13.5 sacks came in his final 7 games. In his first 4 games, he had 1 total sack. He averaged about 5 tackles per game with a really good defensive line. The thought process is Mario Williams will have a longer career. That means if Williams can play 10 years and Reggie Bush plays 6, we will have 4 more productive years. If those 4 years we win a championship because of Mario Williams, then we made the right decision. If they do not, then we didn't. In the end, you need the right "mix" of players to win it all with some stars at different positions. If we don't win a championship, I'd rather have watched an electrifying player for 6 than a great defensive end for 10. Since neither player won a championship, as a fan, would you have rather watched Bruce Smith or Barry Sanders. I'd prefer Sanders.
This all assuming a) Reggie Bush will be as good as Barry Sanders which is a freaking huge assumption and b) GMs are able to draft with the ability of hindsight, which, if they are, they really suck at it.
You're right, except it's not hindsight when most predict before the draft that Reggie Bush is the best player available. When 7 out of 10 people say the Texans made a mistake, and that player actually turns out better, the whole 20/20 hindsight argument can't be used. People have seen Reggie Bush run for 3 years. People have seen Mario Williams play well for half a season. I would argue that Bush is not only the higher ranked player but also the safer pick - and that's what most people think as well. If we were 1 DE from being a playoff contender, then go for Williams. We won't make the playoffs for several years. meanwhile, at least Bush wouldve brought some excitement to the city and the team.
this is what troubles me about this pick. the "i told you so factor" was already out there big time, given the whole VY/RB thing. now you've doubled that. if EITHER VY or RB goes on to have a HOF career and Mario is nothing more than a really good DE, the I told you so stuff is gonna be there big time. and...i keep hearing the texans talk about making this pick for immediate impact. are you sure you wanna communicate that? are you sure you're not blowing up people's expectations? because you could triple your win total from last year and still lose 10 games next season. it's not always WHAT the Texans do that makes me question them...it's sometimes HOW they do it and HOW they communicate it. that surprises me considering what an accomplished businessman McNair is.
OK, I'll agree with you on that. But you can't just say if we don't win a championship with Mario that it was a bad pick. What if Mario is Bruce Smith, Reggie Bush is Eric Metcalf and we never win a championship. How can that be considered a bad pick? But adding Williams could help us get to the playoffs faster. Since we can't predict future team success, then I'm going to go with the player that fits way more of a need than one that's flashy.
i hear ya. and i'm not disagreeing with you, because you know i have tons of questions about bush. but you don't generally draft for need with the #1 pick. you take best available. with the idea being that, if you're bad enough to be drafting first, you've got needs everywhere. which the texans certainly did. i can see both sides of this argument really well. and i'm not really disappointed about it. at first i just thought it was funny. and again...i think the texans organization has some real issues in how it deals with the public..particulalry when the face they trot out there is casserly and his defensive attitude.
Adding anybody will help us make us get to the playoffs faster. We stink on offense and defense. Just because D. Davis racks up yards does not make him a premiere running back. He's serviceable but not a game breaker. That's the problem. We have no game breakers or game changers. We need game breakers. And since Bush is very good catching the ball, he's not your usual 3 yards and a cloud of dust RB who is much more heavily dependent on the offensive line. Bush teamed up with Andre Johnson and Eric Moulds wouldve been a dynamic trio making Carr that much better. If we had a great offense, than yes, let's draft for need. We don't. Bush's versatility wouldve made as much of an impact on offense as Williams on defense. You can always double team a DE. How do you double a player who can play in multiple formations in the back field or as a WR.
Okay, USC lost to Texas, agreed. What about all the other games where LenDale did just as well as Bush? White ended the season with 26 total TDs and Bush ended the season with 18. And just for the record, 177 yards of total offense against UT wasnt his worst game of the season...he had 8 games (out of 12) during the regular season in which he amassed less yardage. Bush is fun, flashy, and exciting. He will do well in the league...Mario is a better fit for the Texans though. I'll stick with our proven 1000 yard rusher and take a beast at DE.
Lendale White was the short yardage back so yes he will score more TDs. Henry Melton for UT always got the ball on 3rd and 1's, so he probably made as many 1st downs as Jamaal Charles. As far as less yards. When you're beating teams 63-10, Reggie Bush is not going to play an entire game. It's not how many total yards or statistics that impresses people about Bush. It's his ability to make people miss in the open field, as evidenced by his yards per carry and yards per reception.
Exactly. The same treatment should be given to Mario Williams as well...instead of pointing to the 0 sacks he had in a game...there is much more to the story. Even when games were close, he didnt play the entire game...check national championship.
The difference is Mario Williams did play an entire game and accumulated no sacks. NC State wasn't beating anyone 63-10. As far as the national championship game, Texas couldnt stop Lendale White so USC kept using Lendale White. It's not as though USC was struggling on offense and refused to put Bush in the game. USC literally scored on every possession in the 2nd half except that last one.
Again, making the fatal flaw of judging a DE by number of sacks...its like judging a baseball player by number of homeruns.
The "I told you so factor" speaks to a poisonous sports culture that takes all joy out of following sports. People get caught up in hating, or worshiping players all out of proportion. The constant threats by Houston sports fans that they were going to stop rooting for the Texans if they didn't pick their chosen player is sickening. The reason Houston has a bad repuation as a sports town is because of that childish, frontrunning attitude. I don't think Houston is alone in this, but the "woe-is-me" crap that you so often hear tells me that that a certain segment of the fan base will complain about anything The rationale that the Texans used to pick Williams was that he was the most highly ranked defensive player and the team needs help on this side of the ball most of all. They *never* deviated from this central message. Williams *was* the consensus top rated pick on defense. According to Chris Mortenson, Ron Woolf, the former GM of the Packers, said that *all* six teams that he keeps in regular contact with had Williams as the #1 overall prospect on the board. I would be more concerned about the Texans management if they bowed down to public pressure and drafted the flashy, famous player at a posistion of strength and ignored a prospect just as highly ranked at a more important and depleted position on the team.
Uhhh...judging a DE by # of sacks is amateur. Come on now, you should know better than that. Fact of the matter is that none of us have seen enough game tape of Mario to assess his game. But, you are supposed to judge a DE by how much pressure he puts on the QB...Ive seen enough of his film to see numerous plays where he hurried the QB into making poor throws. He doesnt get credit for the sack, but the offense loses a down. Getting pressure on a QB isnt measured by number of sacks. Also, seeing how the other linemen fair is an indication as well. A good DE usually opens things up for the other DLinemen by drawing a double team from a TE, RB, or OL...that could be a good reason 2 other lineman from his team were drafted in the first round. There are many things that make a DE a good one...and counting the number of sacks doesnt come close to telling the whole story.
Excellent post! He not only had 14.5 sacks but he had over 20 QB pressures and over 25 tackles for a loss. Lawson and McCargo were both first round picks, I think alot of this had to do with the attention on MW. I think time will show Lawson to be a good DE but not in MW's league.
Right. USC featured Bush in the first half and the offense was anemic. He couldn't break the big runs (except the play he turned it over). They switched strategies at halftime, featured the bigger back and Leinart's arm, and were virtually unstoppable on offense in the second half. And Bush's total yardage was inflated by a meaningless deep completion against a prevent defense at the end of the game.
16 seconds left, UT up 3. Bush takes the ball 27 yards down to the 42. 8 seconds left...they need 10 yards for a reasonably makeable field goal (clock stops for the 1st down, they can spike the ball & set up for the field goal). Leinart then inexplicably scrambles out of the pocket & burns the rest of the clock instead of throwing the ball away quickly. It ended up being so, but at the time the play was hardly "meaningless".
