Norm Chow on Reggie Bush (1 Viewer)

[the hairy scotsman]

yahoo combine notebook

One of the most interesting comments about Bush came from former USC offensive coordinator Norm Chow. Chow said he believes Bush has the ability to be successful in the NFL, but added that he will have plenty of significant hurdles to clear.

"They're huge," Chow said. "Pass protection, blocking, running pass routes. He's played in a good system with a good staff, but the speed of the game – they're all going to be as fast as he is, you know?"

 

[Garrett]

Chow has a unique perspective on this.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

I agree with this perspective. This makes sense to me.............because on the last important play for USC's National Championship, on 4th and short where was supposedly the best player in college football?

On the Bench???????????

He was the 2nd best RB in that situation on his team?

That makes me think about the NFL as well. I can see RbbC. Some are saying he'll be like Tiki Barber..........he'll be lucky to be as good as Tiki is/was.

 

[radballs.]

I agree with this perspective.  This makes sense to me.............because on the last important play for USC's National Championship, on 4th and short where was supposedly the best player in college football?

On the Bench???????????

He was the 2nd best RB in that situation on his team?

That makes me think about  the NFL as well.  I can see RbbC.  Some are saying he'll be like  Tiki Barber..........he'll be  lucky to be as good as Tiki is/was.

I was about to say that's a strong statement. But, then I realized how undervalued Barber constantly was despite his year in and year out production. Barber's ADP won't be a value play again. There's no doubt that Bush is NOT a sure thing at the NFL level, but his floor and unlimited ceiling should exceed Barber's. This is the year to really get burned by taking an aging RB who has exceedingly higher expectations. Given where Tiki is being drafted in 1 ppr leagues who is in the top 6 in '06 drafts up to this point, I'd rather get Curtis Martin in the fifth round than Tiki Barber with the fifth overall pick in the first. I have no idea where I'll be ranking Reggie Bush until I see which team gets him as well as all the other rookies.

 

[cstu]

I think Chow would say the same about any rookie. The things he mentioned were what all RB's have to learn in the NFL. My take on it is he thinks Bush is pretty damn good if that's all he had to say about what Bush needs to work on.

 

[AnonymousBob]

This is news?

 

[DrJ]

I agree with this perspective. This makes sense to me.............because on the last important play for USC's National Championship, on 4th and short where was supposedly the best player in college football?

On the Bench???????????

He was the 2nd best RB in that situation on his team?

That makes me think about the NFL as well. I can see RbbC. Some are saying he'll be like Tiki Barber..........he'll be lucky to be as good as Tiki is/was.

Reminds me of the whole "Ronnie Brown isn't any good because Caddy was the 'starting' RB at Auburn" argument.How's that one working out for ya?

 

[Mr. Vegas]

I agree with this perspective.  This makes sense to me.............because on the last important play for USC's National Championship, on 4th and short where was supposedly the best player in college football?

On the Bench???????????

He was the 2nd best RB in that situation on his team?

That makes me think about  the NFL as well.  I can see RbbC.  Some are saying he'll be like  Tiki Barber..........he'll be  lucky to be as good as Tiki is/was.

Reminds me of the whole "Ronnie Brown isn't any good because Caddy was the 'starting' RB at Auburn" argument.How's that one working out for ya?

So far so good.Caddy had a better year last year then did Brown.

But 1 year doesn't make a career.

 

[knowledge dropper]

If I am the offensive coordinator of the team holding the #3 pick, I might openly question the ability of the expected #1 pick (and best offensive player in the drafts) to succeed in the NFL.

 

[DrJ]

I agree with this perspective.  This makes sense to me.............because on the last important play for USC's National Championship, on 4th and short where was supposedly the best player in college football?

On the Bench???????????

He was the 2nd best RB in that situation on his team?

That makes me think about  the NFL as well.  I can see RbbC.  Some are saying he'll be like  Tiki Barber..........he'll be  lucky to be as good as Tiki is/was.

Reminds me of the whole "Ronnie Brown isn't any good because Caddy was the 'starting' RB at Auburn" argument.How's that one working out for ya?

So far so good.Caddy had a better year last year then did Brown.

But 1 year doesn't make a career.

It wasn't the "Caddy is a better RB argument", people were literally saying Ronnie Brown wasn't good because he wasn't even a starting RB.Pretty similar to what this guy is saying here - because Bush was out on one play, he's all of the sudden not an NFL calibre RB. Yeah, that makes a ton of sense.

 

[Chaos Commish]

If I am the offensive coordinator of the team holding the #3 pick, I might openly question the ability of the expected #1 pick (and best offensive player in the drafts) to succeed in the NFL.

Chow would beg borrow and steal to get his hands back on Reggie. Before leaving USC he called Bush not the best RB he'd every coached, but the best football player.

and

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I agree with this perspective. This makes sense to me.............because on the last important play for USC's National Championship, on 4th and short where was supposedly the best player in college football?

On the Bench???????????

He was the 2nd best RB in that situation on his team?

That makes me think about the NFL as well. I can see RbbC. Some are saying he'll be like Tiki Barber..........he'll be lucky to be as good as Tiki is/was.

Just because Bush is the best RB on his team doesn't mean he's the best RB in every situation on his team. You don't force a player into a situation that he's not better suited for just because he's the better overall player, and likewise not being the best player for every situation does not take anything away from him as a RB.If the Giants have 4th and inches, it's Brandon Jacobs in the game....but that doesn't mean he's better than Tiki.

If the Falcons have 4th and inches, it's TJ Duckett in the game....but that doesn't mean he's better than Dunn.

Hell, if a team had Duckett and Barry friggin Sanders they would probably use Duckett on 4th and an inch.

Likewise, when Pitt has 3rd (or 4th) and 15, even if it were on the last play of the super bowl, Verron Haynes is in the game, not Jerome Bettis. Funny though, Bettis is still pretty much a sure-fire hall of famer even though he's not the best RB for every single situation that can arise, and Haynes isn't exactly as good as Lendale White...

This "he wasn't even on the field on 4th an 1" thing is the weakest arguement out there, and yes that is in any capacity (split out wide even).

 

[DaveGrumbles]

I agree with this perspective. This makes sense to me.............because on the last important play for USC's National Championship, on 4th and short where was supposedly the best player in college football?

On the Bench???????????

He was the 2nd best RB in that situation on his team?

That makes me think about the NFL as well. I can see RbbC. Some are saying he'll be like Tiki Barber..........he'll be lucky to be as good as Tiki is/was.

You're argument is based on the far fetched assumption that Pete Carroll was making intelligent decisions in the last 5 or 6 minutes of that game.

 

[DropKick]

A "Chow on Bush" thread from a Hairy Scotsman?

Not natural.

 

[the hairy scotsman]

A "Chow on Bush" thread from a Hairy Scotsman? 

Not natural.

Ever been to Scotland, or been around many Scots?Couldn't be more natural...

 

[nygiants56]

If I am the offensive coordinator of the team holding the #3 pick, I might openly question the ability of the expected #1 pick (and best offensive player in the drafts) to succeed in the NFL.

Chow would beg borrow and steal to get his hands back on Reggie. Before leaving USC he called Bush not the best RB he'd every coached, but the best football player.

and

yeah he's definitely posturing for Bush..he's hoping other teams ahead of Tenn hear what he is saying,being his former college coach and all, and believe what he is saying about him, and watch as Bush drops down to Tenn @ #3..Tenn is definitely getting either Leinhart or Bush..one way or another..imo..

 

[P Boy]

LOL @ posturing.

He's telling the truth. I think at least one other person here has been making the exact same arguments for a couple of months.

 

[Jason Wood]

Chow has Reggie Bush to thank for his Titans job, among others [Palmer, Leinart]...and, as others have pointed out, he's on a team picking 3rd talking about a guy that barring a minor miracle, won't be available.

Another thought about Chow's comments...I'm betting Reggie himself wouldn't disagree with anything Chow is saying. Sounds to me like what any good coach trying to keep a young hotshot humble would say.

 

[matuski]

Anyone who has watched a few games with Bush playing can tell you without a doubt that he has game-breaker written all over him.

 

[Jason Wood]

Anyone who has watched a few games with Bush playing can tell you without a doubt that he has game-breaker written all over him.

I was somewhat skeptical of Bush's "greatness" heading into this season, but then I made a concerted effort to watch as much USC as I could and was absolutely baffled by what I saw of him. Bush has rare instincts, balance, vision and "game speed" [to quote my fellow FBG Dave Baker] that simply comes around once in a generation.

If he can stay healthy, I don't see how this guy isn't a star regardless of the system.

 

[Tiger Fan]

If I am the offensive coordinator of the team holding the #3 pick, I might openly question the ability of the expected #1 pick (and best offensive player in the drafts) to succeed in the NFL.

 

[Peep It Yo!]

If I am the offensive coordinator of the team holding the #3 pick, I might openly question the ability of the expected #1 pick (and best offensive player in the drafts) to succeed in the NFL.

EXACTLY!

 

[mbuehner]

Bush has rare instincts, balance, vision and "game speed" [to quote my fellow FBG Dave Baker] that simply comes around once in a generation.

I like Bush a lot as well but lets not oversell this thing. Seems like every year there is somebody that is a once in a generation prospect, which clearly makes no sense. Barry Sanders racking 3300 yards and 39 TDs is a once in a generation talent. Watching OJ or Marcus Allen was watching men amongst boys. Bush has shown flashes of that but in my opinion he doesnt simply own the game the way the absolute pinacle guys did. LT2 wouldnt have been on the bench on 4th and short in the National Championship game. Not never no-how.

 

[redman]

yahoo combine notebook

One of the most interesting comments about Bush came from former USC offensive coordinator Norm Chow. Chow said he believes Bush has the ability to be successful in the NFL, but added that he will have plenty of significant hurdles to clear.

"They're huge," Chow said. "Pass protection, blocking, running pass routes. He's played in a good system with a good staff, but the speed of the game – they're all going to be as fast as he is, you know?"

I just find this interesting that this is posted by the guy who's spent the most verbiage defending Vince Young and the Wonderlic score, etc.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

This thread would have gotten exponentially more hits had you not used the two guys' first names in the title.......

 

[FreeBaGeL]

LT2 wouldnt have been on the bench on 4th and short in the National Championship game. Not never no-how.

This whole 4th and 1 thing that people just can't get over is the oldest, off-base, and just flat out worst arguement I've ever seen someone make on these forums.

 

[the hairy scotsman]

yahoo combine notebook

One of the most interesting comments about Bush came from former USC offensive coordinator Norm Chow. Chow said he believes Bush has the ability to be successful in the NFL, but added that he will have plenty of significant hurdles to clear.

"They're huge," Chow said. "Pass protection, blocking, running pass routes. He's played in a good system with a good staff, but the speed of the game – they're all going to be as fast as he is, you know?"

I just find this interesting that this is posted by the guy who's spent the most verbiage defending Vince Young and the Wonderlic score, etc.

This was posted well before the Wonderlic score fiasco, which I've only posted about, briefly, a few times.I just thought it was interesting, considering the source. Apparently some other posters have also. While I'm not on the "He's the next Sanders or Sayers" bandwagon, far from it, I think Reggie will be good, maybe great in the NFL.

What I don't get, however, is how some folks, I think we all know who they are, some are right here in this thread, can say if you watch Bush play you can clearly see he's a gamebreaker...then in almost the same breath say VY will be a dud. It's almost as if they simply cannot like both Reggie Bush and Vince Young, and see their obvious talents.

It's seems fairly obvious to me that both of these guys dominated at the college level and have a chance to be great pros, barring injury.

To say Bush will be incredible, but Young will be a bust, then show no solid reasoning or evidence that you've watched him extensively just reaks of sour grapes.

 

[mbuehner]

This whole 4th and 1 thing that people just can't get over is the oldest, off-base, and just flat out worst arguement I've ever seen someone make on these forums.

Well when your present such a stunning argument as that how can anyone disagree. I wish you had pointed that out before, now i feel foolish.I mean, when you supposedly have the greatest RB in 20 years on your team and he's on the bench at a critical moment... I mean i remember Michael Jordan and Wayne Gretsky and John Elway taking a few of those plays off right? Hardly worth talking about. Plus I suppose Bush was an every down back the rest of the game anyway right, so this was just an isolated incident. Oh...

 

[MLBrandow]

This whole 4th and 1 thing that people just can't get over is the oldest, off-base, and just flat out worst arguement I've ever seen someone make on these forums.

Well when your present such a stunning argument as that how can anyone disagree. I wish you had pointed that out before, now i feel foolish.I mean, when you supposedly have the greatest RB in 20 years on your team and he's on the bench at a critical moment... I mean i remember Michael Jordan and Wayne Gretsky and John Elway taking a few of those plays off right? Hardly worth talking about. Plus I suppose Bush was an every down back the rest of the game anyway right, so this was just an isolated incident. Oh...

see kids, this is why you need to make coherent arguments when you would like to participate in intelligible debate.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

This whole 4th and 1 thing that people just can't get over is the oldest, off-base, and just flat out worst arguement I've ever seen someone make on these forums.

Well when your present such a stunning argument as that how can anyone disagree. I wish you had pointed that out before, now i feel foolish.I mean, when you supposedly have the greatest RB in 20 years on your team and he's on the bench at a critical moment... I mean i remember Michael Jordan and Wayne Gretsky and John Elway taking a few of those plays off right? Hardly worth talking about. Plus I suppose Bush was an every down back the rest of the game anyway right, so this was just an isolated incident. Oh...

see kids, this is why you need to make coherent arguments when you would like to participate in intelligible debate.

Apparently neither of you read very well. Not only have I actually made an arguement about it about 400 times on these forums, I did a quick version of it further up in this very thread.Next time before you make a post about something not being there, at least take a look at the very thread you're posting in.

 

[mbuehner]

Apparently the response was quite memorable in that case. To briefly address your thought: Tiki Barber and Warrick Dunn are excellent running backs, but nobody ever accused them of being all time greats the way Bush is being lauded at least in the collegiate context. If Walter Payton or Barry Sanders werent in on a critical play, eyebrows would go up, not because they may or may not be the best fit for any particular play, but because your Guy, your absolute Playmaker, your Franchise is the guy you go to when the game is on the line. Or at least use as a decoy.

The whole point of the argument is that Bush did not play that roll at USC to that level, and hence it is wrong to place him in that echelon of talent. He is not the prospect some of these guys were although he is certainly very, very talented. He could be the next Tiki Barber, and damn near any team would kill for that because Tiki is a great player. But he isnt the next Jim Brown or Walter Payton or Tomlinson for that matter. If he isnt the ultimate playmaker in his college career he wont be in the NFL either.

 

[Dave Baker]

This whole 4th and 1 thing that people just can't get over is the oldest, off-base, and just flat out worst arguement I've ever seen someone make on these forums.

Well when your present such a stunning argument as that how can anyone disagree. I wish you had pointed that out before, now i feel foolish.I mean, when you supposedly have the greatest RB in 20 years on your team and he's on the bench at a critical moment... I mean i remember Michael Jordan and Wayne Gretsky and John Elway taking a few of those plays off right? Hardly worth talking about. Plus I suppose Bush was an every down back the rest of the game anyway right, so this was just an isolated incident. Oh...

Wait...are we still arguing that one knock against Reggie Bush was that Pete Carroll took him out of the game in that key down? Really?First off, most people think it was a major blunder by Carroll. In retrospect, they might be right since USC failed to get the first. Second, they happened to have a better short yardage player on the team in LenDale White, who likely is a first round draft pick and more proven in short yardage than Bush.

Just because Reggie Bush isn't the greatest player at every single facet of the game doesn't mean he won't be the best playmaker the league has ever seen (note, that's not what I'm saying, just making the point that the two may be mutually exclusive).

If Jim Brown and Walter Payton were on the same team, Payton would likely be off the field in short yardage. Does that mean Payton may not be the greatest ever? Of course not. Again, the point here is not that White = Brown and Bush = Payton.

 

[mbuehner]

If Jim Brown and Walter Payton were on the same team, Payton would likely be off the field in short yardage. Does that mean Payton may not be the greatest ever? Of course not. Again, the point here is not that White = Brown and Bush = Payton.

So if Reggie Bush is one of the greatest talents in decades that makes LenDale White one of the greatest as well by your logic? And lets not pretend it was one isolated play. Bush was not used as an every down back on USC. If he was the next Big Thing i would expect to see him touching the ball as much as humanly possible. Teams that had guys like Marcus Allen or LT2 would get them the ball any way possible as often as possible. If you have a player head and shoulders and torso better as a playmaker than anyone else like some of the true historically elite prospects they dont miss many plays. Thats like sitting Michael Jordan because John Paxon is a better 3 point shooter. No.

 

[Dave Baker]

If Jim Brown and Walter Payton were on the same team, Payton would likely be off the field in short yardage. Does that mean Payton may not be the greatest ever? Of course not. Again, the point here is not that White = Brown and Bush = Payton.

So if Reggie Bush is one of the greatest talents in decades that makes LenDale White one of the greatest as well by your logic? And lets not pretend it was one isolated play.

Please read again. Look at what you quoted for me when I said "the point here is not that White=Brown, etc."

 

[Burning Sensation]

Apparently the response was quite memorable in that case. To briefly address your thought: Tiki Barber and Warrick Dunn are excellent running backs, but nobody ever accused them of being all time greats the way Bush is being lauded at least in the collegiate context. If Walter Payton or Barry Sanders werent in on a critical play, eyebrows would go up, not because they may or may not be the best fit for any particular play, but because your Guy, your absolute Playmaker, your Franchise is the guy you go to when the game is on the line. Or at least use as a decoy.

The whole point of the argument is that Bush did not play that roll at USC to that level, and hence it is wrong to place him in that echelon of talent. He is not the prospect some of these guys were although he is certainly very, very talented. He could be the next Tiki Barber, and damn near any team would kill for that because Tiki is a great player. But he isnt the next Jim Brown or Walter Payton or Tomlinson for that matter. If he isnt the ultimate playmaker in his college career he wont be in the NFL either.

Hmm, if i were you, i would have left this part out.

 

[mbuehner]

Please read again. Look at what you quoted for me when I said "the point here is not that White=Brown, etc."

So the analogy you presented is not analagous to this situation? Ok...

 

[Dave Baker]

If Jim Brown and Walter Payton were on the same team, Payton would likely be off the field in short yardage. Does that mean Payton may not be the greatest ever? Of course not. Again, the point here is not that White = Brown and Bush = Payton.

Bush was not used as an every down back on USC. If he was the next Big Thing i would expect to see him touching the ball as much as humanly possible. Teams that had guys like Marcus Allen or LT2 would get them the ball any way possible as often as possible. If you have a player head and shoulders and torso better as a playmaker than anyone else like some of the true historically elite prospects they dont miss many plays. Thats like sitting Michael Jordan because John Paxon is a better 3 point shooter. No.

I can't describe how much I think you're missing the mark. Again, most USC fans were appalled that Bush wasn't in the game on the big play you mentioned and felt Carroll made a major mistake.I've also never said that Bush is a 30 carry a game guy and when you have someone as talented as LenDale White on the team, you use him. White is a wonderful talent. As with Caddy Williams and Ronnie Brown, USC was lucky enough to have two of the very best RBs in college last year. So it shouldn't be a big surprise that they used both of them extensively. That formula seemed to work fairly well.

Even though Bush is not a 30 carry a game guy, he might argue that he wasn't used enough. And looking at when he was given the ball a lot more, he was very successful.

But the reality here is that the proof is in the pudding. Watching Bush play, even in the Rose Bowl where Bush had 177 yards rushing/receiving, tells you how great he can and IMO will be. of course anything can happen here. Joe Bryant, amongst many, are serious doubters as to how well Bush will perform in the NFL.

There can be many arguments against Bush being successful. Saying that he wasn't in that one play is not one of them. It wasn't his call and some believe it was a major blunder by Carroll. Plus, just because he isn't the best short yardage guy doesn't mean he might not be one of the best playmakers ever.

 

[Dave Baker]

Please read again. Look at what you quoted for me when I said "the point here is not that White=Brown, etc."

So the analogy you presented is not analagous to this situation? Ok...

The analogy is that in my example Walter Payton would not be in the game, arguing against your point that Walter Payton would always be in the game.And although Brown/Payton does not equal Bush/White, White is a heckuva RB. Perhaps when it comes down to it, your feelings here are more a reflection against White? I think he's gonna be a great pro and when all is said and done people might be looking at the two USC RBs as near the best that ever played together in college. And if White is as successful as I think he will be, it makes your argument look even worse.

 

[the hairy scotsman]

Apparently the response was quite memorable in that case. To briefly address your thought: Tiki Barber and Warrick Dunn are excellent running backs, but nobody ever accused them of being all time greats the way Bush is being lauded at least in the collegiate context. If Walter Payton or Barry Sanders werent in on a critical play, eyebrows would go up, not because they may or may not be the best fit for any particular play, but because your Guy, your absolute Playmaker, your Franchise is the guy you go to when the game is on the line. Or at least use as a decoy. 

The whole point of the argument is that Bush did not play that roll at USC to that level, and hence it is wrong to place him in that echelon of talent. He is not the prospect some of these guys were although he is certainly very, very talented. He could be the next Tiki Barber, and damn near any team would kill for that because Tiki is a great player. But he isnt the next Jim Brown or Walter Payton or Tomlinson for that matter. If he isnt the ultimate playmaker in his college career he wont be in the NFL either.

All great points.

Wait...are we still arguing that one knock against Reggie Bush was that Pete Carroll took him out of the game in that key down? Really?

First off, most people think it was a major blunder by Carroll. In retrospect, they might be right since USC failed to get the first. Second, they happened to have a better short yardage player on the team in LenDale White, who likely is a first round draft pick and more proven in short yardage than Bush.

Just because Reggie Bush isn't the greatest player at every single facet of the game doesn't mean he won't be the best playmaker the league has ever seen (note, that's not what I'm saying, just making the point that the two may be mutually exclusive).

If Jim Brown and Walter Payton were on the same team, Payton would likely be off the field in short yardage. Does that mean Payton may not be the greatest ever? Of course not. Again, the point here is not that White = Brown and Bush = Payton.

I think some people are overblowing the absence of Bush on that play. I don't see it so much as a knock against him, but maybe as an eyeopener and a reality check for the "Bush is the next Sanders or Sayers or Payton" folks. The way Buehner puts it, though, is perfectly appropriate and captures the essence of what many people saw:

If Walter Payton or Barry Sanders werent in on a critical play, eyebrows would go up, not because they may or may not be the best fit for any particular play, but because your Guy, your absolute Playmaker, your Franchise is the guy you go to when the game is on the line. Or at least use as a decoy.

It's that those guys were so huge to their team that it would have been unthinkable for any coach, even a stupid one, which is a category into which I would not lump PC, to have them on the bench at such a critical point. I personally don't think it was a mistake to give White the ball there. He hadn't been stopped in short yardage all day, but when I saw that Bush wasn't at least out there to stretch the field, I was stunned.

 

[TheFanatic]

Apparently the response was quite memorable in that case. To briefly address your thought: Tiki Barber and Warrick Dunn are excellent running backs, but nobody ever accused them of being all time greats the way Bush is being lauded at least in the collegiate context. If Walter Payton or Barry Sanders werent in on a critical play, eyebrows would go up, not because they may or may not be the best fit for any particular play, but because your Guy, your absolute Playmaker, your Franchise is the guy you go to when the game is on the line. Or at least use as a decoy.

The whole point of the argument is that Bush did not play that roll at USC to that level, and hence it is wrong to place him in that echelon of talent. He is not the prospect some of these guys were although he is certainly very, very talented. He could be the next Tiki Barber, and damn near any team would kill for that because Tiki is a great player. But he isnt the next Jim Brown or Walter Payton or Tomlinson for that matter. If he isnt the ultimate playmaker in his college career he wont be in the NFL either.

Hmm, if i were you, i would have left this part out.

If I remember correctly, Barry Sanders is still sitting at 99 TD's for a career. While Touchdown Tommy Vardell scored something like 6 TD's in short yardage situations Barry's final season. Barry is absolutely a singular talent that only comes along once a decade or so and he was pulled at the goal line. And just because it was his final season is not why he was pulled. No one, probably not even Barry, knew it would be his final season....I'm not sure where this pertains to this debate but it needs to be pointed out....Carry on....

 

[Bad_Mo]

I had to slow down and re-read your heading.....

Chow on Bush....?

 

[Burning Sensation]

Apparently the response was quite memorable in that case. To briefly address your thought: Tiki Barber and Warrick Dunn are excellent running backs, but nobody ever accused them of being all time greats the way Bush is being lauded at least in the collegiate context. If Walter Payton or Barry Sanders werent in on a critical play, eyebrows would go up, not because they may or may not be the best fit for any particular play, but because your Guy, your absolute Playmaker, your Franchise is the guy you go to when the game is on the line. Or at least use as a decoy. 

The whole point of the argument is that Bush did not play that roll at USC to that level, and hence it is wrong to place him in that echelon of talent. He is not the prospect some of these guys were although he is certainly very, very talented.  He could be the next Tiki Barber, and damn near any team would kill for that because Tiki is a great player. But he isnt the next Jim Brown or Walter Payton or Tomlinson for that matter. If he isnt the ultimate playmaker in his college career he wont be in the NFL either.

Hmm, if i were you, i would have left this part out.

If I remember correctly, Barry Sanders is still sitting at 99 TD's for a career. While Touchdown Tommy Vardell scored something like 6 TD's in short yardage situations Barry's final season. Barry is absolutely a singular talent that only comes along once a decade or so and he was pulled at the goal line. And just because it was his final season is not why he was pulled. No one, probably not even Barry, knew it would be his final season....I'm not sure where this pertains to this debate but it needs to be pointed out....Carry on....

It pertains to the post i quoted, because it is a horrible contradiction. Barry Sanders was often pulled in short yardage situations, and many believe him to be the best/most electricfying RB/player of all time. So to tell me Bush can not be a great player in the NFL because he was pulled in a short yardage situation just doesnt make any sense.

 

[mbuehner]

It pertains to the post i quoted, because it is a horrible contradiction. Barry Sanders was often pulled in short yardage situations, and many believe him to be the best/most electricfying RB/player of all time. So to tell me Bush can not be a great player in the NFL because he was pulled in a short yardage situation just doesnt make any sense.

Its a fair counterpoint- but here is my counter-counterpoint: there is a difference between 1st and goal at the 2 yard line in the 1st quarter, and 4th and short in the second half of a National Championship you are losing. As an example. Its not so much the point that i would expect a great back to play every down (and make no mistake, Sanders was an every down back for the bulk of his career, even if he gave up an odd carry) but that when the game is on the line, you simple wouldnt think about not having your signature player on the field. Now certainly this was only one example, but it is a valid example and shouldnt be tossed aside. It might be taken under consideration that Norm Chow knows Reggie Bush than better than we do.

I've also never said that Bush is a 30 carry a game guy and when you have someone as talented as LenDale White on the team, you use him.

I agree with that. In fact thats my entire point. But my larger point is nobody is going to be a future HOFer that isnt a 30 ball carrier, and all around, 3 down back. Tiki Barber is probably the closest in recent memory and unless he does something extraordinary in the next couple years he doesnt have a prayer- and he does carrry the ball 30 times a game when called on. But he's not quite that 'complete' stud you look for in your HOF legends.Like I said, Bush could be an outstanding player and he is certainly the best prospect this year. But I simply dont buy that he is up in that elite echelon of players that come out once or twice a decade and set the world on fire.

 

[bumpman]

It pertains to the post i quoted, because it is a horrible contradiction. Barry Sanders was often pulled in short yardage situations, and many believe him to be the best/most electricfying RB/player of all time. So to tell me Bush can not be a great player in the NFL because he was pulled in a short yardage situation just doesnt make any sense.

Its a fair counterpoint- but here is my counter-counterpoint: there is a difference between 1st and goal at the 2 yard line in the 1st quarter, and 4th and short in the second half of a National Championship you are losing. As an example. Its not so much the point that i would expect a great back to play every down (and make no mistake, Sanders was an every down back for the bulk of his career, even if he gave up an odd carry) but that when the game is on the line, you simple wouldnt think about not having your signature player on the field. Now certainly this was only one example, but it is a valid example and shouldnt be tossed aside. It might be taken under consideration that Norm Chow knows Reggie Bush than better than we do.

I've also never said that Bush is a 30 carry a game guy and when you have someone as talented as LenDale White on the team, you use him.

I agree with that. In fact thats my entire point. But my larger point is nobody is going to be a future HOFer that isnt a 30 ball carrier, and all around, 3 down back. Tiki Barber is probably the closest in recent memory and unless he does something extraordinary in the next couple years he doesnt have a prayer- and he does carrry the ball 30 times a game when called on. But he's not quite that 'complete' stud you look for in your HOF legends.Like I said, Bush could be an outstanding player and he is certainly the best prospect this year. But I simply dont buy that he is up in that elite echelon of players that come out once or twice a decade and set the world on fire.

I take it you don't think Bettis will get in to the HOF. He was a two down back for most of his career.

 

[mbuehner]

I take it you don't think Bettis will get in to the HOF. He was a two down back for most of his career.

He might but he sure as hell doesnt deserve to. He is the ultimate compiler. Maybe the best short yardage back in NFL history but if he was playing his career in Arizona instead of Pittsburgh he'd be about as famous as Zac Crockett.

 

[Burning Sensation]

It pertains to the post i quoted, because it is a horrible contradiction. Barry Sanders was often pulled in short yardage situations, and many believe him to be the best/most electricfying RB/player of all time. So to tell me Bush can not be a great player in the NFL because he was pulled in a short yardage situation just doesnt make any sense.

Its a fair counterpoint- but here is my counter-counterpoint: there is a difference between 1st and goal at the 2 yard line in the 1st quarter, and 4th and short in the second half of a National Championship you are losing. As an example. Its not so much the point that i would expect a great back to play every down (and make no mistake, Sanders was an every down back for the bulk of his career, even if he gave up an odd carry) but that when the game is on the line, you simple wouldnt think about not having your signature player on the field. Now certainly this was only one example, but it is a valid example and shouldnt be tossed aside. It might be taken under consideration that Norm Chow knows Reggie Bush than better than we do.

Is a first and goal from the 2 in the 1st quarter a meaningless situation? Barry Sanders was an amazing player, but he was not always the best player if you needed short yardage. I know in his best years, he was always amongst the league leaders in negative rushing plays.

 

[mbuehner]

Is a first and goal from the 2 in the 1st quarter a meaningless situation? Barry Sanders was an amazing player, but he was not always the best player if you needed short yardage.

Its certainly not as critical as a 4th down and inches, particularly with the game in the balance. Lets put it this way, if the game is on the line Sanders is in the game.And obviously Sanders wasnt the best choice of examples for me because no-one else has been remotely like him. But I picked him because Sanders ripped up his college career. There was no question he was head and shoulders the best RB in his draft, even at his size. Sanders was an NCAA all time great, Bush is not imo. Now certainly there have been elite college players that failed in the NFL, and elite NFL players that didnt run amuck in college, but we can only go by what we know now about Bush. And that is that he has not dominated the college game the way others have that can be pointed to. Hence I suggest he will not dominate the NFL the way some people expect him to. It has happened, but generally a player does not become more dominant as his level of competition rises.

 

[Dave Baker]

...my larger point is nobody is going to be a future HOFer that isnt a 30 ball carrier, and all around, 3 down back...

Marshall Faulk only carried the ball 30+ times three times in his career. Even during his peak years, he generally was a 20 carry per game player. Many model their opinions of Bush based on Faulk, mostly I think because of Bush's extraordinary ability to line up as a WR and tremendous hands.Bush carried the ball 15 or more times in seven games this season and 20 or more in three of them. And he was playing games where they didn't have to pound it out (Leinart) and they had White there too. And remember, White actually had less carries on the season than Bush, but nobody believes White can't handle the load 25 times a game.

This perception is based strictly on Bush's size (or apparent lack therein) and him being removed from the game in that one instance. Interestingly enough, in that very Rose Bowl game Bush was in, Bush was in for several short yardage situations, not White.

None of those HOFers in your example had someone like LenDale White playing next to them in college, at least not that I am aware. That's why I think your argument is poor. It had less to do with Bush's inability to handle short yardage and more to do with White's expertise with it.

FWIW, I think Bush can easily be a three down back, a la Faulk.

 

[Dave Baker]

Sanders was an NCAA all time great, Bush is not imo.

Statistically, you may be right, but some scouts and media types have called Bush the greatest RB they've even seen play college ball.

 

[matuski]

Sanders was an NCAA all time great, Bush is not imo.

Statistically, you may be right, but some scouts and media types have called Bush the greatest RB they've even seen play college ball.

Sanders wasn't "an" NCAA all time great, he is most likely "the" NCAA all time great... see 1987-88.As far as the quotes on Bush - it is called hype. He is phenomenal, but not in the Barry class. I'd put him in the Faulk/Edge/LT range for NCAA.