A&M had the worse passing defense in the nation , there were no excuses after that game. He simply played terrible.
Bush had a few mediocre games during the season while Vince built the heisman lead, and poof after Fresno State, it was all Reggie all the time. Vince shouldn't have had to "trump" that performance. In fact, he had a better performance of his own at OSU(500 plus passing/rushing yards). If you dare say OSU sucked: a) They beat tech b) Fresno State proved to be mediocre as well after the USC game And what does this have to do with the pick? If Vince won the Heisman, he'd have the award that signifies best college player(offensive usually) in America to go along with his National Title performance and being a hometown guy. There would be little to no chance of the Texans passing on him in such a scenario. It's Reggie Bush's Heisman trophy that is making this debate what it is right now.
So a game Nov. 12 isn't in the crunch time, but a game Nov. 19 is? I've got a hard time believing that. I've seen this for years. There is no precise "crunch time" for voting. Each year's "crunch time" is whatever weeks of the year that the media's consensus Heisman picks do well... there's no consistency to it.
I make perfect sense: If everything else was equal and Vince won the Heisman, I don't think the Texans even consider passing on him. That would mean they passed on the best offensive player in CFB with Houston ties(money for the team) at a premium position for a RB not from houston who didn't get the award for best college football player of 2005-2006. They would get run out of town if they did that because David Carr is not an elite QB by any standard.
Deal. From May 1st until June 1st. Once we draft Bush you have to put "Bush >>>>>>>>>>> Young" on your sig. Deal???
Do you have reading comprehension skills at all? The vote was directly influenced by ESPN/other media outlets and their pumping of Reggie Bush after Fresno State.
the heisman means nothing in the nfl eric crouch, torreta, jason white etc. etc... Why the hell would the texans care who won the heisman. oh because the texans are brainwashed by espn to pick bush
You'll have a hard time convincing any logical fans that the quarterback of a team who scored 40 points played terrible. He certainly didn't play his best, but terrible is an incredible overstatement. If you want to play the "bad defense" card, Fresno State had a defense in the bottom half nationally and UCLA was dead last in rush defense... so Reggie's supposed "winning" performances also should be downgraded because of his lack of competition. Also, Arizona had a rush defense around 100, and Bush had fewer total yards against Arizona than Young did against Texas A&M. Texags is a site that's called for boycotts of campus bookstores, Aggie football games (their own team!) and sports radio stations among numerous other things. Texags is a site that to this day refers to Vince as "radio" and other related terms that of course are not close to accurate. To refer to a thread on that site for a measure of objectivity about the Longhorns (or much of anything, for that matter) is a little ridiculous to say the least.
says who some idiot UT fan? What are they supposed to do? not applaud Bush for his amazing performance, not show the highlights? Everyone was tuning in to see what Bush did, why because it was amazing. He put his team on his back that game. The defense was getting lit up by fresno. If you remember Fresno was a top 20 team. They lost a heartbreaker and then collapsed the rest of the season (prob due to the usc game).
You continue to miss the point. How typical. If Vince won the Heisman, the most prestigious award in CFB(ie the best player award) and Bush didn't, Vince would be considered the best college player coming out(like some consider Reggie now). That plus his Houston ties and the need at QB in Houston would make it near impossible for them to take anyone else.
