Texans: Root for Wins or Root for #1 Pick?

[today]

My dream scenario for each game is that we have the lead with less than a minute to go in the 4th and the refs make a blantantly BAD call, thus handing the game over to the other team on a platter. In short, play well and barely lose.

I say go get that #1 pick and then let's hope to do some wheeling and dealing with it. Hopefully the bidding will be high and we'll be able to get 2 top notch OL.

[reggietodd]

Reggie Bush.

And before you say anything. We have 8 (EIGHT) picks in the next draft. We can get Reggie Bush and then use the other picks to get offensive linemen.

[MadMax]

i can't root against them. i can't root for another team to beat the Houston Texans. i just can't do it.

[msn]

Reggie Bush.

And before you say anything. We have 8 (EIGHT) picks in the next draft. We can get Reggie Bush and then use the other picks to get offensive linemen.
This is intriguing. Could you provide an example of how this could unfold?

[RocketFan007]

Reggie Bush.

And before you say anything. We have 8 (EIGHT) picks in the next draft. We can get Reggie Bush and then use the other picks to get offensive linemen.

But you can't get a franchise LT with one of the other 8 picks, and that's our most glaring need.

[Groogrux]

i can't root against them. i can't root for another team to beat the Houston Texans. i just can't do it.

Me either. I can not be too disappointed if we lose, but I can't actively root against any of my teams.

[pgabriel]

John McClaine Friday was talking about how the Oilers kept passing up stud backs back in the 80's for lineman. He wants the Texans to take Bush. It was funny because I thought he was really contradicting himself. He talked about them passing up Dickerson for Matthews. I was thinking, that wasn’t a bad decision. The he mentioned some back named Warner from Penn St. He really didn’t make a good case. The fact is franchise backs put up great numbers but if on really bad teams they don’t make much difference between winning and losing.

The Oilers’ line ended up being probably their biggest asset right up their with Moon, and even though they had their playoff failures they did go on a run of 7 years of playoffs in a row.

Guys like
O.J.
Payton
Sanders
Dickerson

toiled on bad teams while putting up outstanding numbers. It made no difference. Pass on Bush and start building this line. New England has given the rest of the league the blueprint to building champions. Follow it. Their only superstar is Brady, and he isn’t that exceptional, just a great decision maker. The key to them though is they are solid everywhere on the field.

[today]

Sorry, it took me awhile to get the poll up, I got distracted with work.

[today]

Me either. I can not be too disappointed if we lose, but I can't actively root against any of my teams.

I too would say the same thing, but in order for me to hope that we just BARELY lose, I think that what I'm really rooting for is our team to get to the Super Bowl. If losing now means getting the #1 pick, which in turn helps us get a player(s) to take us to a Super Bowl, then I will root for us to lose now, so that we can win in the future.

I'm not saying that the #1 pick will for sure make us a great team, but getting stuck in mediocrity is a bad rut to get into. Of course FA's would rather sign with a marginal team rather than a cellar dweller, so that may cancel out pinning my hopes on the draft. Maybe someone can make a good argument for why finishing with 6+ wins and having the #6-10 pick would be better than finishing dead last and having the #1 pick. Help me out here :)

[MadMax]

I too would say the same thing, but in order for me to hope that we just BARELY lose, I think that what I'm really rooting for is our team to get to the Super Bowl. If losing now means getting the #1 pick, which in turn helps us get a player(s) to take us to a Super Bowl, then I will root for us to lose now, so that we can win in the future.

I'm not saying that the #1 pick will for sure make us a great team, but getting stuck in mediocrity is a bad rut to get into. Of course FA's would rather sign with a marginal team rather than a cellar dweller, so that may cancel out pinning my hopes on the draft. Maybe someone can make a good argument for why finishing with 6+ wins and having the #6-10 pick would be better than finishing dead last and having the #1 pick. Help me out here :)

personally, i'm not logical when i'm watching my teams. i'm a FANatic. i want them to win. i may be dead next year. right now..they're playing. i want them to win...right now.

[RIET]

Root for what's in the best interest of the organization which for the long term means suffering some short term losses.

[Toast]

I'd rather watch them win than lose.

Go Texans!

[today]

personally, i'm not logical when i'm watching my teams. i'm a FANatic. i want them to win. i may be dead next year. right now..they're playing. i want them to win...right now.

I take more of a macro view of it. Maybe I should have made the poll with that in mind, instead of on a game by game basis.

Knowing that this season is already wasted, my thought is, 'How can we best invest the final games of the year?'. If the best thing we can hope for is the #1 pick, then I hope we lose and get the #1 pick. If the best thing we can hope for is to win 6+ games and attract a huge FA, then I'll root for us to win.

I agree though, it's tough to root for us to lose. On Sunday I was rooting for us to win, but I was also happy when they made the defensive holding call on Seth Payne that gave the Jags the upper hand. There's definitely an inner struggle going on, with my mind having to convince my heart that it's better for us to lose.

[halfbreed]

Reggie Bush will be a bust in the NFL. Most of his yards come sideline to sideline. Let's see him try that against NFL linebackers.

[Svpernaut]

The season was a bust, might as well get a #1 pick out of it.

[xiki]

Let's 'root out' the Texans' cancers, as in personnel chief and personnel director on the field. Can't think of Charley and Dom's names, tho...

[pgabriel]

The season was a bust,


hopefully the pick isn't.

[Mr. Clutch]

John McClaine Friday was talking about how the Oilers kept passing up stud backs back in the 80's for lineman. He wants the Texans to take Bush. It was funny because I thought he was really contradicting himself. He talked about them passing up Dickerson for Matthews. I was thinking, that wasn’t a bad decision. The he mentioned some back named Warner from Penn St. He really didn’t make a good case. The fact is franchise backs put up great numbers but if on really bad teams they don’t make much difference between winning and losing.

The Oilers’ line ended up being probably their biggest asset right up their with Moon, and even though they had their playoff failures they did go on a run of 7 years of playoffs in a row.

Guys like
O.J.
Payton
Sanders
Dickerson

toiled on bad teams while putting up outstanding numbers. It made no difference. Pass on Bush and start building this line. New England has given the rest of the league the blueprint to building champions. Follow it. Their only superstar is Brady, and he isn’t that exceptional, just a great decision maker. The key to them though is they are solid everywhere on the field.

Yeah, I see your point. The Oilers were really good back then without a stud RB, if they just didn't choke they could have made the Super Bowl a couple of times. The GM certainly didn't screw up back then.

And isn't Denver proving that you don't need a super stud back? They traded Clinton Portis and then just insert whoever back there, even guys like Quentin Griffin. Then again, a guy like Tomlinson guarantees you will be a dangerous team every year. It's hard to say, I guess it's a matter of which philosophy the Texans choose.

And for those that say Bush might be a bust. Well, any lineman we take might also be a bust. There is never a 100% sure pick.

[No Worries]

The answer is: Root for the Texans and Root for the #1 pick. No matter how much you root for them, they are still going to lose.

[emjohn]

Sort of numb at this point, personally.

I agree with the side pushing for a franchise tackle over Bush. We aren't going anywhere without an NFL line, no matter who's behind it. Barry F'ing Sanders could never sniff the playoffs because Detroit never got him an O-line.

Evan

[Trader_Jorge]

If the Rockets had not totally shut it in at the end of the 2001 season (by benching virtually their entire starting lineup for the last few games), they would not have gotten that extra ping pong ball which ended up being drawn first. In that case, short term tanking led to long term Yao. Good move. I apply the same rationale to the Texans. Winning this season does the franchise no good in the quest for a ring. They likely won't make the playoffs even if they win out. However, a player like D'Brickashaw could be their anchor for 10+ years at LT. He could be a championship caliber player, to go with guys like Andre Johnson and Dunta Robinson.

The argument against this is rooting for the guy that saved up his money all year to attend his one Texans game. Hard to tell him that you want them to lose when he has invested so much in attending.

[Toast]

I take more of a macro view of it. Maybe I should have made the poll with that in mind, instead of on a game by game basis.

Knowing that this season is already wasted, my thought is, 'How can we best invest the final games of the year?'. If the best thing we can hope for is the #1 pick, then I hope we lose and get the #1 pick. If the best thing we can hope for is to win 6+ games and attract a huge FA, then I'll root for us to win.

I agree though, it's tough to root for us to lose. On Sunday I was rooting for us to win, but I was also happy when they made the defensive holding call on Seth Payne that gave the Jags the upper hand. There's definitely an inner struggle going on, with my mind having to convince my heart that it's better for us to lose.
On the flip side of that, you instill a losing tradition on the team. They get used to losing. They expect losing and feel comfortable in a losing environment.

I heard Strahan being interviewed last night. He talked about how the Giants prepare to beat the teams they're supposed to vs. taking it easy and leaving it up to chance; putting bad teams away. He talked about winning at home, every home game. Definitely had a winning attitude. I don't see that kind of an attitude happening after you tank for the #1 draft pick. Which isn't all that more beneficial than the #2 or #3 or whatever we end up with.

If they learn to win, and play hard to win every game vs. giving up and accepting a loser's mentality, the end result - even with losing the #1 pick - is much more rewarding - for the team, the organization and the fans alike.

[Ric]

I say go get that #1 pick and then let's hope to do some wheeling and dealing with it. Hopefully the bidding will be high and we'll be able to get 2 top notch OL.
no offense, but this brand of thinking and these kinds of discussions, disgust me. why would anyone choose to endure losses for the right to gamble on a #1 pick? as if this team is one pick away from being good even if the pick does pan out.

you don't invite, or feed, a losing culture. you don't ask players to lie down today in order to compete tomorrow. you don't instill in your organization a free pass to underachieve. and you sure as hell don't ask fans to sit through it with their wallets wide open.

[Hippieloser]

The #1 draft pick will be nice. New coaching is gonna be sweeeet.

[Hakeem06]

i'm not a texans fan, i just follow them...so i want them to lose so they can pick up reggie bush and be able to make some plays on offense regardless of line play. he can flat out, outrun defenders even at the NFL level. he doesn't need much of a line, even though they definitely help.

the texans are just pathetic right now. they need line help bad but you can't pass up a guy like reggie bush, and i think he would make the team better for the long run. so one season that is already in the crapper isn't too terribly important than say the next 8.

[gunn]

But you can't get a franchise LT with one of the other 8 picks, and that's our most glaring need.

Who said you need a "franchise LT" to have a solid line?

[Nick]

Who said you need a "franchise LT" to have a solid line?

You don't... but you do need talent... and this team has NONE up front.

If you have to start somewhere, you might as well start with a franchise LT... it would help this current team more than any other commodity, and there's a good chance he'll play for a lot longer than any current, or potential, skills position players.

[A-Train]

The #1 pick in the NFL draft is seriously overrated.

[codell]

Count me in as a fan who just can't root or their team to lose.

Just can't do it.

[gunn]

You don't... but you do need talent... and this team has NONE up front.

If you have to start somewhere, you might as well start with a franchise LT... it would help this current team more than any other commodity, and there's a good chance he'll play for a lot longer than any current, or potential, skills position players.

Most "franchise LT's" do not have an immediate impact. There is about a 2 year learning curve. And Bush is not just any run of the mill skill position player. Some are saying that he is the best skill player to come out in the last 15 years. You don't pass on that. Of the AFC playoff teams last year, NONE, I repeat NONE, have a LT that was taken in the top 10. And only one of those teams that made the playoffs in the AFC last year had a LT that was taken in the first round; Tarik Glenn of Indianapolis who was taken 19th overall.

[today]

no offense, but this brand of thinking and these kinds of discussions, disgust me. why would anyone choose to endure losses for the right to gamble on a #1 pick? as if this team is one pick away from being good even if the pick does pan out.

you don't invite, or feed, a losing culture. you don't ask players to lie down today in order to compete tomorrow. you don't instill in your organization a free pass to underachieve. and you sure as hell don't ask fans to sit through it with their wallets wide open.

Nobody is suggesting that the players tank the games, you're comments are taking this to an extreme. This thread is about what you would like to see happen since our year is wasted. Get the #1 pick or win some games and have the #6-10 pick.

And did you even completely read my first post? I don't suggest that we use the #1 pick, I suggest that we trade down in order to pick up 2 top notch OL.

I also posted that pinning our hopes on the draft may not be the way to go, that maybe winning games to attract big FAs might be better.

[Ric]

This thread is about what you would like to see happen since our year is wasted.
it's not wasted; we have 8 games left to evaluate who can play and who can't; who needs to stay and who needs to go; what are the strengths and where are the weaknesses.

to root for, or excuse losing is, IMO, just as reprehensible as advocating it. i'd rather have a clearer take on carr's long-term potential than the #1 pick. i'd rather solve AJ's tendency to be neutralized to easily. i'd rather evaluate if anyone on the OL is worth a damn. i want to know what kind of character babin and buchannon have. if mathis and armstrong are sleepers; if DD can be productive consistently inside the red zone...

i want sure things to emerge from this season, not a gamble on a #1 pick.

[Another Brother]

Win in a way befitting the #1 pick in the draft.

[gunn]

Ric,

You already know the answer to all you questions. It's about a change in coaching philosophy. This team reeks of a failure due to the staff in my opinion. Are they a Super Bowl team? No, but they are a decent team with good young talent. As bad as it is, I'm all for watching this team underachieve themselves into a situation to get Reggie Bush. I want to see them play well and win this season, but I want the #1 pick more. The way it appears to me is that this season is an anomaly, and not the begining of a downward trend. So if this team can somehow bump into the #1 pick then root on.

[Harrisment]

I can't root for them to lose, but I'm not too upset if they don't win. Make sense? :D

Oh, and count me in the Reggie Bush camp. You don't pass up a talent like that.

[Ric]

You already know the answer to all you questions.
no, i really don't. i think the team has two players worth building around: AJ and robinson, and even they have question marks. it's not, IMO, a talented young team, nor was this year an anamoly. the offense was awful the second half of last year, too, and carr, while certainly better than he's been this year, has never been "#1 pick" good. i think they head into 2006 with almost too many questions and they're essentially starting from scratch. this is, far and away, the worst team in football and their cupboard is nearly bare.

canning capers, et al, is a step in the right direction, but if casserly is still supplying the talent....

[gucci888]

I'd rather us get the #1 pick than win a couple more pointless games and move down to a #5-#10 pick. I would never root for Houston team to lose, but this team isn't gonna get any better the way it is.

Get the #1 pick, trade down for a Top 5 pick + a 2nd rounder, some teams like the Dolphins or Browns might be desperate enough for Leinart to trade another 1st rounder along with their top pick.

Pick up D. Ferguson with the top pick and maybe we could steal another OL like J. Scott or Blaylock.

If VY wins the heisman and wins a NC, I fully expect him to come out, despite what he has said. Then you pick up VY with the top pick and then a OL with the latter.

[Miguel]

no offense, but this brand of thinking and these kinds of discussions, disgust me. why would anyone choose to endure losses for the right to gamble on a #1 pick? as if this team is one pick away from being good even if the pick does pan out.

you don't invite, or feed, a losing culture. you don't ask players to lie down today in order to compete tomorrow. you don't instill in your organization a free pass to underachieve. and you sure as hell don't ask fans to sit through it with their wallets wide open.

It seems we are in the minority. One player will not this team make. We can take Reggie Bush, but if we don't have an offensive line, he's going to get mauled. Even if we did have the first pick, I'd rather trade down a few spots, pick up another 2nd round pick, and users the majority of the first 2-3 rounds on Off. Linemen and a WR or CB.

[percicles]

See Im all for them losing, but then I really dont care. See i came of age during the Rockets Championship. Still in my very early teens the team made an impression on me. If any of us took a Psych 101 class in college then you know how important these years are in the development of adulthood. So in watching the champioship seasons and the heartbreak of seasons prior (I will always hate Hersy Hawkins and smile when I am reminded of what became of Shawn Kemp) an emotional bond was created. Same thing with the Astros. Went 2 a game at the Astrodome 2 days after we moved from Chicago and none other than Dave Smith tossed a ball at me during batting practice and I thought it was the coolest thing. Emotional bond was thus developed.

Football on the other hand I really didnt get &understand as a child. It was too slow(unlike b-ball), never played with friends(we were a baseball crew) so I never got into the Oiler thing. So when they moved i was graduating highschool and making preperations to go to Europe so it really wasnt on my radar. I started college at UT and it wasnt utill then that i began an apreciation of football. It grew on me. The hate for Oklahoma was tangible, i could feel it. And it bacame an experience during a memorable and important period.

Which is why im having problems with the Texans. I honestly could care less if they win or loose cause I have no emotional investment in this team. I know theyre some old schoolers out there who might be projecting thier love of the Oilers on this Texans team but ask yourself is it the same. Ask yourself which would mean more to you. If the Texans won the Superbowl or the Rockets won an NBA championship? If the Texans won the Superbowl of if the Astros won the World Series? If the Texans won the Superbowl or if your college alma matta (or adopted sports team if yall went to Rice... yes I'm talking to you Bigtexx) won a Football or Basketball National Championship? Im willing to bet that 90%+ don't pick the Texans. Why? Zero emotional investment.

Dont get me wrong, Im glad we at least have a football team to complain about, but do any of us really care? Thier so new and so inept. We as fans have not shared playoff experiences (Wins or loses) that is essential in developing a connetction. All we have is a 4 loosing seasons. I agree that its a new franchise and lets give them some time. Which is what I did. And then they passed on my boy Derick Johnson. That really ticked me off coz I couldnt see why they would? If Travis Johnson wasnt so funny I'd be calling for his head.

With each game I hope that we get blown out and get the #1 pick. So we can either trade down, get more picks and wait to see if Vincent Young decides to leave after winning the Heisman and National Championship. If the Texans don't pick him either this year or next then Ive decided to root for whatever teamn does end up picking vincent young. And as is the case when you follow a team it might be likely that I adopt whatever team he ends up with as my own.

Acoording to this site http://www.thehuddlereport.com/draftorder/index.shtml

If the season ended today we would get the second pick coz Greenbay has lost to lesse competition. All but 2 team in the top ten have a higher opp so if we win one more game we go from 2nd to 6th. Jesus the TExans cant even lose properly.

THRU WEEK 9
BASED ON FULL 16 GAME SCHEDULE
PICK TEAM W OPP%
1 PACKERS 1 0.458
2 TEXANS 1 0.600
3 JETS 2 0.417
4/5 49ERS 2 0.500
CARDINALS 2 0.500
6 TITANS 2 0.583
7 RAVENS 2 0.640
8 SAINTS 2 0.708
9-12 BILLS 3 0.375
DOLPHINS 3 0.375
LIONS 3 0.375
VIKINGS 3 0.375
13 BROWNS 3 0.515
14 RAIDERS 3 0.640
15 PATRIOTS 4 0.333
16 RAMS 4 0.417
17 EAGLES 4 0.688
18 BEARS 5 0.292
19 JAGUARS 5 0.440
20/21 BUCCANEERS 5 0.560
CHIEFS 5 0.560
22 CHARGERS 5 0.583
23 COWBOYS 5 0.625
24 REDSKINS 5 0.650
25 SEAHAWKS 6 0.333
26 STEELERS 6 0.480
27 BRONCOS 6 0.520
28/29 FALCONS 6 0.520
PANTHERS 6 0.520
30 GIANTS 6 0.583
31 BENGALS 7 0.458
32 COLTS 8 0.320

[RocketJedi]

The #1 pick would look really nice in April, but it's tough to watch the Texans lose games now in order to get it. I root for them to win, and if they don't I console myself with the thought that they are one week closer to landing some big time talent.

[Rocket River]

NEVER TANK!!!

Rocket River

[reggietodd]

This is intriguing. Could you provide an example of how this could unfold?

Are you saying we don't have 8 picks in the upcoming draft? I think we should take Reggie Bush, use our other 7 picks on solid O-linemen and to fill a few holes on defense. Then we could trade DD and fill a few more holes possibly picking up a veteran O-linemen, a quarterback, or a stud linebacker (linebackers are very important in a 3-4 defense). I personally think the most important characteristic of a good O-lineman is NFL experience, this is why i'm not big on drafting one in the first 5 picks of the draft.

So then we'd have Bush, some new olinemen from the draft, a few veterans from the trade of DD, a new stud linebacker AND a new coaching staff. And if we decline the option on Carr then we will have more money to sign a few good free agents to fill some other gaps including the QB position. That is how it could unfold if any intelligence were put into it, thanks for asking. :)

[reggietodd]

It seems we are in the minority. One player will not this team make. We can take Reggie Bush, but if we don't have an offensive line, he's going to get mauled. Even if we did have the first pick, I'd rather trade down a few spots, pick up another 2nd round pick, and users the majority of the first 2-3 rounds on Off. Linemen and a WR or CB.

We already have 8 picks in the upcoming draft, why would we trade down?

[Ric]

Then we could trade DD and fill a few more holes possibly picking up a veteran O-linemen, a quarterback, or a stud linebacker (linebackers are very important in a 3-4 defense).
DD wouldn't fetch that kind of value. and if you disagree, and value him that highly, why trade him?

I personally think the most important characteristic of a good O-lineman is NFL experience, this is why i'm not big on drafting one in the first 5 picks of the draft.
schemes, chemistry and familiarity are all hallmarks of good units (with a dash of talent), not experience. case in point, the texans' OL currently has quite a bit of experience; doesn't seem to be helping much, though.

That is how it could unfold if any intelligence were put into it, thanks for asking. :)
i'm sure casserly told mcnair the same thing in 2000....

[CriscoKidd]

The only reason to root for losses is to ensure that Capers and Casserly get the boot. The texans don't need the number one pick. Really the only value in them getting it would be to trade down and get more picks/players.

Leinart ain't going to turn this team around. Reggie Bush ain't going to turn this team around(and why, pray tell, would you waste a pick on a rb for a team as bad as this unless you knew he was LT2? rbs shelf life is short, and the texans already have a good stable). In fact, it's unlikely that any one person in the draft would turn this team around.

But at least by getting a stud tackle you are building a foundation for success. If you do luck out and get a great left tackle, then you have the most important position on the line filled out for the next 13 or so years, providing no fluke injury.

Draft an OL, more OL, a multithreat TE and some playmaking linebackers. Bring in a good vet wr to pair with Andre. That would be a successful offseason for the Texans and not too hard to accomplish other than perhaps the vet wr.

[bplld]

When you already have Davis, why get Bush? Davis is decent, which is really rare on this team, so that would seriously blow a number one pick. I say we make trades to stuff ourselves with 1-3 round picks. The first pick should go to a linebacker hands down. No one uses a first pick on OL.

[swilkins]

If D’Brickashaw Ferguson is available when their selection comes up and they don't pick him, I will despise this team.

After 4 f'n years without a competent line, I'm sick of it.

Say "No" to Bush and Leinert and "Yes" to Brick.

[gunn]

After 4 f'n years without a competent line, I'm sick of it.

A team does not need a top 5 tackle to have a competent line. Why not get Bush and a LT in the first?

[Groogrux]

A team does not need a top 5 tackle to have a competent line. Why not get Bush and a LT in the first?

They simply need talent on the OL, something that the team's missing terribly at this point.

[swilkins]

A team does not need a top 5 tackle to have a competent line. Why not get Bush and a LT in the first?

This team would be fools to pass up a franchise type OT in the draft. Bush is talented, but franchise tackles are rare.

[Nick]

A team does not need a top 5 tackle to have a competent line. Why not get Bush and a LT in the first?

Am I the only one who is under the assumption that we only have ONE first round pick this year???

How is everybody thinking that we have all these multiple picks in the first round, where we can draft the best RB, a top-notch LT, another talented O-lineman, a pass-rushing defender, and a shut-down corner... and they will all start and be pro-bowl calibur players...

We have ONE pick in the first round... and if we trade down, we can get multiple picks, but neither of them will be as high (definitely not high enough to get Bush or D'Brick... those guys are top 3), and you're still only going to have ONE first round pick.

I still believe that there are far more skills position players who can have very productive careers who are not top 3 first round picks, then there are perrenial pro-bowl, bohemith-sized, good enough to make the most crappiest of lines look good, franchsie left-tackles.

[gunn]

Am I the only one who is under the assumption that we only have ONE first round pick this year???

It wouldn't be too hard to move back into the 1st if a team has the 1st pick in the second round and 2 3rd round selections. As I have pointed out, of the teams in the AFC playoffs last year, NONE, had a top ten selected LT. And of those teams, only ONE had a LT that was taken in the first; and that was Tarik Glenn of Indianapolis who was selected 19th overall. The Broncos have an unsigned FA who spent time in NFL Europe playing LT.

[Groogrux]

It wouldn't be too hard to move back into the 1st if a team has the 1st pick in the second round and 2 3rd round selections. As I have pointed out, of the teams in the AFC playoffs last year, NONE, had a top ten selected LT. And of those teams, only ONE had a LT that was taken in the first; and that was Tarik Glenn of Indianapolis who was selected 19th overall. The Broncos have an unsigned FA who spent time in NFL Europe playing LT.

If only one had an LT that was taken in the first, why would you advocate trading more picks to get back into the first to take an OL? It doesn't matter how many times you repeat that tidbit of information, it doesn't change the fact that we have negligible talent on the OL and it is by far our biggest need on offense.

This team needs players, plain and simple. We cannot spend another draft or offseason trading multiple picks for one player ala Babin or Buchanon. If we get the first pick, we trade down for more picks this year and next (like the Chargers did in 2004), take the best OL available and go from there.

[swilkins]

If only one had an LT that was taken in the first, why would you advocate trading more picks to get back into the first to take an OL? It doesn't matter how many times you repeat that tidbit of information, it doesn't change the fact that we have negligible talent on the OL and it is by far our biggest need on offense.

This team needs players, plain and simple. We cannot spend another draft or offseason trading multiple picks for one player ala Babin or Buchanon. If we get the first pick, we trade down for more picks this year and next (like the Chargers did in 2004), take the best OL available and go from there.

I just noticed your signature.

You sure it wasn't Ned the Wino?

[Groogrux]

I just noticed your signature.

You sure it wasn't Ned the Wino?

OK, I'm feeling dumber than usual, but :confused:.

[reggietodd]

OK, I'm feeling dumber than usual, but :confused:.

I think Ned the wino may be an african american man in austin (hence black jesus)

[swilkins]

OK, I'm feeling dumber than usual, but :confused:.

He was a character on the hit 70's show Good Times. One day Michael came home with a picture of black Jesus (Or JJ painted it) and either Florida Evans or Willona responded, "That's Ned the Wino".

http://www.valdefierro.com/times02.html

[Toast]

If only one had an LT that was taken in the first, why would you advocate trading more picks to get back into the first to take an OL? It doesn't matter how many times you repeat that tidbit of information, it doesn't change the fact that we have negligible talent on the OL and it is by far our biggest need on offense.


Yeah, some of you sound like you want to repeat last offseason's mistakes.

What's our biggest problem, our largest need? Offensive line. So what are we gonna do about it? Uh ... how about we just unload some big contracts we have on defense and call it an offseason? Oh, and draft a wide receiver or a linebacker. Whatever's cool.

PLEASE! Let's make the o-line our #1 priority this offseason. PLEASE!!!

[Ric]

What's our biggest problem, our largest need? Offensive line.
the rule is, or should be, if you have a LT, RB, WR, LB all graded equally, and all graded top of the draft worthy, then yes, you go for need. but if the RB and LB are heads and tails better than the LT, you can't pass up the RB or LB to grab the LT. the financial stakes of that player not being worth the position you take him are too high.

as i've said repeatedly... this team is not an OL makeover (and regime change) away from being good. it could use an upgrade at every single position. all of them. even WR and CB. it is an awful team, devoid of talent. it is a stinging commentary on how awful casserly has been. if i came in and was given the chance to blow this thing apart, two - TWO! - players would be no-brainer keepers. the rest would have to show me their worth in training camp.

[swilkins]

canning capers, et al, is a step in the right direction, but if casserly is still supplying the talent....

That would be a step in the right direction.

[The Real Shady]

God I hate NY and their stuck up attitude. :rolleyes:

http://www.nj.com/jets/ledger/index.ssf?/base/sports-0/1131515204250960.xml&coll=1&thispage=1

USC star Reggie Bush has one eye ... on the Jets
Wednesday, November 09, 2005

BY KEVIN MANAHAN
Star-Ledger Staff

LOS ANGELES -- There are two newspaper racks in the student center just a block from Howard Jones Field, where the top-ranked USC football team practices. One for the Los Angeles Times, another for the Daily Trojan. Both newspapers are complimentary. And once in a while, Reggie Bush, on his way past, might flip open a Times, grab a sports section, leave the rest, and start wondering about his future:

It's right there, somewhere, in the NFL standings.

He'll start at the bottom and work his way up, mulling the pros and cons of each of The Biggest Losers, the franchises unwittingly jockeying into position to pluck one of college football's best players next April. Somewhere among those teams with the big numbers in the right-hand column could be Bush's next address.

"I look at that stuff all the time," said Bush, USC's star junior tailback who is expected to declare for the draft. "I keep an eye on how teams are doing. I think about where I might want to go."

Let's see ...

The Green Bay Packers are 1-7. It's a storied franchise, but it's headed for major upheaval. Quarterback Brett Favre might be Terrell Owens' first-ballot Hall of Fame lock, but Favre is likely to retire at the end of this season. Oft-injured running back Ahman Green could be on his way out of there, too. And, of course, there are those Wisconsin winters.

Uh, no thanks.

The Houston Texans are 1-7, too. Lousy expansion team taking a big step backward. Unremarkable town with few money-making off-the-field options for a big-name player. City of the fattest people in the USA, according to a recent survey.

Please, dear God, no.

How about the others? The Baltimore Ravens are 2-6, and their star running back, who spent some time in jail on a drug-sale rap, is still playing like he's in leg irons. But that team is built around defense. The Ravens couldn't find a quarterback in a room full of Unitases.

The San Francisco 49ers, also 2-6, are ... well, they're just clueless, frankly.

And then there's a just-throwing-it-out-there scenario: The homeless New Orleans Saints move to L.A., somehow weasel another first-round pick, grab Bush and Matt Leinhart ... and convince USC coach Pete Carroll to come back to the NFL. But there's a better chance of the Vikings going on a Disney cruise.

Geez, are those my only other options?

Well, not exactly, Reg. We left one team out -- the Jets. But they're a disaster, too. The quarterback, who already had trouble getting spirals airborne, is recovering from his second throwing-shoulder surgery. There could be an ugly renegotiation feud on that horizon. Once again, the franchise is playing second fiddle to the Giants, who are headed to the playoffs.

J-E-T-S! Mess! Mess! Mess! So, we really didn't even want to bring them up. People back home would be hurt by the rejection.

Wait, go back. The Jets?

"I'd love to play for the Jets," Bush told The Star-Ledger. "No, really."

As he stood in the locker room after the Trojans' 51-21 victory over Stanford last Saturday, Bush didn't even hesitate. After all, he has been looking at those standings, you know. So, go ahead, start planning Curtis Martin Day. Book the bus to Canton. Frame the jersey. Hang that green No. 28 on the wall at Giants Stadium. If the Jets can keep swimming at the bottom of the AFC East pond like contented catfish, they won't have to worry about finding a playmaker who wants to play for them.

"New York? I love New York," Bush said. "I was there for the Heisman (Trophy ceremony) last year, and we had a great time. It's a great city. We saw where the Twin Towers used to be. We went to the ESPN Zone. Went to the Heisman (ceremony). That would be a great place to play. There are a lot of opportunities there, too.

"I loved the atmosphere, the New York vibe. It's a good place. Lots of marketability."

Memo to the Jets: You might have to sell Mr. Bush, however. He was standing outside the locker room Saturday night, a huge man in a replica game jersey, his son's No. 5 on both sides and "DAD" -- all capital letters -- stretched across his wide shoulders. How does he feel about New York?

"Well, I didn't get picked up at the airport last year when we went there for the Heisman and that kind of (ticked) me off," he said.

No problem. Woody Johnson will gas up the limo and personally pick you up. Other than that?

"It would be a great place for Reggie," he said.

Even with all of the media scrutiny?

"He'd have no problem with that."

Probably true. By now, it was 45 minutes after the end of the game, and Bush was still in front of his locker, answering questions from reporters. Most of his teammates already had left. The place looked like a teenager's bedroom, with towels and socks strewn on the floor. And Bush wasn't even fidgeting to go. Wave after wave came at him with mini-recorders, pens and pads. With one foot propped on his stool, he kept responding. About the game. About the Heisman. About his 42-yard touchdown run. About his future.

The Heisman might be slipping away. Against Stanford, Bush had 113 yards, but only 12 carries. He has 1,022 yards rushing and 13 TDs -- 11 rushing and two receiving. But Texas QB Vince Young is putting up crazy numbers. Still, Bush might be the top pick in the draft.

"Being the No. 1 player selected is a goal, but it's not something I have control over," Bush said. "Teams don't always select the best player. These days it's based more on need."

And, boy, do the Jets need a running back. Blame some of Martin's problems this season on the offensive line, but clearly he is not the same runner he was just a season ago, when he won the rushing title. The first guy used to miss him. No more. And with Lamont Jordan U-hauling his stuff to Oakland in the last off-season, the Jets don't have a backfield heir. Derrick Blaylock is not the answer.

But even with his great college statistics, Bush knows there will be questions. He already hears them. He is 6 feet and 200 pounds, so some wonder if he can survive the NFL pounding. They will suggest he won't be able to carry the ball 20-plus times a game. They'll slap one of those "Hello, my name is" tags on him and fill in the words "situational back." Of course, they tried to do the same thing to Tiki Barber.

"I believe I can play as an every-down back in the NFL," Bush said. "Definitely. I look at myself as a kind of Marshall Faulk-type back. I can carry the ball 25 times and catch it."

All that in due time. First, there's the rest of the season, then a national championship bowl game, then the Heisman ceremony. Chances are, Leinhart and Bush will be returning to New York.

"I'm looking forward to it," Bush said. "There's a lot I didn't see the first time."

Like Weeb Ewbank Hall, the weight room, Herm's office ...

[Boomhauer]

I don't want to draft a OL just because we need one. If the lineman is worthy fine, but don't draft him for need over talent. I say we draft Reggie Bush and trade DD for a 4th round draft pick because of his contract. No way he stays if we draft Bush. I would like him to stay as a second stringer but his contract will be to much.

[david_rocket]

No, I always will root for the texans, but I wont be sad if they lose.

I dont like that strategy to win a draft pick.

[gucci888]

I don't want to draft a OL just because we need one. If the lineman is worthy fine, but don't draft him for need over talent. I say we draft Reggie Bush and trade DD for a 4th round draft pick because of his contract. No way he stays if we draft Bush. I would like him to stay as a second stringer but his contract will be to much.

Bush isn't going to do any better than DD would with this team. Bush has the luxury of being behind one of the best OL in the NCAA, he'll go from that straight to the worst OL in the NFL.

There is a tackle out there named D'Brickshaw Ferguson who is supposedly one of the best OL to come out in a while. They are talking about this guy as a franchise player. I think we should still trade down and get multiple picks.

[percicles]

Need I remind everyone on this board that we got the #1 pick in 1984 (which we used on Hakeem Olajuwon) by tanking the 83 season. Or that the Spurs increased thier chances of landing Duncan by sitting out Miss Robinson midway through. You think Spurs fans, a few championships later, care that they tanked or feel thier team honor has been tainted. Do you feel shame as Rockets fans coz we tanked and got Hakeem?

There is nothing wrong with tanking when your as pathetic as the Texans.

[reggietodd]

Bush isn't going to do any better than DD would with this team. Bush has the luxury of being behind one of the best OL in the NCAA, he'll go from that straight to the worst OL in the NFL.

How does Bush's O-line help him when hes out in the open field with blazing speed and putty incredible moves on everyone? DD does not have the speed or the moves that Bush has. Reggie Bush is the closest thing to a sure thing i've seen since Marshall Faulk and Lebron James. Have you seen him play?

[Groogrux]

How does Bush's O-line help him when hes out in the open field with blazing speed and putty incredible moves on everyone? DD does not have the speed or the moves that Bush has. Reggie Bush is the closest thing to a sure thing i've seen since Marshall Faulk and Lebron James. Have you seen him play?

How did he get in the open field?

[Ric]

Need I remind everyone on this board that we got the #1 pick in 1984 (which we used on Hakeem Olajuwon) by tanking the 83 season. Or that the Spurs increased thier chances of landing Duncan by sitting out Miss Robinson midway through. You think Spurs fans, a few championships later, care that they tanked or feel thier team honor has been tainted. Do you feel shame as Rockets fans coz we tanked and got Hakeem?

There is nothing wrong with tanking when your as pathetic as the Texans.
different sport; not relevant at all. if one player could change the team's fortunes, as can happen in the NBA, then fine. but that doesn't happen in the NFL.

everyone keep in mind, the last top overall pick of the texans is currently being run out of town by most of the fans.

[RocketFan007]

How does Bush's O-line help him when hes out in the open field with blazing speed and putty incredible moves on everyone? DD does not have the speed or the moves that Bush has. Reggie Bush is the closest thing to a sure thing i've seen since Marshall Faulk and Lebron James. Have you seen him play?

I'm not going to say that he's going to be a bust, but in college, he relies on being the fastest player on the field, which likely won't be the case in the NFL where likebackers are faster than alot of college corners.

[Ric]

How did he get in the open field?
i'm not saying his line isn't great; it is. but having the quickness, instincts and vision to hit the right holes is a key component of a great back and can make an OL better.

run blocking is far easier and a lot less complicated than pass blocking. if you have a back who can explode to the right spot, you need only to have the hole open for a brief time. he then does the rest. it's why guys like payton, simpson and campbell were so effective behind average-to-mediocre lines.

[Groogrux]

it's why guys like payton, simpson and campbell were so effective behind average-to-mediocre lines.

And how many Super Bowls are there between those three? One.

I couldn't care less about how spectacular a player is. Tom Brady, Corey Dillion, etc. aren't spectacular players. How many game-breakers were there on the Tampa Super Bowl winner? The last team to have true gamebreakers to win a Super Bowl were the Rams who won in the '99-'00 season.

We need talented players who can do their jobs. I know we're nowhere close to it right now, but the goal should be to build a Super Bowl contending team, not a team with players who can put up great stats, yet barely ever make it to the playoffs.

Not to mention, there's no guarantee that Bush will be a gamebreaker in the NFL.

[The Real Shady]

And how many Super Bowls are there between those three? One.

I couldn't care less about how spectacular a player is. Tom Brady, Corey Dillion, etc. aren't spectacular players. How many game-breakers were there on the Tampa Super Bowl winner? The last team to have true gamebreakers to win a Super Bowl were the Rams who won in the '99-'00 season.

We need talented players who can do their jobs. I know we're nowhere close to it right now, but the goal should be to build a Super Bowl contending team, not a team with players who can put up great stats, yet barely ever make it to the playoffs.

Not to mention, there's no guarantee that Bush will be a gamebreaker in the NFL.

That's an interesting take. It does seem like the NFL is more about quanity over quality these days. The Patriots (not this years) have been stacked with good-solid players at every position with no superstars except Brady. We see how well they have been doing in the age of the salary cap.

Another example is the Chargers. They passed on one of the most hyped QB prospects to come out in a while in Vick, and parlayed that pick into Tomlinson and Brees.

If the Texans do trade out of the top spot they better get several selections in return because I would hate to miss out on a player of Bush's caliber.

[Groogrux]

If the Texans do trade out of the top spot they better get several selections in return because I would hate to miss out on a player of Bush's caliber.

The Chargers moved down three spots, took Rivers and got an extra first round pick last year. If we get the top spot, move down a few spots for an OL, there's a good chance that we'll end up with two first round picks in the 2007 draft, not to mention more picks in the upcoming draft.

I just think for a team this bad, we don't have the luxury of taking someone who plays the same spot of one of the only positions that can consistently do anything positive in games.

[Ric]

And how many Super Bowls are there between those three? One.
i thought we were talking specifically about why bush had been so productive in college, and whether or not that would translate to the NFL...? but if you want to derail that discussion and go this route instead... yes, the answer is one - which is one more than the oilers had building their OL in the 80's, right? i mean, come on. are you even remotely suggesting payton, simpson and campbell were the reasons those teams didn't reach the super bowl? or that the teams should have traded those picks away, moved down in the draft and picked players who would have gotten them to a SB, as if that's a skill GMs have?

one player can't carry a team to a SB, but that doesn't mean the one player should be tossed aside in favor of lesser, but more players.

I couldn't care less about how spectacular a player is. Tom Brady, Corey Dillion, etc. aren't spectacular players. How many game-breakers were there on the Tampa Super Bowl winner? The last team to have true gamebreakers to win a Super Bowl were the Rams who won in the '99-'00 season.
if you'd rather argue the texans are better off with bellichick instead of bush, you'll get no retort from me. but let's get one thing straight: NE's not winning SBs because they don't have any gamebreakers. i doubt bellicheck would pass on adding bush because he's a gamebreaker, and that would foul things up. "we don't those guys mucking up our operations..." bellicheck is winning SBs almost in spite of the talent he's assembled. it is a well-coached team that got lucky with brady and injuries and has tremendous chemistry. you'd be a fool to build a team that tried to duplicate what the pats have done.

as for tampa bay, they had a LOAD of gamebreakers on defense; up and down their roster. same with the ravens when they won it. and the best team in the league right now is a playmaker factory on both sides of the ball.

We need talented players who can do their jobs. I know we're nowhere close to it right now, but the goal should be to build a Super Bowl contending team, not a team with players who can put up great stats, yet barely ever make it to the playoffs.
so you're assuming bush wouldn't be a differencemaker? or that's he's not talented? maybe he won't make the leap, but then, what is that conclusion based on? he's currently a differencemaker on a team that's won 567 games in a row and are poised to take a crack at a third title.

i mean, is your contention that winning teams don't have guys like reggie bush on them? because usc would beg to differ.

Not to mention, there's no guarantee that Bush will be a gamebreaker in the NFL.
or that the offensive lineman you want to trade down for will be any good. it's all a crapshoot. all i know is what i see. and if i'm the texans, and i wind up with the top pick, i don't dismiss ANYONE as a possibility under ANY circumstances because this team needs upgrades all across the board. and i sure as hell don't run further off the tracks by reaching for needs and skipping over better players to squeeze a round peg into a square hole.

I just think for a team this bad, we don't have the luxury of taking someone who plays the same spot of one of the only positions that can consistently do anything positive in games.
i assume you mean DD. DD is not a gamebreaker. i like him, but teams don't fear him. he doesn't bust games open. he's given space to run between the 20's because he's not a threat to break anything. based on what i've seen, bush would be a tremendous upgrade.

[Groogrux]

i thought we were talking specifically about why bush had been so productive in college, and whether or not that would translate to the NFL...?

We were. He's on arguably the best team in the country that's got great players at nearly every position. I know you're not arguing that the Texans' current place in the NFL is equivalent to the Trojans' place in the NCAA.

which is one more than the oilers had building their OL in the 80's, right? i mean, come on. are you even remotely suggesting payton, simpson and campbell were the reasons those teams didn't reach the super bowl?

The Oilers didn't fail to win or go to the Super Bowl because of their OL. They didn't make it basically due to a bunch of choke jobs. They certainly had better shots to go than the Lions with Sanders or the Bills with O.J.

one player can't carry a team to a SB, but that doesn't mean the one player should be tossed aside in favor of lesser, but more players.

When you're the worst team in the league with one of the worst offensive line of all-time pass blocking wise, you don't ignore that to pick a flashier player to take the place of an RB that's a proven 1,000 yard rusher and a great receiver out of the backfield.


if you'd rather argue the texans are better off with bellichick instead of bush, you'll get no retort from me. but let's get one thing straight: NE's not winning SBs because they don't have any gamebreakers. i doubt bellicheck would pass on adding bush because he's a gamebreaker, and that would foul things up. "we don't those guys mucking up our operations..." bellicheck is winning SBs almost in spite of the talent he's assembled. it is a well-coached team that got lucky with brady and injuries and has tremendous chemistry. you'd be a fool to build a team that tried to duplicate what the pats have done.

C'mon. Three Super Bowl victories in four seasons is simply luck and good-coaching? I think it's probably also helped that they many talented players that just don't happen to be gamebreakers. Corey Dillon is a perfect example of that.

as for tampa bay, they had a LOAD of gamebreakers on defense; up and down their roster. same with the ravens when they won it. and the best team in the league right now is a playmaker factory on both sides of the ball.

Let's have this argument when I say we shouldn't take a defensive gamebreaker. If Reggie Bush was a DL or LB or DB, I'd be all for taking him with the first pick.

so you're assuming bush wouldn't be a differencemaker? or that's he's not talented? maybe he won't make the leap, but then, what is that conclusion based on? he's currently a differencemaker on a team that's won 567 games in a row and are poised to take a crack at a third title.

I'm assuming he won't be a difference maker on the Texans. There's a good chance he will be on the right team. The Texans sure ain't it.

i mean, is your contention that winning teams don't have guys like reggie bush on them? because usc would beg to differ.

That is not my contention, necessarily. Recent history has shown that having a gamebreaker like Reggie Bush doesn't necessarily translate into a Super Bowl contending team. USC wouldn't beg to differ if their talent level in the NCAA was equivalent to the current talent level of the Texans in the NFL. Put Reggie Bush on Temple, is he the same gamebreaker?

or that the offensive lineman you want to trade down for will be any good. it's all a crapshoot. all i know is what i see. and if i'm the texans, and i wind up with the top pick, i don't dismiss ANYONE as a possibility under ANY circumstances because this team needs upgrades all across the board. and i sure as hell don't run further off the tracks by reaching for needs and skipping over better players to squeeze a round peg into a square hole.

How is drafting an OL, especially when there may be quite a few projected first rounders, when you have the worst OL in the game, trying to squeeze a round peg into a square hole? Of course this team needs upgrades across the board. You don't use the very first pick in the draft to upgrade the position that arguably needs the least amount of upgrade and ignore the part that needs multiple upgrades.

i assume you mean DD. DD is not a gamebreaker. i like him, but teams don't fear him. he doesn't bust games open. he's given space to run between the 20's because he's not a threat to break anything. based on what i've seen, bush would be a tremendous upgrade.

What happens if you have a better pass blocking OL, one that makes teams actually have to worry about the Texans' passing game? He may not be a gamebreaker, but he could be a 1500 yard back rushing, not to mention his pass-catching skills.

[reggietodd]

How did he get in the open field?

Vision, speed, and good run blocking.

You've said before that our O-line is good a run blocking, but just not pass blocking, therefore Bush could get into the open field with us just as well as he could with USC. Then from that point on I believe that Bush has the talent to take it the distance while DD does not because IMO DD is not a game breaker.

I've also heard that internally the Texans do not think their O-line is that bad, so i'm not sure they feel like they need to draft O-linemen in the first round of the draft. Isn't it Denver who has a really small offensive line, but they work well together and are well coached? Perhaps we should take that approach and try to stick with the O-line guys that we have and get a better O-line coach in here to teach them how to pass block more efficiently.

[Groogrux]

Vision, speed, and good run blocking.

You've said before that our O-line is good a run blocking, but just not pass blocking, therefore Bush could get into the open field with us just as well as he could with USC. Then from that point on I believe that Bush has the talent to take it the distance while DD does not because IMO DD is not a game breaker.

I'm not sure I ever said our line was good at run blocking, just that they're not as bad at run blocking as they are at pass blocking. I still think that Bush is surrounded by arguably the best team in the NCAA. He won't be able to do the same things on arguably the least-talented team in the NFL. Until we improve our pass blocking, teams will continue to stack the line to stop the run. He won't be a gamebreaker on the Texans until we improve that. Until then, why waste a 1st pick on someone who you wouldn't even be able to really utilize his skills.

I've also heard that internally the Texans do not think their O-line is that bad, so i'm not sure they feel like they need to draft O-linemen in the first round of the draft. Isn't it Denver who has a really small offensive line, but they work well together and are well coached? Perhaps we should take that approach and try to stick with the O-line guys that we have and get a better O-line coach in here to teach them how to pass block more efficiently.

If they don't think it's that bad, then that's their problem. It doesn't take a genius to see that they're a horrible pass-blocking OL. If that's the case, it doesn't really matter who we take as their stubborness will prohibit any significant improvement until McNair wises up and fires the lot of them. Hopefully he doesn't share that assessment and gets rid of the whole bunch this offseason.

[Toast]

I've also heard that internally the Texans do not think their O-line is that bad ...

Well whoever said that needs to be fired. Whoever said that probably thinks a pocket is only for clothes. Whoever said that thinks passing lanes are only on highways.

The only way someone should start off a statement by saying, "the Texans' offensive line isn't that bad" better finish it off with a good punch line, or failing that, "April Fool's."

[Ric]

We were. He's on arguably the best team in the country that's got great players at nearly every position. I know you're not arguing that the Texans' current place in the NFL is equivalent to the Trojans' place in the NCAA.
nope, but bush is one of the reasons it's arguably the best team in the country; it certainly wouldn't be better w/o him – surely you’re not arguing that. his speed, vision and tenacity are not products of a system.

The Oilers didn't fail to win or go to the Super Bowl because of their OL. They didn't make it basically due to a bunch of choke jobs. They certainly had better shots to go than the Lions with Sanders or the Bills with O.J.
well, first of all, sanders played in a championship game; campbell played in two; dickerson in one. those oiler teams never did. but you’re making a specious argument. i never said bush makes the texans a SB contender; i just disagreed with your contention that he wouldn’t be productive behind HOU’s OL. like simpson, payton, sanders, campbell, he could definitely succeed behind an average to mediocre or worse OL.

When you're the worst team in the league with one of the worst offensive line of all-time pass blocking wise, you don't ignore that to pick a flashier player to take the place of an RB that's a proven 1,000 yard rusher and a great receiver out of the backfield.
bush is not merely "flashier;" he's better. and LD is a "great" receiver out of the backfield; so, too, is holmes and james. DD is not in their class.

C'mon. Three Super Bowl victories in four seasons is simply luck and good-coaching? I think it's probably also helped that they many talented players that just don't happen to be gamebreakers. Corey Dillon is a perfect example of that.
not good coaching, great coaching. and chemistry. and scheme. and yes, luck. and sure, some of that is because there aren’t great players asked to perform below their egos. TO, for example, isn’t being asked to be a decoy, etc.

but if you want to keep playing the patriot card, fine - how many of their starting OL were first round picks? of all their linemen, exactly one was picked in round 1. and he wouldn't be starting if their usual starter, a 2nd rounder, was healthy. meanwhile, they currently have two undrafted players starting on the right side.

Let's have this argument when I say we shouldn't take a defensive gamebreaker.
or when you specify. here's what you said, "How many game-breakers were there on the Tampa Super Bowl winner?" you didn't ask about offense, nor did you exclude defense. a game breaker is a game breaker, and teams that win have a lot of them on their rosters, NE excluded. getting rid of them certainly doesn’t mean you’ll succeed.

I'm assuming he won't be a difference maker on the Texans. There's a good chance he will be on the right team. The Texans sure ain't it.
why not? davis is a fairly productive back on this team; is your contention that bush is not appreciably better than davis because he is. watch them in the open field. davis gets caught; bush doesn’t. those are significant yards. if this OL is good enough to get davis in the clear, then bush would be an upgrade because if he, too, can hit the clear, he’s a game breaker.

That is not my contention, necessarily. Recent history has shown that having a gamebreaker like Reggie Bush doesn't necessarily translate into a Super Bowl contending team. USC wouldn't beg to differ if their talent level in the NCAA was equivalent to the current talent level of the Texans in the NFL. Put Reggie Bush on Temple, is he the same gamebreaker?
yes, he is. again, davis produces behind what you've called the worst line in the nfl, so why do you think bush would struggle behind an inferior line in an inferior conference? again, usc's scheme, et al, aren't the reason bush is as fast and elusive as he is. you’re coming close to proclaiming bush a product of the system. palmer was in that system – would you trade carr for palmer? i would. in a heartbeat.

How is drafting an OL, especially when there may be quite a few projected first rounders, when you have the worst OL in the game, trying to squeeze a round peg into a square hole? Of course this team needs upgrades across the board. You don't use the very first pick in the draft to upgrade the position that arguably needs the least amount of upgrade and ignore the part that needs multiple upgrades.
because you then have to pay a middle round pick first overall money, and if they're not worthy of that money, you've bungled your cap because that’s $5-10M you don’t have to spend on help in FA. or to resign a key member of your core.

i'm not opposed to trading down and getting a good OL at his perceived value. nor do i oppose taking the OL if he grades at the top of the draft. i just don't want them picking a 5-10 guy #1 because they're desperate and in doing so, watch a legitimate #1 go elsewhere. remember - I know different sports, but it's a relevant comparison - the blazers drafted for need in '84. you get burned drafting for needs far more often than taking the consensus best pick. another example: NO taking mcallister when they had williams.

if you have a chance to land the best player in the draft, and he's heads and tails the best player in the draft, you don't pass on him to get the…. 5th or 6th or 10th best player in the draft. you don’t pass on him to get the 2nd best player in the draft.

What happens if you have a better pass blocking OL, one that makes teams actually have to worry about the Texans' passing game? He may not be a gamebreaker, but he could be a 1500 yard back rushing, not to mention his pass-catching skills.
first of all, davis is not, nor will he ever be a 1500 yard back. but let's say I'm waaaaaaay off on him, and other teams value him as much as you seem to - if bush is an upgrade, couldn't you then turn around and deal davis and upgrade your team in another area? you'd get a better back and… let's say a 2nd round-equivalent talent to add to your OL. would you do that? sacrifice davis to upgrade two positions?

further, ask drew bress if he'd downgrade his RB in order to open up his passing game. again, i'm not contending the texans don't need help on the OL. i'm not even sure bush is the definitive best player in the draft. just that, if he is… then you either take him or trade his rights. you don't, under any circumstances, stay where you are, pass on him and then take a lesser player.

[swilkins]

Well whoever said that needs to be fired. Whoever said that probably thinks a pocket is only for clothes. Whoever said that thinks passing lanes are only on highways.

The only way someone should start off a statement by saying, "the Texans' offensive line isn't that bad" better finish it off with a good punch line, or failing that, "April Fool's."

If McNair didn't say it, it doesn't mean squat.

[Groogrux]

I have never, not once, ever ever ever argued that we should stay put and draft an OL. I guessed you missed my earlier quote today in this very thread:

The Chargers moved down three spots, took Rivers and got an extra first round pick last year. If we get the top spot, move down a few spots for an OL, there's a good chance that we'll end up with two first round picks in the 2007 draft, not to mention more picks in the upcoming draft.

[Uprising]

Here's why I'm rooting for the Texans:


On the Run(R)/Tigermarket convenience stores across the country will kick off a new Fall coffee promotion this month which will reward customers with either free or half-priced Bengal Traders gourmet coffee.

"Free Coffee Mondays" will be offered in selected cities with local or nearby National Football League teams. When a local football team in a designated city wins, on the following Mondays, fans can receive a free Bengal Traders gourmet coffee, cappuccino, hot chocolate, Steamer, Chai Latte or Bengal Traders Tea. "Free Coffee Mondays" will be offered in Baton Rouge, Dallas, Charlotte, Houston, Knoxville, Miami, Orlando, and Ft. Myers and Naples, Florida. The same offer is also valid at Tigermarket convenience stores in San Antonio, Austin, Memphis and Nashville. If a team in one of the named cities wins a Monday Night Football game, the offer will be extended to Free Coffee Tuesday for that week.

In markets that do not have professional football teams, On the Run stores will offer "Halfback Mondays." In these markets on Mondays, customers will be able to purchase any cup of Bengal Traders gourmet coffee, cappuccino, hot chocolate, Steamer, Chai Latte or Bengal Traders Tea at half of the regular price.

But even in cities where "Free Coffee Mondays" is offered and their team doesn't win on a given Sunday, fans will still be offered "Halfback Mondays."

"This promotion gives football fans one more reason to cheer on their local professional football team," said Mike Gore, U.S. convenience retailing manager, ExxonMobil Fuels Marketing. "And not only will they win when their team wins, they'll win at On the Run with free or half-priced Bengal Traders gourmet coffee."

http://www.fatwallet.com/t/22/539457/




Come on Texans! WIn and we get free coffee on Monday!!! :cool:

[swilkins]

Here's why I'm rooting for the Texans:

...

Come on Texans! WIn and we get free coffee on Monday!!! :cool:

I hope that is not the only reason you root for them.

[reggietodd]

Damn Ric. You just put together a well thought out and written response. I agree with all of it.

[gucci888]

How does Bush's O-line help him when hes out in the open field with blazing speed and putty incredible moves on everyone? DD does not have the speed or the moves that Bush has. Reggie Bush is the closest thing to a sure thing i've seen since Marshall Faulk and Lebron James. Have you seen him play?

You're right, Bush does have the speed and moves, but he also has the luxury of having time to make those moves and use his speed (on passes) to get him free.

If you watch USC a lot, their OL gives Leinart a TON of time in the pocket, therefore, allowing his receivers (White and Bush) to do damage in the open field. However, if you go from that, straight to a NFL team that gives their quarterback an average of 2 seconds in the pocket, it's gonna translate into nothing.

Everything starts with the OL, they protect the QB for passes and they block on runs. If you have a crap OL like we do, you don't give the QB or WR enough time to do their thing, you don't get holes for the RB.

AJ is one of the best WRs in the game (my favorite personally) but there is a reason why he has been so unproductive this season.

Please don't get me wrong, Bush is an unbelievable talent, but a running back isn't our biggest need. An O-Line is, and there is a tackle out there by the name of D'Brickshaw Ferguson who is worth a top 3 pick.

[Ric]

Damn Ric. You just put together a well thought out and written response. I agree with all of it.
thanks. i have no life.

the OL is a problem; don't get me wrong. but it can't be treated as the only problem.

I have never, not once, ever ever ever argued that we should stay put and draft an OL.
no, but you've argued getting the best player in the draft can't help far and away the worst team in football:

"We need talented players who can do their jobs. I know we're nowhere close to it right now, but the goal should be to build a Super Bowl contending team, not a team with players who can put up great stats, yet barely ever make it to the playoffs."

i do not understand how that goal would or should automatically rule out reggie bush and players of his ilk. your response to that has been, universally, because we need to upgrade the OL. you've made it the be-all, end-all proposition that should be done at all costs, and that, IMO, is a hazardous approach.

my contention is that, in doing so, you may be passing on someone who could have an even bigger impact on the franchise. that getting the 10th best player in the draft and an additional second rounder isn't such an upgrade over the best player that you automatically rule out getting the best player.

[moonnumack]

I'm enjoying the arguments on both sides of this debate. Although I'm no football talent expert, from the sounds of it, Bush, Leinart, & D'Brickashaw are all outstanding talents, worthy of a Top 3 pick. They all seem to be head & shoulders above their peers at their respective positions. Declaring one of these guys to be clearly superior to another seems like splitting hairs, which pro scouts may be able to do. But otherwise, I think beauty is in the eye of the beholder. In other words, need is relevant if you have guys with similar grades. We have a former #1 pick who has yet to be able to showcase his NFL capabilities clearly at QB, an average to above-average RB who just signed a long-term deal with a capable backup, and then we have the flavor of the week at LT (whether it be Pitts or Wand or Riley, no one seems to have any long-term promise there). If all 3 are considered sure bets at their positions, well then, I'm going for the guy that fills our biggest need. If we can get some extra high-round picks and still nab the top OL, then all the better because we only have about 18 starting positions up for grabs next year.

[Uprising]

I hope that is not the only reason you root for them.


Dude, ofcourse it isn't. I'm the biggest homer EVER. For Houston.

[giddyup]

no offense, but this brand of thinking and these kinds of discussions, disgust me. why would anyone choose to endure losses for the right to gamble on a #1 pick? as if this team is one pick away from being good even if the pick does pan out.

you don't invite, or feed, a losing culture. you don't ask players to lie down today in order to compete tomorrow. you don't instill in your organization a free pass to underachieve. and you sure as hell don't ask fans to sit through it with their wallets wide open.
The one pick could be converted into extra picks. No one is asking them to lie down and dog it. I say to lose going forward and being competitive would be a good thing in the overall picture. I say let's just jinx them. Losing culture? Half the guys won't be around two years from now....

[giddyup]

well, first of all, sanders played in a championship game; campbell played in two; dickerson in one. those oiler teams never did.
The Oilers had the dubious distinction of being the second best team in pro football and the second best team in their own division during those years didn't they?

[Groogrux]

i do not understand how that goal would or should automatically rule out reggie bush and players of his ilk.

I'm not sure what's so hard about understanding that our OL is far and away the worst in the NFL. Far. and. Away. Taking a potential gamebreaker who plays the same position that is already occupied by someone who can get the job done (almost 1200 yards rushing in 15 games in 2003) when you have the chance to draft the best OL and obtain more picks to help other areas is unwise, IMO, since it is inconceivable that the player will be a gamebreaker in the forseeable future. If we had an average OL and didn't have an RB who's capable of 1200 yard rushing, 500 yard receiving seasons, I'd be all over taking Bush. But it's not like that. And yes, DD could rush for 1500 yards if he was behind a good OL.

Reggie Bush on USC is a gamebreaker. I wholeheartedly disagree that he would be a gamebreaker on this Texans team or on it's equivalent in the NCAA.

With that, I'm out. I'm not going to convince you that I'm right, nor will you convince me that I'm right. We're approaching the whole go around in circles routine.

[Groogrux]

Here's a question that was brought up last night while watching the Rockets:

Does anyone think Bush would try to pull an Elway and refuse to play for the Texans?

[swilkins]

Here's a question that was brought up last night while watching the Rockets:

Does anyone think Bush would try to pull an Elway and refuse to play for the Texans?

What makes you think he would do that?

We're only 3 defensive players, a WR and offensive line away from being a .500 football team.

[Groogrux]

What makes you think he would do that?

Because we're only 3 defensive players, a WR and offensive line away from being a .500 football team. :D

[Ric]

RM95 – fair enough; here’s my final $.02. i agree it’s the worst OL in football; maybe – maybe – one of the two or three worst OL ever put together when it comes to pass blocking. it’s an abomination. but i’d say the same thing about the team’s pass rush, and that’s my point…

the texans need help at every single position. I think iof you go into a draft thinking, “OL… OL… OL…” you end up reaching for guys or passing on others who could have a bigger impact on your team, and they can’t afford to do that.

it really comes down to you obviously being a bigger fan of DD’s than i am. i think he’s a marginal player. I like him – runs hard, tough. but he lacks vision, lacks quickness, lacks speed and he isn’t a threat to break a game open. he’s also, by the way, quite possibly the worst running back in the nfl at picking up the blitz.

if I had a chance to upgrade his position with the heads and tails best player in the draft, i’d do it in a heartbeat. same with every single position, save for QB, but only because it would be cost-prohibitive. if DD can rush for 1100 yards behind this line… then reggie bush would rush for 1500-1600, score more touchdowns, and break more games open, put defenses on their heels. i’ve seen DD get caught from behind in the open field. bush wouldn’t. that’s the difference and it’s a big one on a team that has trouble moving the football.

Does anyone think Bush would try to pull an Elway and refuse to play for the Texans?
certainly possible, but why would he? he could cost himself a shot at going #1 overall, and that means a huge chunk of change. if he cries and whines about being drafted by houston, the texans could then trade the top pick to someone who really wants lienart and that could cause him to tumble down the board, costing him MILLIONS. if his agent’s smart, he’ll tell him to keep his yapper shut, that houston’s checks cash just as quickly as new york’s. a more likely scenario – he pulls out of the draft, but that, too, is a GIGANTIC risk.

and again, he can look at DD and see that a back could thrive here, even with this OL. it’s not like DD is being treated like carr and just getting pounded every week.

[gucci888]

the texans need help at every single position. I think iof you go into a draft thinking, “OL… OL… OL…” you end up reaching for guys or passing on others who could have a bigger impact on your team, and they can’t afford to do that.

You're right, the Texans shouldn't go into the draft only thinking about the OL and I highly doubt they will. But there a some offensive lineman that are worth a top 10 pick, D. Ferguson is being considered a top 3-5 pick.

if DD can rush for 1100 yards behind this line… then reggie bush would rush for 1500-1600, score more touchdowns, and break more games open, put defenses on their heels. i’ve seen DD get caught from behind in the open field. bush wouldn’t. that’s the difference and it’s a big one on a team that has trouble moving the football.


How can you be so sure? Bush ran for 908 yards last season, and is projected to run about 1360 yards this season, now he's gonna run 1500-1600 yards all of the sudden in the NFL?

I'm not trying to put down Bush or anything, but he is a RB that is slightly undersized. He has the luxury of being one of the fastest guys on the field during games and has a great OL to do the blocking. He is usually the most athletic player on the field during games, he won't be in the NFL.

That won't be the case for the Texans or for a lot of teams. He won't be the fastest guy anymore, hell, there are a lot of NFL LBs that will be able to run him down straight up. He won't have the big holes to run through as much.

[MadMax]

How can you be so sure? Bush ran for 908 yards last season, and is projected to run about 1360 yards this season, now he's gonna run 1500-1600 yards all of the sudden in the NFL?
.

well, i don't know what Bush will do. but i know they'll play 16 games...and they don't play 16 games at the college level. so a raw number comparison won't work.

i'd draft Ferguson with the first pick we have if it's up to me.

[Major]

Doesn't Reggie Bush touch the ball maybe 15 times a game or so, a lot of it on flares and other plays to get him into the open field? Do we even know if he could handle the rigors of playing traditional NFL running back with 25-30 carries, many of which right up the gut?

This team *could* be successful with Carr and Davis, with a good OL. It *can't* be successful with Carr and Bush, and a crappy OL. In my opinion, you do what needs to be done to trade down and get a powerful OLine. If we still suck, then next year go get a new QB or RB or whatnot.

[gucci888]

well, i don't know what Bush will do. but i know they'll play 16 games...and they don't play 16 games at the college level. so a raw number comparison won't work.

i'd draft Ferguson with the first pick we have if it's up to me.

True, but 1500-1600 yards is still a stretch. I agree that Ferguson should be our pick. Many mock drafts have us picking him up with the #1 overall, but I could see the Texans moving down 2-3 spots to pick up another 2nd rounder or something, we still should be able to steal Ferguson with a top 5 pick.

Doesn't Reggie Bush touch the ball maybe 15 times a game or so, a lot of it on flares and other plays to get him into the open field? Do we even know if he could handle the rigors of playing traditional NFL running back with 25-30 carries, many of which right up the gut?

This team *could* be successful with Carr and Davis, with a good OL. It *can't* be successful with Carr and Bush, and a crappy OL. In my opinion, you do what needs to be done to trade down and get a powerful OLine. If we still suck, then next year go get a new QB or RB or whatnot.

Good post Major. Bush wouldn't be able to do any better than DD with this OL in my opinion. Fix the biggest problem first and then see what else needs fix'n.

[The Real Shady]

Doesn't Reggie Bush touch the ball maybe 15 times a game or so, a lot of it on flares and other plays to get him into the open field? Do we even know if he could handle the rigors of playing traditional NFL running back with 25-30 carries, many of which right up the gut?

This team *could* be successful with Carr and Davis, with a good OL. It *can't* be successful with Carr and Bush, and a crappy OL. In my opinion, you do what needs to be done to trade down and get a powerful OLine. If we still suck, then next year go get a new QB or RB or whatnot.

He'll probably get around 20 carries per game, plus 5-6 receptions, and maybe 3-4 punt returns. It's already been stated, but the difference between Bush and DD is that Bush can score a TD on any play. He's a playmaker, and there are not to many of those in the NFL.

[gucci888]

He'll probably get around 20 carries per game, plus 5-6 receptions, and maybe 3-4 punt returns. It's already been stated, but the difference between Bush and DD is that Bush can score a TD on any play. He's a playmaker, and there are not to many of those in the NFL.

Wow!! All that for a 6-0 200lbs. running back? He won't last a season, it's already kinda dangerous for USC to have him returning punts, I doubt a NFL team would put that much pressure on one player.

[Major]

He'll probably get around 20 carries per game, plus 5-6 receptions, and maybe 3-4 punt returns. It's already been stated, but the difference between Bush and DD is that Bush can score a TD on any play. He's a playmaker, and there are not to many of those in the NFL.

So he would be part of a RB platoon? Teams run the ball about 30 times a game. So would we be paying #1 pick money for a player who's not even the full time starting tailback? We would also need to pay another guy who gets 1/3rd of the carries?

I don't think anyone's arguing that RB is not better than DD. The main argument is that the differential between RB and DD is less than that of our OLine compared to the OLine picks we could get. So the net improvement of the team would be higher by drafting OLine pieces than a new running back.

[Ric]

We would also need to pay another guy who gets 1/3rd of the carries?
we're already paying him; his name is domanick davis, the guy they originally drafted to return kicks and be a third down back.

but let's not get ahead of ourselves - bush has not, to my knowledge, been injured since coming to 'sc and he's always handled the punt and kick return duties, in addition to running the football, averaging about 20 touches a game. remember, like williams/brown at auburn last year, he splits carries with white, not because he can't handle the load, but because usc is loaded with talent they're trying to get on the field. but he's on pace to have more carries this year than brown did last year, in addition to his other touches.

there's no reason to assume a 6', 200-lb tailback can't tote it 25-30 times a game in the NFL, and bush has done nothing to make you think otherwise, either.

I don't think anyone's arguing that RB is not better than DD. The main argument is that the differential between RB and DD is less than that of our OLine compared to the OLine picks we could get. So the net improvement of the team would be higher by drafting OLine pieces than a new running back.
the OL, in theory, could be fixed without adding a single piece. it, more than any other unit, can succeed in spite of itself. scheme, chemistry and coaching play a bigger role in molding an OL than overall talent does. as someone on this thread pointed out, of all the LTs in last year's playoffs, only 1 was a first rounder.

i think you're overrating DD. he's not that good. he's average, at best. as i've said repeatedly, teams do not fear him and he will never break a game open. ever. he has no breakaway speed. i've seen LBs run him down.

again, i like DD; i do. he runs hard and always moves forward. but he's not good enough to make me consider passing on the definitive best player in the draft, if that is, indeed reggie bush. if he's that good, it's a better team with reggie bush. find ways to get him in the open field, and we'll see the difference.

[swilkins]

Ric,

I'm not going to try and convince you to change your mind, because you wouldn't.

This team needs new coaches and new peices to the line. Getting D'Brick would go a long way. I honestly think RB's are over rated players and that the OL in the NFL and NCAA don't get enough credit.

When your weakest part of your offense is your LT and one comes up in the draft in possibly a top 3 spot, I say you have to jump all over it.

Of course you'll continue to praise Bush. If the Texans were to draft Bush and his numbers looked nothing of that at USC, what would you do? I don't see D'Brick being a let down.

I believe that this draft will get us at least one star offensive lineman, another decent lineman, and a few defensive prospects.

[Ric]

This team needs new coaches and new peices to the line.
it needs new everything; don't stop with coaches and the line - that's the kind of short-sighted thinking that worries me.

When your weakest part of your offense is your LT and one comes up in the draft in possibly a top 3 spot, I say you have to jump all over it.
actually, pitts is probably the team's best lineman and has proven to be a pretty decent LT. why the team moved him last year for a one-year experiment with seth wand, who they no longer even activate, no one will ever know. but pitts will be an integral part of this line

Of course you'll continue to praise Bush. If the Texans were to draft Bush and his numbers looked nothing of that at USC, what would you do? I don't see D'Brick being a let down.
no, i really don't. i don't know if bush is the best player in this draft. i've argued only that if he is, you can't afford to pass him up to reach for an OL who isn't as good. all things being equal, yes, you take the OL. let me ask you a questin: would you go back to the '03 draft and trade out of the 3-spot (and away from AJ) to trade down and get jordan gross? cause that's essentially what you're advocating the texans do if bush is the best non-QB in this draft.

all draft picks come with inherent risk of busting. that's why you try to minimize your chance for failure by selecting the best players.

I believe that this draft will get us at least one star offensive lineman, another decent lineman, and a few defensive prospects.
sure, that's reasonable, considering the first four drafts have yielded such high returns...

[LongTimeFan]

The Texans are a long, long way from being a playoff team. Drafting a LT in the top 5 isn't going to all of a sudden make us a contender. I think the Texans need to approach this like they did their first 2-3 years -- take the best player available.

[gucci888]

The Texans are a long, long way from being a playoff team. Drafting a LT in the top 5 isn't going to all of a sudden make us a contender. I think the Texans need to approach this like they did their first 2-3 years -- take the best player available.

It won't make us a contendor right away, but it gives us a solid piece to build our OL around. Ferguson might just be the best player available however, it's just that lineman never get the glory skill players do.

Ferguson is a top 5 pick for sure, some mock drafts have us taking him with the #1 overall and saying that it is justified. Look at what Orlando Pace has done for the Rams and Walter Jones for the Seahawks, this kid has this kind of potential.

[The Real Shady]

Wow!! All that for a 6-0 200lbs. running back? He won't last a season, it's already kinda dangerous for USC to have him returning punts, I doubt a NFL team would put that much pressure on one player.

Yeah, I know that small running backs can't carry the entire work load for teams not matter how special they are.

Barry Sanders
5-8 200 lbs

Thurman Thomas
5-10 206 lbs

Emmitt Smith
5-1- 216 lbs

[Nick]

Yeah, I know that small running backs can't carry the entire work load for teams not matter how special they are.

Barry Sanders
5-8 200 lbs

Thurman Thomas
5-10 206 lbs

Emmitt Smith
5-1- 216 lbs

Two of those three ran behind the best offensive lines in the leauge... and those same two went to the Super Bowl.

The other one was a one-of-a-kind back that the NFL had never seen before, and hasn't seen since. He also had the worst offensive line in the league, and his team never won squat.

[gucci888]

Yeah, I know that small running backs can't carry the entire work load for teams not matter how special they are.

Barry Sanders
5-8 200 lbs

Thurman Thomas
5-10 206 lbs

Emmitt Smith
5-1- 216 lbs

Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, but if you are...maybe you can tell me how many times Sanders, Smith, and Thomas lined up at flanker for passes and returned punts on top of their 20 carries? My guess would be none.

Bush can do this because he is a superior athlete playing against inferior players, that won't be the case in the NFL. No player in the NFL does the
20+ carries, 6 receptions, and 4 punt returns game after game like you're suggesting.

[vaioavan63]

After their 5th loss I was actually rooting for them to have a 0-16 season. Alas, a 1-15 season will suffice :D

[geeimsobored]

Bush will turn into a Brian Westbrook type Running back. He'll carry a chunk of the responsibilities at running back (although domanick davis would certainly take the majority in my opinion) and he'd line up as a wide reciever occasionally. The Eagles have been able to do a lot of creative things with Westbrook but you'll need a more liberal coach than Capers to actually use Bush's strengths. Otherwise he'll amount to a nobody.

[TigerBait]

Bush will turn into a Brian Westbrook type Running back. He'll carry a chunk of the responsibilities at running back (although domanick davis would certainly take the majority in my opinion) and he'd line up as a wide reciever occasionally. The Eagles have been able to do a lot of creative things with Westbrook but you'll need a more liberal coach than Capers to actually use Bush's strengths. Otherwise he'll amount to a nobody.

I'd agree with that, although Bush is bigger and faster than Westbrook.

[The Real Shady]

Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, but if you are...maybe you can tell me how many times Sanders, Smith, and Thomas lined up at flanker for passes and returned punts on top of their 20 carries? My guess would be none.

Bush can do this because he is a superior athlete playing against inferior players, that won't be the case in the NFL. No player in the NFL does the
20+ carries, 6 receptions, and 4 punt returns game after game like you're suggesting.


Doing the research you are right. No player could do that. But I would take the type of production those guys had in their NFL careers if we could get them.



Barry Sanders career averages
20.01 carries per game
2.3 receptions per game
22.31 total touches per game

Thurman Thomas
Years 89' - 96' (His prime years)
19.18 carries per
3.08 receptions per
22.26 touches per

Emmitt Smith
91' - 00' (prime years)
21.26 carries per
2.77 recepts per
24.03 touches per

I think Bush most resembles Marshall Faulk
98' - 01'
18.16 carries per
5.62 receptions per
23.78 touches per

[gucci888]

Doing the research you are right. No player could do that. But I would take the type of production those guys had in their NFL careers if we could get them.



Barry Sanders career averages
20.01 carries per game
2.3 receptions per game
22.31 total touches per game

Thurman Thomas
Years 89' - 96' (His prime years)
19.18 carries per
3.08 receptions per
22.26 touches per

Emmitt Smith
91' - 00' (prime years)
21.26 carries per
2.77 recepts per
24.03 touches per

I think Bush most resembles Marshall Faulk
98' - 01'
18.16 carries per
5.62 receptions per
23.78 touches per

Ya, I would take that type of production too, I think anyone would.

As talented as Bush is, I just don't see him being a major upgrade over DD with THIS OL. As long as our OL fails to pass protect and run protect, our offense will be abysmal.

I just think that since there is a tackle out there that is worth a top 3 pick in this year's draft, we should take him. This kid is suppose to be one of the best offensive linemen to come out in a while. He could have been a top 10 pick last season if he came out early.

[astroagg]

I'd rather build a good OL, then go after Adrian Peterson when he's ready...

[couple of d's]

i think peterson is terribly over-rated and also injury prone

[gucci888]

i think peterson is terribly over-rated and also injury prone

As much as I hate OU (UT fan here), AP is a pretty damn good back.

But it just shows how much a RB is a product of a OL and offensive scheme. Here you have a guy who was a heisman candidate as a freshman because of the veteran line and QB he was playing with, now he is almost nothing.

[swilkins]

it needs new everything; don't stop with coaches and the line - that's the kind of short-sighted thinking that worries me.

We have to start somewhere.

actually, pitts is probably the team's best lineman and has proven to be a pretty decent LT. why the team moved him last year for a one-year experiment with seth wand, who they no longer even activate, no one will ever know. but pitts will be an integral part of this line

I don't have a problem with Pitts, but I think that he is a better guard than tackle. To say that he is our best LT is not saying much IMO. To draft an elite tackle would lock up the left side. I think Hodgedon did a better job at center than McKinney.

no, i really don't. i don't know if bush is the best player in this draft. i've argued only that if he is, you can't afford to pass him up to reach for an OL who isn't as good. all things being equal, yes, you take the OL. let me ask you a questin: would you go back to the '03 draft and trade out of the 3-spot (and away from AJ) to trade down and get jordan gross? cause that's essentially what you're advocating the texans do if bush is the best non-QB in this draft.

all draft picks come with inherent risk of busting. that's why you try to minimize your chance for failure by selecting the best players.

I thought we had plenty of chances to draft an OL or find onein free agency and not have to lose AJ.

sure, that's reasonable, considering the first four drafts have yielded such high returns...

no comment