If Bush was the next Barry, but Mario was the next (1 Viewer)

[JAA]

Edit: Changed from Freeney to Strahan

So everyone thinks Bush will be the next Barry Sanders / Gale Sayers. Lets say we knew for a fact Bush would be as good of a RB than Barry. However, lets also say we knew Mario would be as good as Mike Strahan. Who should Hou take?

Barry Sanders made 1 playoff appearance during his Det tenure. While he electrified, he didnt turn that franchise around into a contender.

We dont know exactly how much of an impact Strahan has had on the Giants. One could argue the Giants would be just as good w/o him. We cant know for sure.

However, with the current Hou team, the difference from Barry Sanders to Dom Davis would be a lot less than the difference from Strahan to (whomever).

In the end, this discussion is really about who would be more of an impact player for the Texans? Rookie Barry Sanders or Rookie Mike Strahan?

 

[fridayfrenzy]

Bush is a lot more marketable than Williams

 

[JAA]

Bush is a lot more marketable than Williams

I wasnt talking about marketability. I was talking about winning football games, but I do see your point.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

In the end, this discussion is really about who would be more of an impact player for the Texans? Rookie Barry Sanders or Rookie Dwight Freeney?

You're saying who'd have the bigger impact for this year, or over the course of their careers?Either way it's Barry Sanders and it's not even close.

 

[JAA]

In the end, this discussion is really about who would be more of an impact player for the Texans?  Rookie Barry Sanders or Rookie Dwight Freeney?

You're saying who'd have the bigger impact for this year, or over the course of their careers?Either way it's Barry Sanders and it's not even close.

Other than numbers, what did Barry do? Was he a leader? Was he able to carry the team?

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Other than numbers, what did Barry do? Was he a leader? Was he able to carry the team?

What has Peppers done? The Panthers of today are infinitely more talented than any team that the Lions had with Barry.Without Barry, the Lions teams he played for are consistent 1-3 win teams.

Take Peppers of the Carolina roster and they're still a playoff contender.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

Dwight Freeney is a relentless pass rusher (particularly at home) but he isn't in the same zip code as Barry Sanders. Now if you made it Lawrence Taylor vs. Barry Sanders you'd have quite a debate.

 

[-OZ-]

Other than numbers, what did Barry do? Was he a leader? Was he able to carry the team?

What has Peppers done? The Panthers of today are infinitely more talented than any team that the Lions had with Barry.Without Barry, the Lions teams he played for are consistent 1-3 win teams.

Take Peppers of the Carolina roster and they're still a playoff contender.

Andy pretty much takes this one, except that when Barry left, Detroit was a .500 team. with Greg Hill as the RB. FWIW, this was a 3 game improvement from the previous year. I'll take Barry over Freeney, but the "1-3 win teams" is a bit much.

Still, Indy without Freeney wouldn't be too much worse than they are now.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Other than numbers, what did Barry do?  Was he a leader?  Was he able to carry the team?

What has Peppers done? The Panthers of today are infinitely more talented than any team that the Lions had with Barry.Without Barry, the Lions teams he played for are consistent 1-3 win teams.

Take Peppers of the Carolina roster and they're still a playoff contender.

Andy pretty much takes this one, except that when Barry left, Detroit was a .500 team. with Greg Hill as the RB. FWIW, this was a 3 game improvement from the previous year. I'll take Barry over Freeney, but the "1-3 win teams" is a bit much.

Still, Indy without Freeney wouldn't be too much worse than they are now.

What's interesting is how I switched from Peppers to Freeney.And yes, the 1-3 wins thing was hyperbole.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Change Freeney to Strahan and it's more interesting.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

I'm voting for the concept of "one of the best DEs of all time vs one of the best RBs of all time" and ignoring the actual names you used.

I'll take DE.

 

[thayman]

I voted that you have to take the next great RB. Not necissarily the smartest pure football decision, but if the Texans passed on Bush for Mario, they would be absolutly crucified by fans. And if your drafting on BPA, you have to take Reggie

 

[GregR_2]

Change Freeney to Strahan and it's more interesting.

Make it Reggie White and it's interesting.

 

[Pat Patriot]

In the end, this discussion is really about who would be more of an impact player for the Texans?  Rookie Barry Sanders or Rookie Dwight Freeney?

You're saying who'd have the bigger impact for this year, or over the course of their careers?Either way it's Barry Sanders and it's not even close.

Dwight Freeney is a bad example. I saw someone online doing a Mock Draft of all available NFL players and he had Freeney in the top 3. I dont get the love. He has done NOTHING in any playoff games. That tells me that he is too easy to gameplan against.Freeney is good but his name should not be mentioned in any analogy involving Barry Sanders.

 

[T Man]

Change Freeney to Strahan and it's more interesting.

Make it Reggie White and it's interesting.

I sense the gist of the post is if we knew Bush would end up being a top 5 RB of all time and we know Williams would be a top 5 DE of all time, who would you take if your Houston?

THe answer is simple -- take the DE. Good and even great RBs are easier to find then DEs. And, Houston already has DD.

 

[Mike]

Change Freeney to Strahan and it's more interesting.

My thoughts exactly, and I'd take Strahan.

 

[JAA]

I'm voting for the concept of "one of the best DEs of all time vs one of the best RBs of all time" and ignoring the actual names you used.

I'll take DE.

 

[JAA]

fixed

 

[Noahs Troopers]

LOL.

Vote Bush, sorry but I'd take Barry over Dwight anyday and twice on sundays.

Now if you said Mario would be the next Reggie White or Bruce Smith then I'd have to think alot more about that one.

 

[Despyzer]

Other than numbers, what did Barry do? Was he a leader? Was he able to carry the team?

I'm going to take a guess.... Cowboys fan?

 

[Noahs Troopers]

Other than numbers, what did Barry do?  Was he a leader?  Was he able to carry the team?

I'm going to take a guess.... Cowboys fan?

Doesn't seem like a Cowboy fan, but a fan of Fishing.

 

[The Man Who Met Andy Griffith]

Other than numbers, what did Barry do?  Was he a leader?  Was he able to carry the team?

I'm going to take a guess.... Cowboys fan?

Must be new around here. JAA is an Iggles fan.Regardless, his questions are valid (I am a Lions fan). Barry is one of the best athletes to ever put on cleats, but he wasn't a leader. I certainly don't blame him for the Lions' ineptitude, but if I am a Texans fan I do not want my team to resemble the Lions of the 1990's.

That said, when comparing Bush to Barry people should focus on the physical skills, not the leadership. Barry was unusually introverted.

 

[Scorehoard]

how could Barry lead when the other 51 guys would be LUCKY to start elsewhere. He had a horrid supporting cast!!! Put Barry on a good team and the would have been a runaway train... He's one of the best of all time rushing for one of the worst of all times. What would we call him if on a REAL team?? Someone do this for me.... Out of all the great running backs ever to play the game, give me their team's record during that player's tenure. Guarentee Barry's is the worst!! Put Barry Sanders on the Cowboys and Emmit on the Lions. What happens?? Reggie's in a similar situation as Barry barring the Texans draft him. Mario is a no go for me. Peppers out of college is hands down better and more developed AND played basketball. FREAK

 

[Jason Wood]

No offense, but Freeney and Strahan?

Perhaps if this poll said Bruce Smith or Reggie White, it would be more even.

 

[Despyzer]

Barry Sanders made 1 playoff appearance during his Det tenure. While he electrified, he didnt turn that franchise around into a contender.

Just for the sake of accuracy, Sanders' "tenure" was from 1989-1998. They won their division in 1991 (12-4) and 1993 (10-6) and also made the playoffs in '94, '95, and '97. They were in the postseason half of the seasons he was there.

 

[JAA]

Barry Sanders made 1 playoff appearance during his Det tenure.  While he electrified, he didnt turn that franchise around into a contender.

Just for the sake of accuracy, Sanders' "tenure" was from 1989-1998. They won their division in 1991 (12-4) and 1993 (10-6) and also made the playoffs in '94, '95, and '97. They were in the postseason half of the seasons he was there.

I guess I had my facts wrong ... was it 1 playoff win?

 

[Despyzer]

Barry Sanders made 1 playoff appearance during his Det tenure. While he electrified, he didnt turn that franchise around into a contender.

Just for the sake of accuracy, Sanders' "tenure" was from 1989-1998. They won their division in 1991 (12-4) and 1993 (10-6) and also made the playoffs in '94, '95, and '97. They were in the postseason half of the seasons he was there.

I guess I had my facts wrong ... was it 1 playoff win?

Yes, there was only one playoff win. Detroit smoked Dallas 38-6 in '91.

 

[matuski]

In the end, this discussion is really about who would be more of an impact player for the Texans?  Rookie Barry Sanders or Rookie Dwight Freeney?

You're saying who'd have the bigger impact for this year, or over the course of their careers?Either way it's Barry Sanders and it's not even close.

Other than numbers, what did Barry do? Was he a leader? Was he able to carry the team?

Give me a break. According to his teammates he was a great leader, by example. Also, what position other than QB is able to "carry" a team? Football is the greatest sport out there for the very reason it requires a good TEAM, Barry never had that... making yours a ridiculous question.

If ever a non-QB could take credit for the good that happened to his team, Barry would have to rank at the top that short list.

 

[ExaltedOne]

Even if Mario ends up a 12+ sack a year guy, your fans will still be pissed when Bush racks up 200+ total yards against you.

Take a defensive end in the second. Hali and Kiwi will still be there.

 

[trader jake]

Change Freeney to Strahan and it's more interesting.

Make it Reggie White and it's interesting.

interesting? make it reggie white and i laugh at anyone who votes for barry sanders. no disrespect to barry, but there are very few players that i would take over reggie white in an all-time draft...maybe noone actually

 

[Texasmouth]

I'll take Barry over Strahan anyday. The Detroit team he carried was far worse than the one Strahan was/is on.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Reggie White > Barry Sanders > Michael Strahan > Dwight Freeney

 

[Texasmouth]

Reggie White > Barry Sanders > Michael Strahan > Dwight Freeney

This is a weak argument. Sure, Reggie White was dominant but he was dominant on a really good team in Green Bay and in Philly. Take Barry off of the craptastic Lions and put him on the Dallas Cowboys of the 90's. Barry would have redefined the running back position even further and there would be zero records without Barry's name on them. Barry was that great on horrible teams. Barry was the only thing the Lions had on those teams. He made his receivers look good because you could never double cover them, there always had to be another person in the box to cover Barry.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Reggie White > Barry Sanders > Michael Strahan > Dwight Freeney

This is a weak argument.

I didn't make an argument. I simply revealed the truth in all its glory.I love Barry and believe he's generally underrated; but I think the difference between Barry and a merely adequate RB, in terms of its effect on a game, is smaller than the difference between Reggie White and a merely adequate DE.

 

[Texasmouth]

Reggie White > Barry Sanders > Michael Strahan > Dwight Freeney

This is a weak argument.

I didn't make an argument. I simply revealed the truth in all its glory.I love Barry and believe he's generally underrated; but I think the difference between Barry and a merely adequate RB, in terms of its effect on a game, is smaller than the difference between Reggie White and a merely adequate DE.

Now that is a good one. So a team would be just as good with say.....Curtis Enis as it is with Barry Sanders but a team with a nobody at defensive end wouldn't be as good as a team with Reggie White?

That is laughable. You must be a Green Bay homer or something because it is clouding your judgement.

 

[trader jake]

Reggie White > Barry Sanders > Michael Strahan > Dwight Freeney

This is a weak argument.

I didn't make an argument. I simply revealed the truth in all its glory.I love Barry and believe he's generally underrated; but I think the difference between Barry and a merely adequate RB, in terms of its effect on a game, is smaller than the difference between Reggie White and a merely adequate DE.

Now that is a good one. So a team would be just as good with say.....Curtis Enis as it is with Barry Sanders but a team with a nobody at defensive end wouldn't be as good as a team with Reggie White?

That is laughable. You must be a Green Bay homer or something because it is clouding your judgement.

when did curtis enis become an "adequate starting RB"tremblay is a chargers honk...he never got on the bandwagon with the rest of us cheeseheads (he does dream about it though)

i'm still not sure i'd take ANY player over reggie white in this scenerio

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Reggie White > Barry Sanders > Michael Strahan > Dwight Freeney

This is a weak argument.

I didn't make an argument. I simply revealed the truth in all its glory.I love Barry and believe he's generally underrated; but I think the difference between Barry and a merely adequate RB, in terms of its effect on a game, is smaller than the difference between Reggie White and a merely adequate DE.

Now that is a good one.

So a team would be just as good with say.....Curtis Enis as it is with Barry Sanders . . .

That's not quite what I said.

. . . but a team with a nobody at defensive end wouldn't be as good as a team with Reggie White?

Of course it wouldn't.

That is laughable. You must be a Green Bay homer or something because it is clouding your judgement.

I am, in fact, a fanatical Cheesehead and a huge Rhys LLoyd fan in particular (not to mention Vonta Leach), but I don't think it's clouding my judgment in this case.

 

[Donnybrook]

I am, in fact, a fanatical Cheesehead and a huge Rhys LLoyd fan in particular (not to mention Vonta Leach), but I don't think it's clouding my judgment in this case.

Who are you? And what have you done with MT?

 

[Texasmouth]

I am, in fact, a fanatical Cheesehead

That is all you had to say. Your judgement is clouded. It is like me saying the 90's Cowboys teams were the greatest in history and then saying my homerism doesn't cloud my judgement. It does. I at least admit it......

 

[Spartans Rule]

I am, in fact, a fanatical Cheesehead

That is all you had to say. Your judgement is clouded. It is like me saying the 90's Cowboys teams were the greatest in history and then saying my homerism doesn't cloud my judgement. It does.

I at least admit it......

:whoosh:

 

[Texasmouth]

I am, in fact, a fanatical Cheesehead

That is all you had to say. Your judgement is clouded. It is like me saying the 90's Cowboys teams were the greatest in history and then saying my homerism doesn't cloud my judgement. It does.

I at least admit it......

:whoosh:

Hey, if the guy loves a kicker, the guy loves a kicker, who am I to question it or read into it........

 

[Tau837]

Reggie White > Barry Sanders > Michael Strahan > Dwight Freeney

This is a weak argument.

I didn't make an argument. I simply revealed the truth in all its glory.I love Barry and believe he's generally underrated; but I think the difference between Barry and a merely adequate RB, in terms of its effect on a game, is smaller than the difference between Reggie White and a merely adequate DE.

Now that is a good one. So a team would be just as good with say.....Curtis Enis as it is with Barry Sanders but a team with a nobody at defensive end wouldn't be as good as a team with Reggie White?

That is laughable. You must be a Green Bay homer or something because it is clouding your judgement.

No offense, but either your reading comprehension or football knowledge needs help. Enis is not an adequate RB.Let's put actual players into the mix. Would the Texans be better off with these starters:

1. Domanick Davis at RB and Reggie White at DE

or with these starters:

2. Barry Sanders at RB and Anthony Weaver at DE

I'd say #1, hands down.

 

[-OZ-]

Let's put actual players into the mix. Would the Texans be better off with these starters:

1. Domanick Davis at RB and Reggie White at DE

or with these starters:

2. Barry Sanders at RB and Anthony Weaver at DE

I'd say #1, hands down.

I get your point, but I'm not real sure Weaver = Dom. Perhaps:

1. Domanick Davis at RB and Reggie White at DE

or with these starters:

2. Barry Sanders at RB and Jared Allen at DE

 

[P Boy]

I didn't make an argument. I simply revealed the truth in all its glory.

I love Barry and believe he's generally underrated; but I think the difference between Barry and a merely adequate RB, in terms of its effect on a game, is smaller than the difference between Reggie White and a merely adequate DE.

Very except for Sanders being underrated. He's generally recognized as one of the top 5 RBs ever to play the game, so I'm missing the underrated part.Sanders' Lions, as well as the latest versions of the Broncos, for examples, show that teams can have outstanding running games, but if the D-line is mediocre that the team can't win championships.

A stellar DE completely changes the nature of the game. He gives the opposing team less time to throw, which means the LBs and the secondary have to cover for less time. That makes the pass D immediately better and creates a much greater opportunity for turnovers. It also puts much greater pressure on the opposing O, as sacks create 2nd & long and 3rd & long situations, and hitting QBs in the pocket can lead to fumbles - which are not condusive to controlling the ball, moving the chains, and gaining field position. LBs & SSs can also maintain their read duties without worrying about blitzing so much, which makes the run D much more effective.

In short, a stud DE allows an entire D to function significantly better in all aspects and changes the way the opposing offense can run.

A stud RB obviously also changes a game, no question. But between the two, given equal dominance at their positions, the DE makes a greater impact. Football championships are still driven by defense with rare exceptions like the greatest-show-on-turf Rams (though their D still played very well, though that may have partly been a function of other teams having to throw so much to try to keep up). That may change if the league decides to make more mamby-pamby rule changes in an effort to turn the NFL into the AFL, but right now defense is the path to the Super Bowl.

 

[T Man]

Let's put actual players into the mix.  Would the Texans be better off with these starters:

1. Domanick Davis at RB and Reggie White at DE

or with these starters:

2. Barry Sanders at RB and Anthony Weaver at DE

I'd say #1, hands down.

I get your point, but I'm not real sure Weaver = Dom. Perhaps:

1. Domanick Davis at RB and Reggie White at DE

or with these starters:

2. Barry Sanders at RB and Jared Allen at DE

Choice 1 still looks best to me.

 

[-OZ-]

Let's put actual players into the mix. Would the Texans be better off with these starters:

1. Domanick Davis at RB and Reggie White at DE

or with these starters:

2. Barry Sanders at RB and Anthony Weaver at DE

I'd say #1, hands down.

I get your point, but I'm not real sure Weaver = Dom. Perhaps:

1. Domanick Davis at RB and Reggie White at DE

or with these starters:

2. Barry Sanders at RB and Jared Allen at DE

Choice 1 still looks best to me.

I'm not saying otherwise. I've been of the mindset that RB is one of the more overvalued positions in the NFL. My original answer was that Barry >>>> Freeney. Once we change that to Strahan or White, the DE wins out.

 

[thayman]

Reggie White > Barry Sanders > Michael Strahan > Dwight Freeney

This is a weak argument.

I didn't make an argument. I simply revealed the truth in all its glory.I love Barry and believe he's generally underrated; but I think the difference between Barry and a merely adequate RB, in terms of its effect on a game, is smaller than the difference between Reggie White and a merely adequate DE.

Now that is a good one. So a team would be just as good with say.....Curtis Enis as it is with Barry Sanders but a team with a nobody at defensive end wouldn't be as good as a team with Reggie White?

That is laughable. You must be a Green Bay homer or something because it is clouding your judgement.

No offense, but either your reading comprehension or football knowledge needs help. Enis is not an adequate RB.Let's put actual players into the mix. Would the Texans be better off with these starters:

1. Domanick Davis at RB and Reggie White at DE

or with these starters:

2. Barry Sanders at RB and Anthony Weaver at DE

I'd say #1, hands down.

perhaps it would be better to look at it this way1. Domanick Davis at RB and Mario Williams at DE

or with:

2. Reggie Bush, and Domanick Davis at RB and Weaver at DE

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Reggie White > Barry Sanders > Michael Strahan > Dwight Freeney

This is a weak argument.

I didn't make an argument. I simply revealed the truth in all its glory.I love Barry and believe he's generally underrated; but I think the difference between Barry and a merely adequate RB, in terms of its effect on a game, is smaller than the difference between Reggie White and a merely adequate DE.

Strange that you mention this, because it's been on my mind a lot lately.It's almost a question of marginal utility.

I've been wondering if anyone ever came up with a theory of which positions carry the greatest value to a team put into a number value. It could be as simple as saying DE = 10, RB = 5.

Basically the question the OP posed boils down to.. what's better for a team DE=10 or RB=10?

Before, I always felt that DE/OT were the "10" positions, but now I'm starting to feel like CB is more of a "10" than DE.

Would the Texans be getting more bang for their #1 pick buck by trying to upgrade a 3 DE to a potential 10, or a 5 RB to a potential 10.

Even if you only feel the DE has "9" potential, is that better than "10" RB?

For my $$, I'm saying DE.

 

[-OZ-]

Reggie White > Barry Sanders > Michael Strahan > Dwight Freeney

This is a weak argument.

I didn't make an argument. I simply revealed the truth in all its glory.I love Barry and believe he's generally underrated; but I think the difference between Barry and a merely adequate RB, in terms of its effect on a game, is smaller than the difference between Reggie White and a merely adequate DE.

Strange that you mention this, because it's been on my mind a lot lately.It's almost a question of marginal utility.

I've been wondering if anyone ever came up with a theory of which positions carry the greatest value to a team put into a number value. It could be as simple as saying DE = 10, RB = 5.

Basically the question the OP posed boils down to.. what's better for a team DE=10 or RB=10?

Before, I always felt that DE/OT were the "10" positions, but now I'm starting to feel like CB is more of a "10" than DE.

Would the Texans be getting more bang for their #1 pick buck by trying to upgrade a 3 DE to a potential 10, or a 5 RB to a potential 10.

Even if you only feel the DE has "9" potential, is that better than "10" RB?

For my $$, I'm saying DE.

My vote would go to "COACH"

 

[T Man]

Let's put actual players into the mix.  Would the Texans be better off with these starters:

1. Domanick Davis at RB and Reggie White at DE

or with these starters:

2. Barry Sanders at RB and Anthony Weaver at DE

I'd say #1, hands down.

I get your point, but I'm not real sure Weaver = Dom. Perhaps:

1. Domanick Davis at RB and Reggie White at DE

or with these starters:

2. Barry Sanders at RB and Jared Allen at DE

Choice 1 still looks best to me.

I'm not saying otherwise. I've been of the mindset that RB is one of the more overvalued positions in the NFL. My original answer was that Barry >>>> Freeney. Once we change that to Strahan or White, the DE wins out.

Agreed.