I like that some have taken the "unrealistic expectations" stance. I feel the same way about this. I also don't think there is much of a debate here. 1st year head coach, new offense, new defense, and a serious lack of players to run either. That was the story of last season. I don't see how anyone could think that Reggie Bush would have changed any of that. To think that he would have put up similar numbers with the Texans is saying that David Carr is as good as Drew Brees. That the Texans O-line is a good pass blocking line. It's almost laughable. The same thing can be said of Vince Young. His running game is directly attributed to pass blocking. They have to hold the pocket for a good 4-5 seconds just to allow the WRs to open the field up for him to make those runs. VY's passing game... well... we all know how well a 5 step drop would do with the Texans O-line. I just don't see a debate here. None of them would have helped the team last season any better than the other. A better debate would be is Reggie Bush better as a RB or a WR? And if he was a WR, would he have been the best WR in that draft? Or is it Santonio Holmes?
I think Bush might be able to learn to run inside. Look at Tiki Barbers career, his first 3 years he wasn't used much at all at RB. Then he got better year by year. But for now Bush kinda looks like a WR playing the wrong position.
Picking a person named bush is def the wrong team...noo matter if its sports or politics...stay away from em
Bush will eventually morph into a stud. He's too talented not to. Whenever it registers in his overinflated skull that he has to stop trying to break every touch into a 50 yd TD, he'll do great. That, and when he gets the nutsack to go between the tackles. Jury's still out if he's worth his pricetag. It'll be easier for Mario to justify his. Evan
This needs to be said. Toward the end of the year, with Bush in the slot between Horn and Colston, with Deuce as a single back, good teams were leaving Bush open underneath. They were letting him have whatever he wanted inside of 10 yards. And he rarely made them pay. At the NFL level, he has shown good, maybe even great, hands; good, but certainly not great speed; and not much else. He can catch the ball in traffic with the best of them, but as far as running back or playmaker receiver skills go, he lacks a lot. For my money, I'd rather have Wes Welker.
Wes Welker? He had 1 TD last year, his 5th year in the league. Bush had I believe 9 tds his rookie year. I think you guys are going too far in the Bush bashing. He isn't living up to the hype but he's still pretty solid.
He's got one already this year. Wes Welker had more yards per reception and is a better return man than Bush. He looked really good yesterday with a real quarterback throwing to him. Besides, he plays the same role at 1/4 the price.
for my money . . still the best meltdown I have seen Jim Mora running a VERY VERY close Second Rocket River "If you want crown them . .CROWN THERE *SS!!" - Dennie Green
this is patently untrue. statistically, williams was roughly on par with bush and exceeded young last year. again, statistically. what williams didn't have was a throng of lazy, distracted, old sportswriters already 2/3 of the way into his coronation as a gamebreaker before the season ever started that they then had to backpedal and (over)justify as the year went on.
and how my friend do you manipulate the stats to show that a de had a better season than a qb or a running back.
you judge them against their peers, not each other. bush had an average season for a running back; young was below average for a qb. williams, meanwhile, was average/slightly below average for a DE.
that's intellectually dishonest. young was a rookie qb, rookie qbs aren't judged against all qbs because it takes longer to become a successful qb than de, or running back.
he was the 30th-ranked qb in the nfl last year, behind both leinart and cutler, and also, for example, first-year starter jason campbell. however you want to break it down, statistically, young was well-below average. oh, wait! i'll do it for you!: "except in wins!!!!!!!!!" right? because baby vince was playing 1-on-22... and DL have a large learning curve, too, btw. smith, doleman, randle, dent and strahan - five of the six all-time sack leaders among DL - combined for 12 in their rookie years, and only smith had more than mario's 4.5.
its funny that the same people who say the titans are going to be one of the wrost teams in the afc because of talent can't deal with the fact that they actually win and then don't want to give credit to one of the main reasons for those wins. so the titans suck overall, but they continue to win. can you tell us why?
Based on what, though? QB Rating? A stat that doesn't even account for rushing yards? I suspect if you ask all 32 teams if they'd trade their QB's season for Vince Young's, more than 2 would have been more than happy to do so.
