Short Corner
Footballguy
Why start now?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Calling all the Reggie Bush pimps (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter TheFanatic
- Start date
- Status
grouse
Footballguy
I'll preface this by saying that I am a Bush owner. I have no issues with Bush as a fantasy running back.
However, I also feel that it should be fair game to criticize Reggie Bush based on the standards and goals he has set for himself. First off, there is a huge disparity (perhaps most in the NFL) between his celebrity status and his on-field accomplishments. Few players in the NFL have been afforded such status without proving it on the field first. Second, it seems anytime someone criticizes Bush as a runner, there is someone else ready defend him based on his pass-catching ability. Reggie Bush is a running back, and Reggie Bush wants to be seen as a running back. Therefore, it seems only fair to judge him so.
"Included in his stated goals this season are to surpass 1,000 yards rushing and 1,000 yards receiving - and to make his first Pro Bowl.
"I definitely feel like I have something to prove this year," Bush said. "I'm ready to prove I'm one of those elite running backs year in and year out." link
The jury is still out on Reggie Bush as an NFL caliber runner. But so far, I think it's perfectly justified to be disappointed.
However, I also feel that it should be fair game to criticize Reggie Bush based on the standards and goals he has set for himself. First off, there is a huge disparity (perhaps most in the NFL) between his celebrity status and his on-field accomplishments. Few players in the NFL have been afforded such status without proving it on the field first. Second, it seems anytime someone criticizes Bush as a runner, there is someone else ready defend him based on his pass-catching ability. Reggie Bush is a running back, and Reggie Bush wants to be seen as a running back. Therefore, it seems only fair to judge him so.
"Included in his stated goals this season are to surpass 1,000 yards rushing and 1,000 yards receiving - and to make his first Pro Bowl.
"I definitely feel like I have something to prove this year," Bush said. "I'm ready to prove I'm one of those elite running backs year in and year out." link
The jury is still out on Reggie Bush as an NFL caliber runner. But so far, I think it's perfectly justified to be disappointed.
MCguidance
Footballguy
I mean, I did start the other Bush thread, but the conversation has seemed to have started to take place over here. No worries, I am just glad to see some good discussion going on. As for my thoughts about Bush, it depends on where you got him, what league type you're in. Personally, I would love to see him breakout. On a FF level, I don't really care as long as he is getting me points. He is a PPR stud, it's quite simple. Moreover, he is doing well in non-PPR leagues, though it may be harder for him to sustain that level all season long. However, I think he has an outside chance to do so in any format, as long as the Saints are creative and get him to touch the ball 15+ times a game. As long as he get his touches, there is no doubt he will produce. I am not in a PPR league full of experts (some are more knowledgble than others) but when I got him in the late 3rd I was estatic.
TheFanatic
Footballguy
Nope, but this is the start of his third year and he is pretty much on pace as a runner to what he did his first 2 years which is be a very mediocre RB. Like I said, it looks like he has really upped his game as a WR but he is not a WR. These two games are only an anomaly in the fact that he is doing better as a pass catcher than he has ever done in his first two years. So, if you want to make the argument that this is only an anomaly and the numbers will go back towards the mean then you need to look at his receiving numbers going down rather than his rushing numbers going up. His rushing numbers are at the mean in terms of YPG versus his career stats. It's his receiving numbers that have gone well away from the mean.
Blackjacks
Footballguy
You mean last year when Bush got hurt for the last 4 games after being a top ten rb when healthy?I remember you complaining when I was winning the sig bet early on in the year due to MJD splitting carries with Freddy but then you want to take credit for winning it after Reggie went down........I see how it is
face it Reggie's good
TheFanatic
Footballguy
Nice revisionist history. We made that bet and both guys involved were RB2 on their respective teams. 1 or 2 weeks in your guy becomes the starter when Deuce goes down. Starts, what 10 games? MJD was the backup. Had less touches and still outscored your boy. When Deuce went down and the nature of the original bet was pretty much blown away because now one of them was starting and not because he earned the starting job I asked if you were going to hold me to the bet. Being the moral and ethical compass you have always been (when everyone in any league you are in uses your last name as a synonym for screwing someone over, particularly in trade negotiations) of course you said that you were going to hold me to the bet even though Reggie was now going to get significant more playing time and touches. I laughed saying it was a typical <Blackjacks' Last Name> move and also in typical <Blackjacks' Last Name> fashion it blew up in your face....But I was kind enough to back off and not hold you to the sig portion of the bet that I not only won but won quite decisively considering your guy was the starter for double digit games.
Afro Samurai
Footballguy
Once again......for those who think slow.......WHAT THE HELL difference does it make whether his yards come rushing or receiving? Don't you think getting 8 yards on a flare pass is better than getting 4 1/2 yards on a carry up the gut? Hell, it's practically an extended handoff, not much different than a stretch run or a toss play.I will never understand why people bag on this guy for not being a traditional RB.TheFanatic said:
TheFanatic
Footballguy
And for those that don't understand football. Not FFB. The NFL. Running the ball runs the clock out. Passing the ball stops the clock on an incomplete pass. Mike Martz tried to win in the NFL without a balanced attack. It worked for a little while and then people figured it out and he has been bouncing around the league ever since. In order to win in the NFL one has to run the ball and stop the run. Plain and simple. Teams that can't run don't win. The fact that he can't run may mean nothing to you in your FFB score but it means something to the coaches of the Saints and opposing coaches. But if he can't run he's going to get less and less chances to run and eventually his opportunity to touch the ball will drop. Now, try to make a point without taking shots.
switz
Footballguy
Hmmm... 3.3YPC x 3 att = 9.9 yards, right? I'm thinking if they chose to use Reggie in that way, he could run out the clock.
Short Corner
Footballguy
Short Corner
Footballguy
That is some impressive logic there. Nice strawman btw.TheFanatic said:
Breesisdaman
Footballguy
New Orleans will use PT, Stecker and Deuce for most of the short yardage push the pile stuff. They are using Reggie just as he should be used, giving defenses fits as the pass catching Back that they have to cover with a LB or Safety. His inside running is a concern not so much because of his abilities as it is the run blocking. The holes have not been there for any of the Saints running Backs. My suspicion is that a shakeup will be coming on that line if this trend continues.
Last edited by a moderator:
Afro Samurai
Footballguy
Why should I? You don't.Please explain the difference between getting 5 yards on a run up the middle and getting 5 yards on a pass. You may not like it because it's not cool and tough and macho like you seem to need it to be, but it is just as effective in gaining yardage, and just as effective in running down the clock, assuming the receiver stays in bounds.Besides which, Reggie is not called on in situations where they're trying to run the clock out. So I really don't see any reason you can possibly hold it against him, other than just your own small-mindedness and inability to understand that he's not a player that you can fit in your neat little box.You can't possibly watch the guy play and still try to say he's not a very effective player. If you do, you're just an idiot. Plain and simple.PS - Next time you think about start a thread like this.........don't. You're only making yourself look like a ######bag.
Last edited by a moderator:
TheFanatic
Footballguy
I wasn't taking a shot. I was pointing out a fact.Afro Samurai said:
What is the difference between getting a 5 yards on the ground and getting 5 yards in the air? Is this concept really that difficult? When was the last time you saw a team running out the clock with a bunch of short pass plays? What is the likelihood of fumbling the handoff and turning it over to the other team? I'm not sure, but it's a lot lower than the odds of someone picking off a pass. And if the pass is incomplete then the clock stops. And thanks for proving the above point. 5 yards in the air and 5 yards on the ground have no real differences in the vast majority of fantasy leagues. But there is a world of difference in the NFL and you just proved the point that you think was a shot at you.Afro Samurai said:
Because he's a horrible RB. Because he can't run but he catches well, which is why they don't use him to run out the clock. If there was no difference between catching the ball for 5 and running for 5 then he would be used to run out the clock as you stated above.Afro Samurai said:
And please re-read my posts. I never said he wasn't an effective player. I said he wasn't an effective RB. He has turned himself into a great receiver but he still blows at running the ball. And the longer we go with sub 4.0 YPC the closer he becomes to nothing more than a 3rd down back/gimmick player.Afro Samurai said:
Wow, more name calling. Class. Nothin but ClassAfro Samurai said:
Short Corner
Footballguy
You're the one who started calling people out. Deal with it sparky.
Pyscho Wife
Footballguy
Dumb topic.
He's the 8th ranked RB in my non-PPR league.
Go back to talking about BBQ, TheFanatic.
He's the 8th ranked RB in my non-PPR league.
Go back to talking about BBQ, TheFanatic.
switz
Footballguy
Got a quote? I don't think anyone ever said Bush was ever going to be a between the tackles runner. In fact, I've always viewed him as a Brian Westbrook type RB, which BTW - the Eagles often use short passes to Westbrook to run out the clock. I expected the Saints would use Bush better this yea than last, and that Shockey would open some things up for Bush. Anyone who has watched the Saints this year can see ?Bush is running with more determination than he has the last two seasons. I still believe his YPC will improve, but I have never believe he'd be a great between the tackles runner... however, he also is not as bad as you make him out to be.
You really haven't been playing FF very long, have you...
TheFanatic
Footballguy
Since 1995
Holy Schneikes
Footballguy
OK, I've stayed out of this ugly fray, but you can't be serious about that comparison. Westbrook is an EXCELLENT runner (one of the best in the NFL). Bush is a horrible runner. All of the elusiveness that Bush is CLAIMED to have, Westbrook actually has. They both catch passes, but to say Bush is a "Westbrook type" implies he can actually run the ball, which he doesn't seem to be able to do.Here is the yardage on all of Bush's runs on Sunday:2-32009 (prevent defense at end of half)9 (see above)522Here's his first game:10 (yeah)-142-22312601401I'm not sure I see the extra determination, unless he's determined to eat dirt.As I said earlier, his pass receiving has actually been fairly effective so far this year (as opposed to last year when he had a lot of catches but NOT much impact). But his running has been below average as it has always been. And the other common misconception is that he only fails when running up the gut. He fails running outside most of the time too.
Afro Samurai
Footballguy
You still haven't explained the difference between running the ball 5 yards and passing the ball for the same amount of yardage. "Running is better" is not a sufficient answer. Just because you keep repeating the same thing over and over, doesn't mean that it makes sense.
As for the other stuff, you come on here acting all confrontational and pissy, make a totally asinine thread, and then you get offended when people call you on it?
Boo hoo hoo, cry me river you ####in' baby.
Holy Schneikes
Footballguy
Do that same calculation for all of the other backs in the league. See what kind of numbers you get.
TheFanatic
Footballguy
And the fact that you still don't get the difference between running and passing the ball in the NFL is absolutely hilarious. I backed up why running is better. Maybe you should re-read the post. Talk about repeating yourself. Oh, and I'm talking about the NFL, not the points your FFB team put up last weekend. And the name calling keeps getting more extreme. Now we're in not being excellent to each other territory. You might want to back off of that before Joe sits you out for a little while. I may have mocked your knowledge of the NFL, and rightfully so with each and every post you make, but I never stooped to name calling. Try it some time....
You still haven't explained the difference between running the ball 5 yards and passing the ball for the same amount of yardage. "Running is better" is not a sufficient answer. Just because you keep repeating the same thing over and over, doesn't mean that it makes sense.
As for the other stuff, you come on here acting all confrontational and pissy, make a totally asinine thread, and then you get offended when people call you on it?
Boo hoo hoo, cry me river you ####in' baby.
Holy Schneikes
Footballguy
Well, for one thing, pass attempt aren't always caught.I'm not 100% sure this is true, but common perception is that running (especially by a "pounder") wears down a defense more than passing.
You still haven't explained the difference between running the ball 5 yards and passing the ball for the same amount of yardage. "Running is better" is not a sufficient answer. Just because you keep repeating the same thing over and over, doesn't mean that it makes sense.
As for the other stuff, you come on here acting all confrontational and pissy, make a totally asinine thread, and then you get offended when people call you on it?
Boo hoo hoo, cry me river you ####in' baby.
He already mentioned the possibility of interceptions. Not to mention the fact that passes in the flat that are intercepted often result in TDs the other way.
Then there is time of possession. Incomplete pass stops the clock, run for 0 yards doesn't.
Other than that, they are exactly the same.
Why doesn't every team pass all of the time? Because it just doesn't work that way.
switz
Footballguy
Outside of Westbrook's 10 and 26 yarder, there wasn't much difference. But that wasn't my point... I was referring to the way they needed to be used. The Eagles use Westbrook off tackle and on the edges, rarely does he run between the tackles. Bush needs to be used the same way... I said a "Brian Westbrook type" - not "as good as Brain Westbrook" - there is a difference.
Afro Samurai
Footballguy
See the Patriots of a few years ago for a good example of a team with almost no running game that still won. Doesn't matter what you do, just as long as you do it really well. Yardage is yardage, and at the end of the day nobody's going to care how you moved the ball, just that you moved the ball.There is obviously some merit to "wearing out the defense", no doubt about that......but the Saints don't have a good running game. The offensive line is terrible and Payton as a play-caller just does not have the right mentality for a "running team". I certainly have problems with this, but I'm also not dumb enough to think it's Reggie Bush's fault.
Now why would I need to do that?
Afro Samurai
Footballguy
No, you just come in here acting like an ### and hoping to start up stuff, so you can whine about it like a little girl later when people call you on it. As if "never stooping to name calling" makes you somehow noble. Give a freaking break. All it does it make you look like a tool.If you're gonna come on here being all confrontational and pissy, you could at least grow some balls and not cry like a little girl when it comes back to bite you in the ###..
Last edited by a moderator:
valhallan
Footballguy
Yep. Could it be that Sean Payton doesn't use his players right and sucks as a playcaller? Oh heavens no!! Not the Coach of the Year!!! It's like people completely forgot about the guy that got stripped of his playcalling duties in New York.
TheFanatic
Footballguy
Seriously, bro. You know they make decaf. Name calling does nothing. It just makes you look foolish. Coming in here and asking all the people that pimp Bush as a great RB the last 2 years and saying that he isn't is not getting pissy or name calling. Repeating yourself and over and over and name calling is a far cry from what I have done here. But here you are again with petty insults. Seriously, try to be an adult and disagree with me with a logical argument and discussion/debate rather than just saying I'm wrong and name calling.
TheFanatic
Footballguy
The Patriots appeared in 4 SB's this decade. In 2001 they ranked 13th in rushing yards per game. In 2003 they ranked 27th. In 2004 they ranked 7th and in 2007 they ranked 13th again. All but one of those appearances was with a team that was in the top half of the league in rushing. Don't mistake having a bunch of seemingly bad runners with not being able to run the ball. They ran the ball just fine for the most part.
So, the lack of a running game is the fault of the play caller? When he calls a run play and gets 2.8 yards/carry from the RB that's his fault? If you want to saddle the problem on management, go with the GM for not drafting/signing someone who can run the ball. But don't blame the coach when a guy just can't get it done. But it's nice to see that at least you agree there is some merit to running the ball. But wearing down the D is only a small part of it, particularly late in a game...
NoFBinLA
Moderator
In your leagues your RBs don't get reception yards?Because in PPR leagues the 15 catches is only 15 points.Whereas the 175 yrds through the air still counts in most leagues - nonppr or ppr.Even in my nonppr league he's a top ten RB. I don't much care where the points come from (though as I don't own him anywhere, I should say 'I wouldn't care....')
Last edited by a moderator:
Holy Schneikes
Footballguy
Because you would likely find that when you cherry pick good games (like games where things were going well and a back got a lot of carries), MOST GUY's stats go up.It's very much like when every year somebody says "When Joe Blow back gets X carries, the team always wins." No, it's more likely that when the team is winning, they are much more likely to run the ball.
Look at DeShaun Foster, that stud. It's easier to look at the inverse (but gives the same insight), so I'll do that. In the 5 games he had less than 15 carries he was sitting at 2.68 YPC. What happens when we remove those games? POOF, he's a magically respectable runner!
Shaun Alexander, who had a terrible season was even worse when he got less than 15 carries (3.25). Take those away, PRESTO - slightly less over the hill!
Rudi Johnson in games where had less than 15 carries last year? 2.24 YPC. Ouch. If only the coaches could have eliminated those games from their memories, he may not have been canned this year!
Ahman Green, had 3.13 in low carry games and 4.0 in high carry games.
Those kind of results are fairly (not perfectly, but fairly) consistent. You take a bad runner (or a guy who had a bad season), you throw out all of the games that weren't going well, and he looks better. And it isn't even that hard to figure out. You take a ball carrier who is consistently putting his team in a hole in the first quarter, and bingo, he tends not to get a lot of carries in that game. Why? Well, the coaches don't like to start at 2nd and 10 for one thing (go figure), and eventually that team NEEDS to pass because they get behind (because the offense isn't moving).
Afro Samurai
Footballguy
You seem like the type that absolutely postively MUST have the last word, so go ahead. I'm done here.Just understand that in the future, when you "call out" a bunch of people (especially when your case is questionable at best) that you're inviting a certain reaction, and that crying about the reaction only makes you look like a whiny little punk,Have a nice day.
Chaka
Footballguy
He is having a great year on both levels.Lots of RBs would have low rushing YPCs if they only carried the ball only 14 & 10 times in a game.His contribution is undeniably top notch for the Saints (and his fantasy owners) after two weeks.
Chaka
Footballguy
It's early and Reggie is doing well. What more point are you looking for?
Chaka
Footballguy
How is him being a triple threat producing ~150 yards and 1 TD per game ordinary?What the heck to people expect from this guy?
Chaka
Footballguy
You're qualifying now. And you are not doing a very good job of it.He is on pace for 620 rushing yards but he is only getting 12 carries per game. Tell the whole story or stop talking ab out it. Reggie is also on pace for 2000 total yards, I think any NFL coach would love that kind of production out of the backfield. The fact that he is also a threat in the return game is an excellent added bonus.
Chaka
Footballguy
11.75 yards per catch on 15 receptions so far.
Chaka
Footballguy
To be fair, Reggie did prove it on the field in college, his draft status and marketability are a direct result of that.
Erin Go Bragh
Footballguy
Not a damn thing. #5 overall in my PPR league.In my receving heavy, return yardage league, he's #2 overall so far behind Cutler (including IDP's).He's a change of pace back and slot receiver all in one on a top offense with a poor defense. Fantasy wise, he will breakout and finish in the top 10 in most leagues at this rate.Even in regular leagues, he's averaging 127 yards from scrimage and a TD per game so far. What the heck is wrong with him?
Maik Jeaunz
Footballguy
- last week he scored the game winning TD on a reception where he had to make a nice effort to get into the endzone.
- this week he returned a punt for a TD that MIGHT have won the game if the Saints had any kind of defense.
- he has over 250 yards froms scrimmage in 2 games, which is more than a lot of RB's that people would put higher.
regardless what you believe, the guy is doing what it takes to try and win games for his team. yet it's WEEK FREAKIN' TWO, and people want to hate on him already. unreal.
- this week he returned a punt for a TD that MIGHT have won the game if the Saints had any kind of defense.
- he has over 250 yards froms scrimmage in 2 games, which is more than a lot of RB's that people would put higher.
regardless what you believe, the guy is doing what it takes to try and win games for his team. yet it's WEEK FREAKIN' TWO, and people want to hate on him already. unreal.
Afro Samurai
Footballguy
I think the problem certain people have with him is that they want to fit him in this nice little "running back" box. But he's not that kind of player. People just need to get used to the fact that he's not a conventional player and appreciate all the amazing things he can do instead of the one thing he can't.I don't care what you call him. Running back, wide receiver, slash, whatever. The point is he's very effective at creating offense and moving the chains and he's clearly the best offensive weapon on his team. I have no earthly idea why some people seem oblivious to that.
Last edited by a moderator:
Chaka
Footballguy
I agree, but I think people also don't like him simply because he went to USC.
Holy Schneikes
Footballguy
Seems to me they ARE being used in almost exactly the same way. Neither of them gets a ton of up the gut carries, but they both get a few here and there. Both get a lot of passes in the flat, both are split out wide to run deeper routes, etc. The real difference is that Westbrook CAN run (outside, inside, whatever), and Bush can't. In general, Westbrook is vastly more productive (because of his running ability).This isn't about playcalling - New Orleans is doing the best they can. It's about Bush and the fact that he can't seem to consistently get any kind of yardage against NFL defenses.switz said:
switz
Footballguy
I think some people like to be different, and then promote themselves for it. How many people were down on Peterson and McFadden as well? They didn't go to USC, but they were largely viewed as the best backs coming out, so some people had to find an argument against them... looking pretty foolish now.Caveat - Even I preferred Lynch to Peterson, due to Lynch's versatility and durability, but I would never argue Peterson was bad at this point. That's as foolish as people arguing Bush stinks, or Maroney is better.Chaka said:
- Status
