[Official] Reggie Bush or Someone else -- Vince Young out of running

Bush will end up being the best ever.

 

Bush is overrated as a WR at this point. He killed most college linebackers and safeties sure. However UT did pretty well on his downfield routes with a reserve LB (converted safety). Bush should be great on screens and dump offs (where he hurt UT), but no where near looks like a polished WR.

I don't agree with the premise small quick guys last longer as backs. Unless you consider Payton, Emmitt and Sanders small quick. I think were more like strong, compact and quick.

ALL-TIME RUSHERS

1. Emmitt Smith 18355
2. Walter Payton 16726
3. Barry Sanders 15269
4. Curtis Martin 14101
5. Jerome Bettis (Active) 13662
6. Eric Dickerson 13259
7. Tony Dorsett 12739
8. Jim Brown 12312
9. Marshall Faulk (Active) 12279
10. Marcus Allen 12243
11. Franco Harris 12120
12. Thurman Thomas 12074
13. John Riggins 11352
14. O.J. Simpson 11236
15. Ricky Watters 10643
16. Eddie George 10441
17. Corey Dillon (Active) 10429
18. Ottis Anderson 10273
19. Joe Perry 9723
20. Earl Campbell 9407

Seems like in frame Faulk, Martin, Allen and Dorsett are closest. All but Martin (who was injured in college) had a lot more carries in college where you could get a better handle on his durability (and between the tackles yards that pro RBs must excell in).

But whether a RB gets injured or worn down IMO is a lot genetics, some work habits and will, and some luck. Can't rule out a guy from being top 20 just because he is over 220, that list is littered with them too. Also, a lot of fine backs don't have long careers--e.g., Terrell Davis, Sayers, Holmes, Jamal Anderson, Bo Jackson, Barry Foster, Duece McAlister, Ahman Green, Stephen Davis, Robert Smith, etc.

For Bush we really don't know about his durability, particularly in a workhorse role.

 

...except for the fact that Faulk was the primary tailback for his entire tenure at SD State and ran a lot more times for a lot more yards - rather than being a complementary player who got most of his yards on outside runs.

You compard him to Carnell Williams before, which shows that if there's a guy that's short and not too big, you're going to say he's the same as Reggie Bush, despite the fact that their playing styles are very different.

 

I never stated Bush ran as many times as Faulk. I said they were similar type runningbacks. And they are.

In reference to Carnell Williams my point was that small backs can be successful in the NFL. But you are saying they are not similar? Let's google that.

Scout.com on Carnell Williams:
Positives: Quick-footed, elusive runner who combines both the physical and mental skills to produce at the next level. Fast around the corner, has a burst of speed and can run to daylight. Game-breaking return specialist. Effective picking up blitzes and blocking in pass protection.

Negatives: Not a strong back effective in short yardage situations. Ducks his head blocking, which makes it difficult for him to finish. Has had problems fumbling the ball in the past.

Yahoo.com
He's not big (5-10, 205) and that becomes a serious concern when you consider two of his seasons at Auburn ended with an injury. But he's oozing with talent, and the reality is that if he were 20 pounds heavier and maintained his current level of play, he'd make a strong push to be No. 1.

 

Add the fact Carnell nears 220 on his 5'11" frame (217 to be exact), he finishs runs very hard.

If Bush weighs in at workouts at near 210, and with all his speed and quickness retained (blowing away the field), I'd feel better about him as a #1 type pick. We will see.

 

I agree. The argument for Bush as the overall #1 pick is he is another Marshall Faulk. Faulk does/did have a long very productive career and put a lot of pressure on defenses with his running and receiving skills.

Bush wasn't near as proven as a workhorse or interior runner as Faulk from college, and like I said we have absolutely no idea about his durability in role like that (more Faulk or more Terrel Davis, anyone's guess), but yeah his talent and style (upside) is a lot like Faulk.

 

He was an accomplished inside runner (as well as the feature TB until his last season when they let Brown play more) in college. If you think he wasn't, then you simply were not paying attention to any game that you watched him. Anyway, your googling skills must be lax, here's what I came up with from NFL.com:

That's not going to sound that much like Reggie Bush's write-up - unless he becomes an up-the-middle back with average hands -- other than the fact that they were both excellent college players.

 

265 carries means Warrick had less than 17 carries a game. Not franchise back material. If I'm drafting this high, I'm thinking franchise player.

250 touches over 16 games equals15-16 touches per game. Most great running backs have over 20.


Faulk had the potential to be one of the best ever, but ultimately he got hurt and doesn't have as many touches as Emmitt and co.

 

Also consider that Williams, when he was given the job of "full time running back" this in the NFL, promptly got hurt, missed a few games, and was not nearly as effective the latter part of the season. After having 3 100+ yd games to start his career, he had 3 in his last 10 games, and 4 of those games was held to under 30 yards.

Carnell Williams is a prime example, at least in his first year, of why to be wary of great part-time college running backs as high picks. Brown is harder to get a read on because he shared time with Ricky Williams, especially in the latter part of the season.

 

Ok you got me. Cadillac was a more accomplished inside runner, and in that area they are different. (While Bush is faster, ran for better ypc, and is a much better receiver). But my original point was that smallish part time backs can carry the load and be studs in the NFL.

 

Most years Faulk did achieve that. For his career Faulk has averaged over 20 touches per game, right at 20.5. That includes this past year when he was used much less.

Andy Warrick Dunn is TINY. He is listed at 180 pounds. And he still finished 12th in the league in carries.

 

Carnell Williamas weeks 14-17:

Week 14- 29 carries, 112 yards, 2 tds
Week 15- 14 carries, 23 yards (tough NE defense shut them out)
Week 16- 31 carries, 150 yards, 1 td
Week 17- 22 carries, 81 yards

Weeks 11-13 were strong to quite strong as well. He was 11th overall in the NFL in carries. I don't think Tampa Bay regrets taking him that high at all.

 

Scar, 7 of the top 10 rushers are about the exact same size as Bush. Again, I think the reason Bush did not do more in college is he did not have to on that team. They did have an excellent 2nd back in White and a top notch passing game to boot. You have pointed out several times that Texas contained him, I went to Texas - wanted them to win - but I don't think someone getting about 180 yards rushing and receiving was being contained all that well. Texas clearly wasn't going to let Bush beat them, he had the focus of one of the top defenses in country on him, a defense built for speed no less, and he still dropped 180 yds on them.

 

I have to keep on stressing this, but the 2nd to last play of the game, where Texas was playing Full Prevent Defense (from the deep ball), Bush took a shovel pass from Leinart and ran 40-50 yards.

Withouth that play, Bush's stats for that game is about 130-140 yards of total offense, which doesn't look as impressive as 180+

 

Well, I'll counter with Texas had more speed on the field at that time, which would make the run more impressive since Bush typically doesn't run people over. In your example, he out ran and out maneuvered DBs which further shows his athleticism. Your arguement would have more merit if he were a big abck and ran over smaller players, but this wasn't the case. A simple fact you cannot argue, UT's defense was AWESOME last year and they focused on stopping Bush, he STILL went for over 180. This is not about VY or RB this is about that fact that RB is a stud - nothing more.

 

It was the 2nd to last play of the game, he didn't out run anybody...everybody was 10-20 yards down the field already. He took a shovel pass at the line of scrimmage and had 40-50 yards of open field. He didn't juke or out maneuver anybody.

In fact. When he actually met some longhorn DB's, that's when he ran out of bounds with about 12 seconds left.

Look, i'm not knocking RB at all. I think he's a stud. But i'm just trying to clarify that his stats for the Rose Bowl isn't as good as indicated. He had 2 catches (screen and shovel) that accounted for most of his yards. And if you use the reasoning that Texan's defense was geared towards stopping Bush, therefore, he didn't have the blowout game everybody was expecting...well I think that in the NFL, he's always going to be accounted for from defenses, and defenses in the NFL are 2X faster than the longhorns.

there isn't going to be anymore fresno st.'s, and ucla's, or notre dame's in the NFL.

 

Of course, Dominick Davis' numbers were better than Carnell Williams (more yards per game and per carry). So if you're happy with those from a top level pick, why are we trying to replace Dominick Davis?

 

I am not sure why we are talking about caidllac williams. The only thing he has in common with Bush is they are both black rbs and small. They have nothing in common in terms of styles

 

Cad is 217lbs in a shorter frame than Reggie Bush. Cad isn't small, he is strong in the lower body and compact. Sizewise Cad is closer to Alexander, Thomlinson and the Edge in than he is to Reggie Bush.

Emmitt Smith is not about the size of Bush. Maybe Bush is within 10lbs, but Emmitt was a world stronger and thicker. Also figure guys like Payton and Simpson would probably carry at least another 10-15lbs for todays game.

There are some 200lbs guys that last and are on this list, sure. But in the top 20 I think there are about even numbers of sub 205 guys, 205-219, and 220+ guys. My point is that it is a crap shoot who lasts--not just a size/style thing--a lot of genetics, some work habits, and some plain luck. Some small quick guys--Sayers, T. Davis, R Smith--didn't prove too durable, you just don't know.

 

First, a prevent is a zone, therefore DBs aren't running down field not watching the play develop like what would happen in a man to man defense. Secondly, NFLs defenses aren't 2Xs faster than UTs defense. UTs defense is built on speed. They take SSs and turn them into LBs they take HS LBs and turn them into DEs so NFL defenses aren't going to be that much faster then UTs - they are twice as fast as most college defenses yes but not UTs. Guys only run so fast, it is not as if everyone in the NFL runs 4.1s. I don't care how Bush got his yards, the bottom line is the defense wasn't going to allow Bush to be them and he still dropped an impressive number of yards on them, additionally the UT defense is a very fast -this also makes what he did more impressive. I wouldn't discount the screen and shovel pass aspect as I guarantee he will be doing these in the NFL as well. I mean are you going to care if he scores 15 TDs next year if half of them come on screens or shovel passes? I won't!