.

With that said, Reggie Bush is the third best running back from that class, behind DeAngelo Williams and Maurice Jones-Drew. He is also behind just Colston, Santonio Holmes, Greg Jennings, and Brandon Marshall in terms of receiving. Add in his return ability (by the way, great draft for returners. Bush, Leon Washington, and Devin Hester), and he has been a quality player.

If we were to do a redraft of the 2006 draft, I bet he'd still be a first rounder. Has he lived up to all the hype? Probably not. But if he ever hits the free agent market, he'll get a big deal because he is a dangerous weapon.

J-Mike88
02-24-2011, 01:17 PM
Well stated..... I find it very interesting because McFadden was written off by many people as a bust prior to him breaking out (and finally staying healthy) in 2010.

He wasn't taken quite as high as Bush was, or had quite the hype, but he was still taken pretty damn high and had high expectations based on his work in the SEC.

Both these guys stories still have a lot to be written..... neither guy is a bust obviously.

Sniper
02-24-2011, 01:45 PM
neither guy is a bust obviously.

Um, well, obviously it's not "obviously" since, you know, Reggie is a bust.

LonghornsLegend
02-24-2011, 02:02 PM
I never had a chance to say it in the other thread, but I do not consider Reggis Bush an example of Scott missing on a guy. Everybody had him rated that highly. For Scott to be wrnog about a guy, he needs to have a guy much higher or lower than others.


That just means everybody was wrong. How would it make sense to grade Scott on if he had a guy alot higher or lower then other scouts? So were gonna grade Scott, by what other scouts thought?




You can't overrate a guy by ranking him at the same spot as everybody else.


Really? So basically what your telling me is, if I come out with my own personal rankings this year, and as long as I make mine look very similiar to Mayock & Kiper with just the slightest bit of variety, I can't be wrong about any prospect in the draft right? According to you, I'd have to have a guy ranked much higher or lower to be wrong, so as long as I avoid that I'd have 100% accuracy.


How does that make sense?

RaiderNation
02-24-2011, 02:30 PM
McFadden learned to compete last year. He was looking like a waste of a pick when the lights suddenly went on for him. He went to a high level performance camp in the off-season and perhaps they got into his head what he needed to succeed. How long he lasts will be another question. Limiting his carries and keeping a good number to the outside will be important for his career longevity. He's still slight in the lower body to be asked to pound it inside for 300 plus carries a season.

I think it was more of him actually being healthy for most of the year. We had seen many flashes of a big play RB his first few seasons but he never got anything going with his toe and hamstring injuries.

Saints-Tigers
02-24-2011, 03:25 PM
I think McFadden is a great example of how getting healthy, getting consistent touches, and building confidence through those two things can really go a long way for a young guy who struggled early on.

Master Exploder
02-24-2011, 03:56 PM
That just means everybody was wrong. How would it make sense to grade Scott on if he had a guy alot higher or lower then other scouts? So were gonna grade Scott, by what other scouts thought?







Really? So basically what your telling me is, if I come out with my own personal rankings this year, and as long as I make mine look very similiar to Mayock & Kiper with just the slightest bit of variety, I can't be wrong about any prospect in the draft right? According to you, I'd have to have a guy ranked much higher or lower to be wrong, so as long as I avoid that I'd have 100% accuracy.


How does that make sense?

That is absolutely horrible logic.

Abaddon
02-24-2011, 11:45 PM
I never had a chance to say it in the other thread, but I do not consider Reggis Bush an example of Scott missing on a guy. Everybody had him rated that highly. For Scott to be wrnog about a guy, he needs to have a guy much higher or lower than others. You can't overrate a guy by ranking him at the same spot as everybody else.

That's a pretty asinine statement. Just because most people missed on that guy doesn't take away from the fact that each of them, including Scott, missed as an individual. A draft bust is a draft bust, no matter how many people got sucked into the hype. Wrong is wrong, and Scott was wrong. Everyone who thought Bush was worth the pick the Saints used on him was flat out wrong. It happens. There's no shame in it. The only shameful part is trying to play it off like you weren't wrong.

Abaddon
02-24-2011, 11:50 PM
I think it was more of him actually being healthy for most of the year. We had seen many flashes of a big play RB his first few seasons but he never got anything going with his toe and hamstring injuries.

It was definitely the offseason regiment. Even when he was healthy, McFadden fell down with little or no contact, couldn't keep his feet under him, didn't break tackles...he just looked flat out bad. In 2010, he ran much harder, broke tackles, delivered some nice hits on would-be tacklers, showed drastically improved balance, and actually looked like a football player. The changes he made to his offseason workout, and to his overall level of dedication to improvement, are what saw him blossom this past season. No question about it.

PACKmanN
02-25-2011, 12:38 AM
looks like a lot of Bush's support came from the PAC-10 fans or people that lived in the Cali areas.