How many GM's/Teams would rank... (1 Viewer)

[gdub]

I wonder if these 4 weeks have changed the mind of how NFL teams view these running backs. During the NE/Cincy game yesterday, the announcer(Simms?) mentioned that several teams had Maroney ranked ahead of Bush at the draft. Do you think that "several" has increased to "many" teams if they had to do it all over again. Granted, their respective situations do have some impact on what they have been able to do so far.

 

[Kiddnets]

Both will be very good NFL backs but it looks so far that Maroney will be the better fantasy RB.

I'm sure the Saints could care less about that!

 

[Hendo]

Maroney's play style was tailor-made for the pro's. hes a 1 cut and go runner with size/speed and good hands. thats why many viewed him as the best back available in last years draft if thats what u were looking for a workhorse.

but if your telling me after 4 weeks people would magicaly take Maroney over Bush now i'd say no thats wrong.

there were teams that wanted Maroney, Cowher and Shanahan did i know for a fact i dont know about others tho.

 

[rabidfireweasel]

I heard Ted Sundquist, GM of the Broncos, on WEEI about ten days ago. He said that Maroney was the top back on their board. Dale Arnold said "You had him higher than Bush?" Sundquist backpedalled just a bit but said, roughly, "It comes down to matching your philosophy. I think Reggie Bush is an unbelievable talent, but Maroney's combination of size speed and power is a better match for what we look for in a running back."

 

[Hamstring]

Is Bush even a running back in the NFL? His hype meter is absurd.

 

[-OZ-]

As usual, the Denver GM knows Running Backs.

Not a complete comparison, but this is almost like comparing Barry Sanders to Emmitt Smith. (only lesser, at least for now). Keep in mind of course, that the Patriots line and team is significantly better than New Orleans.

With Bush, the coach will be challenged to discover new ways to utilize his skills. With Maroney, he basically plugs right in to the Patriots system.

 

[gdub]

I agree that philosophy goes a long way in determining who is right for your team. It doesn't surprise me that Cowher and Shanahan had Maroney higher because they prefer a more physical back. I do wonder though if they(Broncos, Steelers) were presented with a top 3 pick and needed a rb if they would have passed on Bush and traded down a little to get Maroney. It seems a lot of these teams see the player against NFL talent first and then say..."We had player "X" ranked higher".

 

[Hendo]

As usual, the Denver GM knows Running Backs. Not a complete comparison, but this is almost like comparing Barry Sanders to Emmitt Smith. (only lesser, at least for now). Keep in mind of course, that the Patriots line and team is significantly better than New Orleans. With Bush, the coach will be challenged to discover new ways to utilize his skills. With Maroney, he basically plugs right in to the Patriots system.

thats the hidden question right there tho. Maroney not only went to a better team from top to bottom but he also went to a team that he best matched up well system wise. he basicaly couldnt of gone to a better place then where he ended up. add that to his talent skills and it was painfully obvious to me come this years FF drafts.

 

[rabidfireweasel]

I agree that philosophy goes a long way in determining who is right for your team. It doesn't surprise me that Cowher and Shanahan had Maroney higher because they prefer a more physical back. I do wonder though if they(Broncos, Steelers) were presented with a top 3 pick and needed a rb if they would have passed on Bush and traded down a little to get Maroney. It seems a lot of these teams see the player against NFL talent first and then say..."We had player "X" ranked higher".

Another thing Sundquist said (roughly): We have studied the rb position extensively. When we draft a rb, we would like one that can get 20 carries a game, stay strong not only throughout the game, but throughout the season. We have found that bigger backs- by bigger I mean 215-225, have a much better chance at sustained success.Sorry- no link. It was on WEEI the Friday Sept. 22 in the AM.

 

[GregR_2]

I heard Ted Sundquist, GM of the Broncos, on WEEI about ten days ago. He said that Maroney was the top back on their board. Dale Arnold said "You had him higher than Bush?" Sundquist backpedalled just a bit but said, roughly, "It comes down to matching your philosophy. I think Reggie Bush is an unbelievable talent, but Maroney's combination of size speed and power is a better match for what we look for in a running back."

I think this is very true, and I think it's a significant and often overlooked part of the Texans passing on Bush. Bush is a talent but his running style doesn't suit the running system that Kubiak employs. Part of the system is based on hitting the gap running downhill at full speed to force linebackers to commit to a single gap.Tell Bush to do this and you're taking away part of what makes him special. I still think I'd have taken Bush if I was the Texans, and found ways to use him in space.But as far as pure running within the scheme goes, Maroney would have been a better fit for the Texans than Bush would have.

 

[Kleck.]

How many minutes did it take for the Saints to sell out their season tickets?

It's like the Mike Vick effect. People will come just to see him play.

 

[baronson]

there is no way any team with even a snowballs chance in hell would have taken any RB over Bush. that is downright absurd to even consider that.

i can see people making an argument to take mario, or vince young over Bush, sure. different positions & different needs. but no GM in his right mind would have been the guy to pass on the biggest stud prospect in recent college football history for another guy at the same position.

there is a reason Bush went #2 and everyone screamed at Houston. there's also a reason Maroney went late 1st round. Bush is special.

having said that, i think Maroney at this point is the better *fantasy* back, but Bush is the more talented, versatile guy. anyone that says they had any RB listed over Bush on their "board" is lying. hell, Bush didn't even work out for 75% of the teams outside the top 5...

this thread is stupid. - EDIT - sorry. that was harsh. the notion is stupid, but i suppose the thread has merit.

 

[jon_mx]

I wonder if these 4 weeks have changed the mind of how NFL teams view these running backs. During the NE/Cincy game yesterday, the announcer(Simms?) mentioned that several teams had Maroney ranked ahead of Bush at the draft. Do you think that "several" has increased to "many" teams if they had to do it all over again. Granted, their respective situations do have some impact on what they have been able to do so far.

Draft day, I thought Maroney was going to fall to the Colts. Imagine Maroney in the Colts offense.

 

[GDogg]

I wonder if these 4 weeks have changed the mind of how NFL teams view these running backs. During the NE/Cincy game yesterday, the announcer(Simms?) mentioned that several teams had Maroney ranked ahead of Bush at the draft. Do you think that "several" has increased to "many" teams if they had to do it all over again. Granted, their respective situations do have some impact on what they have been able to do so far.

Draft day, I thought Maroney was going to fall to the Colts. Imagine Maroney in the Colts offense.

The Colts were on the phone with Maurice Drew two picks prior to drafting Joseph Addai. They thought Addai was about to be taken, and told Maurice to get ready because there was a very good chance he would be a Colt. Addai slipped to the Colts and Maurice Drew slipped out of the first round to Jacksonville.

 

[My Hope Street Alias]

I'd heard that the Colts wanted Maroney badly and that they had to "settle" for Addai. Anyone know what teams thought highly of Addai?

 

[rabidfireweasel]

there is no way any team with even a snowballs chance in hell would have taken any RB over Bush. that is downright absurd to even consider that.i can see people making an argument to take mario, or vince young over Bush, sure. different positions & different needs. but no GM in his right mind would have been the guy to pass on the biggest stud prospect in recent college football history for another guy at the same position.there is a reason Bush went #2 and everyone screamed at Houston. there's also a reason Maroney went late 1st round. Bush is special.having said that, i think Maroney at this point is the better *fantasy* back, but Bush is the more talented, versatile guy. anyone that says they had any RB listed over Bush on their "board" is lying. hell, Bush didn't even work out for 75% of the teams outside the top 5...this thread is stupid. - EDIT - sorry. that was harsh. the notion is stupid, but i suppose the thread has merit.

I would disagee. I believe Sundquist. If you have a philosophy, and you believe in it, you take players to match your philosophy. The Patriots have carried a pounding big back in their current run: Smith, Dillon, and the future is Maroney. They would run the ball, even when they had a low aypc. Perhaps no one would have picked Maroney at #2 (they would trade back), but I think that some teams would prefer Maroney to Bush. Why does that seem inconceivable.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

I heard Ted Sundquist, GM of the Broncos, on WEEI about ten days ago. He said that Maroney was the top back on their board. Dale Arnold said "You had him higher than Bush?" Sundquist backpedalled just a bit but said, roughly, "It comes down to matching your philosophy. I think Reggie Bush is an unbelievable talent, but Maroney's combination of size speed and power is a better match for what we look for in a running back."

So why didn't they take him over Cutler?

 

[Ministry of Pain]

How many minutes did it take for the Saints to sell out their season tickets?

2

 

[Hamstring]

Reggie Bush and myself have the same amount of tds this year. He also has one more fumble than I do.

 

[rabidfireweasel]

I heard Ted Sundquist, GM of the Broncos, on WEEI about ten days ago. He said that Maroney was the top back on their board. Dale Arnold said "You had him higher than Bush?" Sundquist backpedalled just a bit but said, roughly, "It comes down to matching your philosophy. I think Reggie Bush is an unbelievable talent, but Maroney's combination of size speed and power is a better match for what we look for in a running back."

So why didn't they take him over Cutler?

How is that relavent? Just because they have a player rated #1 at his position doesn't mean they have to draft him. There are about 15 top players at a position a year. If you look at the draft, usually teams prefer to draft the top QB on the board before the top rb. Sunquist said Cutler was their top QB on the board. He said that they were blown away by Cutler's intelligence, competitiveness, and athleticism. They really liked his ability to roll out and throw with velocity and accuracy. I also believe that they think they can get a very good rb without spending a first round pick.

 

[-OZ-]

I heard Ted Sundquist, GM of the Broncos, on WEEI about ten days ago. He said that Maroney was the top back on their board. Dale Arnold said "You had him higher than Bush?" Sundquist backpedalled just a bit but said, roughly, "It comes down to matching your philosophy. I think Reggie Bush is an unbelievable talent, but Maroney's combination of size speed and power is a better match for what we look for in a running back."

So why didn't they take him over Cutler?

How is that relavent? Just because they have a player rated #1 at his position doesn't mean they have to draft him. There are about 15 top players at a position a year. If you look at the draft, usually teams prefer to draft the top QB on the board before the top rb. Sunquist said Cutler was their top QB on the board. He said that they were blown away by Cutler's intelligence, competitiveness, and athleticism. They really liked his ability to roll out and throw with velocity and accuracy. I also believe that they think they can get a very good rb without spending a first round pick.

I also believe they've proven this. Mangold was ranked the #1 Center, why did he slip to the end of the 1st? (same reason as Denver had for not taking Maroney)

 

[baronson]

there is no way any team with even a snowballs chance in hell would have taken any RB over Bush. that is downright absurd to even consider that.i can see people making an argument to take mario, or vince young over Bush, sure. different positions & different needs. but no GM in his right mind would have been the guy to pass on the biggest stud prospect in recent college football history for another guy at the same position.there is a reason Bush went #2 and everyone screamed at Houston. there's also a reason Maroney went late 1st round. Bush is special.having said that, i think Maroney at this point is the better *fantasy* back, but Bush is the more talented, versatile guy. anyone that says they had any RB listed over Bush on their "board" is lying. hell, Bush didn't even work out for 75% of the teams outside the top 5...this thread is stupid. - EDIT - sorry. that was harsh. the notion is stupid, but i suppose the thread has merit.

I would disagee. I believe Sundquist. If you have a philosophy, and you believe in it, you take players to match your philosophy. The Patriots have carried a pounding big back in their current run: Smith, Dillon, and the future is Maroney. They would run the ball, even when they had a low aypc. Perhaps no one would have picked Maroney at #2 (they would trade back), but I think that some teams would prefer Maroney to Bush. Why does that seem inconceivable.

it's inconceivable because Bush was a RB coming out, same as Maroney. if he doesn't fit your philosophy, then you find a place where he does fit - sort of like the way N.O. has opted to "fit him in." he's too talented. he's a game-breaker/changer/maker. Maroney is not a guy the defense fears every time his hands are on the ball, and never will be. sure, he can make big plays, but so can half the league. Bush can make a big play at any point in the game, which is why he's on a completely different level.any team that would put the philosophy over taking a potential Michael Jordan, would NOT take a guy at the same position instead. which is why there is no way anyone had any RBs above Bush on their board. they simply would have never pulled the trigger on the other guy (in this case Maroney) if given the choice between the two on draft day.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

I heard Ted Sundquist, GM of the Broncos, on WEEI about ten days ago. He said that Maroney was the top back on their board. Dale Arnold said "You had him higher than Bush?" Sundquist backpedalled just a bit but said, roughly, "It comes down to matching your philosophy. I think Reggie Bush is an unbelievable talent, but Maroney's combination of size speed and power is a better match for what we look for in a running back."

So why didn't they take him over Cutler?

How is that relavent? Just because they have a player rated #1 at his position doesn't mean they have to draft him. There are about 15 top players at a position a year. If you look at the draft, usually teams prefer to draft the top QB on the board before the top rb. Sunquist said Cutler was their top QB on the board. He said that they were blown away by Cutler's intelligence, competitiveness, and athleticism. They really liked his ability to roll out and throw with velocity and accuracy. I also believe that they think they can get a very good rb without spending a first round pick.

Hey RFW, I was not doubting what you said in any way...I almost took down that post cause it didn't tell what I was trying to get across. My point was Plummer can lead them far if the rest of the team is pretty good. Their defense is great and they have a shutdown corner that takes half the field away and allows for Lynch to roam around the other half or play the run. If they though that highly of Maroney they should have taken him as he could have helped them win this season. Did Denver win 2 SB because of Elway or Terrell Davis? Probably both but Davis and that running game made life easy for Elway and crew. I'm just saying I think they made a mistake. Cutler may very well be their QB for the next 10-12 years but I'll take a SB run over what we might do 3-5 seasons down the road.

 

[rabidfireweasel]

there is no way any team with even a snowballs chance in hell would have taken any RB over Bush. that is downright absurd to even consider that.i can see people making an argument to take mario, or vince young over Bush, sure. different positions & different needs. but no GM in his right mind would have been the guy to pass on the biggest stud prospect in recent college football history for another guy at the same position.there is a reason Bush went #2 and everyone screamed at Houston. there's also a reason Maroney went late 1st round. Bush is special.having said that, i think Maroney at this point is the better *fantasy* back, but Bush is the more talented, versatile guy. anyone that says they had any RB listed over Bush on their "board" is lying. hell, Bush didn't even work out for 75% of the teams outside the top 5...this thread is stupid. - EDIT - sorry. that was harsh. the notion is stupid, but i suppose the thread has merit.

I would disagee. I believe Sundquist. If you have a philosophy, and you believe in it, you take players to match your philosophy. The Patriots have carried a pounding big back in their current run: Smith, Dillon, and the future is Maroney. They would run the ball, even when they had a low aypc. Perhaps no one would have picked Maroney at #2 (they would trade back), but I think that some teams would prefer Maroney to Bush. Why does that seem inconceivable.

it's inconceivable because Bush was a RB coming out, same as Maroney. if he doesn't fit your philosophy, then you find a place where he does fit - sort of like the way N.O. has opted to "fit him in." he's too talented. he's a game-breaker/changer/maker. Maroney is not a guy the defense fears every time his hands are on the ball, and never will be. sure, he can make big plays, but so can half the league. Bush can make a big play at any point in the game, which is why he's on a completely different level.any team that would put the philosophy over taking a potential Michael Jordan, would NOT take a guy at the same position instead. which is why there is no way anyone had any RBs above Bush on their board. they simply would have never pulled the trigger on the other guy (in this case Maroney) if given the choice between the two on draft day.

I guess we will just disagree. I would guss you haven't seen that much of Maroney as a pro, as he has had several big plays already.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

32.00

 

[baronson]

there is no way any team with even a snowballs chance in hell would have taken any RB over Bush. that is downright absurd to even consider that.i can see people making an argument to take mario, or vince young over Bush, sure. different positions & different needs. but no GM in his right mind would have been the guy to pass on the biggest stud prospect in recent college football history for another guy at the same position.there is a reason Bush went #2 and everyone screamed at Houston. there's also a reason Maroney went late 1st round. Bush is special.having said that, i think Maroney at this point is the better *fantasy* back, but Bush is the more talented, versatile guy. anyone that says they had any RB listed over Bush on their "board" is lying. hell, Bush didn't even work out for 75% of the teams outside the top 5...this thread is stupid. - EDIT - sorry. that was harsh. the notion is stupid, but i suppose the thread has merit.

I would disagee. I believe Sundquist. If you have a philosophy, and you believe in it, you take players to match your philosophy. The Patriots have carried a pounding big back in their current run: Smith, Dillon, and the future is Maroney. They would run the ball, even when they had a low aypc. Perhaps no one would have picked Maroney at #2 (they would trade back), but I think that some teams would prefer Maroney to Bush. Why does that seem inconceivable.

it's inconceivable because Bush was a RB coming out, same as Maroney. if he doesn't fit your philosophy, then you find a place where he does fit - sort of like the way N.O. has opted to "fit him in." he's too talented. he's a game-breaker/changer/maker. Maroney is not a guy the defense fears every time his hands are on the ball, and never will be. sure, he can make big plays, but so can half the league. Bush can make a big play at any point in the game, which is why he's on a completely different level.any team that would put the philosophy over taking a potential Michael Jordan, would NOT take a guy at the same position instead. which is why there is no way anyone had any RBs above Bush on their board. they simply would have never pulled the trigger on the other guy (in this case Maroney) if given the choice between the two on draft day.

I guess we will just disagree. I would guss you haven't seen that much of Maroney as a pro, as he has had several big plays already.

as a matter of fact, i've seen all but 2 quarters of Pats football so far this year. and yes, he's had several big plays. i freely said that he has had some.you're obviously still missing my point. Bush = game changer. Maroney = gamer. they're on completely different levels of physical ability.

 

[SSOG]

I agree that philosophy goes a long way in determining who is right for your team. It doesn't surprise me that Cowher and Shanahan had Maroney higher because they prefer a more physical back. I do wonder though if they(Broncos, Steelers) were presented with a top 3 pick and needed a rb if they would have passed on Bush and traded down a little to get Maroney. It seems a lot of these teams see the player against NFL talent first and then say..."We had player "X" ranked higher".

The Broncos aren't jumping on Maroney's bandwagon. Shanahan said immediately after the draft that he thought that, in a couple of years, Maroney would be the best RB in the entire NFL.

there is no way any team with even a snowballs chance in hell would have taken any RB over Bush. that is downright absurd to even consider that.i can see people making an argument to take mario, or vince young over Bush, sure. different positions & different needs. but no GM in his right mind would have been the guy to pass on the biggest stud prospect in recent college football history for another guy at the same position.there is a reason Bush went #2 and everyone screamed at Houston. there's also a reason Maroney went late 1st round. Bush is special.having said that, i think Maroney at this point is the better *fantasy* back, but Bush is the more talented, versatile guy. anyone that says they had any RB listed over Bush on their "board" is lying. hell, Bush didn't even work out for 75% of the teams outside the top 5...this thread is stupid. - EDIT - sorry. that was harsh. the notion is stupid, but i suppose the thread has merit.

I agree that no team would have taken Maroney over Bush, but just because of the market value differential. To make a fantasy football comparison... you could have thought that Rex Grossman was going to be the best fantasy QB in the league, but you wouldn't have drafted him in the second round because his market value was so much lower. You could have drafted anybody in the second round and then traded that player for Grossman *AND CHANGE* a day after the draft.It's the same thing with Reggie Bush. Several teams most certainly *DID* like Maroney more than Bush, and would have taken Maroney if it was just a choice between Maroney or Bush... but it wasn't. Once you throw in the idea of market values, Bush became the easy favorite, because a team could have selected Bush and then traded him for Maroney *AND CHANGE*. Or they could have traded down from the top pick to the middle of the first round, still landed Maroney, and gotten extra picks in the process.This isn't to say that people out there didn't believe that Maroney was better than Bush. And as for your claims that Bush is a "special player"... try comparing his ypc to Maroney's sometime. Maroney's a pretty "special player", too.

I heard Ted Sundquist, GM of the Broncos, on WEEI about ten days ago. He said that Maroney was the top back on their board. Dale Arnold said "You had him higher than Bush?" Sundquist backpedalled just a bit but said, roughly, "It comes down to matching your philosophy. I think Reggie Bush is an unbelievable talent, but Maroney's combination of size speed and power is a better match for what we look for in a running back."

So why didn't they take him over Cutler?

Again, it's a question of market demands. A QB of Cutler's quality never falls below 11th. An RB of Maroney's caliber frequently falls to late in the first or even in the second (see Maroney, or Portis, etc). Shanahan had never before drafted higher than 15th. As a result, Shanny had one chance at a Cutler-type, and lots of shots to land a Maroney-type. It was a no-brainer decision to get Cutler.It's not like Denver's running game has been suffering from a lack of production, here.

I heard Ted Sundquist, GM of the Broncos, on WEEI about ten days ago. He said that Maroney was the top back on their board. Dale Arnold said "You had him higher than Bush?" Sundquist backpedalled just a bit but said, roughly, "It comes down to matching your philosophy. I think Reggie Bush is an unbelievable talent, but Maroney's combination of size speed and power is a better match for what we look for in a running back."

So why didn't they take him over Cutler?

How is that relavent? Just because they have a player rated #1 at his position doesn't mean they have to draft him. There are about 15 top players at a position a year. If you look at the draft, usually teams prefer to draft the top QB on the board before the top rb. Sunquist said Cutler was their top QB on the board. He said that they were blown away by Cutler's intelligence, competitiveness, and athleticism. They really liked his ability to roll out and throw with velocity and accuracy. I also believe that they think they can get a very good rb without spending a first round pick.

Hey RFW, I was not doubting what you said in any way...I almost took down that post cause it didn't tell what I was trying to get across. My point was Plummer can lead them far if the rest of the team is pretty good. Their defense is great and they have a shutdown corner that takes half the field away and allows for Lynch to roam around the other half or play the run. If they though that highly of Maroney they should have taken him as he could have helped them win this season. Did Denver win 2 SB because of Elway or Terrell Davis? Probably both but Davis and that running game made life easy for Elway and crew. I'm just saying I think they made a mistake. Cutler may very well be their QB for the next 10-12 years but I'll take a SB run over what we might do 3-5 seasons down the road.

Again, let's look at it this way. Maroney would have been a big upgrade at RB for Denver, just like Portis was a big upgrade at RB... but Denver ran the ball as well last season as they ever did with Portis. If you can run for 2,000 yards without Maroney, he's not really that pressing of a need.Also, you always hear teams talk about taking the "best player available", but very few teams actually do. Denver is one of those teams. They've had one losing season under Shanahan, and a large reason why is because they draft BPA rather than for need. Reaching based on perceived need is a great way to ensure a bad draft, especially because your needs change so dramatically from season to season.Denver taking Cutler was sort of like the FBG philosophy of "letting the draft come to you". They let the draft come to them, grabbed the best player they could get regardless of what their need was, and then stood confident that they would be set for a while.As a comparison... imagine it's the offseason, and you have a dynasty team with Tomlinson, LJ, Shaun Alexander, and Clinton Portis. Your QBs are pretty sucky, with Chad Pennington, Rex Grossman, Charlie Frye, and J.P. Losman... and that's it. Do you use your #1 overall rookie draft pick based on need and grab a Matt Leinart, or do you say "screw this, I'm getting the best player available" and grab Bush or Maroney?

 

[Tommy Collins]

I wonder if these 4 weeks have changed the mind of how NFL teams view these running backs. During the NE/Cincy game yesterday, the announcer(Simms?) mentioned that several teams had Maroney ranked ahead of Bush at the draft. Do you think that "several" has increased to "many" teams if they had to do it all over again. Granted, their respective situations do have some impact on what they have been able to do so far.

I had Maroney ranked as the #1 RB from the beginning of the season...

 

[icehouse]

there is no way any team with even a snowballs chance in hell would have taken any RB over Bush. that is downright absurd to even consider that.i can see people making an argument to take mario, or vince young over Bush, sure. different positions & different needs. but no GM in his right mind would have been the guy to pass on the biggest stud prospect in recent college football history for another guy at the same position.there is a reason Bush went #2 and everyone screamed at Houston. there's also a reason Maroney went late 1st round. Bush is special.having said that, i think Maroney at this point is the better *fantasy* back, but Bush is the more talented, versatile guy. anyone that says they had any RB listed over Bush on their "board" is lying. hell, Bush didn't even work out for 75% of the teams outside the top 5...this thread is stupid. - EDIT - sorry. that was harsh. the notion is stupid, but i suppose the thread has merit.

I would disagee. I believe Sundquist. If you have a philosophy, and you believe in it, you take players to match your philosophy. The Patriots have carried a pounding big back in their current run: Smith, Dillon, and the future is Maroney. They would run the ball, even when they had a low aypc. Perhaps no one would have picked Maroney at #2 (they would trade back), but I think that some teams would prefer Maroney to Bush. Why does that seem inconceivable.

it's inconceivable because Bush was a RB coming out, same as Maroney. if he doesn't fit your philosophy, then you find a place where he does fit - sort of like the way N.O. has opted to "fit him in." he's too talented. he's a game-breaker/changer/maker. Maroney is not a guy the defense fears every time his hands are on the ball, and never will be. sure, he can make big plays, but so can half the league. Bush can make a big play at any point in the game, which is why he's on a completely different level.any team that would put the philosophy over taking a potential Michael Jordan, would NOT take a guy at the same position instead. which is why there is no way anyone had any RBs above Bush on their board. they simply would have never pulled the trigger on the other guy (in this case Maroney) if given the choice between the two on draft day.

Please never compare Bush to Jordan again in life. MJ was dominating from day 1. Bush has yet to dominate a single game. Bush has contributed to the Saints offense but hasn't made too many game-breaking plays as of yet.

 

[Da Guru]

Bush will be like Mike Vick....decent players but not woth the hype or $$$$.

 

[SSOG]

Bush will be like Mike Vick....decent players but not woth the hype or $$$$.

I've posted it in several other threads, but I definitely agree. Reggie Bush is the highest paid RB in the entire NFL. In order for him to live up to his contract, he's going to need to PRODUCE like the best RB in the entire NFL. He could be a pro-bowl RB and still not be worth the $$$$.

 

[baronson]

i'm sorry, as a Maroney owner (keeper) and a Bush loather, i have been referring to draft day value. they don't compare. and when you watch them with the ball, they still don't.

i LOVE maroney, seriously i do. i think he's nasty. i just think Bush is ridiculous (aka better... much better).

 

[ThePittbully]

The colts had maroney as their top back, supposedly the GM threw a phone across the room when the patriots took him just before them

 

[Englishteacher]

anyone remember shanny saying Kevan Barlow as the best back in the draft when he came out?

everything having been said, I believe Bush carries tremendous value as a WR

 

[-OZ-]

any team that would put the philosophy over taking a potential Michael Jordan, would NOT take a guy at the same position instead. which is why there is no way anyone had any RBs above Bush on their board. they simply would have never pulled the trigger on the other guy (in this case Maroney) if given the choice between the two on draft day.

Please never compare Bush to Jordan again in life. MJ was dominating from day 1. Bush has yet to dominate a single game. Bush has contributed to the Saints offense but hasn't made too many game-breaking plays as of yet.

I won't get into the arguments of how MJ didn't "dominate" immediately, or how football is much different than the NBA, but simply say you're missing his point.

 

[Spike]

As usual, the Denver GM knows Running Backs.

Not a complete comparison, but this is almost like comparing Barry Sanders to Emmitt Smith. (only lesser, at least for now). Keep in mind of course, that the Patriots line and team is significantly better than New Orleans.

With Bush, the coach will be challenged to discover new ways to utilize his skills. With Maroney, he basically plugs right in to the Patriots system.

thats the hidden question right there tho. Maroney not only went to a better team from top to bottom but he also went to a team that he best matched up well system wise. he basicaly couldnt of gone to a better place then where he ended up.add that to his talent skills and it was painfully obvious to me come this years FF drafts.

What about DeAngelo Williams to the Carolina Panthers?

 

[djcolts]

The colts had maroney as their top back, supposedly the GM threw a phone across the room when the patriots took him just before them

The Pats picked at #21. The Colts picked at #30. He may have thrown a phone, but the Colts had no chance at getting Maroney.