let's say the texans had drafted reggie bush. and let's further say that bush's producion as a texan has been on par with his production in NO - nothing consistently great, but decent overall numbers (maybe he'd have better rushing numbers as the #1 back, but overall, 1,300-1,400-yard pace) with a few, "wow"-inducing moments mixed in for good measure. and let's further assume that bush was good for an additional win, which seems fair given he's scored 7 TDs this year playing behind mcallister, horn and colston in NO. cool? seem fair? ok, so the texans are 5-7 with tennessee and vy rolling into town, also at 5-7. and let's put bush in place of dayne sunday, so he's churning out 80-85 yards and a TD... but everything else breaks THE EXACT SAME WAY - carr's decent, we tie it late, but young still scores the winning TD in OT... are you AS upset? and i don't want to the rose bowl, the heisman voting, or david carr's extension - i'm really curious: if the texans had done the "right" thing (ie taken the guy the vast majority of people said was the consensus #1 pick), would the vy sting sunday (however it hit you) been as severe? IOW, would reggie be a decent plan B for the vy camp because, yeah, they passed on vince, but at least they didn't draft some DE... , or salvation for the texan camp who has no allegiance whatsoever to vy... just to the texans?
I wanted Bush before the draft ( I think). I got over it (for the most part). But I think if passing on Bush gets the Texans Adrian Peterson (or...somehow Brady Quinn) it was worth it. MW + AP > RB
I don't know. I really don't. I think there were good reasons to avoid drafting Reggie Bush. But if everything were the same...and Reggie was just coming off a 4 TD game, I think most people would be more forgiving.
I wanted, like so many other Houstonians, for the pro football team to draft Vince Young. Mario was not even on my map. I always thought Manny Lawson was more impressive at NCST, and said as much prior to the draft.
At draft time, Texans management thought Carr could be the team's future QB. At draft time, Texans management thought that Domanick Davis would play in 2006. At draft time, Texans management saw major holes in the defense, so they drafted Mario Willams in the 1st round and then DeMeco Ryans in the 2nd round.
Not really sure where you are going with this. 1. The VY supporters would have watched VY still beat us, and if they had thought it best for us to draft Young in the first place they would still appear to have been right. 2. If we had Bush there's no way to know how the Texans' game plan would have changed. Kubiak has no real weapons on offense and we play a conservative game to spare us a Carr mistake. This may change if we had Bush (and he was actually productive). Either way, a loss is a loss. You've now got a large contingent (either Y or Bush, Young only, Bush only) all pissed off right now. Had the scenario worked out the way you describe it, you'd just have a few less people pissed, that's all. Also either way, it would still be clear that Carr wasn't getting it done.
yes. As fans and sideline gm's no outcome is without fault. It is painful to watch VY even though the pick they made (Mario) was a sound one. I think the compounding factor in relation to this argument is how Carr's season has gone. He went from promising, to productive, to broken down. How much of that is on the offensive unit as a whole and how much of it is on Carr is undetermined, but most fans will enjoy putting all the blame on Carr. I myself and beginning to lay more of the blame on Carr and would like to see a change at the qb position. Given the lack of quality (in my eyes) of quarterbacks in the upcoming draft, it only adds to the sting of watching VY rip through our defense and do what he has continually done since highschool.
i don't mean to call you out, personally. but i'm so tired of hearing this. you all thought andre johnson was a weapon. you all thought eric moulds was a weapon. you all thought jeb putzier was a weapon. i heard over and over again that carr would be out of excuses after the texans put together these guys on offense. that this was part of the reasoning. give him another year, but he needs to show it because there are pieces around him now. finally. and now it's still carr excuses.
You misunderstand. Because of Carr Kubiak plays conservatively. Not much point in having those receivers if you're too afraid of your QB turning the ball over to take advantage of them.
It's astounding how many times the same basic thread (Draft 2006: What if?) can be rehashed. I think having Reggie instead of Mario would have easied the suffering for two main reasons: 1. The worst thing about the draft was the national pile on that followed. It stung and no one likes being the league laughingstock. The uproar isn't over Vince or Reggie, they're just bringing the spotlights back on the laughingstock aspect every time they do well. We;re not getting trashed if we take Reggie, so there's only a slight uproar (the UT crowd) if he beats us at Reliant. 2. Since Carr has become dependant on dump routes and Reggie is arguably the best dump route reciever in recent years, his contributions might actually be a big deal for us. Mario Williams being rendered ineffective with plantar fascitis made this a worst case scenario. I've said it for the past 8 months, and I'll keep on saying it: we screwed up by not trading out of that spot. We (Kubiack) didn't want Vince or Reggie - fine. Just don't take any random guy at #1. Trade down for Brick or Hawk and an additional pick or two. Throw in a lower pick to make it happen if need be. But don't tell me that no one wanted Bush. Don't tell me that Mario Williams is Julius Peppers. The biggest mistake of all was extending Carr by 3 years instead of two or starting over. Evan
you're right then..i did misunderstand. i agree with your point. in that sense, it's Carr who is limiting the other guys, then.
It's hard to say how having Bush would have affected the offense and, in essence, Carr's play this year.......and thus, everyone's opinion of him. Like someone else said in a different thread, with Bush, who knows if some of those little 5-yard dumpoff passes we seem to love so much don't turn into 65 yard TD's. Like the one against dallas last week.
Really, I'm not so mad that they lost but more so that Houstonians are cheering for Bud's team after they way did us. Nothing personal against VY, but he does play for the enemy. But to answer your question I would have rather have Bush. Just like the Godfather says, "Never go against the family"
I had Bush ranked lower- with Young #1 and then in no particular order Brick, Leinhart, and Bush and Mario about even. I was warm to the idea of Bush once I began to try to convince myself he was the next Barry Sanders or Tony Dorsett, but I was very wary of his ability to break tackles and run inside consistently as a #1 back. I believe in the first round as much as possible you must draft a sure thing impact player if not an all pro player and it should always be best available or the one you think will be a pro bowl caliber player. The only exception I make to this is if I have a very good All Pro QB or running back and those are the top options. Drafting Bush still is not something I can evaluate as a better long term move than Mario. If Mario improves (and he needs alot of improvement) then he could possibly be more valuable to us in the long run. If we had Bush I would be happier right now than having Mario, but I still would want to see next year which way they go. I definately saw 'you know who' as a no brainer pick that would turn the franchise around. So I would have still been pretty saddened that we passed and the 'game' would have still been a dagger twisting in my heart for the Texans. It's all about my Texans winning and so the difference makers to me in this last draft were- Young Brick Leinhart I think of those 3 Young or Leinhart would have had the most immediate impact. Reggie Bush looks great. I was wrong about his level of impact, I did not think he would be able to do so much without being the go to back. Would I like to have Reggie Bush on the Texans - YES Would I have felt better Sunday- NO
ok... sorry - too many people are rehashing the draft... which, yeah, i know is the entire point of the thread, but... i guess what i'm asking is this: we all like mario williams; he was a solid pick. but picking him, and not RB or VY, puts your entire franchise on a real shakey limb - you BETTER BE RIGHT; he better not only be good, but better than RB and VY. if not... but if you draft bush, which was the "right" thing to do (and by "right" i mean in conjunction with the consensus opinion of those in the know who said bush was the obvious best player in the draft), and vince young proves to be better... well, at least the franchise could say, "look, we took the guy everyone thought we should have taken..." i guess this is aimed more at the vy-crowd: we know you wanted vy, but would bush have been a better plan b than mario williams, given the way the season's turned out...?
Bush hasn't had 85 yds rushing in a game all year. He might have had 85 yds receiving and some td's in the hypothetical game, but he hasn't done much when he's carried the ball. He's still hasn't shown that he can run between the tackles, which many had concerns about. If he is used in the slot or catching swing passes out of the backfield he can do some really good things. I don't think he's ever going to be anything more than average carrying the ball.
It would have caused a paradox. Weaver would be at DE and Smith would be inside. Payne might not have been injured and the Earth would have exploded, including the cheerleader.
sorry; i didn't like the way that read- too dismissive of mario. would bush have made the passing on vy easier to swallow because at least the texans took the more.... "obvious" or more "correct" pick as opposed to going out on a limb with mario?
