LSSpam
Practice Squad
Offline
If I am the only one seeing this, then why have there been so many threads on Bush' production?
Btw, I am not arguing how productive or non-productive he's been, but rather, how the attitudes seem to be when it comes to his production.
The threads come from...well I don't know precisely. I suppose people feel that, because he was a #2 pick, it's important to bash him and watch him bleed a little. People are like that for whatever reason. When a player is hyped and doesn't nessecarily meet the hype, people feel obligated to swing to the other extreme of the hype and try to trash the player as harshly as possible. I'm not entirely sure the motivation for this, but it's constant.
Because modern media, especially the media surrounding the NFL, overhypes EVERYTHING, it's virtually guranteed players will constantly fall short of the hype. Reggie Bush never had a chance in hell of being the next Gale Sayers because Gale Sayers wouldn't be the next Gale Sayers in todays NFL. It's evolved. You don't have Michael Jordans in the NFL.
But the comparison is made and for some reason it ticks people off at Reggie Bush, as if he should apologize for being succesful in college and causing people to like him.
The same thing happens with guys like Peyton Manning for instance. Peyton's a good quarterback. Maybe he isn't the best in the NFL, it's a subjective arguement, but he IS overhyped because the accolades he recieves no one on the planet deserves.
So what happens? Make a thread "PEYTON MANNING IS THE BEST QB IN THE NFL" and people will pile in to completely trash Manning with a venom usually reserved for worst enemies. Why? I don't know. They feel like the accolades aren't deserved and, even though it's not Mannings fault (he's never said he's the best QB in the world), people take it out on him.
Again, it's as if people want players to apologize for the media's hype, even though media hype isn't done for the sake of the player but rather for the media.
I don't know why people are like this. But I know that this was entirely predictable and is NOT like what occured with Aaron Brooks.
For example, if we sign Colston to a big time deal and then he gets injured or doesn't perform, you'd see the same stuff go about darling Colston. That happens.
What occured with Brooks however was taken far more personnally. People were making judgements on other peoples character and very beliefs based on the stance on Brooks. Brooks was a polarizing character on the level with like Bush (as ridiculous as that seems to be considering he just played football).
Brooks was a very destructive arguement. The Bush arguements are annoying, but an unfourtante and expected part of how fans react to professional football these days.