davis does put up good numbers. bush - in theory - would put up better numbers. next time davis busts into the open field, watch him get run down. now imagine a back that doesn;t get caught... and your line of thinking, re: the OL and the appraoch to the draft is what scares me. you can't - CANNOT - take your attitude into the draft, not in the cap era. you can't pay the fifth best player in the draft first overall money. it is NOT economically viable. if you stay #1, you have to pick the best player. i would only advocate trading down if you had 2 or 3 guys you were comfortable with and stayed within range to grab at least one of them. otherwise, you're taking another risk. this team can't take risks.
And Ronnie Brown is now sharing carries with Ricky Williams. Meanwhile, his counterpart, is hurt after shouldering a much bigger load than he was used to. What part of "no one is saying White is a better back than Bush" did you not understand? Or what part of "once in a lifetime back" vs. "pretty good" back confused you into thinking I was saying White is as good as Bush? White's taking carries in critical games when the season is on the line. If you have Ricky Williams (in the prime of his career) and Dominic Davis and you need to win a game, are you giving Davis lots of carries? There's a reason White is getting the carries - and that should be a question you'd want answered if you're thinking of taking Reggie Bush for your team.
I haven't dug through this thread yet, but I don't need to. I don't see how this is even a question. There is no logical reasoning behind using that pick to do anything else BUT trade down to shore up the line. 4 years later, with the same problems since our inceptions, I hope management has figured that out. Bush or Leinart are the sexy picks but O-line is the smart pick. Carr+Davis+decent O.line COULD succeed. Leinart/Carr+Bush/Davis+NO O Line ==> exact same situation as now.
Bush/White reminds me a lot of Palmer/Leinert... except that you can play both Bush and White in the same game. USC has a great system in place that develops great players. But, these players are NOT the "once in a lifetime" type players that a lot of you think they may be.
Which was an illegal play BTW, but refs never call it. I'm glad USC players thing that was the toughest and best game they've ever been a part of, but what does that have to do with the draft? It's the same scouts that were saying Tim Couch was a sure thing. Gunn- I'm not saying Bush wouldn't be worth the #1 pick if we were in need of a RB. Our biggest need is a OL and there is a player out there that is supposedly a "franchise" type player. Linemen never get the glory skill players do, but that doesn't mean they aren't as "talented" or as "good." Do you think Bush or any RB in that matter can be successful with our OL? We have poor run blocking and even worse pass protection, I don't see how any RB or QB could have real success here w/o improving our OL first. IF you ask any football coach (high school, NCAA, NFL), they'll tell you that the most important factor on the field is your offensive line, right now, we don't have crap there.
i don't see the relevance. is your contention that brown is sharing carries with williams because he's not capable of shouldering the load himself? if so, it's a faulty, but oh-so-convenient conclusion. i mean, was cedric benson splitting carries with thomas jones because he wasn't able to shoulder the load on his own? can we draw the same conclusion about priest holmes and larry johnson? mike anderson and tatum bell in denver? willis mcgahee and travis henry last year in buffalo? as for williams, you're again drawing a pretty favorable, but highly debateable conclusion. only small-ish backs who can't tote the load every down get hurt in the NFL? is that why DD is currently on the sidelines? bush gets 20 touches a game, including punt returns, far and away the most dangerous and vulenerable thing you can do on a football field. before he got hurt, DD was averaging 23 tocuhes a game. so we're really concerned bush, if he dropped return duty, would struggle with the heavier workload? was this a rhetorical question, because..... you're clearly insuinating that white is better than bush by asking this question, no? or are you just playing devil's advocate? if it had any basis in fact, it's a question worth asking, but it doesn't. i'm not sure which "critical" game you're referring to, or when this year USC's season has "been on the line", considering their margins of victory have been 46, 53, 32, 10, 21, 3, 27, 42, 30, 25. maybe you meant the only games they won by less than three touchdowns...? let's see.... in those games (ND, 3, and ASU, 10), the stat lines read like this: bush: 48 touches; 458 total yards; 5 TDs white: 29 tocuhes; 223 yards; 3 TDs when and where in "critical" games with the "seaon on the line" is white "getting the carries" over bush? even if you want to tilt the discussion in your favor by disallowing receptions and returns, bush still has more carries (32 to 29), more yards (318 to 223) and more TDs (5 to 3) in "critical" games where the "season was on the line."
and tony mandarich - what's your point? then how has a guy the team thought would be nothing more than a return specialist compiled back-to-back 1,000 yard seasons? please, please, PLEASE (!!!) stop confusing pass protection and run blocking - two entirely different animals. run blocking requires you to hold a block and create a path for, well, it's dependent on how quick your back is, but miliseconds. pass protection requires you to hold it much longer and have a competent QB and WRs that can run proper routes and create separation, not to mention proper scheme, placement, coaching. the texans have none of that right now. hell, even jonathan wells runs decently behind this line. they run block well. the awful pass protection is a component of the rest of the team being just as bad. carr is spooked; the WRs suck; there's no TE; the RB is awful at picking up the blitz. one guy doesn't solve all that ails, so why reach for him? so the system created bush's speed, agility, instincts, vision, quickness and toughness? is that why palmer has been such an abject failure outside the system?
let's not pretend the draft is an exact science - it's not. so scouts missing on couch, leaf, mandarich and a dozen other prospects doesn't negate their opinions. bush may be added to the list. but, no matter they're track record, they're infinitely more knowledgeable and experienced about this kind of thing than you, me, major or gunn are, giving their evaluations far more relevance than anything we post, no?
The Texans are in a unique situaion at the end of the season if everything holds true and they receive the first pick in the draft. We know that there are about four or five teams that want Leinart. There will be teams that will want Reggie Bush if he declares (which is highly likely, IMO). The Texans could target a couple of players, D'Brickshaw Ferguson (OT), Jonathan Scott (OT), Leonard Pope (TE), Marcedes Lewis (TE), Ahmad Brooks (LB), AJ Hawk (LB), Eric Winston (OT), Max Jean-Gilles (OL), Rodrique Wright (DT), etc. Now tell me that having at least two of those names above wouldn't make the Texans better. If the Texans are able to trade down to lets say the fifth pick and pick up an extra second and third this year and an extra first next year. Thats quite a few picks with which to help shape up this team. If the Texans take Ferguson with the fifth pick you have the guy you targeted and you still have the 33rd pick overall to take a talented player that will fall into the second. Plus, now you have another second (hopefully still very high in the second round) with which to take yet another player that was probably rated as a first rounder but fell. So the Texans could have potentially three first round rated players (two of which you know for sure were rated as such). I'd rather have that than one player in Bush who has the potential to be a game-breaker. This team is in dire straits and should not pick a position that is already giving production. Taking Reggie Bush would not make the Texans any better IMO because the O-Line is the back bone of the offense. With a better O-Line you have more time to throw the ball and you have holes that may stay open a little longer allowing DD or JW to burst through gaining maybe an extra couple of yards. I'm not against taking Bush because I don't like him, I think he is a great college player and an intriguing prospect. Its that the Texans have way too many needs to key in on one player, and taking an OL shores up your biggest need, helps the passing game and helps the running game. DD may not be a long-term back, but you can find RB's a dime a dozen. If you have a good line, even an average RB can gain plenty of yards. Even splitting time with JW could give DD a little more rest and help him last a little longer during the season. If I'm the GM of the Texans (hey I can wish ) I take OL for the reasons stated throughout this post, taking an OL is not a "sexy" pick because skill players are the ones that carry the ball and make dynamic plays. But you need the big guys in the trenches making it happen so those skill players can make those great plays. After OL, I'm looking to pick TE, LB, DB, WR with the next four picks (two second and two third round picks). After that I start looking for WR, OL, FS and SS in the fourth and after that I start taking BPA through round seven.
I think Nick's point was that when you bring a large group of really good players together, they tend to look even better than they are. Bush and White are good backs, but look even better when they have mammoth holes to run through. Leinart is a super accurate quarterback and having all day to throw to All-American receivers and running backs makes him look that much better. When so many good players are together it's very easy to start over valuing their perceived impact in the NFL. This is what I think is happening with Bush. If he really is in line with amazing talents like Sanders, Sayers, Tomlinson, J. Brown, etc, I have to question why White is getting so many carries. Thurman Thomas kept Barry Sanders on the bench when they were at OSU together. That's right, Barry Sanders rode the pine. That's because Thomas was so good, Sanders never got to show what he could do. Everyone expected there to be a huge dropoff when Thomas went to the NFL, instead Sanders had probably the greatest college season ever, regardless of position. Guys like that would relegate Lendale White to mop up duty, regardless of how good he is. Ronnie Brown and Cadillac Williams were very close in talent. They split time as a result. Neither of those guys were talked about like Reggie Bush. I don't think it's unrealistic to have some reservations about him.
Absolutely. But if it's the same scouts saying D. Ferguson is a franchise type tackle worthy of a top 3 pick, and a good tackle is EXACTLY what we need, shouldn't we take one?
It's not about a "top 3 pick". You don't lump them together. Why? Because a player like Reggie Bush is there. If you have the third pick and Bush is off the board, then fine take the tackle. But you don't pass on a player that scouts are saying is the "best player of any age or position in the country" for a lesser player for reasons based on need on a team with too many needs. I have never advocated ignoring the offensive line. I think this year's draft is exceptionally deep at the tackle position and the Texans could move back into the first round or stay put with the top pick in the second and select a quality tackle.
Don't we say that every year? We always think we can pick up quality offensive linemen with 2nd-3rd round picks and they've all ended up garbage for the most part. It's time to do some major revising to our OL. What do you mean by lumping them together? You're going with the "sexy" pick, linemen don't get the glory skills players do, but like I said, that doesn't mean they are any less of a player. Just remember, Bush wouldn't be anything w/o his OL, but how often do you hear about OL in the media or with analysts? We NEED a tackle and there is one available that is WORTH the pick, it's very simple. NO team will be successful without a OL, right now we have the worst OL in my opinion and I'm sure most of ya'll will agree. We have a chance to pick up a player that can anchor our OL for years to come. And please don't act like there won't be another Reggie Bush to come out. He is a good running back, but by no means is he the best RB to come out in recent years. The same can't be said for Ferguson. He is the best tackle to come out of college in a pretty long time.
The draft is exceptionally deep at the tackle position, but tackles usually go fast too. Ferguson and Winston are what I consider the best tackle prospects. Then you have McNeil and Scott (IMO they are more suited for the RT rather than LT, I have watched all of the Longhorns games and two Auburn games, not much to go on McNeil). Then you have Colledge, Whitworth and Trueblood, all of which you could probably get in the second round. But why would you not take the best available tackle? It would be like me telling you that in 1999 you could go out and get either Tim Couch, Dante Culpepper, Donovan McNabb, Akili Smith or Cade McNown, its a deep QB draft so we could take X player at #1 and then trade back up and get one of these players since they are all rated very high. IMO, the Texans need to take the BPA of need, they do not need a RB, they need OL help and they are in position to address that with the best OL prospect. I understand that Bush is a special player and has the potential to be a great NFL player. However, QB's WR's and RB's are usually the biggest busts when taken in the first round. We could go back and forth all day about what OL's were busts and which RB's were busts, the draft is not an exact science. I think its all about what your philosophy is when trying to make a team better. My personal opinion is that Casserly wanted to build a great line (the backbone of the offense) to protect his then-rookie-QB with Boselli and Young as the bookends. Neither panned out, but he continued to build the team with a soft backbone. IMO, you need to go back and solidify that area, the OL. McKinney and Pitts (Pitts is a guard, I don't care how well he looks at LT, he isn't one) should be your guards, hopefully with a much improved Wand and Ferguson as your bookends and Hodgdon as your center. Hell, if I'm the GM and Max Jean-Gilles is there in the second round and I have him rated hgiher than any LB, WR, or TE that is available I take him and stick him at guard, the guy is great at Georgia. Let me tell you why I like Ferguson, last year he dominated almost every DE and LB coming his way. This year he has been injured but has performed well nonetheless. He has intangibles like great eye-hand coordination, great movement with his feet and great technique. Some may say that he is too light to be a LT at 295lbs.. Obviously when players get to the NFL, nutritionists and coaches put players on a strict regimen to get them to bulk up, which is why this particular "knock" on him does not concern me. After reading a couple of interviews of Ferguson he seems to be down to earth and takes pride in his job, he strives to be the best and wants to excel. Basically I like Ferguson for all the reasons you like Reggie Bush, its just that Ferguson doesn't get the attention or Sportscenter highlights like Reggie Bush does.
For me I voted for trading down. If you were to take all the first round RB and Qb's taken in drafts and put them against all the late round steals im sure the late round players have the edge in overall quality lately. You can easily get a good backup back or something late in the 3rd and 4th round. That is not what we need. We don't need Bush and honestly don't need Lienart. They really need to focus on the OL and they would be stupid if they didn't. Just look at some of the teams with great OL's like Denver for instance. The team put in no name back after no name back when Davis left and they had 1000 yard rushers left and right. If you have a great OL you can do a lot in this league. Carr is scared like hell when he is back there and totally mentally gone becuase he knows he doesn't have time. He doesn't have time to sit in the pocket and his recievers don't have time to get open. Leaving usually one option , the run, which every defense banks on and stops us. If you remember the first year Carr wasn't scared to take hits and he sat back in the pocket for a long time waiting for something to develop and it didn't because of the OL and he just took the sack. After 3 years of this it has gotten to his head and you can notice that even when he does have time to throw he thinks he is going to get hit and takes off running or makes a quick desicion. It will definently take him some time to trust his OL if we get one and let him relax back there. The guy is not a bad quarterback and he can succeed if he has the personal around him. Without the OL you are not going to get anything going...wheter it is the run or the pass, plain and simple. Build a tough OL by trading down getting a draft pick and maybe an established vetran OL from the team as well if you need it. Give Carr a couple years behind a good OL and if he doesn't produce then you can go ahead and move on. But as of right now it's pretty simple to see that our OL sucks and it would be stupid to pick Lienart or Bush when their value is so high and we can completly revamp the line with either vetran linemen or some great young talent.
Like Jared Novak said, we need Leonard Pope if he's available in the 2nd round. He's a big athletic tight end that would be a MAJOR upgrade especially to anything we have now.
This team has yet to experience a draft that is this deep at the tackle postion. I understand your concerns of the early-mid second to third round picks. But hopefully, and potentially, the lowest pick we would be talking about would be the top pick in the second round. Or taking that pick and moving back into the 1st to get a first round talent tackle if need be. By lumping D'Brickashaw into the "top 3" you are essentially saying he is worth the #1 overall pick. And in any given year I would agree with you, but this year he's not. Not with Reggie Bush out there, who scouts are saying is head and shoulders the best player in the country. You don't pass on said best player and reach for another when your team has so many needs. If we have the #2 or #3 pick then, by all means, take the tackle. But if you don't think this team could use Reggie Bush then you are turning a blind eye. They are the worst pass blocking OL right now, not run blocking. Two different animals. Again, and as Ric stated, I think NFL scouts have a more credible opinion than you or I. And they would disagree with your assessment of Reggie Bush not being the best back to come out in recent years.
