Who would you want the Texans to DRAFT?

That wasn't the point. The point is that if Reggie Bush is able to handle duties as a full-time running back, is a once-in-a-lifetime back, and as you mentioned, he was far more effective than White in the ND game, why are they splitting carries in a game when they were fighting for their lives? Why isn't Bush getting all the carries?

There's no doubt he's substantially better than White. My question is if he's capable of being a full-time back. When they needed their best player to get all the carries, he didn't. The question is why?

 

That's the thing about opinions; everyone else has them, but I know the facts.

 

Is that your opinion, or is that a fact? Because, you're passing it off as fact, and instucting other people as to what opinion they should have. It must be awesome to make up the rules on the fly. (I'm just having fun at the expense of your posts, not trying to start anything.)

 

Who said anything about "sure-fire"? I said that Reggie Bush is a gamebreaker, and "this just in".... he is.

 

I'm not the head coach, so I can't give you the definitive answer you're seaching for. But if you want my opinion, I'll say that if you have a program with two good backs with contrasting styles, why would you not utilize them both?

 

You've got a "once in a lifetime" back and a "pretty good" back, and your season is on the line. And you're giving the ball to the "pretty good" guy?

Something is wrong there. Either Bush can't handle all the carries, he's good partially because of that change-of-pace, or something else. Whatever it is, it's a question in my mind about Bush's role on an NFL team.

 

That's fact. As I have stated before, I'm not putting Reggie Bush on another level because I think the Texans should draft him. I think the Texans should draft him because the NFL scouts are the ones saying that he's on another level and is without a doubt the "best player of any age, or position, in the country".

 

I didn't see LenDale White pushing Matt Leinart into the endzone to beat ND, which according to the players of USC was the "toughest and best game they had been a part of".

 

I also didn't see Leinart hand the ball off to Reggie Bush when they needed to get that 1 yard. Neither of those is relevant. I'm talking about a whole game, not one play.

 

The Chiefs were already damn good and had the luxury of planning for the future. Using the #1 overall pick to fill half of your running back position would be possibly the biggest waste of a pick in NFL history.

 

I like Brick, really I do. That's the way I'd lean, I suppose though that:

I'd listen intently to moves that would land me Winston and Howard or Ahmad Brooks and McNeill. Both sides of the ball need help and I'd like to leverage the deep offensive tackle pool and grab a line backer to add some extra defensive team speed ( I like Brooks and Howard to do that).

We need guys that can wreak havoc on the qb's, or those that can draw the offensive focus so others can wreak havoc --- and no, I'm not talking about our very own current offensive line (and what it does to Carr each week).

 

Nor did they give it to LenDale, who many of you claim to be the tougher, between the tackles type of back. The bottom line was that was Leinart's call, and he took it into his own hands. What can you say, Leinart's a star in his own right as well. And speaking of the whole game LenDale came up small; 10 carries for 26 yards is nothing to write home to mom about. Bush on the other hand went off for 160 and 3 TD's on 15 carries.

 

You still are completely missing the point, here. No one is arguing that White is a better back. The yardage stats are irrevelent - the question is the # of carries.

 

Again, I don't have the definitive answer you are looking for. Why don't you write to Pete Caroll and ask him. Maybe he is utilizing all of his talent. Maybe he likes two fresh backs. Maybe he is living up to obligations he made to these kids when they signed a LOI. Maybe everyone is wrong and Reggie Bush just isn't that good. The latter is highly doubtful as NFL scouts think otherwise. I understand your point, but asking me will not get you the answer.

 

does DD routinely get engulfed by 2 or 3 linemen as soon as he takes the handoff? i see a back succeeding to some degree in spite of the fact he’s slow to the hole, often chooses the wrong running lane and has zero breakaway speed. in fact, that the 4th round pick they thought was going to be nothing more than a return specialist has posted back-to-back 1,000 yard seasons is a testament to the line being pretty decent in run blocking.

so explain to me how putting a better running back in DD's spot wouldn’t represent not just an upgrade, but a superior one.

again, I have NO IDEA if bush is the best player in the draft. but if you’re the worst team in football, and the texans clearly are, you’ve earned the right to draft the best player. why settle for the 3rd or 4th or 5th best player just to add the… 45th best player? why take a chance that the player you want will even be there if you were to trade down. that’s the other thing that frustrates me in these discussions – how people deal in such absolutes with such an inexact science. for all this speculation and hole-punching everyone’s doing with bush, what if you jump from 1 to 4 hoping to get the brick, and someone who wants him more moves to 3? you’ve passed on the best player AND lost the guy you wanted – double whammy. but by all means, let’s assume that couldn’t happen and instead focus on whether bush can handle the load on a full-time basis as if that’s a less volatile, more clear-cut subject.

i advocate only that the texans take the best player period, minus leinart because – and only because – of cap constraints. i don’t want them to mess around and screw this up – they can’t afford to. nor do i want them to pretend their roster couldn’t use an upgrade at every single position, because it most certainly could.

 

it's nitpicking gobbledegook. again, bush is on pace to tally more carries than ronnie brown did last year and brown was a top 5 pick. and those numbers don't include catches or returns. bush is averaging 20 touches and 185 yards of total offense per game.

white may be taking carries, but notice how he's not taking heisman votes from bush. the best back on that team is pretty clear cut.

 

I don't have an opinion on how good Bush is. I haven't really watched him. Is he really that sure of a thing? If you can put him in the Gale Sayers, Earl Campbell, Barry Sanders category, then that truly is a special back.

My biggest problem with the Texans taking him at 1 or 2 is the position he plays. RB's have the shortest careers of anyone. It has nothing to do with how good they are, they take the biggest and the most hits and they break down. Look at all the best backs, now. Of the backs that have 5 seasons under their belt, most (not all) have had a couple of unproductive years, mainly due to injuries.

If they wind up with the 1st or 2nd pick, I think taking a running back is a luxury the Texans can't afford. Unless you're sure you will get 8 or 9 great seasons out of the guy. Given the odds, how could you be sure? Offensive linemen, on the other hand average much longer, productive careers.

IF the Texans are a top team, then they could afford to take a chance on a running back, but they are not. The Bears were bad with Sayers and the Lions were bad with Sanders. The Oilers were good with Earl, but they had talent at just about every position.

 

I admit that was an exaggeration. Davis would put up really good numbers if he was behind a good line. If David Carr had time to throw, we'd know if he has what it takes to succeed in the NFL. This team isn't going to be really good until they have at least a solid offensive line. It has to be fixed eventually. If the Texans are worried about Ferguson dropping, take him no 1. Just do something about the line already.

 

Some would argue that he already has put up really good numbers.