and neither one of those guys, and few others, had deuce mcallister on their roster as rookies. i've always thought EVERYONE was off on bush - gayle sayers this, barry sanders that; the guy i think he'll remind us of when all is said and done is tiki barber, a smallish back who split time early in his career amid concerns he couldn't carry the load (plus, he was a fumbler) who has since emerged as one of the nfl's elite backs. i think paying $6MM for a guy with the talent to break a game open in a variety of ways is a good investment, yes. as impressive to who? 84 yards is 84 yards at the end of the day. it's, essentially, 8 first downs. i guess i should clarify: he's been everything i thought he'd be. i'm the happy medium between the espn fellatio-fest and the ut homers/mario williams apologists. he's 4 games into his career: he's won a game with a punt return, he's on a 1,300-yard pace as a back-up and whenever he's on the field, he forces a defense to account for him, opening things up for his teammates. that's about what i expected. what's the difference, major? here, i'll make it easier: which rookie would you select to build a team around?
Hmm... I thought the discussion was "Has Bush been a dissappointment?" Or "has Bush had a bigger impact than Mario Williams?" Or even "Should the Texans drafted Bush over Williams?" Spin it anyway you want, Bush has been an effective rookie for NO so far. He has impacted games. Opposing teams have to gameplan for him. You can continue to sputter about "he hasn't been effective as a RB" or "Other RBs have gained more yards" or even "gee, you you spend $xM" for someone that only breaks games open as a PR?" but WIlliams has costs about the same and he has been even less productive so far. And... just ask the NO front office if they feel they have gotten a good deal with Bush Ask NO fans if they have gotten a good deal. Now I know, folks in NO is biased and not as knowledgeable about football as folks here in Houston. And I also know folks across the US are simply buying into the media hype, Like this writer (Ira Miller): "We'll probably never know the real story why the Houston Texans chose to draft defensive end Mario Williams instead of Reggie Bush last spring. But we did see on Sunday, really for the first time as a pro, why Houston should have chosen Bush. "In one 16-second stretch of the fourth quarter for the New Orleans Saints, Bush displayed the talent that has led many people to believe the Texans' choice of Williams could be remembered as football's equivalent of the basketball draft in which Sam Bowie was chosen over Michael Jordan. With a single electrifying play, Bush turned around a game and perhaps a season for the Saints, the lucky team into whose laps Bush fell when the Texans selected Williams. Tampa Bay was ahead of New Orleans 21-17 and punting with 4:33 remaining in the fourth quarter. Bush, whose longest punt return in the first four games was 14 yards, took the kick at his own 35-yard line, headed straight to the right sideline, eluding the Bucs' Antoine Cash, and then outran everyone to the end zone to complete a 65-yard scoring play. New Orleans held on to win the game, 24-21. The Saints otherwise had their hands full and were being beaten by a Tampa Bay team led by rookie quarterback Bruce Gradkowski, a sixth-round draft pick making his first NFL start. Gradkowski completed 20 of 31 passes for 225 yards and two touchdowns without an interception, and he brought the Bucs from 10 points behind to take the lead in the fourth quarter. The schedule made this victory imperative for the Saints. Their next two opponents are Philadelphia (4-1) and Baltimore (4-0). That's followed by a return match with the Bucs and then successive games against Pittsburgh, Cincinnati and Atlanta. Heading into that stretch, the Saints need all the margin they can muster, and losing to Gradkowski would not have helped. New Orleans has only one problem with Bush. The Saints don't know who to thank for their good fortune in being able to draft him. Charley Casserly, at the time Houston's lame-duck general manager, took the fall for picking Williams. But there is almost no chance it was really his idea, because everyone in the NFL knew Casserly had one foot out the door. The choice had to be the work of first-year coach Gary Kubiak or owner Bob McNair, or a combination of the two. Most around the league think it was Kubiak, because, while working for Mike Shanahan in Denver, he saw the success Shanahan had in finding less-heralded backs. Also, if an owner like McNair was calling the shot, he almost certainly would have wanted the headline-grabbing, ticket-selling, popular running back, not a defensive lineman. Whatever the Texans' thinking, it was one of the most stunning top-of-the-draft moves in years because Bush appears to be a once-in-a-generation talent." http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/sports/football/nfl/oakland_raiders/15713985.htm
if he ends being no better than dante hall, then no, of course not. but i'm not ready to slot after 240 minutes of football. all of those players went to better teams, save, of course, for colston. re: him - you're a defensive coordinator playing the saints. you have to find a way to stop deuce mcallister, joe horn, reggie bush and drew brees. do you think maybe... just maybe... colston is a product of not having much attention thrown his way?
I might buy more into that if Bush looked impressive in his rushing attempts, and he hasn't. The Saints have given him chances (a few double digit attempt games) and opportunities at the goal-line. He just hasn't gotten it done. Was Tiki the expectation coming out for Bush? I don't think so. Should the Texans go down in infamy for passing on the next Tiki Barber? If it were a rookie RB, it would be Maroney or Norwood. Those guys are splitting carries too, but still showing that they ca produce when given the rock to run.
You can make that same argument for Bush. Having a good RB to move the chains, an All-Pro QB and two ncie receivers makes your life a lil easier. It's the chicken vs the egg argument. In my opinion, I still think the NO offense would be very successful if you removed Bush, as long as Deuce doesn't get gurt. Colston is a nice big target, and Brees and Horn have shown that they can get the job done.
See, this is the bs that I'm talking about, lol. Bush has shown us nothing so far to warrant this: "Whatever the Texans' thinking, it was one of the most stunning top-of-the-draft moves in years because Bush appears to be a once-in-a-generation talent." Outran everyone, lol. No mention of the perfect blocking on the play. Bush > Mario at this point. Mario has sucked so far....I'm not a Mario apologist. But Bush has shown me squat to make me regret the Texans passing on him. Maroney...different answer....
Reggie Bush was one of the most overly hyped players to come out of college. Still is. Mario Williams was a big risk of a pick at #1- still very much is. How about 'we should have traded down' Mario has to earn cred for being the #1 pick- so far I haven't seen the special talent he supposedly has. Bush- he is very very good in space, do you know how much space you get in the NFL from week to week- little. Keep him as a receiver and a return specialist. He is not the next Barry Sanders.
he's had 3 games where he totaled double digit carries; his averaged 4+ yards a carry in two of them. well, he was for me; i never bought into the hype. i thought bush was an electric running back in college with wonderful vision and natural instincts. i expected him to be able to break games open in the nfl and put a defense on its heels. so you'd build a team around two guys who aren't yet good enough to start for their teams? bush has struggled as a RB, sure; as MM pointed out, some of the concerns about him may have been legitimate. i think, though, bush is undergoing an adjustment - his game is going to have to evolve on this level. i thought the rose bowl was bush's most impressive performance last year, and i figured it was more indicitive of what we'd see from him in the nfl. the ut defense keyed on him and had the horses to slow him down. but that attention opened things up for leinart and white and bush STILL had, what i thought, was the most electrifying play of the night - him beating ut's extremely fast d to the sideline and then somehow finding a higher gear and beating them all down the sideline for a touchdown. my mouth dropped.
Bush will not impact the running game while the DUECE is there This would be like Mario starting in front of Julius Peppers [if the texans had him] Rocket River
That's not the case. Bush has had a chance to make an impact running the ball (he get's carries) and he has looked so-so. Bush isn't getting a ton of carries, but he isn't doing much with the carries he gets.
That excuse might work for overall yardage, but it doesn't fly for YPC. If Bush was all he's cracked up to be but simply held back because of the presence of McAllister, he wouldn't be averaging 3.1 yards per rush in the opportunities he does get.
Bush has 54 rushing attempts this season (31 guys have more) and he averages 3.1 ypc. That's worse than 29 other backs with as many carries as him (S.Alexander is at 2.9 but he has been injured...Edge is at 3.1). The defenses he has faced so far haven't been stellar. He is at best, average at running the ball. Bush leads the league in RB receptions (I would bet he also leads the league in passing targets for RB's). However, his receiving yards per game and yards per reception are not outstanding. Of all the backs with over 15 receptions, half of them have a higher ypr average. Has he shown game changing ability in this area, or have they just been throwing to him a lot (to try to give him more chances "in space")? He is good in this area, but not great (not good enough to make up for sucking at rushing). Bush isn't in the top 10 in yards per punt return. I give him props for taking it to the house last game...on a perfectly executed play. If those were your expectations even you must admit they were a notch below what most expected from him. Yes, because they have shown the ability to run the ball. Isn't that what you draft a RB for? I would understand if Bush was dominating in the other areas, but he isn't. Outside of that one TD and the chunk of yardage when the game was over, Bush was practically shut down in the Rose Bowl. He wasn't even in the game on the most important play for his team. If you want the #1 pick to be a great decoy...fine. I prefer to have mine making a difference doing what the position demands. He has been ok so far but has shown me nothing to regret not taking him #1.
You are judging too early. If those are your criteria, then the Texans still f**ked up. Badly. Personally, I'm not ready to call 'disappointment' on either one...though Mario has been slower to come around. I'm hoping the Miami game (even though it was Miami) is something of a breakthrough. Regardless, you guys are just as bad as the ones who are dead set that Bush is the next Sayers. So far there has been one simple fact: Bush has been effective and has helped the Saints. I don't see this as debatable.
I'm not saying he hasn't helped. I'm saying he is overrated so far (proclaimed as the next great back...yet struggling to run the ball). It's quite simple. Bush has helped the Saints. So have Brees, Deuce, Colston and the new coaches. Bush has not looked "special". Aren't we dumb as hell for passing on the next great back?
I think Reggie Bush getting more credit for the Saints turnaround (and the subsequent Texans bashing) than Deuce McAllister's comeback from injury is a problem. Deuce has been amazing.
If our pick turns out to be even less effective, then yes. But see, I'm not ready to believe that's going to happen. Saying that Mario will be an ineffective bust at this point is like saying that Bush will in no way be a great back. You guys and say, jgreen, are mirror images of each other. Except, you know, in reverse...or something.
