he definitely isn't in Madden!

 

How exactly was this insulting?

Oh god, he said Walter Payton was 200 lbs, the same weight he is. Let's burn his house down. :rolleyes:

 

I dont see a problem with Bush trying to prove he can be an everydown back.He has been boxed in as a specialty back without really having a chance to prove his point.

Sparano has apparently bought into his argument.The proof will be in the his performance .

I dont think Bush is comparing himself to Payton.Only that there have been undersized backs who have had success as feature backs.

 

No, his implication is that weight/size has no bearing one one's ability to be a complete back.

 

Larry needs a sedative to calm his self at 10:50 AM....lol, relax my man. Bush wasn't trying to anoint himself an all time great.

 

Well, why not? The self annointed "experts" in all things NFL bang that drum, perhaps Reggie can't hear them, which means all things are possible for him?

I believe he can, I question his intelligence of wanting to in the first place...:lol:

 

For a RB who was predicted to rush 2000 yards a season in the pro, only able to rushed over 2000 yards in his whole career? Took 5 seasons for Sean Payton to realize that Bush wasn't able to run the ball...

 

Who does a running play in Madden? that's the question...

 

Bush isn't an every down back, if he thinks so thats fine but if the front office thinks so then we have a serious problem in Miami. As an interested fan of the NFL I can see clearly that he is a good returner/receiver/spot running back but as an every down back? Nope. If we signed him to be our every down back then we are in for a big disappointment, hopefully we get to see Daniel as the main ball carrier soon.

 

Bush specifically said he wasn't Walter Payton. His implication was that he was the same size and that since a player that size has run between the tackles before, clearly being that size does not mean you can't run between the tackles. Factually, he is completely accurate. Anybody taking offense is just being hyper-sensitive and for that matter struggling with reading comprehension.

Personally, I agree that the size thing is a non-issue. Whether Bush can run between the tackles for a full season will have more to do with his durability and whether or not he's injury prone.

 

No. The implication was that there are other small players who were all time greats. Wow man...

 

Look at Ronnie, he got hurt a lot and he was a bigger back. I dont think size has a whole lot to do with it, but I am sure Reggie's extra practice is helping him prepare for more of a load...

 

It's not running between the tackles, it's breaking tackles while running between the tackles. Bush is just too small for that.

 

I tend to think of Warrick Dunn, but his body type was more Ray Rice, Bush is built more like a Wr.

Which does not mean he cannot play 16 running between the tackles it does mean his body type is more like Eric Metcalf's and it has not been done.

Walter Payton also had a huge "bubble", and a slashing running style, and lower pad level.

 

Running between the tackles is generally an overrated skill in the first place. Second, with the rise of running back committees, it's okay to only do one or two things as long as you do them very well. Third, Bush should be more concerned with his blitz pickups and pass protection on third down, because this team looks pretty bad when it comes time to convert downs. Lastly, I don't see how Reggie Bush becomes a featured back when the team traded three picks to move up to the 2nd round to draft Daniel Thomas. This regime is pretty schizophrenic when it comes to sunk costs, and I suspect Thomas' sunk cost is one they regard as important (as opposed to, say, Donald Thomas).

This is such an overblown issue.

 

It's not really about size, it's about power an leverage. Reggie does not run with power an he doesn't have the leverage to break through tackles. Reggie is a sports car, not a truck.

 

Wow what an extreme over reaction while starting a thread. What do you have against reggie? Because certainly seems like you have something against him.

Anyways size doesn't have much to do with being an inside runner, its the way a RB runs. In his career Reggie ran to light to be an inside runner. Not that one game turns everything around, but he certainly ran heavier and tougher and even dragged a couple defenders while running inside. He didn't have many holes, but I was impressed with his inside running against the Pats. There is little doubt, Reggie looks like a different back so far in a dolphin uniform then the one in a Saints uniform...

 

Reggie isnt shying away from contact he is welcoming contact and doing his best to run through it....he is goinng to end up leading this team in total yards imo so get off his damn back.

 

You realize those were 5th and 7th round picks right?

 

People said Chris Johnson couldn't run between the tackles and that the Titans were idiots in reaching for him in the 1st round. I'm less concerned about Reggie Bush's size or some intangible "between-the-tackles running ability" and more concerned with our offensive line creating holes for him to burst through and into the second level.

P.S. - King, when did you steal my quote? :lol:

 

I dont expect a Jamaal Charles type season from Bush, I think he will have a good year for us as a RB much better than he EVER did in N.O.

And in fairness to him the whole running game was bad and I cant say that its all Reggie's fault. All this being said I welcome back Daniel Thomas with open arms.

 

All I know is that I'am happy I have a 26 year old focused Reggie Bush, and a Talented rookie, over a lazy Ronnie brown and an aging ricky williams..

 

Me too! Baffles me that people still question getting rid of those 2 for fresh guys, whether stars or not...I like the moves...

 

Your quote? I AM Aristotle :tongue2:

 

No, he's comparing his size. That was exactly what he said. The fact that you don't see that and (so far, I believe) everybody else who has responded in this thread does see that indicates that your comprehension is not "fine". You over-reacted. People do it all the time. It's no big deal. Take a step back and realize that if nobody else took it to mean what you got out of it, then odds are you took it to mean something it didn't.

 

Size didn't stop Warrick Dunn from rushing for over 10K yards. I'm glad Reggie wants to become a more complete back.

 

The offensive line is supposed to get him past the Dline so he can break tackles

 

:cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry::cry:

Some people will find anything to get upset about.

 

I'm 6'4'', the same height as Karlos Dansby.

Did I just compare myself to Dansby's skills? Did I just commit some grand blasphemous offense?

OR did I simply state that I'm the same height as Karlos Dansby?

 

Doesn't matter. A sunk cost is a sunk cost. You can't get it back no matter what.

 

Even when it is a great deal?

 

Sunk costs aren't supposed to be factored in to "great deals", or even "bad deals". They're the price of admission, not a line item cost consideration. Ted Ginn wasn't a bad choice because he was taken in the first round, he was a bad choice because he was a bad choice.

Fans don't look at it this way, though. I understand that. Doesn't make it any less true, but I understand it.

 

Then that makes "Sunk costs" meaningless when it comes to football.

People who understand football do not see it that way. I understand that. Doesn't make it any less meaningless.

 

Yes, they are meaningless. That's the point. Doesn't matter if it's a 1st round pick or a 7th round pick. It's a sunk cost.

Thanks for your backhanded agreement. :up: