What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

If you're the Houston Texans, who do you draft ? (1 Viewer)

You're the GM for the Houstons, and you're on the clock, what do you do?

  • Draft RB Reggie Bush

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Draft QB Matt Leinart

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Draft QB Vince Young

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Draft OT D'Brickshaw Ferguson

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Trade down a FEW spots and gather an extra pick/player

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Trade down to the middle of the first and gather multiple picks/player(s)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
The Texans need players in numerous positions and they would be best served dropping down in the draft and picking up additional picks/players.  If they cannot find a deal they like, the easy pick is Reggie Bush who is an immediate impact player which they sorely need.  He will make the offense better right out of the gate.
What impact would that be? Dom Davis is the starter. The only impact Bush is going to make is against the salary cap.
You really think Davis is going to keep Bush off the field? How do you figure that a moderately above average RB is going to hold a starting job over a guy who most scouts feel is in the Marshall Faulk/Gale Sayers class as a prospect? Anything can happen, but if the Texans use 1.01 money on Bush then you'd better believe they're going to give him every chance to pay some dividends.
Bush has proven nothing. He has yet to take an NFL snap. Dom Davis has all ready proven he can get it done. Bush has yet to prove anything. Yes, he was an exciting college running back. I am not debating that he was a great running back in college, maybe the best ever but lets wait and see how he does in the NFL before we annoint him gale Sayers.Second, you have to draft for need. Maybe Bush is better than Davis, doesn't matter, they all ready have Davis. Lienart may be the next coming of Joe Montana but you dont see the Colts trying to draft him. The Texans need help in other areas, not in the backfield.

 
The Texans need players in numerous positions and they would be best served dropping down in the draft and picking up additional picks/players.  If they cannot find a deal they like, the easy pick is Reggie Bush who is an immediate impact player which they sorely need.  He will make the offense better right out of the gate.
What impact would that be? Dom Davis is the starter. The only impact Bush is going to make is against the salary cap.
You really think Davis is going to keep Bush off the field? How do you figure that a moderately above average RB is going to hold a starting job over a guy who most scouts feel is in the Marshall Faulk/Gale Sayers class as a prospect? Anything can happen, but if the Texans use 1.01 money on Bush then you'd better believe they're going to give him every chance to pay some dividends.
Bush has proven nothing. He has yet to take an NFL snap. Dom Davis has all ready proven he can get it done. Bush has yet to prove anything. Yes, he was an exciting college running back. I am not debating that he was a great running back in college, maybe the best ever but lets wait and see how he does in the NFL before we annoint him gale Sayers.Second, you have to draft for need. Maybe Bush is better than Davis, doesn't matter, they all ready have Davis. Lienart may be the next coming of Joe Montana but you dont see the Colts trying to draft him. The Texans need help in other areas, not in the backfield.
Again, I think you're underestimating Bush's abilities.The Leinart/Manning comparison doesn't work very well. Matt Leinart probably doesn't grade as high as Reggie Bush. More importantly, Manning is easily one of the best QBs in the NFL, whereas Davis is merely an average starting RB.

Like I said, the difference between Bush/Davis in talent is not negligible. It's comparable to the difference between Cadillac Williams and Michael Pittman last year. No one knocked the Bucs for taking Pittman, but a lote of people seem to be having real trouble accepting Bush as Houston's pick. I think this is mostly because DD's FF success has clouded peoples' ability to objectively evaluate his true NFL worth.

 
It wasn't a choice, but it should've been...

"Draft the highest rated player on our draft board, regardless of position."

The Texans are going to spend a tremendous amount of time, manpower and effort on evaluating all the top prospects and ranking them on their board. The franchise can't afford to pass up greatness, regardless of what form that may take. By taking the top player, Casserly has no one else to blame is it doesn't pan out. That's what GMs are paid to do, although too many of them fail to follow that doctrine.

 
The Texans need players in numerous positions and they would be best served dropping down in the draft and picking up additional picks/players. If they cannot find a deal they like, the easy pick is Reggie Bush who is an immediate impact player which they sorely need. He will make the offense better right out of the gate.
What impact would that be? Dom Davis is the starter. The only impact Bush is going to make is against the salary cap.
You really think Davis is going to keep Bush off the field? How do you figure that a moderately above average RB is going to hold a starting job over a guy who most scouts feel is in the Marshall Faulk/Gale Sayers class as a prospect? Anything can happen, but if the Texans use 1.01 money on Bush then you'd better believe they're going to give him every chance to pay some dividends.
Bush has proven nothing. He has yet to take an NFL snap. Dom Davis has all ready proven he can get it done. Bush has yet to prove anything. Yes, he was an exciting college running back. I am not debating that he was a great running back in college, maybe the best ever but lets wait and see how he does in the NFL before we annoint him gale Sayers.Second, you have to draft for need. Maybe Bush is better than Davis, doesn't matter, they all ready have Davis. Lienart may be the next coming of Joe Montana but you dont see the Colts trying to draft him. The Texans need help in other areas, not in the backfield.
Again, I think you're underestimating Bush's abilities.The Leinart/Manning comparison doesn't work very well. Matt Leinart probably doesn't grade as high as Reggie Bush. More importantly, Manning is easily one of the best QBs in the NFL, whereas Davis is merely an average starting RB.

Like I said, the difference between Bush/Davis in talent is not negligible. It's comparable to the difference between Cadillac Williams and Michael Pittman last year. No one knocked the Bucs for taking Pittman, but a lote of people seem to be having real trouble accepting Bush as Houston's pick. I think this is mostly because DD's FF success has clouded peoples' ability to objectively evaluate his true NFL worth.
Not really, I think Bush can be as good as any RB in league. The problem is that the Texans already have a solid young RB and desperately need a LT. D'Brick fills the biggest need on the team and is a guy that should be able to stay healthy and remain on the team for a decade. As a RB, Bush is more likely to get injured and also holds little trade value down the road (see SA and Edge). Teams would trade a 1st round pick for Walter Jones, Pace, etc. without even blinking, unlike with a RB once he reachs 27-28.
 
The Texans need players in numerous positions and they would be best served dropping down in the draft and picking up additional picks/players. If they cannot find a deal they like, the easy pick is Reggie Bush who is an immediate impact player which they sorely need. He will make the offense better right out of the gate.
What impact would that be? Dom Davis is the starter. The only impact Bush is going to make is against the salary cap.
You really think Davis is going to keep Bush off the field? How do you figure that a moderately above average RB is going to hold a starting job over a guy who most scouts feel is in the Marshall Faulk/Gale Sayers class as a prospect? Anything can happen, but if the Texans use 1.01 money on Bush then you'd better believe they're going to give him every chance to pay some dividends.
Bush has proven nothing. He has yet to take an NFL snap. Dom Davis has all ready proven he can get it done. Bush has yet to prove anything. Yes, he was an exciting college running back. I am not debating that he was a great running back in college, maybe the best ever but lets wait and see how he does in the NFL before we annoint him gale Sayers.Second, you have to draft for need. Maybe Bush is better than Davis, doesn't matter, they all ready have Davis. Lienart may be the next coming of Joe Montana but you dont see the Colts trying to draft him. The Texans need help in other areas, not in the backfield.
Again, I think you're underestimating Bush's abilities.The Leinart/Manning comparison doesn't work very well. Matt Leinart probably doesn't grade as high as Reggie Bush. More importantly, Manning is easily one of the best QBs in the NFL, whereas Davis is merely an average starting RB.

Like I said, the difference between Bush/Davis in talent is not negligible. It's comparable to the difference between Cadillac Williams and Michael Pittman last year. No one knocked the Bucs for taking Pittman, but a lote of people seem to be having real trouble accepting Bush as Houston's pick. I think this is mostly because DD's FF success has clouded peoples' ability to objectively evaluate his true NFL worth.
Not really, I think Bush can be as good as any RB in league. The problem is that the Texans already have a solid young RB and desperately need a LT. D'Brick fills the biggest need on the team and is a guy that should be able to stay healthy and remain on the team for a decade. As a RB, Bush is more likely to get injured and also holds little trade value down the road (see SA and Edge). Teams would trade a 1st round pick for Walter Jones, Pace, etc. without even blinking, unlike with a RB once he reachs 27-28.
It sounds simple enough but I keep saying it...the Texans need to take the highest rated player on their board. In the off chance both Brick and Bush grade out with equivalent franchise grades, I agree that you HAVE to take the tackle over the RB. Presumably any team taking Bush first legitimately views him as a once-in-a-lifetime runner.
 
Not really, I think Bush can be as good as any RB in league. The problem is that the Texans already have a solid young RB and desperately need a LT. D'Brick fills the biggest need on the team and is a guy that should be able to stay healthy and remain on the team for a decade. As a RB, Bush is more likely to get injured and also holds little trade value down the road (see SA and Edge). Teams would trade a 1st round pick for Walter Jones, Pace, etc. without even blinking, unlike with a RB once he reachs 27-28.
I agree that offensive line is a big need for this team. However they can probably upgrade it later in the draft as well as through free agency if need be. If they can make a deal to trade down a few spots and still land Brick then it would be a good move but otherwise they should take Bush for this reason...How many touchdowns has this team scored since entering the NFL? Bush is the type of playmaker (see Gale Sayers) that can score from anywhere and anytime on the football field. Much like a Barry Sanders, he doesn't need much space to make big plays and he will add a sorely needed dimension to the Texans offense if drafted.

I still believe the best move the Texans can make is to move down and pick up additional picks/players but if that move isn't possible, you can't go wrong with Bush.

 
If I am drafting for the Texans I trade down and get more picks; they need more talent in several position more than a single RB or QB.

That being said... If the Texans do not take Young and he becomes a very good to great QB and the Texans continue to suck it's going to be bad, very bad, news for McNair and the Texans. He will become one of those most hated owners in pro football. THe Houston area fans will likely not forgive him for many years to come.
Then the Houston area fans are morons. Hindsight is 20/20. Taking a QB makes NO sense here, regardless of Carr's contract situation.
Football fans in general are morons especially when it comes to their own teams; I'm not sure I see your point. That doesn't make much difference when it comes to putting butts in the seat. I have seen Houston area Texans fans on a couple of other boards that I frequent that say they are already so fed up with the Texans terrible start to the franchise that if the Texans do not draft Vince that they will cancel their season tickets now and not even wait.

Stupid? Probably, but the Texans still risk losing a lot of revenue if they don't draft the local favorite when they have a chance and then follow it up with several more years of ineptitude. See the top of my post to see my feelings, but then I am not a big Texans fan.
These fans need to ask themselves one question. If R. Bush and Young both played for Texas, which one would they want Houston to draft? Bush is the most talented of the 2, so most would probably lean towards him. As a Lions homer, we're fed up, but still show up for our lumps every year and so will true Houston fans.
 
Which is worth more - a 5th year Pro Bowl RB or a 5th year Pro Bowl LT?   There's your answer.
If you all ready have a probowl back on your roster? Drafting a 5th year pro bowl LT is the answer.
Right answer and I think it's clear from the current values of Shaun Alexander and Walter Jones which one is more important to a football team.
Actually, no, its the wrong answer. Drafting at a position where you already have a pro-bowler under contract is dubious at best. Lets say they draft Bush this year, suck again because their OL, WR2, WR3, and entire D are the same crap as last year, and end up with a top 3 pick again. If the next Gale Sayers declares for the draft, should they draft him too? Our imaginary RB is touted more highly than any RB ever, will be twice as good as Bush, etc, so by that logic, HOU grabs him too. If you want to be the Detroit Lions, go ahead and draft players you don't need. If you want to win football games, draft players that will fill the glaring holes you have on both sides of the ball. Bold prediction: Reggie Bush will never lead the NFL in tackles, interceptions, sacks, pancake blocks, or any other category the Texans need more of than they need rushing yards.
You said we were wrong and then totally supported what we said....I am confused. :confused: Both of us said to draft an offensive lineman.
If you wanted to draft an O-lineman, my bad. Saying "If you all ready have a probowl back on your roster? Drafting a 5th year pro bowl LT is the answer" said to me I draft Ladanian Tomlinson.... :putsthecrackpipedown: :shock: To me, it doesn't matter that Bush is the most highly rated player on your board; he's still not the most highly rated player that you need. That moniker falls on Fergie. Yes, trade down if you can and still get him, but get him no matter what. For comparison, the last "can't miss" RB that I recall was LT2. The last "can't miss" OL was O. Pace. If I recall, the Rams took a litle heat for grabbing Pace #1 overall, but I'd be willing to bet they'd do it all over again today.

 
I voted for Ryan Leaf.... I mean VY.
I'm not sure you could have found a worse comparison. VY is nothing like Leaf, on or off the field.As for the Texans, they should trade the pick and draft needs. However, if they are going to keep it, they should take Vince Young. If they are making a football decision, they don't need a QB or a RB as their highest priority, so trade down and take O-line, defense, maybe even WR or TE. If they don't do that, then make a business decision and draft VY, the guy that will increase their fanbase, give them a chance to compete against the Cowboys in the Texas market, and energize the hometown fans.

Taking Bush IMO is the one move that really makes no sense to me. It's not the best football move or the best business move, so why do it?

 
Which is worth more - a 5th year Pro Bowl RB or a 5th year Pro Bowl LT?   There's your answer.
If you all ready have a probowl back on your roster? Drafting a 5th year pro bowl LT is the answer.
Right answer and I think it's clear from the current values of Shaun Alexander and Walter Jones which one is more important to a football team.
Actually, no, its the wrong answer. Drafting at a position where you already have a pro-bowler under contract is dubious at best. Lets say they draft Bush this year, suck again because their OL, WR2, WR3, and entire D are the same crap as last year, and end up with a top 3 pick again. If the next Gale Sayers declares for the draft, should they draft him too? Our imaginary RB is touted more highly than any RB ever, will be twice as good as Bush, etc, so by that logic, HOU grabs him too. If you want to be the Detroit Lions, go ahead and draft players you don't need. If you want to win football games, draft players that will fill the glaring holes you have on both sides of the ball. Bold prediction: Reggie Bush will never lead the NFL in tackles, interceptions, sacks, pancake blocks, or any other category the Texans need more of than they need rushing yards.
You said we were wrong and then totally supported what we said....I am confused. :confused: Both of us said to draft an offensive lineman.
If you wanted to draft an O-lineman, my bad. Saying "If you all ready have a probowl back on your roster? Drafting a 5th year pro bowl LT is the answer" said to me I draft Ladanian Tomlinson.... :putsthecrackpipedown: :shock: To me, it doesn't matter that Bush is the most highly rated player on your board; he's still not the most highly rated player that you need. That moniker falls on Fergie. Yes, trade down if you can and still get him, but get him no matter what. For comparison, the last "can't miss" RB that I recall was LT2. The last "can't miss" OL was O. Pace. If I recall, the Rams took a litle heat for grabbing Pace #1 overall, but I'd be willing to bet they'd do it all over again today.
If you think the Texans don't need an additional playmaker then you have not watched them too closely. While OL is a higher need for them, it is not like they don't need the things that Bush does. One of the poorest draft strategies is to make a list of your needs and totally ignore the more talented player overall.
 
Not really, I think Bush can be as good as any RB in league.  The problem is that the Texans already have a solid young RB and desperately need a LT.  D'Brick fills the biggest need on the team and is a guy that should be able to stay healthy and remain on the team for a decade.  As a RB, Bush is more likely to get injured and also holds little trade value down the road (see SA and Edge).  Teams would trade a 1st round pick for Walter Jones, Pace, etc. without even blinking, unlike with a RB once he reachs 27-28.
I agree that offensive line is a big need for this team. However they can probably upgrade it later in the draft as well as through free agency if need be. If they can make a deal to trade down a few spots and still land Brick then it would be a good move but otherwise they should take Bush for this reason...How many touchdowns has this team scored since entering the NFL? Bush is the type of playmaker (see Gale Sayers) that can score from anywhere and anytime on the football field. Much like a Barry Sanders, he doesn't need much space to make big plays and he will add a sorely needed dimension to the Texans offense if drafted.

I still believe the best move the Texans can make is to move down and pick up additional picks/players but if that move isn't possible, you can't go wrong with Bush.
Bush is not Gale Sayers. Bush is not Barrry Sanders. Bush is going to be a rookie and will more than likely make the biggest impact on special teams this year. Sorry, a lot of you are just so enamored with him that you are overlooking the fact that he will still be a rookie who will need a year to learn and who knows if he can make it through the whole season without getting injured. Most rookies dont. A lot of scouts dont even think he is an every down back, he wasn't in college.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not really, I think Bush can be as good as any RB in league.  The problem is that the Texans already have a solid young RB and desperately need a LT.  D'Brick fills the biggest need on the team and is a guy that should be able to stay healthy and remain on the team for a decade.  As a RB, Bush is more likely to get injured and also holds little trade value down the road (see SA and Edge).  Teams would trade a 1st round pick for Walter Jones, Pace, etc. without even blinking, unlike with a RB once he reachs 27-28.
I agree that offensive line is a big need for this team. However they can probably upgrade it later in the draft as well as through free agency if need be. If they can make a deal to trade down a few spots and still land Brick then it would be a good move but otherwise they should take Bush for this reason...How many touchdowns has this team scored since entering the NFL? Bush is the type of playmaker (see Gale Sayers) that can score from anywhere and anytime on the football field. Much like a Barry Sanders, he doesn't need much space to make big plays and he will add a sorely needed dimension to the Texans offense if drafted.

I still believe the best move the Texans can make is to move down and pick up additional picks/players but if that move isn't possible, you can't go wrong with Bush.
Bush is not Gale Sayers. Bush is not Barrry Sanders. Bush is going to be a rookie and will more than likely make the biggest impact on special teams this year. Sorry, a lot of you are just so enamored with him that you are overlooking the fact that he will still be a rookie who will need a year to learn and who knows if he can make it through the whole season without getting injured. Most rookies dont
By this statement, you seem to be thinking no more than one year out. The same things can and should be said about all rookies. Example even if D'Brick becomes an all-pro player like he projects, he is just as unlikely to perform at a Pace or Walter Jones level as a rookie either.
 
Not really, I think Bush can be as good as any RB in league.  The problem is that the Texans already have a solid young RB and desperately need a LT.  D'Brick fills the biggest need on the team and is a guy that should be able to stay healthy and remain on the team for a decade.  As a RB, Bush is more likely to get injured and also holds little trade value down the road (see SA and Edge).  Teams would trade a 1st round pick for Walter Jones, Pace, etc. without even blinking, unlike with a RB once he reachs 27-28.
I agree that offensive line is a big need for this team. However they can probably upgrade it later in the draft as well as through free agency if need be. If they can make a deal to trade down a few spots and still land Brick then it would be a good move but otherwise they should take Bush for this reason...How many touchdowns has this team scored since entering the NFL? Bush is the type of playmaker (see Gale Sayers) that can score from anywhere and anytime on the football field. Much like a Barry Sanders, he doesn't need much space to make big plays and he will add a sorely needed dimension to the Texans offense if drafted.

I still believe the best move the Texans can make is to move down and pick up additional picks/players but if that move isn't possible, you can't go wrong with Bush.
Bush is not Gale Sayers. Bush is not Barrry Sanders. Bush is going to be a rookie and will more than likely make the biggest impact on special teams this year. Sorry, a lot of you are just so enamored with him that you are overlooking the fact that he will still be a rookie who will need a year to learn and who knows if he can make it through the whole season without getting injured. Most rookies dont. A lot of scouts dont even think he is an every down back, he wasn't in college.
1) If any team drafts Reggie Bush first overall, he's not playing much if any special teams. MAYBE he'll return some punts/kicks in big games.2) Rookie RBs have a long and storied history of making their impacts right away...

Gayle Sayers was 2nd in the league in rushing and rush TDs in his rookie season
Barry Sanders was 2nd in the league in rushing and rush TDs in his rookie season
Curtis Martin 3rd yards, 3rd rush TDs
Jerome Bettis 2nd yards, 9th rush TDs
Eric Dickerson 1st yards, 2nd rush TDs
Tony Dorsett 9th yards, 2nd rush TDs
Marshall Faulk, 5th yards, 3rd rush TDs
Marcus Allen, 4th yards, 1st rush TDs
Franco Harris, 6th yards, 3rd rush TDs
Eddie George, 5th yards, 10th rush TDs
Corey Dillon, 9th yards, 6th rush TDs
Ottis Anderson, 3rd yards
Earl Campbell, 1st yards, 2nd rush TDs
Edgerrin James, 1st yards, 2nd rush TDs
Fred Taylor, 10th yards, 2nd rush TDs
LaDainian Tomlinson, 9th yards, 4th rush TDs
 
Not really, I think Bush can be as good as any RB in league. The problem is that the Texans already have a solid young RB and desperately need a LT. D'Brick fills the biggest need on the team and is a guy that should be able to stay healthy and remain on the team for a decade. As a RB, Bush is more likely to get injured and also holds little trade value down the road (see SA and Edge). Teams would trade a 1st round pick for Walter Jones, Pace, etc. without even blinking, unlike with a RB once he reachs 27-28.
I agree that offensive line is a big need for this team. However they can probably upgrade it later in the draft as well as through free agency if need be. If they can make a deal to trade down a few spots and still land Brick then it would be a good move but otherwise they should take Bush for this reason...How many touchdowns has this team scored since entering the NFL? Bush is the type of playmaker (see Gale Sayers) that can score from anywhere and anytime on the football field. Much like a Barry Sanders, he doesn't need much space to make big plays and he will add a sorely needed dimension to the Texans offense if drafted.

I still believe the best move the Texans can make is to move down and pick up additional picks/players but if that move isn't possible, you can't go wrong with Bush.
Bush is not Gale Sayers. Bush is not Barrry Sanders. Bush is going to be a rookie and will more than likely make the biggest impact on special teams this year. Sorry, a lot of you are just so enamored with him that you are overlooking the fact that he will still be a rookie who will need a year to learn and who knows if he can make it through the whole season without getting injured. Most rookies dont. A lot of scouts dont even think he is an every down back, he wasn't in college.
1) If any team drafts Reggie Bush first overall, he's not playing much if any special teams. MAYBE he'll return some punts/kicks in big games.2) Rookie RBs have a long and storied history of making their impacts right away...

Gayle Sayers was 2nd in the league in rushing and rush TDs in his rookie season
Barry Sanders was 2nd in the league in rushing and rush TDs in his rookie season
Curtis Martin 3rd yards, 3rd rush TDs
Jerome Bettis 2nd yards, 9th rush TDs
Eric Dickerson 1st yards, 2nd rush TDs
Tony Dorsett 9th yards, 2nd rush TDs
Marshall Faulk, 5th yards, 3rd rush TDs
Marcus Allen, 4th yards, 1st rush TDs
Franco Harris, 6th yards, 3rd rush TDs
Eddie George, 5th yards, 10th rush TDs
Corey Dillon, 9th yards, 6th rush TDs
Ottis Anderson, 3rd yards
Earl Campbell, 1st yards, 2nd rush TDs
Edgerrin James, 1st yards, 2nd rush TDs
Fred Taylor, 10th yards, 2nd rush TDs
LaDainian Tomlinson, 9th yards, 4th rush TDs
Woodrow beat me to it with this post...Will Bush be the next Sayers?

Will Bush be the next great rookie back?

Both of those are impossible to answer right now but after watching him play over the past couple of seasons, his vision and quickness are unsurpassed and he'll have an impact as a rookie no matter where he plays. Bush is that good of a player.

 
Not really, I think Bush can be as good as any RB in league.  The problem is that the Texans already have a solid young RB and desperately need a LT.  D'Brick fills the biggest need on the team and is a guy that should be able to stay healthy and remain on the team for a decade.  As a RB, Bush is more likely to get injured and also holds little trade value down the road (see SA and Edge).  Teams would trade a 1st round pick for Walter Jones, Pace, etc. without even blinking, unlike with a RB once he reachs 27-28.
I agree that offensive line is a big need for this team. However they can probably upgrade it later in the draft as well as through free agency if need be. If they can make a deal to trade down a few spots and still land Brick then it would be a good move but otherwise they should take Bush for this reason...How many touchdowns has this team scored since entering the NFL? Bush is the type of playmaker (see Gale Sayers) that can score from anywhere and anytime on the football field. Much like a Barry Sanders, he doesn't need much space to make big plays and he will add a sorely needed dimension to the Texans offense if drafted.

I still believe the best move the Texans can make is to move down and pick up additional picks/players but if that move isn't possible, you can't go wrong with Bush.
Bush is not Gale Sayers. Bush is not Barrry Sanders. Bush is going to be a rookie and will more than likely make the biggest impact on special teams this year. Sorry, a lot of you are just so enamored with him that you are overlooking the fact that he will still be a rookie who will need a year to learn and who knows if he can make it through the whole season without getting injured. Most rookies dont
By this statement, you seem to be thinking no more than one year out. The same things can and should be said about all rookies. Example even if D'Brick becomes an all-pro player like he projects, he is just as unlikely to perform at a Pace or Walter Jones level as a rookie either.
Right but the Texans don't NEED a RB. They have one all ready that they dont have to wait on. Drafting Bush makes no sense to me. I understand that everyone thinks he is the second coming of Sayers but......
 
Not really, I think Bush can be as good as any RB in league.  The problem is that the Texans already have a solid young RB and desperately need a LT.  D'Brick fills the biggest need on the team and is a guy that should be able to stay healthy and remain on the team for a decade.  As a RB, Bush is more likely to get injured and also holds little trade value down the road (see SA and Edge).  Teams would trade a 1st round pick for Walter Jones, Pace, etc. without even blinking, unlike with a RB once he reachs 27-28.
I agree that offensive line is a big need for this team. However they can probably upgrade it later in the draft as well as through free agency if need be. If they can make a deal to trade down a few spots and still land Brick then it would be a good move but otherwise they should take Bush for this reason...How many touchdowns has this team scored since entering the NFL? Bush is the type of playmaker (see Gale Sayers) that can score from anywhere and anytime on the football field. Much like a Barry Sanders, he doesn't need much space to make big plays and he will add a sorely needed dimension to the Texans offense if drafted.

I still believe the best move the Texans can make is to move down and pick up additional picks/players but if that move isn't possible, you can't go wrong with Bush.
Bush is not Gale Sayers. Bush is not Barrry Sanders. Bush is going to be a rookie and will more than likely make the biggest impact on special teams this year. Sorry, a lot of you are just so enamored with him that you are overlooking the fact that he will still be a rookie who will need a year to learn and who knows if he can make it through the whole season without getting injured. Most rookies dont
By this statement, you seem to be thinking no more than one year out. The same things can and should be said about all rookies. Example even if D'Brick becomes an all-pro player like he projects, he is just as unlikely to perform at a Pace or Walter Jones level as a rookie either.
Right but the Texans don't NEED a RB. They have one all ready that they dont have to wait on. Drafting Bush makes no sense to me. I understand that everyone thinks he is the second coming of Sayers but......
some thoughts1- DomDavis is "just another guy" in term of NFL RBs. Good enough, but not great. He is fine unless you get the opportunity to get someone who is truly special...Bush could be considered that opportunity.

2-One of the things that makes Bush the prospect that he does not have line-up behind QB and take 22-25 handoffs to be effective. RB is a convient handle for him, but he is more offensive tool than pure classic RB.

3- Davis and Bush should be able to co-exist. Kubiak handled Bell and Anderson this year and neither of those guys are as multi-talented as Bush and maybe even Davis.

4- drafting Bush DOES NOT preclude the Texans from resolving issues in other rounds of the draft, FA and simply being a better coached football team. Honestly, the Texans will have to draft better in 2nd and 3rd rounds than they have no matter what direction they go in the first.

 
Not really, I think Bush can be as good as any RB in league.  The problem is that the Texans already have a solid young RB and desperately need a LT.  D'Brick fills the biggest need on the team and is a guy that should be able to stay healthy and remain on the team for a decade.  As a RB, Bush is more likely to get injured and also holds little trade value down the road (see SA and Edge).  Teams would trade a 1st round pick for Walter Jones, Pace, etc. without even blinking, unlike with a RB once he reachs 27-28.
I agree that offensive line is a big need for this team. However they can probably upgrade it later in the draft as well as through free agency if need be. If they can make a deal to trade down a few spots and still land Brick then it would be a good move but otherwise they should take Bush for this reason...How many touchdowns has this team scored since entering the NFL? Bush is the type of playmaker (see Gale Sayers) that can score from anywhere and anytime on the football field. Much like a Barry Sanders, he doesn't need much space to make big plays and he will add a sorely needed dimension to the Texans offense if drafted.

I still believe the best move the Texans can make is to move down and pick up additional picks/players but if that move isn't possible, you can't go wrong with Bush.
Bush is not Gale Sayers. Bush is not Barrry Sanders. Bush is going to be a rookie and will more than likely make the biggest impact on special teams this year. Sorry, a lot of you are just so enamored with him that you are overlooking the fact that he will still be a rookie who will need a year to learn and who knows if he can make it through the whole season without getting injured. Most rookies dont
By this statement, you seem to be thinking no more than one year out. The same things can and should be said about all rookies. Example even if D'Brick becomes an all-pro player like he projects, he is just as unlikely to perform at a Pace or Walter Jones level as a rookie either.
Right but the Texans don't NEED a RB. They have one all ready that they dont have to wait on. Drafting Bush makes no sense to me. I understand that everyone thinks he is the second coming of Sayers but......
some thoughts1- DomDavis is "just another guy" in term of NFL RBs. Good enough, but not great. He is fine unless you get the opportunity to get someone who is truly special...Bush could be considered that opportunity.

2-One of the things that makes Bush the prospect that he does not have line-up behind QB and take 22-25 handoffs to be effective. RB is a convient handle for him, but he is more offensive tool than pure classic RB.

3- Davis and Bush should be able to co-exist. Kubiak handled Bell and Anderson this year and neither of those guys are as multi-talented as Bush and maybe even Davis.

4- drafting Bush DOES NOT preclude the Texans from resolving issues in other rounds of the draft, FA and simply being a better coached football team. Honestly, the Texans will have to draft better in 2nd and 3rd rounds than they have no matter what direction they go in the first.
I'll agree with 2-4 but not 1. Dom Davis is not an average back. The guy is a real threat out of the back field and is a lot more like Marshall Faulk than a run of the mill running back. I think a lot of people haven't seen him play that are chiming in in this thread. He plays behind the worst offensive line in the NFL and he still puts up strong numbers. He got a little banged up last year but still posted solid numbers. You talk about the versatility of Bush, how about Dom Davis? He averages over 4 yards per carry for his carrer. Just one year ago he had 68 receptions for 588 yards. That is pretty darn versatile. He caught 154 balls for 1296 yards in three years and he didn't even play a full season last year and he has only played in 40 total games. He is set to break out year this season with some help in place around him. Who knows how good he can be with some talent around him?

No one feared Carr and the third rate linemen and receivers. They dont even have a decent TE. Name the two starting TE for the Texans without looking it up in Google. Not many people can.

The bottom line is the Texans DONT NEED BUSH! The Texans need help elsewhere.

 
Not really, I think Bush can be as good as any RB in league.  The problem is that the Texans already have a solid young RB and desperately need a LT.  D'Brick fills the biggest need on the team and is a guy that should be able to stay healthy and remain on the team for a decade.  As a RB, Bush is more likely to get injured and also holds little trade value down the road (see SA and Edge).  Teams would trade a 1st round pick for Walter Jones, Pace, etc. without even blinking, unlike with a RB once he reachs 27-28.
I agree that offensive line is a big need for this team. However they can probably upgrade it later in the draft as well as through free agency if need be. If they can make a deal to trade down a few spots and still land Brick then it would be a good move but otherwise they should take Bush for this reason...How many touchdowns has this team scored since entering the NFL? Bush is the type of playmaker (see Gale Sayers) that can score from anywhere and anytime on the football field. Much like a Barry Sanders, he doesn't need much space to make big plays and he will add a sorely needed dimension to the Texans offense if drafted.

I still believe the best move the Texans can make is to move down and pick up additional picks/players but if that move isn't possible, you can't go wrong with Bush.
Bush is not Gale Sayers. Bush is not Barrry Sanders. Bush is going to be a rookie and will more than likely make the biggest impact on special teams this year. Sorry, a lot of you are just so enamored with him that you are overlooking the fact that he will still be a rookie who will need a year to learn and who knows if he can make it through the whole season without getting injured. Most rookies dont
By this statement, you seem to be thinking no more than one year out. The same things can and should be said about all rookies. Example even if D'Brick becomes an all-pro player like he projects, he is just as unlikely to perform at a Pace or Walter Jones level as a rookie either.
Right but the Texans don't NEED a RB. They have one all ready that they dont have to wait on. Drafting Bush makes no sense to me. I understand that everyone thinks he is the second coming of Sayers but......
some thoughts1- DomDavis is "just another guy" in term of NFL RBs. Good enough, but not great. He is fine unless you get the opportunity to get someone who is truly special...Bush could be considered that opportunity.

2-One of the things that makes Bush the prospect that he does not have line-up behind QB and take 22-25 handoffs to be effective. RB is a convient handle for him, but he is more offensive tool than pure classic RB.

3- Davis and Bush should be able to co-exist. Kubiak handled Bell and Anderson this year and neither of those guys are as multi-talented as Bush and maybe even Davis.

4- drafting Bush DOES NOT preclude the Texans from resolving issues in other rounds of the draft, FA and simply being a better coached football team. Honestly, the Texans will have to draft better in 2nd and 3rd rounds than they have no matter what direction they go in the first.
I'll agree with 2-4 but not 1. Dom Davis is not an average back. The guy is a real threat out of the back field and is a lot more like Marshall Faulk than a run of the mill running back. I think a lot of people haven't seen him play that are chiming in in this thread. He plays behind the worst offensive line in the NFL and he still puts up strong numbers. He got a little banged up last year but still posted solid numbers. You talk about the versatility of Bush, how about Dom Davis? He averages over 4 yards per carry for his carrer. Just one year ago he had 68 receptions for 588 yards. That is pretty darn versatile. He caught 154 balls for 1296 yards in three years and he didn't even play a full season last year and he has only played in 40 total games. He is set to break out year this season with some help in place around him. Who knows how good he can be with some talent around him?

No one feared Carr and the third rate linemen and receivers. They dont even have a decent TE. Name the two starting TE for the Texans without looking it up in Google. Not many people can.

The bottom line is the Texans DONT NEED BUSH! The Texans need help elsewhere.
Here's the thing...whether you're pro Bush or pro Davis or both. All that matters is what Casserly, Kubiak and McNair think. And frankly, no matter what we see or read in box scores, there's no one on the planet more qualified to determine if Dom Davis is closer to "average" or not than the guys running the franchise. If THEY think Davis isn't a special player, they'll take Bush excitedly. If they happen to agree more with your viewpoint, they'll likely move the pick or take someone else. Time will tell.
 
True. I just dont think Bush is the answer to all of their prayers.....

Wouldn't be the first time a Bush in Texas was disappointing....

 
Here are the starting NFL RBs for 2005:

Willis McGahee

Ricky Williams/Ronnie Brown

Corey Dillon

Curtis Martin

Julius Jones

Tiki Barber

Brian Westbrook

Clinton Portis

Jamal Lewis

Rudi Johnson

Reuben Droughns

Willie Parker/Jerome Bettis

Thomas Jones

Kevin Jones

Ahman Green

Michael Bennett/Mewelde Moore

Edgerrin James

Fred Taylor

Chris Brown

Warrick Dunn

Stephen Davis/Deshaun Foster

Deuce McAllister

Cadillac Williams

Mike Anderson

Larry Johnson

LaMont Jordan

LaDainian Tomlinson

JJ Arrington/Marcel Shipp

Steven Jackson

Kevan Barlow/Frank Gore

Shaun Alexander

I'm not sure how anyone can look at this list of backs and conclude that Domanick Davis is an above average NFL starter. I think he ranks in the bottom third of this list. I'd probably take him over Shipp/Arrington, Barlow/Gore, Anderson, and Parker/Bettis. I think you can make a strong case for any of the remaining backs being better than DD. A few of them are getting old (Dillon, Martin) and a few of them had bad years in 2005 (J. Lewis, K. Jones, Jackson), but I think they're close with DD in terms of ability.

 
Not really, I think Bush can be as good as any RB in league.  The problem is that the Texans already have a solid young RB and desperately need a LT.  D'Brick fills the biggest need on the team and is a guy that should be able to stay healthy and remain on the team for a decade.  As a RB, Bush is more likely to get injured and also holds little trade value down the road (see SA and Edge).  Teams would trade a 1st round pick for Walter Jones, Pace, etc. without even blinking, unlike with a RB once he reachs 27-28.
I agree that offensive line is a big need for this team. However they can probably upgrade it later in the draft as well as through free agency if need be. If they can make a deal to trade down a few spots and still land Brick then it would be a good move but otherwise they should take Bush for this reason...How many touchdowns has this team scored since entering the NFL? Bush is the type of playmaker (see Gale Sayers) that can score from anywhere and anytime on the football field. Much like a Barry Sanders, he doesn't need much space to make big plays and he will add a sorely needed dimension to the Texans offense if drafted.

I still believe the best move the Texans can make is to move down and pick up additional picks/players but if that move isn't possible, you can't go wrong with Bush.
Bush is not Gale Sayers. Bush is not Barrry Sanders. Bush is going to be a rookie and will more than likely make the biggest impact on special teams this year. Sorry, a lot of you are just so enamored with him that you are overlooking the fact that he will still be a rookie who will need a year to learn and who knows if he can make it through the whole season without getting injured. Most rookies dont
By this statement, you seem to be thinking no more than one year out. The same things can and should be said about all rookies. Example even if D'Brick becomes an all-pro player like he projects, he is just as unlikely to perform at a Pace or Walter Jones level as a rookie either.
Right but the Texans don't NEED a RB. They have one all ready that they dont have to wait on. Drafting Bush makes no sense to me. I understand that everyone thinks he is the second coming of Sayers but......
some thoughts1- DomDavis is "just another guy" in term of NFL RBs. Good enough, but not great. He is fine unless you get the opportunity to get someone who is truly special...Bush could be considered that opportunity.

2-One of the things that makes Bush the prospect that he does not have line-up behind QB and take 22-25 handoffs to be effective. RB is a convient handle for him, but he is more offensive tool than pure classic RB.

3- Davis and Bush should be able to co-exist. Kubiak handled Bell and Anderson this year and neither of those guys are as multi-talented as Bush and maybe even Davis.

4- drafting Bush DOES NOT preclude the Texans from resolving issues in other rounds of the draft, FA and simply being a better coached football team. Honestly, the Texans will have to draft better in 2nd and 3rd rounds than they have no matter what direction they go in the first.
I'll agree with 2-4 but not 1. Dom Davis is not an average back. The guy is a real threat out of the back field and is a lot more like Marshall Faulk than a run of the mill running back. I think a lot of people haven't seen him play that are chiming in in this thread. He plays behind the worst offensive line in the NFL and he still puts up strong numbers. He got a little banged up last year but still posted solid numbers. You talk about the versatility of Bush, how about Dom Davis? He averages over 4 yards per carry for his carrer. Just one year ago he had 68 receptions for 588 yards. That is pretty darn versatile. He caught 154 balls for 1296 yards in three years and he didn't even play a full season last year and he has only played in 40 total games. He is set to break out year this season with some help in place around him. Who knows how good he can be with some talent around him?

No one feared Carr and the third rate linemen and receivers. They dont even have a decent TE. Name the two starting TE for the Texans without looking it up in Google. Not many people can.

The bottom line is the Texans DONT NEED BUSH! The Texans need help elsewhere.
TEs Mark Breuner and Marcelus (SP) Rivers.. ;) ...I have seen 90% to 95% of the plays that the Texans have run in thier history and moderate on the official board. I like DomDavis, but he has everything fall in place to max out his production in a very TB friendly system. The Texans are not seeking out a replacement, a guy widely thought to be a supreme talent is sitting in thier lap. Not a knock against DomDavis, but a vote for Bush.

 
I'm not sure how anyone can look at this list of backs and conclude that Domanick Davis is an above average NFL starter. I think he ranks in the bottom third of this list. I'd probably take him over Shipp/Arrington, Barlow/Gore, Anderson, and Parker/Bettis. I think you can make a strong case for any of the remaining backs being better than DD. A few of them are getting old (Dillon, Martin) and a few of them had bad years in 2005 (J. Lewis, K. Jones, Jackson), but I think they're close with DD in terms of ability.
How about looking at this list insteadRank Player Team G Rush Yds Avg Lg TD 1st Stf YdL Fum FbL

1 Shaun Alexander SEA 16 370 1880 5.1 88 27 107 41 100 5 1

2 Tiki Barber NYG 16 357 1860 5.2 95 9 72 34 82 1 1

3 Larry Johnson KC 16 336 1750 5.2 49 20 97 19 41 5 4

4 Clinton Portis WAS 16 352 1516 4.3 47 11 74 27 45 3 2

5 Edgerrin James IND 15 360 1506 4.2 33 13 94 27 56 2 1

6 LaDainian Tomlinson SD 16 339 1462 4.3 62 18 71 31 55 2 0

7 Rudi Johnson CIN 16 337 1458 4.3 33 12 79 23 53 1 0

8 Warrick Dunn ATL 16 280 1416 5.1 65 3 65 16 35 1 0

9 Thomas Jones CHI 15 314 1335 4.3 42 9 61 29 57 2 2

10 Willis McGahee BUF 16 325 1247 3.8 27 5 71 27 52 1 1

11 Reuben Droughns CLE 16 309 1232 4.0 75 2 60 30 77 6 1

12 Willie Parker PIT 15 255 1202 4.7 80 4 47 30 65 4 0

13 Carnell Williams TB 14 290 1178 4.1 71 6 54 28 61 3 2

14 Steven Jackson STL 15 254 1046 4.1 51 8 50 47 95 3 3

15 LaMont Jordan OAK 14 272 1025 3.8 26 9 61 25 55 2 1

16 Mike Anderson DEN 15 239 1014 4.2 44 12 62 9 16 1 1

17 Julius Jones DAL 13 257 993 3.9 51 5 47 29 44 4 2

18 Domanick Davis HOU 11 230 976 4.2 44 2 39 16 30 1 1

19 Tatum Bell DEN 14 173 921 5.3 68 8 41 14 28 3 1

20 Ronnie Brown MIA 15 207 907 4.4 65 4 41 21 46 3 3

21 Jamal Lewis BAL 15 269 906 3.4 25 3 48 32 69 5 5

22 DeShaun Foster CAR 15 205 879 4.3 70 2 34 14 21 1 0

23 Chris Brown TEN 15 224 851 3.8 38 5 37 24 58 3 2

24 Fred Taylor JAC 11 194 787 4.1 71 3 26 24 45 0 0

25 Ricky Williams MIA 12 168 743 4.4 35 6 37 19 32 1 1

26 Curtis Martin NYJ 12 220 735 3.3 49 5 35 21 36 2 1

27 Corey Dillon NE 11 209 733 3.5 29 12 49 23 59 1 1

28 Kevin Jones DET 13 186 664 3.6 40 5 26 18 42 2 0

29 Mewelde Moore MIN 14 155 662 4.3 33 1 32 17 44 1 1

30 Antowain Smith NO 16 166 659 4.0 42 3 23 9 22 2 2

18th in rushing yards despite missing 5 games, not to mention 337 rec yards. Yeah, he's terrible, can't see why anyone would want him, much less HOU. :rolleyes:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm not sure how anyone can look at this list of backs and conclude that Domanick Davis is an above average NFL starter. I think he ranks in the bottom third of this list. I'd probably take him over Shipp/Arrington, Barlow/Gore, Anderson, and Parker/Bettis. I think you can make a strong case for any of the remaining backs being better than DD. A few of them are getting old (Dillon, Martin) and a few of them had bad years in 2005 (J. Lewis, K. Jones, Jackson), but I think they're close with DD in terms of ability.
18th in rushing yards despite missing 5 games, not to mention 337 rec yards. Yeah, he's terrible, can't see why anyone would want him, much less HOU. :rolleyes:
People are just so enamored with the "shiny new toy" that they overlook common sense. Domanick Davis is a top ten back at worst when healthy and with some talent in place around him. So what if Reggie Bush is top five, not much difference for the price. No way Bush will be better than Alexander, LJ, LT, Edge any time soon if ever. I see him as an expensive Warrick Dunn at best.
 
I'm not sure how anyone can look at this list of backs and conclude that Domanick Davis is an above average NFL starter. I think he ranks in the bottom third of this list. I'd probably take him over Shipp/Arrington, Barlow/Gore, Anderson, and Parker/Bettis. I think you can make a strong case for any of the remaining backs being better than DD. A few of them are getting old (Dillon, Martin) and a few of them had bad years in 2005 (J. Lewis, K. Jones, Jackson), but I think they're close with DD in terms of ability.
How about looking at this list insteadRank Player Team G Rush Yds Avg Lg TD 1st Stf YdL Fum FbL

1 Shaun Alexander SEA 16 370 1880 5.1 88 27 107 41 100 5 1

2 Tiki Barber NYG 16 357 1860 5.2 95 9 72 34 82 1 1

3 Larry Johnson KC 16 336 1750 5.2 49 20 97 19 41 5 4

4 Clinton Portis WAS 16 352 1516 4.3 47 11 74 27 45 3 2

5 Edgerrin James IND 15 360 1506 4.2 33 13 94 27 56 2 1

6 LaDainian Tomlinson SD 16 339 1462 4.3 62 18 71 31 55 2 0

7 Rudi Johnson CIN 16 337 1458 4.3 33 12 79 23 53 1 0

8 Warrick Dunn ATL 16 280 1416 5.1 65 3 65 16 35 1 0

9 Thomas Jones CHI 15 314 1335 4.3 42 9 61 29 57 2 2

10 Willis McGahee BUF 16 325 1247 3.8 27 5 71 27 52 1 1

11 Reuben Droughns CLE 16 309 1232 4.0 75 2 60 30 77 6 1

12 Willie Parker PIT 15 255 1202 4.7 80 4 47 30 65 4 0

13 Carnell Williams TB 14 290 1178 4.1 71 6 54 28 61 3 2

14 Steven Jackson STL 15 254 1046 4.1 51 8 50 47 95 3 3

15 LaMont Jordan OAK 14 272 1025 3.8 26 9 61 25 55 2 1

16 Mike Anderson DEN 15 239 1014 4.2 44 12 62 9 16 1 1

17 Julius Jones DAL 13 257 993 3.9 51 5 47 29 44 4 2

18 Domanick Davis HOU 11 230 976 4.2 44 2 39 16 30 1 1

19 Tatum Bell DEN 14 173 921 5.3 68 8 41 14 28 3 1

20 Ronnie Brown MIA 15 207 907 4.4 65 4 41 21 46 3 3

21 Jamal Lewis BAL 15 269 906 3.4 25 3 48 32 69 5 5

22 DeShaun Foster CAR 15 205 879 4.3 70 2 34 14 21 1 0

23 Chris Brown TEN 15 224 851 3.8 38 5 37 24 58 3 2

24 Fred Taylor JAC 11 194 787 4.1 71 3 26 24 45 0 0

25 Ricky Williams MIA 12 168 743 4.4 35 6 37 19 32 1 1

26 Curtis Martin NYJ 12 220 735 3.3 49 5 35 21 36 2 1

27 Corey Dillon NE 11 209 733 3.5 29 12 49 23 59 1 1

28 Kevin Jones DET 13 186 664 3.6 40 5 26 18 42 2 0

29 Mewelde Moore MIN 14 155 662 4.3 33 1 32 17 44 1 1

30 Antowain Smith NO 16 166 659 4.0 42 3 23 9 22 2 2

18th in rushing yards despite missing 5 games, not to mention 337 rec yards. Yeah, he's terrible, can't see why anyone would want him, much less HOU. :rolleyes:
All that proves is that he got a lot of carries. While no backs above him on that list had less carries, only one back below him had more.
 
I'm not sure how anyone can look at this list of backs and conclude that Domanick Davis is an above average NFL starter. I think he ranks in the bottom third of this list. I'd probably take him over Shipp/Arrington, Barlow/Gore, Anderson, and Parker/Bettis. I think you can make a strong case for any of the remaining backs being better than DD. A few of them are getting old (Dillon, Martin) and a few of them had bad years in 2005 (J. Lewis, K. Jones, Jackson), but I think they're close with DD in terms of ability.
18th in rushing yards despite missing 5 games, not to mention 337 rec yards. Yeah, he's terrible, can't see why anyone would want him, much less HOU. :rolleyes:
People are just so enamored with the "shiny new toy" that they overlook common sense. Domanick Davis is a top ten back at worst when healthy and with some talent in place around him. So what if Reggie Bush is top five, not much difference for the price. No way Bush will be better than Alexander, LJ, LT, Edge any time soon if ever. I see him as an expensive Warrick Dunn at best.
He's not a top ten back.At 100%, these guys are definitely better than DD:

Larry Johnson

LaDainian Tomlinson

Shaun Alexander

Edgerrin James

Deuce McAllister

Tiki Barber

Cadillac Williams

Ahman Green

Clinton Portis

Jamal Lewis

You can make a pretty strong case for these guys being better than DD:

Steven Jackson

Thomas Jones

Rudi Johnson

Brian Westbrook

Warrick Dunn

Fred Taylor

Willis McGahee

LaMont Jordan

Kevin Jones

Ricky Williams

Ronnie Brown

Julius Jones

Like I said, he's no better than average. Passing on Bush because you have DD is like passing on Cadillac because you have Pittman.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Like I said, he's no better than average. Passing on Bush because you have DD is like passing on Cadillac because you have Pittman.

All that proves is that he got a lot of carries. While no backs above him on that list had less carries, only one back below him had more.
Except that you can't compare DD to Pittman. Pittman has been nothing but a disapointment since soming into the league. DD has been 15th (T), 11th, and 18th in NFL rushing yards, despite missing 8 games. Throw in his well above average (for a RB) receiving stats, and you still want to tell me he's in the bottom 3rd of the league? :rolleyes: Yep he had a lot of carries. What NFL head coach gives loads of carries to crappy RBs?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Like I said, he's no better than average. Passing on Bush because you have DD is like passing on Cadillac because you have Pittman.
Except that you can't compare DD to Pittman. Pittman has been nothing but a disapointment since soming into the league. DD has been 15th (T), 11th, and 18th in NFL rushing yards, despite missing 8 games. Throw in his well above average (for a RB) receiving stats, and you still want to tell me he's in the bottom 3rd of the league? :rolleyes:
Michael PittmanCareer YPC average - 4.0

Career yards/reception average - 8.2

Domanick Davis

Career YPC average - 4.1

Career yards/reception average - 8.3

Looks pretty close to me. I know it's not quite as simple as this, but I don't think the Pittman/Davis comparison is as far-fetched as it seems. Last year I said that Thomas Jones was as productive as DD in 2004. A lot of people had a big problem with this, but Jones went on to have a pretty strong 2005 season on a weak team.

Anyhow, I don't think Domanick Davis is a bad player, but I don't think he's in the elite class of NFL backs. His stats are decent, but he benefits from a large number of touches and has been unable to stay healthy with his heavy workload.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Like I said, he's no better than average. Passing on Bush because you have DD is like passing on Cadillac because you have Pittman.
Except that you can't compare DD to Pittman. Pittman has been nothing but a disapointment since soming into the league. DD has been 15th (T), 11th, and 18th in NFL rushing yards, despite missing 8 games. Throw in his well above average (for a RB) receiving stats, and you still want to tell me he's in the bottom 3rd of the league? :rolleyes:
Michael PittmanCareer YPC average - 4.0

Career yards/reception average - 8.2

Domanick Davis

Career YPC average - 4.1

Career yards/reception average - 8.3

Looks pretty close to me. I know it's not quite as simple as this, but I don't think the Pittman/Davis comparison is as far-fetched as it seems. Last year I said that Thomas Jones was as productive as DD in 2004. A lot of people had a big problem with this, but Jones went on to have a pretty strong 2005 season on a weak team.

Anyhow, I don't think Domanick Davis is a bad player, but I don't think he's in the elite class of NFL backs. His stats are decent, but he benefits from a large number of touches and has been unable to stay healthy with his heavy workload.
I never wanted to argue that he was an elite back. I'd agree with your top 10 being better than him, but he more than belongs in that second group. Never said he wasn't injury-prone either. He deserves the label as much as Fred Taylor, who I think is the more apt comparison: Taylor is a better runner, DD a better receiver, making overall talent ~equal. Both can be counted on for decent production, but not for a full season. DD will never be a top 5 back, but HOU doesn't need one. I can name 3 backs on the last 10 SB winners who wouldn't be considered more than bottom 1/3 in the league; but how many SB winners had O-lines in the bottom 1/2 of the league?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Like I said, he's no better than average. Passing on Bush because you have DD is like passing on Cadillac because you have Pittman.
Except that you can't compare DD to Pittman. Pittman has been nothing but a disapointment since soming into the league. DD has been 15th (T), 11th, and 18th in NFL rushing yards, despite missing 8 games. Throw in his well above average (for a RB) receiving stats, and you still want to tell me he's in the bottom 3rd of the league? :rolleyes:
Michael PittmanCareer YPC average - 4.0

Career yards/reception average - 8.2

Domanick Davis

Career YPC average - 4.1

Career yards/reception average - 8.3

Looks pretty close to me. I know it's not quite as simple as this, but I don't think the Pittman/Davis comparison is as far-fetched as it seems. Last year I said that Thomas Jones was as productive as DD in 2004. A lot of people had a big problem with this, but Jones went on to have a pretty strong 2005 season on a weak team.

Anyhow, I don't think Domanick Davis is a bad player, but I don't think he's in the elite class of NFL backs. His stats are decent, but he benefits from a large number of touches and has been unable to stay healthy with his heavy workload.
I never wanted to argue that he was an elite back. I'd agree with your top 10 being better than him, but he more than belongs in that second group. Never said he wasn't injury-prone either. He deserves the label as much as Fred Taylor, who I think is the more apt comparison: Taylor is a better runner, DD a better receiver, making overall talent ~equal. Both can be counted on for decent production, but not for a full season. DD will never be a top 5 back, but HOU doesn't need one. I can name 3 backs on the last 10 SB winners who wouldn't be considered more than bottom 1/3 in the league; but how many SB winners had O-lines in the bottom 1/2 of the league?
The problem I have with the general tone of these threads is a this thought that the Texans are not resovling issues with the OL by not taking one in the first round. Good offensive lines are constructed picks throughout the draft and acquiring FA who fit the system that you are running. Houston has not handled the acquisition of OLmen any differently than anyone else. They have just done a poor job of recognizing the right guys and putting a quality unit together. Ironically, the last two Superbowl winners to have an extremely high picks playing OLT (Ravens and Rams) are also the ones who had RBs who were clear top 10 runners with high draft choices spent on them. Historically, the high pick OT has no more of a correlation to Superbowl success than the high pick RB.

 
Like I said, he's no better than average. Passing on Bush because you have DD is like passing on Cadillac because you have Pittman.
Except that you can't compare DD to Pittman. Pittman has been nothing but a disapointment since soming into the league. DD has been 15th (T), 11th, and 18th in NFL rushing yards, despite missing 8 games. Throw in his well above average (for a RB) receiving stats, and you still want to tell me he's in the bottom 3rd of the league? :rolleyes:
Michael PittmanCareer YPC average - 4.0

Career yards/reception average - 8.2

Domanick Davis

Career YPC average - 4.1

Career yards/reception average - 8.3

Looks pretty close to me. I know it's not quite as simple as this, but I don't think the Pittman/Davis comparison is as far-fetched as it seems. Last year I said that Thomas Jones was as productive as DD in 2004. A lot of people had a big problem with this, but Jones went on to have a pretty strong 2005 season on a weak team.

Anyhow, I don't think Domanick Davis is a bad player, but I don't think he's in the elite class of NFL backs. His stats are decent, but he benefits from a large number of touches and has been unable to stay healthy with his heavy workload.
I never wanted to argue that he was an elite back. I'd agree with your top 10 being better than him, but he more than belongs in that second group. Never said he wasn't injury-prone either. He deserves the label as much as Fred Taylor, who I think is the more apt comparison: Taylor is a better runner, DD a better receiver, making overall talent ~equal. Both can be counted on for decent production, but not for a full season. DD will never be a top 5 back, but HOU doesn't need one. I can name 3 backs on the last 10 SB winners who wouldn't be considered more than bottom 1/3 in the league; but how many SB winners had O-lines in the bottom 1/2 of the league?
The problem I have with the general tone of these threads is a this thought that the Texans are not resovling issues with the OL by not taking one in the first round. Good offensive lines are constructed picks throughout the draft and acquiring FA who fit the system that you are running. Houston has not handled the acquisition of OLmen any differently than anyone else. They have just done a poor job of recognizing the right guys and putting a quality unit together. Ironically, the last two Superbowl winners to have an extremely high picks playing OLT (Ravens and Rams) are also the ones who had RBs who were clear top 10 runners with high draft choices spent on them. Historically, the high pick OT has no more of a correlation to Superbowl success than the high pick RB.
:goodposting: There's no one player that's going to make the Texans complete. That's EXACTLY why they should take the best player on their board. Period. If he's a tackle, great. If he's a linebacker, great. If he's a RB, great.

The idea that a franchise like Houston could afford to take someone with a lower grade based on perceived positional need is misguided. The consensus says Bush will be the guy atop their board, but none of us know that for sure.

 
Here are the starting NFL RBs for 2005:

Willis McGahee

Ricky Williams/Ronnie Brown

Corey Dillon

Curtis Martin

Julius Jones

Tiki Barber

Brian Westbrook

Clinton Portis

Jamal Lewis

Rudi Johnson

Reuben Droughns

Willie Parker/Jerome Bettis

Thomas Jones

Kevin Jones

Ahman Green

Michael Bennett/Mewelde Moore

Edgerrin James

Fred Taylor

Chris Brown

Warrick Dunn

Stephen Davis/Deshaun Foster

Deuce McAllister

Cadillac Williams

Mike Anderson

Larry Johnson

LaMont Jordan

LaDainian Tomlinson

JJ Arrington/Marcel Shipp

Steven Jackson

Kevan Barlow/Frank Gore

Shaun Alexander

I'm not sure how anyone can look at this list of backs and conclude that Domanick Davis is an above average NFL starter. I think he ranks in the bottom third of this list. I'd probably take him over Shipp/Arrington, Barlow/Gore, Anderson, and Parker/Bettis. I think you can make a strong case for any of the remaining backs being better than DD.
LOL and wtfoI also give a :loco: to anyone who thinks a team should ignore their current roster when considering who to draft.

Finally one more goes to anyone who doesn't get that if they upgraded their OL, what a big impact it would have on the "skill" players.

The only thing stupider than drafting Bush (within reason) would be drafting Young because he's a "home boy"

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'll go on record saying that if the Texans draft Bush they won't make the playoffs in the next 3 years, but if they draft D'Brick they will. I'll also say that with D'Brick, Carr will become a top 10 QB and Andre Johnson will be a consistent Pro Bowl WR. That's how important the LT position is and what a difference an elite LT can make.

:blackdot:

 
Like I said, he's no better than average. Passing on Bush because you have DD is like passing on Cadillac because you have Pittman.
Except that you can't compare DD to Pittman. Pittman has been nothing but a disapointment since soming into the league. DD has been 15th (T), 11th, and 18th in NFL rushing yards, despite missing 8 games. Throw in his well above average (for a RB) receiving stats, and you still want to tell me he's in the bottom 3rd of the league? :rolleyes:
Michael PittmanCareer YPC average - 4.0

Career yards/reception average - 8.2

Domanick Davis

Career YPC average - 4.1

Career yards/reception average - 8.3

Looks pretty close to me. I know it's not quite as simple as this, but I don't think the Pittman/Davis comparison is as far-fetched as it seems. Last year I said that Thomas Jones was as productive as DD in 2004. A lot of people had a big problem with this, but Jones went on to have a pretty strong 2005 season on a weak team.

Anyhow, I don't think Domanick Davis is a bad player, but I don't think he's in the elite class of NFL backs. His stats are decent, but he benefits from a large number of touches and has been unable to stay healthy with his heavy workload.
I never wanted to argue that he was an elite back. I'd agree with your top 10 being better than him, but he more than belongs in that second group. Never said he wasn't injury-prone either. He deserves the label as much as Fred Taylor, who I think is the more apt comparison: Taylor is a better runner, DD a better receiver, making overall talent ~equal. Both can be counted on for decent production, but not for a full season. DD will never be a top 5 back, but HOU doesn't need one. I can name 3 backs on the last 10 SB winners who wouldn't be considered more than bottom 1/3 in the league; but how many SB winners had O-lines in the bottom 1/2 of the league?
The problem I have with the general tone of these threads is a this thought that the Texans are not resovling issues with the OL by not taking one in the first round. Good offensive lines are constructed picks throughout the draft and acquiring FA who fit the system that you are running. Houston has not handled the acquisition of OLmen any differently than anyone else. They have just done a poor job of recognizing the right guys and putting a quality unit together. Ironically, the last two Superbowl winners to have an extremely high picks playing OLT (Ravens and Rams) are also the ones who had RBs who were clear top 10 runners with high draft choices spent on them. Historically, the high pick OT has no more of a correlation to Superbowl success than the high pick RB.
:goodposting: There's no one player that's going to make the Texans complete. That's EXACTLY why they should take the best player on their board. Period. If he's a tackle, great. If he's a linebacker, great. If he's a RB, great.

The idea that a franchise like Houston could afford to take someone with a lower grade based on perceived positional need is misguided. The consensus says Bush will be the guy atop their board, but none of us know that for sure.
That's all great, but you are comparing grades between positions. I mean you could give Bush a 9.9 and D'Brick a 9.8 and do you really think that just because Bush is .1 higher that the team should automatically draft him?
 
Here are the starting NFL RBs for 2005:

Willis McGahee

Ricky Williams/Ronnie Brown

Corey Dillon

Curtis Martin

Julius Jones

Tiki Barber

Brian Westbrook

Clinton Portis

Jamal Lewis

Rudi Johnson

Reuben Droughns

Willie Parker/Jerome Bettis

Thomas Jones

Kevin Jones

Ahman Green

Michael Bennett/Mewelde Moore

Edgerrin James

Fred Taylor

Chris Brown

Warrick Dunn

Stephen Davis/Deshaun Foster

Deuce McAllister

Cadillac Williams

Mike Anderson

Larry Johnson

LaMont Jordan

LaDainian Tomlinson

JJ Arrington/Marcel Shipp

Steven Jackson

Kevan Barlow/Frank Gore

Shaun Alexander

I'm not sure how anyone can look at this list of backs and conclude that Domanick Davis is an above average NFL starter. I think he ranks in the bottom third of this list. I'd probably take him over Shipp/Arrington, Barlow/Gore, Anderson, and Parker/Bettis. I think you can make a strong case for any of the remaining backs being better than DD.
LOL and wtfoI also give a :loco: to anyone who thinks a team should ignore their current roster when considering who to draft.

Finally one more goes to anyone who doesn't get that if they upgraded their OL, what a big impact it would have on the "skill" players.

The only thing stupider than drafting Bush (within reason) would be drafting Young because he's a "home boy"
I don't know about that, I think it is more stupid to draft Bush. At least with Vince you can see the business logic of the move as they could make a real push to gain fans in Texas away from the Cowboys, especially in Austin and San Antonio. The marketing possibilities for them in Texas have to make them at least consider taking VY. However, while I'd like to see them take VY, they SHOULD trade down or take Brick. A Bush pick would leave me shaking my head. :no:

 
Whoever just posted that moronic list of people who are better than DD knows nothing about football. Period.

Gore and Barlow better than DD? One of the dumbest things I have heard....

 
Whoever just posted that moronic list of people who are better than DD knows nothing about football. Period.

Gore and Barlow better than DD? One of the dumbest things I have heard....
Not my list, but you apparently did not read the attached note. If you are going to call something moronic at least bother to read it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The Texans need O line help more than anything else. D'Brickshaw or trade down for another top OL and more picks.

 
Pretty simple. If they stay at #1 they take Bush, it's as much of a lock as i've ever seen in a draft.

If they trade down, they better not go past 3 since they need to guarantee themselves Brick.

With the #1 pick you don't draft for NEED. If your drafting #1 you have a lot more needs than 1 player. You take the best player available, and that is Bush.

FF warps people's minds as far as players real NFL value. D.Davis is a marginal starter on a team who uses their RB a ton even when they are down a ton. Any RB in the NFL can put up stats if they keep getting fed the ball when they are losing.

There have also been many posts in the past on here that show how bad DD has been on 1st down throughout his career. He also is NOT a big play RB, whoever compared him to Faulk is off their rocker.

 
For comparison, the last "can't miss" RB that I recall was LT2.
I don't remember him being "can't miss." There were questions about him coming from a smaller conference and not playing with the big boys of the SEC, Big 10, Big 12, etc. In hindsight he's can't miss, but at the draft he wasn't.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top