mel kiper just defended reggie bush (1 Viewer)

[vanman]

Why so many hate Reggie on this page.

 

[25Saintsfan]

Why so many hate Reggie on this page.

He was drafted #2 overall. He was drafted to be an everydown back and he has been anything but that. He has not lived up to his hype, and has been a disappointment. He is the highest paid RB in the league.

 

[Danchrism]

Why so many hate Reggie on this page.

But your post was the first on this page.

Seriously, let go of the simultaneity of "Reggie" and "hate." I doubt anyone here hates him, as a football player or otherwise. It's been well-stated and defended that he had an integral role on the '06 team, but to say he's the reason that year was so good for us is akin to smacking the rest of this team's talent square in the face. And there's some dang-fine talent there. When dealing with all matters football, it's pretty much taboo to give so much credit to one player.... Falcons fans were notorious for doing this to/for Ron Mexico. When they won it was because of Mexico, when they lost it was any or all of the other 52 players + coaches and educated fans from all bases began to greatly dislike them for it. Let's keep that from happening now.

 

[cruize]

Reggie wasn't just a third down back in 06....He and Mcallister took turns on entire possesions. Some possesions you would only see Reggie in there. He usually ended up with about 12-15 carries and 5 or 6 catches.....That's not what a third down back does.

It's not what a #1 RB in the NFL does. He has proven his value as a situational player. He hasn't shown he can handle being a #1 RB in the NFL. That's essentially what they were arguing about. I like Reggie. I'm glad he's a Saint. But, he is what he is. So far, that's not a complete, full-time RB in the NFL. Thus, he's closer to a third down back than a #1 RB.

 

[bobad]

Why so many hate Reggie on this page.

Why does it have to be love or hate, all or nothing?

I'm one of Reggie's biggest fans, and biggest critics. I think intelligent fans have enough mental capacity to recognize skill in some aspects of a player's game, and lack of skill in other areas.

Reggie needs to learn patience to let holes develop, when to fight for yardage, and when to go down and protect the ball and himself. If he masters those skills, he can be an elite running back. I think he will eventually learn those skills, but I hope his body is not worn out by then.

Now is the time to criticize Reggie. When the bullets start flying in Sept, we need to get behind him.

 

[Deuuuuce]

It's not what a #1 RB in the NFL does. He has proven his value as a situational player. He hasn't shown he can handle being a #1 RB in the NFL. That's essentially what they were arguing about. I like Reggie. I'm glad he's a Saint. But, he is what he is. So far, that's not a complete, full-time RB in the NFL. Thus, he's closer to a third down back than a #1 RB.

What is the deal with trying to label players in to categories. So i guess based on what youre saying you can only be an "eevry down back" or a "third down back". I dont buy in to that at all

Bush was not drafted to be what you may call "an every down back" who gets 30 carries a game...He was drafted to be a good football player. Last time I checked, a guy that can run the ball, catch it, split out as a reciever, return punts and kicks has just as much, if not more value than a guy that just takes hand offs.

So long as he helps the team win, who cares what KIND of back he is.

 

[Paul]

I support all of our players, and wish them all well. While I may not be as critical of them as many of you on here, I also recognize the need for improvement.
What I don't understand is the "reverting back to old ways" by Reggie. What I mean is that I look at the SF & NYG games of 2006, and the Seattle game of 2007, and he ripped these defenses to shreds by running inside and outside. It worked, but then he goes back to the bouncing outside and losing yardage thing. He seemed fearless in 2006, and reserved in 2007 - I guess due to injury?
I hope that he has a great year, along with the rest of our offense.... I believe that we'll be top 5 again. My main concern right now is our defense, because I want to finally have a team that is good in all three phases of the game.

 

[cruize]

What is the deal with trying to label players in to categories. So i guess based on what youre saying you can only be an "eevry down back" or a "third down back". I dont buy in to that at all

Bush was not drafted to be what you may call "an every down back" who gets 30 carries a game...He was drafted to be a good football player. Last time I checked, a guy that can run the ball, catch it, split out as a reciever, return punts and kicks has just as much, if not more value than a guy that just takes hand offs.

So long as he helps the team win, who cares what KIND of back he is.

Read my post a few more times. You may see where I said I like Reggie and I'm glad he's a Saint. The original argument was about different types of backs and what they bring. Reggie was drafted and is being paid to be an every down back in the NFL. If you don't believe that, you're just making excuses for what you think is my criticism of him. My seeing Reggie for what he is so far in his NFL career, an extremely gifted, situational RB and playmaker, is fact, not a criticism.

 

[SVSaint]

I don't believe Reggie Bush has come anywhere close to living up to the hype but the guy is not as bad as many of you have made him out to be. It is a known fact that he got hurt sometime last year during the Jacksonville game. When called upon to be the full time starter Reggie Bush averaged 110 yards per game while healthy. I believe during those games he could have been better but did prove he could handle the load over that stretch. If you were to look at his situational stats his highest YPC last year came between the tackles so the argument about him not being able to run between the tackles is also not really valid and it is something that he drastically improved upon from 06

 

[dentonez]

YouTube - MN Vikings Adrian Peterson vs Chicago Bears

Peterson seems to have no trouble getting to the outside. Is it because he's a better runner. No, he and Reggie run at about the same speed....Peterson is better at breaking tackles, but Reggie is shiftier.

The reason for Petersons success is that sick blocking you see in that video. The O-line pushes back the bears D-line like 5 yards on most every play. Watch this next to a saints running play and you will know why Reggie hasn't lived up to the hype yet. Give Reggie the space Peterson has in this video and he would be as productive.

The oline is def helping him, but man AP is good. He's got people falling all over themselves. I think a big difference in their styles is that AP runs in straight lines and uses the angles and cuts to throw people off. He doesn't get hit head on or spend time circling or dancing around. AP cranks up to full speed and blasts through altering his angles to hit the holes in stride while Reggie is at half speed circling around trying dance through the players. That makes it easy to hit him hard and straight and to get tackles on him. That being said that's only a comparison of traditional back style running. Reggie has tons of other skills AP doesn't. I think the guy who said we need to back Reggie up is right. Give him another couple of steps to get that speed cranking. Then he needs to get closer to the line for his cuts if he expects to get to the edge without them getting the better angle on him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oe6dLH2uKUs

 

[bobad]

The original argument was about different types of backs and what they bring. Reggie was drafted and is being paid to be an every down back in the NFL.

I think because Reggie was used successfully as a situational back in his rookie year, we assumed that's what he was drafted as. I for 1 thought using him every down in 2007 was an experiment. If you want the truth, don't ask the coach. He will tell you that he has confidence in all his players as every down players.

 

[lilvipa221]

He was drafted #2 overall. He was drafted to be an everydown back and he has been anything but that. He has not lived up to his hype, and has been a disappointment. He is the highest paid RB in the league.

False he isnt even close to the highest paid running backs and before you say that he hasnt lived up to the hype is wrong just look at this video. not to mention the fact that he is one of the most feared players in the league in defensive coordinators minds, that is why his stats arent great.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=hE-tmbX4Mmc

 

[dentonez]

Depends on what you mean by "highest paid"

He is the highest in 2007 for total salary... it's his base that is kind of low.

http://content.usatoday.com/sports/...tion.aspx?piece of work=118&order=Salary+desc

 

[gtaz21]

i disagree with Kiper's response on reggie because the conversation was about how well can a rb run sucessfully on the outside in the nfl, example used reggie bush. instead of answering the question about how well reggie can run on the outside in the nfl, kiper said what he said.

Exactly right. Kiper didn't answer the original question. He evaded it by making a totally different statement that in and of itself is false.

Running backs who are outside runners do NOT survive let alone succeed in the NFL (AS RUNNING BACKS). Maybe they can transition to returners or receivers, but they will not succeed at running the football as a tailback in the NFL.

Reggie did not CARRY the Saints to the NFL Championship Game. This has been argued ad nauseum on this board. Reggie was a big part, but his biggest contribution was as a receiver NOT as a running back. Kiper's assertion especially falls apart when you look at Deuce's stats that year. DEUCE was our biggest contributor as a running back that year NOT Reggie. So, if a case was to be made that any running back CARRIED the team to the NFC Championship Game, it would be made for Deuce not Reggie.

Furthermore, the most important guy on that team was Drew Brees. If any single player could be named for carrying the team to the NFC Championship Game, it would be Drew Brees.

Kiper just got busted and he had no defense of his ridiculous statement. Then, he compounded his idiocy by making a different ridiculous statement.

 

[gtaz21]

I still have to disagree. Without Bush, guys like Brees, McAllister, and Colston aren't as successful as they could be. Yeah, you can say that about any player, but Bush affects players around him the most.

No way Bush is as valuable to this team as Drew Brees. That's just an astonishing statement to make. You're saying that a Pro Bowl quarterback is not as valuable as non-Pro Bowl second string tailback??? Are you serious?