What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Is Faulk A Comp Player For Bush? (1 Viewer)

Bob Magaw

Footballguy
... taken from a question i posted in the top 10 dynasty rookies thread that i thought deserved a separate thread... i have a question for the naysayers... how does bush, in any of his physical traits & attributes or skill set... differ from marshall faulk, in any substantive & important respects?they have similar size...faulk 5'10" 210bush 5'11" 205 (could presumably add 5 lbs without catastrophic loss of speed)faulk was EXTREMELY fast... new orleans prep legend & one of fastest skill position players in nation at SDSUbush was one of fastest sprinters in state of CAfaulk had probably the best hands for a RB i have ever seen in the NFL... its possible he could have been a pro bowl WR if rams had asked/needed him to be.bush has the best & most developed hands for a RB i have ever seen at the college level... he has been splitting out wide, running downfield routes (& excelling at it) since he was a freshman.both have (or had in faulks case for some attributes) superior vision, instincts, cutting ability, burst, explosiveness, elusiveness, ability & creativity to string moves together.both flash deceptive power, routinely run through arm tackles & break tackles.so again, for the doubters, if bush ISN'T faulk... WHY? where & how do they differ?and if he IS faulk... than of course he can be a franchise RB... faulk has already proven that... not only could somebody with his constellation of physical attributes & skill set PLAY... but played well enough to be a first ballot HOFer.

 

Texasmouth

Footballguy
I saw Faulk play a lot of games in college, to me, Bush looks a lot better than Faulk and that is saying a lot. I thought Faulk was the best college player I had ever seen on the field and I still think Bush was better. I don't know for sure that it will translate to the NFL, but in my opinion, Bush was the best college player I have ever seen play...... and that is coming from a Longhorn fan. Everyone talks about his size hindering him but Faulk and Warrick Dunn should prove there are exceptions....

 

AnonymousBob

Footballguy
I think this whole comparing Bush to every HOF running back we can think of is going a tad overboard. Lots of backs have looked great in college. After Bush actually plays a few games in the NFL I'll get back to you on who is his closest comparision.

 
M

MLBrandow

Guest
I think this whole comparing Bush to every HOF running back we can think of is going a tad overboard. Lots of backs have looked great in college. After Bush actually plays a few games in the NFL I'll get back to you on who is his closest comparision.
agreed. But the Faulk comparisons are certainly worthy.
 

Bob Magaw

Footballguy
I think this whole comparing Bush to every HOF running back we can think of is going a tad overboard. Lots of backs have looked great in college. After Bush actually plays a few games in the NFL I'll get back to you on who is his closest comparision.
your point is well taken...but scouts almost HAVE to use comp players... look at physical antecedents & precursors to see which constellation of traits & attributes are sometimes predictive of success... & failure.

how come there aren't any 160 or 300 lb feature RBs in the NFL... & probably won't be anytime soon?

i could speculate as to why with a few reasons... but perhaps more simply, we could just observe there isn't... maybe this wasn't best way to illustrate point at hand...

another question we could ask... why do those of us that employ comp players use HOFers to try & describe who he looks, moves & plays like... is it bush's fault that the players he resembles most closely in terms of traits & skills are HOFers? :)

and even to take your (justified & relevant) point at face value... its not like guys are hyped THIS much often... when was the last time you can remember a prospect compared to sayers, sanders & faulk?

 

Wildman

Footballguy
Bob,First, great taste in avatars. Always wanted to tell you...I think the best comp player for Reggie Bush is Gale Sayers. Now I'm not old enough to have watched Sayers games when he was playing, but I have watched a ton of his runs. Sayers and Bush are the only two players I have ever seen that can make dramatic, lateral cuts at full speed. They both possess amazing open field vision, and played with a reckless style that involved hurdling players and finishing with acrobatic moves. A lot of backs have great burst, but when you combine it with vision, a style based on reckless abandon, and cutting at full speed, you have Gale Sayers. Find the NFL Films episode where they cover Sayers 6-Td day in Chicago on a muddy field against the 49ers. Sayers' last TD was a punt return in the 4th quarter. He makes a cut at full speed that looks like someone played a camera trick--then watch Reggie Bush's TD run in the Notre Dame game....Sayers.

 

AnonymousBob

Footballguy
I think this whole comparing Bush to every HOF running back we can think of is going a tad overboard.  Lots of backs have looked great in college.  After Bush actually plays a few games in the NFL I'll get back to you on who is his closest comparision.
your point is well taken...but scouts almost HAVE to use comp players... look at physical antecedents & precursors to see which constellation of traits & attributes are sometimes predictive of success... & failure.

how come there aren't any 160 or 300 lb feature RBs in the NFL... & probably won't be anytime soon?

i could speculate as to why with a few reasons... but perhaps more simply, we could just observe there isn't... maybe this wasn't best way to illustrate point at hand...

another question we could ask... why do those of us that employ comp players use HOFers to try & describe who he looks, moves & plays like... is it bush's fault that the players he resembles most closely in terms of traits & skills are HOFers? :)

and even to take your (justified & relevant) point at face value... its not like guys are hyped THIS much often... when was the last time you can remember a prospect compared to sayers, sanders & faulk?
I never watched Faulk in college but I do understand players always have to be compared to somebody else. Else there would be no measuring stick.I think players are compared to HOF'ers because let's face it-if they made the HOF they were the best in their respective position. So if you think the kid is the best at his spot, why not compare him to other elite guys? Plus it's much easier to sell a person if you're comparing them to the uber studs.

The only star rb I can say I saw in college is Tomlinson. Bush does look like he'll be very good, it's hard to not hype him with further comparisions.

 

Adrian Peterson

Footballguy
... taken from a question i posted in the top 10 dynasty rookies thread that i thought deserved a separate thread...

i have a question for the naysayers... how does bush, in any of his physical traits & attributes or skill set... differ from marshall faulk, in any substantive & important respects?

they have similar size...

faulk 5'10" 210

bush 5'11" 205 (could presumably add 5 lbs without catastrophic loss of speed)

faulk was EXTREMELY fast... new orleans prep legend & one of fastest skill position players in nation at SDSU

bush was one of fastest sprinters in state of CA

faulk had probably the best hands for a RB i have ever seen in the NFL... its possible he could have been a pro bowl WR if rams had asked/needed him to be.

bush has the best & most developed hands for a RB i have ever seen at the college level... he has been splitting out wide, running downfield routes (& excelling at it) since he was a freshman.

both have (or had in faulks case for some attributes) superior vision, instincts, cutting ability, burst, explosiveness, elusiveness, ability & creativity to string moves together.

both flash deceptive power, routinely run through arm tackles & break tackles.

so again, for the doubters, if bush ISN'T faulk... WHY? where & how do they differ?

and if he IS faulk... than of course he can be a franchise RB... faulk has already proven that... not only could somebody with his constellation of physical attributes & skill set PLAY... but played well enough to be a first ballot HOFer.
John Avery and Doug Chapman once drew same comparisons. :mellow: Bush is no doubt very good - but in college he relies on running to the outside edge - in the NFL - there are no slow playoer positions - the speed of the game will limit him to what he was in college.

Also - his surrounding cast in USC was always better than teams he played, not only on his offensive line, but he was spelled with Lendale White and had stud WR's to take the heat off as well.

Bush will be good, but not a 25 carry per game back who resembles Faulk of yesteryears.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

David Yudkin

Footballguy
Bush will be good, but not a 25 carry per game back who resembles Faulk of yesteryears.
Faulk never was a huge carry per game guy. He derived much of his value from his receiving abilities (50 receptions per year early on and 80+ per year in his prime). In 188 career games (regular and post-season) . . .Games w/Less than 20 carries: 130 (69%)Games w/20 or more carries: 58 (31%)Games w/25 or more carries: 21 (11%)By comparison, his replacement in Indianapolis, Edgerrin James' numbers in 105 career games (regular and post-season) . . .Games w/Less than 20 carries: 32 (30%)Games w/20 or more carries: 73 (70%)Games w/25 or more carries: 42 (40%)
 

Family Matters

Footballguy
Great posts and great topic. There are many ways to look at these two in trying to compare them and right now there's a lot of guessing in order to make the argument. My apologies for this long post but I knew no other way to make my point.I have a question and/or comment that I know we cannot answer but one that I think it where the difference come into play. First off, we know they are both extremely talented. They are fast, great running skills and very good hands. The talent is there and I do not think anyone can argue otherwise and make sense.But let's look at the 1 intangible that cannot be measured statistically. Game speed, instinct and decision making on the field during the play. IOW-when a player makes the decision to make a cut, move, spin or angle that turns an average play into a HOF memorable play. I'm not sure I know what it's called but perhaps instinctive speed is what I'm referring to.You know how some guys run a fast 40 time but look slow on the field? Then others seem slow in the 40 but are lights out fast on the field? I'm talking game speed, not 40 times. These guys show up when it matters. They make great plays without thinking about it in advance.You can't teach this stuff. You can't learn it. No one can give it to you. You either have it or you don't.The other day my son made 3 TD's in his league that were really cool like that. As we watched the film on those plays I asked him what he was thinking to make those plays. He made several comments that made me think: On getting around the corner to daylight, "I just knew I had to get to the corner". On spinning out of a tackle, "I didn't think about spinning out of the tackle, I just knew I didn't want the defender to stop me". On how he was able to pull away from everyone while running faster then I though he could to get to the end zone, "I just ran as hard as I could".So what I'm saying is that some guys, like Faulk, Sanders and LT, they just do it without pre-planning. Another instinct and gear kicks in at game time that allows these guys to do what no one else could do.IMO-Bush has this. He has shown the ability to do things no one else can do.

 

jurb26

Footballguy
I think the best comp player for Reggie Bush is Gale Sayers. Now I'm not old enough to have watched Sayers games when he was playing, but I have watched a ton of his runs. Sayers and Bush are the only two players I have ever seen that can make dramatic, lateral cuts at full speed. They both possess amazing open field vision, and played with a reckless style that involved hurdling players and finishing with acrobatic moves.
Never watched<----------------------------

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sopranos

Footballguy
I would compare Bush more to a WR like S Smith. He has those kind of moves. He hasnt been used like an NFL RB like Faulk was used in College. IMO he will be a KR a WR and a 3rd down guy and be used in alot of trick plays,reverses and short passes. He will get his 20 touches but i dont see him as an everydown rb like Faulk. He is 1 or 2 years away from learning Blocks and finding the running lanes from BEHIND the line.

 

Bloom

Moderator
I think Bush is Faulk with a faster 5th gear and more power finishing his runs. I also like putting Steve Smith in there for the small area quicks and toughness.All in all, I do think Faulk is the best compare - :thumbup:

 

David Yudkin

Footballguy
IMO-Bush has this. He has shown the ability to do things no one else can do.
I agree to what almost everyone is posting, and I myself will want to see he does at the pro level. Until then, we could say he is the second coming of whomever we want to compare him to.My concern is that Bush looked great playing on the equivalent of a semi-pro team at USC, many times with holes that I could get 5 yard gains on after a night of heavy drinking.Clearly Bush is special in the open field, so the $64,000 question is how likely will his new team be able to get him in that situtation. Houston already has suggested that if they draft him, their initial thought process was to give him 10-12 (with IIRC a max of 15) carries a game and use him a bit like Westbrook with another 3-5 receptions a game. Who knows if that will happen though . . .
 

UnknownCoach

Footballguy
Faulk is a great goalline back. He's one of those small guys good enough to replace the big guys come time to pound it in. He runs patiently, reads the blocks, squeezes through small openings, and falls forward. He had the work effort, discipline, and learn quickly and excel at the basics like blitz protection, route running, holding onto the football, and catching passes. Tiki Barber is more comparable to Bush. Barber had to earn the full time job through years of hard work and competition. Barber is easily replaced at the goalline. Barber used to fumble a lot. Barber gradually got better running inside but it has never been a real strength.

 

cstu

Footballguy
I think this whole comparing Bush to every HOF running back we can think of is going a tad overboard. Lots of backs have looked great in college. After Bush actually plays a few games in the NFL I'll get back to you on who is his closest comparision.
Not many backs have looked as good in college as Faulk looked in college. That alone makes me think he'll succeed in the NFL. You throw in that he has the determination to be the best and willing to work out with LT in San Diego and you're looking at someone who has everything he needs to be as good as Faulk in the NFL.
 

cstu

Footballguy
For those of you who don't like the comparisons to Faulk, just ask yourself if you can see him carrying the ball 250 times for 4 YPC and catching 50 passes.

 

radballs.

Footballguy
so the $64,000 question is how likely will his new team be able to get him in that situtation. 
Bush is special but he is still going to have to be utilized effectively by his new team and he will still need to have offensive support with a good system. Faulk's greatness also happened to coincide with being in one of the best offensive systems in the last 10-12 years. Some will say, a great player will make the system but Bush is going to need the right system to reach his full potential. I have my doubts about Houston being a franchise that will be able to squeeze every last drop out of his talents.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sheriff66

Footballguy
Warrick Dunn or Brian Westbook would be a better compairison IMO, I don't see him being a HOF back in the NFL... :no:

 

Family Matters

Footballguy
IMO-Bush has this. He has shown the ability to do things no one else can do.
I agree to what almost everyone is posting, and I myself will want to see he does at the pro level. Until then, we could say he is the second coming of whomever we want to compare him to.My concern is that Bush looked great playing on the equivalent of a semi-pro team at USC, many times with holes that I could get 5 yard gains on after a night of heavy drinking.

Clearly Bush is special in the open field, so the $64,000 question is how likely will his new team be able to get him in that situtation. Houston already has suggested that if they draft him, their initial thought process was to give him 10-12 (with IIRC a max of 15) carries a game and use him a bit like Westbrook with another 3-5 receptions a game. Who knows if that will happen though . . .
I think it's valid to make that statement about any player coming out of college and going pro. They must be able to play with the big boys. But what he was able to do at times defies explanation. You can either dothose things or you can't. And frankly he's shown us he can. Now is that enough? That remains to be seen. I say that because you in order to be an every down back and make the impact a guy like Faulk did you have do things he didn't need to worry about so much in college. Things like the running between the tackles. Which is much more demanding than college was. Also picking up the blitz is an art form. One that pro QB's must have in order to survive.

 

Sheriff66

Footballguy
IMO-Bush has this. He has shown the ability to do things no one else can do.
I agree to what almost everyone is posting, and I myself will want to see he does at the pro level. Until then, we could say he is the second coming of whomever we want to compare him to.My concern is that Bush looked great playing on the equivalent of a semi-pro team at USC, many times with holes that I could get 5 yard gains on after a night of heavy drinking.

Clearly Bush is special in the open field, so the $64,000 question is how likely will his new team be able to get him in that situtation. Houston already has suggested that if they draft him, their initial thought process was to give him 10-12 (with IIRC a max of 15) carries a game and use him a bit like Westbrook with another 3-5 receptions a game. Who knows if that will happen though . . .
I think it's valid to make that statement about any player coming out of college and going pro. They must be able to play with the big boys. But what he was able to do at times defies explanation. You can either dothose things or you can't. And frankly he's shown us he can. Now is that enough? That remains to be seen. I say that because you in order to be an every down back and make the impact a guy like Faulk did you have do things he didn't need to worry about so much in college. Things like the running between the tackles. Which is much more demanding than college was. Also picking up the blitz is an art form. One that pro QB's must have in order to survive.
Great question, and if he plays in Texas, we will find out real quick. Also, can he take the pounding an every down NFL back endures ?
 

bagger.

The One Play Quiz
i saw both faulk and bush live in college.faulk was absolutely amazing and bush looks just as amazing.bush is even faster live than he is on tv if you can believe that.

 
M

MLBrandow

Guest
John Avery and Doug Chapman once drew same comparisons. :mellow:

Bush is no doubt very good - but in college he relies on running to the outside edge - in the NFL - there are no slow playoer positions - the speed of the game will limit him to what he was in college.

Also - his surrounding cast in USC was always better than teams he played, not only on his offensive line, but he was spelled with Lendale White and had stud WR's to take the heat off as well.

Bush will be good, but not a 25 carry per game back who resembles Faulk of yesteryears.
I never watched Faulk in college either. Can anyone tell me how many national championships and first rounders his team had the year he came out?
 

Bob Magaw

Footballguy
just a clarification on the whole comp player thing...we don't have to be so exacting & rigorous that height & weight is IDENTICAL... but warrick dunn, for instance (cited above), is listed at 5'9" 180... & he has been in the league nine seasons... bush seems to have the kind of frame he could add 5 or more pounds & not lose too much or any speed.the difference between 5'9" 180 & 5'11" 205 is the same as the difference between 5'11" 205 & 6'1" 230... exact size as LJ, & close to fred taylor, steven jackson, ronnie brown, willis mcgahee, stephen davis & corey dillon... clearly these RBs are different animals from bush... just as bush is from dunn.tiki barber's name was brought up... i think as a dis (not a good goal line runner)... barber is a good comp in terms of size (5'10" 200) & in terms of skill set... tiki is a gifted receiver for a RB, & has put up prodigious receiving yardage numbers. imo, if bush roars out of the gate with 1,800+ rushing & 530 receiving yards (barber's numbers in 2005), his new team will be thrilled... so that isn't such a bad comp player.westbrook was also cited... he is shorter but stockier (about 5'8" 1/2 205-210)... as probably the RB with the best hands right now (faulk still has great hands but is relegated to reserve role & may be retiring), that is an excellent comp in terms of skill set, as far as that goes. he is also incredibly elusive in the open field... so is bush... check... but don't forget... although westbrook is one of QUICKEST RBs in the league (marvin harrison & steve smith-like ability to basically be at full speed by his first or second step) in the first ten yards... he is nowhere close to being the FASTEST RB in the NFL... he probably runs a pedestrian 4.6 40.again, bush was one of the fastest sprinters in the state of CA as a prep, so he has some serious wheels... it is in the speed department that using westbrook as a comp breaks down (though they are much alike in hands, quickness & elusiveness)...bush's talent is so multi-faceted, which is one reason why it takes the attributes of several players (such as sayers, sanders & faulk) to adequately do justice to his skill set... short of that, referencing multi-skilled players like faulk (& tiki) are about as close as we can get with a single player comp he is CLOSEST TO.

 

David Yudkin

Footballguy
I never watched Faulk in college either. Can anyone tell me how many national championships and first rounders his team had the year he came out?
Faulk matriculated from San Diego State. He was a marvel at breaking big plays and could go the distance at any time (and often did so).He was the #2 pick overall in the 1994. The only other players from SDSU that year were WR Darnay Scott (CIN @ 2-1) and DE Ramando Stallings (CIN @7.1). No SDSU players were drafted at all the season before. In 1992, WR Patrick Rowe was selected at 2-24, TE Ray Rowe went at 6-28, and G Ray Jennings was picked at 8-17. In 1991, QB Dan McGwire (brother to slugger Mark) went at 1-16 to the Seahawks, but for the most part Faulk did not have a great QB along side him in college.Here's a blurb from the NFL Player site on his college years . . .
Three-time consensus all-America at San Diego State … career totals included school record 766 carries for 4,589 yards and 57 touchdowns … rushed for at least 100 yards in 23 of 32 career outings … had seven 200-yard games and two 300-yard games … finished fourth in Heisman Trophy balloting as junior, second as sophomore, and ninth as freshman, the second-highest freshman ranking ever to Herschel Walker’s third place finish in 1980 … finished fifth in the nation in rushing as junior with 1,530 yards on 300 carries with 21 touchdowns … became just fifth player in NCAA history and first since Cornell’s Ed Marinaro in 1970-71 to record back-to-back rushing titles after rushing 265 times for 1,630 yards and 15 touchdowns … caught 18 passes for 128 yards…joined Walker as only players to surpass 3,000 yards rushing after sophomore season … rushed 201 times for 1,429 yards and 21 touchdowns to become first freshman in NCAA history to lead nation in scoring (15.6 ppg) and rushing (158 ypg.) … set career high and then-NCAA freshman record with 386 rushing yards and seven touchdowns on 37 carries vs. Pacific in second collegiate game … set four NCAA freshman records and tied Emmitt Smith for earliest game for freshman to surpass 1,000 yards by doing so in seventh game … public administration major.
 

Rev

Footballguy
Saw Faulk play when SDSU came to Minny to play the Gophers. It was ugly for Gopher fans. He was a man among boys. His speed, power and cutting ability made us look foolish. Comparing him to Bush, I'd say that Faulk did more work on the inside in college, gettin his yards the hard way. Bush (when I saw him) let Lendale wear down the D-line and then jet around the outside for the score. I think Bush needs to prove his inside running ability before we can talk about him in the same breath as Faulk. For now, LT2 comparisons seem more appropriate (which is still saying alot). Finally, I believe that Bush's situation will make or break his career. If he's on a diseased offense with a poor line and a crappy defense, he'll get less opportunities and won't live to the all world hype we currently see.

 

Wildman

Footballguy
I think the best comp player for Reggie Bush is Gale Sayers. Now I'm not old enough to have watched Sayers games when he was playing, but I have watched a ton of his runs. Sayers and Bush are the only two players I have ever seen that can make dramatic, lateral cuts at full speed. They both possess amazing open field vision, and played with a reckless style that involved hurdling players and finishing with acrobatic moves.
Never watched<----------------------------
Actually, different style. Sanders is the king of jump cuts and stop-start cuts that generate from the strength of the ankle and actually coming to a complete stop prior to quickly changing direction with great acceleration. Sanders could kill you running 25-40 yards East-West on a play before gaining significant yardage North-South. Sayers and Bush can make the kind of dramatic cut in a direction at full speed with a long stride that most players have to slow down or take false steps to accomplish with less effectiveness.
 

Bob Magaw

Footballguy
Bob,

First, great taste in avatars. Always wanted to tell you...

I think the best comp player for Reggie Bush is Gale Sayers. Now I'm not old enough to have watched Sayers games when he was playing, but I have watched a ton of his runs. Sayers and Bush are the only two players I have ever seen that can make dramatic, lateral cuts at full speed. They both possess amazing open field vision, and played with a reckless style that involved hurdling players and finishing with acrobatic moves.

A lot of backs have great burst, but when you combine it with vision, a style based on reckless abandon, and cutting at full speed, you have Gale Sayers.

Find the NFL Films episode where they cover Sayers 6-Td day in Chicago on a muddy field against the 49ers. Sayers' last TD was a punt return in the 4th quarter. He makes a cut at full speed that looks like someone played a camera trick--then watch Reggie Bush's TD run in the Notre Dame game....

Sayers.
wildman... a man who knows his afropolyrhythmic junglefunk... :) i have seen sayers 6 TD game, but you piqued my interest to see it again, especially that particular play... definitely saw the ND showstopper... about 100 times...

your breakdown was very distinctive & imo adept... did you ever play RB or coach?

 
Last edited by a moderator:

UnknownCoach

Footballguy
As for another comparison, I wonder how Bush (5'11", 205) compares to Ricky Watters (6'1", 211).
Watters was tall and thin. Although he added pounds for a while he ended up shedding most of them. He wasnt a big time burner and was almost boring to watch play. The only thing he was truely great at was receiving but he was good at most. He converted from WR in college. He ran upright and was good at falling forward on a tackle after shifting or spinning. His style was simuliar to Marcus Allen. A slasher who was patient and agile but not explosive. While not a great inside runner, he was disciplined at running forward, waiting for blocks, and he could shift, spin, dive, or fight a tackle. Bush is an electric burner. He's much more exciting to watch. He's much more of a big play threat. He explodes with tremdous accelleration. That burst and his breakaway speed is what reminds us of players like Faulk, LT, and Barber. He'll average more than 4.1 ypc as long as he's used properly. I wouldnt compare him to Watters. While he explodes like Faulk or LT, Bush lacks their interior skills. Barber, Dunn, and Westbrook are all better comparisons. Bush is more talented than Westbrook and bigger than Dunn. Barber is the closest match of today's starters. Because backs didnt run a lot of passing routes until the 80s, its diffacult to find many past comparisons. Barry Sanders wasnt a good receiver. Charlie Garner is lighter but had good interior ability. In one way or another, Bush compares to any of these guys. In other ways he doesnt. Barber is the closest comparison of size, style, positives, and negatives all wrapped together.

 

Wildman

Footballguy
Bob,

First, great taste in avatars. Always wanted to tell you...

I think the best comp player for Reggie Bush is Gale Sayers. Now I'm not old enough to have watched Sayers games when he was playing, but I have watched a ton of his runs. Sayers and Bush are the only two players I have ever seen that can make dramatic, lateral cuts at full speed. They both possess amazing open field vision, and played with a reckless style that involved hurdling players and finishing with acrobatic moves.

A lot of backs have great burst, but when you combine it with vision, a style based on reckless abandon, and cutting at full speed, you have Gale Sayers.

Find the NFL Films episode where they cover Sayers 6-Td day in Chicago on a muddy field against the 49ers. Sayers' last TD was a punt return in the 4th quarter. He makes a cut at full speed that looks like someone played a camera trick--then watch Reggie Bush's TD run in the Notre Dame game....

Sayers.
wildman... a man who knows his afropolyrhythmic junglefunk... :) i have seen sayers 6 TD game, but you piqued my interest to see it again, especially that particular play... definitely saw the ND showstopper... about 100 times...

your breakdown was very distinctive & imo adept... did you ever play RB or coach?
Saw that man himself in '89 with Kenny Garrett on alto. Sun Ra and Art Blakey were also on the bill...I did play in this arena, but never on the level of these guys, though I performed with players that are now. As for football, I did not play or coach, but I watch a ton of film--the scouting checklists on the link below are a developing project--I'm learning every day.

To combine the subject with our little side conversation...a good RB is very much like a good improviser. They have to have excellent technique. They have to navigate the timing and play design on the field the way a musician can navigate the harmony and rhythm he's soloing over. The great one's learn how to set things up (improvising or running). DeAngelo Williams can do it. Just watch. I don't know if he'll be great, but I'll gladly take him as a consolation prize to Bush.

I used to replay that Sayers punt return over and over, because that cut was so devastatingly effortless at full speed on that muddy field. Sayers style was almost paradoxical--he ran violently and effortlessly at the same time. I can see why Bill Cosby once remarked that he watched a Bears game and saw Gale Sayers split in two. Reggie Bush runs this way.

 

cstu

Footballguy
As for another comparison, I wonder how Bush (5'11", 205) compares to Ricky Watters (6'1", 211).
Watters was tall and thin. Although he added pounds for a while he ended up shedding most of them. He wasnt a big time burner and was almost boring to watch play. The only thing he was truely great at was receiving but he was good at most. He converted from WR in college. He ran upright and was good at falling forward on a tackle after shifting or spinning. His style was simuliar to Marcus Allen. A slasher who was patient and agile but not explosive. While not a great inside runner, he was disciplined at running forward, waiting for blocks, and he could shift, spin, dive, or fight a tackle. Bush is an electric burner. He's much more exciting to watch. He's much more of a big play threat. He explodes with tremdous accelleration. That burst and his breakaway speed is what reminds us of players like Faulk, LT, and Barber. He'll average more than 4.1 ypc as long as he's used properly. I wouldnt compare him to Watters. While he explodes like Faulk or LT, Bush lacks their interior skills. Barber, Dunn, and Westbrook are all better comparisons. Bush is more talented than Westbrook and bigger than Dunn. Barber is the closest match of today's starters. Because backs didnt run a lot of passing routes until the 80s, its diffacult to find many past comparisons. Barry Sanders wasnt a good receiver. Charlie Garner is lighter but had good interior ability. In one way or another, Bush compares to any of these guys. In other ways he doesnt. Barber is the closest comparison of size, style, positives, and negatives all wrapped together.
So he's a faster Ricky Watters with better moves? The writers should fill out their HOF ballots now and get it over with.
 

Verbal Kint

Footballguy
I think this whole comparing Bush to every HOF running back we can think of is going a tad overboard. Lots of backs have looked great in college. After Bush actually plays a few games in the NFL I'll get back to you on who is his closest comparision.
your point is well taken...but scouts almost HAVE to use comp players... look at physical antecedents & precursors to see which constellation of traits & attributes are sometimes predictive of success... & failure.

how come there aren't any 160 or 300 lb feature RBs in the NFL... & probably won't be anytime soon?

i could speculate as to why with a few reasons... but perhaps more simply, we could just observe there isn't... maybe this wasn't best way to illustrate point at hand...

another question we could ask... why do those of us that employ comp players use HOFers to try & describe who he looks, moves & plays like... is it bush's fault that the players he resembles most closely in terms of traits & skills are HOFers? :)

and even to take your (justified & relevant) point at face value... its not like guys are hyped THIS much often... when was the last time you can remember a prospect compared to sayers, sanders & faulk?
Quentin Griffin
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bob Magaw

Footballguy
I think this whole comparing Bush to every HOF running back we can think of is going a tad overboard.  Lots of backs have looked great in college.  After Bush actually plays a few games in the NFL I'll get back to you on who is his closest comparision.
your point is well taken...but scouts almost HAVE to use comp players... look at physical antecedents & precursors to see which constellation of traits & attributes are sometimes predictive of success... & failure.

how come there aren't any 160 or 300 lb feature RBs in the NFL... & probably won't be anytime soon?

i could speculate as to why with a few reasons... but perhaps more simply, we could just observe there isn't... maybe this wasn't best way to illustrate point at hand...

another question we could ask... why do those of us that employ comp players use HOFers to try & describe who he looks, moves & plays like... is it bush's fault that the players he resembles most closely in terms of traits & skills are HOFers? :)

and even to take your (justified & relevant) point at face value... its not like guys are hyped THIS much often... when was the last time you can remember a prospect compared to sayers, sanders & faulk?
Quentin Griffin
i don't ever recall seeing griffin compared to sayers, sanders AND faulk...i could have avoided controversy by more narrowly delimiting the search space of comp players... :)

how many potential #1 overall RBs in recent memory have been compared to above players?

 

cstu

Footballguy
I think this whole comparing Bush to every HOF running back we can think of is going a tad overboard. Lots of backs have looked great in college. After Bush actually plays a few games in the NFL I'll get back to you on who is his closest comparision.
your point is well taken...but scouts almost HAVE to use comp players... look at physical antecedents & precursors to see which constellation of traits & attributes are sometimes predictive of success... & failure.

how come there aren't any 160 or 300 lb feature RBs in the NFL... & probably won't be anytime soon?

i could speculate as to why with a few reasons... but perhaps more simply, we could just observe there isn't... maybe this wasn't best way to illustrate point at hand...

another question we could ask... why do those of us that employ comp players use HOFers to try & describe who he looks, moves & plays like... is it bush's fault that the players he resembles most closely in terms of traits & skills are HOFers? :)

and even to take your (justified & relevant) point at face value... its not like guys are hyped THIS much often... when was the last time you can remember a prospect compared to sayers, sanders & faulk?
Quentin Griffin
i don't ever recall seeing griffin compared to sayers, sanders AND faulk...i could have avoided controversy by more narrowly delimiting the search space of comp players... :)

how many potential #1 overall RBs in recent memory have been compared to above players?
The closest would be LT.
 

Verbal Kint

Footballguy
I think this whole comparing Bush to every HOF running back we can think of is going a tad overboard. Lots of backs have looked great in college. After Bush actually plays a few games in the NFL I'll get back to you on who is his closest comparision.
your point is well taken...but scouts almost HAVE to use comp players... look at physical antecedents & precursors to see which constellation of traits & attributes are sometimes predictive of success... & failure.

how come there aren't any 160 or 300 lb feature RBs in the NFL... & probably won't be anytime soon?

i could speculate as to why with a few reasons... but perhaps more simply, we could just observe there isn't... maybe this wasn't best way to illustrate point at hand...

another question we could ask... why do those of us that employ comp players use HOFers to try & describe who he looks, moves & plays like... is it bush's fault that the players he resembles most closely in terms of traits & skills are HOFers? :)

and even to take your (justified & relevant) point at face value... its not like guys are hyped THIS much often... when was the last time you can remember a prospect compared to sayers, sanders & faulk?
Quentin Griffin
i don't ever recall seeing griffin compared to sayers, sanders AND faulk...i could have avoided controversy by more narrowly delimiting the search space of comp players... :)

how many potential #1 overall RBs in recent memory have been compared to above players?
So no one compared him to Sayers or Faulk, but here are 3 links that compare Q to Barry, without even looking hard. http://www.punditsports.com/articles/index.html

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/...fin_broncos_ap/

http://archive.tri-cityherald.com/sports/riley/riley514.html

 
Last edited by a moderator:

SoloMatisse

Footballguy
Man, for all we know Bush might be Lee Suggs waiting to happen. Why even compare kids who have done nothing at the pro level to future HOFers???? Faulk has won MVPs and SBs and broken all time records and shown toughness and durability and NOT PITCHED THE BALL BACKWARDS a whole lot in big games. Noone is the next Marshall Faulk, imho. Bush is the next Bush and whatever that is is anyone's guess. Draft him, have fun with him, but just dont expect him to be a difference maker for 3 years, if ever.

 

-OZ-

Footballguy
Just as long as we keep in mind the last RB to be drafted #1 overall - the only RB to go #1 in the last 20 years, and that he was compared to other HOF RBs, make any comparison you want.I can see the similar skill set, does Bush have the mental part down as Faulk did? From what I've heard in interviews and seen, he seems to, but time will tell.

 

Verbal Kint

Footballguy
Just as long as we keep in mind the last RB to be drafted #1 overall - the only RB to go #1 in the last 20 years, and that he was compared to other HOF RBs, make any comparison you want.
There were 2 in the last 20 years. Which one were you thinking of? Bo Jackson or Ki-Jana Carter?
 

-OZ-

Footballguy
Just as long as we keep in mind the last RB to be drafted #1 overall - the only RB to go #1 in the last 20 years, and that he was compared to other HOF RBs, make any comparison you want.
There were 2 in the last 20 years. Which one were you thinking of? Bo Jackson or Ki-Jana Carter?
Bo is excused, but still a waste of a pick.I was looking at Ki-Jana, the one who at least tried to play for the team drafting him.

 

Nihilist Pig

Footballguy
I think this whole comparing Bush to every HOF running back we can think of is going a tad overboard.  Lots of backs have looked great in college.  After Bush actually plays a few games in the NFL I'll get back to you on who is his closest comparision.
your point is well taken...but scouts almost HAVE to use comp players... look at physical antecedents & precursors to see which constellation of traits & attributes are sometimes predictive of success... & failure.

how come there aren't any 160 or 300 lb feature RBs in the NFL... & probably won't be anytime soon?

i could speculate as to why with a few reasons... but perhaps more simply, we could just observe there isn't... maybe this wasn't best way to illustrate point at hand...

another question we could ask... why do those of us that employ comp players use HOFers to try & describe who he looks, moves & plays like... is it bush's fault that the players he resembles most closely in terms of traits & skills are HOFers? :)

and even to take your (justified & relevant) point at face value... its not like guys are hyped THIS much often... when was the last time you can remember a prospect compared to sayers, sanders & faulk?
Quentin Griffin
i don't ever recall seeing griffin compared to sayers, sanders AND faulk...i could have avoided controversy by more narrowly delimiting the search space of comp players... :)

how many potential #1 overall RBs in recent memory have been compared to above players?
The closest would be LT.
LT wasn't even the RB most compared to Faulk in his own draft class. Deuce was often described with phrases like, "better hands than Faulk," and, "the only RB who could play WR."
 

Donnybrook

Footballguy
Incredibly, it now seems, more than a few pro scouts questioned whether Gale could make it in the pros. Everyone recognized the Jayhawk all-America's natural abilities but some doubted that the 6-0, 200 pound speedster could stand the pounding that he was sure to face.
Sayers was before my time so I haven't seen him play. But based on pure body type wouldn't Sayers be a better comparison than Faulk.
 

redman

Footballguy
It's interesting to go back and look at Faulk's career stats. He really wasn't an outstanding RB until he went to the Rams, at least not statistically.

Code:
+--------------------------+-------------------------+                 |          Rushing         |        Receiving        |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| Year  TM |   G |   Att  Yards    Y/A   TD |   Rec  Yards   Y/R   TD |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| 1994 ind |  16 |   314   1282    4.1   11 |    52    522  10.0    1 || 1995 ind |  16 |   289   1078    3.7   11 |    56    475   8.5    3 || 1996 ind |  13 |   198    587    3.0    7 |    56    428   7.6    0 || 1997 ind |  16 |   264   1054    4.0    7 |    47    471  10.0    1 || 1998 ind |  16 |   324   1319    4.1    6 |    86    908  10.6    4 || 1999 ram |  16 |   253   1381    5.5    7 |    87   1048  12.0    5 || 2000 ram |  14 |   253   1359    5.4   18 |    81    830  10.2    8 || 2001 ram |  14 |   260   1382    5.3   12 |    83    765   9.2    9 || 2002 ram |  14 |   212    953    4.5    8 |    80    537   6.7    2 || 2003 ram |  11 |   209    818    3.9   10 |    45    290   6.4    1 || 2004 ram |  14 |   195    774    4.0    3 |    50    310   6.2    1 || 2005 ram |  16 |    65    292    4.5    0 |    44    291   6.6    1 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+|  TOTAL   | 176 |  2836  12279    4.3  100 |   767   6875   9.0   36 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
I hadn't realized that he hadn't averaged more than 4.1 ypc with the Colts. There's a similar (but not as marked) pattern to the career of another player who Bush is compared with a lot, Warrick Dunn, prior to being joined in Atlanta for the first time with another offensive teammate of note in Vick (by this I mean a player who defenses have to account for.
Code:
+--------------------------+-------------------------+                 |          Rushing         |        Receiving        |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| Year  TM |   G |   Att  Yards    Y/A   TD |   Rec  Yards   Y/R   TD |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| 1997 tam |  16 |   224    978    4.4    4 |    39    462  11.8    3 || 1998 tam |  16 |   245   1026    4.2    2 |    44    344   7.8    0 || 1999 tam |  15 |   195    616    3.2    0 |    64    589   9.2    2 || 2000 tam |  16 |   248   1133    4.6    8 |    44    422   9.6    1 || 2001 tam |  13 |   158    447    2.8    3 |    68    557   8.2    3 || 2002 atl |  15 |   230    927    4.0    7 |    50    377   7.5    2 || 2003 atl |  11 |   125    672    5.4    3 |    37    336   9.1    2 || 2004 atl |  16 |   265   1106    4.2    9 |    29    294  10.1    0 || 2005 atl |  16 |   280   1416    5.1    3 |    29    220   7.6    1 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+|  TOTAL   | 134 |  1970   8321    4.2   39 |   404   3601   8.9   14 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+
What I wonder is whether Bush, by being drafted onto a team with only modest offensive talent, will struggle like these two guys did running the ball early in their respective careers. Teams like Houston or Arizona at least have decent talent at the offensive skill positions, but if he goes to a team like SF or NO, or Tenn or the Jets, that won't be the case, at least not starting out (obviously I'm assuming some sort of trades occurring by mentioning some of these teams).
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top