You may be right, but i'll tell you what I do see and i'll tell you why its wrong. I honestly don't think its right to debate with people on who we should take, IF that person is a UT/Vince Young fan. The bias in their arguments is just too strong. If somone who is not a UT fan and didn't grow up watching Vince Young play in high school and they still thought the Texans should take him, i'd be more open to hear their argument fully. The only UT fan i've seen so far who thinks we should probably take Bush is RM95 and I really respect that stance by him. I'm not a VY/UT hater, i'm not an aggie, i'm completely indifferent on that situation, but just looking at it and basing it off what i've seen from Reggie Bush, VY, and the needs and direction of the Houston Texans, I truly believe the Bush is the answer. I think IC2000 doesn't want the Texans to draft VY because hes an aggie and he doesn't like Young, so to me, is arguments and standpoint are crap for the same reasons, too much bias influence.
if your name wasn't reggie, your opinion might be worth the bandwidth you're taking up. it's obvious you're biased towards players named reggie.
I am not a UT fan (UH alum) don't like UT I am not necessarily a Vince Young fan (that began at the Rose Bowl) I have just been football impressed with the obvious freak talent he has. He passes very well, runs the offense very well, is strong fast, football smart and elusive. I only saw him play in highlights in high school and I drooled for him to go to the Univ. of Houston. (would have turned our program around) I never was real real high on Reggie Bush, though he has impressed me this season, dude is insane fast. I think Vince over Bush is the right thing for the Texans, Vince Young will become a super star. Just my opinion. It's not even about Carr. Although I am disappointed with his leadership and poise on the field. I know alot of that has to do with the crummy talent around him.
We didn't goof. Put MJ on the teams that Dream played with for the majority of his career (with no other start players) and he loses. Give Dream Pippen, Grant/Rodman and shooters and he wins every season...
Just like Chas C. addressed it the last few years (bringing in journeyman, pinning hopes on "sleepers" like Wand, and blaming it on the "blocking scheme"?) Anyway, their hands are tied as far as personnel goes. We couldn't sign a big FA fish last year (despite having a mega-high payroll) and I don't see how that will change this year. Then we're stuck with the first day of the draft, so we can hope that the crappy legacy of Texans 2nd and 3rd round picks finally ends - assuming they don't get traded away for Maurice Clarett or something equally useful.
I am a UT, fan but I have watched most of both Texas games (thanks ESPNgameplan) and most USC games living in Pac 10 country. I have watched both teams and players a lot in making some observations AND PREDICTIONS before the last games. Here are some thoughts on the games and KEY PLAYERS BEFORE the Rose Bowl. From: http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=105680&highlight=Young+bush&z=1 12-08-2005, 10:14 PM #24 Desert Scar Contributing MemberSince: Aug 2000Posts: 5,168 Member: #1767 Though he shouldn't--as I think it is pretty obvious Vince Young is the most dominant, most effective, college football player, I am very confident Bush will get the Heisman and it is probably is good thing for Texas. A mad, motivated, Vince will improve their chances. Bush is great fun to watch, but he really is more of a part time player. It isn't clear he is the most valuable player on his own team as well. The real prize is Jan 4th. Texas needs VY at his sharpest. 12-09-2005, 01:28 PM #69 Desert Scar Contributing MemberSince: Aug 2000Posts: 5,168 Member: #1767 Quote: Originally Posted by GriffinFan How about this stat? Reggie's TD runs averaged over 30 yards. Let that sink in for a bit. He averaged almost 9 yards a carry. That's almost at Vince's yards per pass. He also had 36 plays of 20+ yards this year. All of this while playing in a much tougher conference than the Big 12 (this year, at least). Vince is great, Bush is better. 99% of college football coaches would build a team around VY over RB. It is simple, VY touches the ball every play. Anything that tries to look at yards per play and such ignores the overwhelming factor that VY puts his stamp on every UT offensive play (#1 scoring offense in the nation) where RB puts his stamp, admitted spectacularly, on about 1 and 4. BTW the guy that shares RB's running load almost evenly (White) has more TDs than Bush and averages about 7 yards per play running between the tackles. Just maybe the SC offensive line isn't getting enough credit. Quote: Originally Posted by KAS13 Salaam and Bush don't even have similar styles. They aren't even comparable. However, if you actually followed what you where saying Salaam had an great rookie season for the Bears. He would have been a great running back if not for a mar1juana problem. I agree Slaam or Dayne are poor comparisons. Bush is much more in the Tim Brown, Rocket Ismial, Desmond Howard, Peter Warrick, Eric Metcalf, Charles Woodson, mold, many of whom won the Heisman not because they should have as the best college football player but because they made the best TV highlights. I have questions about how well both VY and RB will do in the pros. VY has to become much more consistent and quicker throwing. Bush probably will not be workhorse RB like LThom, Barry Sanders, Eric Dickerson, The Edge, etc. Eric Metcalf and Bryan Westbrook are the most comparable players I can think of. Westbrook is a good pro back, but not in the class with the others because you have to limit his touches, as I think will happen with Bush, seeing as how they have to do that for him in college. It is possible Bush can be a Marshall Faulk or Tony Dorsett, but again those guys had at least shown they can deal with 25-30 carriers consistently in college, let alone survive those carries with pro LBs and pro safeties smacking them. Reggie Bush is no sure thing as a workhorse NFL RB. from: http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=104779&highlight=Young+bush&z=1 11-21-2005, 07:38 PM #72 Desert Scar Contributing MemberSince: Aug 2000Posts: 5,168 Member: #1767 I am a UT homer. I have seen UT and USC both A LOT this year (and a lot of other Pac 10 and other football). Here are some observations and comments, I am mixed about the outcome of their probable meeting: *USC's offense is great. It isn't just Bush or Leinart. Their OL blows huge holes, and their WRs and TEs are hard to match up with 1 on 1 too. White is very tough between the tackles. I am not about to say they have a better offense than some of the best Miami teams or the Nebraska (mid 90s I think) juggernuat, but they have weapons everywhere and the most underrated OL.[/b] *USC's offense isn't perfect. They are not that great when pressured. Leinart moves well against average defenses, but he sure can't outrun fast defenses and isn't that good on the run. Great looking offense not used to speed and not having time to throw can look ordinary if not feeble (OU vs LSU suger bowl, Florida versus that NU team team). *USC has not faced a defense like Texas, nor anyother elite college defense. They havn't faced a Miami, LSU, Penn State, Alabama or Ohio State caliber defense all year. They have not done so in practice either. They will need to make huge adjustments, particularly their OL and blitz pick up. They might be able to, or they might not. *Major big game coached edge to Carroll. He has been awesume in Bowls lately too. His defense has been flat medicore, but he might have the athletes to be a lot better and he has a lot of time to work on the defense too. This is concerning as a UT fan. *Texas has A LOT of offensive weapons. Not just Young, but speed and skill in WRs, RBs and TE. Call them a poor mans, younger SC offense. The just might rip apart SC if we are executing well. *Young and Texas's offense does occasionally throw away plays--miss or not see open guys. They do this more than Leinart or USC does, usually they have been so much better it didn't matter. *As great as I hear UT's DL is supposed to be, at times they haven't got a ton of pressure. They are going to need pressure. *Don't count your chickens. UCLA's offense has been smoking at times, they could easily win via shootout on a good day versus SC. That would likely mean LSU or PSU. Texas probably will have an easier time with the Aggies so long as they don't believe that. *IN SUMMARY. If they played next week, I'd like Texas to win. I can't remember a national championship team with a defense that has been as exploitable as SC's. But there is a lot of time between now and New Year's. If Carroll gets the defense humming and Young doen't throw the ball superbly Texas is in deep trouble. As of now I'll wait for the end of the regular season to pick. I sure hope UCLA wins, because I'd like Texas 4-1 over anyone else, but SC-Texas is probably a toss up. Finally, forget September, yes UT special teams were horrible versus OSU. Yes ASU almost beat LSU. Very little relevance to right now. http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=106594&page=8&pp=30&highlight=Young+bush 01-04-2006, 02:34 PM #223 Desert Scar Contributing MemberSince: Aug 2000Posts: 5,168 Member: #1767 I am a Texas fan in Pac 10 country, watched both teams a lot, but honestly this game is hard to predict. Plusses for Texas. -Texas comp has looked much better. Ohio State (Tx best win and only win Texas scaped by) proved much faster and better than ND (who USC scraped by). I think after the other BCS games it is safe to safe Ohio State was the 3rd best team. Oregon (clear Pac #2) proved to be a pretender and couldn't handle a distant Big 12 #3 (OU). It wasn't just a fluke either. Fresno and Arizona should have beat the Ducks too, the Ducks had been the most fortunate 1 loss team in the country and it showed. UCLA, ASU, Cal, Fresno--all shaky, West Coast teams unimpressive and certainly play no defense this year. Tech, Kansas, NU, Colo, ISU, Missou all played as well or better than expected given their opponnet (all covered the spread if I am not mistaken). Big 12 looking underrated. -USC defense. Last year they were #1 in scoring (12.5) and top 10 in yards (272). That team had two shut outs and 4 games where opponents were held less than 10. This year they are mediocre in both 21 PPG and 345 YPG, and NO team scored less than 10. Remember Fresno put up 42 points and over 400 yards at their place, and Texas is no Fresno. -Texas defense. They are a lot closer to what USC was last year. Top 10 in scoring (14.6) and total defense (281). USC has not faced a team with Texas defensive speed, including in practice. That makes it hard to prepare, just ask OU before meeting LSU and USC in the last two NC games. -Heisman voting. Best thing that could have happend off the field, as Texas needs Young to play focused and excellent and he should be very motivated to prove who is the most dominant (best) college football player. -USC has dodged the best defenses and probably best opponents to beat them the last few years. They missed out on Auburn last year, they missed out on LSU the year before. How they would have fared we will never know. plusses for USC . -USC defense did play better versus UCLA. -Pete Carrol has months to scheme and prepare, he has a great track record in that circumstance. -Leinart is unshakable. -Last year OU had an excellent defense statswise and they still got shredded. -Great Oline to anchor great skill players. (same is true for Texas, but they are less proven) -Texas can be less carefull with the ball and less offensively (more TO prone, Young can miss easy throws). OVERALL I certainly like Texas and 7.5 points. If Texas does not turn the ball over and Young is accurate USC's defense cannot stop them. Barring TOs by Tx offense, Texas has a better chance to stop USC offense here and there than visa versa because Texas defense, including the best secondary in college football, has been a lot better than USCs. JUST HAVE TO WAIT AND SEE Though I am optimistic, I also know if Young is not crisp throwing or if the RBs put the ball on the ground it could get ugly the other way. I have had a stronger feeling one way or the other in recent big games (LSU over OU, USC over OU, OU over FSU--I was wrong about Miami-OSU which is earily similar in build up except OSU didn't have UT's offensive weapons). This one I have a slight, but not big (TOs and Carrol's prep time chiefly concern me), Texas feeling. I am optimistic about Texas chances overall as well (not just spread). I think Young and Texas have a lot to prove and should play well, the media play since the Heisman voting (Bush this, Bush that, USC best team/offense ever, Texas has no chance like OU last year) has only worked in their favor, and the talent is very close. I'll say 37-31, Texas' favor. I may be a Texas fan, but I was pretty accurate SC players, each teams’ strengths and weakenesses, and the how the game would go. I reiterate I would not take Reggie Bush if I had the 1st pick in this draft whether I was the Texans or anyone else.
Just want to state the obvious, MJ is not Bush and Vince is not Hakeem, sure we may have won more with MJ (maybe) but that draft in now way pertains to the situation today. What we do know is Vince is well on his way to becoming a(n) Houston icon and talentwise they are about equal. We also know that our current rb has shown way more on the field than our current QB. We know that QBs typically have a much longer career than RBs in the league. We know our current QB will bring much more in a trade than our current RB despite onfield production. As has been stated arguing who is the better pick is pointless unless you preface it with for this team. And for this team, there really is no better pick at this point and time than Vince Young.
You are crazy. Yeah Pippen, horace grant, and Rodman made Jordan what he is today. They may have helped him win championships (not horace grant, because he sucked when he went elsewhere for the most part). But they did not make him the most popular player in the history of pro sports. He was that before the championships. He would have done more for the city of Houston and the Houston Rockets than Dream did. And thats taking nothing away from Dream.
Dream was never surronded with the talent that Jordan was, and that is taking nothing away from Michael.
Who cares about popularity? I care about championships. Before Pippen, Grant/Rodman & the shooters....MJ was a losing star, like everyone else before they got help. Jordan was always popular, but heavily criticized before he won something.
those are some mighty big assumptions my friend. I guess you must be one of those 'tellers of the future in an alternate universe'? Would you be willing to be my broker? quick question to you icehouse... what would happen if steve jobs was at microsoft and bill gates was at apple?
Did you really just call MJ a losing star? I guess Dream was a losing star up until we got Cassell to help him win his championships.
Are you even a Houston fan? With all your Kobe and MJ jocking, I'd be surprised to learn that you are.
Of course i'm a houston fan, but what does MJ and Kobe have to do with Houston??? I am a true NBA basketball fan. Are you even an NBA basketball fan? Do you watch other teams and games, or do you just watch Rockets games and then act like you know everything about the NBA on a message board?
When you're saying SCOREBOARD to demean a Rockets fan on a Rockets BBS, it kinda irks me. And probably not just me. Actually, assholes like Kobe are part of the reason I'm not an NBA fan anymore (the other part is the ridiculous officiating). I can't stand the cockiness and the me-first attitude of him and many other NBA players. Back in the day, 99.9% of players would have jumped at the chance to play for a coach like Phil and alongside a player like Shaq instead of ****ting all over the situation like he did. BTW, I have never acted like I know everything about the NBA on this or any other message board.
Ok. Well even though i'm a big time Houston Rockets fan. I also love the NBA, always have. I love the star players and the different personalities. I get caught up more in players than I do teams. Like watching a good movie, i'd rather watch a player that I like, one that wows me and keeps me interested on "what will he do next" than watch a good "boring" team like the pistons or spurs. Probably why I like MJ, Kobe, AI, etc.. so much. I watch every game that I can, I put Rockets priority #1, but still love watching the others.
