I slightly disagree with you Desert. I think VY has already given us glimpses of his influence on his whole team, not only the offense, but the defense and special teams. Leaders are leaders are leaders are leaders. VY is a leader. And that means so much in a sport like football where it really is like going into battle. VY has the presence, aura, charisma, whatever you want to call it, of greatness. Just his mere presence makes other players play at a different level. We are seeing that 5 games into his rookie season. I still maintain that when it is all said and done, Vince will be the best player in this draft. And I think Mario will be second and will have a much longer career than Reggie Bush. Bush will give the league some sensational moments, sensational games. But, I still believe that VY plays in and wins more big games than both the other two.
Maybe I just want Mario to peform well so bad I'm just seeing things but I thought Mario looked really really good today. Anybody else? Oh yes I'm glad I wasnt the only one repping the Mario jersey there were alot more than I would have thought. good job
I think Mario may be a top 10 player from this draft, but I do not think he will be the 2nd best. Like you said, I think Vince will be good, but I also think guys like lienart, maroney, possibly Cutler, D'Brick, and yes REGGIE could be better than Mario.
thought he looked good on the first couple of series. didn't see him again. so he fits in well with the houston texans.
Even I can't believe the Saints are 5-1 at this point in the season. They are a good all around solid football team headed to the playoffs. Where would they be without Bush? Probably 4-2 or maybe 3-3. Brees, Horn, Deuce, Colston & their defense are all playing well. Bush is not the best player on that team right now, but he is the perfect piece to their puzzle. He compliments those other guys by doing a little bit of everything on offense all while returning game winning punts. The Saints had vision, even though they had Deuce, they still found a place for Reggie. Even when the Texans had DD, they decided they didn't need Reggie and what a mistake that was. The golden boy's team is 5-1, he is a winner.
Something tells me that the Saints would have liked it better if he still looked as good running the ball as he did in college. If he doesn't get back to that level, he wasn't worth the hype... nor is any highly picked player. Sure, they can all be role-players on good teams... and "fit in", and do only what they're asked of... so can 2nd and 3rd round picks with little to no fanfare. People aren't here saying Reggie Bush has zero talent, or Reggie Bush shouldn't be in the NFL... they're simply saying that he's not the "super-duper-can't-miss" prospect that everybody made him out to be, and whatever he's doing in New Orleans... he likely provides LESS to the Texans. Arguing anything else is straying away from the original argument... that Reggie Bush was going to cure the Texans almost by himself, and they made a gargantuan mistake for passing on him.
Okay, once again, this thread is about MARIO WILLIAMS. There's a thread about Jesus Bush in the Hangout. Please stop trolling and take your accolades and blind worship there. Thanks in advance. EDIT: Ima beat me. Oh, well. The advice still rings true, though.
One thing I liked about Mario yesterday besides his tackles was when Romo completed a long pass to the sideline late in the game. Mario threw his arms up, looked at the CB and had the "You gotta be #$#*)# me" expression. Baby steps
Do you honestly really believe that the Texans would have a better record if Reggie Bush had been drafted instead of Mario Williams?
Definitely. He's a winner. Had nothing to do with Matt Leinart, LenDale White, Dwayne Jarrett and the best collection of offensive linemen and skill position depth and talent perhaps in the history of college football. Reggie won those games himself! And in the NFL, it has nothing to do with a good offensive line, superb All-Pro running back, Pro Bowl quarterback and deep receiving corps. It doesn't have anything to do with a stunningly good defense either. Reggie's winning those games!!! Calling any player a "winner" or "loser" is ridiculous in a team sport. It's silly. The Saints might even be more productive without a 3.0 YPC runner taking away carries in their offense.
are you seriously suggesting that there aren't guys who are "winners?" guys who put their team on their back?? guys who never seem to be able to do that, on the other extreme? in my experience, that's just not so, Cat. i saw John Elway take teams to the super bowl that i'm not sure any other QB could. i saw Magic Johson make his teammates better. i saw great regular season statistical players fall apart in the postseason over and over again. p.s. i'm not suggesting reggie is a winner or loser...just addressing the concept, in general.
Sure, there are "winners and losers"... but winners are normally the best player on a team, by far (as Elway, Jordan, and Magic Johnson were) Robert Horry is "clutch", but by sucking the regular season, and becoming great in the post-season for great teams... does that really make him a winner? Tracy McGrady has had not won a playoff series before... neither did Bagwell or Biggio... and they were all wrongly labeled as "failures" (or "losers") becuase they didn't get their teams further. If a guy is not at the level of Elway or Jordan... then yes, there is grey area when you just flat-out say "winner vs. loser."
it just occurs to me there have been guys in team sports i would call winners and some i would call losers. some guys seem to have some intangible qualities..and others don't. that's not just true in sports. there are some people who perform under pressure, in all sorts of walks of life...and some who don't. i don't have a chart or graph to show that...just experience.
Football is such a team sport. I think winner-loser differentiation of individuals is pretty hard to determine generally. Where is is most relevant is for QBs. Some guys have that intangible leadership (Montana, Elway, Staubach). Some other guys suck compared with their talent (Jeff George, Leaf)--"losers". Even some guys with modest talent are winners (Trent Dilfer). After QBs few players strike me as winners. Emmitt Smith (carry a team on a seperated shoulder, relentless on defenses), Walter Payton (despite his only title came late in his career, he nonetheless was a relentless competitor), Jerry Rice, and a I hate the Stealers, but that freaken tough annoying Hines Ward is their "winner" IMO. Ronnie Lott, Ray Lewis, Roy Williams, Palomalo, LT, those are some of the defensive guys. These are guys with incredible skills and incredible competitive fire that just make a difference out there. As for this draft, when I think "winner" I think Vince Young and Matt Leinart. Bush is a spectacular athlete, but is he a team leader and relentless competitor who keeps his teammates together, I can't say that yet.
What I'm suggesting is that in most cases there is evidence you can quantify that with. For example, you can find John Elway's rating in the fourth quarter of crucial games and determine a consistent pattern of elevating his play. You can find assist numbers for Magic Johnson and how they rise or fall accordingly based on the situation. There are definitely players who have certain positive or negative intangibles that affect their leadership... but you can find that in quantifiable individual results, not team records. I'm not saying there's no possibility of there being "winners." There definitely can be. What I don't believe in is the concept of saying "so and so is a winner" and then only posting team record. Well, there's 50-something players on a team. Trent Dilfer has the same amount of Super Bowl rings as Brett Favre. Does that make Dilfer as much of a "winner" as Favre? Absolutely not. All I'm saying is that if there is such a thing as a winner, there are usually individual results that you can empirically judge that hold that up. Let's use those in discussions instead of randomly throwing out a record.
Devin Hester returned a punt 83 yards today, he should've been number 1 pick! Look at that electricity, he won the game for them!!!!! That guys a winner. Sound familiar? Reggie Bush may become a great back, but that punt return proved nothing for him as far as running backs go. He needs to do better than 11 carries for 25 yards to be known as a great player. I'm still waiting for him to have a good game running!
Here's where the stat guys lose me. Particularly in football. It's not just that Elway completes the pass...it's that he creates the play. Down to the Oilers late....big play....Oilers need a stop. Broncos need a first down. Elway drops back. Receivers covered. He drifts to his left. There's nothing. He sees a guy covered by a corner in the flats. He tucks like he's gonna run. The CB takes one step up...Elway quickly releases a lofted pass over his head that hits the receiver perfectly. Elway made something out of nothing. A covered play. He changed it. You can say, "well...he completed another pass. give him the yardage...see...stats tell the story." But stats don't tell the story there. I'm not sure they even tell half of the story there. Some guys make those plays. Others don't. Some guys seem to have a knack for making those plays when they count most. When everything is on the line. When other guys freeze up. When others are nervous and get tight, these guys point out John Candy from the huddle. Those guys are who I call, "winners."
Well, I call them "hall of famers". Shoot, I've never even seen Peyton do that. If *that* is the standard you're holding DCarr to, no wonder you're disappointed. You know, there is something in between once-in-a-generation greatness and "bust". Quite a few things, actually.
