[quote]A-Town Crown wrote:
It’s not perception, it’s proven on field statistics. Leinart has allready shown up to bigger games than Croyle will his whole career. You need to stop going off combine numbers.
I’m sure Croyle will make a nice backup in the NFL. Cutler has a good chance in Denver.[/quote]
I know nothing of Croyle’s combine #'s. My assessment is from watching games-pure and simple.
What ='s a big game in the PAC-10? UCLA? LSU,Auburn,Georgia,Florida,Tenn.
Those qualify as big games.
And seeing as it’s simply opinions I don’t quite see you’re so upset with mine. I’ll make a wager though–Leinart starts less games in his NFL career than either one of the others.
I realize noone will be around to collect. Just remember me one day in the future when you are drinking a beer, watching the Super Bowl and you choke on your baked dorito when they announce the starting QB
[quote]A-Town Crown wrote:
I’ll bet that on my life. I’m not upset I just think saquatch=jack@ss for saying Croyle and Leinart in the same sentance, simple and plain.[/quote]
Would you idiots (namely A-town) please stop acting like you know everything?
Good Lord, you’d think that with how accurate your vision into the future is that all the NFL teams would be dying over your services… strangely they are not.
You can play both sides of every argument.
Bush sucks, he’s way too small.
Well how have Barry Sanders, Warrick Dunn, Tiki Barber, or Gale Sayers done?
Bush is amazing, he’s so fast and awesome!
Well how have Napolean Kaufman, Trung Candidate, Tim Biakabutuka or John Avery done.
Leinart is a winner and his stats were amazing!
How did Andre Ware, Rick Mirer, Heath Shuler and Kerry Collins turn out?
Jay Cutler has all the tools to be a great pro, who cares that he was from Vandy?
How bout Tim Couch, Patrick Ramsey, Dan McGwire and Jeff George?
[quote]doogie wrote:
OKLAHOMA STATE wrote:
You guys who think Bush is overrated are damn fools. Bush is the best RB since Barry Sanders. He is an incredible talent and will be a superstar in the NFL.
Being a superstar doesn’t mean a whole hell of a lot in a team sport.
10 years and 5 losing seasons, 1 play-off win.[/quote]
What the hell was he supposed to do? Play defense? Throw passes? Kick field goals?
You are right, it is a team game. Barry Sanders did his role as well as anybody in the history of the NFL. It’s not like you can hog the ball in football or be a selfish player line in basketball.
[quote]jtrinsey wrote:
doogie wrote:
OKLAHOMA STATE wrote:
You guys who think Bush is overrated are damn fools. Bush is the best RB since Barry Sanders. He is an incredible talent and will be a superstar in the NFL.
Being a superstar doesn’t mean a whole hell of a lot in a team sport.
What the hell was he supposed to do? Play defense? Throw passes? Kick field goals?
You are right, it is a team game. Barry Sanders did his role as well as anybody in the history of the NFL. It’s not like you can hog the ball in football or be a selfish player line in basketball.[/quote]
I was trying to get at drafting what you need as a team. Bush isn’t a huge upgrade from Davis.
I know people have been trying to say this for a while now, but when determining the value of a player you have to look at not only the conference he played in, but the team surrounding him.
Reggie Bush and Matt Leinart had the best of both worlds; they were surrounded by a very talented team with a good run game to set up the pass and a good passing game to set up the run. Factor in the poor quality of the defences they faced throughout the season, and it’s easy to see why they look so good. But, they have never really been tested; level the playing field and their numbers would not look nearly as impressive.
Now look at a guy like Cutler; he played for a historically bad team, spent plenty of time on his back, and still led Vanderbilt to its best record in years and won the SEC player of the year award. Quote: “He did not have great players around to make his stats better so his numbers are all the result of his great play.”
Obviously the super-hyped guys are great athletes and have lots of potential in the NFL. I just don’t think they deserve all the hype; they may have immediate impact on their teams, but I think it’s more likely that Bush will become a Ron Dayne and Leinart a Ryan Leaf in the long run, while guys like Cutler mature into Brett Farves. But I am a Bronco fan, so maybe I’m a bit biased here.
So here we are, five weeks into the season, and Reggie Bush is leading the entire NFL in receptions.
If you aren’t seeing how much defensive attention he commands and how that is opening up the field for everyone else, well I guess you can continue thinking he’s all hype.
[quote]chillain wrote:
So here we are, five weeks into the season, and Reggie Bush is leading the entire NFL in receptions.
If you aren’t seeing how much defensive attention he commands and how that is opening up the field for everyone else, well I guess you can continue thinking he’s all hype.
[/quote]
Reggie has been a good receiving threat out of the backfield so far. His rushing needs to be improved though. For the amount of hype he received, 3.1 yards per carry is terrible. Deuce is averaging 4.8 with the same team around him. Although teamed up with Deuce New Orleans has a very good backfield.
[quote]Myllz wrote:
chillain wrote:
So here we are, five weeks into the season, and Reggie Bush is leading the entire NFL in receptions.
If you aren’t seeing how much defensive attention he commands and how that is opening up the field for everyone else, well I guess you can continue thinking he’s all hype.
Reggie has been a good receiving threat out of the backfield so far. His rushing needs to be improved though. For the amount of hype he received, 3.1 yards per carry is terrible. Deuce is averaging 4.8 with the same team around him. Although teamed up with Deuce New Orleans has a very good backfield.[/quote]
yeah but i feel that bush is more versatile than him though plus what as far overall yardage how many does deuce have? and how many does Bush have?
