If Houston picks Reggie Bush is he still #1 (1 Viewer)

[Marc Levin]

I don't think it would change his long term outlook very much. Dom Davis is a nice player, but Bush can do almost everything he can do and then some. I'd probably still take him at 1.01 if the Texans end up with him. The only guy I might consider over him is LenDale White if he ends up on a team like Pittsburgh, Carolina, or Jacksonville.

Maroney?????

 

[Chaos Commish]

Leinert and Bush - as awesome as they are - have two things against them; (1) the "second best" after them are pretty gosh darned good players - nearly the same level of marquee, if not the same level, just without the name recognition; (2) there are two of them.

Convince me. Names please?

 

[EBF]

I don't think it would change his long term outlook very much. Dom Davis is a nice player, but Bush can do almost everything he can do and then some. I'd probably still take him at 1.01 if the Texans end up with him. The only guy I might consider over him is LenDale White if he ends up on a team like Pittsburgh, Carolina, or Jacksonville.

Maroney?????

I think White is probably a better NFL prospect than Maroney. He may not be quite as shifty or explosive, but he's much more powerful and he has excellent feet. He could be a goal line monster if given a chance.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

I COMPLETELY disagree for the same reason you cited - The teams picking 1-4 are guaranteed a marquee/franchise player at a very important spot, making it highly unlikely they would trade out of those spots.

They would if the player they could get at 1 or 2 has more impact on improving the franchise than the marquee player they could get at 3/4.Lets say at the 3/4 spot is players like Ferguson and Hawk. Would a team like the Jets or Cardinals rather have one of those guys or Leinart or Bush provided it only cost them a pick in the 3rd rounder or later? I'd say they'd rather trade up.

A lot of this depends on what the Texans asking price would be to a team wanting to move up 2 or 3 spots to get the number one. I don't think teams would give up their 1st and 2nd rounders just to move up 2 or 3 spots. But if the price is a 1st and a 3rd, I think that's a no-brainer.

Trading up for Vick or Manning made sense - clear cut #1 marquee players who were supposedly head and shoulders above the next one down the list.

Leinert and Bush - as awesome as they are - have two things against them; (1) the "second best" after them are pretty gosh darned good players - nearly the same level of marquee, if not the same level, just without the name recognition; (2) there are two of them.

The 2nd best QB is nowhere near as attractive as Leinart. I'd wager we couldn't get a consensus as to who the 2nd best QB in the draft IS. Your argument is stronger with Bush, though. The 2nd best RB is Williams, not Maroney.

Even if you figure Leinert and Bush 1-2 (which could, but probably won't, happen) how would another team be able to provide "equal value" to make it enticing for one of the top two teams to trade down - those two teams are guaranteed one of those two franchise changing players.

But you said yourself that there are marquee players at 3 and 4. If the Texans move to #3 and take what's left of Leinart/Bush/Ferguson plus they get an extra first day pick, that would make total sense for a team starting over as the Texans are.

And when you factor in the REAL NFL draft, Leinert is the #1 overall player and Bush will probably be selected number 4 or number 5 overall - and the RB right behind him is probably Maroney (assuming he will declare himself for the draft).

I agree, Leinart is the #1 pick. Bush doesn't drop to 4 or 5.

Teh trade I think you are likely to see this year is trading up into the top-10 with one of th eteams in the 6-9 range. Once the first handful of marquee players is selected, a team with a lot of needs sitting at the #7/8/9 spot may think it is worth it to trade down to #15 or so and get more picks.

I think you'll likely see that too.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

???

There is no more exposure to "one play" on ST than any other play in the game.

??? Right back at you.Of course there is. On a regular play, both sides start from a standstill. On ST (moreso punts than ko's), your returner is at a standstill while 11 other guys are getting a running start at him.

I just wouldn't do it.

 

[dgreen]

???

There is no more exposure to "one play" on ST than any other play in the game.

??? Right back at you.Of course there is. On a regular play, both sides start from a standstill. On ST (moreso punts than ko's), your returner is at a standstill while 11 other guys are getting a running start at him.

I just wouldn't do it.

I'm guessing returnmen are injured far less often per play than most other positions. Seriously, I just don't see a returnman go down very often. It's usually a blocker or tackler on the return that is slow to get up.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

???

There is no more exposure to "one play" on ST than any other play in the game.

??? Right back at you.Of course there is. On a regular play, both sides start from a standstill. On ST (moreso punts than ko's), your returner is at a standstill while 11 other guys are getting a running start at him.

I just wouldn't do it.

I'm guessing returnmen are injured far less often per play than most other positions. Seriously, I just don't see a returnman go down very often. It's usually a blocker or tackler on the return that is slow to get up.

Maybe my fears are unfounded.

 

[Marc Levin]

Leinert and Bush - as awesome as they are - have two things against them; (1) the "second best" after them are pretty gosh darned good players - nearly the same level of marquee, if not the same level, just without the name recognition; (2) there are two of them.

Convince me. Names please?

There's a slew of non-QB/non-RB picks.Bush will be the first RB taken.

Leinert will be the first QB taken.

That is all I'll say - but I would not be surprised to see a non-RB/QB (maybe an LT) go to one of the top-2 teams before another QB/RB (Green Bay, for instance, might not go the Leinert/Bush route).

 

[Marc Levin]

???

There is no more exposure to "one play" on ST than any other play in the game.

??? Right back at you.Of course there is. On a regular play, both sides start from a standstill. On ST (moreso punts than ko's), your returner is at a standstill while 11 other guys are getting a running start at him.

I just wouldn't do it.

I'm guessing returnmen are injured far less often per play than most other positions. Seriously, I just don't see a returnman go down very often. It's usually a blocker or tackler on the return that is slow to get up.

Maybe my fears are unfounded.

they are.BIggest FF myth is that ST plays are more prone to injury.

BTW, I answered your ??? Star offensive players don't play on ST due to the work overload factor than the injury factor.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

???

There is no more exposure to "one play" on ST than any other play in the game.

??? Right back at you.Of course there is. On a regular play, both sides start from a standstill. On ST (moreso punts than ko's), your returner is at a standstill while 11 other guys are getting a running start at him.

I just wouldn't do it.

I'm guessing returnmen are injured far less often per play than most other positions. Seriously, I just don't see a returnman go down very often. It's usually a blocker or tackler on the return that is slow to get up.

Maybe my fears are unfounded.

they are.BIggest FF myth is that ST plays are more prone to injury.

BTW, I answered your ??? Star offensive players don't play on ST due to the work overload factor than the injury factor.

Okay. I'm wrong on this account.

 

[dgreen]

???

There is no more exposure to "one play" on ST than any other play in the game.

??? Right back at you.Of course there is. On a regular play, both sides start from a standstill. On ST (moreso punts than ko's), your returner is at a standstill while 11 other guys are getting a running start at him.

I just wouldn't do it.

I'm guessing returnmen are injured far less often per play than most other positions. Seriously, I just don't see a returnman go down very often. It's usually a blocker or tackler on the return that is slow to get up.

Maybe my fears are unfounded.

they are.BIggest FF myth is that ST plays are more prone to injury.

BTW, I answered your ??? Star offensive players don't play on ST due to the work overload factor than the injury factor.

And not just work overload on the field on gameday. It can be work overload during the week watching film and studying.

 

[-OZ-]

Trading up for Vick or Manning made sense - clear cut #1 marquee players who were supposedly head and shoulders above the next one down the list.

Leinert and Bush - as awesome as they are - have two things against them; (1) the "second best" after them are pretty gosh darned good players - nearly the same level of marquee, if not the same level, just without the name recognition; (2) there are two of them.

The 2nd best QB is nowhere near as attractive as Leinart. I'd wager we couldn't get a consensus as to who the 2nd best QB in the draft IS.

If Vince Young declares, I totally disagree. Leinart will probably be the #1 QB still, but Young is pretty close to Leinart in talent, some would say he's more talented.

 

[The Man Who Met Andy Griffith]

I meant that Julius Jones probably won some people titles last season, which can be worth more than getting Steven Jackson, who's more talented but was in a worse situation.

Gotcha. But do note that many people thought--going into this year--that Julius Jones was the more talented running back. For example, although both guys had the starting job, Jones went first in many (most?) dynasty drafts I saw.

 

[cstu]

I'm hoping we get Hutchinson, but I'm also leery of our chances of getting him.

I wouldn't want to see us trade lower than #4, because if we don't get Bush, I'd rather see us get either Da Brickhouse, or AJ Hawk. We could really use a LB who is effective against the run and pass both, and who can also create pressure in the backfield. I'm not sure we'd get enough compensation for the pick to drop down further than that. I don't believe anyone has two first rounders this year. Eli went for a 1st and a 3rd that year, and a 1st and 5th the next year.

Hutchinson wouldn't be cheap, but fixing the Texans' situation isn't going to be.I think the ideal, and completely realistic, scenario is the teams at #3/4 will be willing to give up a 3rd rounder (maybe even a 2nd) to move up to #1 to take Leinart or Bush. That leaves the Texans with an extra first day pick and still in position to take Ferguson. Then take one of the top centers with the 2nd round pick.

The flashier players may put fans in the seats for a while, but losing keeps them away too. The allure of going to see Reggie Bush play is worn off in week 12 when your team is 2-9 and looking at at top pick in the 2007 draft.

As a side note, Denver has two first round picks this year. They own Washington's.

One way or another they need to get D'Brick. Then they need to sign Hutchinson and lock down the left side of the line. They have good enough players that if they do that they will have a solid offense. Use the rest of the draft on defense and the Texans will be on their way to turning the team around.

 

[Raagsreth]

I just don't see any legitimate reason the Texans take Bush. The only reasonable scenario would be for selling tickets because it would be foolish to take him with what they have IMO. There O-Line is horrible and not to mention they could possibly have the worst defense in recent memory and you guys really belive they will take another RB when they have one who's rushed for 2200 yards, 21 touchdowns in his first two seasons and on pace for a 3rd 1,000 yard season behind a very very bad O-Line?Davis just signed a long term deal and not to long ago people where saying Houston was a playoff contender with there young "big 3" Carr, Davis and AJ. So what's changed since then??? We'll unless Bush plans on playing every postion on offense and defense for Houston, oh and lining and playing O-Line the Texans won't be any better then they are now.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

One way or another they need to get D'Brick. Then they need to sign Hutchinson and lock down the left side of the line. They have good enough players that if they do that they will have a solid offense. Use the rest of the draft on defense and the Texans will be on their way to turning the team around.

As an offensive lineman EVER been taken #1 overall?

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

BIggest FF myth is that ST plays are more prone to injury.

BTW, I answered your ??? Star offensive players don't play on ST due to the work overload factor than the injury factor.

I ready a study that you are twice as likely to be injured on ST as normal offensive/defensive plays.Obviously the injuries on offense/defense total more since they are more offensive/defensive plays per game than ST plays.

Regardless of whether or not you are MORE likely to hae an injury, I think we can all agree that the player will be at an increased risk for injury with zero return FF wise.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

One way or another they need to get D'Brick. Then they need to sign Hutchinson and lock down the left side of the line. They have good enough players that if they do that they will have a solid offense. Use the rest of the draft on defense and the Texans will be on their way to turning the team around.

As an offensive lineman EVER been taken #1 overall?

Orlando Pace.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

One way or another they need to get D'Brick.  Then they need to sign Hutchinson and lock down the left side of the line.  They have good enough players that if they do that they will have a solid offense.  Use the rest of the draft on defense and the Texans will be on their way to turning the team around.

As an offensive lineman EVER been taken #1 overall?

Orlando Pace.

Yeah, and how did that work out for them? So Ferguson at #1 overall isn't a stretch. Hmmm.

 

[Tick]

I meant that Julius Jones probably won some people titles last season, which can be worth more than getting Steven Jackson, who's more talented but was in a worse situation.

Gotcha. But do note that many people thought--going into this year--that Julius Jones was the more talented running back. For example, although both guys had the starting job, Jones went first in many (most?) dynasty drafts I saw.

Hmm - I don't think I've ever heard anyone say Julius is more talented than Jackson. Faulk and Martz are what drove Jackson's value down, I'd say.

 

[Jiggyonthehut]

Think of it this way. Teams that are in need of a RB heir or have a downright atrocious situation will throw themselves at the Texans' feet. After all, players of his caliber dont scoot by so often and the Texans perhaps will realize that by trading down, they are elegible for two or more quality draft slots which- if drafted correctly- will improve their offense more than the homerun hitter in Bush.The Texans have made some solid moves in the past so they wont be fooled this time. Further bolstering their decision will be the fact that they wont be giving away a huge asset to their own rivals- the majority of teams floating around these very boards are NFC teams, and non-divisional opponents if they are in the AFC. Besides, if they cash in on a early to mid round pick, they still have a shot at Brick. And its a risk they must take. After looking at Jacksonville and Carolina's meteoric rise as expansions to goto the playoffs and advance past the second round both within two years, this team has not lived up to its legacy. For the naysayers who point to the Houston D, keep in mind that the Jags had the third worst Defense in the league in its inaugural season, losing 9 games by 24 points or more, and advanced to the AFC title game within 2 or 3 years.

 

[cstu]

One way or another they need to get D'Brick. Then they need to sign Hutchinson and lock down the left side of the line. They have good enough players that if they do that they will have a solid offense. Use the rest of the draft on defense and the Texans will be on their way to turning the team around.

As an offensive lineman EVER been taken #1 overall?

Orlando Pace.

Yeah, and how did that work out for them? So Ferguson at #1 overall isn't a stretch. Hmmm.

Historically, if an OL is taken in the top 10 then the odds are he'll turn out to be pretty good. When your weak spot in OL and you have a lot of money invested in your offensive players, I think it should be the number one concern - especially if you have a shot an potentially elite LT.

 

[-OZ-]

One way or another they need to get D'Brick.  Then they need to sign Hutchinson and lock down the left side of the line.  They have good enough players that if they do that they will have a solid offense.  Use the rest of the draft on defense and the Texans will be on their way to turning the team around.

As an offensive lineman EVER been taken #1 overall?

Orlando Pace.

Yeah, and how did that work out for them? So Ferguson at #1 overall isn't a stretch. Hmmm.

Historically, if an OL is taken in the top 10 then the odds are he'll turn out to be pretty good. When your weak spot in OL and you have a lot of money invested in your offensive players, I think it should be the number one concern - especially if you have a shot an potentially elite LT.

Tony Mandarich?

 

[Chaos Commish]

Leinert and Bush - as awesome as they are - have two things against them; (1) the "second best" after them are pretty gosh darned good players - nearly the same level of marquee, if not the same level, just without the name recognition; (2) there are two of them.

Convince me. Names please?

There's a slew of non-QB/non-RB picks.Bush will be the first RB taken.

Leinert will be the first QB taken.

That is all I'll say - but I would not be surprised to see a non-RB/QB (maybe an LT) go to one of the top-2 teams before another QB/RB (Green Bay, for instance, might not go the Leinert/Bush route).

Gotcha. I understood you wrong, but I cannot comfortably agree with this either. I have a compelling argument against Andy's opinion and your take here that I think Texans' fans should consider. It's involved and I don't have the time now, but a recent thread on the Jets got me studying these things a little more carefully. So, I'm just adding this to remind myself to post my thoughts later. I know the anticipation will be tough for you all, but I will be back.

 

[Marc Levin]

One way or another they need to get D'Brick.  Then they need to sign Hutchinson and lock down the left side of the line.  They have good enough players that if they do that they will have a solid offense.  Use the rest of the draft on defense and the Texans will be on their way to turning the team around.

As an offensive lineman EVER been taken #1 overall?

Orlando Pace.

Yeah, and how did that work out for them? So Ferguson at #1 overall isn't a stretch. Hmmm.

Historically, if an OL is taken in the top 10 then the odds are he'll turn out to be pretty good. When your weak spot in OL and you have a lot of money invested in your offensive players, I think it should be the number one concern - especially if you have a shot an potentially elite LT.

Agreed.Franchise LTs come along oncve every three or four years - several quality starting RBs come out of every draft, every year.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Franchise LTs come along oncve every three or four years - several quality starting RBs come out of every draft, every year.

Now this I agree with. IF the Texans are planning on keeping the #1 pick their correct play is to take Ferguson.

 

[Marc Levin]

Franchise LTs come along oncve every three or four years - several quality starting RBs come out of every draft, every year.

Now this I agree with. IF the Texans are planning on keeping the #1 pick their correct play is to take Ferguson.

I think if they are anywhere in the top-3 and he is there, they should take him. I think they will end up winning a game down the stretch and either the Jets or 9ers will have the #1 overall pick - Jets would take Leinert and '9ers would take Bush. If houston is #3, they could still probably get Ferguson.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Franchise LTs come along oncve every three or four years - several quality starting RBs come out of every draft, every year.

Now this I agree with. IF the Texans are planning on keeping the #1 pick their correct play is to take Ferguson.

I think if they are anywhere in the top-3 and he is there, they should take him. I think they will end up winning a game down the stretch and either the Jets or 9ers will have the #1 overall pick - Jets would take Leinert and '9ers would take Bush. If houston is #3, they could still probably get Ferguson.

Agreed.

 

[Marc Levin]

everyone - mark this day on your calendar.

 

[EBF]

Franchise LTs come along oncve every three or four years - several quality starting RBs come out of every draft, every year.

That's true, but Bush isn't just a standard RB. He has rare home run ability and is a major threat in the passing game. That's why I think almost any team in the NFL would be crazy not to take him at #1. You don't pass on a dynamic offensive player like this if you get the chance to draft him.

 

[Marc Levin]

I have long been saying Reggise Bush is the #1 overall pick an dis a rare talent - but I could easily see a team passing on him for a less sexy Ferguson pick - winning games is the idea, right?

 

[Holy Schneikes]

One way or another they need to get D'Brick.  Then they need to sign Hutchinson and lock down the left side of the line.  They have good enough players that if they do that they will have a solid offense.  Use the rest of the draft on defense and the Texans will be on their way to turning the team around.

As an offensive lineman EVER been taken #1 overall?

Orlando Pace.

Yeah, and how did that work out for them? So Ferguson at #1 overall isn't a stretch. Hmmm.

Historically, if an OL is taken in the top 10 then the odds are he'll turn out to be pretty good. When your weak spot in OL and you have a lot of money invested in your offensive players, I think it should be the number one concern - especially if you have a shot an potentially elite LT.

Tony Mandarich?

Robert GalleryJordan Gross

Mike Williams

Bryant McKinnie

Leonard Davis

Chris Samuels

Kyle Turley

Pace

Walter Jones

Jonathan Ogden

Willie Anderson

Boselli

Willie Roaf

Those are the guys since 93. Overall, that's probably a better success rate than the other positions that typically go high (though Defensive End isn't bad either).

 

[azgroover]

One way or another they need to get D'Brick. Then they need to sign Hutchinson and lock down the left side of the line. They have good enough players that if they do that they will have a solid offense. Use the rest of the draft on defense and the Texans will be on their way to turning the team around.

As an offensive lineman EVER been taken #1 overall?

Orlando Pace.

Yeah, and how did that work out for them? So Ferguson at #1 overall isn't a stretch. Hmmm.

Historically, if an OL is taken in the top 10 then the odds are he'll turn out to be pretty good. When your weak spot in OL and you have a lot of money invested in your offensive players, I think it should be the number one concern - especially if you have a shot an potentially elite LT.

Agreed.Franchise LTs come along oncve every three or four years - several quality starting RBs come out of every draft, every year.

Good RBs are a dime-a-dozen compared to franchise linemen.

 

[-OZ-]

One way or another they need to get D'Brick. Then they need to sign Hutchinson and lock down the left side of the line. They have good enough players that if they do that they will have a solid offense. Use the rest of the draft on defense and the Texans will be on their way to turning the team around.

As an offensive lineman EVER been taken #1 overall?

Orlando Pace.

Yeah, and how did that work out for them? So Ferguson at #1 overall isn't a stretch. Hmmm.

Historically, if an OL is taken in the top 10 then the odds are he'll turn out to be pretty good. When your weak spot in OL and you have a lot of money invested in your offensive players, I think it should be the number one concern - especially if you have a shot an potentially elite LT.

Tony Mandarich?

Robert GalleryJordan Gross

Mike Williams

Bryant McKinnie

Leonard Davis

Chris Samuels

Kyle Turley

Pace

Walter Jones

Jonathan Ogden

Willie Anderson

Boselli

Willie Roaf

Those are the guys since 93. Overall, that's probably a better success rate than the other positions that typically go high (though Defensive End isn't bad either).

I know, just figured I'd toss perhaps the greatest blown pick ever in there.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

One way or another they need to get D'Brick.  Then they need to sign Hutchinson and lock down the left side of the line.  They have good enough players that if they do that they will have a solid offense.  Use the rest of the draft on defense and the Texans will be on their way to turning the team around.

As an offensive lineman EVER been taken #1 overall?

Orlando Pace.

Yeah, and how did that work out for them? So Ferguson at #1 overall isn't a stretch. Hmmm.

Historically, if an OL is taken in the top 10 then the odds are he'll turn out to be pretty good. When your weak spot in OL and you have a lot of money invested in your offensive players, I think it should be the number one concern - especially if you have a shot an potentially elite LT.

Agreed.Franchise LTs come along oncve every three or four years - several quality starting RBs come out of every draft, every year.

Good RBs are a dime-a-dozen compared to franchise linemen.

I know I'm playing both sides here, but...Good RBs ARE a dime-a-dozen. GREAT RBs are not. Bottom line is that if you can get a GREAT player at any position, you get him - even if there is a really good player at another position you have a bigger need for.

Question is whether Bush is going to be a GREAT NFL RB. For the most part, we'll see what NFL scouts think about that question in a couple of months because I don't think it's like last year when the scouts really didn't see ANY great talents out there and ended up with a bunch of really good ones at the top of the draft.

 

[coolnerd]

Assuming Houston has the number 1 pick, one key will be how close that this supposedly deep class of OT is really ranked. If the step down between Ferguson and tackle 5 or 6 is not considered huge (say pro bowler to above average starter) then the Texans could have a potentially dynamic offense (assuming a decent OC not what they have now) by taking Bush and getting tackle 5 or 6.Also, one thing the Texans will need to do if they are to trade down, is really convince the world they are ready, willing and able to take Bush. If people think for more than half a second that they are taking Ferguson number 1, they will let the Texans do so and deal with The Jets or whoever the heck is setting at number 2.

 

[cstu]

Franchise LTs come along oncve every three or four years - several quality starting RBs come out of every draft, every year.

That's true, but Bush isn't just a standard RB. He has rare home run ability and is a major threat in the passing game. That's why I think almost any team in the NFL would be crazy not to take him at #1. You don't pass on a dynamic offensive player like this if you get the chance to draft him.

That's what we hear every year in the draft. I think it's true in Bush's case, but the bust rate on RB's is too high for them to pass on the surest pick in the draft and their biggest need. If Ferguson grades out well at the combine/workout day like I think he will, it would make no sense for the Texans to pass on a chance to get him.

 

[EBF]

Franchise LTs come along oncve every three or four years - several quality starting RBs come out of every draft, every year.

That's true, but Bush isn't just a standard RB. He has rare home run ability and is a major threat in the passing game. That's why I think almost any team in the NFL would be crazy not to take him at #1. You don't pass on a dynamic offensive player like this if you get the chance to draft him.

That's what we hear every year in the draft. I think it's true in Bush's case, but the bust rate on RB's is too high for them to pass on the surest pick in the draft and their biggest need. If Ferguson grades out well at the combine/workout day like I think he will, it would make no sense for the Texans to pass on a chance to get him.

Who did we hear this about last year? I've been watching the draft pretty closely lately and no back has been hyped like Bush. Sure, there have been some nice runners and some highly-selected RBs in the past few classes, but there hasn't been a dynamic home run threat like Bush. I guess you could make a case for guys like Ronnie Brown and Willis McGahee, but they're different from Bush in the same way that McNabb and Palmer are different from Vick. Bush is a unique player who has everyone in Pac-10 country saying "once in a generation" player. I don't recall hearing that about any other RB in recent memory. That's the point I'm stressing here. Bush is not an average RB, but rather a different type of weapon in the Westbrook/Faulk mold. These rare hybrid backs are tremendously valuable. NFL teams understand this, which is why I don't expect any of them to pass on Bush for an OT. I understand the value of guys like Ogden and Pace, but I also understand the opportunities that a guy like Bush can create for his teammates and the plays that he can make on his own.

 

[GregR_2]

Assuming Houston has the number 1 pick, one key will be how close that this supposedly deep class of OT is really ranked. If the step down between Ferguson and tackle 5 or 6 is not considered huge (say pro bowler to above average starter) then the Texans could have a potentially dynamic offense (assuming a decent OC not what they have now) by taking Bush and getting tackle 5 or 6.

Also, one thing the Texans will need to do if they are to trade down, is really convince the world they are ready, willing and able to take Bush. If people think for more than half a second that they are taking Ferguson number 1, they will let the Texans do so and deal with The Jets or whoever the heck is setting at number 2.

Scouts Inc currently has D'Brick as the #3 rookie prospect overall. Winston, the next O-lineman, was down in the latter half of the first round.

 

[Biabreakable]

One way or another I see the 49ers getting Bush.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

They would if the player they could get at 1 or 2 has more impact on improving the franchise than the marquee player they could get at 3/4.Lets say at the 3/4 spot is players like Ferguson and Hawk. Would a team like the Jets or Cardinals rather have one of those guys or Leinart or Bush provided it only cost them a pick in the 3rd rounder or later? I'd say they'd rather trade up.A lot of this depends on what the Texans asking price would be to a team wanting to move up 2 or 3 spots to get the number one. I don't think teams would give up their 1st and 2nd rounders just to move up 2 or 3 spots. But if the price is a 1st and a 3rd, I think that's a no-brainer.

A 3rd???!? As in a 3rd round pick? I think you've vastly underestimating the cost of moving up from 4 to 1 overall. The only plausible scenario I could see for any of the teams picking around 3 or 4 (since none of them have two first rounders) is a 1st and a 3rd this year, AND their first rounder next year. That is likely the minimum of what it would take to move up, as it did with SD/NYG.

 

[-OZ-]

They would if the player they could get at 1 or 2 has more impact on improving the franchise than the marquee player they could get at 3/4.

Lets say at the 3/4 spot is players like Ferguson and Hawk. Would a team like the Jets or Cardinals rather have one of those guys or Leinart or Bush provided it only cost them a pick in the 3rd rounder or later? I'd say they'd rather trade up.

A lot of this depends on what the Texans asking price would be to a team wanting to move up 2 or 3 spots to get the number one. I don't think teams would give up their 1st and 2nd rounders just to move up 2 or 3 spots. But if the price is a 1st and a 3rd, I think that's a no-brainer.

A 3rd???!? As in a 3rd round pick? I think you've vastly underestimating the cost of moving up from 4 to 1 overall. The only plausible scenario I could see for any of the teams picking around 3 or 4 (since none of them have two first rounders) is a 1st and a 3rd this year, AND their first rounder next year. That is likely the minimum of what it would take to move up, as it did with SD/NYG.

You're probably right, but it just seems to me that the drop off from 1-4 isn't as big as it was that year. Even if you prefer Rivers to Eli (put the pipe down), nobody can deny that Eli was the better marquee QB. A lot depends on Young now. If he declares, I can easily see a team trading down from Leinart (I see him as #1, regardless) to Young and not needing quite that package to do it. Brick and Bush are 2/3 IMO.

 

[Donnybrook]

One way or another I see the 49ers getting Bush.

Week 17 - Houston at San Francisco. If Houston beats SF and they finish with identical records, would SF be #1 in the draft by virtue of the head-to-head loss?

 

[coolnerd]

One way or another I see the 49ers getting Bush.

Week 17 - Houston at San Francisco. If Houston beats SF and they finish with identical records, would SF be #1 in the draft by virtue of the head-to-head loss?

If memory serves me correct the first tie breaker is strength of schedule. If the team having faced the weaker schedule would get the better draft pick.

 

[Softball 3:16]

Maybe someone will swoop in and take DD the way the Rams took Faulk off the Colts hands which opened the door for the Edge pick in '99.

DD's numbers are very similar to Faulk in his early years with the Colts.

I posted this in the Barlow thread too. I think it's likely that San Fran or Houston takes Bush, thus making Davis or Barlow expendable. San Fran can trade Barlow without huge cap penatlies. Since Davis recentally signed an extention, I'm not sure how the cap would effect the Texans. Assuming it would be OK, I'd look for Green Bay to make a run at Davis or Barlow in a similar deal to the Faulk deal of 1999. Maybe a 3rd and 5th, maybe even a #2. Then Green Bay can use the #1 to go D. Mario Williams, AJ Hawk etc. An Impact player on D plus an above average runner to pair with Gado in a 1-2 punch would make for an imediate turn around. Extra picks in the middle of the draft would help Houston find an O-Lineman or two or San Fran help out other needs.

 

[Marc Levin]

Assuming Houston has the number 1 pick, one key will be how close that this supposedly deep class of OT is really ranked. If the step down between Ferguson and tackle 5 or 6 is not considered huge

The drop from Ferguson to the second OL taken at any OL spot is very large.

 

[Marc Levin]

Franchise LTs come along oncve every three or four years - several quality starting RBs come out of every draft, every year.

That's true, but Bush isn't just a standard RB. He has rare home run ability and is a major threat in the passing game. That's why I think almost any team in the NFL would be crazy not to take him at #1. You don't pass on a dynamic offensive player like this if you get the chance to draft him.

That's what we hear every year in the draft. I think it's true in Bush's case, but the bust rate on RB's is too high for them to pass on the surest pick in the draft and their biggest need. If Ferguson grades out well at the combine/workout day like I think he will, it would make no sense for the Texans to pass on a chance to get him.

Who did we hear this about last year? I've been watching the draft pretty closely lately and no back has been hyped like Bush.

i'm starting to sound like a brokenm record, but we haven't seen a back like Bush in the draft since LT.

 

[Marc Levin]

They would if the player they could get at 1 or 2 has more impact on improving the franchise than the marquee player they could get at 3/4.

Lets say at the 3/4 spot is players like Ferguson and Hawk. Would a team like the Jets or Cardinals rather have one of those guys or Leinart or Bush provided it only cost them a pick in the 3rd rounder or later? I'd say they'd rather trade up.

A lot of this depends on what the Texans asking price would be to a team wanting to move up 2 or 3 spots to get the number one. I don't think teams would give up their 1st and 2nd rounders just to move up 2 or 3 spots. But if the price is a 1st and a 3rd, I think that's a no-brainer.

A 3rd???!? As in a 3rd round pick? I think you've vastly underestimating the cost of moving up from 4 to 1 overall. The only plausible scenario I could see for any of the teams picking around 3 or 4 (since none of them have two first rounders) is a 1st and a 3rd this year, AND their first rounder next year. That is likely the minimum of what it would take to move up, as it did with SD/NYG.

You're probably right, but it just seems to me that the drop off from 1-4 isn't as big as it was that year.

Exactly why noone would move up a few spots from the #4 spot. Th egiants were willing to spend ANYthing for Manning. I don't think the teams at #3-#5 will spend that much for Bush. And I believe the team sitting at #1 will ask more than SD asked for Manning. IIRC, the only team even willin gto think about moving up for Manning was NY - and SD did it b/c they knew they'd STILL get a great QB prospect.What's the incentive for the #1 team to move DOWN and remove themselves from dafting Bush?

 

[Marc Levin]

One way or another I see the 49ers getting Bush.

Week 17 - Houston at San Francisco. If Houston beats SF and they finish with identical records, would SF be #1 in the draft by virtue of the head-to-head loss?

Might be the first game in NFL history where both sides try to forfeit the game.LOL!

 

[GregR_2]

One way or another I see the 49ers getting Bush.

Week 17 - Houston at San Francisco. If Houston beats SF and they finish with identical records, would SF be #1 in the draft by virtue of the head-to-head loss?

If memory serves me correct the first tie breaker is strength of schedule. If the team having faced the weaker schedule would get the better draft pick.

If the season ended today and the teams were tied, Houston would have the weaker schedule and would still get the 1st pick. There's still a lot of games left to play though, but as Houston plays a lot of bottom-feeders, they have a good at winning the tiebreaker and getting the earlier pick. If they don't win against too many of those poor teams.