Players that Scott Wright Overrated

[J52]

You people are really special. This argument has degraded to nothing but a semantical debate over the term "bust" rather then talking about players.

Who cares what arbitrary value you give the term "bust." Reggie Bush's expectations were x and he fell short of them, but he still is a solid player.

Can't believe this has six pages of "that's not what bust means."

[J-Mike88]

Originally Posted by J52

You people are really special. This argument has degraded to nothing but a semantical debate over the term "bust" rather then talking about players.

Who cares what arbitrary value you give the term "bust." Reggie Bush's expectations were x and he fell short of them, but he still is a solid player.

Can't believe this has six pages of "that's not what bust means."

Exactly. Reggie should have his own thread debating all this... who chose to make this thread about Bush?

I want to know what Scott's pre-draft thoughts were on Nick Collins and Greg Jennings, as well as Clay Matthews.

None of us here ever saw Collins or Jennings play in college, probably the same case with James Jones.

What I notice about everyone who gives their opinions before a draft, they are sure to cover themselves on each side, just like the weathermen who say partly sunny with a chance at isolated showers.

Scott and the others always put positives and weaknesses and mention something that will cover them if they succeed, or if they fail.

I'd like to see them add a category that says my career prediction for this player:

[yourfavestoner]

The six page Bush diatribe solely blossomed from the ******** emanating from this statement:

Originally Posted by Scott Wright

I honestly believe Reggie Bush has turned into exactly the type of player I envisioned.

Anyone who thought he was going to be an elite starting running back was kidding themselves. Bush is and always was a versatile, all-around threat best suited for a third down role.

[LonghornsLegend]

Which is funny because even with Scott's comments it sounds like revisionist history. It's not like his scouting report said something along the lines of "excellent role player but not suited to be an elite starting RB". Kinda hard to say he is likely to end up better then Marshall Faulk, then later say you were kidding yourself if you thought he was gonna be an elite starting RB.

[Saints-Tigers]

Yea, anyone saying they think Reggie has lived up to what they thought, is probably full of ****, I don't remember many, if any detractors.

That's kinda lame Scott.

I still think he can be an elite player with good health, he'll never be Barry Sanders with Marshall Faulk's receiving like some people wanted to say.

Either way, he's a dissappointment that I'll be thrilled to have back next year, and I still think his best football is ahead of him, and even if he keeps getting hurt, you can almost count on him winning you a game or two when he has one of those "moments".

I almost feel like he will fluke into at least 1-2 healthy years. The guy hasn't played a full healthy season since his rookie year(hell, even then, he tweaked his ankle early, but it wasn't TOO bad), he's either come into the season hurt, got hurt pretty significantly in the middle, or ended on IR, it's kind of a shame =/.

[MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)]

I was labeled a Reggie Bush hater prior to the draft, but only because I said woah there, hold up tiger, when people said he was the next Marshall Faulk. That's all it took. People here looked at his FLOOR as a rich man's Brian Westbrook. Even if we ignore the "rich man's" part, it shows that the sentiment of most people on here was that he would be a dominant NFL player, and he simply is NOT. Whether that's a bust or not, I don't care to argue. But he is NOT a dominant NFL player by any stretch. He's a good player, but he's not great. And S-T, I really don't think his numbers would hold up with more carries. Maybe he really has turned a corner, but I don't know if that would continue if he had to take the grind of 12-15 carries per game, which isn't even a lot. He's underperformed this "hater"'s expectations, because although I never thought he'd be Faulk, I thought he'd be Westbrook more or less.

A lot of teams would want Bush, yes, I want the Broncos to get him too at a reasonable price. That doesn't mean anything though. Broncos need returners and playmakers in a big way, plus having a guy like Bush out of the backfield could help Tebow. I think the Saints should restructure depending on the new cap situation, because in a cap situation he is nowhere near worth $12M or whatever. They could probly get him for half that. And they should agree to that, because Reggie Bush is good for the Saints, and the Saints are good for Reggie Bush.

[bearsfan_51]

Originally Posted by J52

Can't believe this has six pages of "that's not what bust means."

[Saints-Tigers]

Reggie isn't getting 12 million, and he doesn't feel he deserves that much, that really isn't an issue.

"Saints running back Reggie Bush indicated Tuesday that he's willing to renegotiate his $11.8 million 2011 base salary to stay with the Saints. "I'm open to whatever is going to help me stay here," Bush said"

Bush is due about $11.8 million next season – the final year of his current contract – and figures there's little chance the Saints will bring him back at that price.

"Common sense would tell you probably not," Bush said


I have no evidence that Bush would be able to sustain high yards per carry with a high amount of carries, his number of high carries is limited.

He hasn't had 15+ carries since early in 2008, they all came in 2006 and 2007, but even still, he averaged 4.2 yards per carry on those 140 carries, and he's pretty clearly a better runner now than he was in 2007, and the Saints can open up holes better too.

Hell, I'm not even sure more carries will get him hurt, I'm pretty sure all of his injuries have come on punt returns, I remember at least 3 significant injuries on punt returns.

I know his 09 numbers can be easily skewed, and a small amount of carries can be spiked by one or two big runs, but it's not like he padded his numbers on a few big runs over his 70 carries, even you take out the 55 yarder he had, he still averaged 4.9 yards per carry, with only two carries over 20 yards. That's pretty good consistency for a guy who was so damn inconsistent early on, that's a huge improvement. He was gashing people in that 5-20 yard area every game, and deserved more carries than he got.

He's definitely improved a lot since his first two seasons, and I don't think enough people want to give him credit for that because his body hasn't held up enough for him to sustain bigger carries, and that's totally fair, but even outside of the numbers, you can just see he's a clearly improved player.

[njx9]

Originally Posted by J-Mike88

None of us here ever saw Collins or Jennings play in college, probably the same case with James Jones.

not that i expect you to ever answer a direct question or admit that you made something up to make yourself sound smart, but do you honestly think no one ever saw a western michigan game? do you ever think before hitting submit reply?

[yourfavestoner]

FWIW:

Jennings (10th rated WR)

Collins (19th rated CB)

To be fair, WR and DB are the two hardest position groups to scout for the average fan since you rarely see them in the play. You need coaches tape to scout them properly.

[draftguru151]

PL loved Jennings so I think he might have seen him play once. I'm sure he was the only one though!

[Caulibflower]

"Jennings is not much a a deep threat and won't stretch the field."

...Whoops.

[P-L]

Originally Posted by njx9

not that i expect you to ever answer a direct question or admit that you made something up to make yourself sound smart, but do you honestly think no one ever saw a western michigan game? do you ever think before hitting submit reply?

Yeah, it's not like one of the Head Moderators here attended four WMU games during Jennings' senior season and wore a Greg Jennings WMU sig for months leading up to the draft...

[ElectricEye]

I LOVED Jennings and wanted the Patriots to pick him. Didn't think he would drafted as high as he was though. Defiantly saw him play multiple times in college his Junior and Senior seasons and was very impressed. I thought Jamarko Simmons was going to be something too. Was wrong on that one haha.

[MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)]

Originally Posted by yourfavestoner

FWIW:

Jennings (10th rated WR)

Collins (19th rated CB)

To be fair, WR and DB are the two hardest position groups to scout for the average fan since you rarely see them in the play. You need coaches tape to scout them properly.

My Greg Jennings scouting report from that year:

Strengths: He puts da team on his back do.

Weaknesses: Occasionally breaks his leg.

[J-Mike88]

Originally Posted by Calubflower

"Jennings is not much a a deep threat and won't stretch the field."

...Whoops.

"Can make his mark as a #3 or possession receiver in the NFL"

[MidwayMonster31]

Nobody was arguing about Nick Collins' physical abilities, but it did take him a while to turn into an effective starting safety. That scouting report wasn't that far off. A lot of it comes down to the coaching they get.

[jnew76]

Originally Posted by MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)

My Greg Jennings scouting report from that year:

Strengths: He puts da team on his back do.

Weaknesses: Occasionally breaks his leg.

Damn... This made my drink come out my nose.

[GB12]

Scott's strengths for Jennings were dead on. The rest, not so much, but if you stop reading after the strengths he looks like a genius.

Originally Posted by MidwayMonster31

Nobody was arguing about Nick Collins' physical abilities, but it did take him a while to turn into an effective starting safety. That scouting report wasn't that far off. A lot of it comes down to the coaching they get.

He was an effective starting safety as a rookie.

[yourfavestoner]

Originally Posted by J-Mike88

Right, this will be his 5th year.
They 100% want him back, as Green Bay wants AJ Hawk back 100% but he has a ridiculously high $ on the books for 011, but you're talking about silly cap #'s..... not busts.

People love to throw the word "bust" around these days. Guys like Bush may not have lived up to some people's unrealistic expectations, but he's certainly no bust. He's exactly who Scott said he was and he's been good enough that the Saints definitely want to keep him.

Well, AJ Hawk just got cut today. Wompwompwomp.

[PossibleCabbage]

Originally Posted by yourfavestoner

Well, AJ Hawk just got cut today. Wompwompwomp.

Wouldn't be surprised if Bush gets cut tomorrow. It depends on "at what point Bush's ridiculous 2011 escalator will become guaranteed" more than anything else.

Packers are still looking to resign Hawk, they just cut him to avoid being on the hook for $10.5m once the league starts. For high picks signed to six year contracts, generally the sixth year serves as a sort of proxy for free agency where a team can "resign" the player for roughly the cost of a high priced free agent for a year or cut him and make him an actual free agent.

[Nebula]

Shame AJ Hawk became such an average player. I wonder what were some of his negatives Scott had in his scouting reports that made him underachieve in Green Bay

[PossibleCabbage]

Here's Scott's scouting report on Hawk. It's not too far off of what happened. Just "impact", "playmaker", "good in coverage", and "good at shedding blocks" were absent.

[MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)]

I don't think it's fair to call Scott out for missing on someone EVERYONE missed on. AJ Hawk was far from polarizing.

[GB12]

It's not like he's bad either. He hasn't lived up to the 5th pick, that's for sure, but he'd still start on most teams. There are so very many players he, and everyone else, have gotten more wrong than Hawk.